乔·劳里亚(Joe Lauria)档案



书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论

Under increasing pressure from a population angry about endless wars and the transfer of wealth to the one percent, American plutocrats are defending themselves by suppressing critical news in the corporate media they own. But as that news emerges on RT and dissident websites, they’ve resorted to the brazen move of censorship, which is rapidly spreading in the U.S. and Europe. I know because I was a victim of it.

At the end of October, I wrote an 文章 提供 财团新闻 about the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign paying for unvetted opposition research that became the basis for much of the disputed story about Russia allegedly interfering in the 2016 presidential election.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaking with supporters at a campaign rally in Phoenix, Arizona, March 21, 2016. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaking with supporters at a campaign rally in Phoenix, Arizona, March 21, 2016. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

The piece showed that the Democrats’ two paid-for sources that have engendered belief in Russia-gate are at best shaky. First was former British spy Christopher Steele’s largely unverified dossier of second- and third-hand opposition research portraying Donald Trump as something of a Russian Manchurian candidate.

And the second was CrowdStrike, an anti-Putin private company, examining the DNC’s computer server to dubiously claim discovery of a Russian “hack.” CrowdStrike, it was later discovered, had used 错误的软件 it was later forced to 改写. The company was hired after the DNC refused to allow the FBI to look at the server.

My piece also described the dangerous consequences of partisan Democratic faith in Russia-gate: a sharp increase in geopolitical tensions between nuclear-armed Russia and the U.S., and a New McCarthyism that is spreading fear — especially in academia, journalism and civil rights organizations — about questioning the enforced orthodoxy of Russia’s alleged guilt.

After the article appeared at 财团新闻, I tried to penetrate the mainstream by then publishing a version of the article on the 赫芬顿邮报, 这是 更名 来自 赫芬顿邮报 in April this year by new management. As a contributor to the site since February 2006, I am trusted by 赫芬顿邮报 editors to post my stories directly online. However, within 24 hours of publication on Nov. 4, HuffPost editors 缩回 the article without any explanation.

This broke with the earlier principles of journalism that the Web site espoused. For instance, in 2008, Arianna Huffington 告诉 radio host Don Debar that, “We welcome all opinions, except conspiracy theories.” She said: “Facts are sacred. That’s part of our philosophy of journalism.”

But Huffington stepped down as editor in August 2016 and has nothing to do with the site now. It is 运行 by Lydia Polgreen, a former “纽约时报” reporter and editor, who evidently has very different ideas. In April, she completely redesigned the site and renamed it 赫夫邮报。

Before the management change, I had published several articles on the 赫芬顿邮报 about Russia without controversy. For instance, 赫芬顿邮报 published my on Nov. 5, 2016, that predicted three days before the election that if Clinton lost she’d blame Russia. My point was confirmed by the campaign-insider book 碎了, which revealed that immediately after Clinton’s loss, senior campaign advisers decided to blame Russia for her defeat.

On Dec. 12, 2016, I published another ,其 赫芬顿邮报 editors promoted, called, “Blaming Russia To Overturn The Election Goes Into Overdrive.” I argued that “Russia has been blamed in the U.S. for many things and though proof never seems to be supplied, it is widely believed anyway.”

After I posted an updated version of the 财团新闻 piece — renamed “On the Origins of Russia-gate” — I was informed 23 hours later by a Facebook friend that the piece had been retracted by 赫芬顿邮报 editors. As a reporter for mainstream media for more than a quarter century, I know that a newsroom rule is that before the serious decision is made to retract an article the writer is contacted to be allowed to defend the piece. This never happened. There was no due process. A 赫芬顿邮报 editor ignored my email asking why it was taken down.

Support from Independent Media

Like the word “fascism,” “censorship” is an over-used and mis-used accusation, and I usually avoid using it. But without any explanation, I could only conclude that the decision to retract was political, not editorial.

The New York Times’ connect-the-dots graphic showing the Kremlin sitting atop the White House.
The New York Times’ connect-the-dots graphic showing the Kremlin sitting atop the White House.

I am non-partisan as I oppose both major parties for failing to represent millions of Americans’ interests. I follow facts where they lead. In this case, the facts led to an understanding that the Jan. 6 FBI/NSA/CIA intelligence 评估” on alleged Russian election interference, prepared by what then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called “hand-picked” analysts, was based substantially on unvetted opposition research and speculation, not serious intelligence work.

The assessment even made the point that the analysts were not asserting that the alleged Russian interference was a fact. The report contained this disclaimer: “Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents.”

Under deadline pressure on Jan. 6, Scott Shane of 纽约时报 instinctively wrote what many readers of the report must have been thinking: “What is missing from the public report is what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack. … Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’”

Yet, after the Jan. 6 report was published, leading Democrats asserted falsely that the “assessment” represented the consensus judgment of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies – not just the views of “hand-picked” analysts from three – and much of the U.S. mainstream media began treating the allegations of Russian “hacking” as fact, not as an uncertain conclusion denied by both the Russian government and WikiLeaks, which insists that it did not get the two batches of Democratic emails from the Russian government.

Yet, because of the oft-repeated “17 intelligence agencies” canard and the mainstream media’s over-hyped reporting, the public impression has built up that the accusations against Russia are indisputable. If you ask a Russia-gate believer today what their faith is based on, they will invariably point to the Jan. 6 assessment and mock anyone who still expresses any doubt.

For instance, an unnamed former CIA officer 告诉 拦截 last month, “You’ve got all these intelligence agencies saying the Russians did the hack. To deny that is like coming out with the theory that the Japanese didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor.”

That the supposedly dissident 截距 would use this quote is instructive about how unbalanced the media’s reporting on Russia-gate has been. We have film of Japanese planes attacking Pearl Harbor and American ships burning – and we have eyewitness accounts of thousands of U.S. soldiers and sailors. Yet, on Russia-gate, we have only the opinions of “hand-picked” intelligence officials who themselves admit their opinions aren’t fact. No serious editor would allow a self-interested and unnamed source to equate Russia-gate and Pearl Harbor in print.

In this atmosphere, it was easy for 赫芬顿邮报 editors to hear complaints from readers and blithely ban my story. But before it was pulled, 125 people had shared it. Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst, then took up my cause, being the first to write about the 赫芬顿邮报 censorship on his 博客。 McGovern included a link to a .pdf file that I captured of the censored HuffPost story. It has since been republished on numerous other 网站。

Journalist Max Blumenthal 啾啾 about it. British filmmaker and writer Tariq Ali 发布 it on his Facebook page. Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams 采访 me at length about the censorship on their TV program. ZeroHedge wrote a widely shared and someone actually took the time, 27 minutes and 13 seconds to be exact, to read the entire article on YouTube. I began a 请愿赫芬顿邮报’s Polgreen to either explain the retraction or restore the article. It has gained more than 2,000 signatures so far. If a serious fact-check analysis was made of my article, it must exist and can and should be produced.

Watchdogs & Media Defending Censorship

Despite this support from independent media, a senior official at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, I learned, declined to take up my cause because he believes in the Russia-gate story. I also learned that a senior officer at the American Civil Liberties Union rejected my case because he too believes in Russia-gate. Both of these serious organizations were set up precisely to defend individuals in such situations on principle, not preference.

10 年 2015 月 XNUMX 日,俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京与德国总理安格拉·默克尔在克里姆林宫。 (来自俄罗斯政府的照片)
10 年 2015 月 XNUMX 日,俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京与德国总理安格拉·默克尔在克里姆林宫。 (来自俄罗斯政府的照片)

In terms of their responsibilities for defending journalism and protecting civil liberties, their personal opinions about whether Russia-gate is real or not are irrelevant. The point is whether a journalist has the right to publish an article skeptical of it. I worry that amid the irrational fear spreading about Russia that concerns about careers and funding are behind these decisions.

One online publication decidedly took the HuffPost’s side. Steven Perlberg, a media reporter for BuzzFeed使用,赫芬顿邮报 why they retracted my article. While ignoring me, the editors issued a statement to BuzzFeed saying that “Mr. Lauria’s self-published” piece was “later flagged by readers, and after deciding that the post contained multiple factually inaccurate or misleading claims, our editors removed the post per our contributor terms of use.” Those terms include retraction for “any reason,” including, apparently, censorship.

Perlberg 发布 练习 赫芬顿邮报 statement on Twitter. I asked him if he inquired of the editors what those “multiple” errors and “misleading claims” were. I asked him to contact me to get my side of the story. Perlberg totally ignored me. He wrote nothing about the matter. He apparently believed the 赫芬顿邮报 and that was that. In this way, he acquiesced with the censorship.

BuzzFeed, of course, is the sensationalist outlet that irresponsibly published the Steele dossier in full, even though the accusations – not just about Donald Trump but also many other individuals – weren’t verified. Then on Nov. 14, BuzzFeed reporter Jason Leopold wrote one of the most 可笑的 of a long line of fantastic Russia-gate stories, reporting that the Russian foreign ministry had sent money to Russian consulates in the U.S. “to finance the election campaign of 2016.” The scoop generated some screaming headlines before it became clear that the money was to pay for Russian citizens in the U.S. to vote in the 2016 Duma election.

That Russia-gate has reached this point, based on faith and not fact, was further illustrated by a Facebook exchange I had with Gary Sick, an academic who served on the Ford and Carter national security staffs. When I pressed Sick for evidence of Russian interference, he eventually replied: “If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…” When I told him that was a very low-bar for such serious accusations, he angrily cut off debate.

When belief in a story becomes faith-based or is driven by intense self-interest, honest skeptics are pushed aside and trampled. True-believers disdain facts that force them to think about what they believe. They won’t waste time making a painstaking examination of the facts or engage in a detailed debate even on something as important and dangerous as a new Cold War with Russia.

This is the most likely explanation for the 赫芬顿邮报‘s censorship: a visceral reaction to having their Russia-gate faith challenged.

Why Critical News is Suppressed

但是, HuffPost’s action is hardly isolated. It is part of a rapidly growing landscape of censorship of news critical of American corporate and political leaders who are trying to defend themselves from an increasingly angry population. It’s a story as old as civilization: a wealthy and powerful elite fending off popular unrest by trying to contain knowledge of how the elite gain at the others’ expense, at home and abroad.

