Averko in The New York Times

Tribune Archives, Asia, Campaign Trail, Europe, Governance, History, People, Political Analysis, Politics, Radio 9 Comments

Regarding: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/28/us/politics/russia-disinformation-coronavirus.html

Michael Averko – https://www.eurasiareview.com/author/michael-averko/ –https://www.strategic-culture.org/contributors/michael-averko/ is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic.

Averko’s Note: For the record, Julian Barnes sent me this email: “Would you have time to talk to me today about the recent FBI visit and their discussion discussions about the Strategic Cultural Foundation?”

Michael Averko’s Reply: “Thanks for the interest Mr. Barnes and pardon my not getting back to you sooner. For now, I’m leaving things as stated. I’ll keep you posted on any further developments.

“I’ll end this note by once again expressing the view that this occurrence is the result of an overly paranoid situation which is quite misguided in a way that negatively influences the best interests of the US. It’s a matter that should get a high profile hearing.

“Hope the FBI is getting a hold of this.  I’m not the one looking for off record discussion over an open exchange. The typical CNN and MSNBC segments aren’t the way to go in terms of better informing the public. Ditto the Al Jazeera 3 against 1 segments. Regarding what I think about RT:


A trusted friend sent me this:

“Don’t get involved with reporters from the NYT. They will distort anything you tell them and make you look bad. I’d stay clear of them if I were you.”

As a follow-up, The NYT piece mentions my last article without specifically noting that I was its author that comments about (among other things) Evelyn Farkas. Farkas contributes comments to The NYT article.
MICHAEL AVERKO: I submitted that article of mine to the Yonkers Tribune which reposted it at its site with a credit to the Strategic Culture Foundation, where it first appeared. At the time, Farkas was running for office in the area which the Yonkers Tribune involves itself with. For a few days, it was highlighted at its homepage. Suddenly, it got buried away from the homepage as older articles remained.
The two comments currently below that article are a tell all on the kind of idiotic notions that are out there regarding Russia and someone thinking along the lines of yours truly:

I’ve my views on who might’ve initiated a wasteful FBI investigation as they’re more pressing matters. Either someone in elected office and/or someone with government ties, with the last choice being someone in a media/academia/think tank kind of a situation.

Michael Averko – https://www.eurasiareview.com/author/michael-averko/

# # #          

Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic. He has appeared as a guest commentator on the BBC and WABC talk radio, in addition to having been a panelist at the World Russia Forum, Russia Forum New York and US-Russia.org Experts’ Panel. Besides Averko’s Eurasia Review column – Academia.edu, Counterpunch, Foreign Policy Journal, Global Research, History News Network, InoSMI.Ru, Johnson’s Russia List, Journal of Turkish Weekly, Kyiv Post, Oriental Review, Penza News, Pravda.Ru, Pravoslavie.Ru, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Russia Insider, Sputnik News, Strategic Culture Foundation, The Huffington Post, Valdai Discussion Club and WikiLeaks, are among the numerous venues where his commentary have either appeared or been referenced. The American Institute in Ukraine and the Lord Byron Foundation for Balkan Studies, have referenced some of his commentary, along with academic white papers prepared for NATO Watch, Ohio State University, Problems of Post-Communism and the Royal College of Defence Studies. He is source referenced in Richard Sakwa’s book “Frontline Ukraine”. Averko’s Eurasia Review article on Pavlo Skoropadsky, provides the first full online transcript of Skoropadsky’s edict calling for an “All-Russian Federation”, inclusive of Russia and Ukraine. Among other issues, that article explains the relationships among the major combatants in the Russian Civil War. He can be reached via michaelaverko@msn.com.

TribuneAverko in The New York Times

Comments 9

  1. Mike you have done some great work down the years. But if you lie with dogs you’re gonna get fleas. Its time you looked objectively at Russian efforts to distort elections and put your ”Russocentric” bias to one side

  2. Regarding The NYT and its coverage of Russia related matters, is this excellent article:


    I actually spend a good deal of time, reading, listening and watching sources, whose views differ from my own. This manner serves to have a better understanding of the issues at hand, when compared to those like the ones who’ve so far posted comments under my two pieces, picked up by the Yonkers Tribune.

    Michael Averko

  3. “The trusted friend is an American, who doesn’t buy into the kind of BS which the likes of yourself post.”
    Oh – he’s an American. That makes everything you say true.

    Easy to see why you couldn’t speak to real reporters – you can’t make a case.
    I never mentioned Evelyn Farkas.
    I cited a real website that does analysis and fact checks of organizations like yours.
    Yet, you state that my post was BS.
    It says a lot about you.

