Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 20, 2020

How 'Western' Media Select Their Foreign Correspondents

Did you ever wonder why 'western' mainstream media get stories about Russia and other foreign countries so wrong?

It is simple. They hire the most brainwashed, biased and cynical writers they can get for the job. Those who are corrupt enough to tell any lie required to support the world view of their editors and media owners.

They are quite upfront about it.

Here is evidence in form of a New York Times job description for a foreign correspondent position in Moscow:

Russia Correspondent

Job Description

Vladimir Putin’s Russia remains one of the biggest stories in the world.

It sends out hit squads armed with nerve agents against its enemies, most recently the opposition leader Aleksei Navalny. It has its cyber agents sow chaos and disharmony in the West to tarnish its democratic systems, while promoting its faux version of democracy. It has deployed private military contractors around the globe to secretly spread its influence. At home, its hospitals are filling up fast with Covid patients as its president hides out in his villa.

If that sounds like a place you want to cover, then we have good news: We will have an opening for a new correspondent as Andy Higgins takes over as our next Eastern Europe Bureau Chief early next year.


To be allowed to write for the Times one must see the Russian Federation as a country that is ruled by just one man.

One must be a fervent believer in MI6 produced Novichok hogwash. One must also believe in Russiagate and in the multiple idiocies it produced even after all of them have been debunked.

One must know that vote counts in Russia are always wrong while U.S. vote counting is the most reliable ever. Russian private military contractors (which one must know to be evil men) are 'secretly deployed' to wherever the editors claim them to be. Russia's hospitals are of course always much worse than ours.

Even when it is easy to check that Vladimir Putin (the most evil man ever) is at work in the Kremlin the job will require one to claim that he is hiding in a villa.

Most people writing for the Times will actually not believe the above nonsense. But the description is not for a position that requires one to weigh and report the facts. It is for a job that requires one to lie. That the Times lists all the recent nonsense about Russia right at the top of the job description makes it clear that only people who support those past lies will be considered adequate to tell future lies about Russia.

No honest unbiased person will want such a job. But as it comes with social prestige, a good paycheck and a probably nice flat in Moscow the New York Times will surely find a number of people who are willing to sell their souls to take it.

Interestingly the job advertisement does not list Russian language capabilities as a requirement. It only says that 'Fluency in Russian is preferred'. 

'Western' mainstream media are filled with such biased, cynical and self-censoring correspondents who have little if any knowledge of the country they are reporting from. It is therefore not astonishing that 'western' populations as well as their politicians have often no knowledge of what is really happening in the world.


h/t Bryan MacDonald

Posted by b on November 20, 2020 at 19:06 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

Mr. Gruff@83, also Anne,

“so long as those grievances are not directed at the capitalist elites and the economic system they rely upon to maintain their dominance.”

It seems that the sense of micro aggression is unidirectional. For example, if the MAGA hat wearer (and I don’t own one either) is offended by a topknot on a purportedly male head or a Planned Parenthood t-shirt, he or she is not allowed to express that offense at whatever they think may be in the thoughts of their micro aggressor, lest they be labeled nazi/racist/genderist, etc. The support for the concept of these thought crimes occurs mainly towards “one side of the equation”.

I’m all for “Do not do to others what you would not have done to yourself”, but it has to be a two-way street.

Posted by: NotBob | Nov 21 2020 19:16 utc | 101

Allen Baker @ 100:

I also had my doubts about the authenticity of The NYT's job advert for the Moscow bureau position until I came across a July 2019 article by Morris Kiruga at The Africa Report on The NYT's job advert for its Nairobi bureau position. That job advert is just as unspeakably bad, to the extent of reinforcing racist stereotypes about African people ... "pirate seas of the Horn of Africa" indeed!

I'm typing on my smartphone now so I can't link to the report but try Googling "Morris Kiruga", "The Africa Report" and "New York Times" and see what you find.

Bryan MacDonald linked to Kiruga's article on his Twitter thread as well.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 21 2020 19:29 utc | 102

Whilst researching my claim up thread about internet searches being censored as well as left wing internet sites / organisations. I came upon this ——-

Topical to this post on oh so many levels !

Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 21 2020 20:35 utc | 103

Kiza | Nov 21 2020 6:06 utc | 48

A truly high level classical music station. Unfortunately, every hour it picks up the standard government pollution swill produced for all ABC radio and TV stations. I go to memory stick or to Mute for five minutes then back.

I would confidently venture that more and more people go through the same hourly routine as you and I do, to preserve own sanity and peace of mind from under this aggression on the mind. I sincerely do not envy the prostitutes writing it and delivering it. Ditto NYT “correspondents”.

I read a couple of days ago that a recent poll by (I think Pew) had found that while 73% of Chinese polled believed that they lived in a democratic system, only 49% of US citizens polled had the same belief. It did not strike me at the time, but if this is true, it is startling! It suggests that the US population is finally waking up! Doesn't it?

Posted by: foolisholdman | Nov 21 2020 20:38 utc | 104

@ Allen Baker | Nov 21 2020 18:54 utc | 100 hi allen... my friend expressed the same scepticism, but if you follow the link which i share abelow and which b posted to above you either have to believe the workday webpage has been compromised or you are stuck with the fact it is legit!! my person viewpoint is it is legit!

here is the link that b shared above - International Opportunities Russia Correspondent

Posted by: james | Nov 21 2020 20:39 utc | 105

here is a link to the article @ 103 jen refers to for anyone interested..

The New York Times shows how not to write an Africa job advert

Posted by: james | Nov 21 2020 20:44 utc | 106

Posted by: Jen | Nov 20 2020 19:31 utc | 3

My thoughts exactly upon initially seeing this. What kind of job listing for such an "important" role is so devoid of any qualifications or educational requirements other than "fluent in Russian preferred"? El Oh El.

