And the Beat Goes On. The False News Beat.

19 Comments

1. 

   Arthur Gilroy on November 28, 2016 at 10:29 am

   Frenzied shouts of “Traitor!!!”?

   He won.

   You lost.

   You fucked up.

   Deal with it.

   How?

   Change, fer chrissake!!!

   Later…

   ASG

2. 

   Oui on November 28, 2016 at 10:38 am

   Wrote a few words in recent days about fake news, antiRussian sentiment, Euromaidan Press and Cold War relics coming back to life – hallmark of a New McCarthyism here in the US of A.

   ○ EU/NATO Propaganda It’s About Daesh and Russia [Update5]

3. 

   Arthur Gilroy on November 28, 2016 at 10:43 am

   November 27, 2016
   The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts
   Richard Baehr

   The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states.  No recount ever changes thousands of votes.  I do not think that is the purpose.

   The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters.  If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232.  No one hits 270.  

   Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time this happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.  

   If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it?  The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote  (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

   —snip—

   HMMMmmmmm…!!!

   AG

4. 

   Arthur Gilroy on November 28, 2016 at 11:17 am

   From Counterpunch:

   NOVEMBER 28, 2016
   Confessions of an Alleged `Russian Propagandist’
   by DAVE LINDORFF

   ThisCantBeHappening.net didn’t make the Washington Post’s list of 200 news sites that are “purveyors of Russian propaganda” designed to “undermine Americans’ faith in democracy,” but an article by yours truly published on our site on September 29 which was picked up by CounterPunch and run the following day was cited as “proof” that CounterPunch is just such a perfidious agent of Russian subversion of the US.

   The article in question, headlined US Propaganda Campaign to Demonize Russia in Full Gear over One-Sided Dutch/Aussie Report on Flight 17 Downing, called out the Dutch “investigation” into that horrific shoot-down of a fully-loaded Malaysian jumbo jet over war-torn eastern Ukraine in 2013, pointing out that the prosecutors and investors involved refused to accept any radar or transmission monitoring evidence offered by Russia or by separatist rebels in the region, using instead only evidence provided by the Ukrainian intelligence service and government — this despite the fact that both Ukraine and Russia possessed quantities of the BUK missile and mobile launchers that were known to have been involved in the downing of the plane, and should thus both be potential suspects in the case.

   I also noted that as reported by noted former AP investigative reporter Robert Parry on his own Consortium News site (also on the Washington Post’s hit list of Russian propaganda sites), and by retired CIA Senior Analyst Ray McGovern, the Dutch investigators never asked for nor received any satellite surveillance photos or NSA transcripts of relevant telecommunications concerning the shoot-down from the US, though such evidence certainly exists.

   The Washington Post article in question, written by Craig Timberg — surely either one of the most credulous and lazy journalists working in a major US news organization (and that’s really an accomplishment!), or a rank propagandist for the US government posing as a journalist at the Post — relied upon only two sources for his dramatic “exposé” purporting to prove that a massive Russian propaganda campaign had surreptitiously attempted to undermine (perhaps successfully!) the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and to throw the race to Donald Trump, at the same time undermining US foreign policy and faith in the US government while elevating the reputation of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Both sources are falsely described collectively by Timberg as being “two teams of independent researchers.” The assumption we clearly are meant to have is that these organizations have no institutional bias.

   In fact, the first of these sources, the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI), turns out to be a hoary relic of the Cold War founded in 1955 by Robert Strausz-Hupé, an Austrian emigré and passionate anti-Communist. It has continued its anti-Russian propaganda stance since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the 2002 death of its founder and now boasts on its board of trustees jailbait like former Reagan National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, a key player in the Reagan-era Iran Contra scandal who pleaded guilty to four counts of lying to Congress but was pardoned by President Reagan, arch-neocon and Russia-phobe Robert Kagan, a key promoter of the the US invasion or Iraq in 2003, and a whole host of other right-wing anti-Russian fanatics.

   Meanwhile, the other of Timberg’s sources, PropOrNot, an organization with a website, PropOrNot.com, founded only several months ago, remains totally secret, providing no information on its site about its origins, its funding, its leadership or its staff. And yet Timberg confidently claims its information about Russia’s alleged epic propaganda effort was the result of the painstaking analytical work of these “experts.” And his editors at the vaunted Post allow him to get away with this.

   To get the full picture of how credulous and unprofessional — or wilfully biased — Timberg’s editors at the Washington Post (often still considered one of the nation’s top “newspapers of record”), were in not veting his article, read the Intercept’s article Washington Post Disgracefully Promotes a McCarthyite Blacklist from a New, Hidden and Very Shady Group, which devastatingly eviscerates both PropOrNot and the Post.