    Since you claim to be an expert of US-Russian relations, why does President Trump always take Putin’s side?

    1. You were the one who mocked him, suggesting he had a Russian surname. He’s not even of Russian origin.

      I’m willing to consider a high profile CNN, MSNBC, Fox, BBC, Al Jazeera, RT segment on this. Your real reporter relied on two unnamed sources involved with Intel as stated in his co-written article. Yet, some suggest that I’m directly or indirectly involved with Russian Military Intelligence. Mighty rich. BTW, these two unnamed sources gave no conclusive proof that the SCF is involved with Russian Military Intel.

      FYI, Trump has been arming the Kiev regime in a way that Obama didn’t. Trump okayed the bombing of a Russian allied Syrian government position for a sketchy reason – something Obama was reluctant to do.

      That so-called real site you mention is subject to its own biases. Still waiting to see a substantive criticism of my SCF article, which was picked up at the Yonkers Tribune, c/o my submission and without SCF prodding.

      Farkas has been posting some absurd Tweets on this matter. The NYT article at issue includes her input.

      Michael Averko

      1. Why do you keep on harping on Farkas?

        I mocked your anonymous source BECAUSE you used as justification for not responding to NY Times. It is meaningless as anyone who has half a brain knows.

        To say that Trump hasn’t defended Putin shows you are not acting in the interests of the USA. At every turn, he has defended Putin. The action you cite were passed by veto-proof congressional votes. And Trump spoke against passage.
        It is in Russia’s interests to see Trump reelected. It is obvious to anyone who doesn’t have ties to Russia. My bad – it is obvious to them but they work for Russia.
        Go Russia – help Trump

        1. Why not bring up Farkas, seeing how she said that some at Fox News had (according to her) misinterpreted what she said, adding that she would clarify to them – only to then not come on that network? Talk about not responding. I answered The NYT in the above piece, while also indicating an interest in discussing the matter further at venues like Fox News, One America News, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, Al Jazeera and RT. You’ve flopped miserably in trying to refute me.

          I already showed at this thread where Trump hasn’t gone along with Putin. The link you give regarding Marsha Blackburn includes comments on why she blocked that bill as excerpted in these passages:

          “I objected to the unanimous consent proposal presented on the floor because it was a blatant political stunt,” Blackburn said in a news release Thursday. “My colleagues on the left tried to rush this legislation through the Senate without giving it a chance for the careful consideration and debate needed to address such an important issue. Of course action needs to be taken to protect the integrity of our elections, but let’s do this the right way.”

          President Donald Trump late Friday afternoon thanked Blackburn for blocking the bill and “fighting obstructionist Democrats.”

          “Democrats continue to look for a do-over on the Mueller Report and will stop at nothing to distract the American people from the great accomplishments of this Administration!” Trump tweeted.
          After the Senate decision, Blackburn, R-Tenn., told reporters campaigns should report foreign contact to the FBI.


          “All of us know, if you were to ever be contacted by a foreign entity, your first call is the FBI,” Blackburn said, according to Vox. “I don’t care if it’s Russia, Norway, China, whomever.”

          Michael Averko

  4. The media bias/fact check site gives the Strategic Culture Foundation its lowest rating for facts – “very low”

    Also states:
    Overall, we rate the Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF) a Questionable source based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of Russian propaganda and conspiracy theories as well as a complete lack of transparency with the goal to deceive readers. This is not a credible source.

    Its reasoning is that it is: “Extreme Right, Conspiracy, Propaganda, Complete Lack of Transparency”

    Mr Averko writes:
    A trusted friend sent me this:
    “Don’t get involved with reporters from the NYT. They will distort anything you tell them and make you look bad. I’d stay clear of them if I were you.”

    Who is “this trusted friend?
    Possibly – Igor Kostyukov?

    Choosing to put out a mass statement rather than a Q&A shows you are a fraud.

    1. The trusted friend is an American, who doesn’t buy into the kind of BS which the likes of yourself post.

      As for being a “fraud”, consider some of the comments said about the Strategic Culture Foundation. No conclusive proof whatsoever, given that Russian Intel is involved with it.

      In terms of objectivity, it’s certainly not less objective than Evelyn Farkas.

      Michael Averko

Leave a Reply

This comment will be displayed anonymously. Your name and email address will not be published.

Comments that are off topic will be removed. If you want a topic to be covered, email me at: ehezi@hush.com

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.