Rachel Maddow Blames RUSSIA For Ukraine-Gate

OCT 10, 2019

Paul Joseph Goebbels: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

This woman needs a straight jacket and four padded walls.

 

Propaganda 101: The New York Times pumps another ‘evil Russia’ plot

CAP

By Finian Cunningham

The “newspaper of record” New York Times arguably holds the record for peddling anti-Russia scare stories. This week the NY Times delivered yet another classic spook tale dressed as serious news.

Among its splash articles, under the headline ‘Top Secret Russian Unit Seeks to Destabilize Europe, Security Officials Say’, readers were told of an elite Russian spy team which has, allegedly, only recently been discovered.

It’s called “Unit 29155” and purportedly directed by the Kremlin to “destabilize Europe” with “subversion, sabotage and assassination.”

According to the NY Times, this crack squad of Russia’s most ruthless military intelligence agents were involved in an attempted assassination of an arms dealer in Bulgaria in 2015; the destabilization of Moldova; a failed coup against the Montenegrin government; and the alleged poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal in England last year.

The article states: “Western security officials have now concluded that these operations, and potentially many others, are part of a coordinated and ongoing campaign to destabilize Europe, executed by an elite unit inside the Russian intelligence system skilled in subversion, sabotage and assassination.”

The NY Times adds: “The purpose of Unit 29155, which has not been previously reported, underscores the degree to which the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, is actively fighting the West with his brand of so-called hybrid warfare — a blend of propaganda, hacking attacks and disinformation — as well as open military confrontation.”

This is all because, the readers are told, “The Kremlin sees Russia as being at war with a Western liberal order that it views as an existential threat.”

In response, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed it as more of the “pulp fiction category” which Western news media have manufactured with seeming increasing intensity over recent years. Peskov pointed out that Moscow has repeatedly stated its desire to normalize relations with Western states and the European Union in particular, contradicting the theme of the NY Times’ piece.

Indeed, the Russian Embassy in Britain recently published a compilation of false articles peddled by Western media over the past four years. The NY Times features prominently as one of the main purveyors of scare stories about alleged malign Russian activities, from hacking into presidential elections, to targeting American power grids, to covert collusion with President Donald Trump.

For students of Propaganda 101, this week’s tale makes a case study of how disinformation is disseminated in the guise of “news reporting.”

First of all, the NY Times reporter, Michael Schwirtz, gives a meandering account of lurid dirty deeds performed in various international locations allegedly carried out by the supposed “elite” Kremlin hybrid warriors. But tellingly, there are no details evidencing Russian involvement. It’s all lurid speculation spiced with fear-mongering, which reads like a pallid John le Carré spy novel.

Then, the usual giveaway that the NY Times is engaging in disinformation, it quotes anonymous security officials for apparent verification of its claims about “Unit 29155”. This is tacit admission of who the real authors are: Western spooks.

READ MORE: Problem of NYT 1619 Project isn’t that it sees America through slavery, it’s that it tells untruths

Next, a neat effort to give the lame story some legs is to quote named public figures. But these sources don’t confirm the existence of the alleged Kremlin unit; they are merely invited to speculate on its existence and presumed malign purpose. One of those named sources is MI6 chief Alex Younger. Yes, that’s right, the paper of record is quoting British military intelligence as a reliable source for public information. Another named source is Peter Zwack, who is described as a former US military intelligence officer who worked at the American Embassy in Moscow. Zwack is quoted as describing Russians as “organically ruthless” (whatever that means), while the paper actually admits that “he was not aware of the unit’s existence.”

The purpose of throwing a few names into the reporting mix is to lend a veneer of credibility to the nebulous, unverifiable, scary stuff that the anonymous spooks feed the reporter.

A special mention must be given to a third named source quoted by the NY Times. He is Eerik-Niiles Kross, an Estonian lawmaker and former military intelligence chief in Tallinn. He styles himself as “Estonia’s James Bond,” and is known for his salacious Russophobic warnings of “imminent invasion of the Baltic states” – over the past three decades. Kross is quoted to speculate on the existence of the alleged Kremlin hybrid warfare unit. Of course, he dutifully serves up his notorious anti-Russian fear-mongering. But he is not confirming. His speculation is pseudo-validation of information that is essentially fictional.

All in all, the latest installment of anti-Russia propaganda from the NY Times this week is a damp squib among many previous baseless reports of alleged Kremlin malign activity. If it serves any purpose, it is perhaps a choice illustration of how disinformation is sneakily, insidiously presented as ‘news’. The fact that this should appear in a Pulitzer Prize-winning, supposedly premier, American newspaper is the disturbing part.

