Neocons and Media Unite to Attack Trump’s Syria Decision

By Mark Alan

President Trump’s decision to withdraw US troops from Syria has been met with some push back among neoconservatives and the media. Although the move seems consistent with the presidents previous statements about the conflict, that didn’t stop some from expressing shock over the decision. Undoubtedly, the two loudest voices among Republicans were Senators Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio.

Graham called the move an “Obama-like” mistake. Rubio, apparently trying to establish himself as the leading figure of the neoconservative movement, went as far as calling the president’s decision a “retreat.” Graham and Rubio have both expressed past support for using the US military to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The response from many in the media hasn’t been too different from that of the neocons. CNN’s Erin Burnett strongly condemned President Trump’s decision. She said the president was giving Vladimir Putin an early Christmas present by withdrawing US soldiers from Syria. However, she failed to articulate why she believes the lives of US soldiers are less valuable than the alleged disruption between the US and Russia.

Burnett wasn’t the only CNN personality to attack the president for his decision. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria also bashed the withdraw of US troops from Syria. He claimed President Trump was making an even bigger mistake than former president George W Bush’s “mission accomplished” fiasco during the Iraq War. It’s worth noting that Zakaria is one of many prominent members of the media who supported the decision to invade Iraq.

Anchors from other networks also condemned the president’s choice to withdraw troops from Syria. Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade called Trump’s decision “stunning and irresponsible.” He also suggested the president was “cutting and running.” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough expressed similar sentiments on his show this morning.

The reaction of the neoconservatives and like minded members of the media shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. The two groups have united numerous times in the past, salivating at the idea of a ground war to overthrow Assad in Syria. Thankfully, peace has prevailed.

United States military forces have been in Syria for over four years. The first known instance of American troops fighting on the ground in Syria occurred in July of 2014, as part of a hostage rescue operation. The Global War on Terror has already cost US tax payers nearly 6 trillion dollars. To provide that number some context, the combined value of the entire US housing market is worth about 30 trillion dollars.

Elsewhere, President Trump’s decision has been met with praise. Senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul both applauded the president’s withdraw of troops from Syria. Senator Paul saidthe president’s decision is another example of Trump keeping his campaign promises. Paul further defended the move, saying the president’s decision in Syria illustrates why he won the 2016 election.

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

See the source image

By Robert Bridge

Once again, a reporter has been accused of writing fake stories – over a span of years – reinforcing the suspicion that we are living in a post-truth world where words, to paraphrase Kipling, “are the most powerful drug.”

This week, Der Spiegel, the German news weekly, was forced to admit that one of its former star reporters, the award-winning Claas Relotius“falsified his articles on a grand scale.”

Indeed, it seems the disgraced journalist was motivated more by fiction writers John le Carre and Tom Clancy than by any media heavyweights, like Andrew Breitbart and Walter Cronkite.

Relotius, who just this month took home Germany’s Reporterpreis (‘Reporter of the Year’) for his enthralling tale of a Syrian teenager, “made up stories and invented protagonists,” Der Spiegel admitted.

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

There is a temptation to rationalize Relotius’s multiple indiscretions, not to mention the failure of his fastidious employer to unearth them for so long, as an unavoidable part of the dog-eat-dog media jungle. After all, journalists are not robots – at least not yet – and we are all humans prone to poor judgment and mistakes, perhaps even highly unethical ones.

That explanation, however, falls short of explaining the internal forces battering away at the foundation of Western media, an institution built on the shifting sand of lies, disinformation and outright propaganda. And what is readily apparent to those outside of the Western media fortress is certainly even more apparent to those inside.

A good example is Russiagate. This elaborate myth, which has been peddled repeatedly and without an ounce of 100-percent real beef since the US election of 2016, goes like this: A group of Russian hackers, buying a few hundred social media memes for just rubles to the dollar, were able to do what all the Republican campaign strategists, and all the special interests groups, with all of their billions of dollars in their massive war chest, simply could not: keep Democratic voters at home on the couch come Election Day – a tactic now known as “voter suppression operations” – thereby handing the White House to Donald Trump on a silver platter. Or shall we say ‘a Putin platter’?