But, then, I myself have been immediately blocked by one Jeff Bezos Owned CIA funded WaPo analyst and the NY Times' Venezuela correspondent (presumably the same type of position as the one advertised here, except that he NEVER actually goes to Venezuela) on Twitter for asking them *VERY* simple and unloaded (other than that the truth would required them to go against their writings) questions about some of their writing and reportage.

Maybe the situation really is this simple now. Shit, sign me up for the NY Times Spain correspondent. If the pay is right I could be persuaded to tell US, UK and NATO lies. And I kind of speak fluent Spanish, but not quite.

Posted by: _K_C_ | Nov 21 2020 21:26 utc | 107

Posted by: Allen Baker | Nov 21 2020 18:54 utc | 100

Another consideration is that this "workdayjobs" subdomain could be a job listing site that NY Times contracts with do do their in-house hires - i.e., hidden behind the NY Times main domain and not normally visible to the general public? There's a login script at the top of b's link and when I go to workday's public facing website, there is no such listing (NY Times Moscow branch) - plus the vast majority of the public facing job listings I see are for software devs and such.

Posted by: _K_C_ | Nov 21 2020 21:31 utc | 108

Now that Trump followers torn their clothes apart on being censored for first time in their lives, they must know that before them they came many others, since ages, some were banned even to death...When that was happening, trumpsters said nothing...

Following the assassination of #Patrice_Lamumba in 1961, young #Gaddafi of 17 years old led a demonstration against imperialism chanting Lamumba‘s name aloud. Libya was still under the submissive rule of British-backed monarchy.

Gaddafi was later arrested & excluded from school

Also,what about "Communist Control Act", did you say anything?

Liberals take on "Communist Control Act" that oppress and persecute communists..

Also, in Canada, before all could be blamed on Stalin since at the time he was too young and had no power...

in 1919 an *economic* general strike in winnipeg prompted the canadian government to beat up protesters, distribute tons of anti-communist propaganda, and label anyone who disagreed an “alien”

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Nov 21 2020 21:37 utc | 109

but Mr. Gruff, it is not the media that is the concern, Media merely the records and transports the content. The concern is what is it in those packaged items (the content) that media records and delivers to the eyes of audiences that is the concern.. IANAL so be aware as you read the following.. thanks in advance for your forgiveness

Might I suggest to redirect your good intentions and experienced observations to those who produce the content and pay to air their produced contents over on or in public media.. financing false and misleading content should, IMO, subject the financier share in the warranty against false or misleading content damage, because without Advertising support, content providers would be unable to reach a mass market and making the advertiser who enjoys a tax subsidy for his contribution to the media should make that advertiser liable for the damage caused by the content.

<==basically the tax deduction for advertising is a subsidy that begs private parties to use the public media. Corporate checks to media are not unrestricted grants; they are written to insert advertising between a program oron a page in a: book, program or whatever (just 6 entities own 92% of the media globally could they do it without advertising revenue?). When government makes something tax deductible it is subsidizing the revenue of the recipient of the check that qualified for the tax deduction so that deduction, IMO, makes the media it funds into a public media and public media must be responsible to the public audience they serve.

But before our panties wad up.. over media, I think concentrate on how to regulate and control the content that the media delivers is much easier and more to the point than trying to stop the media. Recently I suggested that a lie perpetrated against an audience thru content delivered over public media (<=any media supported by advertising) should be considered a crime against humanity. I suggested the courts should think of the offense of lying in public media as a tort to enable those damaged by the offense of lying in or over public media to be compensated for the harms the mal content caused the victimized person.

I'll bet it would not take the courts long to sort out definitions that distinguish a lie from the truth and that distinction should encourage tort lawyer haydays. Billions in recovered damages might be possible suing content providers like news agencies, movie makers, book writers and new show providers, talk show quests and expert comments for or on behalf of the injured clients of the Tort Bar. I believe the public believes the public media has a duty not to knowing allow misleading, deceitful or fiberistic content to be transported by public media to an uninformed audience but how would the media know in advance that such content was misleading unless the media itself created the content(as in news shows and talk show) or unless the courts clearly define safe-harbor process and criteria/

first amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press.. probably should not protect a provider of false and misleading content aired over public media from damage claims by persons injured because of the falsehood, or because the content was misleading (by omission or commission).. . The media (network TV, book, newsprint and magazine publishers ) might find some protection if it acted responsibly, but the content providers first amendment right was exercised when the content was aired on public media. He or she's right to speak and be heard was allowed and did occur, what remains is who should pay for the damage a false or misleading content might cause to the person damaged by its falsity or misleadingness?

So media that creates content (like the news, talk shows, and political advertising and the like ) would need to prove it had responsibly investigated and made a determination based on its review that the content might cause harm to one or more members of the audience.

Posted by: snake | Nov 21 2020 21:48 utc | 110

Sorry to break into the ad for a news reporter thread with some actual news. Yet another Summit is underway--the G20--and again Trump looks like a fish out-of-water. Global Times doesn't shy from reporting such events:

"In a speech at the opening ceremony of the G20 summit via video, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for G20 countries to play a greater role in the global governance sphere, saying the world should follow the principle of extensive consultation, joint construction and sharing, uphold opening-up and inclusiveness, and adhere to win-win cooperation.

"Xi stressed China's determination to safeguard multilateral trade mechanism, ensure developing countries' space and right of development and oppose protectionism.

"He noted that China is ready to strengthen cooperation with other countries on research, production and distribution of vaccines for COVID-19. China will also provide support to other developing countries to let the vaccines be available and affordable to all, he said." [My Emphasis]

The last bolded clause is something new I've not seen before--China proposing to be a protector--"ensure"--of developing countries. Guess there'll be no more IMF/World Bank Neoliberal Structural Adjustment Programs that deter development and invade developing nations's sovereignty--all of which is a direct challenge to what's known as the Washington Consensus.