   —snip—

   The second link in PropOrNot’s CounterPunch listing is under the heading “Absurd Pro-Russia Content.” This link leads directly to my article! Apparently in the view of the “experts” at PropOrNot, my piece is so clearly propaganda that no introduction and analysis by someone as skilled at detecting hidden bias and Russian perfidy as Harding is even required. Probably it’s mylead, which refers ironically enough to the Pentagon’s own all-too real propaganda campaign aimed at Americans designed to convince them that Russia is an aggressive and existential threat to the United States.

   And in fact, while our corporate media don’t talk about it, the US does run a vast propaganda operation, which includes the spawning and spreading of, guess what?, fake news stories! This kind of thing has gone on for years abroad, but since 2001, under both the Bush and Obama administrations, both the Pentagon and the US Information Agency have done away with an earlier ban on spreading such lies posing as news inside the US. Now we’re all fair game for US propaganda, which by the way the mainstream media routinely parrot. (Of course, we were already massively fed false stories by our mainstream media, from WMDs in Hussein’s Iraq to Assad’s chlorine gas attacks in Damascus, from only “moderate” Jihadi rebels being armed and trained in Syria to US hospital bombings like the one in Kunduz, Afghanistan being “accidents,” not deliberate targeting.)

   —snip—

   What it appears we really have here courtesy of Timberg and the Washington Post is a classic piece of McCarthyite red-baiting propaganda, complete with a call for the FBI and US Justice Department to investigate those on the list for possible violation of the US Espionage Act, the Foreign Agent Registration Act “and other related laws.”

   And remember, this is happening not because of President-elect Donald Trump — the guy the Russians supposedly manipulated American voters into putting into the White House. Rather, pretty evidently, it’s happening because some leading Democratic Party hacks, and the very clearly pro-Hillary Clinton Washington Post, are trying to divert the blame for Clinton’s stunning loss to Trump not on the Democratic Party’s and Clinton’s epic failure to connect with the working class voters they both long since abandoned, but on the alternative media that helped expose not just Clinton’s and the Democratic Establishment’s corruption, but the ugly reality of US militarism and foreign policy that both Clinton and the Democratic Party so enthusiastically back.

   —snip—

   Think on, me pretties.

   

   Think on.

   AG

   • 

     Oui on November 28, 2016 at 2:12 pm

     After the downing of Malaysia flight MH-17, the fake news and propaganda started immediately. Dutch PM Mark Rutte played a key role in delay of the start of the Dutch investigation at the crash site.

     Immediately US investigators of FBI and CIA agents swarmed into the offices of the SBU in Kiev, one of the most corrupt organizations of the Ukrainian government.

     The alternate list of the 200 Russian fellow travelers, is a list of “Allies” which includes The Interpreter and Bellingcat of Eliot Higgins fame … highlighted as a USAID and Atlantic Council stooge … salaried of course, the poor British fellow.

     See my diary for full write-up.

     Furthermore …

     Fake news with headline from Reuters!!!

     ○ Ukraine hands back stolen paintings to Dutch museum | Reuters |

     Real story as facts became known in Holland, paintings were held by SBU  in bargaining for a few million …

     Report: Paintings stolen from West Fries Museum surface in Ukraine with criminal gang

     “Our collection is in the hands of corrupt people, deep in the Ukrainian political elite”, museum director Ad Geerdink said to the newspaper. “They refuse to give back the paintings and only want one thing: to earn rough money at the expense of our cultural heritage.”

     Stolen art expert Arthur Brand traveled to the Ukraine to negotiate for the paintings on behalf of the museum. He managed to talk to the militia leader, but could not reach a deal. In January Brand announced that he tracked the stolen paintings to a criminal gang.

     ○ Ukraine’s SBU, neonazis accused of trading stolen Dutch paintings

     Original article in Dutch News is deleted …  link here [cached version]

      ○ EU vows unwavering support to Ukraine but problems with deal mount | Reuters – Nov. 24, 2016 |

5. 

   Arthur Gilroy on November 28, 2016 at 1:09 pm

   Ron Paul’s fake news list:

   

   Overwhelmingly sourced by wikileaks.

   Go look for yourself.

   Type any pf these names into wikileaks search and see what comes up. LOTS of Podesta shit. How does he find time to do anything other than write emails!!!???

   AG

   • 

     TarheelDem on November 28, 2016 at 2:40 pm

     Too bad we don’t have the corresponding emails from these folks to the Trump campaign.

     The job of a campaign manager is mostly writing emails, dontcha know?  And a few cameo appearances on TV horserace shows.  After all Kellyanne Conway likely has lots of emails to these same bootlicking people.

