Best of the Web:


Attention

Best of the Web: Here we go AGAIN! US sez Syria 'may be using chemical weapons' - threatens 'retaliation'

David Brunnstrom & Idrees Ali
Reuters
Wed, 22 May 2019 10:22 UTC
OPCW inspectors chemical weapons
© Yousef Albostany/Local Committee of Arbeen/Associated PressOPCW inspectors
The United States sees signs the Syrian government may be using chemical weapons, including an alleged chlorine attack on Sunday in northwest Syria, the State Department said on Tuesday, warning that Washington and its allies would respond "quickly and appropriately" if this were proven.

"Unfortunately, we continue to see signs that the Assad regime may be renewing its use of chemical weapons, including an alleged chlorine attack in northwest Syria on the morning of May 19," State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement.

"We are still gathering information on this incident, but we repeat our warning that if the Assad regime uses chemical weapons, the United States and our allies will respond quickly and appropriately," she said.

Comment: This comes less than 36 hours after a leaked OPCW report confirmed that the Douma 'chemical weapons attack' that 'justified' F.UK.US. airstrikes against Syrian military and state targets fighting ISIS/Al-Qaeda last year was STAGED.

The reason, as always, why they're launching another chemical attack propaganda blitz now is because the Syrian government forces are moving in on the concentrated pocket of terrorists remaining in Idlib province...

Read More...
Stock Down

Best of the Web: Oddly enough, study says the US has become LESS racist under Trump - Anti-black, anti-Hispanic prejudice declining

Ross Clark
Spectator
Thu, 16 May 2019 01:08 UTC
Mission Imposs
© YouTubePresident Donald Trump
The election of Donald Trump has, of course, unleashed the latent racist which lurks within millions of Americans. We know this because enlightened opinion keeps telling us so. The New Yorker, for example, ran a piece in November 2016 declaring 'Hate on rise since Trump's election', and quoting a list of incidents collected by the Southern Poverty Law Center - including the experience of a girl in Colorado who was allegedly told by a white man: 'Now that Trump is president I am going to shoot you and all the blacks I can find'. TIME magazine, too, ran a story in the same month announcing 'Racist incidents are up since Donald Trump's election'. In March 2017 the Nation asserted 'Donald Trump's rise has coincided with an explosion in hate groups', claiming that 100 racist organizations had been founded since Trump began his presidential campaign.

And so it goes on. Just as with Britain's vote for Brexit, Trump's strident language and his concentration on issues such as migration is supposed to have coarsened political discourse - legitimizing racist and xenophobic opinions in people who might otherwise have been shamed into silence. By this narrative, even slightly immoderate speeches, posters and campaigns by politicians become magnified through the lens of public opinion into something much more sinister. A speech on migration, goes the theory, can all too easily erupt into bar room arguments and end with a Muslim or a black man having his head kicked in.

It sounds vaguely plausible, but is it true?

Comment: Or maybe Obama was just a sh*t president who was a vacuous yes-man for the deep state, whereas Trump has integrity and is popular.

See also:

Read More...
Snakes in Suits

Best of the Web: EU establishment cries 'Russia!' in desperate bid to defeat critics

Nebojsa Malic
RT
Sat, 18 May 2019 20:20 UTC
eu leaders
© Reuters/Alessandro Garofalo
With European Parliament elections looming, the establishment parties and mainstream media are reaching for the playbook of US Democrats and hyping the specter of 'Russia' to drive voters away from the rising tide of populism.

One of the most outspoken liberals in the European Parliament, former Belgian PM Guy Verhofstadt, openly accused five populist politicians of being "paid by [Russian President Vladimir] Putin" and plotting to destroy the EU. Challenging Italian Deputy PM Matteo Salvini to a debate on Monday, Verhofstadt also name-checked Hungarian PM Viktor Orban, French opposition politician Marine Le Pen, Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage and freshly resigned Austrian Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache.

In another tweet, Verhofstadt framed the coming election in terms of voting for "pro-European"parties or "letting our continent become a playground for Trump & Putin's puppets," citing an EuroNews report about former Trump campaign chief Steve Bannon praising Le Pen's campaign in france.

