|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2021-005
Last week's posts at Moon of Alabama:
ANATꙮLY KARLIN @akarlin88 – 16:39 UTC · Jan 16, 2021
A Russian meets up with an American.
"We have freedom of speech," the Russian says. "I can post that Russian elections are falsified on social media."
"What's the big deal?" asks the American. "I too can write that Russian elections are falsified on social media."
—
Other issues:
Covid-19:
Eric Feigl-Ding @DrEricDing – 1:13 UTC · 17 Jan 2021
Psssst… pass it on: ➡️ COVID LUNG is worse than smoker’s lung.
"Post-COVID lungs look worse than any type of terrible smoker's lung we've ever seen. And they collapse. And they clot off. And the shortness of breath lingers” says Dr @BKendallMD. #COVID19
> I decry the stubborn resistance of most governments and people to acknowledge and to learn from China’s success. For most, their resistance is led by ignorance. China’s successes are not widely known and rarely covered by the US and international media. For others who are more well informed, it is willful disregard of an important public health achievement that we should all be learning from. <
Germany:
The governing conservative party (CDU) elected Armin Laschet as its new leader. He defeated two staunch Atlanticists.
John Kerry @JohnKerry – Aug 20, 2014
ISIL must be destroyed/will be crushed.
Armin Laschet @ArminLaschet – 19:55 UTC · Aug 20, 2014
Replying to @JohnKerry
@JohnKerry: Yes, Mr Kerry. But You supported ISIS and Al Nusra against President Assad in Syria. And they are financed by Qatar and Saudi-Arabia.
Brexit:
Haggis_UK 🇬🇧🇪🇺 @Haggis_UK – 12:07 UTC · Jan 14, 2021
Jacob Rees-Mogg – "The key is we've got our fish back. They are now British fish, & they're better & happier fish for it." 😬
Mr Speaker – Obviously there's overwhelming evidence for that. – vid
Intercept:
> Now, Jeremy Scahill, a former Nation writer who is close to the Intercept’s editor in chief, Betsy Reed, is the only member of the founding team remaining at the organization. <
> The most logical conclusion to draw is that Poitras, under pressure from the pro-Democratic Party and left-feminist circles in which she travels, has accommodated herself to the anti-WikiLeaks campaign. Again, what is especially significant is the coming together of the gender politics zealots, on the one hand, and the proponents of American imperialist intervention across the globe in the name of “democratic rights,” on the other. <
Use as open thread …
Continuing the discussion from the last open thread (04) on Cynthia Chung and her outstanding essay An OrWELLSian Purge? Why H.G. Wells’ ‘The Shape of Things to Come’ Has Arrived Today
See
On last Thursday, there was a discussion about Webster Tarpley wherein I disclosed he was published by Lyndon LaRouce’s media firms. I also again disclosed the fact that Matthew Ehret and Cynthia Chung were also part of that network, are both based in Canada, and are often published by Strategic-Culture. Today, One finds this essay by Chung, “An OrWELLSian Purge? Why H.G. Wells’ ‘The Shape of Things to Come’ Has Arrived Today,” that presents some very curious facts about H.G. Wells. As I wrote on Thursday, one must be very aware while reading their work. This was proven true regarding Chung’s essay when she discusses Wells’s The War of the Worlds and the radio play performed by Orson Welles in the USA–She says there was a similar radio play that occurred in England run by Wells that never happened. Why a so easily discovered falsehood amidst her essay?! Indeed, there were two as she also states, “Apparently, during the broadcast it had not made itself clear to its audience that it was in fact a radio drama and not the actual news,” when in fact the audience was informed on four separate occasions–once before, twice during, and once after–during the broadcast. (I had a double disc vinyl recording of that very radio play that I listened to well over 100 times and thus confirm what’s reported about that fact in the linked Wiki entry.) The vast majority of readers–and the publishers!!–will never know the author lied to them thus destroying the credibility of her entire essay. And that’s not the first time I’ve discovered such deviance, which she shares with Ehret.