President Donald Trump being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017. (Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov)
President Donald Trump being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017. (Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov)

A lesson of the 2016 campaign was that growing numbers of Americans are fed up with three decades of neoliberal policies that have fabulously enriched the top tier of Americans and debased a huge majority of everyone else. The population has likewise grown tired of the elite’s senseless wars to expand their own interests, which they to conflate with the entire country’s interests.

America’s bipartisan rulers are threatened by popular discontent from both left and right. They were alarmed by the Bernie Sanders insurgency and by Donald Trump’s victory, even if Trump is now betraying the discontented masses who voted for him by advancing tax and health insurance plans designed to further crush them and benefit the rich.

Trump’s false campaign promises will only make the rulers’ problem of controlling a restless population more difficult. Americans are subjected to economic inequality greater than in the first Gilded Age. They are also subjected today to more war than in the first Gilded Age, which led to the launch of American overseas empire. Today American rulers are engaged in multiple conflicts following decades of post-World War II invasions and coups to expand their global interests.

People with wealth and power always seem to be nervous about losing both. So plutocrats use the concentrated media they own to suppress news critical of their wars and domestic repression. For example, almost nothing was reported about militarized police forces until the story broke out into the open in the Ferguson protests and now the story has been buried again.

Careerist journalists readily acquiesce in this suppression of news to maintain their jobs, their status and their lifestyles. Meanwhile, a growing body of poorly paid freelancers compete for the few remaining decent-paying gigs for which they must report from the viewpoint of the mainstream news organizations and their wealthy owners.

To operate in this media structure, most journalists know to excise out the historical context of America’s wars of domination. They know to uncritically accept American officials’ bromides about spreading democracy, while hiding the real war aims.

例子比比皆是: America’s role in the Ukraine coup was denied or downplayed; a British parliamentary report exposing American lies that led to the destruction of Libya was 压制; and most infamously, the media promoted the WMD hoax and the fable of “bringing democracy” to Iraq, leading to the illegal invasion and devastation of that country. A recent example from November is a 60分钟 报告 on the Saudi destruction of Yemen, conspicuously failing to mention America’s crucial role in the carnage.

I’ve pitched numerous news stories critical of U.S. foreign policy to a major American newspaper that were rejected or changed in the editorial process. One example is the declassified Defense Intelligence Agency 文件 of August 2012 that accurately predicted the rise of the Islamic State two years later.

The document, which I confirmed with a Pentagon spokesman, said the U.S. and its Turkish, European and Gulf Arab allies, were supporting the establishment of a Salafist principality in eastern Syria to put pressure on the Syrian government, but the document warned that this Salafist base could turn into an “Islamic State.”

But such a story would undermine the U.S. government’s “war on terrorism” narrative by revealing that the U.S.-backed strategy actually was risking the expansion of jihadist-held territory in Syria. The story was twice rejected by my editors and to my knowledge has never appeared in corporate media.

Another story rejected in June 2012, just a year into the Syrian war, was about Russia’s motives in Syria being guided by a desire to defeat the growing jihadist threat there. Corporate media wanted to keep the myth of Russia’s “imperial” aims in Syria alive. I had to publish the 文章 outside the U.S., in a South African daily newspaper.

In September 2015 at the U.N. General Assembly, Russian President Vladimir Putin 确认 my story about Russia’s motives in Syria to stop jihadists from taking over. Putin invited the U.S. to join this effort as Moscow was about to launch its military intervention at the invitation of the Syrian government. The Obama administration, still insisting on “regime change” in Syria, refused. And the U.S. corporate media continued promoting the myth that Russia intervened to recapture its “imperial glory.”

It was much easier to promote the “imperial” narrative than report Putin’s clear 解释 to French TV channel TF1, which was not picked up by American media.

“Remember what Libya or Iraq looked like before these countries and their organizations were destroyed as states by our Western partners’ forces?” Putin said. “These states showed no signs of terrorism. They were not a threat for Paris, for the Cote d’Azur, for Belgium, for Russia, or for the United States. Now, they are the source of terrorist threats. Our goal is to prevent the same from happening in Syria.”

But don’t take Putin’s word for it. Then Secretary of State John Kerry knew why Russia intervened. In a 音频泄漏 conversation with Syrian opposition figures in September 2016, Kerry said: “The reason Russia came in is because ISIL was getting stronger, Daesh was threatening the pos­sibility of going to Damascus, and that’s why Russia came in because they didn’t want a Daesh government and they supported Assad.”

Kerry admitted that rather than seriously fight the Islamic State in Syria, the U.S. was ready to use its growing strength to pressure Assad to resign, just as the DIA document that I was unable to report said it would. “We know that this was growing, we were watching, we saw that Daesh was growing in strength, and we thought Assad was threatened. We thought, how­ever, we could probably manage that Assad might then negotiate, but instead of negotiating he got Putin to support him.” Kerry’s com­ment suggests that the U.S. was willing to risk the Islamic State and its jihadist allies gaining power in order to force out Assad.

Why Russia Is Targeted

Where are independent-minded Western journalists to turn if their stories critical of the U.S. government and corporations are suppressed? The imperative is to get these stories out – and Russian media has provided an opening. But this has presented a new problem for the plutocracy. The suppression of critical news in their corporate-owned media is no longer working if it’s seeping out in Russian media and through dissident Western news sites.

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier outside the Kremlin wall, Dec. 6, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)
Tomb of the Unknown Soldier outside the Kremlin wall, Dec. 6, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)

Their solution has been to brand the content of the Russian television network, RT, as “propaganda” since it presents facts and viewpoints that most Americans have been kept from hearing.

As a Russian-government-financed English-language news channel, RT also gives a Russian perspective on the news, the way CNN and 纽约时报 give an American perspective and the BBC a British one. American mainstream journalists, from my experience, arrogantly deny suppressing news and believe they present a universal perspective, rather than a narrow American view of the world.

The viewpoints of Iranians, Palestinians, Russians, North Koreans and others are never fully reported in the Western media although the supposed mission of journalism is to help citizens understand a frighteningly complex world from multiple points of view. It’s impossible to do so without those voices included. Routinely or systematically shutting them out also dehumanizes people in those countries, making it easier to gain popular support to go to war against them.

Russia is scapegoated by charging that RT or 人造卫星 are sowing divisions in the U.S. by focusing on issues like homelessness, racism, or out-of-control militarized police forces, as if these divisive issues didn’t already exist. The U.S. mainstream media also seems to forget that the U.S. government has engaged in at least 70 years of interference in other countries’ elections, foreign invasions, coups, planting stories in foreign media and cyber-warfare, which Russian media crucially points out.

Now, these American transgressions are projected exclusively onto Moscow. There’s also a measure of self-reverence in this for “successful” people, like some journalists, with a stake in an establishment that underpins the elite, demonstrating how wonderfully democratic they are compared to those ogres in Russia.

The overriding point about the “Russian propaganda” complaint is that when America’s democratic institutions, including the press and the electoral process, are crumbling under the weight of corruption that the American elites have created or maintained, someone else needs to be blamed.

The Jan. 6 intelligence assessment on alleged Russian election meddling is a good example of this. A third of its content is an attack on RT for “undermining American democracy” by reporting on Occupy Wall Street, the protest over the Dakota pipeline and, of all things, holding a “third party candidate debates,” at a time when 71% of American millennials they want a third party.

According to the Jan. 6 assessment, RT’s offenses include reporting that “the US two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population and is a ‘sham.’” RT also “highlights criticism of alleged US shortcomings in democracy and civil liberties.” In other words, reporting newsworthy events and giving third-party candidates a voice undermines democracy.

The assessment also says all this amounts to “a Kremlin-directed campaign to undermine faith in the US Government and fuel political protest,” but those protests by are against privileges of the wealthy and the well-connected, a status quo that the intelligence agencies were in essence 创建 保护。

There are also deeper reasons why Russia is being targeted. The Russia-gate story fits neatly into a geopolitical strategy that long predates the 2016 election. Since Wall Street and the U.S. government lost the dominant position in Russia that existed under the pliable President Boris Yeltsin, the strategy has been to put pressure on getting rid of Putin to restore a U.S. friendly leader in Moscow. There is substance to Russia’s concerns about American designs for “regime change” in the Kremlin.

Moscow sees an aggressive America expanding NATO and putting 30,000 NATO troops on its borders; trying to overthrow a secular ally in Syria with terrorists who threaten Russia itself; backing a coup in Ukraine as a possible prelude to moves against Russia; and using American NGOs to foment unrest inside Russia before they were forced to register as foreign agents.

Accelerated Censorship in the Private Sector

The Constitution prohibits government from prior-restraint, or censorship, though such tactics were imposed, largely unchallenged, during the two world wars. American newspapers voluntarily agreed to censor themselves in the Second World War before the government dictated it.

In the Korean War, General Douglas MacArthur said he didn’t “desire to reestablish wartime censorship” and instead asked the press for self-censorship. He largely got it until the papers began reporting American battlefield losses. On July 25, 1950, “the army ordered that reporters were not allowed to publish ‘unwarranted’ criticism of command decisions, and that the army would be ‘the sole judge and jury’ on what ‘unwarranted’ criticism entailed,” according to a Yale University 根据一项研究, on military censorship.

After excellent on-the-ground reporting from Vietnam brought the war home to America, the military reacted by instituting, initially in the first Gulf War, serious control of the press by “embedding” reporters from private media companies. They accepted the arrangement, much as World War II newspapers censored themselves.

It is important to realize that the First Amendment does not apply to private companies, including the media. It is not illegal for them to practice censorship. I never made a First Amendment argument against the 赫芬顿邮报, for instance. However, under pressure from Washington, even in peacetime, media companies can do the government’s dirty work to censor or limit free speech for the government.

Executives from Facebook, Twitter and Google hauled before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on crime and terrorism on Oct. 31, 2017.
Executives from Facebook, Twitter and Google hauled before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on crime and terrorism on Oct. 31, 2017.