And of course, Putin attended, and we learn what this year's G-20 agenda is from the Kremlin's website:

"The forum’s agenda includes issues of tackling the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, providing universal access to vaccines, strengthening healthcare systems, global economic recovery and employment, as well as cooperation in the digital economy, fighting climate change, environmental protection and countering corruption."

None of which Trump would be in favor of implementing even if 2020 was his first year in office. But apparently Trump actually contributed something worthy of reporting according to what Putin said in his speech, although I'd fact check Trump's words: "The US President has spoken now about the US efforts – indeed, it is a very big contribution to the recovery of the American economy, which also means the recovery of the world economy."

I want to highlight just two paragraphs from Putin's presentation, although I must suggest barflies read all of what Putin had to say in his compact yet to the point address:

"The main risk, obviously, even despite some positive signals, the main risk remains: mass long-term unemployment, a so-called “stagnant” unemployment with the subsequent growth of poverty and social insecurity. The role of the G20 is to stop this from happening....

"Let me stress – this crisis must become an opportunity to alter the trajectory of global development, preserve the favourable environment and climate, ensure equal conditions for all nations and peoples, build up effective tools of multilateral cooperation and key international institutions while drawing upon the UN Charter and universally accepted norms and principles of international law. We see this approach to solving global issues as the key task and responsibility of the G20 as the main forum of the world’s leading economies."

This report about Trump's G-20 contribution differs little from many others--he lied about his administration's efforts to combat the pandemic then began tweeting about the election before leaving early to paly golf. Some world leader!

What all the post election Summits have had in common is pushing the Outlaw US Empire to the sidelines and wresting leadership over the genuine Global Community away from it finally. And that position we find reflected in the NY Times ad for a Moscow-based reporter that doesn't even need to know the local language while supporting its other lies. As I wrote above, thank goodness for the "threat" of the internet. What I find most ballsy of it all is Trump's massive condescension toward the G-20 leaders by treating them like so many of his fans at his campaign rallies where he lied just as much. Given Trump's actual behavior, I wonder if Putin wasn't speaking in an ironic manner about Trump's contribution to the discourse.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 21 2020 22:07 utc | 111

Thanks Karlofi
I’d just like to add a couple of random but relivant points.
The G20 conference was based in Saudi Arabia astonishing considering that’s the people responsible for poor Koshiggs murder in there Turkish embassy.
Unrelated ——-
Russia has just announced their going to sanction 25 U.K. citizens banning them from entering Russia, as a reply for similar action by the west under the ‘Majinsky Act’
(I’m after that job not)

Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 21 2020 22:47 utc | 112

USA is like a kid in the playground crying that the other kid stole his lollies.

After all international diplomacy is about influencing the host country in changing its views of your country. Espionage too is the order of the day.

USA seems to lack the resilience to meet the foreign influences by countering with facts and actions that US is doing for its citizens. Perhaps it is the lack of it. It need some anti-fragility and truth telling by its politicians and media to stand up to the task.

Just saying.

Posted by: OzGuy | Nov 21 2020 23:08 utc | 113

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 21 2020 22:07 utc | 112 -- "What all the post-election Summits have had in common is pushing the Outlaw US Empire to the sidelines and wresting leadership over the genuine Global Community away from it finally."

Two phrases jumped out at me, both with the word "ensure":
Xi : ".... ensure developing countries' space and right of development...."
Putin: ".... ensure equal conditions for all nations and peoples...."
Reading between the lines, their words these days are amazingly bold. And these are the words of two men used to speaking words that come true, making promises that get fulfilled. And so, the world has hope that they will serve their people, not their rich.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 21 2020 22:07 utc | 112 -- "....What I find most ballsy of it all is Trump's massive condescension toward the G-20 leaders...."

It could also betray a lack of believe that he can make a difference to the rest of the world, seeing as he has enough of a battle fighting his own 'civil' servants, fighting a fractious populace. Putin and Xi, on the other hand, has the wind behind their backs with the support of their people.

Thank you, karlof1 for your tireless effort to help us connect the geo-political dots.

Posted by: kiwiklown | Nov 21 2020 23:42 utc | 114

@107 james and #103 Jen

Thanks for the link to the story on the NYT Africa ad. Complete affirmation that the ad is real - it's the NYT that's unreal, of course.

james, did you follow the link at the bottom of the article, to the essay on How to Write About Africa?

The entire article is superb, biting in every line, a satire on 500 years of imperialist misdirection and misperception of the subjugated "inferior races" - a misperception that saturates both the NYT ads.

We need to remember that racism is only a subset of imperialism, and not a thing in itself. It only arises when you wish to take something from a land that the other inhabits. To despise as inferior the group of people one massacres is how one keeps one's self-worth intact while stealing from entire continents.

So the article linked above doesn't so much describe racism as it does imperialism, and brilliantly at that, I think - and Africa would know. Here are a few excerpts:

Among your characters you must always include The Starving African, who wanders the refugee camp nearly naked, and waits for the benevolence of the West. Her children have flies on their eyelids and pot bellies, and her breasts are flat and empty. She must look utterly helpless. She can have no past, no history; such diversions ruin the dramatic moment. Moans are good. She must never say anything about herself in the dialogue except to speak of her (unspeakable) suffering. Also be sure to include a warm and motherly woman who has a rolling laugh and who is concerned for your well-being. Just call her Mama. Her children are all delinquent. These characters should buzz around your main hero, making him look good. Your hero can teach them, bathe them, feed them; he carries lots of babies and has seen Death. Your hero is you (if reportage), or a beautiful, tragic international celebrity/aristocrat who now cares for animals (if fiction).


Broad brushstrokes throughout are good. Avoid having the African characters laugh, or struggle to educate their kids, or just make do in mundane circumstances. Have them illuminate something about Europe or America in Africa. African characters should be colourful, exotic, larger than life—but empty inside, with no dialogue, no conflicts or resolutions in their stories, no depth or quirks to confuse the cause.


