An enlightening read...

https://www.rt.com/usa/418035-anti-russia-think-tanks/

I wonder who funds RT

An astute observation, many might have glossed over the "RT" in the provided link or their logo above the article but you caught that right away. That's the kind of critical eye that's required in today's news environment to be sure. Whether it's the BBC, Voice of America, CNN, Fox News, Global Research, The Intercept, New Eastern Outlook, Vinyard of the Saker or RT one must sort though any possible bias or agenda promotion and get down to the facts, and then form their own opinions. That is, in essence, what the article is about.

From your intuitive observation it's likely that you were able to ascertain the facts provided within the article in short order, and no doubt have developed some very well informed viewpoints, and I'm confident many of us would be interested in hearing them as well.

For certain, the warmongering crap these government funded think tanks spew would fall on deaf ears, if only there were more people like you.

I'm not sure anyone has the time or inclination to do an institutional analysis of these think tanks. Mind you, it is a worthwhile project (because, it's true, think tanks can be dodgy). But I would personally be more interested in reading an analysis that has passed peer review (and which has some kind of non-arbitrary methodology) than an article posted on Russia Today.

I skimmed trough the article. I am someone who is into conspiracy and what is the real truth of our world and our origins. For long time I go with 90% of mainstream media is a lie with an agenda to shape our opinions. Emotionally driven and lacking facts and whole story. I don't know if many here listen to Coast to Coast AM but there has been a lot of guest delving into these subjects and many others. Follow the money.

Just search Operation Mockingbird that began in the 1950. The CIA use of media for propaganda. How far have there developments in mind control gone.
Operation Paperclip is another topic to get into and the Nazis brought tech beyond rocket propulsion.
Ancient aliens and suppressed archeology are other interesting topics.

Divide and conquer. Russia isn't bad like we have been told. Sure they are not perfect s there is corruption in any system for now. I believe they are in a positive direction against the cabal groups.

The whole global warming campaign is an agenda as well. It's not just earth, but all the planets and moons in our system are very active with weather and volcanoes. Look at the north pole on Saturn. Neptune is like 100 times brighter than 20 years back. We are moving into a high energy part of our galaxy and the implications and what these means they don't want us to know.
https://www.gaia.com/lp/content/are-interstellar-clouds-raining-on-our-solar-system/

we hope more people wake up. It is consciousness and awareness that will bring humanity back in control of our future. They have no control when enough people know the truth

Since were in the area remember the Norway Spiral ? Some sort of scalar or torsion tech. Torsion fields/Physics is an interesting study the Russians did lots on in the 1970.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G77nRwfnyeY

And this is why Trump is Dear Leader.

There should be entire psychology departments dedicated to the study of the sorts of people who are capable of unironically saying stuff like "I am someone who is into conspiracy and what is the real truth of our world". Conveniently, the truth is out there, but unlike on the X-Files, it's just one hot-link away.

I would never call any so-called "think" tank a "think" tank.
Yeah, although I admire RT News for presenting some alternatives to all the other lamestream media outlets, they are hardly objective when it comes to anything about Russia.

However, RT News is nowhere nearly as bad as the trolls who infest their RT News
YouTube channel. 99% of these troll comments fall into these categories:

1) "USA bad, Russia good" - whenever the video shows Russia's army fighting ISIS
or muslim fascists in Syria. And 90% of these comments are conspiracy comments:
about how "USA created ISIS".

While normally I agree with praising Russia for fighting ISIS,
that does NOT mean I have to believe "USA created ISIS".

2) "USA imperialism is bad. USA is pushing into too many parts of the world."

Again - a lot of that is true. I agree USA is too militaristic.
But, again, that opinion is independent of the notion that
"USA will kill Julian Assange"
No. I do NOT have to believe/agree with that idea.
Julian Assange has NOTHING to do with the USA.
His troubles are with England, Ecuador, Sweden, & his home nation of Australia.

3) "Israel caused ISIS." Conflict in Poland? Hungary? Syria? China?
South America? "Israel caused it. Israel is to blame. Jews are to blame"

4) Anything sexual is "evil". There was some video on RT News YouTube channel of some pagan "penis phallic" festival. The comment section was 99% trolls who
seemed like the most extreme rightwing conservative prudish anti-sex christians,
spouting about "demons" and "how this pagan religion is destroying civilization"

Just tons & tons of GARBAGE comments. ALL religion, including pagan, is stupid & unnecessary. But pagan religions certainly are & have been FAR less harmful than
monotheistic Abraham religions like christianity & islam.

5) Anti-socialist anti-communist comments.

6) Anti-banker comments.

#5 is particularly bizarre because it contradicts #6. Historically it has ONLY been communists and socialists who have sided AGAINST the super-rich, such as the bankers, and FOR the poor or workers. And, even though communists and socialists themselves have not always sided against the lazy banker rich, the philosophy, ideals of communism, of Marxism, themselves certainly do not side with the owner-class/banker-class.

7) If the video features athletic Russian women in bikinis,
then illogically the comments PRAISE the Russian women for being fit & thin
and INSULT Americans for being "fat". COMPLETELY contradicting #4
type anti-sex, sex-is-evil comments

I find it truly amazing that this topic brought forth so many comments, especially since virtually none focus on the topic presented.

