Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 21, 2018

The Media War On Truthful Reporting And Legitimate Opinions - A Documentary

Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’.
George Orwell, Looking back on the Spanish War, Chapter 4

Last week saw an extreme intensifying of the warmongers' campaign against individuals who publicly hold and defend a different view than the powers-that-be want to promote. The campaign has a longer history but recently turned personal. It now endangers the life and livelihood of real people.

In fall 2016 a smear campaign was launched against 200 websites which did not confirm to NATO propaganda. Prominent sites like Naked Capitalism were among them as well as this site:

This website,, is now listed as "Russian propaganda outlet" by some neoconned, NATO aligned, anonymous "Friendly Neighborhood Propaganda Identification Serviceprominently promoted by today's Washington Post. The minions running that censorship list also watch over our "Russian propaganda" Twitter account @MoonofA.

While the ProPornOT campaign was against websites the next and larger attack was a general defaming of specific content.

The neoconservative Alliance For Securing Democracy declared that any doubt of the veracity of U.S. propaganda stories discussed on Twitter was part of a "Russian influence campaign". Their 'dashboard' shows the most prominent hashtags and themes tweeted and retweeted by some 600 hand-selected but undisclosed accounts. (I have reason to believe that @MoonofA is among them.) The dashboard gave rise to an endless line of main-stream stories faking concern over alleged "Russian influence". The New York Times published several such stories including this recent one:

Russia did not respond militarily to the Friday strike, but American officials noted a sharp spike in Russian online activity around the time it was launched.

A snapshot on Friday night recorded a 2,000 percent increase in Russian troll activity overall, according to Tyler Q. Houlton, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security. One known Russian bot, #SyriaStrikes, had a 4,443 percent increase in activity while another, #Damsucs, saw a 2,800 percent jump, Mr. Houlton said.

A person on Twitter, or a bot, is tagged by a chosen name led with an @-sign. Anything led with a #-sign is a 'hashtag', a categorizing attribute of a place, text or tweet. Hashtags have nothing to do with any "troll activity". The use of the attribute or hashtag #syriastrike increased dramatically when a U.S. strike on Syria happened. Duh. A lot of people remarked on the strikes and used the hashtag #syriastrike to categorize their remarks. It made it easier for others to find information about the incident.

The hashtag #Damsucs does not exit. How could it have a 2,800% increase?  It is obviously a mistyping of #Damascus or someone may have used as a joke. In June 2013 an Associated Press story famously carried the dateline "Damsucs". The city was then under artillery attack from various Takfiri groups. The author likely felt that the situation sucked.


The spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security Tyler Q. Holton, to which the Times attributes the "bot" nonsense, has a Twitter account under his name and also tweets as @SpoxDHS. Peter Baker, the NYT author, has some 150,000 followers on Twitter and tweets several times per day. Holton and Tyler surely know what @accounts and #hashtags are.

One suspects that Holton used the bizzare statistic of the infamous 'Dashboard' created by the neoconservative, anti-Russian lobby. The dashboard creators asserted that the use of certain hashtags is a sign of 'Russian bots'. On December 25 the dashboard showed that Russian trolls and bots made extensive use of the hashtag #MerryChristmas to undermine America's moral.


One of the creators of the dashboard, Clint Watts, has since confessed that it is mere bullshit:

“I’m not convinced on this bot thing,” said Watts, the cofounder of a project that is widely cited as the main, if not only, source of information on Russian bots. He also called the narrative “overdone.”

As government spokesperson Holton is supposed to spout propaganda that supports the government's policies. But propaganda is ineffective when it does not adhere to basic realities. Holton is bad at his job. Baker, the NYT author, did even worse. He repeated the government's propaganda bullshit without pointing out and explaining that it obviously did not make any sense. He  used it to further his own opinionated, false narrative. It took a day for the Times to issue a paritial correction of the fact free tale.

With the situation in Syria developing in favor of the Syrian people, with dubious government claims around the Skripal affair in Salisbury and the recent faked 'chemical attack' in Douma the campaign against dissenting reports and opinions became more and more personal.

Last December the Guardian commissioned a hatchet job against Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett. Beeley and Bartlett extensively reported (vid) from the ground in Syria on the British propaganda racket "White Helmets". The Guardian piece defended the 'heros' of the White Helmets and insinuated that both journalists were Russian paid stooges.

In March the self proclaimed whistle-blower and blowhard Sibel Edmonds of Newsbud launched a lunatic broadside smear attack (vid) against Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett. The Corbett Report debunked (vid) the nonsense. (The debunking received 59,000 views. Edmonds public wanking was seen by less than 23,000 people.)

Some time ago the CIA propaganda outlets Voice of America and Radio Free Europe started a 'fact-checking' website and named it (Some satirist or a clueless intern must have come up with that name. No country but the U.S. believes that the unscientific results of polygraph tests have any relation to truthfulness. To any educated non-U.S. citizen the first association with the term 'polygraph' is the term 'fake'.)

On April 4 the Polygraph wrote a smear piece about the Twitter account Ian56 (@Ian56789). Its headline: Disinfo News: Doing the Kremlin’s Work: A Fake Twitter Troll Pushes Many Opinions:

Ben Nimmo, the Senior Fellow for Information Defense at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, studies the exploits of “Ian56” and similar accounts on Twitter. His recent article in the online publication Medium profiles such fake pro-Kremlin accounts and demonstrates how they operate.

Nimmo, and several other dimwits quoted in the piece, came to the conclusion that Ian56 is a Kremlin paid troll, not a real person. Next to Ian56 Nimmo 'identified' other 'Russian troll' accounts:

Ben Nimmo @benimmo - 10:50 UTC - 24 Mar 2018

One particularly influential retweeter (judging by the number of accounts which then retweeted it) was @ValLisitsa, which posts in English and Russian. Last year, this account joined the troll-factory #StopMorganLie campaign.

Nimmo's employer, the Atlantic Council, is a lobby of companies who profit from war.

Had Nimmo, a former NATO spokesperson, had some decent education he would have know that @ValLisitsa, aka Valentina Lisitsa, is a famous American-Ukrainian pianist. Yes, she sometimes tweets in Russian language to her many fans in Russia and the Ukraine. Is that now a crime? The videos of her world wide performances on Youtube have more than 170 million views. It is absurd to claim that she is a 'Russian troll' and to insinuate that she is taking Kremlin money to push 'Russian troll' opinions.

Earlier this month Newsweek also targeted the journalists Beeley and Bartlett and smeared a group of people who had traveled to Syria as 'Assad's pawns'.

On April 14 Murdoch's London Times took personal aim at the members of a group of British academics who assembled to scientificly investigate dubious claims against Syria. Their first investigation report though, was about the Skripal incident in Salisbury. The London Times also targeted Bartlett and Beeley. The piece was leading on page one with the headline: "Apologists for Assad working in universities". A page two splash and an editorial complemented the full fledged attack on the livelihood of the scientists.


Tim Hayward, who initiated the academic group, published a (too) mild response.

On April 18 the NPR station Wabenews smeared the black activists Anoa Changa and Eugene Puryear for appearing on a Russian TV station. It was the begin of an ongoing, well concerted campaign launched with at least seven prominent smear pieces issued on a single day against the opposition to a wider war on Syria.

On April 19 the BBC took aim at Sarah Abdallah, a Twitter account with over 130,000 followers that takes a generally pro Syrian government stand. The piece also attacked Vanessa Beeley and defended the 'White Helmets':

In addition to pictures of herself, Sarah Abdallah tweets constant pro-Russia and pro-Assad messages, with a dollop of retweeting mostly aimed at attacking Barack Obama, other US Democrats and Saudi Arabia.
The Sarah Abdallah account is, according to a recent study by the online research firm Graphika, one of the most influential social media accounts in the online conversation about Syria, and specifically in pushing misinformation about a 2017 chemical weapons attack and the Syria Civil Defence, whose rescue workers are widely known as the "White Helmets".
Graphika was commissioned to prepare a report on online chatter by The Syria Campaign, a UK-based advocacy group organisation which campaigns for a democratic future for Syria and supports the White Helmets.

The Syria Campaign Ltd. is a for profit 'regime change' lobby which, like the White Helmets it promotes, is sponsored with millions of British and U.S. taxpayer money.

Brian Whitaker, a former Middle East editor for the Guardian, alleged that Sarah Abdullah has a 'Hizbullah connection'. He assumes that from two terms she used which point to a southern Lebanese heritage. But south Lebanon is by far not solely Hizbullah and Sarah Abdallah certainly does not dress herself like a pious Shia. She is more likely a Maronite or secular whatever. Exposing here as 'Hizbullah' can easily endanger her life.  Replying to Whitaker the British politician George Galloway asked:

George Galloway @georgegalloway - 14:50 UTC - Replying to @Brian_Whit

Will you be content when she’s dead Brian?
Will you be content Brian when ISIS cut off her head and eat her heart? You are beneath contempt. Even for a former Guardian man

Whitaker's smear piece was not even researched by himself. He plagiarized it, without naming his source, from Joumana Gebara, a CentCom approved Social Media Advisor to parts of the Syrian 'opposition'. Whitaker is prone to fall for scams like the 'White Helmets'. Back in mid 2011 he promoted the "Gay Girl in Damascus", a scam by a 40 year old U.S. man with dubious financial sources who pretended to be a progressive Syrian woman.

Also on April 19 the Guardian stenographed a British government smear against two other prominent Twitter accounts:

Russia used trolls and bots to unleash disinformation on to social media in the wake of the Salisbury poisoning, according to fresh Whitehall analysis. Government sources said experts had uncovered an increase of up to 4,000% in the spread of propaganda from Russia-based accounts since the attack, – many of which were identifiable as automated bots.