Capture

Don’t believe me? Here’s the opening line of a recent Washington Post article that should be rated ‘R’ for racist: “One difference between Russian and Republican efforts to quash the black vote: The Russians are more sophisticated, insidious and slick,” wailed Joe Davidson, who apparently watched too many Hollywood films where the Russkies play all of the villains. “Unlike the Republican sledgehammers used to suppress votes and thwart electorates’ decisions in various states, the Russians are sneaky, using social media come-ons that ostensibly had little to do with the 2016 vote.”

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel, despite being forced to come clean over the transgressions of Claas Relotius, will most likely never own up to its own factual shortcomings with regards to their dismal reporting on Russia.

For example, in an article published last year entitled ‘Putin’s work, Clinton’s contribution,’ the German weekly lamented that “A superpower intervenes in the election campaign of another superpower: The Russian cyber-attack in the US is a scandal.” Just like their fallen star reporter, Der Spiegel regurgitated fiction masquerading as news.

Capture

However, there is no need to limit ourselves to just media-generated Russian fairytales. The Western media has contrived other sensational stories, with its own cast of dubious characters, and with far greater consequences.

Consider the reporting in the Western media prior to the 2003 Iraq War, when most journalists were behaving as cheerleaders for military invasion as opposed to conscientious objectors, or at least objective observers. In fact, two reporters with the New York Times, Michael Gordon and Judith Miller, arguably gave the Bush administration and a hardcore group of neocons inside Washington, which had been pushing for a war against Saddam Hussein for many years, the barest justification it required for military action.

Just six months before the bombs started dropping on Baghdad, Gordon and Miller penned a front-page article in the Times that opened with this stunning claim: “Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.”

The article in America’s ‘paper of record’ then proceeded to build the case for military action against Iraq by quoting an assortment of anonymous senior administration officials, anonymous Iraqi defectors, and anonymous chemical weapons experts. In fact, much of the story was based on comments provided by one ‘Ahmed al-Shemri,’ a pseudonym for someone purported to have been connected to Hussein’s chemical-weapons program. The authors quoted the mystery man as saying: “All of Iraq is one large storage facility.”

Gordon and Miller also claimed their source had said that “he had been told that Iraq was still storing some 12,500 gallons of anthrax.” Several months later, just weeks before the US invasion of Iraq commenced, US Secretary of State Colin Powell invited the UN General Assembly to imagine what a “teaspoon of dry anthrax” could do if unleashed on the public.

Powell, who later said the testimony would be a permanent “blot” on his record, even shook a tiny faux sample of the deadly biological agent in the Assembly for maximum theatrical effect.

Shortly after the release of the Times piece, top Bush officials appeared on television and alluded to Miller’s story in support of military action. Meanwhile, UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq never found chemical weapons or the materials needed to build atomic weapons. In other words, the $1-trillion-dollar war against Iraq, which led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, was a completely senseless act of aggression against a sovereign state, which the US media helped perpetrate.

Aside from the question of whether readers really put much faith in these fantastic media stories, complete with pseudonymous characters and impossible to prove claims; there remains another question. Does the Western media itself believe its own stories?  The answer seems to be no, at least not always.

With regards to the Russiagate story, for example, an investigative journalism outfit, Project Veritas, caught a few Western journalists off-guard about their true feelings in relation to the claims against Russia, and their feelings in general about the state of the media.

“I love the news business, but I’m very cynical about it – and at the same time so are most of my colleagues, CNN Supervising Producer John Bonifield admitted, unaware he was being secretly filmed.

When pushed to explain why CNN was beating the anti-Russia drum on a daily basis, things became clearer: “Because it’s ratings,” Bonifield said. “Our ratings are incredible right now.”

