US "Mercenaries" in Ukraine: Is it all just Russian propaganda?

As I stated in my first blog on this issue, recently there have been rumors that US military security contractors have been deployed in Ukraine. There has been much debate in the media over whether or not these rumors are true. One viewpoint proposed by Dr. Nafeez Ahmed, a security expert with the Institute for Policy Research & Development, in an article by Dan Bloom of the Daily Mail was, "it's all Russian propaganda." "It" being the rumors and accusations by the Russian government that US military contractors operating in Ukraine. The Russian Ministry of Foreign affairs made the accusation that "about 150 American specialists from the private military organization 'Greystone'" have been deployed in Ukraine. Additionally, the Voice of Russia radio station, has an article on their website saying that the US spends 8 million dollars a month to have it's "private armies" deployed in Ukraine (This fact they cite from the oh so credible source of "British Press").

Russia would have incentive to start these rumors because, according to Bloom, "if a private military security contractor is currently operating in Ukraine it would give Russia some pretext for military invasion."

The exact details on why this is I must admit I don't entirely understand, but of all the possible rumors to spread to indicate just how bad the situation is in Ukraine is and the need for military intervention, it would make sense to start one about US private military security companies. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the Russian government and media have started these rumors that have been going around in the media, nor am I arguing whether these rumors are true or not.

I'm only exploring this possibility to expose what a bad reputation these private military security contractors have. That's why if Russia did start these rumors as propaganda it would make sense because US PMSCs have such a bad reputation for committing immoral acts in the countries in which they operate. For example, the former PMSC "Blackwater USA" was made infamous after the media found out about the Baghdad shootings. Thus, it would make sense that in many articles including one by RT (a Russian news channel) the title is "'Blackwater' footage: Who are the mercenaries in Ukraine?" when the article later informs the reader that Blackwater no longer exists, it has changed some of it's management and it's name twice once to Xe and now it's called Academi. This is largely due to the bad publicity it's gotten from the horrible acts it's committed I keep talking about (see the somewhat comical and largely inappropriate photo below).

PMSCs have earned a bad rep. (rightfully so) and the media, well aware of their infamy, uses them as a way to get people's attention and maybe even push an agenda.

US "Mercenaries" in Ukraine?

Recently, there has been a lot of rumors circulating in the media, both Russian and Western, (the bias of these two media sources could be a blog inanofitself, so take that into account when reading them) as to whether or not US private military security contractors have deployed troops in Ukraine. The video below has been used as evidence that Academi (a private military security contractor formerly known as Blackwater) is in Ukraine.

According to Dr. Nafeez Ahmed, a security expert with the Institute for Policy Research & Development in, in an interview with The Centre for Globalization, the uniforms "are consistent with US mercs." He later questions this theory saying, "why run around in public making a show of it?” Now it's hard to say for certain whether these troops were part of a US military contractor or not, but the US government's response to the accusation that they were in Ukraine may be cause for concern.

According to an article by Damien Gayle of the Daily Mail, "A U.S. State Department spokesman said it could not answer for a private company but added: 'We do not have any U.S. military units in Ukraine.'" Interesting that they decided to not answer whether or not the US military has hired Academi to deploy troops in Ukraine (the question that we really want to know) and instead just said that there weren't any official US troops. Granted, technically US military contractors like Academi can be hired by anyone, so maybe the official didn't comment because they couldn't know for sure because someone else could have hired them without the US government knowing. But this isn't that likely when considering the fact that about 90% of Academi's contracts come from the US government according to study by the Institute for Policy Studies. Additionally, many of the members of the board of directors are former high up US military officials (Gayle). Clearly, the ties between the US military and Academi are incredibly strong and the likely hood of the US not knowing whether Academi has been deployed is unlikely, which makes the typical "we can neither confirm nor deny" response by the US government seem all the more suspicious.

This story is an example of what private military security contractors are used by the world's governments for. When they need something done but don't want to be directly tied to the event or it would be inappropriate for that nation's troops to be in that location, they often hire a private military security contractor to get the job done while keeping that nation's military and the nation itself out of the world's view.

A Sensationalistic Society

Lady Gaga has stunned us by wearing a "meat dress" and even by pulling outrageous stunts like having someone throw up on her on stage, but this Wednesday she left the audience at the Roseland Ballroom feeling underwhelmed. According to Amanda Holpuch, writing for The Guardian, the crowd was "muted". The audience seemed to be "waiting for their leader to do something outrageous". But instead of over the top outfits and shocking performances, they recieved heartfelt accoustic renditions of hit songs like "You and I" and personalized compliments as well as a sincere thankyou to the city of New York for supporting her from the start.