Notice that this idiotic % increase claim, without giving a base number, is similar to the one made in the New York Times piece quoted above. It is likely also based on the lunatic 'dashboard'.

[C]ivil servants identified a sharp increase in the flow of fake news after the Salisbury poisoning, which continued in the runup to the airstrikes on Syria.

One bot, @Ian56789, was sending 100 posts a day during a 12-day period from 7 April, and reached 23 million users, before the account was suspended. It focused on claims that the chemical weapons attack on Douma had been falsified, using the hashtag #falseflag. Another, @Partisangirl, reached 61 million users with 2,300 posts over the same 12-day period.

The prime minister discussed the matter at a security briefing with fellow Commonwealth leaders Malcolm Turnbull, Jacinda Ardern and Justin Trudeau earlier this week. They were briefed by experts from GCHQ and the National Cyber Security Centre about the security situation in the aftermath of the Syrian airstrikes.

The political editor of the Guardian, Heather Steward, admitted that her 'reporting' was a mere copy of government claims:

Heather Stewart @GuardianHeather - 10:38 UTC - 20 Apr 2018

It's not my analysis - as the piece makes quite clear - it's the government's.

The government claim was also picked up by other British outlets like Sky News (vid).


A day earlier Ian56/@Ian56789 account with 35,000 followers had suddenly been blocked by Twitter. Ben Nimmo was extremely happy about this success. But after many users protested to the Twitter censors the account was revived.

Neither Ian, nor Partisangirl, are 'bots' or have anything to do with Russia. Partisangirl, aka Syria Girl, is the twitter moniker of Maram Susli, a Syrian-Australian scientist specialized in quantum chemistry. She was already interviewed on Australian TV (vid) four years ago and has been back since. She has published videos of herself talking about Syria on Youtube and on Twitter and held presentations on Syria at several international conferences. Her account is marked as 'verified' by Twitter. Any cursory search would have shown that she is a real person.

The claim of bots and the numbers of their tweets the government gave to the Guardian and Sky News are evidently false. With just a few clicks the Guardian and Sky News 'journalists' could have debunked the British government claims. But these stenograhers do not even try and just run with whatever nonsense the government claims. Sky News even manipulated the picture of Partisangirl's Twitter homepage in the video and screenshot above. The original shows Maram Susli speaking about Syrian refugees at a conference in Germany. The picture provides that she is evidently a living person and not a 'bot'. But Sky News did not dare to show that. It would have debunked the government's claim.


After some negative feed back on social media Sky News contacted the 'Russian bot' Ian and invited him to a live interview (vid). Ian Shilling, a wakeful British pensioner, managed to deliver a few zingers against the government and Sky News. He also published a written response:

I have been campaigning against the Neocons and the Neocon Wars since January 2002, when I first realised Dick Cheney and the PNAC crowd were going to use 9/11 as the pretext to launch a disastrous invasion of Iraq. This has nothing to do with Russia. It has EVERYTHING to do with the massive lies constantly told by the UK & US governments about their illegal Wars of Aggression.

Brian Whitaker could not hold back. Within the 156,000 tweets Ian wrote over seven years Whitaker found one(!) with a murky theory (not a denial) about the Holocaust. He alleged that Ian believes in 'conspiracy theories'. Whitaker then linked to and discussed one Conspirador Norteño who peddles 'Russian bots' conspiracy theories. Presumably Whitaker did not get the consp-irony of doing such.

On the same day as the other reports the British version of the Huffington Post joined the Times in its earlier smear against British academics, accusing Professor Hayward and Professor Piers Robinson of "whitewashing war crimes". They have done no such thing. Vanessa Beeley was additionally attacked.

Also on the 19th the London Times aimed at another target. Citizen Halo, a well known Finnish grandma, was declared to be a 'Russian troll' based on Ben Nimmo's pseudo-scientific trash, for not believing in the Skripal tale and the faked 'chemical attack' in Syria. The Times doubted her nationality and existence by using quotes around her as a "Finnish activist".

Meanwhile the defense editor of the Times, Deborah Haynes, is stalking Valentina Lisitsa on Twitter. A fresh smear-piece against the pianist is surely in the works.

The obviously organized campaign against critical thinking in Britain extended beyond the Atlantic. While the BBC, Guardian, HuffPo, Times and Sky News published smear pieces depicting dissenting people as  'Russian bots', the Intercept pushed a piece by Mehdi Hasan bashing an amorphous 'left' for rejecting a U.S. war on Syria: Dear Bashar al-Assad Apologists: Your Hero Is a War Criminal Even If He Didn’t Gas Syrians.

Mehdi Hasan is of course eminently qualified to write such a piece. Until recently he worked for Al Jazeerah, the media outlet of the Wahhabi dictatorship of Qatar which supports the Qatari sponsored al-Qaeda in its war against Syria. The Mehdi Hasan's piece repeats every false and debunked claim that has been raised against the Syrian government as evidence for the Syrian president's viciousness. Naturally many of the links he provides point back to Al Jazeerah's propaganda. A few years ago Mehdi Hasan tried to get a job with the conservative British tabloid Daily Mail. The Mail did not want him. During a later TV discussion Hasan slammed the Daily Mail for its reporting and conservative editorial position. The paper responded by publishing his old job application. In it Mehdi Hasan emphasized his own conservative believes:

I am also attracted by the Mail's social conservatism on issues like marriage, the family, abortion and teenage pregnancies.

A conservative war-on-Syria promoter is bashing an anonymous 'left' which he falsely accuses of supporting Assad when it takes a stand against imperial wars. Is that a 'progressive' Muslim Brotherhood position? (Added: Stephen Gowans and Kurt Nimmo respond to Hasan's screed.)

On the same day Sonali Kolhatkar at Truthdig, as pseudo-progressive as the Intercept, published a quite similar piece: Why Are Some on the Left Falling for Fake News on Syria?. She bashes the 'left' - without citing any example - for not falling for the recent scam of the 'chemical attack' in Douma and for distrusting the U.S./UK government paid White Helmets. The comments against the piece are lively.

Those working in the media are up in arms over alleged fake news and they lament the loss of paying readership. But they have only themselves to blame. They are the biggest creators of fake news and provider of government falsehood. Their attacks on critical readers and commentators are despicable.

Until two years ago Hala Jabar was foreign correspondent in the Middle East for the Sunday Times. After fourteen years with the paper and winning six awards for her work she was 'made redundant' for her objective reporting on Syria. She remarks on the recent media push against truth about Syria and the very personal attacks against non-conformist opinions:

Hala Jaber @HalaJaber - 18:36 UTC - 19 Apr 2018

In my entire career, spanning more than three decades of professional journalism, I have never seen MSM resolve to such ugly smear campaigns & hit pieces against those questioning mainstream narratives, with a different view point, as I have seen on Syria, recently.

.2/ This is a dangerous manoeuvre , a witch hunt in fact, aimed not only at character assassination, but at attempting to silence those who think differently or even sway from mainstream & state narrative.

.3/ It would have been more productive, to actually question the reason why more & more people are indeed turning to alternative voices for information & news, than to dish out ad hominem smears aimed at intimidating by labelling alternative voices as conspirators or apologists.

.4/ The journalists, activists, professors & citizens under attack are presenting an alternative view point. Surely, people are entitled to hear those and are intelligent enough to make their own judgments.

.5/ Or is there an assumption, (patronizing, if so), that the tens of thousands of people collectively following these alternative voices are too dumb & unintelligent to reach their own conclusions by sifting through the mass information being dished at them daily from all sides?

.6/ Like it or hate it, agree or disagree with them, the bottom line is that the people under attack do present an alternative view point. Least we forget, no one has a monopoly on truth. Are all those currently launching this witch hunt suggesting they do?

The governments and media would like to handle the war on Syria like they handled the war in Spain. They want reports without "any relation to the facts". The media want to "retail the lies" and eager propagandists want to "build emotional superstructures over events that never happened."

The new communication networks allow everyone to follow the war on Syria as diligently as George Orwell followed the war in Spain in which he took part. We no longer have to travel to see the differences of what really happens and what gets reported in the main stream press. We can debunk false government claims with freely available knowledge.

The governments, media and their stenographers would love to go back to the old times when they were not plagued by reports and tweets from Eva, Vanessa, Ian, Maram and Sarah or by blogposts like this one. The vicious campaign against any dissenting report or opinion is a sorry attempt to go back in time and to again gain the monopoly on 'truth'.

It is on us to not let them succeed.

Posted by b on April 21, 2018 at 23:02 UTC | Permalink

next page »

The good news about both The Intercept and Truthdig pieces is that the comments quickly showed that readers knew what the publishers were up to.
The Intercept seemed to have removed Hasan's obscene act of prostitution within a day.
The reality is that we simply have to expect the imperialists, now reduced to propaganda and domestic repression, to act in this way: there is no point in attempting to shame them and they never did believe in journalistic principles or standards or ethics. They are the scum who serve a cannibalistic system for good wages and a comfortable life style- that is what the 'middle class' always did do and always will.

Posted by: bevin | Apr 21 2018 23:23 utc | 1

No longer is it possible to control TV, Radio and printed newspapers and use them to set the message. There are now an almost infinite set of channels including youtube, twitter, blogs, podcasts,streamed radio... It's like there is a public bitcoin/bitnewsledger where new information only gets written into the ledger if it is authenicated by sufficient endorsements.
In the past, a lie could travel around the world before the truth got its shoes on (Mark Twain I believe) but the truth is catching up. We are in the midst of the great changeover where older people still rely on traditional information channels yet younger internet enabled peoplecan leverage the new channels more effectively to educate themselves.