Actually reading past the clickbait headline, however, quickly makes it apparent that Verhofstadt didn't bother: namely, the article clearly spells out that Bannon is in no way involved with Le Pen's campaign, and was commenting as a private person. It even quotes Le Pen's remarks to the French media complaining about the press "dragging" Bannon into the election.
Read More...
Russian Flag

Best of the Web: Russia emerges from Ukraine crisis with several grinding wins in Europe

Tom Luongo
Gold, Goats 'N Guns
Sun, 19 May 2019 00:00 UTC
Merkel and Putin
Europe is finally coming to its senses five years after the coup in Kiev started what is now the new Cold War between Russia and the West.

The first part of Russia's win comes from Italian leader Matteo Salvini. Speaking for the under-represented in European politics, Salvini declared this week, "I continue to believe that we don't need sanctions. The issue of their removal unites all decent people."

Salvini is tackling, head-on, the European political establishment in this week's European parliamentary elections. And his raising the issue of lifting sanctions on Russia imposed over the reunification with Crimea is a massive attack on them.

It means that Salvini is looking at using the extension of sanctions as a bargaining chip this summer. He is threatening to veto any extension with words this strong on the eve of an election.

The second victory for Russia, however, is far more significant. The Council of Europe has finally agreed to restore Russia's voting rights after suspending them over the unification with Crimea.
Read More...
Stormtrooper

Best of the Web: Missing legal step and MSM double-standards expose Assange prosecution as show-trial

Craig Murray
craigmurray.org.uk
Mon, 20 May 2019 22:10 UTC
assange
Julian Assange
In Sweden, prosecutors have applied to the Swedish courts to issue a warrant for Julian's arrest. There is a tremendous back story to that simple statement.

The European Arrest Warrant must be issued from one country to another by a judicial authority. The original Swedish request for Assange's extradition was not issued by any court, but simply by the prosecutor. This was particularly strange, as the Chief Prosecutor of Stockholm had initially closed the case after deciding there was no case to answer, and then another, highly politically motivated, prosecutor had reopened the case and issued a European Arrest Warrant, without going to any judge for confirmation.

Assange's initial appeal up to the UK Supreme Court was in large part based on the fact that the warrant did not come from a judge but from a prosecutor, and that was not a judicial authority. I have no doubt that, if any other person in the UK had been the accused, the British courts would not have accepted the warrant from a prosecutor. The incredible and open bias of the courts against Assange has been evident since day 1. My contention is borne out by the fact that, immediately after Assange lost his case against the warrant in the Supreme Court, the British government changed the law to specify that future warrants must be from a judge and not a prosecutor. That is just one of the incredible facts about the Assange case that the mainstream media has hidden from the general public.

Comment:

Read More...
Cut

Best of the Web: Totalitarian? Media collude to censor Christchurch mosque shooter trial, spare public the details, follow PM's lead

Igor Ogorodnev
RT
Wed, 01 May 2019 15:42 UTC
Brenton Tarrant
© REUTERSBrenton Tarrant, whose face cannot be shown due to a court order, and whose words likely won't be cited either.
Opposing New Zealand's press restrictions on the coverage of Brenton Tarrant's trial is not some abstract free speech argument, it's about reining in a media that thinks it knows what's best for the public.

The country's five major media corporations responsible for the coverage of the proceedings against the man accused of killing 50 people during the March 15 shootings at two Christchurch mosques, have signed a voluntary "indefinite" protocol "to limit any coverage of statements that actively champion white supremacist or terrorist ideology."

The outlets will not cite excerpts from the gunman's manifesto, 'The Great Replacement', they will not quote anything he says in support of his actions, and if he does a raised-arm salute or perhaps even the OK sign (the neo-Nazi gesture du jour) these can only be shown in pixelated form.

This has been widely received as an unequivocally virtuous gesture - "not giving the extremist a platform" is being treated as a win for ethics over typical media salaciousness.

Instead, the audiences of these media outlets should feel alarmed and insulted. The New Zealand media evidently holds the public in such dubious regard that it believes that we could not be trusted to make up our own minds on the merits of an ideology propagated by a mentally unbalanced fitness trainer who committed one of the least-justifiable acts of violence against innocents in recent memory.

Comment: See also:

Read More...
Gold Seal

Best of the Web: No to Christchurch Call: Put aside your hate of Trump for a day - he may have just saved free speech

Igor Ordonev
RT
Fri, 17 May 2019 16:31 UTC
jacinda arden and macron
© REUTERS/PHILIPPE WOJAZER
Even adversaries of the US president should admit that he is the only one who has stood up to the disturbing anti-free speech proposal concocted by illiberal globalist world leaders and compliant tech companies.