     I find Wolf Blitzer on the list amusing and the fact that Joy Reid is not on the list instructive.

     Don’t forget that Wikeleaks only leaked one campaign in the election.  Love to see what the Donald was emailing, tweeting Mz. Kellyanne and Mr. Steve.

     I find this to be more of a list of enemies of Ron Paul with annotation to Wikileaks.

     Welcome to an inside look at how a modern campaign actually operates.  The Podesta emails are not an aberration.

     This is how sausage is made under current meatpacking regulations.  Podesta was just ordering the herbs and spices that constitute the media’s special flavor.  Or ensuring that the lobbyist’s sawdust got mixed in.  Sorta makes Mondale’s question, “Where’s the beef?” eligible for a revival, doesn’t it?

     But then, Assange was facing the wrath of Hillary Clinton in the Federal Court of Northern Virginia (the CIA’s own) for the State Department leaks that showed how US diplomacy actually operated on a day-to-day basis.  And how an ambassador who knows zero about a country can be quickly schooled up to deal at least hamhandedly with the leadership of that country.

     • 

       Arthur Gilroy on November 28, 2016 at 3:55 pm

       Why do you I find Wolf Blitzer being on the list amusing, Tarheel? I didn’t watch much of the ludicrous mass media coverage of the whole campaign, but I watched CNN on Election eve and was amazed at how blatantly…and weakly, obviously very nervous…Blitzer tried to hold back  recognition of the rising tide of Trump’s win with breathy little exclamations. Every time the map guy…I forget his name but he obvioously knew his stuff…would say that Trump’s vote count had risen in some important, little Wolfie would visibly shudder and stutter his wishful disapproval.

       It was like a comedy routine, only the joke’s on us.

       Joy Reid?

       Sigh…

       Maybe she’s just not important enough to mention. How is her absence instructive? I am genuinely curious.

       ASG

     • 

       Marie3 on November 29, 2016 at 9:34 am

       Too bad we don’t have the corresponding emails from these folks to the Trump campaign.

       Yeah, politics isn’t fair.  Or maybe because Trump’s campaign was a one-man band, there are NO corresponding emails to/from folks running his campaign for years before and during the campaign.  What a shame those non-existent emails didn’t make their way to Wikileaks that could then release them to the public.

       There weren’t even folks at the RNC that were engaged in fixing the GOP nomination for Trump and therefore, weren’t communicating among themselves and the Trump staffers on how the effort was going.  (Okay, maybe some at the RNC did email after Trump secured the nomination as to how to stop the guy from tweeting.)

       • 

         Arthur Gilroy on November 29, 2016 at 9:40 am

         LOL!!!

         Thank you, Marie!!!

         AG

     • 

       Shaun Appleby on November 29, 2016 at 5:06 pm

       Aren’t Trump’s tweets enough? We have plenty of them.

6. 

   TarheelDem on November 28, 2016 at 4:12 pm

   The failed candidate–the nut of truth in an awful lot of half-truths.  What a female Presidential candidate that is “credible” is finally up against.

   “…workers disliked Clinton because she reminded them of the professionals who have bossed them around all their lives.”

   I can fully see how that would fly under the radar because the very qualities that attracted the party leaders are those qualities that turn off those who have had female bosses from hell.

   • 

     Arthur Gilroy on November 28, 2016 at 4:28 pm

     “…workers disliked Clinton because she reminded them of the professionals who have bossed them around all their lives.”

     Why is this necessarily sexually oriented, Tarheel? She reminds me of every underqualified, anosognosiac, bossy “boss” under whom I have ever worked. Of any of the seven sexes.

     AG

     • 

       priscianus jr on November 28, 2016 at 7:54 pm

       Gilroy, you’re amazing. After numerous people have explained to you, on at least two different occasions, that the supposed translation of Cicero is wrong, you still have not corrected it. Or if you like it so much, why don’t you just remove the name “Cicero” from it?

       Let me put this in musical terms. It’s like playing a B natural in a G chord even though you’ve been told again and again that the chord is G minor.

       The correct translation is “A liar IS NOT BELIEVED even when he speaks the truth.”
       Don’t you understand the difference between “IS NOT TO BE BELIEVED” and “IS NOT BELIEVED” ?

       The first expresses necessity or obligation. It means the same as “should not be” or “ought not to be”. The second is just a factual observation.

       The fact is, anyone SHOULD be believed if he speaks the truth. A liar, when actually speaking the truth, is not being a liar. That would be a contradiction. But that’s what your ridiculous quote says.

       In reality, when a liar says something, we don’t know if he’s telling the truth. Most likely he’s lying. So “A liar is not to be believed”, makes perfect sense. But that’s not what you’re saying. You’re saying that if a liar tells you “it’s raining”, and it really is raining — you shouldn’t believe it’s raining.