Posted by: Kaiama | Apr 21 2018 23:56 utc | 2

Western propagandists are freaking out because nobody believes their lies anymore. The more they freak out, the more we know they have lost the narrative.

I just fear for the safety of these independent journalists. It is not beneath the deep state to assassinate their enemies. These people need to be very careful.

Posted by: Cycloben | Apr 22 2018 0:01 utc | 3

A fine example of the reason i read the content here. Good post.

Posted by: Alan Reid | Apr 22 2018 0:07 utc | 4

Thanks Alan.

Posted by: b | Apr 22 2018 0:12 utc | 5

Thank you b. I think this Strangelovian effort to turn what was the Western media into PURE, unadulterated propaganda is the most important thing going on right now on our side of the world. There's a huge need for alternatives.

Posted by: fairleft | Apr 22 2018 0:18 utc | 6 thats pretty good......

Posted by: heath | Apr 22 2018 0:24 utc | 7

Great piece, Great site only just discovered. Will be making regular visits from now on

Posted by: Tony | Apr 22 2018 0:34 utc | 8

History will reveal the truth. And I suspect it will not radically differ from what b publishes on here regularly.

Hopefully we'll still be around to help share it with others.

Posted by: WorldBLee | Apr 22 2018 0:40 utc | 9

Brian Whitaker is a serial plagiarizer-his website has attack journalism articles without attributing sources, also has scripts that keep trying to latch on your URL and sets off browser alarms ahem.

Posted by: Naseer Ahmad | Apr 22 2018 0:44 utc | 10

Orwell would have understood and loved this:

The 2018 Pulitzer Prize winner in National Reporting – Staffs of The New York Times and The Washington Post

For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration. (The New York Times entry, submitted in this category, was moved into contention by the Board and then jointly awarded the Prize.)

The hysterical, side-splitting laughter over this chicken-choking, circle-jerking drivel will echo in eternity. Galactic stupidity simply doesn't get any more cosmic, except perhaps awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry Kissinger and Barack Obama.

Posted by: Michael Murry | Apr 22 2018 0:47 utc | 11

This is a fight between Deep States of the Rothschild-UK 'Octopus,' US-centric Rockefeller-Kochs, Russian (itself split between competing and intertwined Anglo-American clans/Eurasianists vs Altanticists) and China (also divided between sovereignty oriented Shanghai and Rothschild affiliated Hong Kong which was founded upon the opium trade in cooperation with the UK-Octopus).

The main point of contention is whether we have a hard or soft landing as the New World Order is born, with the UK-Octopus needing to instigate an epic crisis so as to bury countless trillions of worthless derivatives it sits upon, specifically seeking to collapse the USD as a global fiat and use the ensiung chaos to assist the Chinese as they establish an unasailable Yuan fiat. A war with Russia will bring the US-centric Deep State to it's knees and so this forms the basis of the not-so secret alliance between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, while China attempts to remain neutral since Xi prefers a smooth transition since the US-centric group may well launch a nuclear false flag attack on the Korean peninsula, thus irradiating the region and dooming the potential for a Chinese dominated century, should the interests of yhis group be ignored.

All gloves are off and the dispostions of various players are suddenly crystal clear after the firing of Octopus agent Tillerson by Trump via twitter led immediately to the launching of operation 'Novichok,' and was followed up with an attempted series of false flags in East Ghouta which were planned so as to bring the US and Russia to war.

Other important players include the US military (itself divided between Octopus NATO and US-centric Pentagon), the CIA, which is always on all sides of any conflict but was until recently headed by Koch protege Mike Pompeo, as well as smaller Arab, Persian and Turkish Deep States all jockeying for advantage and position. Even the Vatican is included and said to be divided between Polish Cardinals on one side, with German, Italian and many Spanish speaking Cardinals as opponents. There are other Deep States as well and in every instance they are divided between one of the two main parties and themselves to one or another degree.

Media and social control is mainly the preserve of the UK Octopus, so as all of us have understood for some time, anything included within it, from the NYTimes to most of Hollywood, is completely worthless. Alternative media was created as an alternative to Octopus media, while Trump takes to twitter so as to bypass their control.

I feel like a US voter forced to choose between Republicans and Democrats, but with the promised 'Blue Wave' coming in November when Congressional elections are due, certain to be impeached Donald Trump and his US-centric backers have a very short time frame in which to change the score.

Posted by: C I eh? | Apr 22 2018 1:04 utc | 12

CNN also published a long smear piece against YouTubers, basically advocating for depriving them of ad income: . Among other things, it had this to say about a U.S. comedian and political commentator Jimmy Dore:

Ads also appeared on The Jimmy Dore Show channel, a far-left YouTube channel that peddles conspiracy theories, such as the idea that Syrian chemical weapons attacks are hoaxes.

Syria is really the unifying theme in all these attacks.

Posted by: S | Apr 22 2018 1:08 utc | 13

@Michael Murry: Don't forget the Oscar given to the Netflix "documentary" on the White Helmets.

Posted by: S | Apr 22 2018 1:16 utc | 14

I congratulate Bernhard on yet another excellent piece of investigative journalism. My comment is not intended to criticise or take away from it, but only to point out that Orwell's quote was taken out of context, in the sense that although he remarks on partisan propaganda, he says that it is unimportant, since "the broad picture of the war which the Spanish Government presented to the world was not untruthful. The main issues were what it said they were." On the other hand, the lies of the pro-NATO press are important because unlike the partisan lies told by leftist parties during the Spanish Civil War, today's NATO lies are the equivalent of the official fascist propaganda of that time: they distort and hide the main issues. Here is the full quote from the link that B has diligently provided:

I remember saying once to Arthur Koestler, ‘History stopped in 1936’, at which he nodded in immediate understanding. We were both thinking of totalitarianism in general, but more particularly of the Spanish civil war. Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’. Yet in a way, horrible as all this was, it was unimportant. It concerned secondary issues — namely, the struggle for power between the Comintern and the Spanish left-wing parties, and the efforts of the Russian Government to prevent revolution in Spain. But the broad picture of the war which the Spanish Government presented to the world was not untruthful. The main issues were what it said they were. But as for the Fascists and their backers, how could they come even as near to the truth as that? How could they possibly mention their real aims? Their version of the war was pure fantasy, and in the circumstances it could not have been otherwise.

Posted by: Diana | Apr 22 2018 1:21 utc | 15

As a given group loses its grip on power, it tends to employ ever more extreme tactics. This explains the recent behavior of players like the US government, the UK government, the American mainstream media and various think tanks. What other extreme behavior should we expect from such a cabal? After all, they've already shown contempt for conditionally protected freedoms- all of them- and a willingness to manufacture any narrative they want in order to further their aims of conquest and profiteering. This whole mess could spiral out of control in countless ways with terrifying consequences.

Posted by: Tyronius | Apr 22 2018 1:48 utc | 16

@15 Yes but I'm not sure how relevant Orwell's quote is to today. Do we even have a 'left-wing' anymore? Or a Comintern for that matter? Even fascism wears a smiley face. Seems to me that what we have is a tightly controlled MSM. That control may be slipping but we have yet to see a replacement.

Posted by: dh | Apr 22 2018 1:49 utc | 17

Those of us at MoA who are regulars may feel a certain level of complacency based on the level of discourse here but I assure you that most Americans are still very much zombie followers of whatever the TV and other media tell them.

I believe that there is a strong possibility that MoA and like sites will become the focus of paid narrative pushers and if that is not successful there are other ways to make b and our lives difficult.

If b is ever knocked offline for some reason and needs help I encourage him to email his readers with potential strategies to show/provide support.

Thanks again and again for your web site b.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Apr 22 2018 2:01 utc | 18

The first casualty of war is the truth.

Many Westerners would recognize this phrase but many of them don’t understand that there -IS- a war (the new Cold War).

The longstanding law that prevented government propaganda in the US was revoked several years ago. U.S Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Apr 22 2018 2:05 utc | 19

This type of tyranny has been going on forever in the US. Take A. Lincoln.

More than 14,000 civilians were arrested under martial law during the war throughout the Union. Abraham Lincoln did so because they expressed views critical of Lincoln or his war.

It's the same-o. Different faces same crap.

Posted by: Ken | Apr 22 2018 2:07 utc | 20


Posted by: Bakerpete | Apr 22 2018 2:11 utc | 21

b- I am sorry to see their attacks on you, if things do go sideways please contact me if I can be of help in any way.
Do you know what has happened to Tucker Carlson, he has been such a strong voice for truth that I am concerned for him.
Stay strong and thank you for all you do in support of the truth.

Posted by: frances | Apr 22 2018 2:14 utc | 22

Sure, there are more people that see the lies and bullshit for what they are. Still, seeing it is not enough. What really matters now is to fully wipe out the mainstream media, to make it completely extinct, and therefore seeing they're full of shit is only the prerequisite to pondering how to actually bankrupt and destroy them. That's what everyone who's not fully on board with the Western regimes' and bankers' propaganda should be thinking about. How to convince people not only to stop buying their lies, but to stop buying them at all, how to cut down the vast majority of their readership/viewers to the point they don't matter anymore.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Apr 22 2018 2:23 utc | 23

Thank you b. This a very important subject. It wouldn't surprise me if a false flag happened that would be aimed at censuring all alternative news. This might be centered around a decoupling of east from west, perhaps when the current financial crisis explodes. Oh, has anyone heard from Tucker Carlson lately?