But it is no surprise to those who have long studied how the US corporate media has been under the control of state intelligence agencies for many decades, especially after the Second World War and during the subsequent Cold War against the Soviet Union.

In a seminal essay in 1977 for Rolling Stone magazine, award-winning journalist Carl Bernstein documented how the CIA systematically cultivated hundreds of reporters, columnists, editors, publishing executives and broadcast networks to function as conduits for disinformation – much of it directed at demonizing the Soviet Union.

“From the outset, the use of journalists was among the CIA’s most sensitive undertakings,” writes Bernstein.

He added: “By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.”

How the CIA goes about planting false stories in the American and European media is outlined in this candid interview by John Stockwell, who was former National Security Council coordinator for the agency during the 1970s. Stockwell also added: “Enemies are necessary for the wheels of the US military machine to turn.”

You may wonder, if the Cold War ended nearly 30 years ago when the Soviet Union dissolved, why then do the NY Times and other Western media outlets continue to pump out anti-Russian propaganda? But that assumes the Cold War was primarily about the US opposing the ideology of communism. It wasn’t. It was, and still is, all about imposing control over the masses so they don’t ever challenge the power structure that deprives them of full democratic rights and decent livelihoods.

In a recent interview, philosopher André Vitchek makes the point that Western politicians and media like the NY Times keep harping on Cold War scare stories about evil foreigners in order “to distract their citizens from thinking about their increasingly limited freedoms and diminishing standards of living.”

The Cold War continues, and anti-Russia hysteria is but a distraction, as was the anti-Soviet hysteria. The aim is to distract the public from the real Cold War which is a war by the elites against democracy ever being actually realized among the masses.

 

FLIP FLOP: AOC SUDDENLY THINKS PULLING OUT OF SYRIA IS TERRIBLE

FLIP FLOP: AOC Suddenly Thinks Pulling Out Of Syria Is Terrible

Trump Derangement syndrome on full display

Steve Watson – OCTOBER 9, 2019

After months and months of criticizing US involvement in ‘forever wars’, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has had a sudden change of mind, tweeting Tuesday that pulling US troops out of Syria could have ‘catastrophic  consequences’.

CAP

Of course, her only reason for adopting this position now is that she will oppose literally anything President Trump does.

Last year AOC ran for Congress on a promise of working to remove troops from  Syria and elsewhere:

“Alexandria believes that we must end the “forever war” by bringing our troops home, and ending the air strikes that perpetuate the cycle of terrorism throughout the world,” her 2018 campaign website noted.

She has repeatedly criticized ‘endless war’:

CAP

CAP

CAP

CAP

But now suddenly, AOC is OK with US troops staying in Syria, because… ORANGE MAN BAD.

The response was swift:

CAP

View image on Twitter

CAP

CAP

 

Trump DOJ to Disclose Identity of Saudi-Connected Man Alleged to Have Aided 9/11 Perpetrators

More truth about the Sept. 11 attacks is going to be released to the public.

By Shane Trejo

The Trump administration is getting ready to release the identity of a man who allegedly aided and abetted the Sept. 11, 2001 attackers, believed to be an individual with deep ties to the Saudi government.

Attorney General William Barr made the final determination for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release this information on Thursday, one day after the 18th anniversary of the attacks.

The information will be released to attorneys that are representing the families of victims who have filed a lawsuit accusing the government of Saudi Arabia of helping to coordinate the terror attack that took their loved one’s lives. The attorneys will have to petition the DOJ to release the name to the greater public for the man’s identity to be widely known.

While it is commonly understood that 15 of the 19 terrorists who committed the attacks were Saudi nationals, the Saudi government has denied any complicity in the attacks, and the official investigation has largely cleared them of any wrongdoing. Additional information released to the public has shown that the Saudis may have been more intimately involved in planning the attacks than what was initially claimed by the Bush administration.

Stunning disclosures illuminating previously unknown facts about who provided material support to the 9/11 attackers have been made available to the public, as 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001 were finally released in 2016. The unredacted information provides shocking details that show the Saudi government had more than a passive role in facilitating the attacks.

The report states: “Prior to September 11th, the FBI apparently did not focus investigative resources on [redacted] Saudi nationals in the United States due to Saudi Arabia’s status as an American ‘ally.’”