In the past few weeks, we’ve seen an acceleration of attempts by corporations to inhibit Russian media in the U.S. Both Google and Facebook, which dominate the Web with more than 50 percent of ad revenue, were at first resistant to government pressure to censor “Russian propaganda.” But they are coming around.

Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, 说过 on Nov. 18 that Google would “derank” articles from RT and Sputnik in the Google searches, making the stories harder for readers to find. The billionaire Schmidt claimed Russian information can be “repetitive, exploitative, false, [or] likely to have been weaponized,” he said. That is how factual news critical of U.S. corporate and political leadership is seen by them: as a weapon threatening their rule.

“My own view is that these patterns can be detected, and that they can be taken down or deprioritized,” Schmidt said.

Though Google would essentially be hiding news produced by RT and 人造卫星, Schmidt is sensitive to the charge of censorship, even though there’s nothing legally to stop him.

“We don’t want to ban the sites. That’s not how we operate,” Schmidt said cynically. “I am strongly not in favor of censorship. I am very strongly in favor of ranking. It’s what we do.”

But the “deranking” isn’t only aimed at Russian sites; Google algorithms also are taking aim at independent news sites that don’t follow the mainstream herd – and thus are accused of spreading Russian or other “propaganda” if they question the dominant Western narratives on, say, the Ukraine crisis or the war in Syria. A number of alternative websites have begun reporting a sharp fall-off of traffic directed to their sites from Google’s search engines.

Responding to a deadline from Congress to act, Facebook on Nov. 22 announced that it would inform users if they have been “targeted” by Russian “propaganda.” Facebook’s help center will tell users if they liked or shared ads allegedly from the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency, which supposedly bought $100,000 in ads over a two-year period, with more than half these ads coming after the 2016 U.S. election and many not related to politics.

The $100,000 sum over two years compares to Facebook’s $27 billion in annual revenue. Plus, Facebook only says it “believes” or it’s “likely” that the ads came from that firm, whose links to the Kremlin also have yet to be proved.

Facebook described the move as “part of our ongoing effort to protect our platforms and the people who use them from bad actors who try to undermine our democracy.” Congress wants more from Facebook, so it will not be surprising if users will eventually be alerted to Russian media reports as “propaganda” in the future.

While the government can’t openly shut down a news site, the Federal Communications Commission’s upcoming vote on whether to deregulate the Internet by ending net neutrality will free private Internet companies in the U.S. to further marginalize Russian and dissident websites by slowing them down and thus discouraging readers from viewing them.

Likewise, as the U.S. government doesn’t want to be openly seen shutting down RT operations, it is working around the edges to accomplish that.

After the Department of Justice forced, under threat of arrest, RT to register its employees as foreign agents under the 外国代理人注册法, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nuaert said that “FARA does not police the content of information disseminated, does not limit the publication of information or advocacy materials, and does not restrict an organization’s ability to operate.” She’d earlier said that registering would not “impact or affect the ability of them to report news and information. We just have them register. It’s as simple as that.”

The day after Nuaert spoke the Congressional press office 剥离 RT correspondents of their Capitol Hill press passes, citing the FARA registration. “The rules of the Galleries state clearly that news credentials may not be issued to any applicant employed ‘by any foreign government or representative thereof.’ Upon its registration as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), RT Network became ineligible to hold news credentials,” read the letter to RT.

But Russia-gate faithful ignore these aggressive moves and issue calls for even harsher action. After forcing RT to register, Keir Giles, a Chatham House senior consulting fellow, acted as though it never happened. He said in a Council on Foreign Relations Cyber Brief on Nov. 27: “Although the Trump administration seems unlikely to pursue action against Russian information operations, there are steps the U.S. Congress and other governments should consider.”

I 评论 on this development on RT America. It would also have been good to have the State Department’s Nuaert answer for this discrepancy about the claim that forced FARA registrations would not affect news gathering when it already has. My criticism of RT is that they should be interviewing U.S. decision-makers to hold them accountable, rather than mostly guests outside the power structure. The decision-makers could be called out on air if they refuse to appear.

Growing McCarthyite Attacks

Western rulers’ wariness about popular unrest can be seen in the extraordinary and scurrilous attack on the Canadian website globalresearch.ca. It began with a chilling study by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization into the relatively obscure website, followed by a vicious 打击片 on Nov. 18 by the Globe and Mail, Canada’s largest newspaper. The headline was: “How a Canadian website is being used to amplify the Kremlin’s view of the world.”

Lawyer Roy Cohn (right) with Sen. Joseph McCarthy.
Lawyer Roy Cohn (right) with Sen. Joseph McCarthy.

“What once appeared to be a relatively harmless online refuge for conspiracy theorists is now seen by NATO’s information warfare specialists as a link in a concerted effort to undermine the credibility of mainstream Western media – as well as the North American and European public’s trust in government and public institutions,” the 环球邮报 报告。

“Global Research is viewed by NATO’s Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence – or 战略司令部 – as playing a key accelerant role in helping popularize articles with little basis in fact that also happen to fit the narratives being pushed by the Kremlin, in particular, and the Assad regime.” The website never knew it had such powers.

I’ve not agreed with everything I’ve read on the site. But it is a useful clearinghouse for alternative media.

众多 财团新闻 articles are republished there, including a handful of mine. But the site’s typical sharing and reposting on the Internet is seen by NATO as a plot to undermine the Free World.

“It uses that reach to push not only its own opinion pieces, but ‘news’ reports from little-known websites that regularly carry dubious or false information,” the he Globe and Mail 报道。 “At times, the site’s regular variety of international-affairs stories is replaced with a flurry of items that bolster dubious reportage with a series of opinion pieces, promoted on social media and retweeted and shared by active bots.”

The newspaper continued, “’That way, they increase the Google ranking of the story and create the illusion of multi-source verification,’ said Donara Barojan, who does digital forensic research for [StratCom]. But she said she did not yet have proof that Global Research is connected to any government.”

This sort of smear is nothing more than a blatant attack on free speech by the most powerful military alliance in the world, based on the unfounded conviction that Russia is a fundamental force for evil and that anyone who has contacts with Russia or shares even a part of its multilateral world view is suspect.

Such tactics are spreading to Europe. La Repubblica newspaper in Italy wrote a similar hit piece against L’Antidiplomatico, a dissident website. And the European Union is spending €3.8 million to counter Russian “propaganda.” It is targeting Eurosceptic politicians who repeat what they hear on Russian media.

High-profile individuals in the U.S. are also now in the crosshairs of the neo-McCarthyite witch hunt. On Nov. 25 “华盛顿邮报” ran a nasty hit piece on Washington Capitals’ hockey player Alex Ovechkin, one of the most revered sports figures in the Washington area, simply because he, like 86 percent of other Russians, supports his president.

“Alex Ovechkin is one of Putin’s biggest fans. The question is, why?” ran the headline. The story insidiously implied that Ovechkin was a dupe of his own president, being used to set up a media campaign to support Putin, who is under fierce and relentless attack in the United States where Ovechkin plays professional ice hockey.

“He has given an unwavering endorsement to a man who U.S. intelligence agencies say sanctioned Russian meddling in last year’s presidential election,” write the Post reporters, once again showing their gullibility to U.S. intelligence agencies that have provided no proof for their assertions (and even admit that they are not asserting their opinion as fact).

Less prominent figures are targeted too. John Kiriakou, a former CIA agent who blew the whistle on torture and was jailed for it, was 拉开序幕 a panel in Europe on Nov. 10 by a Bernie Sanders supporter who refused to appear with Kiriakou because he co-hosts a show on 人造卫星电台.

At the end of November, Reporters Without Borders, an organization supposedly devoted to press freedom, tried to kick journalist Vanessa Beeley off a panel in Geneva to prevent her from presenting evidence that the White Helmets, a group that sells itself as a rescue organization inside rebel-controlled territory in Syria, has ties to Al Qaeda. The Swiss Press Club, which hosted the event, resisted the pressure and let Beeley speak.

But as a consequence the club director said its funding was slashed from the Swiss government.

Russia-gate’s Hurdles

Much of this spreading mania and intensifying censorship traces back to Russia-gate. Yet, it remains remarkable that the corporate media has failed so far to prove any significant Russian interference in the U.S. election at all. Nor have the intelligence agencies, Congressional investigations and special prosecutor Robert Mueller. His criminal charges so far have been for financial crimes and lying to federal authorities on topics unrelated to any “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russians to “hack” Democratic emails.

Former FBI Director James Comey.
Former FBI Director James Comey.

There will likely be more indictments from Mueller, even perhaps a complaint about Trump committing obstruction of justice because he said on TV that he fired Comey, in part, because of the “Russia thing.” But Trump’s clumsy reaction to the “scandal,” which he calls “fake news” and a “witch hunt,” still is not proof that Putin and the Russians interfered in the U.S. election to achieve the unlikely outcome of Trump’s victory.

The Russia-gate faithful assured us to wait for the indictment of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, briefly Trump’s national security adviser. But again there was nothing about pre-election “collusion,” only charges that Flynn had lied to the FBI about conversations with the Russian ambassador regarding policy matters during the presidential transition, i.e., after 选举。

One of Flynn’s conversations was about trying unsuccessfully to comply with an Israeli request to get Russia to block a United Nations resolution censuring Israel’s settlements on Palestinian land.

As journalist Yasha Levine tweeted: “So the country that influenced US policy through Michael Flynn is Israel, not Russia. But Flynn did try to influence Russia, not the other way around. Ha-ha. This is the smoking gun? What a farce.”

The media is becoming a victim of its own mania. In its zeal to push this story reporters are making a 数量庞大 of amateurish mistakes on stories that are later corrected. Brian Ross of ABC News was 暂停 for erroneously reporting that Trump had told Flynn to contact the Russians before the election, and not after.

There remain a number of key hurdles to prove the Russia-gate story. First, convincing evidence is needed that the Russian government indeed did “hack” the Democratic emails, both those of the DNC and Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta – and gave them to WikiLeaks. Then it must be linked somehow to the Trump campaign. If it were a Russian hack it would have been an intelligence operation on a need-to-know basis, and no one in the Trump team needed to know. It’s not clear how any campaign member could have even helped with an overseas hack or could have been an intermediary to WikiLeaks.