Posted by: Tom | Apr 22 2018 2:26 utc | 24

You can fool someone for a long time, you can fool a lot of people for a short time - but you can't fool a lot of people for a long time.

That is, unless those people are willing to live the lie.

I think the reason the MSM's propaganda is so effective nowadays (and I'm thinking specifically about the world since the Iraq invasion in 2003) is that, deep down, maybe in the collective inconsciousness level, the working classes from the First World countries know their superior living standards depend on imperial brutality over the rest of the world. That's why, for example, the USG and Downing Street haven't lost significant credibility domestically after Iraq and after Libya. This is a dark social pact: people live the lies only to sleep well at night and claim plausible deniability after; they only wish it to be over quickly and at the least human cost from their side (every coffin that comes back to their community from the Middle East is a crack in the illusion). They believe in Russiagate because, deep down, they don't want to believe they were capable of electing someone like Trump and, mainly, because they know their economies are failing, and the only solution is to invade other countries/prop up the war industry.

Posted by: VK | Apr 22 2018 3:06 utc | 25

Smearing people for appearing on RT! Americans who prattle on about freedom and democracy are pressuring other not to do this or that which is to inhibit their freedom.
Don't they know it makes them look like dictators without portfolio?

Posted by: Brian | Apr 22 2018 3:16 utc | 26

The greatest martyr IMHO is Lisa Howard. If she were alive today she would have thrived on the Alt-media circuit.
She is our patron saint.

Posted by: Fernando Arauxo | Apr 22 2018 3:34 utc | 27

Great article, b. I am a relative newcomer to MoA, having found it through Caitlin Johnstone (Rogue Journalist), but in a short time, I have come to rely heavily on it for “hidden” news and incisive analysis. Yes, independent news outlets are vital sources of truth, but their reach is still tiny compared to that of the Empire and its toads in the media. The well organized smear campaign against those who refuse to bow down is a frightening development indeed.

Posted by: Rob | Apr 22 2018 4:35 utc | 28

Thanks b for your outstanding dissecting! The Information War is complex yet still remains simple--all that's required is a critically thinking approach for any personally unconfirmed sources and the data presented followed by the willingness to ask questions, no matter how uncomfortable. Such a disciplined mind was once the paramount goal for those seeking wisdom, but such pursuits are deemed passé, unrequired in the Digital Age. But Big Lie Media's been working its evil for decades despite many calling out the lies. Funny how the two big former communist nations are now more credible than the West and expressly seek honest and open--Win-Win--relationships based on trust and equality. The Moral Table at play during Cold War 1 is flipped with the Outlaw US Empire being the Evil Empire. And the Evil Empire can't stand its own nakedness and its oozing social sores.

The liar is often agitated and nervous whereas one with the facts rests easy and remains calm. In the run up to their summit, note how Trump is already agitated and nervous, already prefacing his lies to come, whereas Kim is easy and calm, setting the table. Shrillness and hysteria are the similar signs provided by media liars and is almost always fact-free, supposed "sources" anonymous.

Posted by: karlof1 | Apr 22 2018 4:45 utc | 29

A magisterial piece of journalism, b. Congratulations, and thank you.


Spain. Orwell. Fascism.

I was born decades after the Spanish Civil War, and to be very honest I never knew much about it, nor have ever learned since. But Guernica I knew about, even as a young teenager in school. The culture was shocked into remembering forever that there was a lie involved with Guernica. That's all I ever really knew, was that Spain was a lie, underneath which a massacre lay.

They say it was the humanitarian and artistic type of people who kept the truth of Spain alive against the propaganda of the fascists. I don't know. I believe as I said the other day that propaganda only works to crowd out the truth, so that people are not exposed to the truth. But propaganda doesn't work in a battle against the truth, when people are exposed to both sides of the story.

If you were running a scam based on fake news, and one day you had to make allegations using this very term, and play your "fake news" card on the table in a round of betting that was merely one round in a long game - if you did this, you'd be a bad card player, or one driven to the corner and getting extremely close to leaving the table.

If your playing partner suddenly had to show the "false flag" card on the surface of the table for the whole game to see - yet another secret hole card exposed and now worthless forever - you could well think your game was finished. And it is - barring a few nasty tricks...which will be recorded and placed into the game as IOU's.

Don't anybody be part of that collateral damage - be well. And instead, let's collect on those IOU's. The game is almost over. Many people will appear to say that the players cannot be beat. But they are with the losers. We are the players.

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 22 2018 5:02 utc | 30

Is there any difference between fake news and a canard, or they are the same thing?

Posted by: hopehely | Apr 22 2018 5:21 utc | 31

psychohistorian @17

I wholeheartedly second your suggestion. I think the battle against the truth by the deep States everywhere has only begun. They will not stop at smearing individual posters or sites.

I do think we all need to start becoming more aware of alternatives, to YouTube (how's DTube?), Twitter (gab?), Facebook, Google (several alternatives) etc. But that will not be enough because I fear that in time the IP providers will come under pressure too - in all the western countries, especially. And the domain providers 9we all know them), followed by blog platforms such as WorldPress. I am not saying it's easy to curtail all of those, but they will try, as sure as the sun sets in the West.

Of course, the biggest attacks will be mounted against anonymous commenters and posters. That's already in the works at several outlets. The idea is of course that by stripping off anonimity people will self-censor for fear of repercussions to their real life selves.

There are people working on alternative platforms of all sorts. I am somewhat hopeful about user owned sites though these efforts are nascent. I hope commenters here will share what they know of alternatives, even knowing this won't be an easy battle. After all, Twitter owes its popularity to well, its popularity. Same with Facebook or Instagram or youTube. Therein lies the rub - it won't be easy to wean users from these platforms as many start-ups found out. That however should not mean that we shouldn't try. More and more Twitter users for example are cross-posting on gab, and several youTubers started uploading also to Dtube. neither site is ideal, I know. But neither was Twitter when it started.

Posted by: Merlin2 | Apr 22 2018 5:32 utc | 32

The real aim of propaganda is to persuade the politicians and not the public. One man in their middle wants to start a war and the media make sure that his or her fellow politicians will hear no other story and make support the only possibility. That's why people like us have to be vilified, so that all these politicians can invent an excuse for themselves and turn their head away. What we think really doesn't matter because we are not the ones in control. They only have to convince the Colin Powells and Frank Timmermans's.

Posted by: Antares | Apr 22 2018 5:50 utc | 33

The current increased smear campaigns against the so called Russian Bots, Assad Apologists etc., is surely just the first part of of a an attempt to implement very serious censorship and control over the internet to attempt to completely block out any alternative voices. Amber Rudd the UK Home Secretary has been banging on about Russian cyber attcks for the past couple of months. Whilst based on the history of UK Government IT projects I couldn't expect the UK alone to be capable of implementing any meaningful censorship scheme (they have a track record of producing so many multi-billion pound national IT project disasters) but with the coordinated help of the US and others they might just be able to put up enough censorship barriers to be able to get back to their original plans (removing Assad and whatever else they have in mind). False-flag chemical attacks haven't quite worked out to plan, but add in a false-flag cyber attack that apparently disables some of the UK (and/or US/EU) vital services and that should be enough for them to convince the plebs and sufficient MP's that it has become absolutely necessary to block Russain and other media and internet sites and force the owners of many social media channels to disable long lists of people with alternative views.

Posted by: Al-Pol | Apr 22 2018 5:52 utc | 34

Outstanding piece! Thanks, b.

Posted by: Mina | Apr 22 2018 5:56 utc | 35

Prop or Not is NOT a 'friendly neighbourhood' anything. It was exposed a while ago as being a joint state propaganda project between the CIA and West Ukraine, with the goal of spreading anti-Russia disinformation, and employing the collusion of some no-integrity US propaganda rags like The Daily Beast.

Posted by: Dave | Apr 22 2018 6:32 utc | 36

Many thanks b for the hard work. This is what we wish our traditional media would invest the time and publish.

Instead, what we get is something like:Terry Glavin: Here's why some people choose not to believe in Assad's atrocities which seems to be a great example of the Dunning Kruger effect. Note the vitriol!
My question is their motivation and timing. Why does the rhetoric seem to increase after the latest attack? Why care if 10% of the population doesn't follow their narrative now? Are they preparing for a new round of kinetic action? Or do they simply believe their management of the narrative needs more investment?

Posted by: bobzibub | Apr 22 2018 7:14 utc | 37

Thank you b. The attacks are proof you are making a difference.

Posted by: Norwegian | Apr 22 2018 7:24 utc | 38

@ 18
Totally agree.

There has been an up-change of gear by those seeking to block/counter we who are going against the state (and its lap-dog media) narrative on Syria and other associated issues.

I saw what the UK government and media were capable of doing during the Scottish referendum on Independence: the disinformation spread by the MSM and numerous new accounts on social media platforms and I am still convinced that the UK intelligence agency MI5 was involved, too. But enough of that for now.

Since then, I became a lot more 'information aware' and, one day, made a decision never to believe anything the MSM ever said again after witnessing the BBC openly lying about subject after subject, in particular, the Syrian Issue. After that, it was a matter of process to discover sites like MOA, South Front, and The Saker, et al. I do not think I am alone in that progress.

I support Psychohistorian's suggestion, b. Please take it on board. We are all now capable of being targeted.

Posted by: Bevin Kacon | Apr 22 2018 8:40 utc | 39

Is this the sole spot on earth not bugged by the Izzies?