You’ll also need a nightclub called Tropicana, where mercenaries, evil nouveau riche Africans and prostitutes and guerrillas and expats hang out.

One could quote every paragraph - it was difficult to choose - it's one of those pieces where every line stands out equally brilliantly, equally crushing to the western indoctrination that we carry, I think in various residues, all of us, after 500 years of training.

Highly recommended, of course.

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 22 2020 0:18 utc | 115

Catlin Johnstone has a similar piece up and quotes/links to this MoA posting...

And ZH has picked up on Catlin Johnstone's posting that quotes/links to this MoA posting....

People that think that attorneys have a corner on shading the truth are not paying attention. Lying, obfuscation and misdirection have become features of the Western MSM instead of bugs. The US had a Fairness Doctrine enforced by the FCC from 1949 to 1987 and the League of Women voters use to run the presidential debates until 1988.

I suspect that job announcements for reporting positions in the states also are clear about the lying for a living expectations.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 22 2020 3:00 utc | 116

karlof1@112, thank you. i do search the sites for news, but invariably miss some, thank you for you for your thoroughness. very much appreciated.

Posted by: emersonreturn | Nov 22 2020 3:07 utc | 117

James @ 107: Thanx muchly for finding that article and linking to it. Hope u got as many laughs as I did at the responses to it and the recruiter's feeble defence that the ad was 17 months old already when he posted it. The guy's name was Slackman appropriately enough.

KC @ 108, 109:

Olivia Solon, who wrote a hit piece for The Fraudian some years ago attacking Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett and others for exposing the White Helmets as fakes and as the real terrorists they were, happened to be a digital journalist based in San Francisco at the time she wrote the article. Her major claim to fame before then was writing a blog obsessed with shopping. Nothing to show that she'd ever been anywhere near Syria.

I had to find out what a "digital journalist" is and what such a person does: well, very little more than review the latest software and hardware products and write PR based on the sellers' PR.

Last time I looked, The Fraudian's Middle Eastern correspondent was based in Istanbul. I guess Istanbul is representative of the Middle East as a whole. Fluency in Arabic, French, Hebrew, Persian or Turkish probably optional but not essential.

The NYT is not the only ratbag rag that pretends it's a quality newspaper.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 22 2020 3:26 utc | 118

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 22 2020 0:18 utc | 116 --- "To despise as inferior the group of people one massacres is how one keeps one's self-worth intact while stealing from entire continents."

Helps to block cognitive dissonance for "church-going Christians"; makes it easier to squeeze trigger if you call them sand niggers, rag heads, gooks, barbarians, brutes, animals, savages...

Helps to build one's self-regard if you also have a British Museum to "safeguard cultural treasures for all mankind" never mind that said treasures had stood in situ, unmolested for centuries.

But of course, thieves will always brag in the end, admiring their own cleverness, even if said bragging and said Museum are now evidence of crime.

"Errrrr..... it became necessary to steal the treasures to protect them from the savages.... and we burned to the ground the other treasures we could not carry away..... Errrr.... to protect them from the savages, of course...."

Summer Palace, anybody? Not once. But twice. LOL

Posted by: kiwiklown | Nov 22 2020 5:13 utc | 119

In the 1960s, NYT's Moscow correspondent Harrison E Salisbury wrote a book The Coming War Between Russia and China, as tensions between the two giants nearly boiled over on the Amur.
Salisbury was a Pulitzer prize winner. But so was Judith Miller, the NYT `writer' who cheered on the Iraq war, where the lives of 500,000 Iraqi children was `worth it', according to the so-maternal Albright.
Fortunately, Salisbury's predictive powers weren't so keen.
The New Dork Times vacancy sounds like a pretext at casting the net wide.
The preferred candidate could have been singled out by the ptb at the company and `external stakeholders'.
Human resources, however, also has a say in the hire, if only for the sake of appearance.
Due process has been followed, and everyone's arxe is covered, in case the new operative/correspondent doesn't pan out.
The position for a New Dork Times post-truth narrator based in Moscow may also go to an in-house team member, when the dust settles on internal politicking.
Whatever it is, don't expect objective reporting, based on the job specs.

Posted by: LittleWhiteCabbage | Nov 22 2020 5:23 utc | 120

Many young Zbignews lining up for the job.

Posted by: pajero | Nov 22 2020 6:02 utc | 121

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 21 2020 16:12 utc | 83 -- "The attentive reader might notice a more sinister precedent that is being developed here. The agency of the accused in this new definition of violence is no longer relevant and the perceptions of the victim are all that matter. The "crime" is thus one that occurs entirely with people's minds. It is thus "thoughtcrime", only improved in that the "crime" is unrelated to anything that may have been going on in the mind of the accused and is based entirely upon what the supposed victim is thinking!"

Well-observed, Gruffy. We are criminals because they say so. LOL !!!

How do people raise children and their children's children in such a charged culture?

Posted by: kiwiklown | Nov 22 2020 8:04 utc | 122

Anne @97 -- Bleach? Nah, presstitudes eat their own 'emissions'. A little chlorine is no deterrence to those dastardly bastards. They say fish rot from the head first. I say men rot from their souls first.

Anne @ 95 -- Reading that quote by Thomson taught me why they keep the us ignorant and poor. No wonder Cankles cackled so loudly about expendable deplorables. I see much of evidence the dumbing down of the citiznry in kiwi-land, and of course, amedikastan. No wonder karlof1 is almost driven to distraction. :o)

Posted by: kiwiklown | Nov 22 2020 8:13 utc | 123

Mmm interesting concept
The perpetrator as the victem. Nice real nice.
But keep going

Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 22 2020 8:39 utc | 124

So if I was that newly recruited journalist reporting from Russia
I would pose the question why was Putin so benign toward trump ?
And I suggest the answer that ——-
Putin knew Trumps fasicism would devide America clean down the middle.
Thus rearranging the world wide geopolitical power map !
That Putin is a very cleaver man.
I like him.

Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 22 2020 10:09 utc | 125

Americans have no frame of reference in dealing with anywhere else in the world. If they have a view of Russia at all, it is often still through the lens of the Cold War, which applies only to the most limited extent if at all.

Posted by: Malchik Ralf | Nov 22 2020 10:38 utc | 126

So Kyle Ryttenhouse just got out of bail, what I'm really surprised is that his bail is set at freaking 2 million USD, and his GoFundMe got banned.

Oh well, glad the kid got out, hope his defense is solid.

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 11:06 utc | 127

So Kyle Rittenhouse, the Kid from Kenosha, just got out of bail. Apparently, the bail was two freaking millions dollar, but I'm glad people were able to foot the bill.

Now just hope the kid's defense is solid, gonna be tough for him but he looks optimist.

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 11:15 utc | 128

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 11:15 utc | 129

Rittenhouse will never be convicted of anything by a jury, defense shmefense. If they talk him into a plea deal or threaten his family or something, maybe, but any jury is going to be asking for his autograph, not looking to convict him.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 22 2020 13:10 utc | 129

It is no surprise that our resident fascist "antifa" troll who glorifies physically assaulting random "deplorables" gets confused between victims and perpetrators, but the issue I discussed in post #83 isn't criticism of any of that poor damaged individual's preferred victim statuses. It was about how the elites are instrumentally using a ludicrously broadened definition of "violence" that encompasses perceptions of psychological assault and abstract offenses against "identity" to silence unsanctioned public discourse (note present tense; it is already happening).

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 13:17 utc | 130

To demonstrate that the alleged current war amongst Trump, his staff and followers with the social media networks and MSM is fake.

Chinese Ambassador to Venezuela´s Twitter account suspended by alleged "communist" Twitter:

This is the kind of people who really has always been, is, and will be banned from social media networks, not Trump, his staff, or followers, who continue psoting whatever they wish and, in any case, get a succint sentence of warning below their comments, whatever they are...

That is not censure/banning...

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Nov 22 2020 13:18 utc | 131

Can anyone explain how Kyle Rittenhouse managed to reunite $2 million for his bail?

As it was obvious, this was a well organized event by powerful people behind Trump.

Posted by: H.Schmatz | Nov 22 2020 13:21 utc | 132

It sends out hit squads armed with nerve agents against its enemies, most recently the opposition leader Aleksei Navalny. It has its cyber agents sow chaos and disharmony in the West to tarnish its democratic systems, while promoting its faux version of democracy. It has deployed private military contractors around the globe to secretly spread its influence. At home, its hospitals are filling up fast with Covid patients as its president hides out in his villa.

One can seriously ponder why NYT human resources put all these [facts, beliefs?] in the ad. Employers often stress in such ads aspects that were causing problems either with candidates who interviewed previously or the recently fired/departed personnel. In this case, questioning this and that. BTW, there is a serious increase in Covid cases in central and eastern Europe, with Czech republic having catastrophic stats (number of daily deaths per million reaching 18), and Austria, Hungary, Romania and Poland having quite dire statistics (close to 10). In the same time, the "wave" is also seen in Russia (nearing 3) Ukraine (above 4) and USA (about 4.5). In general, Covid reporting is a total disaster, countries have very different stats and we have no idea why, it could be very illuminating to understand what is so different between Argentina and Uruguay, between Czech and Slovak republics or even between different states or regions of USA. There are big disputes what government actions may be disastrous or essential.

Anyway, I found the bolded words interesting, because they refer to this vexing issue: how democratic or anti-democratic is Russia? Most Russians vote for the ruling party, and in opinion polls, even a larger majority approves Putin. There exist opposition media. The access to internet is reaching close to universal, the censorship seems very modest, especially compared with China and censorial activities in the West (that Russia seems to copy with a delay). In what way is Russia less democratic than, say, UK or USA, or nearby countries, say Latvia, Poland and Ukraine? As in the case of Covid, nobody seems to care about comparing different countries, except for latching to difference that "prove" inferiority of the subject country.

In this case, the prescription is clear: political system is "faux", end of story.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 22 2020 13:22 utc | 133

Re: Rittenhouse

The charges are first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, and attempted first-degree intentional homicide. Bemildred @130 is correct, there is 0% chance of a jury convicting on these charges. The entire incident was captured on video and is now in the public domain. Rittenhouse was clearly being pursued by a mob and was trying to escape his "victims".

Now, if the charges were reckless endangerment and involuntary manslaughter, then the trial would be a bit more of a nail-bitter, but even then there is a solid chance that a self-defense legal defense would prevail.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 13:35 utc | 134

H.Schmatz @133

Rittenhouse's bail had nothing to do with Trump. Stop talking about your imaginary demons as if they are something that exists in the real world.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 13:40 utc | 135

William Gruff @Nov22 13:35 #135

The charges are ...

You forgot to mention the charge for illegal possession of a gun. It's very likely that none of this would've happened if this baby-faced 17-year old wasn't carrying a gun in a riot.

Why are there no charges for the adults that put him in that dangerous situation (or allowed him to be in that situation)?

Rittenhouse was clearly being pursued by a mob and was trying to escape his "victims".

But he didn't fire into a mob. He fired at four specific people. Each of those shootings will be examined and judged separately.

... there is 0% chance of a jury convicting on these charges.

Rittenhouse fired at an unknown guy that was unarmed and moving past him. And when he fired at the guy that hit him with a skateboard that guy was off-balance (trying to retrieve his skateboard) and moving away from him.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 13:56 utc | 136

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 13:35 utc | 135

Yeah, if the charges were at least loosely related to what occurred, then it might require some sort of argument, but even then you won't get to "guilty" from all twelve of them unless the jury has been "curated" to get that effect. I would expect around half of them to see nothing much wrong with Rittenhouse's activities that day. Mind you I'm not one of them, but I know my fellow citizens.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 22 2020 14:02 utc | 137

They make it hard to donate to Rittenhouse, but plenty of right-wing groups, boomers and youngs alike unite to help the kid.