There’s also the question of how significant the release of those emails was anyway. They did provide evidence that the DNC tilted the primary campaign in favor of Clinton over Sanders; they exposed the contents of Clinton’s paid speeches to Wall Street, which she was trying to hide from the voters; and they revealed some pay-to-play features of the Clinton Foundation and its foreign donations. But – even if the Russians were involved in providing that information to the American people – those issues were not considered decisive in the campaign.

Clinton principally pinned her loss on FBI Director James Comey for closing and then reopening the investigation into her improper use of a private email server while Secretary of State. She also spread the blame to 俄罗斯 (repeating the canard about “seventeen [U.S. intelligence] agencies, all in agreement”), Bernie Sanders, the inept DNC and other factors.

As for vaguer concerns about some Russian group “probably” buying $100,000 in ads, mostly after Americans had voted, as a factor in swaying a $6 billion election, it is too silly to contemplate. That RT 人造卫星 ran pieces critical of Hillary Clinton was their right, and they were hardly alone. RT 人造卫星‘s reach in the U.S. is minuscule compared to 福克斯新闻, which slammed Clinton throughout the campaign, or for that matter, MSNBC, CNN and other mainstream news outlets, which often expressed open disdain for Republican Donald Trump but also gave extensive coverage to issues such as the security concerns about Clinton’s private email server.

Another vague Russia-gate suspicion stemming largely from Steele’s opposition research is that somehow Russia bribed or blackmailed Trump because of past business with Russians. But there are evidentiary and logical problems with these theories, since some lucrative deals fell through (and presumably wouldn’t have if Trump was being paid off).

Some have questioned how Trump could have supported detente with Russia without being beholden to Moscow in some way. But Jeffrey Sommers, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin, wrote a convincing essay explaining adviser Steve Bannon’s influence on Trump’s thinking about Russia and the need for cooperation between the two powers to solve international problems.

Without convincing evidence, I remain a Russia-gate skeptic. I am not defending Russia. Russia can defend itself. However, amid the growing censorship and the dangerous new McCarthyism, I am trying to defend America — from itself.

An earlier version of this story appeared on 财团新闻.

Joe Lauria is a veteran foreign-affairs journalist. He has written for the Boston Globe, the Sunday Times of London and the Wall Street Journal among other newspapers. He is the author of 我如何迷失希拉里·克林顿 published by OR Books in June 2017. He can be reached at [电子邮件保护] and followed on Twitter at @unjoe.

• 类别: 对外政策 •标签: 美国媒体, 检查, 俄罗斯 
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
  1. Wally 说: • 您的网站

    “They don’t jail you for lies. They jail you for truth.”


    An obvious admission that the ‘6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ doesn’t stand up to scientific, logical, & rational scrutiny.


    • 回复: @Ger
  2. AndrewR 说:

    People believe what they want to. Evidence, or lack thereof, has little to do with it, so censorship, or lack thereof, is largely pointless.

  3. 1. Calculate mean household income using GDP data and US census data
    2. Compare it to median household income…the figure actually published
    3. Compute how many families make less than the mean (it’s about 90%)
    4. Review definitions of mean and median and ask if you agree that “outlier effect” is an adequate explanation of why we don’t see the mean published or discussed, ever

    • 回复: @Logan
    , @Anonymous
  4. El Dato 说:

    But Huffington stepped down as editor in August 2016 and has nothing to do with the site now. It is run by Lydia Polgreen, a former New York Times reporter and editor, who evidently has very different ideas. In April, she completely redesigned the site and renamed it HuffPost.

    Ah, so HuffPo is now a NYT vehicle.

  5. Mark James 说:

    Just because Hillary a lousy candidate. Why can’t Consortiumnews.com accept the fact that Comey’s 11th hour reopening of the e-mail investigation and Russia’s relentless hacking and disinformation put the nails in her coffin? Yes it’s her fault she lost! But there were additional significant factors: Russia being one.

    She ran a putrid campaign. But she still likely would have won if Comey didn’t do what he did which was in part, a reaction to a potential mutiny at the NY office of the FBI.

    So please acknowledge this Joe. Hillary’s gross negligence doesn’t mean Russia is not guilty or Steele is incompetent. It doesn’t work that way.
    I’m sorry you feel affected by censorship but it’s hard for any media outlets– except “Fox”– to be a cheerleader for an organized criminal like Putin. Who some day will be marched out to a wall — a la Nicolae Ceaușescu– when Mother Russia finally tires of letting him rip off hundreds of millions in assets.

  6. ” It’s a story as old as civilization: a wealthy and powerful elite fending off popular unrest by trying to contain knowledge of how the elite gain at the others’ expense, at home and abroad. ”

    This is exactly what Howard Zinn writes.
    Alas it is the same at this side of the Atlantic.

    The British newspaper Guardian was independent, Soros bought it.
    Dutch official ‘news’ is just government propaganda.

    But also most Dutch dicussion sites are severely biased, criticism of Israel is next to impossible.
    And of course the words ‘populist’ and ‘extreme right’ are propaganda words, used for those who oppose mainstream politics: EU, euro, globalisation, unlimited immigration, etc.

    Despite all these measures and censorship, including self censorship, dissident political parties grow stronger and stronger.
    One could see this in the French presidential elections, one sees it in Germany where AfD now is in parliament, the Reichstag, one sees it in Austria, where the nationalist party got about half the votes, one sees it in countries as Poland and Hungary, that want to keep their cultures.
    And of course there is Brexit ‘we want our country back’.

    In the Netherlands the in October 2016 founded party FvD, Forum for Democracy, got two seats in the last elections, but polls show that if now elections were held, it would have some fourteen seats in our parliament of 150.
    The present ruling coalition, led by Rutte, has very narrow margins, both in parliament and what here is called Eerste Kamer.
    Parliament maybe can be seen as House, Eerste Kamer as Senate.
    There is a good chance that at the next Eerste Kamer elections FvD will be able to end the reign of Rutte, who is, in my opinion, just Chairman of the Advance Rutte Foundation, and of course a stiff supporter of Merkel and Brussels.
    Now that the end of Merkel is at the horizon, I’m curious how Rutte will manoevre.

  7. “The viewpoints of Iranians, Palestinians, Russians, North Koreans and others are never fully reported in the Western media although the supposed mission of journalism is to help citizens understand a frighteningly complex world from multiple points of view” — Joe Lauria

    Lauria’s article is an excellent review of the hydra-headed MSM perversion of political journalism in this era of the PATRIOT Act, with special focus on 2016-2017. With one small exception … that still is worth noting. Namely the inclusion of “North Koreans” along with Palestinians, Russians and Iranians as those whose viewpoints are never represented in the Western media.

    It”s true, of course, that the viewpoints of North Koreans go unreported in MSM, but that’s hardly the “whole truth and nothing but the truth.” The problems confronting any journalist who might endeavor to report on public opinion in North Korea are incomparably more difficult than the problems confronting attempts to report on public opinion in Iran, in Russia or in Palestine. These three “theaters” — so to speak –each with its own challenges, no doubt, should never be conflated with the severe realities of censorship and even forceful thought policing in North Korea.

    • 回复: @Kweli
  8. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    Despite this support from independent media, a senior official at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, I learned, declined to take up my cause because he believes in the Russia-gate story. I also learned that a senior officer at the American Civil Liberties Union rejected my case because he too believes in Russia-gate. Both of these serious organizations were set up precisely to defend individuals in such situations on principle, not preference.

    I’m not even sure that they believe in Russia-gate. This could easily be cowardice or corruption. The globalists have poured untold millions into “fixing” the Internet wrongthink so it’s only natural that we’re seeing results. I’m seeing “grassroots” shilling everywhere, for instance.

    This is not going to work for them. You can’t force consent of the governed. The more you squeeze, the more sand slips through your fingers.

    • 回复: @botazefa
    , @Anon
  9. Vladimir Brovkin [又名“ Vlad”] 说:


  10. It is worse than censorship. History, via web searches, are being deleted. Now, you have no hint what is missing. Example, in 1999 I read an article in a weekly tech newspaper – maybe Information Week – about university researchers who discovered that 64 bit encrypted phones were only using the first 56 bits and the last 8 were zeros. They suspected that the US government was responsible. Cannot find any reference to that online.

    • 回复: @Hu Mi Yu
  11. Joe Lauria may very well be a “victim”, but certainly not one that I would parade around as some USDA table grade poster child victim of really egregious reprisals. He’s a veteran in the establishment MSM milieu and certainly knew what kind of a shit bird operation it is that he chose to attempt to publish his piece in.

    Oh, lest I forget to mention, he didn’t lose his livelihood, get ejected from his gym, have his country club membership revoked, get banned from AirB&B ad nauseum.

    • 回复: @Alden
    , @Anon
  12. Che Guava 说:


    I am curious about the ’17 intellience agencies’
    thing, CIA., FBI, NSA, army and navy
    intel units, well that is making five or so. The latter two would likely having no connection with checking the ‘Russia was hacking the election’, likewise, air force sigint (which they obviously need and have).

    So, a list from a poster who is expert on the topic, what are the seventeen agencies which were agreeing on vicious Vlad having ‘hacked’ poor Hillary’s campaign?

    Is anybody knowing?

    This is a very real, good, and serious question, from me, and have not seeing it before. Can anybody producing a list of the seventeen agencies? Parodic replies welcome, but it would be of interest to many if somebody could making a list of the seventeen lurching about in Hillary’s addled mind.

  13. 我们正在目睹美国自由党世俗思想的巨大关闭。 曾经有像大西洋杂志这样的世俗自由硬拷贝杂志,从有原则的世俗自由主义角度发表了关于外交事务、移民、伊斯兰教的聪明的文章和评论——尤其是在 1990 年代初期。

    现在几乎没有了,因为大西洋主要只是一个发布派对路线的博客。 幸好还有一些例外,比如

    Graeme Wood 的“ISIS 真正想要的东西”


    《大西洋杂志》仍然允许在评论部分发表大量言论自由,但 Ta-Nehisi Coates 撰写的文章除外。

    我们试图用幽默来消解没有幽默感的 PC Lib Left 思想警察和在 Cuckservative、Conservative Inc. 中相处的人。

    这是我们/Farstar 的一部卡通片,只是注意到太多人只是鹦鹉学舌地模仿 CNN 对俄罗斯阴谋的胡说八道。


  14. Che Guava 说:

    Sorry, mods, accidental button-pressing, thanks for deleting it, later one up is what I was wanting to posting.