Posted by: Mina | Apr 22 2018 9:06 utc | 40

If people are going to rely on social media feeds for anything other than information on what their friends and family are up to, then they are opening themselves up to being manipulated easily and with a minimum of actual effort.

You no longer need to own a newspaper or a broadcast network to do so.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Apr 22 2018 9:38 utc | 41

Posted by: dh | Apr 21, 2018 9:49:40 PM | 17

Orwell's quote is relevant on how people's perception of reality is colored by the side they take in a conflict. And switch accordingly. Like Maidan is good, Donbass is bad and vice versa. Assad is good, rebels are bad and vice versa. Truth is it is a choice of oligarchs. Like Trump is not as bad as Clinton, or Clinton is not as bad as Trump. Truth is the US army cannot count on shock and awe any more and therefore the US will have to negotiate.

Via the internet you can compare different narratives. Like this Xinhua report on Douma after the rebels. The panic is about governments losing control of information - which the internet was designed to do at a time the US believed their way of life to be so attractive that the US would win propaganda wars very easily.

It does not mean we know what went on there. Partisans of all sides will tell something different.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 22 2018 9:41 utc | 42

and the "game" goes on: The pro-Assad lobby has already seized upon Robert Fisk’s exclusive about his “search for truth”

Posted by: rs911 | Apr 22 2018 10:19 utc | 43

I spent a few hours last night going trough and reading trough tweeter accounts that you mentioned in this piece. To me it was like going trough Iraq war propaganda and all that and (I think) Iraq was worst by all accounts. Anglo-Zionist'w were unhinged in its lunacy, conquest and destruction of innocent society that will never recover.

Difference is now there is Russia in Syria, and there is China in N. Korea the countries which are in focal point in current clash between two (three) opposing poles in the world. Press-conference such as this were not possible few years back. Therefore in light of military defeat in Syria and N. Korea I sense futileness of nowadays propaganda coming from Washington. Of course the satrap EU's countries only follow the empire.

Even German's ZDF which have corespondent in Damascus shows some degree of independence, that guy do not believe in official narrative

I also must say that Moscow is involved is disinformation camping in Syria, not sure why is that but I guess it is "lesser evil" than sleepwalking in open confrontation with the US.

Posted by: partisan | Apr 22 2018 10:50 utc | 44

Also Caitlin Johnstone answer to Mehdi Hassan (US Gov. propagandists) terrible article:

Posted by: partisan | Apr 22 2018 10:53 utc | 45

Posted by: partisan | Apr 22, 2018 6:50:39 AM | 44

Yep, there are now lots of different stories - German ZDF reporting on rebels' depots of chlorine gas being hit and the videos being fake, Fisk on dust causing the symptons and the videos being real. Anyone free to choose what they want to believe.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 22 2018 11:01 utc | 46

the infographic is somewhat outdated, some faces are gone but there are new ones as well. Nevertheless I sense desperation in their propaganda effort, an efforts that do not bear the fruit due to emergence of multi-polar world.

@somebody | Apr 22, 2018 5:41:12 AM | 42

Not sure that "...governments losing control of information..." and I am sure that people are using the Internet in right way. Just as Einstein said "Most people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist. They are wrong: it is character."
Vast majority of the people have a little of character if any. People and individuals with the character do not allow to be manipulated.

Posted by: partisan | Apr 22 2018 11:08 utc | 47

Sorry, It should be:

"...and I am sure that people are NOT using the Internet in right way."

Posted by: partisan | Apr 22 2018 11:10 utc | 48

Ultimately people with a concience and some integrity will realize that something is awry. I’m no spring chicken and have been on the net for nearly 20 years. There are more ‘ old ‘ people surfing the net than initially may be apparent. As life passes by people become much more attuned to bullsh*t. T. May’s husband is on the board of a large British Armaments company. No doubt her ministers are all in on many scams. She is a very mediocre character, a fool as her time as home secretary demonstrated and was only voted in place so as to do the bidding of others. And in my opinion, when I say others I mean she is the western harlot who jumps when anyone pulls her string. They say that if you tell a lie often enough people believe it to be the truth. Not necessarily. There are so many holes in the Skripal and Syrian stories that only someone who doesn’t want to have their view challenged will believe them. The stories are falling apart and as they do, so does the credibility and trust of the western MSM and Politik. The reason the Germans and others refused to join in, is I suspect, they realize that in part, because once that is lost, it takes a great deal more to recover it. The Skripal case and the latest Syrian faked gas attack is the start of the end for T. May and her govt.

Posted by: JohnnyRVF | Apr 22 2018 11:23 utc | 49

Good comments, especially psychohistorian about being prepared to jump to alternative platforms ... Perhaps Russian ones?

What I was referencing in comment 5 is this relatively new desire by the 'powers that be' for purity, for absolutely no one from 'our side' dissenting against the mainstream (and completely bonkers in its anti-Russian extremism) narrative. This is not like the pre-digital age, when small-circulation real leftist publications were not subject to mainstream and official government extermination campaigns. And I don't think this is simply because of digital age reach, because the readership for the real alternative media's left/anti-imperial perspective doesn't engage enough people to be meaningful in terms of power and elections. At least in the US; less certain about elsewhere.

There's something angry, extreme, and extremely insecure about the psychology of the Western ruling class right now. My bet is that because of that insecurity they won't be so dangerous to Russia/China in the years to come, but instead the anger will be directed at internal left/anti-militarist dissenters. For some reason our reality bugs the sh!t out of them despite our small numbers.

Posted by: fairleft | Apr 22 2018 11:25 utc | 50

Until recently I used to read articles at both The Intercept and at Truthdig, but have since realized both of these 'news' outlets actively censor posts that are too accurate, too insightful of what the US government and MSM are doing in Syria and how they are manipulating public opinion with the White Helmets, staged false gas attacks, etc. I don't trust Pierre Omidyar, the philanthropist behind The Intercept, he has questionable political alliances. I have had many of my posts at both Truthdig and The Intercept censored even though they were entirely within comment rules. The Intercept has a lot of really BAD journalists posting crap there, like this ass clown Mehdi Hasan. Even Glenn Greenwald, a multi millionaire, is suspect. Both of these websites are psuedo-left and should not be trusted!

Posted by: deschutes | Apr 22 2018 11:33 utc | 51

....attacks on critical readers and commentators are despicable..

Indeed, but "the one free of sin to throw the first stone"....

From my experience at several supposed "alternative media", most of them somehow pro-Russian in the sense that they do not promote the sick warmongerism coming from the US and UK stablishments against Russia and its allies in Syria and against Syria herself, every site has its biases and slandering attacks by the owners of the blogs or by the "community" os sycophants residing there are everyday bread for any newcomer who could express a bit of dissent against the general editorial view.
I mayself have been obliged to change my nickname several times already to avoid attacks or banning/censorship, when my position about Syrai and Russia does not differ almost in the least with that of the people mentioned above who are being object of smearing campaign by the MSM....and this has happened to me in the supposed pro-Russian "alt-media"....

Thus, I would recommend to apply a bit of self-criticism and reflect about how anyone of us are probably contributing to the same effort of the bullies mentioned above against mainly common citizens who only try to commit themselves to spread some of the truth they are finding online through research and intensive reading, and try to offer an alternative point of view or simply debunk the usual nonsense especially against certain ideologies, mostly spreaded by US commenters.....

Posted by: From the resistance trench with love | Apr 22 2018 11:40 utc | 52

I noticed the part about Ian Shillilng being accused of denying the Holocaust or implying it was a govt conspiracy.

I find that interesting, because a co-worker asked me out to the blue "Do you even believe the Holocaust happened?" It's a strange question with no relation to Russiagate, yet pops up a lot so it clearly has an agenda. The question made no sense but I did recognized it as a familiar attack by the warmongers. My response was to to respond to such a ridiculous, dishonest question and I ignored it.

He went to ask if I was "stupid" for not seeing that Mueller's indictments over lying to the FBI and tax evasion/money laundering in Ukraine are NOT are not same thing as proving Russia meddled to deny Hillary her Presidency.

Posted by: timbers | Apr 22 2018 11:50 utc | 53

Thanks for the article b.
As painful as it is to watch the increasing attempts at censoring non-msm voices, we can take solace in the fact that, like a cornered rat, the establishment has no other option left but an all-out, full-retard attack on anyone not toeing the line. While the damage they are doing is real, this should be balanced with the fact that this attack comes out of weakness and not strength: they are the ones "losing", and knowledge of that reality makes them increasingly unhinged.

Posted by: Don Wiscacho | Apr 22 2018 12:07 utc | 54


At first I thought this is some kind of joke. Than I watched few times, I still believe CNN guy is in some kind of mission here, let's say to distract its viewers from existential matters that grips ordinary people in the US. His insistence on the "Russians" is illogical at first...this woman appear to be serious but when it comes to CNN everything is set-up, not just everyone can come to CNN, period. No facts involved the conversation is about NOTHING, that is the US national narrative being imposed by the ruling class trough various media. Just like "attack" on Syria and Syria's gas attack. There were none, there were no cruise missile fired, there were no downed ones! CNN's role is also to entertain its audience as well, everything but not talk about social and economic issues. In other words to indoctrinate - shift attention, not to ask unpleasant questions.

Posted by: partisan | Apr 22 2018 12:13 utc | 55

"b" - You are inevitably in a weaker position here, as are all like you who are attempting to get the truth of the Syrian conflict out to the public.

This is a vicious and brutal conflict, perhaps more so, certainly in scale, than the Ukrainian conflict. Troops, particularly irregular forces, do commit atrocities in such circumstances, and on all sides.