In the same media sting operation, Van Jones, a prominent CNN political commentator who has pushed the anti-Russia position numerous times on-air, completely changed his tune when caught off-air and off-guard. “The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger,” he remarked.

This brings us back to the story of the fallen Der Spiegel journalist. It seems that a deep cynicism has taken hold in at least some parts of the Western media establishment. Journalists seem increasingly willing to produce extremely tenuous, fact-challenged stories, many of which are barely held together by a rickety composite of anonymous entities.

And why not? If their own media bosses are permitting gross fabrications on a number of major issues, not least of all related to Russia, and further afield in Syria, why should the journalists be forced to play by the rules?

Under such oppressive conditions, where the media appears to be merely the mouthpiece of the government’s position on a number of issues, those working inside this apparatus will eventually come around to the conclusion that truth is not the main priority. The main priority is hoodwinking the public into believing something even when the facts – or lack of them – point to other conclusions.

Thus, it is no surprise when we find Western reporters imitating the greatest fiction writers, because in reality that is what they have already become.

@Robert_Bridge

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Maddow’s latest crystal ball reading: Putin ‘ordered’ Trump to withdraw from Afghanistan

Capture

Rachel Maddow (R) and a US soldier in Afghanistan © AFP / Theo Wargo; Reuters / Shamil Zhumatov

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow – a pioneer of Putin-ate-my-homework journalism – has predictably mused that Donald Trump is considering pulling troops out of Afghanistan on the orders of Russia’s president. The evidence speaks for itself.

In a segment on her critically-acclaimed show, “Watch Me Scream ‘Russia’ Until I Dislocate My Jaw”, Maddow made an adroit observation of seismic proportions: Reports that Donald Trump is mulling a partial withdrawal from Afghanistan emerged only hours after Vladimir Putin said that the US keeps promising to leave the country but never does! In layman’s terms: Putin ordered Trump to pull troops out of Afghanistan, during a live broadcast? It seems Maddow believes that she decrypted their top-secret communications channel.

Capture

Apparently she cannot fathom that there may be any non-Putin related motives for leaving Afghanistan after 17 years. But in August, the MSNBC host accused Trump of “flip-flopping” after announcing that more US troops would be deployed to Afghanistan.

Capture

Capture

So Rachel Maddow opposes sending more troops to Afghanistan – but anyone who wants to withdraw US forces from the country is a Putin stooge. A daunting pickle, indeed.

As Vox pointed out at the time, Trump “spent years railing against the war in Afghanistan and calling for a US withdrawal from the country.” Before moving into the White House, he made it clear to lawmakers that his administration would not send US troops to fight abroad unless “absolutely necessary.”

ALSO ON RT.COMPutin: ‘US right to leave Syria, but no signs of pullout – remember Afghanistan’

Maddow’s other celebrated Russiagate hits include having a stroke – live on television – after discovering that Russia shares a border with North Korea. She also famously revealed that Rex Tillerson was hand-picked by Putin to serve as Secretary of State – you know, the guy who allegedly called Trump a “f*cking moron”.

Imagine Maddow’s on-air meltdown if Trump really does withdraw troops from Afghanistan.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Psyop which saw Democrats pose as Russians ahead of Alabama poll swept under carpet (VIDEO)

Psyop which saw Democrats pose as Russians ahead of Alabama poll swept under carpet (VIDEO)

A $100,000 Democrat psyop to fake Russian interference in an Alabama election was brushed aside by the US media as nonconsequential. But the alleged Russian operation of similar cost is treated as a Pearl Harbor-like attack.

The controversial social media operation, launched to undermine Republican candidate for Senate Roy Moore, was exposed by the New York Times this week.

The newspaper said it was an experiment which had little if any consequence on the outcome of the 2017 vote, which Democrat Doug Jones won by a less than 2-percent margin.