  15. Hu Mi Yu 说:
    @cowardly troll

    Example, in 1999 I read an article in a weekly tech newspaper – maybe Information Week – about university researchers who discovered that 64 bit encrypted phones were only using the first 56 bits and the last 8 were zeros.

    If you read source code, you will find other cases of security being compromised by coding “errors”. This is why we are being pushed into accepting proprietary code.

    • 回复: @cowardly troll
  16. My “Reply” button seems not to be working. This is in respose to CT a#11, who correctly states,

    “It is worse than censorship. History, via web searches, are being deleted.” (blockquote button not functioning either.)

    Or worse, fabricated, which is a classic way “history” has always been presented. The ancients were well aware of it, but somehow we lost our ability to determine the difference between lies and reality. There is a popular online “encyclopedia” that is obviously notorious for fake history.

    Moral.: Question everything. Especially if some “authority” is the source.

  17. Bias MSM. Censorship. These are affirmative sins of insecurity eventually leading to desperation, resulting in dictatorship.

  18. Flynn’s evidence is certainly scaring Putin’s American supporters! The problem for people like Mr Lauria that, by blindly peddling simplistic propaganda, he discredits himself. Even if every word he said was true, the simplistic and manipulative style he uses means that no one will believe him. Everything starts from a childish, primary school playground mentality: if it’s done by my pals, it has to be good. If it’s done to my pals, it has to be bad”. Then, America is defined as automatically bad and “not-America” is defined as automatically good for no reason other than that it is “not-America”. Such transparent propaganda fools nobody! Thus, when the US speaks about Syria, it’s “obviously” a pack of lies, when Putin speaks on the same subject it’s, equally “obviously”, the unvarnished truth. Does Mr Lauria really think that readers are going to swallow such obvious bias uncritically?
    As for RT, I have no idea what Americans may or may not have been kept from hearing. I am not American. I live in my native Europe. I have RT on my cable and I can certify that it is a pro-Putin propaganda station. It consists essentially of boring American nonentities conducting boring interviews with boring American nonentities about domestic American political subjects from the same simplistic perspective I mentioned above: “America bad, not-America good”. “Not-America” in this case is, of course, St. Vladimir the Munificent (praised be his holy name)! Thus, I can assure Americans that they’re not missing anything if they haven’t got RT! The propaganda is so childishly transparent that no one could be fooled.
    Of course, the same can be said of most US websites as well.

  19. Joe Hide 说:

    你的文章在其他方面看起来不错,但早期缺乏幽默感来让我继续阅读。 毕竟是6000字! 我有工作、家庭、义务、其他阅读,一天只有这么多的思考能量。 我想您可能会尝试将此类文章缩短到 2000 到 3000 字左右? 就像我说的,你确实提出了一些好主意。

    • 哈哈: Delinquent Snail
  20. Crikey. You ‘Murcans are sure stuffed up in ‘gate’ heaven. Anyway, the Russkies are winding down in Syria so let’s see the colo(u)r of yo(u)r boots.

  21. tjm 说:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Oh for God’s sake, your fake news…

    The news is all propaganda, it has been for decades, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, NPR…all of it.

  22. Anonymous [AKA "Julius n\' Ethel"] 说:

    Mark James’ modified limited hangout shows us the true purpose of his ICCPR-illegal statist war propaganda. James candidly jettisons Hillary, acknowledging the obvious, that she was the more repulsive choice in this duel of the titans. But James is still hanging on to the crucial residual message of the CIA line: Putin tripleplus bad.

    Without factual support James calls Putin an organized criminal. US NGO staff who have actually dealt with Putin characterize him as a strict legalist. In fact, Putin’s incorruptibility is what drives CIA up the wall. Ask any upper-echelon spook. Putin’s cupidity deficit short-circuits CIA’s go-to subversion method, massive bribes. Putin has an uneasy relationship with the kleptocrats CIA installed while their puppet Yeltsin staggered around blind drunk. But Putin has materially curbed kleptocratic corruption and subversion. Russians appreciate that.

    James fantasizes that Putin is going to get ousted and murdered. However Putin has public approval that US politicians couldn’t dream of. This is because Russia’s government meets world human rights standards that the US fails to meet. The Russian government complies with the Paris Principles, world standard for institutionalized human rights protection under expert international review. The USA does not. The USA is simply not is Russia’s league with respect to universally-acknowledged rights.

    James can easily verify this by comparing the US human-rights deficiencies to corresponding Russian reviews, point-by-point, based on each article of the core human rights conventions.


    Comprehensive international human rights review shows that the USA is not in Russia’s league. Look at the maps if you can’t be bothered to read the particulars – they put the US in an underdeveloped backwater with headchopping Arab princelings and a couple African presidents-for-life. CIA’s INGSOC fixation on Putin is intended to divert your attention from the objectively superior human-rights performance of the Russian government as a whole, and the USA’s failure and disgrace in public in Geneva, front of the whole world.

    How did this happen? Turns out, dismantling the USSR did Russia a world of good. Now we see it’s time to take the USA apart and do the same for America. That’s the origin of the panic you can smell on the CIA regime.

  23. Don Bacon 说:

    There is censorship on blogs.
    >I have been banned from The Atlantic blog for correcting a noted anti-Iran blogger.
    >I have been banned from the National Interest blog for highlighting Pentagon’s acquisition problems.
    >I have been banned by Facebook for declaring that females don’t belong in the infantry. I “violated community standards” with my opinion which was based somewhat on my time in the infantry, which my PC critic probably lacked.

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  24. @Don Bacon

    In hindsight I wish I would have made a list of sites where I was banned, some of them several times.
    In the USA Washpost and Christian Science Monitor, both sites were abolished, I suppose because censorship and banning became too expensive.
    In UK War Without End was was one of the very few sites where was no censorship, UK laws forced the owner to close down.
    The site was near impossible to hack, the owner had a hand built interface in Linux between incoming messages and the site itself.
    At present there is not one more or less serious Dutch site where I can write.
    On top of that, most Dutch sites no longer exist, especially those operated by newspapers.
    It seems to be the same in Germany.
    The German journalist Udo Ulfkotte, he died maybe a year ago, he worked long for the prestigious newspaper FAZ, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, wrote a book about bought journalism.
    His explanation for the disappearence of discussion sites with newspapers is that the journalists discovered that the reactions got far more attention than the articles.
    Very annoying, of course.
    With us here, Follow The Money, and The Post Online behave as childish as German newspapers.

    • 回复: @Alden
  25. Alden 说:
    @Jim Bob Lassiter

    Your post is exactly what I wanted to write. Saved me the effort. I figured out the MSM was nothing but lies around 1966. I have no sympathy for any MSM journalist.

    • 回复: @Vidi
  26. Wouldn’t it be scary if a nation’s central bank was controlled and run by a group pretending to be loyal to their host nation, but was actually in league with a nation that was trying to gobble up huge chunks of ME land, doing this by controlling the host nation’s media outlets, and forever posting psyop stories and actual lies to support the land thefts?

    And if that same central bank would give out 贷款–that never get repaid–to the same ethnic gangsters that would then would use those loans to buy up over 90% of the host nations MSM outlets to forever ensure that a steady drip, drip, drip of propaganda went into the host nation’s residents, ever so slowly turning them into mindless sheep always bleating for more wars to help the ethnic gangsters steal their way to an Eretz state?

    Yes, it would be scary to live in a tyrant state like that.

  27. nsa 说:

    Joogle and Kikebook are both overt jooie image / info filters. If it’s double plus good for jooies…it gets through the jooie filter. If it’s jooie ungood…it doesn’t get through the jooie filter. So what? 99% of the servile population has a JooBox in their living room and believes whatever jooie plus good images / info it spews forth. Tell us something new……..

  28. joe webb 说:

    just about any basic argument can be stated in just a few sentences.

    The reason that the US is anti-Russia is not global baloneyism.

    The reason is that Russia threw out and neutralized the Jew Power. It is that simple, and the reason the US cares is that it is run by Jews in its foreign policy and much of everything else.

    This was accomplished under Kissinger, et al when they threw out the Arabists in the State Dept.


    • 回复: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  29. Ger 说:

    The US Congress has passed (will pass more) laws that will brand you and I as Un-American for reading the truth and criticizing government actions. They will call it ‘reform’.

  30. joe webb 说:

    “neo-McCarthite witch hunt”. what a gas, as in laughing.

    McCarthy was correct in everything he did and said.


    • 同意: Alden
  31. botazefa 说:

    You can’t force consent of the governed.

    Since when has consent got anything to do with it?

  32. @Hu Mi Yu


    (1) Orwell’s memory hole is real, and if you have a memory of something, but no web page to back it up, you cannot convince someone .

    (2) A former government contractor says that the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation installed a number of back doors into the encryption software used by the OpenBSD operating system.


    No word from Wikileaks or the Linux community about CIA hack:
    The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) found different ways to penetrate the defenses set up by various well-known anti-virus programs, the WikiLeaks whistleblowing website said Tuesday.

    According to the document, the CIA also devised malware targeting Microsoft Windows, Mac OS, Linux and other operating systems.

  33. @cowardly troll

    Concerning the memory hole:

    One of the most moving sequences in the book is the chapter 61 when Innokenty visits his mother’s brother, Uncle Avenir, whom he barely knows and has not seen since her death. Despite this, and Ink’s initial doubts, the two men discover an instant family bond and are soon exchanging deep and treasonous opinions. Uncle Avenir is a secret memory man, retaining old newspapers back to the time of the revolution which show how the party line has changed and history has been re-written. His connection with his Uncle is one of the things which changes Innokenty irrevocably so that he goes on to take the momentous action of the first chapter.

  34. @cowardly troll

    Concerning point 2


    A security researcher has revealed that some HP laptops have hidden software which can log everything typed on its keypads. More than 460 模型 have been affected, dating back to 2012, according to the list released by HP.