In the past this was accepted as an inevitable part of war. The brutalities of the Peninsula war, for example, after a town or city had been taken, were on an appalling scale. In those times that was regarded as regrettable but inevitable. These days the brutalities are not so regarded; but they still happen.

It's for that reason that I think the prosecution recently of a British soldier who murdered prisoners after a combat in which some of his fellow soldiers were killed should not have been pursued. Of course the British soldier behaved wrongly. Of course discipline and training should have stopped him doing what he did. But in the intense frenzy of war discipline and training sometimes isn't enough. If we demand of men that they should be subjected to such extreme pressures as these it is unrealistic to demand that they should behave as peaceful civilians must behave.

That is not an apologia for atrocity. It is a sober recognition that in war atrocities are more likely to occur.

And occur they do. On BOTH sides. It is because the Russians are aware of that that they stationed Military Police in East Aleppo after the defeat of the Jihadists in that city. Had those MP's not been there we can be sure that the victors, particularly the militias, would have looted and wrought havoc on an extensive scale. The reports of the MP's restraining such activities after the fighting are proof enough of that. We may also be sure that in places we do not know about there were atrocities when a town or area had been taken. And at other times. Again, both sides. That is war.

In my perhaps simplistic view that is down to us. We fomented the war. We drove it on. We are still attempting to do so. Therefore what either side does would not have been done had we not so acted.

But that's not the issue here. Why are you in a weak position?

You see it as your duty to give us an accurate account as far as you can determine it of this conflict. As a military analyst you can do this. That accurate account must cover what is done by all sides. In the main our Western propagandists only cover incidents they want to pick out that will prove their case. They need not invent atrocities by the Syrian side, although I think they sometimes do. They need only report them and them alone. That is enough to give the picture of a brutal regime oppressing its people. In giving your more accurate account you must necessarily at times confirm the accuracy of their story. They will never acknowledge the more balanced accuracy of yours.

The way many of us deal with this problem is to act as our Western propagandists do but in reverse. The propagandists make heroes of the "rebels", suppress stories of what they do wrong, emphasise what the Syrians do wrong. We make heroes of the Syrians, gloss over their wrong acts, emphasise the brutalities of the Jihadists. To the fake reality of the propagandists we oppose our own reverse fake reality. That keeps us comfortable, but there's no getting over the fact that our partisan version of reality is as false as theirs.

That is not your way. You must continue to set out the true reality as you find it. You will always therefore be in a weaker position because the man who tells the whole truth is always vulnerable to the man who only tells part of it.

It's that, rather than the danger of getting your internet cut off or finding your name blackened, that renders your task so very difficult. But given the forces against you, I don't suppose you and those like you ever expected it to be easy.

Posted by: English Outsider | Apr 22 2018 12:36 utc | 56

Someone mentioned the Netflix documentary White Helmets winning the Oscar, and that jogged memories from a couple years ago when the movie was released. While browsing Netflix looking for movies, I came across it and clicked on to watch, quickly discovering it to be a one-sided propaganda piece glorifying White Helmets and demonizing The Syrian "regime". I went to the Netflix reviews for the film expecting to see posts exposing this, but was shocked with what I saw. There were 61 reviews at that time, and 57 of them were rated 5-star, two 4-star, one 3-star, with one 1-star review (it had been posted that day) which brought truth to the issue. I had never seen any film ever which got that percentage of 5-star ratings.

I posted a review (giving 1-star) pointing out who funded White Helmets, and informed viewers that there was a lot of information available which countered the film's narrative (including Beeley and Bartlett's first-hand reporting from Syria). My review (like the other critical one) was mild with no content which would violate any standards. I checked my posting for the next two days to check response, and was happy to see it listed at the top as the "most helpful" review (based on reviewer clicks). And guess what happened the next day? Both my review and the other 1-star had just disappeared; it was back to 100% positive reviews. Looking for Netflix policy about deleting reviews, I could find no way an ordinary subscriber could do it, and guidelines for management to do it were only if a review was extremely offensive (racist, profanity, etc.).

I was disgusted with the whole thing and never checked back. I assume there are plenty of critical reviews there now. But there is no question the reviews were manipulated during the critical time period when the film was "hot", just released and leading up to the Oscars, with Hollywood celebrities singing the praises.

It may seem a trivial affair, but what it did for me was inform me of the depth and extent this propaganda happens, even in the most unlikely of places. Even with a limited diet of MSM consumption, I'm amazed at how many times a day I encounter it, with NPR being just awful. I am both frustrated with how many friends and acquaintances have swallowed this totally, but also encouraged to see the growing number of folks seeking the truth from sources like MOA, Consortium, Saker, etc. I agree with many who see what's happening in Syria as crucial for both the warmongers and for us in exposing it. My little experience with Netflix is just a small piece of a huge and widespread campaign.

Posted by: kabobyak | Apr 22 2018 12:48 utc | 57

B, can you publish some recent web traffic statistics?

I have noticed a huge increase in reader comments since 4th March. Is that reflecting a huge increase in distinct IP addresses accessing moonofalabama pages, or is it largely the same people who write more comments because the political situation is so unstable?

It would be interesting to compare traffic before and after 4th March (say, Jan to Apr by month), and also the rate of change after 4th March (say, week by week). Also, for comparison, 1 year ago and 5 years ago. Very interesting would be a breakdown by country, over time. What I am inclined to suspect is a catastrophic collapse of confidence in the MSM which is snowballing. The more confidence in the propaganda collapses, the more desperate the state apparatuses are (especially the incompetent and morally repugnant/bankrupt UK), the more own-goals they score in their desperate insanity, and the more they feed the snowballing collapse of confidence in the propaganda.

There can be absolutely no doubt that this is happening to some extent - the big question is to what extent, and what proportion of people are affected. Is this becoming a major issue now, in for example the UK (and, by contrast, Germany), or are we still a pitiful minority? Also, to what extent was the last UK election influenced by keen awareness of alternate news (I do believe that count was faked by MI5 though, as it always is)?

There is no question that Teresa May has thoroughly lost the plot big time and is on the run. The flood of false flags in both the UK and in Syria are both a direct result of that and the prime cause of its accelleration.

Posted by: BM | Apr 22 2018 13:10 utc | 58

I found this blog about 10 years(probably linked from Information Clearinghouse), and it has been one of the most informative I've ever come across. Great article!

Posted by: relament | Apr 22 2018 13:16 utc | 59

Very, very good piece.

I am one of those commenters at Truthdig (Maxwell) who excoriated Kohlhatkar and openly challenged her to a debate on this topic. Certainly she would never agree to such a thing as she is sorely lacking in any contextual understanding of the situation and consistently shows complete historical ignorance on most of what she writes. Usually her pieces are self-aggrandizing fluff and do not merit much if any response but this one was so disgusting it needed severe admonishment and it did get just that.

At present there are nearly 800 comments and virtually all of them address Sonali's incoherence and lib/prog passive aggressive form of propaganda.

At present from the liberal wing of the War Party (you might also include DemockcracyNow's! horrendous coverage this past two weeks) you are getting the usual hypocritical slant that "they really don't want the US to bomb Syria" as they claim to be "anti-interventionist" even as they reinforce the very same propaganda construct that is used to manufacture consent for intervention. I guess the "Cruise Missile Left" is out to save the world from yet another "brutal dictator" as in Iraq, Libya etc. Dead bodies everywhere you look but these geniuses can't seem to smell the rot they tacitly support.

A few sort of, uh, well, relevant items are always omitted from these narratives. When I say "a few" I mean an ocean's worth, but two that are a bit hard to overlook unless you're paid to be blind to such things is that:

1) Syria is a sovereign nation and as such has invited Russia and Iran into it's borders. All other countries and their proxies that are operating within the borders of Syria are in violation of international law-end of story;

2) The US has been targeting Syria for regime change for decades and has been at work to destabilize Syria (and many other nations in the region) for decades as well- this so-called "civil war" is actually a US-led intervention since day one. The US has been funding militants within Syria for the last decade and before that violently working for regime change in Syria and throughout the region to any and all "disobedient" governments.

Posted by: Allen | Apr 22 2018 13:32 utc | 60

The NYT and NPR are warmonger institutions. It is sad that ppl who consider themselves to be liberals, democrats, blue team (anti-war?- that's a stretch!) embrace these institutions as purveyors of truth or even real news.

Has the NYT ever seen a war it didn't support?

Posted by: fast freddy | Apr 22 2018 13:50 utc | 61

Great job b,

Obivously western intelligence servies, NATO leak stuff to western msm to intimidate and censor political oppostion in every western country.

Ben Nimmo is one of the most maniac propaganda dogs Nato/Neocons out there, he is a propaganda agent for NATO.

Posted by: Anonymous2 | Apr 22 2018 14:00 utc | 62

@ Diana 15

I don't feel that the quote is out of context. Yes, you show that Orwell clearly didn't consider it a big deal at that time, but what is happening now is that what he describes is omnipresent, the main stream of information we get, there is nothing else if you don't search for alternatives. It is beyond doubt that Orwell, in the present context, would never have added what he added in that book.
So in that light I feel the quote is extremely relevant and a good start of the article.

I want to express my thanks for this site and am really glad I was pointed towards MoA by other sources of real information.

Posted by: Levcek | Apr 22 2018 14:06 utc | 63

Meanwhile, the same western media give free pass to liberal warcriminals like Macron's France that just today call for permanent illegal occupation of Syria - after illegally bombing it.