ALSO ON RT.COMTwitterstorm as bombshell Russiagate report suggests SEX TOYS penetrate US democracy

 

RT’s Murad Gazdiev wonders why a false flag operation involving Russia is not a bigger scandal for the US media. After all, they eagerly reported Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election, which is claimed to have a similar budget, as a major crime or even an act of war on par with Pearl Harbor.

Watch the video and take a guess.

 

Neocons and Media Unite to Attack Trump’s Syria Decision

By

President Trump’s decision to withdraw US troops from Syria has been met with some push back among neoconservatives and the media. Although the move seems consistent with the presidents previous statements about the conflict, that didn’t stop some from expressing shock over the decision. Undoubtedly, the two loudest voices among Republicans were Senators Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio.

Graham called the move an “Obama-like” mistake. Rubio, apparently trying to establish himself as the leading figure of the neoconservative movement, went as far as calling the president’s decision a “retreat.” Graham and Rubio have both expressed past support for using the US military to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The response from many in the media hasn’t been too different from that of the neocons. CNN’s Erin Burnett strongly condemned President Trump’s decision. She said the president was giving Vladimir Putin an early Christmas present by withdrawing US soldiers from Syria. However, she failed to articulate why she believes the lives of US soldiers are less valuable than the alleged disruption between the US and Russia.

Burnett wasn’t the only CNN personality to attack the president for his decision. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria also bashed the withdraw of US troops from Syria. He claimed President Trump was making an even bigger mistake than former president George W Bush’s “mission accomplished” fiasco during the Iraq War. It’s worth noting that Zakaria is one of many prominent members of the media who supported the decision to invade Iraq.

Anchors from other networks also condemned the president’s choice to withdraw troops from Syria. Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade called Trump’s decision “stunning and irresponsible.” He also suggested the president was “cutting and running.” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough expressed similar sentiments on his show this morning.

The reaction of the neoconservatives and like minded members of the media shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. The two groups have united numerous times in the past, salivating at the idea of a ground war to overthrow Assad in Syria. Thankfully, peace has prevailed.

United States military forces have been in Syria for over four years. The first known instance of American troops fighting on the ground in Syria occurred in July of 2014, as part of a hostage rescue operation. The Global War on Terror has already cost US tax payers nearly 6 trillion dollars. To provide that number some context, the combined value of the entire US housing market is worth about 30 trillion dollars.

Elsewhere, President Trump’s decision has been met with praise. Senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul both applauded the president’s withdraw of troops from Syria. Senator Paul saidthe president’s decision is another example of Trump keeping his campaign promises. Paul further defended the move, saying the president’s decision in Syria illustrates why he won the 2016 election.

This article contains the personal opinions of the author. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Mess of Media. This disclaimer appears on all articles that feature the personal opinions of the author, as Mess of Media is an unbiased and nonpartisan source of information.

 

(GLOBALISTS) -George Soros crowned ‘person of the year’ by Financial Times, but not everyone is cheering

George Soros crowned ‘person of the year’ by Financial Times, but not everyone is cheering

Georges Soros (L) ; Anti-Orban demonstrators in Hungary © Reuters / Charles Platiau / Laszlo Balogh

Being “under siege” from Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin has earned George Soros the FT’s ‘person of the year’ title. Eyebrows were raised over the not-at-all biased description of the billionaire as a champion of democracy.

For thirty years, liberal businessman and philanthropist Soros has used his vast wealth to crusade against“authoritarianism, racism and intolerance,” the FT profile reads.

Capture

Armed with his expansive grant-giving network, Open Societies Foundations (OSF), the Hungarian-American spread his influence to some 100 countries across the globe. The NGO currently has annual expenditures of over $940 million, with 26 national and regional foundations and offices.

There’s hardly a question over whether the Soros-funded apparatus is doing the right thing. The first paragraph of the story says it just “helped thwart an allegedly corrupt nuclear power plant contract with Russia” – a feat to be admired in the liberal world.

“We haven’t stopped having a beneficial influence,” Soros is then quoted as saying.