I brought this article here to make note of an all too often overlooked aspect of political interference, namely "Think Tanks" and how much influence they wield. That in itself would not be so bad were these Think Tanks actually "thinking" and not so permeated by agenda. Their financial sources should be all the evidence required to more aptly call them "Agenda Tanks" and to put their influence where it belongs, in the flusho!

For those too blinded by prejudice and Corporate Media to actually gain any knowledge from what has been presented - I offer some CliffNotes

The Atlantic Council

What does it do?
Promotes the idea of Russia being an existential threat to Europe and the US, in order to justify NATO's reason for being.

Who pays for it?
Saab, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon Company, The UK Foreign Office, Ukrainian World Congress, the US Department of State, US military (via separate contributions from the Air Force, Navy, Army and Marine Corps), Northrop Grumman and Boeing.



The Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA)

What does it do?
Despite the name, CEPA is based in Washington, not the 'old continent', but it does have an outpost in Warsaw. This club specifically focusses on Central and Eastern Europe and promoting the US Army and foreign policy establishment's agenda there. Or, in its own words, creating a Central and Eastern Europe with close and enduring ties to the United States.

Who pays for it?
FireEye, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Bell Helicopters and BAE systems pump funds in and they are joined by the US State Department and the Department of Defence. Another notable paymaster is the National Endowment for Democracy 'regime change' experts who are surely interested in CEPA's remit to also cover Belarus. The US Mission to NATO and NATO's own Public Diplomacy Division also provide cash.



German Marshall Fund of the United States

What does it do?
Is a vehicle promoting US influence in Eastern Europe, with outreaches in Warsaw, Belgrade and Bucharest.

Who pays for it?
USAID are big backers, throwing in a seven-figure annual sum. The State Department also ponies up capital, as does NATO and Latvia's Defense Ministry. Other interesting paymasters are George Soros, Airbus and Google. While Boeing and the ubiquitous Raytheon are also involved.



Institute for the Study of War

What does it do?
The IFTSOW agitates for more and more American aggression. It supported the Iraq 'surge' and has encouraged more involvement in Afghanistan. IFTSOW also focuses on Syria, Libya and Iran. Just last week, one of its lobbyists, Jennifer Cafarella, called for the US military to take Damascus, which would bring Washington into direct conflict with Russia and Iran.

Note: Kimberly Kagan is the brains behind this operation. She's married to Frederick Kagan, who was involved in the neocon 'Project for the New American Century' group along with his brother, Robert Kagan. Which makes Kimberly the sister-in-law of Victoria f**k the EU Nuland who, for those interested, was the US Government's leading spokesperson taking credit for supplying some 5 billion in US tax dollars for the illegal over throwing of the democratically elected standing government of the Ukraine in 2014.

Who pays for it?
Predictably, Raytheon has opened its wallet. Meanwhile, other US military contractors like General Dynamics and DynCorp are also involved. L3, which provides services to the US Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, and government intelligence agencies is another backer along with Vencore, CACI and Mantech.



Think Tanks who are predominantly funded by the US Military Industrial Complex and extensively lobby Governments with billions annually are NOT Think Tanks, they are indeed Agenda Tanks!


"The biggest obstacle to knowledge is the belief that you already have it."

...

wafm My bad. I know you were referring to my long comment re: RT News.
I just did NOT want to comment about the American so-called "Think Tanks" that I suspected you had in mind, which you rightly call Agenda Tanks, because honestly I was NOT well equipped with specific knowledge & details to comment on them.

I strongly suspected that you know more details about that topic than I do.

Like all topics, my knowledge fades in & out throughout life, fading out mostly because I try to forget about things that get me angry yet which I have no direct control over
(as opposed to what I personally consume).

But, the comment section at RT News I DO have personal experience with.
And your source WAS RT.com. My criticisms were directed at the crazy mishmash of comments on their YT channel: much less a criticism of how objective RT is.

I still think RT is an important necessary news source.

Here is the ONLY conservative I admire or respect,
mostly, except for his bashing of socialism & communism,
because he is the ONLY conservative demonstrating ANY amount of logic
(that means logical consistency)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vueWcKz-UT4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuyhXof_IRA

As I put it: if government won't help everybody equally,
then it has no business punishing anyone.
So you either make the laws work for YOU,
which the poor & workers have done or at least tried to do
(socialism, communism),
or you accept both the good & the bad of total anarchy.
(Again - "anarchy" is not an insult.)

As long as BREEDERS MURDER people by FORCING THEM INTO EXISTENCE
without their permission, KNOWING they will die some day,
I don't blame non-breeders for fighting to force government to take care of them.

I appreciate the acknowledgement of my observation (Dr. Zoidberg) however my reply was not pointed at you or your assessments of RT.

To be honest it was born out of frustration. The first commentator queried "I wonder who funds RT?" Well he wasn't "asking" he was pointing out that RT has financial backing which could influence their perspective, true enough. The obvious retort to that would be what sources don't have influence by way of financing. In truth "six" corporations control 90% of the media in the US, hence my reference to "Corporate Media". So I'm inclined to ask more appropriately, what sources does he consider trust worthy?