France's Macron Urges US, Allies to Stay in Syria Even After Daesh Defeat

But no, it is people like us who call out this BS that gets silenced and harassed by the same ignorant western media/"journalists" along with the western deep state spy networks!

Posted by: Anonymous2 | Apr 22 2018 14:14 utc | 64

This site is blocked due to a security threat.

Posted by: Orwell Blocked | Apr 22 2018 14:22 utc | 65

What an excellent source of information the MoA site offers those of us who are seeking the truth and living in an Empire full of lies.Over the past few months, I have perused this site regularly and always find it very helpful in gaining a better and more concise understanding of
what is really going on in our world.

I am also astounded at how helpful it is for me to read the comments of so many who are regulars here.
The courtesy and level of intellectual dialog that goes on here in the comments section is a rare thing indeed! We all must fight for truth for the sake of our families and loved ones.

Posted by: Eric | Apr 22 2018 14:28 utc | 66

It's a measure of the integrity of this site, of b himself, and of the commenters, that even regulars are repeatedly moved to express gratitude for such truth-seeking posts. This granular, scrupulously sourced analysis is a perfect example. Some of us older readers hark back to the old "Whiskey Bar" days and the anti-war voices early in this century. . . when dissenting views were even more rare.

Posted by: Glorious Bach | Apr 22 2018 14:30 utc | 67

@ somebody | Apr 22, 2018 7:01:49 AM | 46

"Fake" and "Genuine" are used to describe the video with the water being poured over people. Fisk calls them genuine because the video was taped in the place where it pretends to be, not in a film set or a location where nothing was going on. It was filmed in the real hospital with real doctors, nurses and victims.
The video therefore is real (not staged), but the claim that people are suffering from gas wounds is false.
You can thus also say that the video is fake: it is said to show victims of a gas attack, while the doctor says they were suffering from suffocation, and only when someone shouted "gas", did people start hosing each other down (which as someone posted in another article, would have only made things worse if they had chlorine on them). As evidence of a gas attack, the video is fake.

As long as a person is not claiming that the video shows victims of a real gas attack aftermath, we're all on the same side I guess.

Posted by: Levcek | Apr 22 2018 14:45 utc | 68

I actually find Tim Hayward's response not mild at all. He is certainly gentlemanly (probably could not help it) but essentially tells them "fuck off liars".

Posted by: kemerd | Apr 22 2018 14:49 utc | 69

The response is of course to more eagerly call out the neocons propangada, western media propaganda and so forth,
get a twitter account, get a blog, lets multiply this movement, because these people will of course not stop at destroying peoples lives in the newspapers, they will call for censorship, registrations and sooner or later jail for these views.

Posted by: Anonymous2 | Apr 22 2018 14:51 utc | 70

Orwell's great fear was totalitarianism. Either from the left or the right. What we have now is much more subtle. The MSM retains the illusion of freedom and most people go along with it. We may even realize we are being manipulated but the only alternative is posting on sites like MOA.

Posted by: dh | Apr 22 2018 14:54 utc | 71

These neocons love to harass intimate, expose people, why not start a site exposing every nato/western msm/troll/nato-agents - like a index/encyclopedia?

Posted by: Anonymous2 | Apr 22 2018 14:59 utc | 72

2 things:

1) R/e Netflix and The White Helmets propaganda.
Expect more like this. Consider - Susan Rice Added to Netflix Board of Directors
CEO Reed Hastings says streaming service will benefit from former Obama administration official’s “experience and wisdom”

2) DO watch this new interview by Jimmy Dore with Carla Ortiz. You won't regret it.
Carla Ortiz Shocking Video From Syria Contradicts Corp. News Coverage

Ortiz spent 2 years in Syria, she had originally intended to make a documentary about how women of Syria are coping, she also was naive about the White Helmets. She filmed the human corridors, she talked to regular people, she has lots of great footage.

Comedian Jimmy Dore has been demonetized on any youtube videos that talk about Syria or war. CNN did a smear piece on him and other youtubers.

Posted by: Laura Roslin | Apr 22 2018 15:13 utc | 73

Is this coordinated by western states? People being attacked on different MSM or is it the usual, copy and paste technique that stupid liberal media are so often using to multiply their propaganda?

Posted by: Anonymous2 | Apr 22 2018 15:17 utc | 74

The silence of the UK media was absolutely deafening in their coverage of this little bit of possible Corruption.
Had it been Jeremy Corbyn or Gerard Batten the sky would have fallen in.
Britain is now faced with the prospect of a war criminal as PM.
May is already very tarnished and still grubby from leading roles in both the illegal attacks on Iraq and on Libya and is hopefully on borrowed time..
She must go if Britain is to be seen as having any integrity whatsoever.

Posted by: Emily | Apr 22 2018 15:21 utc | 75

@ 75

The UK has no credibility left now. May's farcical handling of the Brexit negs has exposed her as little more than a Tory mouthpiece, parroting party bon mots whilst having no clue where she is heading. And I suspect her civil servants haven't, either!

The Skirpal charade was a front for several things but mainly, I think, to turn the focus away from Brexit and to opening the Cold War front again. But what is alarming was her open support for attacks on Syria. It's been known for some time that the UK has special forces operating in Syria covertly; May's tub-thumping pretty much clarified that the Uk is as determined as Washington and that Rothschild puppet Macron to force a regime change in Syria.

You said she must go. I said the same thing last September after the fall-out from the June election and other foot-in-mouth incidents: she'd be gone before year end. How wrong I was. She has figures in the background protecting her.

Posted by: Bevin Kacon | Apr 22 2018 15:49 utc | 76

Thanks for all you do, B. To use the 60s slogan, you are certainly "part of the solution".

I also posted appropriately critical/snarky "Ort" comments to that dreadful Kolhatkar article.

The Syria debacle has "outed" a group of individuals and sites that offer themselves (pose) as contrarian, independent, anti-authoritarian government "alternative" news sites. Now we are seeing the masks crack and peel, assuming they're not openly flung aside entirely.

This always happens in periods of national/international turmoil and political hysteria. As the McCarthy witch-hunt gained momentum, eventually persons identified as Communist/socialist sympathizers and fellow travelers either cravenly renounced their tentative radicalism, or proved to be posers, impostors, and/or Western intelligence-agency assets.

Kolhatkar is a typical progressive-liberal lightweight-- which is to say, complacent, submissive, and conformist. It's predictable that she would join the pseudo-left infoganda campaigns-- and who knows, she might be enough of a natural Useful Idiot to really believe the drivel she's written.

As I'd commented recently, even though I admired Glenn Greenwald's work for a long time, his "throwaway" assertion that Assad conducted chemical weapons attacks was another "tell".

He's been running away from it ever since, and trying to unsay it with elaborate rationalizations that I call "blowing Chomsky Bubbles". Anyway, at least now we know that neither Greenwald or the "Intercept" modified limited hangout can be trusted.

It's a troubling, even dire, situation. But hang in there, keep up the good work, etc. We appreciate it.

Posted by: Ort | Apr 22 2018 17:57 utc | 77

Crushing dissent goes completely against 'liberal values' which is about the only high ground left for the humanitarian regime changers a.k.a the Franquistas. So that is not going to happen. On the other hand, social media is the easiest place to use covert operatives, even MSM has other sponsors and actors, social media can be directly controlled by governments , and the 'intelligence community'. So they are just using the net for what they set it up for.
Propaganda for domestic consumption in the USA, isn't really meant to convince as much as to scare people into submission. People don't obey Big Brother because they like him or believe him, but because they cannot talk back to him and are scared of him. Media Scare tactics work less if people can talk back, hear their own voice, not just Big Brother from every loudspeaker.
Martin Luther (not King) said that “A lie is like a snowball: the further you roll it the bigger it becomes.” The snowball is melting because there is shift in the narrative given what is happening on the ground in Syria. I find it fascinating that as it melts down layer by layer, the first trojan horse outfits to implode are left humanitarian ones like the Intercept, Newsbud, Democracy Now. The right wing ones like Fox, Young Turks, just concentrate on dumbing down the conversation to reduce reality to bombastic and misleading 'political' points. This is a another way to control the conversation, to scare people into thinking that facts or not facts but partisan political 'opinions'. Look at how Jimmy Dore's in the interview mentioned by B with Carla Ortiz, is trying to dumb down the conversation and keeps feigning ignorance. Thankfully she blows him out of the water. Good job Carla!
The snowball is big and melting slowly. Who's next?

Posted by: majobrs | Apr 22 2018 19:10 utc | 78

Superb piece, b. Hats off.

Posted by: fx | Apr 22 2018 21:26 utc | 79

@Posted by: English Outsider | Apr 22, 2018 8:36:27 AM | 56

I found your comment very alligned with the last "Animal Assad" rethoric by The Donald.
Amongst the many words of your comment ( that I found risky since other commenters have been warned about the lenght of comments here before...)I found that you subtly try to whitewash the terrorist and their supporters, ( amongst whom we ca nfind your country...)by equating them with the procedure of both the SAA and its allied militias.
I would like to see some facts supporting your denounciations, since I am sure that in case they would exist, they would have rounded the world through MSM thousands of times already for everybody to know...

For starters, neither the SAA nor its allied militias behead or cut parts of the body of dead people as they use to do the terrorrist of several franchises supported, financed, and trained by the US, UK, France and Israel. Nor they harass falling parachuters to dead as they do the terrorists and then mistreat the corpses as we have witnessed the terrorist doing many times already....
On the contrary, the SAA and its allies negotiate with the terrorists for them desisitng in the fight, and in case there are local Syrians amongst them, they are offered to remain in the liberated neighborhood once the heavy armament surrendered and even, if they wish, joining the government forces in the fight of liberation of Syria. The rest are being bussed along with their families to Idlib with their light weapons included. They were the terrorists who some of the times in the past bombed these buses....