The 28 pages contain evidence that the 9/11 attackers contacted and received support from individuals closely connected to the Saudi royal family. The report also indicated that CIA and FBI officers were aware of these connections, but they were mysteriously covered up. The Saudis also stonewalled the investigative process and made it difficult for federal authorities to get answers after the attacks took place.

“A number of FBI agents and CIA officers complained to the Joint Inquiry about a lack of Saudi cooperation in terrorism investigations both before and after the September 11 attacks,” the report states.

While some lawmakers see the release of the documents as a substantial victory for transparency, Saudi authorities still refuse to take any culpability for their behavior that led to the worst attacks in American history.

“The information in the 28 pages reinforces the belief that the 19 hijackers — most of whom spoke little English, had limited education and had never before visited the United States — did not act alone in perpetrating the sophisticated 9/11 plot,” former Senate Intelligence Chairman Bob Graham said in a statement after the documents were released.

“It suggests a strong linkage between those terrorists and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Saudi charities, and other Saudi stakeholders. The American people should be concerned about these links,” he added.

“Hopefully, these pages will provide some resolution to the families of victims of the attacks and help our government craft better foreign policy moving forward,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) said after the pages were released.

“Several government agencies, including the CIA and the FBI, have investigated the contents of the ’28 Pages’ and have confirmed that neither the Saudi government, nor senior Saudi officials, nor any person acting on behalf of the Saudi government provided any support or encouragement for these attacks,” Saudi Ambassador to the United States Abdullah Al-Saud said in 2016.

“We hope the release of these pages will clear up, once and for all, any lingering questions or suspicions about Saudi Arabia’s actions, intentions, or long-term friendship with the United States,” he added.

Nothing will be cleared up until an authentic independent investigation takes place into what really took place on 9/11. The new release of a four-year academic study showing that World Trade Center building seven did not collapse due to office fires only underscores the need for another investigation.

 

Some airplanes did something?! New York Times article ‘de-terrorizes’ 9/11 attacks

CAP

On the anniversary of the most devastating terrorist attack on US soil, a story by the New York Times suggested that “airplanes” brought down the twin towers. The seeming shift of responsibility did not sit well with readers.

“18 years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center,” read a tweet from the New York Times on Wednesday. “Today families will once again gather and grieve at the site where more than 2000 people died.” Inside an accompanying article, the same bizarre sentence was repeated.

Though technological dystopia was all the rage in 2001, what with the success of ‘The Matrix’ two years earlier and the passing of Y2K after that, the 9/11 attacks were not carried out by sentient airplanes, but by terrorist hijackers. Enraged readers made sure the NYT knew that, slating the newspaper for omitting the terms ‘Islamic terrorists’ or even the less-loaded ‘Al Qaeda’ from its story.

CAP

CAP

The Times later deleted the tweet and amended its story, which, this time around, read: “Eighteen years have passed since terrorists commandeered airplanes to take aim at the World Trade Center and bring them down.” Responsibility was placed squarely with Al Qaeda in the updated article.

But why the strange phrasing in the first place? The Times did not report the recent mass shootings in Texas as the work of a disembodied AR-15. Nor does the paper attribute President Donald Trump’s executive orders to levitating pens, or climate change to fossil fuels deciding to burn themselves.

CAP

To some observers, the watered-down description of the attacks was an effort to… not offend anybody, including ordinary Muslims who risk guilt-by-association for sharing their religious beliefs with the perpetrators. “Some airplanes did something,” jibed one commenter, comparing the Times’ coverage to a much-maligned soundbite from Democratic Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar earlier this year, in which Omar summarized the attacks as “some people did something.”

CAP

CAP

To be fair, radical Islamic terrorists aren’t alone in having their deeds sanitized by the New York Times in recent days. The paper marked the 43rd anniversary of Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong’s passing on Monday with a tweet describing how Chairman Mao “began as an obscure peasant” and “died one of history’s great revolutionary figures.”

After a similar backlash, the tweet was deleted, with the paper apologizing for not providing “critical historical context;” namely the famines that occurred on Mao’s watch and his role in the 1966-1976 ‘Cultural Revolution,’ events that left tens of millions of Chinese citizens dead.

 

The end is nigh: Scottish cops blasted for panic-inducing ‘preparedness bag’ tweet

CAP

Police Scotland are under fire for a worrying tweet advising citizens to prepare a grab bag with emergency supplies for immediate use, sparking wild speculation, meme-making and understandable concern among the masses.

“September is preparedness month. Emergencies can happen at any time and it’s recommended to have a #GrabBag ready containing essential items including medication, copies of important documents, food/water, torch, radio and other personal items,” the police tweeted as part of their ‘30 days 30 ways’ campaign.