This is a great example of how American society has become obsessed with things being over the top or sensationalistic. Lady Gaga's success is undoubtedly correlated to how shocking she is. That's what makes the news and that's what people talk about, and as they say any publicity is good publicity. Now I'm not going try and speculate whether her outlandish behavior is just who she is or if she is using it to increase her fame, but my guess would be that it's a little bit of both. And at the end of the day it doesn't matter much because people will still talk about it and it will still be considered news. So when she tones it down a notch  while still giving a performance her all, the audience leaves feeling a little dissapointed and maybe even jaded because they didn't get to see (or take a picture of) Lady Gaga doing something absurd.

Other pop stars have caught on to this means of achieving and maintaining fame such as the one and only Miley Cyrus. After her controvertial music video of the song Wrecking Ball (now at just under 600 million views), she shot to the front pages of the media and to the top of the pop charts. She now continues to go over the top and make people uncomfortable as an attempt to maintain this fame.

Now there is even a knock-off Flappy Bird app that is Wrecking Ball themed

When it comes down to it being outlandish sells, and it seems difficult for some artists nowadays to maintain fame and hold people's attention when they aren't acting extreme.

Bible Bucks

While talking with a friend the other day, the topic of religion came up. She told me a fascinating story about what going to her cousin's church was like. One detail that I found particularly interesting was the system they used for rewarding kids who went to sunday school. According to her, kids earned "Bible Bucks" from their sunday school teacher which they can then turn in for various prizes.

Curious to see if this was a common thing, I looked up Bible Bucks online and found numerous websites offering printable bible bucks and possible ways to use them. Kidssundayschool.com for example says, "Bible Bucks are a great way to reward kids for good behavior, completing memory work, bringing their Bibles to Sunday school or even inviting their friends to church."

If Sunday school is so boring for kids that you need to pay them to participate, maybe kids shouldn't have to go at all. Kids shouldn't be have to "complete memory work" if they don't want to, they should be outside playing and just being kids.The kids that receive this money are so young that they don't see the value in religion yet, and they might not see it when they are older either which is fine as well. The point is, kids should be allowed the time to grow up to a point where they can think for themselves before becoming involved in religion. Then they can choose whether or not they want to become involved in said religion or not. Otherwise, you're forcing or incentivizing to sit through something they are not interested in so you can impose your beliefs onto them. People should be allowed to form their own beliefs, not be brainwashed (a harsh term, yes, but an accurate one nonetheless) into having someone else's.

The last bit of the quote from Kidssundayschool.com really stands out to me. Because, essentially what they are doing is paying kids to go out and convert their friends to Christianity. Now when I put it like that, it seems manipulative and a little creepy, but when you think about it, maybe it is. If any adult got payed real money to go out and convert people, many people may would have a visceral reaction. And, when they use kids and fake money to achieve the same goal it's just as bad if not worse. The link between the action and the outcome may be a little bit harder to see but that doesn't change anything.

People's religious practices rarely get criticized because so many Americans strongly believe in "Freedom of Religion". But when people are doing things that aren't right, it doesn't matter whether if it's affiliated with a religion or not, you need to stand up for what you believe in and speak your mind. And in this case, I think that the entire concept of "Bible Bucks" is twisted and wrong.

Words For Women

Languages are something that most people don't think to deeply about. I certainly didn't think about why the words I use to communicate are what they are. But recently, I have started noticing some intriguing similarities between the words within languages and I think these similarities can give some sociological insight of the past.

The first similarity was illustrated in an American studies course I am taking. We looked at the word "esposa" which means wife in spanish. It turns out that if you ad an "s" to this word (esposas), the meaning then becomes handcuffs. 

The second similarity I noticed while studying Chinese. The Chinese character for female is 女 which is pronounced "nǚ". Interestingly enough, the chinese character for slave is 奴 which is pronounced "nú". As you can see, the only difference between the two is a slight change of tone when pronouncing the word and the addition of this radical: 又.

Why are these words so closely related? Well, I think it's because when these words were first being formed women's voices were being silenced. After all, no woman would want to go around calling herself and other women "slaves" or "handcuffs". So, It seems to me that it was the men who decided to use an existing word to express how the viewed woman or their wives. 

This made me wonder if these views still existed today in modern day American society. I think that men in modern day America don't view women as "slaves" as much as they used to. The idea of the stay at home mom who takes care of the kids and does all the cleaning does seem somewhat slave-like, but this trend is well over.  In fact, according to the Population Reference Bureau, in 2002, only 7 percent of all U.S. households consisted of married couples with children which only the husband worked. 

Although American men don't necessarily view women as slaves, they may view wive's as handcuffs considering that 74% of men said they would have an affair if they knew they would never get caught when asked in study by the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. Clearly, many American men would like to stray from their wives, but can't because they are, in a sense, chained to their wives (or at least they may view the situation in that way). 

Looking closely at the world's languages can give insight to the dynamics of the societies who spoke said language when it was first being formed were like, and it's interesting to see if modern day America has a similar dynamic as these societies.