    And what about Android and IOS predictive “keyboards”


    More than 31 million users of a popular virtual keyboard app AI.type, have had their private data exposed online, including email addresses, passwords, dates of birth and details from Google accounts, as well as actual text entered using the keyboard.


    On Android phones and iPhones you can swap out the traditional keyboards with emoji and gif-laden alternatives, but pay attention when you install third party keyboards because apps require full access. By choosing that option, developers “transmit anything you type” back to their servers.

  35. @joe webb

    你完全糊涂了。 Jooos想通过俄罗斯领导的共产主义制度统治世界。
    他们的政策是通过阿富汗潜入穆斯林世界。 但俄罗斯人对阿富汗的抵抗感到惊讶,放弃了。 Jooos 就像一群鸟飞走了并降落在美国。 到目前为止,他们对美国的表现比较满意,但现在他们的世界统治陷入僵局。

    • 回复: @Delinquent Snail
  36. Anonymous [AKA "_daniel_"] 说:

    You may be remembering DES:


    It was a standard for many years, and it had 56 bit keys.

  37. Logan 说:

    3. Compute how many families make less than the mean (it’s about 90%)

    Not possible. Median income means 50% of households make more, 50% make less.

    It is of course quite possible that the reported median household income numbers are fudged, but you clearly don’t understand what median means.

    • 回复: @Logan
    , @Alfred
  38. Vidi 说:

    You are probably doing Lauria an injustice. It is quite possible for Lauria to be honest while he’s making a living in the media (which was not as corrupt as it is now).

  39. Vidi 说:
    @Michael Kenny

    blindly peddling simplistic propaganda

    OK, give some evidence that Lauria’s overall point is false. I doubt you can. Like the mainstream media, you feel you don’t need evidence to sling some serious accusations at someone.

    You remind me of the people who incited the witch hunts in Salem, which caused many women to be burnt to death on practically zero evidence. That was four hundred years ago. Nothing like progress, right?

  40. @Mark James

    It A MA Z E S me how some people can read an article without being able to learn the most basic facts presented.
    Wally, you win 1st Prize

    • 回复: @Wally
  41. @Michael Kenny

    Assuming you get paid by how many responses you generate, I’ll add mine so you have something to spend on yourself at Christmas.
    To some people, truth is an enemy. A thing to rebuke, obfuscate and defer from. The more you write, the less you say.
    Buy yourself a candle

  42. AnonFromTN [又名“ Anon”] 说:

    Reminds me of a contemporary Russian joke: “Everything communists told us about socialism turned out to be a lie. However, everything they told us about capitalism is perfectly true”.

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
  43. goy 说:

    what the adl has to acknowledge is that there are rabbis in this country preaching racism and genocide, right out of the babylonian talmud; who are these amalek, ? maybe the rabbi’s talks should be recorded, and examined for hate speech before we take away everyone’s 1st amendment rights ?

  44. Skeptikal 说:
    @Mark James

    U sound nuts. You just repeat hypotheticals. You are happy to embrace the position of being evidence-challenged that is the principal target of Lauria’s piece.
    Russia and Russian journalists or any others have the right to publish what they want.
    It is called the marketplace of ideas. Freedom of the press.
    People even apparently have the right to publish lies, and then to back down mealy-mouthed and say the lies were a “mistake.” Come on.
    American news organizations and others masquerading as news organizations cream their panties to spread “news” in Russia that is critical of Putin and tear down “Russian” values and try to create the preconditions for regime change.
    Russia certainly has the right to do the same here.
    Whether it does or doesn’t do so is immaterial. Russian journalists have the right to report on what they see here. The crackdown on RT is a very bad omen.
    This country and its media are getting so effing totalitarian, it is terrifying.
    It is very discouraging to see the ACLU falling into line and becoming part of the “resist” movement. Because they have done a lot of very good work. I have supported the ACLU for years.
    But the ACLU will destroy itself if it caves in to “liberals” and fails to hew to its principles and mission. It cannot be destroyed from the outside, but it can be destroyed from the inside if it lets itself be used as tool by a political faction parading as . . . not sure what these “resist” and Antifa people are parading as.

    • 回复: @RobinG
  45. Skeptikal 说:
    @Michael Kenny

    Per Michael Kenny, “Flynn’s evidence is certainly scaring Putin’s American supporters!”
    Like, why?
    What scares “Putin’s supporters” is the same as what scares “sanity supporters.”
    No doubt Americans support Putin because they have access to other info than the drivel from the American MSM and TV. Consequently, they know that Putin is the greatest statesman alive on the planet today and wish that our “democratic” system could put in place a similar leader. I wonder whom in the American firmament (;-) Michael Kenny nominates for that spot of “best world leader” or even “good enough.” Trump? Hillary Clinton? Obama? Paul Ryan? John McCain? Lindsey Graham? Al Franken?????

  46. Alden 说:
    @jilles dykstra

    Well, Jilles, welcome

    I enjoy your posts. I’m impressed by the way you back up your comments with references to books and articles. Your recent posts about FDR and Pearl Harbor was excellent. You’ve read a lot of Charles Beard.

    Charles Beard was a great historian. he often delved into the economic reasons for wars which historians often don’t do.

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  47. Wally 说: • 您的网站
    @Aspen Tingleblot

    I hit a nerve. Good.

    And clearly you support censorship of those who demolish impossible Zionist lies.
    Because you are a Zionist. LOL

    Science, rational thought, & logic simply demolish the impossible ‘holocaust’ storyline.


    法庭上的“ Holocau $ t Industry”:
    “请尊敬,确实有数以百万计的遗骸被埋在巨大的万人坑中,我们知道这些万人坑在哪里,但是,但是,嗯,我们无法向法院展示。 您必须相信我们,我们是犹太复国主义者。


    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  48. RobinG 说:

    “Russian journalists have the right to report on what they see here.”

    Indeed, and I’m sure they do…. at some news outlet inside Russia, but here in the US, on RT, ‘Russian journalists’ are rare. Peter Lavelle may have a couple as guests on Bullhorns, and a couple of women do interviews (weekly shows), but otherwise almost nil. Even the Brits are scarce.

    Thom Hartmann used to get 2 or 3 hours every evening. (Glad to see the back of him!) Currently, Ed Schultz has the daily 11pm news slot. Tabetha Wallace is also nightly, together with sons of Oliver Stone and Jesse Ventura. And Jesse has a show. And Larry King. And Chris Hedges. And Max Kaiser. And some other libertarian financial types. Super Russian bunch, eh?

    • 回复: @Skeptikal
    , @Joe Lauria
  49. @Alden

    I’m old and retired, and curious, and I can read in four languages.
    I became curious about history when an orthodox Israeli jew murdered Rabin, 1993 or so, after the Oslo Accords, that were supposed to bring peace.
    I wondered ‘do Israeli jews want peace ?’.
    Quality Dutch newspapers did not explain the murder.
    I discovered that mainstream history brought by these ‘quality’ newspapers was mainly nonsense.
    My reading goes on, if it ever will end ?
    Nearly finished a book on Japan’s decision to surrender, always thought that the bombs on Nagasaki and Hirosjima were nonsense.
    FDR, in my view, provoked the war with Japan, but my opinion now is that in the circumstances the two bombs saved lives.
    Without these bombs millions of Japanese were willing to fight until death.
    Even with the bombs, the emperor had to make the decision.

  50. Logan 说:

    Ignore previous comment. Too late at night.

  51. @Wally

    莱昂·波利亚科夫,'Bréviaire de la Haine,Le IIIe Reich et les Juifs',1951 年,1974 年,巴黎
    there are no remains.
    A special group with special fluids destroyed all bones in all mass graves.
    They did this when the German troops had to withdraw from Russia.
    Of course they had to dig up the bones first.
    Great pity for Stalin that he was unaware what fluids, had he known the massacre of the Polish officers in Katyn would never have been proven.
    Poliakov bases his book on the Neurenberg trials, where he was present.
    The translation of haine is hate.

    • 回复: @anarchyst
  52. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    我不认为中国人会收留那些鸟。 事实证明,这些鸟会破坏它们降落的任何国家。中国人在文化和种族上非常团结,对其他民族有着与生俱来的不信任。

  53. Skeptikal 说:

    Let’s rephrase.
    Journalists hired by or aired on RT have the right to report what they want.
    Here or in Russia. Or anywhere, actually, where there is freedom of the press.
    You agree with that, right?
    Let’s also bear in mind that in the Internet age, “here” means at the website.

  54. anarchyst 说:
    @jilles dykstra

    “a special group with special fluids”…more holohoax jokes…good one!

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  55. Ben Frank 说:

    审查制度是最滑坡的,因为它像艾滋病一样,攻击社会的免疫系统。 社会的免疫系统是传播真相的源泉。

  56. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Mark James

    Hey Mark James (is this a new nick for Michael Kenney?), here is your man — a traitor from a family of traitor: “The man who gave fake “Trump dossier” to John McCain speaks out” http://theduran.com/the-man-who-handed-off-fake-trump-dossier-to-john-mccain-speaks-out/
    “British court records reviewed by Fox News as well as U.S. congressional testimony revealed that Steele was directed and paid at least $168,000 by Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson to push the research that fall to five American media outlets. According to British court documents, Steele met with The New York Times (twice), The Washington Post (twice), CNN, The New Yorker and Yahoo News (twice). “Each of these interviews was conducted in person and with a member of Fusion also present,” according to the records associated with separate civil litigation against Steele and Fusion GPS.
    Three weeks after Trump won the presidential election … the details were finalized for the dossier hand-off to McCain. British court records state McCain ordered Kramer to get a personal briefing from Steele in Surrey, just outside of London, and then return to Washington, D.C., where Fusion GPS would provide McCain with hard copies.
    In January, McCain officially gave the dossier to the FBI, which already had its own copy from Steele.”

    Comment section: “Doesn’t this make McCain guilty of offenses under the Logan act; the very offense that was commonly leveled against Trump and called “collusion” in the press.”
    — True. The Tokyo Rose McCain has been working hard to enhance his image of a traitor for posterity.