More to the point of my frustration and too the article's contents, is that I was presenting an article that was based on "facts" not perception or opinion. As a side note; one of the things I appreciate about RT and Sputniknews is that this requirement of "facts" is paramount in their presentations and any assumptive commentary is stated as such with disclaimers where necessary. In other words they do their fact checking before it's written and let the assumptions lie where they may. Something Corporate Media has long given up for the sake of agenda promotion. One does not hear news (and you'd think it would be daily in this environment) of RT providing "fake news". Something very few, if any, in MSM can attest to.

Likewise they (and others) provide information on a host of subjects that are not even considered for publication in the Corporate Media. Which in turn permits me to bring several topics to light here which have otherwise not been generally exposed.

But back to the article. Was any of the information provided in the article questionable? Does someone want to debate that the MIC, which then President of the US Eisenhower "warned" the general public about in 1961, is investing heavily in these Think Tanks who across the board promote war in return for their funding. Does anyone want to debate that many in the general public have been effectively brainwashed already to the point of criticizing an article relating only facts because it comes from a source deemed at odds with the same voices? The voices of Military spending, war and destruction.

There in lies my frustration, that the damage is done. We're currently going through the "#metoo" realization, bringing unjust power to pay for it's sins and respect women (people) equally in all regards, far to late in my opinion. Granted possibly, that some of these allegations coming to light may be without merit but the general intent; to bring equality to life, is well meant and long over due. So why is it that we cannot afford the same rational for the rest of the world?

To look at what the U.S. government has been and is doing around the world with it's overbearing attitude and hypocrisy is depressing; it has attempted and in many cases succeeded in overthrowing the governments of some 55 countries since the second world war and it's currently trying to do that in both Syria (an illegal occupation) and Venezuela, to mention two. It has placed military bases in some 800-900 locations around the world. Through NATO for which the US Gov provides the primary funding, it has placed massive amounts of armaments around Russia and Iran, taunting them to make any move that might be considered aggressive, and for which there has been none. The Russiagate thing, which is equal parts an MIC funding drive as well as conditioning and a distraction for the remote clickers, is a prime example as well. From the perspective of the majority of the world's people outside of the USA, also not broadcast via MSM, is that of the USA quickly becoming a joke on the international stage due to it's posturing, rhetoric and blatant warmongering. Can you believe that the US Gov was "upset" at the prospect of the two Korea's discussing peace! Just recently the Ex-CIA director was reported as saying the US meddles in foreign elections for a 'very good cause' yet their government is belligerently posturing over the prospect that Russia "might have", wtf?.


I could go on with countless examples of the US's atrocities around the world (see previous postings lol) and too it would be easy with this knowledge to just "hate" Americans BUT I once lived there, as a child I spent several years in the US school system and obviously got to know a lot of people, nice people. So the take-a-way I have from that and that I feel should be projected is that it is the actions of the Government I object to, Americans are not "bad" people but their Government is corrupt and the people are not yet ready to correct that. Israel is another consideration, I see the Israeli Government's actions as tan-a-mount to obscene but that is not the Jewish people, many of whom I'm certain are just as nice as you and me, so goes for the Russians, Koreans etc. There in lies a major distraction gripping the west in regards to BDS. The Israeli Government (including AIPAC and all it's arms) has promoted a belief that BDS is directed against the Jews and is therefore racially motivated when in fact it is actually directed at the Israeli Government's actions, not that of it's people. AIPAC in it's self is another example of how corrupt the US Government has become in that they (AIPAC) have not even been required to register as a foreign agent even though they exist solely to promote the agenda of the Israeli Government and admit by popular account that "no lawmaker in Washington dares to defy them".

So to capsulize, I have no need to defend "where" my news comes from if it is presented with supportive facts. Does someone want to debate the funding of the American "Think Tanks"? If not, then considering their funding sources, not to mention their affiliations (Kagen?) their statements and agenda deserve derailment. So too for any "news" outlet that gives them a voice.

Only when the bias is set aside (undone) can we possibly move forward and act on the truth.

Note: As a Canadian I can no longer take any degree of pride in my own Government's actions either, they, as a vassal (pussy state) to the US are on the wrong side in the Ukraine, Syria, Palestine, Venezuela, BDS etc. Actions for which I am embarrassingly apologetic. What voice I have, I use against these positions.

...

I agree generally with what you're saying, wamf.
But, to achieve maximum justice, one must keep track of
/ take into account each individual's political views that create US foreign policy. There exists no such thing as some amorphous
"US foreign policy". All that exist are individuals who create the laws that create
the institutions - whether CIA, army, navy, NSA - and legalize giving taxpayer money
to these institutions.

Individuals feel personally offended or threatened, who feel being unjustly blamed (whether they are or not), feel powerless because some get jobs in government (I know: I have a relative with a job at a big government agency that he hates and does not give a shit about its mission yet he has no choice where else to make money), individuals who have WAY too much power yet choose to use it unfairly & unwisely rather than fairly & wisely.