CAP

The anxiety-inducing advice proposed packing a bag with food, water, and medication, as well as a pen and notepad, phone charger, whistle, and first aid kit. However, a Sunday morning may not have been the best time to urge people to prepare for some undisclosed disaster headed their way, judging by the reactions online, most of which centered around a single theme: “Do they know something we don’t?”

“What emergencies do you envisage? Brexit? War? Civil disturbance? Flood? Pestilence? Nuclear accident? Martial Law?”wrote one user, while another offered a variety of betting odds on what the impending doom might be: “Asteroid 4/1 Tsunami 8/1 Nuclear war 14/1 Alien invasion 22/1 Zombie Apocalypse 33/1 No deal Brexit 1000/1.”

Others adopted a more tongue-in-cheek approach.

CAP

One commenter quipped: “Some advice please on #grabbag regarding ‘seasonal clothing’. I have packed some fancy dress for Hallowe’en and then a Santa suit for Christmas. Will that be enough do you think?”

Alien invasion, zombie apocalypse, and calamity in the form a Boris Johnson-led Brexit were all recurring themes as Scots piled on the police for such a needlessly panic-inducing tweet.

CAP

Some, however, called for calm (sincerely) and claimed not to see the big fuss while humble-bragging about their multitude of emergency preparedness plans.

CAP

The whole kerfuffle reportedly stems from an initiative initially introduced by the US Department of Homeland Security that has been widely picked up by various institutions and public bodies across the UK.

The timing couldn’t be worse, however, as the tweet only added to online speculation that British Prime Minister Boris Johnson might declare a national emergency in order to force through a no-deal Brexit, effectively weaponizing the Civil Contingencies Act of 2004 against his political opponents.

CAP

Study Finds Rise In ‘Doomsday Prepping’ Due To Mainstream American ‘Culture Of Fear’

Emergency survival kit

By John Anderer

CANTERBURY, England — “Doomsday prepping” or stockpiling food, medicine, weapons and other supplies in case of an apocalyptic scenario has long been considered peculiar behavior only exhibited by conspiracy theorists and other extremists in the United States. However, such prepping has actually been steadily on the rise in the U.S. over the past decade. So, what’s causing this surge in stockpiled rice packets and underground bunkers? One group of researchers say it is an ever growing sense of impending doom in American culture.

Many have speculated that this surge in doomsday preppers over the last 10 years was linked to an extreme political reaction among many conservatives to Barack Obama’s initial election in 2008, but a new study out of the United Kingdom finds that neither the Obama presidency nor extreme right-wing conspiracy theories in general are the main cause of this growing phenomenon.

Researchers interviewed preppers from 18 U.S. states and asked about their motivations for stockpiling food and supplies. The results indicated that, although most did seem to be conservative and fear liberal policies, the main reason behind their motivations was the overall sense of fear currently dominating U.S. culture across a variety of media channels. Most Americans can’t seem to log online or turn on the television without being hit by a grim view of the future being reported or speculated on.

Potential occurrences commonly worried about by preppers include possible economic depressions, terrorist attacks, cyber-attacks, pandemics, or environmental disasters.

Furthermore, researchers say that frequent recommendations from the U.S. government on how to prepare for potential disasters, such as when residents of certain communities are advised to stockpile water in preparation for a hurricane or blackout, have also contributed to the rising number of doomsday preppers in the United States.

The study’s authors say their findings paint a more nuanced picture of doomsday preppers and their motivations, especially since up until now most were simply considered crazy or delusional. According to their results, most preppers don’t believe the world will end tomorrow or a giant meteor will hit the earth at any moment, they simply want to be prepared for anything “just in case” something terrible happens.

Researchers note that while extreme right-wing ideologies don’t seem to be the main cause of these fears and preparations, the general idea among many conservatives that if a Democrat regains control of the White House it will inevitably lead to chaos remains very much connected to the phenomenon of doomsday preppers. At the end of the day, though, that is just another possible event for conservative preppers to fear, and not themain cause.

“Fear is now deeply entrenched in modern American culture and is the principal reason that so many citizens are engaging in ‘prepping’,” explains lead author Dr. Michael Mills in a release.

According to Mills, these preppers believe that if the worse were to happen, the government’s response simply wouldn’t be adequate and many people would be left to fend for themselves.

“Rather than seeing prepping as an exception within America’s right-wing political culture, we ought to see it as being reflective of increasingly established and popular outlooks,” Mills comments.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