It's probably one of the good things the right did this year.

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 14:14 utc | 138

@ jackrabbit

He fired into people that were chasing and ganging up on him.

The skateboard guy tried to hit him with the skateboard.

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 14:28 utc | 139

I left this in another forum, and I will drop this here too:

The following may be viewed as mere attempt to remove from the shooter access to a self-defence protection under the law, but it does substantiate why the advice the guy in the video and The Saker is appropriate as applied to civilians:

don’t go somewhere you would not go without a gun with a gun

This is more than common sense, this underlies a law principle actio libera in causa. I will cite this reference [Provocateurs and Their Rights to Self-Defence]:

A provocateur does not pose a threat of harm. Hence, a forceful response to provocation is generally considered wrongful. And yet, a provocateur is often denied recourse to a self-defence justification if she defends herself against such a violent response. This denial is based on the actio libera in causa principle. According to this legal principle, an agent cannot invoke an excuse or justification for an otherwise wrongful act (here, defence against the respondent) if she brought about the excusing or justifying conditions herself.
my emphasis

How could the Kenosha shooter be considered himself a provocateur before the law, specially if under the circumstances the obvious provocateurs were his shooting victims? Because he may have put himself in the situation that made his lethal defence necessary. Again:

don’t go somewhere you would not go without a gun with a gun

The Kenosha shooter, despite his provable good intentions, put himself alone surrounded by rioters, with the lethal means to defend himself, yet with dubious access to invoke self-defence if he had to resort to those means.

Posted by: Vasco da Gama | Nov 22 2020 14:48 utc | 140

@ Vasco de Gama

I feel the guys shot by Kyle lost their right by chasing him.

It's not their rights to chase and apprehend him, civilian arrest or not, Kyle was clearly in retreat, and unironically it's the job of the cops to catch him, not the mob.

These guys lost the right to live the moment they start to chase the guy with the gun.

Then again, I wonder what went on the mind of these guys, that's some sick fanatism, they aren't afraid of the gun?

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 14:54 utc | 141

Bunny lawyer: "Your Honor and members of the jury, you can see from this frame of the video that Boarder Dude was not striking the defendant at the precise instant the defendant pulled the trigger. He was striking the defendant in the previous frame. Clearly Boarder Dude had finished striking the defendant and ceased being a threat to the defendant in the interval between these two sequential frames of the video and thus there was no longer any compelling reason for the defendant to feel threatened! Since the defendant was no longer threatened the only possible justification for firing his weapon was to commit unprovoked murder. Further, the defendant had plenty of time between these two frames of the video to meditate about pulling the trigger, making this particular act premeditated! Obviously you must find guilty on all charges!"

Cute, bunny!

I hate to be a downer, though, but that pig just ain't gonna fly. The attack by skateboard and the subsequent shooting are not going to be treated as separate and unrelated events.

"Why are there no charges for the adults that put him in that dangerous situation..."

I believe they got shot and killed, or shot and disarmed. Maybe there will be civil charges against their estates at some point in the future?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 15:11 utc | 142

I suspect the antifa guys acted the way they did because they were being offered big payments by their sponsors.

Posted by: lysias | Nov 22 2020 15:11 utc | 143

17-year old Kyle was sent into the crowd by the militia that he was working for. They have a duty to know who is working for them and that they are legally armed. We can't rule out that Kyle was used as a pawn.

Yet no charges against the militia?

As his legal guardian, Kyle's mother has a responsibility to know where Kyle is and what he's doing - and to keep him safe.

Yet no charges against the mother? Because she might sue the militia if she were charged?


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 15:12 utc | 144


Then again, I wonder what went on the mind of these guys, that's some sick fanatism, they aren't afraid of the gun?

One also wonders what went on the kid's mind, to leave his armed buddies behind and delve deep into the rioters lines. Even if he had been carrying a first aid kit that night while his automatic weapon was prominently visible. The dissuasive power of his weapon disappeared when he left his buddies in front of the store they where allegedly asked to defend.

Posted by: Vasco da Gama | Nov 22 2020 15:17 utc | 145

Posted by: Smith | Nov 22 2020 14:54 utc | 142
Posted by: Vasco da Gama | Nov 22 2020 14:48 utc | 141

Mr. de Gama makes the sound point that Rittenhouse was a dumb ass just for being there, let alone with a gun.

It appeared to me that the two guys Rittenhouse shot in the video with the skateboard guy being one of them, Rittenhouse was fleeing and they were chasing him, two or three guys. They seemed to think he was naive or would not shoot. But he did seem to have some training, you could see that. I assumed they thought he was a naive suburban kid and one of them clearly tried to grab his gun.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 22 2020 15:18 utc | 146

Didn't Rittenhouse go out to put out a fire in a dumpster that the antifa rioters had set?

Posted by: lysias | Nov 22 2020 15:21 utc | 147

William Gruff@143

I will remind the defendant before having been threatened by a skate board had already used its weapon in a previous altercation with another rioter, killing him, making attempts to disarm the defendant plausible, perhaps even justifiable before the law.

Posted by: Vasco da Gama | Nov 22 2020 15:24 utc | 148

Bemildred @Nov22 15:18 #147

I assumed they thought he was a naive suburban kid ...

17-year old baby-faced Kyle looked like an easy target (to steal his gun).

Very convenient for anyone that wanted to use Kyle as a pawn.

Kyle is lucky to be alive.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 15:24 utc | 149

Vasco da Gama @141

Very interesting, but how difficult would it be to flip that around and apply it to the rioters themselves?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 15:39 utc | 150

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 15:24 utc | 150

"Kyle is lucky to be alive."