  57. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Mark James

    “Hillary’s gross negligence doesn’t mean Russia is not guilty or Steele is incompetent.”
    — How do you know? More for your weak-minded attempts at evasion: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-12/mccabe-cancels-testimony-something-far-more-sinister-fusion-gps
    “A senior Justice Department official demoted last week for concealing his meetings with the men behind the anti-Trump “dossier” had even closer ties to Fusion GPS, the firm responsible for the incendiary document… Nellie H. Ohr, wife of the demoted official, Bruce G. Ohr, was paid by Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016. Also notable is the she not only worked for Fusion GPS, but also represented the CIA’s “Open Source Works” group in a 2010 “expert working group report on international organized crime” along with Bruce Ohr and Fusion GPS co0founder Glenn Simpson.
    House investigators determined that during the 2016 election, Bruce Ohr met with former MI6 spy Christopher Steele, and shortly after the 2016 election he met with Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of Fusion GPS – who commissioned Steele to assemble the dossier.
    Another factor in McCabe’s sudden cancellation is a report from The Hill’s John Solomon that Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) recently interviewed a retired FBI supervisor who told him he was instructed by Deputy Director Andrew McCabe not to call the 2012 Benghazi attack an act of terrorism when distributing the FBI’s findings to the larger intelligence community – despite knowing exactly who conducted the attack. The agent found the instruction concerning because his unit had gathered incontrovertible evidence showing a major al Qaeda figure had directed the attack and the information had already been briefed to President Obama. If true, it means McCabe lied for the Obama administration in a clear, partisan violation of the FBI’s mandate to “detect and prosecute crimes against the United States…”
    As Rep. DeSantis told The Hill: “By placing the interests of the Obama administration over the public’s interests, the order is yet another data point highlighting the politicization of the FBI.”
    The ziocons’ goons are panicking.

  58. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Mark James

    Hey, ziocon, let’s go to the heart of the matter:
    评论部分 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-12/mccabe-cancels-testimony-something-far-more-sinister-fusion-gps
    “The facts are coming in, and it appears there is a concerted effort to destroy the Presidency of Mr Trump.
    Laws were broken.
    High ranking people committed treason.
    High ranking people committed sedition.
    Criminal conspiracies are still operational.
    The USA is a laughing stock to the entire world.
    Although Trump understands all the duplicity and corruption of Obama and Clinton, he cannot expose the inherent corruption; it will destroy the nation.
    Trump will allow this investigation to play out as long as the special counsel investigation proceeds.
    The criminal, Mueller, will make a deal with the Patriot, Donald Trump.
    Everything involved with Obama/Hillary Clinton Scandal will be marked as classified; and no one can lay eyes on the information for 100 years or so.

  59. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “I’m not even sure that they believe in Russia-gate. This could easily be cowardice or corruption.”

  60. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Jim Bob Lassiter

    “Oh, lest I forget to mention, he didn’t lose his livelihood..”
    We sure could detect a high level of irritation on your part. It seems that the direction the Russiagate is taking is against your desires.

  61. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Michael Kenny

    “I live in my native Europe. I have RT on my cable and I can certify that it is a pro-Putin propaganda station.”
    — Why have you been suffering the RT? — Are you paid for watching it? The readers of the Unz review do not bother to attend to MSM because that would be the waste of tme, but you seem to be very attentive to RT and spend a lot of time on RT side. By the way, even the former director of the CIA Michael Morell went to speak on RT. Have you noticed? Is Morell a propagandist for Putin?
    On a point of bias, your posts are consistently pro-Israel (pro-ziocon). They are not pro-USA. And they are not pro-EU. The readers of both Unz Review and consortiumnews.com have identified you, on numerous accosaions, as a dishonest propagandist. And yet you continue coming on the sites with your fact-free silly statements and zocon opinions. Take a break already.
    Here are some facts (FACTS) for you: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-12/mccabe-cancels-testimony-something-far-more-sinister-fusion-gps

  62. I do not understand why US admin did single out the RT.
    BBC and RT were the sites where I used to check the news. There were some editorials, but not really critical of US. I have seen some Rt videos that were critical of US.
    Now RT does not have a news section at all only some articles.
    News section on BBC was also truncated to the extent that is not worth to go there at all.
    Rense is frozen now for about a week,
    I do not know what is happening.

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  63. @anarchyst

    This is the problem with the persecutions of jews during WWII, what to believe and what not ?
    I’m Dutch, we had at the beginning of WWII some 120.000 jews, if I remember correctly 100.000 Dutch and 20.000 refugees.
    The 100.000 were deported, some 5000 returned.
    The jewish refugees went underground, the majority was never discovered.
    The problem is how and why the approx 95000 died.

    Similar problems are with the gas chambers, that Auschwitz commander Höss, according to his confession, constructed himself.
    The Auschwitz crematoria came from well known German industries.

    The usual stories are that prisoners removed by hand the dead bodies after having been gassed.
    Why did not the efficient Germans build some mechanised system for transporting the bodies to the crematoria, and why had the remains to be pulverised by hand ?

    The Einsatz Kommando’s raise similar questions.
    According to Poliakov there were some 900 executioners in these groups, averaging some fifty men.
    In Neurenberg some twenty suspects appeared, it is their confessions on which anything rests.
    And how is it possible that the reports of the highly secret Einsatz activities were distributed in a hundred copies each time ?
    Poliakov several times states that say 40.000 jews were shot, and their bodied buried in mass graves.
    I am at loss to imagine how fifty men shot 40.000 men, who may have dug the grave, and fell in, all possible, but how did the fifty men get them there, and closed the grave ?
    Graves like this then were afterwards dug up by the special group, with what equipment, it is not stated, and the remains were destroyed by the special fluids.

    The number of Auschwitz victims over time has gone down from four million to 1.1 milion, the six million did not change.
    If it is coincidence I do not know, but the website specifying the names of jews who died in WWII has no more than three million names, despite that there is no check whatsoever on the entered names.
    When jews are criticised on this, they point out that the Armenians, claiming one and a half million victims, never could specify more than fifteen thousand names.

  64. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    After BBC criticised Tony B-liar on Saddam’s 45 minutes WMD’s the BBC CEO was dismissed, and replaced by someone more constructive.
    RT of course is Russian propaganda, it also is one of the few places where the west can be criticised, most of the time, in my judgment, by sincere people.

  65. anarchyst 说:

    The people who were charged and prosecuted at Nuremburg were almostall tortured and gave their “confessions” and “statements” under duress. From having their testicles smashed, to being forcefully sleep-deprived, British and American torturers under the direction of the jews were able to get the answers they wanted, but not the TRUTH. Many of the outlandish statements were (and still are) taken as truth, although they are mathematically and physically impossible.

    如果一个国家死于种族灭绝,为什么他们会保留记录? 他们为什么要在数百英里(甚至数千英里)以外的地方建造带有卫生设施,住房,医疗,娱乐和其他辅助设施的“营地”? 仅通过“消除”这些麻烦而不经历所有这些麻烦,难道不是一件容易的事吗? 如果目标是灭绝,他们为什么要利用有限的能源在后勤运输上投入大量精力? 事情不会“累加”……

    在这整个犹太“大屠杀™”交易中,有些大“臭”。 犹太复国主义者与德国政府达成“交易”,以使德国犹太人的生活“不舒服”,这已经不是什么秘密了。 事实上,是犹太复国主义领导人首先提出所有犹太人都佩戴“黄色大卫之星”臂章,以便于识别。

    The establishment of a “homeland” along with the 6,000,000 figure was a Zionist “dream” since the 1800s. What better way to encourage “emigration” to a foreign land than to make things difficult for the “cream of German society” (jews)?? The TRUTH about the so-called jewish “holocaust ™” is out .

    Since the jews declared war on Germany in 1933 (yes, 1933), the Germans had no choice but to complete the Zionist plan of marginalizing German jews (to say the least).. This fulfilled the Zionist plan of forcing German jews to emigrate to Palestine while making the world grant jews a “homeland”–Israel. It is interesting to note that the German boycott of jewish businesses lasted for one day, whil the jewish boycott (actually the jews’ declaration of war on Germany) started in 1933 and lasted until the summation of WW2. Not only that, it was Zionist leaders who insisted that jews be identified with the “yellow star of David” armband…

    所谓的犹太人“大屠杀™”已变成事实上的“宗教”,不允许偏离正统观念。 实际上,在大多数欧洲国家,在罚款和监禁的痛苦下,严格禁止对犹太人的“大屠杀”真相进行独立调查。 在美国,情况并没有那么糟,只有“部落”成员的工作丧失以及个人和职业毁灭才可以明显看出犹太人“大屠杀™”的真实真相暴露出来。 不能将真相用作防御程序,也不能在可以进行调查历史事件的“袋鼠法庭”中用作证据。 给您一个“大屠杀™”发起人的问题-为什么有法律将寻求真理定为刑事犯罪?

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  66. @AnonFromTN

    “Everything communists told us about socialism turned out to be a lie. However, everything they told us about capitalism is perfectly true”.

    It is a joke only so far, it is also an excellent summary of prevailing mood in Russia. In the end Soviet “communists” (I deliberately put this word in quotation marks) were accurate with their geopolitical forecasts after WW II. In fact, they were prescient.

  67. Alfred 说:

    Mean is not the same as median. Thank you for your later correction. 🙂

  68. Joe Lauria 说:

    I am horrified by the numerous anti-semitic comments on this thread. You took my article as an excuse to unleash this fetid racism?

  69. Joe Lauria 说:

    You quote is completely wrong and hence your comment makes no sense. The actual thing I wrote was:
    “That RT and Sputnik ran pieces critical of Hillary Clinton was their right, and they were hardly alone. ”

    • 回复: @RobinG
  70. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    The roots of anti-Zionism:
    Ambassador Nikki Haley brags about bullying UN for Israel during AIPAC Conference, 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=234&v=iwyDfZToo1E

  71. RobinG 说:
    @Joe Lauria

    LOL. The quote isn’t from you, it’s from 怀疑的, to whom I was replying.

