Washington Post's Sloppy 'Journalism' Blames Russia for 'Fake News' Crisis and Trump's Win, While Pushing Neo-McCarthyism
21st Century Wire
Sat, 26 Nov 2016 20:42 UTC
The hacking claim is nothing new - backed by the White House and trumpeted by Hillary Clinton, the US mainstream media has claimed that Russia has been hacking and manipulating our US elections. The only problem is... it never happened. What's more disturbing though, is the complete collapse in journalistic standards at what used to be considered 'America's paper of record.'
It seems the The Post is playing a key role in waging a new McCarthy-style witch hunt targeting any independent websites which dare to challenge the prevailing anti-Russian party line currently dominating the mainstream political and media establishment - evident beyond any doubt after reading this latest feature in The Washington Post written by Craig Timberg entitled, 'Russian propaganda effort helped spread 'fake news' during election, Experts say.'
Comment: The Western hive mind is in its death throes.
As one of the blacklisted news sites, Sott.net wishes to thank WaPo for the free advertising!
Moon of Alabama
Sun, 27 Nov 2016 00:00 UTC
Viva Fidel. Your revolutionary courage & your commitment to fighting for the self-determination of the Cuban people will never be forgotten
To truly understand Cuba and in fact the rest of Latin America you need to study the Monroe doctrine in 1823
It's important to note that the US in the early 19th century wasn't strong enough to stop Europe from colonizing Latin America... not yet
That ended in the late 1800s. Look up the Cuban War of Independence where the Cuban people had been whooping the Spanish colonial government
Liberty Blitzkrieg and SOTT.net included on Washington Post highlighted hit list of 'Russian propaganda' websites
Fri, 25 Nov 2016 13:03 UTC
The group in question calls itself PropOrNot, and self-describes in the following manner:
PropOrNot is an independent team of concerned American citizens with a wide range of backgrounds and expertise, including professional experience in computer science, statistics, public policy, and national security affairs. We are currently volunteering time and skills to identify propaganda - particularly Russian propaganda - targeting a U.S. audience. We collect public-record information connecting propaganda outlets to each other and their coordinators abroad, analyze what we find, act as a central repository and point of reference for related information, and organize efforts to oppose it.
We formed PropOrNot as an effort to prevent propaganda from distorting U.S. political and policy discussions. We hope to strengthen our cultural immune systems against hostile influence and improve public discourse generally. However, our immediate aim at this point is to empower the American voter and decrease the ability of Russia to influence the ensuing American election.
Comment: The mainstream news sites' attack dogs are coming out. One hopes this is their last gasp.
Sun, 12 Jun 2016 22:17 UTC
Would Allen Dulles have resorted to assassinating the President of the United States to ensure the achievement of his 'Indonesian strategy'?
This is the central question addressed by Greg Poulgrain in his extraordinarily important book, The Incubus of Intervention: Conflicting Indonesian Strategies of John F. Kennedy and Allen Dulles.
Two days before President John Kennedy's assassination on November 22, 1963, he had accepted an invitation from Indonesian President Sukarno to visit that country the following spring. The aim of the visit was to end the conflict (Konfrontasi) between Indonesia and Malaysia and to continue Kennedy's efforts to support post-colonial Indonesia with economic and developmental aid, not military. It was part of his larger strategy of ending conflict throughout Southeast Asia and assisting the growth of democracy in newly liberated post-colonial countries worldwide.
He had forecast his position in a dramatic speech in 1957 when, as a Massachusetts Senator, he told the Senate that he supported the Algerian liberation movement and opposed colonial imperialism worldwide. The speech caused an international uproar and Kennedy was harshly attacked by Eisenhower, Nixon, John Foster Dulles, and even liberals such as Adlai Stevenson. But he was praised throughout the third world.
New York Post
Mon, 21 Nov 2016 05:12 UTC
"Trump started with [CNN chief] Jeff Zucker and said, 'I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed,' " the source said.
"The meeting was a total disaster. The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing-down," the source added.
A second source confirmed the fireworks. "The meeting took place in a big boardroom and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks," the other source said.
"Trump kept saying, 'We're in a room of liars, the deceitful, dishonest media who got it all wrong.' He addressed everyone in the room, calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was [a] network of liars," the source said.
Comment: There is some hefty reasoning behind Trump's dressing-down of the MSM regarding its biased reporting, lack of independent investigation and objectivity. He is doing them a favor by calling them on their duty to the public while setting the bar for his administration. The media has effectively been 'put on notice.'
Update: Looks like Trump forgot to give them a trigger warning. Some anonymous reactions given to the New Yorker:
Another participant at the meeting said that Trump's behavior was "totally inappropriate" and "f***ing outrageous." The television people thought that they were being summoned to ask questions; Trump has not held a press conference since late July. Instead, they were subjected to a stream of insults and complaints—and not everyone absorbed it with pleasure.Ahh, taste that delicious salt.