       What Cicero actually said is, “A liar IS NOT BELIEVED even when he speaks the truth.” That is a factual observation. Why should people believe a liar?

        “Even when he speaks the truth” — but that’s the point. They don’t think he’s speaking the truth and they don’t know he’s speaking the truth. So it’s an irony. Ever heard the story of the boy who cried “wolf” ? That’s what Cicero’s talking about.

       • 

         Arthur Gilroy on November 29, 2016 at 1:05 am

         Priscianus Jr., it is you who are amazing.

         Here we are, ever deeper in the shit that the last 24 years of PermaGov presidents have piled up around us. Now we have a reactionary president…in violent reaction to the previous 24 years or more of bullshit and very likely to do even more damage than the preceding several presidents.

         And all you can do is split hairs about a dead language???!!!

         Amazing.

         When first informed of this grievous fault I went on an internet search for the truth of the matter. All I found were “opinions.” This linguist translated it this way, another translated it another way.

          Etc., etc., etc.

         Eventually I simply applied the “FAT” theory to the whole mess.

         Fuck All That!!!

         Which Google Translate translates into Latin as:

         Pedicabo omnes!!!

         You want to continue to jerk off on this blog with your high school/college undergraduate Latin?

         Fine.

         We all need a hobby.

         Mine is trying to figure a way out of this mess.

         Go to it.

         I’ve got other things to think about, myself.

                                                   Go away, son.

                                                   Y’bother me.

         

         AG

         P.S. I asked Google Translate to translate “Priscianus Jr.” from Latin to English. It came up with “Priseianus Jr.”

         That sounds like this when spoken.

         “Prissy Anus Jr.”

         Go anusalyze someone else.

         Please.

         • 

           priscianus jr on November 29, 2016 at 1:10 am

           Go fuck yourself.

         • 

           Arthur Gilroy on November 29, 2016 at 1:37 am

           Excellent!!! Now we’re really getting somewhere!!!

           Your own true level.

           Thank you for your honesty.

           Ain’t about the Latin, is it?

           Nope.

           AG

     • 

       TarheelDem on November 28, 2016 at 10:37 pm

       Because a lot of the verbal and homemade signage attacks on Clinton were sexually (gender) framed.

       And because of the strong thread of anti-feminism in the Republican Party’s appeals even before Trump.

       In fact, you are correct that in terms of underqualified, anosognosiac, bossy “boss” types, all genders are represented.  But Hillary Clinton was a second-wave feminist when she left Little Rock for Washington in 1993.

       • 

         Oui on November 29, 2016 at 9:06 am

         Biography

         In a debate during her 2008 campaign, Hillary would credit her mother as her defining inspiration, a woman “who never got a chance to go to college, who had a very difficult childhood, but who gave me a belief that I could do whatever I set my mind [to].”

         When Hillary was three years old, the Rodham family moved into a two-story brick house in Park Ridge, Illinois. Hillary participated actively in her Methodist church, excelled in the town’s first-rate public schools, and demonstrated an early interest in politics.

         Coming of Political Age in the 1960s

         Through her teenage years, Hillary mirrored her father’s political leanings. At 13, she canvassed the South Side of Chicago after Richard Nixon’s defeat by John F. Kennedy, and she volunteered for Barry Goldwater’s campaign in 1964.

         In 1965, she enrolled as a political science major at Wellesley College, where she became the president of the Young Republicans Club her freshman year. But the tumultuous years of the 1960s opened Hillary’s mind to new political perspectives.

         From my point of view, if you were against the Vietnam War in the 1960s, how in the world can you cast a vote FOR the Iraq war … out of political expediency? Did HRC ever make a choice later in life? She was much too hawkish on foreign policy to my taste. Even at the start of the 20th century, women were passionate about women’s rights, women’s suffrage and the global peace movement. I remember covering the topic some years ago – link.  

         I am two years older than Hillary, reared in Holland after a devastating occupation during WWII by the Germans in 1940-45 and emigrated to the US. Fortunately in a loving family with both parents, and a mom held back by “authority” of religious pastors, but with much wisdom to educate her children on social issues and equality between man and woman. My maternal grandmother was a strong woman, burdoned by religious belief, but she always placed the welfare of a fellow human beyond authority of the state or church as a God given right

         I was a strong supporter of Democratic candidate JFK in 1960 (oldest brother voted for Nixon), never had the urge to support a Republican candidate on (just about) any level in the local community. Never doubted about a strong anti-war position during the 1960s and most certainly never doubted about the ill-conceived venture into Iraq. I never had the urge to run for public office.