Yes, he is. But I wonder if he knows that? I suppose he is getting more sophisticated all the time now that he got himself involved with the legal system.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 22 2020 15:41 utc | 151

William Gruff@151

Maybe not too difficult, since rioters could certainly have known armed militias where being organized to be present in Kenosha. Some of them where also seen with sidearms, this even including the shooter's 3rd victim (which to the latter's own defence was also seen raising his hands just before reaching for his weapon).

I am just pointing out the possibility that this may not be as clear cut a jury decision in the case at hand. At the time I was much more attentive to how the different actions by the different actors in the US were wittingly or unwittingly taking the country into the abyss... leading me to the following comment:

That is the paradox. By the time the civil society in general must be learned in the detail of gun law we are at the point exactly when law and order has already broke down. We are past the point of the gun’s dissuasive power. Blaming “communists” and the left as the guy on the video does is laughable.

I hate to agree with L445 view here, but the clear push towards generalization of armed internal conflict is very visible. Whoever, is organizing both sides of the conflict in a descent towards anarchy. Increasing levels of indiscriminate violence on one side and stand down orders on the other.

Trotskyites are focusing on social engineering and their energy is global.

Posted by: Vasco da Gama | Nov 22 2020 15:56 utc | 152

Of course Rittenhouse considers himself lucky to be alive. He was in a life-threatening situation and he knew it. That is why he fired his weapon. People who think he fired for fun or on a lark are working with an imaginary caricature of a 17 year old kid, not the real thing.

I'm not saying he wasn't stupid, but every single individual involved that night was stupid, from every single rioter to the police to all of the "militia" that the bunny imagines to be some nefarious and powerful organization operating in the shadows.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 16:00 utc | 153

Wm Gruff

The more you ridicule and talk past my points, the more you prove yourself to be partisan and thus not credible wrt Rittenhouse and the events in Kenosha WI.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 16:10 utc | 154

Don’t worry nurse will be along in a minute with a sedative for you.

Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 22 2020 16:25 utc | 155

When I go gather and study news, I go read PressTV and E. J. Magnier’s recent writings to inform myself about the viewpoints of Axis of Resistance. I go read Sputnik and Saker’s recent writings to inform myself about the viewpoints of Russia. I go read PD and P. Escobar’s recent writings to inform myself about the viewpoints of China. I go read WSJ and NYT followed by MoA to inform myself about the viewpoints of US government.

It would be very confusing and frustrating for me to process the data if NYT start to sound like PressTV. Let us hope they all continue to do the job the way it is.

Posted by: Framarz | Nov 22 2020 16:56 utc | 156

Frankly, I've no effing clue as to why, since around the 1990s, anyone under 20 is presumed a child.

Back in 1963 I left school (legally) at the age of 15 and began (as was normal, legal and expected of the working classes at that time) aged 15 there was quite a history behind that as I'd wanted to go to uni and read English...but 13 schools twixt 4-15 with more in prospect (mobile parents) was enough already.

So at 15 I became a full-time worker, initially employed by the NHS as a filing clerk in a small office in Aylesbury, Bucks.... As was fully normal in those days (and earlier) I was expected to turf up my wage packet (actual money) to my mother and she handed back what amounted to my bus costs, the rest being my board and lodging charge...You grow quickly when these are the parameters - that you are expected to contribute to the household costs, pay your share (and on top of that since I [female] was 8 years old increasing numbers of household and household maintenance tasks were given me)...

Adulthood arrived earlier before the 1970s. Or at least adult responsibilities did. At least in the UK.

Rittenhouse at age 17 was Not a child any longer...

Posted by: Anne | Nov 22 2020 16:56 utc | 157

@ Grieved | Nov 22 2020 0:18 utc | 116

and @ Jen | Nov 22 2020 3:26 utc | 119

thanks you two! i hadn't seen that article that you linked to grieved... i might have seen the link, but i didn't read it until you drew my attention to it... quite good as you say, in articulating al that is skewed in so many peoples writing and views on africa.. thanks for pointing it out... @ jen - yes - slakman, a good name for him in all of that!

Posted by: james | Nov 22 2020 17:33 utc | 158

Anne @158

Things have changed a great deal since 1963! In particular, the age at which people reach emotional and cognitive maturity has increased substantially over that period of time. A fifteen year old from 1963 would have the mental development of a twenty-something or older individual from the present. What is curious about this is that the age of development of primary and secondary sexual characteristics has been dropping over the same time period, so the stunting of emotional and cognitive development cannot be attributed to physiological causes.

My suspicion based upon personal observations in the classrooms where I've taught and interactions with parents is that a parenting philosophy has developed since WWII in which parents prioritize letting their children "enjoy their childhood" over teaching them how to be autonomous adults. An infantile mentality, which is mistakenly labelled "innocence", is now seen as a valued characteristic to maintain as far into chronological adulthood as possible, so children are discouraged from taking a more pragmatic and objective view of their world. In a very real sense what we are witnessing is the psychological equivalent of the former Chinese practice of foot binding, applied to children's minds rather than their feet. Parents believe that it is "cute" for their children to retain infantile behavior and thinking into early adulthood in the same way that pre-Revolution Chinese people thought that tiny feet were attractive. Sadly, both practices result in crippled adults.

Rittenhouse at 17 in current American culture is very much still a child, even though he will be tried as an adult. He is growing up fast (mentally), as Bemildred suggested above, but his starting point in this spectacle was likely at a mental age of around a ten or eleven year old from your own childhood. This should not be seen as personal criticism of Rittenhouse as it seems likely that he is slightly more mature than the majority of his chronological age-equivalent peers, even if that is not saying very much for his maturity.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 22 2020 18:16 utc | 159

Anne @Nov22 16:56 #158

I've no effing clue as to why ... anyone under 20 is presumed a child....

'Age of maturity' is a well-established concept in law. Civilized society accepts the need for laws to protect vulnerable populations like minor children, the elderly and disabled, etc.

Science says that the mind of a human develops into the early twenties.