    • 回复: @Joe Lauria
  72. @Joe Lauria

    You are horrified because the usual fairy tales are no longer accepted by a lot of people.
    What is horrifying about expressing doubts, and asking questions, about the standard holocaust stories ?
    Are you afraid of facts ?
    About racism, google Gentiles in Halacha, change to english in the upper left hand corner, there at right, from hebrew to english, and read an article by three rabbis that judaism is, or was, how many jews still have these ideas, do not know, racist.
    Alternatively you can read
    以色列·沙哈克(Israel Shahak),“犹太历史,犹太宗教,三千年的重量”,1994年,2002年,伦敦

    • 回复: @Joe Lauria
  73. @anarchyst

    Neurenberg was almost completely run by jews who had fled from Germany to the USA.
    When Felix Frankfurter, USA high court judge, made preparations to join in Neurenberg, the chairman of the High Court called Neurenberg a ‘farce’, and said to Frankfurter that he did not go there as a judge, but as a jew.
    Goering, the accused with the highest IQ, according to tests there, seems to be to have been the only one one who foresaw what would happen.
    Thus he had his last fun, bringing chairman Jackson, a jew, so to frenzy with facts, that Jackson had to leave the court.
    His ultimate fun was suicide, with cyanide hidden in a bottle with cosmetics.
    But also Milch succeeded in hiding cyanide, but was just convicted to a few years in prison.
    He did not need it.

    布鲁斯·艾伦·墨菲(Bruce Allen Murphy),“布兰代斯/法兰克福关系,两位最高法院法官的秘密政治活动”,纽约,1983年

    伦纳德·莫斯利(Leonard Mosley),“帝国马歇尔(The Reich Marshall),赫尔曼·戈林(Hermann Goering)传记”,伦敦,1974年

    戴维·欧文(David Irving),《德国空军的兴衰》,伦敦,1973年,1976年(德国航空航天大学,Ausden Akten和Erinnerungen von Feldmarschall Erhard Milch,1970年,1975年,法兰克福)

    Contrary to popular views, the accusation was ‘conspiracy for a war of agression’.
    In 1939 waging war was no crime, until now nobody has been able to define ‘war of agression’.

  74. Joe Lauria 说:
    @jilles dykstra

    What does any of this anti-semitic stuff have to do with my article? Not only is it vile, but it is off-topic. It seems that any open forum is seized on by imbeciles to spew their racist bile.

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
    , @Anonymous
  75. @Joe Lauria

    I wonder what your idea of antisemitic and off topic is.

    Your article is about censorship in the USA.
    Is your idea that USA jews have nothing to do with this censorship ?
    Leading USA media are CNN, Washpost and NYT.
    These media are attacking Trump continually.
    Anyone knows that jews do influence these media.

    Then antisemitism, is criticism of (some) jews, and of Israel antisemitism ?
    Already long ago Obama and Sarkozy were at a conference, talked to one another, near a microphone not switched off.
    They agreed that Netanyahu was a liar, ‘but’, Obama said, ‘I have to deal with him every day’.
    Israel does not determine all USA policies, but does influence many USA policies, as senator Hollings stated in 2004 ‘it is politics when Bush jr promised AIPAC the Iraq war in case he was elected’.
    I mention facts, I wonder if you see my mentioning facts as antisemitic.

    • 回复: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  76. RobinG 说:
    @Joe Lauria

    Sorry, Joe, no cigar. Skeptical didn’t quote you, either. He was expressing his own opinions, in rebuke to Mark James – the only one who even referenced your article (and made an off-base jab at Robert Parry, as well).

    Censorship has already been discussed here, as well as the bankruptcy of the media. In fact, I submit that the reason Ron republished your article is because upsetting the Fake News applecart is a pet interest for him. (“Fake” includes lies by omission – or suppression – of course.) Welcome to Unz.

  77. @jilles dykstra

    Anyone knows that jews do influence these media.

    You are soooooooo ridiculous!!!!!!!

    No influence!
    Total control is the correct term.

    • 回复: @jilles dykstra
  78. @Joe Lauria

    Yes we are racist and we are proud of it.
    (I am beginning to have fun here}

    Jozephus! why worry?

    You are not responsible what these mean characters are writing.

  79. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Jews nowhere have total control, they did not even control Franklin Roosevelt.
    In his last speech he said ‘that ten minutes with king Saud had learned him more about zionists than hundreds of letters from USA rabbi’s, and that he had promised Saud to restrict jewish immigation into Palestine’.
    He died a few weeks later, and was cremated where he died, Warm Springs.
    His coffin just contained an urn with his ashes.
    USA people never knew.
    Stalin was surprised that he did not lay in state.

    • 回复: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  80. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    Israel’s call: http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/12/russia-us-is-training-new-batch-of.html
    “The US are training a new batch of militants called the New Syrian Army at a refugee camp who will then be transferred to Syria’s south to fight the Syrian Army. “Despite the statements from the American side about its adherence to elimination of the IS terrorist organization [ISIS], the “International Coalition” continues cooperating with the remaining terrorists in Syria… The U.S. instructors, according to refugees returning home, are saying after the training the new units would be relocated to Syria’s south to fight the Syrian governmental forces there,” the center explained.”
    — The Golan Heights… Yinon Plan… The same bloodthirsty projects
    “Israeli Intel Chief: We don’t want ISIS defeated in Syria” that would put Israel in ‘hard position’ http://news.antiwar.com/2016/06/21/israeli-intel-chief-we-dont-want-isis-defeated-in-syria/
    –Everythng has been already explained: The obedient US must protect ISIS to please Isael that has been squealing about existential threat from Iran, while cheering up the slaughter of 4 million civilians of all ages in the Middle East. The slaughter has been initiate and organized via ziocons in cooperation with ISIS/Al Qaeda and Saudis. Very much “democracy on the march!” Still whining about “eternal victimhood…”

  81. @jilles dykstra

    I watch CNN extensively.
    Maybe I am too influenced by it.

  82. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    The presstituting MSM and the incomparable (and very expensive) US national security apparatus as a can of useless parasitic worms: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-15/deconstructing-almighty-russian-hackers-myth
    “Let us pretend that Moscow wanted Trump to win. Let us further pretend that Moscow thought that there was a chance that he could win despite the fact that almost all news outlets, pollsters and pundits were completely confident that he could not. … Let us pretend that the strategy was to try and discredit Clinton….
    The Russians would know all about the 铀一号 matter where, as even the Clinton-friendly NYT admitted, “a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation”. It would be very easy for them to package this as a case of Secretary of State Clinton selling US policy for personal profit. Russian intelligence organizations would have a great deal of true information and would find it easy to manufacture material to fill in any gaps in the story. Presented as a case of corruption and near treason, the story could have done a great deal of damage to her. And, given that it had happened six years earlier, all the details would have been known and ready to be used. It would have been a very powerful attack that even the complaint media would have had difficulty ignoring.
    … she [Clinton] ran a private e-mail server on which there were thousands and thousands of official communications. The server was very insecure and we can assume that Russia’s signals intelligence (and everyone else’s, for that matter) had penetrated it. Think of all the real material from that source that could be revealed or twisted to make a scandal.. Further, it is a reasonable assumption that Russian intelligence would have some of the thousands of e-mails that were “bleached”. There would be enough material for a months-long campaign of leaks…. So, a preliminary look would suggest that there were several angles of attack of which 铀一号 would be the easiest and most effective.
    So, on the one hand we are supposed to believe that the Russian government is so clever that it can hack anything… is a threat to practically everything we hold sacred… but is too stupid to get it right. Possessing great and powerful secrets and a stunningly powerful machine to spread them, it chooses to fire a damp squib too late to make any difference and passes up the chance to have a compromised US president for it to control. In other words, it’s nonsense: we don’t really need the forensics of VIPS; we don’t need to argue with people who say it’s fake news about Seth Rich, or that Assange is a Putinbot, or carefully ignore Murray.”
    — Some national security services.
    And this is before the public awakens to the Awan affair (the greatest breach of national cybersecurity that was run for years!) and the murder of Seth Rich, an operative of Democratic Party. Our incomparable and very expensive security apparatus is still in the dark by whom was Seth Rich murdered in the D.C. A hint for the hapless pinkertons: Seth Rich was a leaker on Hillary machinations.

  83. Anonymous [又名“ Dan55434”] 说:

    That’s really only a valuable exercise if you view the United States as an economically contiguous nation. It’s not, by a long shot.

    It’s a collection of relatively economically isolated municipalities. To complicate matters, agricultural municipalities are of an entirely different economic and social nature than urban-town municipalities. But that’s a more complicated topic.

    At best, intra-state municipalities find economic relationships at the state level, but I would also argue that making that case for most would be difficult. The mean, then, is only relevant to each municipality.

    Put differently, there are a lot of poor municipalities in this nation. There are a lot of wealthy municipalities in this nation. They really have little to do with one another economically or culturally. Though, the beauty of this country is that the people from poor municipalities, if they work hard and with no small degree of luck, can move to economically and culturally better municipalities.

    Using the economic disparity, nationwide, to make a national political point is about as good as comparing the mean income of the USA to that of Thailand to make a political point. Your measurement is entirely too geographically broad to be economically meaningful. Though, I agree that it makes a nice alarmist headline.

    That being said, comparing economic inequality within a small geographic space can be meaningful. It can reflect quality of life and other arguable inferences.

  84. Anonymous [又名“ Dan323”] 说:
    @Joe Lauria

    Interesting. Could you define antisemitic, Joe?

    What I see is a recounting of a historical situation.

    • 回复: @Joe Lauria
  85. Kweli 说:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    True, the marginalization and exclusion of opinions of many more countries than the list you mention, would probably add up to a substantial percentage of the world’s population. When was the last time African, Latin American or 许多 Asian opinions on matters of international import have been reported in the MSM? Forget that many citizens in these countries are better educated and informed than their brainwashed American counterparts. To label the MSM as a source of fake news is to flatter them. The nail in the head is the drivel that the West led by the US promote democracies and human rights while the existence of the UN security council where a handful of permanent members can veto resolutions and skew decisions in favor of the powerful makes that organ the most formidable barrier to global democracy.



 记得 我的信息为什么?
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 Subscribe to All Joe Lauria Comments via RSS