Ironically, by becoming the sole leader of a major Western power to reject the 'Christchurch Call' - the cross-border plan to restrict "terrorist and extremist" content online - Donald Trump has consolidated support for the document, sparing it deserved scrutiny.

After all, who doesn't want to stop violence being spread through social media, particularly in the wake of the double mosque shooting in New Zealand in March? Well - judging by the commentary in mainstream media outlets - only that exceptionalist US president, and that band of white supremacists on whom he is relying to win in 2020.

But I would urge those of all political persuasions to study the text of the document, presented by New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Emmanuel Macron in Paris this week, and endorsed by every major US online giant - Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft and Twitter.

Are these really the powers you want to give away to officials and Silicon Valley execs? Or should we at least ask some clarifying questions first?
Read More...
Document

Best of the Web: OPCW confirms leak of covered-up report, suggesting Douma incident 'false-flag' is genuine

Kit Knightly
Off-Guardian
Fri, 17 May 2019 09:48 UTC
OPCW
The leaked OPCW report appears to have been confirmed genuine.

The report, titled "Engineering Assessment of Two Cylinders Observed at Douma Incident", came to public prominence a few days ago after The Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media released their analysis of the text.

Since then it has gotten a lot of play all across the alternate media (you can read our original report here, but there were many others too).

It has received virtually zero coverage in the mainstream media, of course. And that doesn't appear likely to change any time soon.

Comment: So there you have it. The security services for the US, UK and French governments - aka FUKUS - staged a 'chemical weapons attack' in Douma, killing 70 Syrian innocents, blamed the Syrians/Russians, then bombed Syria to 'punish' Syria.

Those are the facts. The rest is Fake News.

Read More...
Attention

Best of the Web: Gates Foundation funded "Fact-Checker" (POLITIFACT) censors GreenMedInfo on Facebook for reposting accurate vaccine meme

Sayer Ji
GreenMedInfo
Wed, 15 May 2019 14:45 UTC
greenmedinfo censored facebook


Recently, Politifact.com, a website run by the Poynter Institute and funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, ran an article titled, "No, anti-vaccination meme is way off on vaccine testing," claiming that the meme below which we posted to our Facebook page on April 15th was false.

vaccine untested meme

Comment: Facebook and other social media platforms have a long history of censoring 'inconvenient truths' under the banner of 'fake news'. Labelling true claims as false is the epitome of censorship and the pushing of a preferred ideology over truth. Welcome to the dystopian future.

See also:

Read More...
Dollar Gold

Best of the Web: Pentagon Syndrome: How the invisible military-industrial virus starves the rest of the country

Andrew Cockburn
Harper's Magazine
Thu, 16 May 2019 17:15 UTC
capitol jets military budget
© Shonagh Rae
How bloated defense budgets gut our armed forces

For a country that spends such vast sums on its national security apparatus-many times more than the enemies that supposedly threaten it do - the United States has a strangely invisible military establishment. Military bases tend to be located far from major population centers. The Air Force's vast missile fields, for instance, are hidden away in the plains of the northern Midwest. It is rare to see service uniforms on the streets of major cities, even Washington. Donald Trump did dream of holding a "beautiful" military parade down Pennsylvania Avenue, complete with "a lot of planes going over and a lot of military might," but the Pentagon nixed the scheme by putting out word that the extravaganza would cost $92 million. The estimate was surely inflated - ­it was four times greater, in real dollars, than the price tag for the 1991 Gulf War victory parade - suggesting that the military prefers a lower profile. It often takes an informed eye to appreciate signs of defense dollars at work, such as the office parks abutting Route 28 south of Dulles Airport, heavily populated with innocuously titled military and intelligence firms.

Largely out of sight, our gargantuan military machine is also increasingly out of mind, especially when it comes to the ways in which it spends, and misspends, our money. Three decades ago, revelations that the military was paying $435 for a hammer and $640 for an aircraft toilet seat ignited widespread media coverage and public outrage. But when it emerged in 2018 that the Air Force was now paying $10,000 for a toilet-seat cover alone, the story generated little more than a few scattered news reports and some derisive commentary on blogs and social media. (This was despite a senior Air Force official's unblushing explanation that the ridiculous price was required to save the manufacturer from "losing revenue and profit.") The Air Force now claims to have the covers 3-D-printed for $300 apiece, still an extravagant sum.
Read More...