So at 15 I became a full-time worker . . . I was expected to turf up my wage packet (actual money) to my mother ... Adulthood arrived earlier before the 1970s. Or at least adult responsibilities did. At least in the UK.

Was it really adulthood, or simply child labor? Did parents (in the UK or elsewhere) expect a 15-year old to make their own way or just provide income to a household that they ran?

In USA, 15-year olds can also work but they need their parent's permission to do so (except maybe if they are working on a family farm).

Rittenhouse at age 17 was Not a child any longer...

Legally he is.

In USA, someone is legally a child until 18. Primarily, this makes their parent(s)/guardian(s) responsible for the actions of their children until the age of 18.

In this case, there is a specific law in Wisconsin that made it against the law for Rittenhouse to have a gun.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 18:17 utc | 160

Robert Fisk? Lindsey Hilsum? Orla Guerin? Nah.

Posted by: Mike Ghirelli | Nov 22 2020 20:12 utc | 161

Mr Gruff @160...Yes - your perception (and the accepted "reality," given that according to psychologists brains do not mature until early 20s [thus why voting at 18??]) is in fact my understanding, too...what a society expects is what it develops and gets...

Mr Wabbit @161 - yes, legally in this country (and in the UK these days)... NO it wasn't "child labor" (how bizarro) to start work at 15 in the 1960s (and let me tell you, filing boring documents is mind numbing, not exhausting). It was all normal and legal...yes those in the middle classes (the real middle classes) stayed at school till 18 (usually, though not always; they might leave at 16) and then went to college/university.

Indeed my brother - 14 years younger - left school at 16 and began work. And so far as I am aware, 16 is still a legal age at which to leave school and start work - in the UK.

And over here, my late husband, while still at school (he went on to university so was still in school till 18) worked first in a grocery store and then for a liquor store (delivering) between the ages of 16-18...Child Labor?????

We become what is expected of us...if you expect responsibility and mindfulness you will get it; if you expect stupidity, idiocy, lack of responsibility - you'll get that. At any age.

Posted by: Anne | Nov 22 2020 20:25 utc | 162

In this case, there is a specific law in Wisconsin that made it against the law for Rittenhouse to have a gun.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 18:17 utc | 161

In my home state, juniors are allowed to hunt, but only with adults present. There is even special rabbit hunting season for juniors. So if a parent was observing the junior, it was perhaps OK.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 22 2020 21:02 utc | 163

In USA, children can be tried "as adults", although it depends on state etc. This is an example:

In June, a 14-year-old boy was arrested after he threw a rock at police during a political rally in New Mexico. Prosecutors stated that the boy, who was charged with two felonies, would be tried as an adult. A police spokesperson stated, “We don’t want to make an example out of a 14-year-old boy. We want to guide him and lead him in the right direction.” The boy’s attorney disagreed, however, asserting that trying his client as an adult “would indicate a completely different scenario than one where they’re not trying to destroy this child.” See Candace Hopkins, “14-Year-Old Charged with Felony after Throwing Rocks at Police in Trump Rally,” KRQE 13 News, June 3, 2016 .

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 22 2020 21:21 utc | 164

William Gruff @Nov22 18:16 #160

Things have changed a great deal since 1963!

Yeah. In the early 70's legal age of maturity in USA was dropped from 21 to 18.

The efficacy of our modern educational system and the Vietnam War military draft (of 18 year olds) caused a movement to REDUCE the age of maturity from the longstanding age of 21 (same as UK).

... the age of development of primary and secondary sexual characteristics has been dropping over the same time period

A lot of that is due to environmental factors such as endocrine disruptors in widely used chemicals such as plastics, organophosphates, flame retardants, etc.

Anne @Nov22 20:25 #163

Mr Gruff @160...Yes - your perception ... is in fact my understanding, too...what a society expects is what it develops and gets...

AFAIK the brain's maturing in the twenties is something that is innate to human development. Society can't change that.

Does "society" expect that/approve of a young man being used as a pawn for political purposes - putting his very life at risk - and yet those who do so have no liability?

While you rejoice in a 17-year old being treated as an adult, I see a miscarriage of justice.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 21:35 utc | 165

Piotr Berman @Nov22 21:02 #164

Kyle's adult supervision was from the militia that he was working for.

Kyle is heard on video saying, at least twice, that he was working at the business that was being protected by militia members.

But everything is being done to shield the militia from charges and public scrutiny.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 22 2020 21:39 utc | 166

'You Can Lie Remotely': Russian MFA Spokeswoman Zakharova Piques NYT Headhunt in Moscow

Posted by: Virgile | Nov 22 2020 23:24 utc | 167

Sad, but nothing new. The Exile was the only foreign based publication, in Russia, that spoke to truth. But then again, the Exile wasn't a front for propaganda for anyone.
Nowadays, maybe. But I could recall how during the 1998 World Cup, a writer with the name/alias Genghis Goldberg wrote an article titled "Why Soccer Sucks: The Antidote To World Cup Idiocy" ( ) - the content of which I would expect from a USian neoconservative rag were it not intended as satire. Suffice it to say, reading it back in 2017 left a bad taste in my mouth and made me wonder since when the eXile began covering e.g. US war crimes like it does today.

Wikipedia claims that the eXile was initially published as a tabloid for the Anglophone expatriate community in Moscow at a time when Yeltsin was president (we all know what that meant, don't we?), often discussing drugs and prostitution. Make of that what you will.

Posted by: joey_n | Nov 26 2020 0:09 utc | 169

Nothing surprises me, but Allen Baker asks a reasonable question. The ad looks like something from The Onion or Babylon Bee. I hope it doesn't turn out to be fake news squared. If it is real, it mocks any pretense of objectivity, but even at the NYT, a pretense of objectivity presumably still exists. I don't read the rag myself.

Posted by: Martin Brock | Nov 30 2020 7:09 utc | 170

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.