ALSO ON RT.COMGeorge Soros’ Open Society foundation ends operations in Hungary

But there’s a worrying trend for the Democrat mega-donor, passionate advocate for open borders and outspoken critic of Brexit. More and more detractors see his work as an existential threat to conservative values and even state sovereignty.

The “standard bearer of liberal democracy and open society” has found his ideals “under siege” as he “has attracted the wrath of authoritarian regimes and, increasingly, the national populists who continue to gain ground,” writes FT.

Capture

At one point Soros sounds a bit more critical of himself than the paper, as he acknowledges he’s a divisive figure, something he still believes indicates his effectiveness as an activist.

“I’m blamed for everything, including being the anti-Christ,” Soros says. “I wish I didn’t have so many enemies, but I take it as an indication that I must be doing something right.”

Soros wasn’t joking. Hungarian lawmaker Andras Aradszki of the Christian Democratic People’s Party (KDNP) once declared that it is a Christian’s duty to oppose Soros’ calls for Europe to take in asylum seekers from Africa and the Middle East – what Aradszki called Satan’s Soros plan.” The lawmaker added that “Soros and his comrades want to destroy the independence and values of nation states.”

Capture

In May, the OSF ended its operations in Hungary, citing an “increasingly repressive political and legal environment.” A month later, Hungary’s parliament passed the ‘Stop Soros’ law which threatens jail time for anyone helping illegal immigrants claim asylum.

Hungarian PM Viktor Orban accused Soros of attempting to use mass migration to undermine Europe’s stability.

“Soros has antagonized not only us but also England, President Trump and Israel too,” Orban said in February.“Everywhere he wants to get migration accepted. It won’t work. We are not alone and we will fight together… and we will succeed.”

ALSO ON RT.COMHungary approves ‘Stop Soros’ law criminalizing aid to illegal migrants

In the UK, the billionaire has been sharply criticized for his donations of over £800,000 ($1,062,000) to pro-EU campaigns. The pledges included £400,000 to Best for Britain, a campaign group that has been at the forefront of anti-Brexit activism.

Capture

The businessman’s activities have received similar hostility in the United States, where some have accused him of providing assistance to the so-called “migrant caravan” which made its way from Central America to the US’ southern border. “The venom, long concealed among extreme right networks, has leaked into the mainstream,” laments the FT.

Capture

Soros, along with other notable critics of Donald Trump, such as former President Barack Obama, the Clintons and CNN, was recently targeted by an alleged pipe bomb mailed to his home in New York.

A prominent backer of the Democratic Party, Soros has called Trump a “danger to the world,” and once (wrongly) bet that stocks would collapse if Donald won presidency. The bet reportedly cost him $1 billion – quite affordable for the investor who is currently worth $8.3 billion after his 2017 transfer of $18 billion to the OSF.

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Lock him up!’ Smiling Trump joins chant against Soros (VIDEO)

For a man who made billions short-selling the UK pound sterling and has been accused of several more currency crises in Asia, FT’s Soros comes across as a wise old benefactor “looking beyond his formidable legacy” in his “twilight years.”

READ MORE: Soros sold off Facebook stocks before they tanked, documents show

But for all the accolades, the paper may have forgotten that the businessman has long had his sights set on a title more ambitious than merely the ‘person’ of the year. In a 1993 interview with the UK Independent, Soros actually confessed that he suffers from a god complex.

Capture

“It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out,” he said.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

MSNBC’s Russia ‘expert’: Moscow terrorizing US with meme-filled ‘cruise missiles’ (VIDEO)

MSNBC’s Russia 'expert': Moscow terrorizing US with meme-filled ‘cruise missiles’ (VIDEO)

Malcolm Nance

Millions of impressionable American minds are being corrupted by Russian-linked memes, “the cruise missiles of fake news”, according to MSNBC’s self-anointed Russia expert. Everyone agrees that this is a reasonable observation.