"I have to tell you, I am emotionally f***ing pissed," another participant said. "How can this not influence coverage? I am being totally honest with you. Toward the end of the campaign, it got to a point where I thought that the coverage was all about [Trump's] flaws and problems. And that's legit. But, I thought, O.K., let's give them the benefit of the doubt. After the meeting today, though—and I am being human with you here—I think, F*** him! I know I am being emotional about it. And I know I will get over it in a couple of days after Thanksgiving. But I really am offended. This was unprecedented. Outrageous!"
Tue, 08 Nov 2016 17:42 UTC
Comment: Bonus video:
Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:01 UTC
Comment: The gender pronoun debate has reached new levels of absurdity, but it can now be clearly seen as a symptom of encroaching fascism under the guise of "political correctness" or "Liberal and Progressive Values". What must be realized is that these values are nothing but an empty shell ideology that conceals total pathology underneath.The main ponerization process begins among "intellectuals" at universities because those are the guides and teachers of the young. Universities train teachers of even younger children, and thus it becomes easy to poison an entire society in a single generation if you have the power to determine what is "correct".
- Ridiculous: What's your preferred pronoun? Gender non-conformist students adopt new badge of courage
- Policing of speech: NYC to fine businesses for not using the correct gender pronoun
- Professor explains the increase of 'precious snowflakes' - cites narcissism, over-nurturing
- The Health & Wellness Show: The medical and social implications of gender multiplicity
Three Green Berets training 'moderates' killed in Jordan by ISIS supporter - CIA 'ignored' multiple warnings
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:41 UTC
Initial reports were conflicted with each other, and a subsequent FBI investigation describes finding no trace of terrorist activity involved in the incident. At first the Jordanians claimed that one of the Special Forces soldiers opened fire at the gate unprovoked. A second story claimed that one of the Americans accidentally discharged his weapon leading to a confused firefight of mistaken identity. However, according to multiple sources inside Special Forces, the shooter conducted a deliberate and pre-planned assault on the 5th Special Forces Group members. Multiple sources confirmed that the shooter is an ISIS sympathizer. Lewellen, McEnroe, and Moriarty, who were in the process of transitioning back to the United States were killed, the Jordanian officer injured.
Comment: If this was a deliberate and planned attack, what was the motive? Was the attack simply directed against Americans in general, or were the three SF members deliberately targeted? If they were targeted, who gave the order, and why were they specifically targeted? If the reports of disaffection among the SF about what they are doing are true, what did these men know? And who gave the order for them to be targeted?
The CIA sounds very aware of what they're doing in Jordan and Turkey: training the next generation of jihadis. But special forces think they're supposed to be training 'rebels' and are rightfully feeling angry and betrayed. This is not what they signed up for. Unfortunately, the CIA's agenda is much different than what ordinary Americans, SF included, are led to believe.
- U.S. Special Forces officer: How the CIA armed and trained jihadists for war in Syria
- US Special Forces hate Syrian mission: "Nobody believes in it, everyone on the ground knows they are jihadis"
You're still crying wolf: Trump is "openly racist", "white supremacist", "literally Hitler" - No, he's not
Slate Star Codex
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:17 UTC
[Epistemic status: A reduction of a complicated issue to only 8000 words, because nobody would read it if it were longer. I think this is true but incomplete. I will try to discuss missing parts at more length later.]
A New York Times article from last September that went viral only recently: Crying Wolf, Then Confronting Trump. It asks whether Democrats have "cried wolf" so many times that nobody believes them anymore. And so:
When "honorable and decent men" like McCain and Romney "are reflexively dubbed racists simply for opposing Democratic policies, the result is a G.O.P. electorate that doesn't listen to admonitions when the genuine article is in their midst".I have a different perspective. Back in October 2015, I wrote that the picture of Trump as "the white power candidate" and "the first openly white supremacist candidate to have a shot at the Presidency in the modern era" was overblown. I said that "the media narrative that Trump is doing some kind of special appeal-to-white-voters voodoo is unsupported by any polling data", and predicted that:
If Trump were the Republican nominee, he could probably count on equal or greater support from minorities as Romney or McCain before him.Now the votes are in, and Trump got greater support from minorities than Romney or McCain before him. You can read the Washington Post article, Trump Got More Votes From People Of Color Than Romney Did, or look at the raw data (source)
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:27 UTC
The document, discovered in the recently-liberated Iraqi city of Bakhdida, about 32 km southeast of the Daesh-held stronghold of Mosul, explicitly tells jihadis not to attack any coalition aircraft over Mosul or its suburbs.