So, no, English Outsider, while war is always inhuman and a bestiality in itself, not everybody behaves the same at war, and there is a slight difference ( sarc.), for not to say a huge one, between those who provoke wars by exporting an army of foreign mercenary terrorists of different nationalities recruited amongst the most flowery from KSA jails and the rest of the muslim world, and those who are oblied to fight for their very lives in the defense of their land and country against this army of invaders and their looting ambitious sponsors....

Posted by: From the resistance | Apr 22 2018 21:34 utc | 80

English Outsider @ 56:

You say: "...It's for that reason [that war is vicious and brutal] that I think the prosecution recently of a British soldier who murdered prisoners after a combat in which some of his fellow soldiers were killed should not have been pursued ..."

Have you ever heard of the Geneva Conventions, that govern the conduct of armies and individual soldiers towards POWs and civilians?

If that British soldier did murder POWs, who may or may not have killed his fellow soldiers, AFTER combat and while they were in his or someone else's custody, then he is clearly guilty of violating the Third Geneva Convention (which covers the treatment of POWs) and should have been prosecuted. He is no different from the takfiris who fired on and killed a Russian pilot while he was parachuting from his plane which they had hit some years ago.

The rest of your argument is quibble. As From The Resistance Trench With Love says @ 81, you are excusing and whitewashing the actions of terrorists.

Posted by: Jen | Apr 22 2018 22:32 utc | 81

The Sky actually had the gall to call Ian56 over Skype and ask him if he is a Russian bot. Ian gave perfect responses to all the ridiculous accusations thrown against him. Here's the video of their exchange with some commentary (Ian appears at 7:48): .

I wonder how many people in the MSM realize that “bot” is a contraction of “robot”. “Good evening, sir. People claim that you are a robot. How do you respond to that?” Could be a great opening for a Monty Python sketch.

Posted by: S | Apr 22 2018 22:53 utc | 82

thanks b.. awesome coverage of the many layers of the propaganda industry in full swing at present..

@59 bm.. i have noticed a real increase since around the time of the skripal affair... i don't believe the regulars are posting more.. there are a lot of new posters posting, or one's who don't post and only read are now posting..

Posted by: james | Apr 22 2018 23:49 utc | 83


Vesti has a great 10-minute clip dated yesterday from a Russian talk show with Margarita Simonyan of RT doing much of the talking. What she says is really encouraging about how she's trying to talk, not to power (which already knows the real truth that it's obscuring) but to common people, because there are those among the common people who do speak up and who really do shape public opinion - not governments.

She cited Roger Waters as an example, who was speaking at a concert and telling the truth about the White Helmets. She said, someone has to read in order to speak. And someone has to write so someone can read. And that's what RT is doing, and that's how it works. And it is working.

The panel agreed that the truth from Tony Blair finally came out 15 years later. So we have only to persist and stay safe for 15 years and we win:
The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 23 2018 1:47 utc | 84

Laura, thanks for the link to Carla Ortiz's videos. What a contrast to the video clips (Al Jazeera, especially) featured in Sonali Kolhatkar's post at These confirm what eyewitnesses told Robert Fisk - that someone burst into a room, yelled 'gas attack' Not heard), after which the video cameras started rolling, as White Helmeteers grabbed children and started hosing them down with water, even though nobody appeared ill, although the children did seem annoyed. Presumably extemporaneous speeches were delivered by (1) a White Helmeteer and (2) a representative of the Syrian American Medical, both organizations CIA funded. Staged events, if ever there was one. Why truthdig allowed such obvious fake news on its website? Well, they simultaneously featured a story by Frank Ritter that challenged the triple alliance (USA, GB & France) of evil's Assad did it line, so perhaps Sonali's piece was published so that when the censors come aknockin,the editors can say, "look, we did provide balance (ie cover their asses).

Posted by: jacobo | Apr 23 2018 2:12 utc | 85

@ Grieved that is passing on the snark of
The panel agreed that the truth from Tony Blair finally came out 15 years later. So we have only to persist and stay safe for 15 years and we win
I vote for a shorter cycle time on truth to come out....15 days sounds about right instead of 15 years......and for the next it will be 15 minutes, then 15 seconds if necessary.......

It is refreshing to see adults in the room

Posted by: psychohistorian | Apr 23 2018 2:13 utc | 86

Thanks for introducing us to Valentina Lisitsa! Her playing is magnificent with exquisite dynamics and timing.

Posted by: David Park | Apr 23 2018 2:16 utc | 87

oops, Scott (not Frank) Ritter (see above)

Posted by: jacobo | Apr 23 2018 2:41 utc | 88

George Orwell has been a presence throughout this thread.

It was unfortunate he was hurried by MI 6 to finish the last pages of 'Animal Farm' so it could be translated into Arabic and be used to discredit Communist parties in Western Asia. This always raised the ire of Communist organisations through following decades .
This being said he wrote some great text especially for me the revealing 1939 novel - Coming up for A

Posted by: ashley albanese | Apr 23 2018 3:52 utc | 89

oops ! Coming up for Air - which is a sardonic look at the phoney war period 1938/39.

Posted by: ashley albanese | Apr 23 2018 3:54 utc | 90

What many people don't realize is that fascism is a greedy habit, it expands to finally swallow up those who think they are protected by silence or looking the other way. The individuals and organizations villified today are the real heroes, and even if they suffer today, they will be vindicated in the end. But unfortunately the gullible masses would by then be in the open prison of fascism.

Posted by: Steve | Apr 23 2018 8:54 utc | 91

For the record:

RT Crosstalk show mentions the post above at the beginning and with some quotes at 5:00min:
Bullhorns: The possessed
Published time: 23 Apr, 2018 06:58

Posted by: b | Apr 23 2018 10:13 utc | 92

This is the second time Crosstalk has mentioned MoA. Shame he does not mention MoA.ORG.

Posted by: Sam.D | Apr 23 2018 10:21 utc | 93

I don't know if wars are really an extension of diplomacy by other means, but they certainly seem to be... an extension of ideology and propaganda. Ideas are very important in preparing and fighting wars; especially today, though, in reality the way we think about our western imperial war-fighting, goes back well over a century, back to the Whiteman's Burden and other imperialist myths.

For the last thirty years we've essentially been fighting 'liberal crusades for freedom and democracy.' That, at least, was the 'cover story' the pretext presented to the people. There's an irony here. Just like Islamic State, we've been engaging in 'holy warfare' too!

The reason our media is so full of lies and distortions and propaganda is because the harsh realities of our New Imperialism wars are so out of synch with the reality of what's happening and crucially the attitudes of the general public who don't want to fight more overseas wars, and especially if they are 'crusades' for democracy and freedom. But what's happened recently is that dissent is being targeted as tantamount to treason. This is rather new and disturbing.

It's because the ruling elite are... losing it and way too many people are questioning their ideas about the wars we are fighting and their legitimacy and 'right to rule.'

In many ways the Internet is bringing about a kind of revolution in relation to the people's access to 'texts' and images that reminds one of the great intellectual upheavals that the translation of the Bible had on European thought four hundred years ago. Suddenly Bibles were being printed all over the place and people could read the sacred texts without having to ask the educated priests to 'filter' and translate and explain what it all meant. In a way Wikileaks was doing the same thing... allowing people access to secret material, masses of it, bypassing the traditional newsmedia and the journalistic 'preists.'

Posted by: MichaelK | Apr 23 2018 15:00 utc | 94

@85 grieved... that was a great 10 minute clip you shared.. thanks!~

Posted by: james | Apr 23 2018 16:37 utc | 95

Congrats, b! Right-wing conspiracy site MoA was apparently the #1 link destination for #FalseFlag tweets according to @conspirator0, except he described MoA as a news site, not a fake news site - although it's neither. He needs a little retraining (with sand-filled rubber hoses) in the basement of DFR Labs to remember the requisite fake news qualifier.

@conspirator0, @benimmo and @DFRLabs - tirelessly working to cleanse Twitter of unsafe ideas, incorrect thinking and those damn Russians meddling in the neocon narratives.

Posted by: PavewayIV | Apr 23 2018 16:56 utc | 96

A bit of sardonic humor:

"The Rise and Fall of the United Sheepdom (Tales From My Uncle’s Animal Farm)

"Once upon a time there was a wonderful country. Its full name was the Union of White Sheep and White Wolves, but everyone called it United Sheepdom for short..."

PavewayIV's @conspiratoro would seem to reside within United Sheepdom and is likely a white wolve wearing white sheep's clothing.

Posted by: karlof1 | Apr 23 2018 17:27 utc | 97

I was delighted when today's Crosstalk, as B. notes, showcased his seminal "The Media War On Truthful Reporting..." article.

It brings to mind the traditional song, "Mole in the Ground":

I wish I was a mole in the ground
I wish I was a mole in the ground
A mole in the ground, I'd root this mountain down
I wish I was a mole in the ground

B., and Crosstalk for that matter, are moles that might yet root this disinformational authoritarian-hegemony Tower of Babel down.

Posted by: Ort | Apr 23 2018 17:34 utc | 98

Sounds like the Ds are trying to start a "Who lost China?" blame game over Syria:

Posted by: jalp | Apr 23 2018 18:02 utc | 99

Dude, welcome to the 3rd world :) Its nice to know that u live in Germany. Viva la revolucion Y

Posted by: meme | Apr 23 2018 18:21 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.