Malcolm Nance, a former Navy cryptologist who studied Arabic and served in the Middle East, makes regular appearances on MSNBC, where he is given generous amounts of airtime to share his thoughts on all things Russia related. In his latest appearance on the network, Nance described how the destructive power of Russian-linked internet memes have apparently devastated America.

 

“The Internet Research agency built all these memes and tropes which became the cruise missiles of fake news and disinformation,” Nance said. He claimed that these nefarious meme-bombs have ravaged the mental faculties of “one third of the United States population,” leaving them unable to “believe what they see before their very eyes.” And of course, these JPEG-rockets “may have elected a president in the process.”

Photographs of these ghastly cruise missiles have been floating around on the internet in recent days, with many noting their astonishing level of sophistication.

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 11.02.11 AM

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 11.03.26 AM

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 11.05.19 AM

This is not the first time that Nance has deployed terrifying images of Russian meme missiles to warn Americans about the new Moscow menace: In a July interview he declared that, “As an information war, the payloads in the information cruise missiles that Russia launched at this country were propaganda products which had their origins in 1917, in the Bolshevik revolution.”

Months before that outburst, in March, Nance was quoted by the Washington Post as thoughtfully asking: “What happens if 100s of millions of progressives worldwide abandon Facebook because they think it’s a tool of Trump, Russia authoritarians and neo-Nazis? Facebook needs to own up and do damage control to ensure they are not 2018’s information cruise missile of choice.”

Nance really has a knack for inventive Russia commentary. He previously demonstrated his vast knowledge about the country by falsely claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin was a “former director of the KGB.”

The “intelligence analyst” is also a savvy media observer, describing journalist Glenn Greenwald as “an agent of Trump & Moscow” after the Intercept editor attended a conference in Moscow.

When it comes to comparing GIFs to airstrikes, the MSNBC talking head keeps good company: Guardian writer Carole Cadwalladr once famously suggested that the UK was now at “war” with Russia. The reason? Russia’s Foreign Ministry changed its Twitter profile picture to a photograph of Maria Butina.

Mika missing at Morning Joe after calling Pompeo ‘a wannabe dictator’s butt boy’

Mika missing at Morning Joe after calling Pompeo ‘a wannabe dictator’s butt boy’

MSNBC’s talk show Morning Joe had half of its host family missing on Thursday. Mika Brzezinski was notably absent amid a scandal over a homophobic slur thrown at Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Brzezinski’s offensive remark slipped in during a live interview with Senator Richard Durbin on Wednesday. She wanted to ask his opinion about the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and remarks made by Pompeo on the subject earlier on Fox & Friends.

“I understand that Donald Trump doesn’t care. He doesn’t care. But why doesn’t Mike Pompeo care right now? Are the pathetic deflections that we just heard when he appeared on Fox and Friends, is that a patriot speaking? Or a wannabe dictator’s butt boy?” she asked.

MSNBC apparently tried and failed to censor the poorly thought-out quip by briefly silencing Brzezinski’s words.

On Thursday, Brzezinski’s co-host and husband, Joe Scarborough, explained her absence by saying that “Mika has the day off with her family, a long-planned family event.” He assured she would be coming back on Friday.

The network however did not immediately comment on the scandal, in contrast to its swift expression of support for host Joy Reid at the time she was criticized for homophobic posts written a decade ago.

Mika’s slur was met with instant outrage on social media, with people of all kinds of political affiliation expressing disgust with the phrase.

Capture

Capture

Capture

Facing the heat, Brzezinski tried to apologize on her Twitter account, saying that implying a pederasty relationship was a“SUPER BAD choice of words” and that she should have called the secretary of state a “water boy” instead.

Capture

Capture

Brzezinski’s remark is hardly the first instance when critics of Donald Trump have used homophobic biases to target him or his policies. In June, the New York Times published a cartoon showing an imaginary date between the US president and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, which viewers were supposed to find disgusting.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