There was absolutely no reason to insert those lies. Worse, it hurts the reputation of Strategic-Culture, which is already censored by Facebook. The essay’s purpose was likely ethical in the author’s mind. But employing unethical means lowers the author to the level of those she’s accusing, thus in reality rendering her no different.
Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 16 2021 23:01 utc | 120
and
@120 karlof1
I’m inclined to be more forgiving of Cynthia Ching for this, preferring, with uncle tungsten @126, to call it a “blunder” rather than outright lies.
She cites a radio play and quotes Wells talking about London by name, giving the footnote to a Wells book published in 1905 – before, I assume, radio plays in London were actually happening, and certainly before the NY version of his novel was aired. So there’s some broken coherence here but it seems to me more innocent than sinister. I urge forgiveness here. There are few enough authentic and well meaning writers around as it is. I’d hate to lose this one. And as you know, citations can be a bear.
…
People are foolish and misguided – but it’s best we keep them 🙂
Posted by: Grieved | Jan 17 2021 3:07 utc | 131
I very strongly agree with Grieved. This is an absolutely trivial and inconsequential error, a minor mixup of sources, an easily arisen mixup between H G Wells, Orson Welles and George Orwell, with absolutely no consequence to her argument. Yes, journalists should get their facts right – but you know what, Karl, human beings are fallible and make errors. That includes all of us including you. It is disingenuous and irresponsible to accuse her of deliberate lying with absolutely zero evidence of intention of deception.
The article in question is absolutely bang on with the sinister connections between H G Wells’ fictional story, his long time work for British establishment propaganda and manipulation of public perception, and his history of arguing for totalitarianism and killing off the “nutzlose Fressern” (useless eaters), on the one hand, and the coming Biden regime, Gate’s population control ambitions, Covid-19, and the many recent years of convergence to an Orwellian State and worse.
Cynthia Chung’s essay is – as is wont for her essays – deeply insightful, relevant, and meticulously researched (notwithstanding the aforementioned errors), and prescient to the intentions of the elites and the goals of Western politicians. You make a grave mistake in dismissing it.
It is also a grave mistake to lump Cynthia Chung with that most pathetic of incompetent fools Matthew Ehret – they are on incomparably different levels. Matthew Ehret – in my view – writes about good topics, but is utterly unreliable and has a hopelessly inadequate grasp of his topics, being frequently wrong as a result.
Posted by: BM | Jan 17 2021 17:49 utc | 18
Mao Cheng Ji, driven to desperation that Tin God Trump is finally going out without (yet) murdering Democrats en masse, resorts to more lies, astonishingly shameless even for Mao Cheng Ji.
First, “reactionary” does not mean wanting to stand point, it means wanting to turn back the clock. Being stodgy or cautious or unwelcoming to novelty is what reactionaries pretend to want rather than admit their real program. Conservative in the sense falsely alleged by Mao Cheng Ji means things like accepting the results of elections. Reactionary means wanting to set aside the will of the majority (technically, plurality,) for the will of a minority because of a self-serving belief that the proponent is one of the superior people.
Second, comparison with Hitler are apt when talking about fascists, even those of the modern US variety. *Hitler was put into power by conservative people.* He didn’t win the presidency, the Nazi Party didn’t win a parliamentary majority. Hitler was chosen as chancellor by the conservative president, Hindenburg, at the behest of the conservative army general von Schleicher and the conservative politician von Papen, because they wanted to use him to roll back the Weimar Republican left, the Communists primarily but also the Social Democrats. After the Reichstag fire, Hitler basically declared a state of emergency with police powers, then had elections under the gun so to speak. The Nazis *still* didn’t win a majority, but Hitler’s bully boys intimidated the Reichstag into passing the Enabling Act. The Communists were then banned, then trade unions were replaced by Nazi fronts, then the Social Democrats were expelled. The Zentrum, the Catholic party “voluntarily” dissolved. When Hindenburg died, Hitler absorbed the powers of the presidency into his new office of Chancellor and Reichsfuehrer. Other conservative parties, like the German People’s Party and the German National People’s Party (and its conservative veterans’ group, the Stahlhelm or Steel Helmet,) were never opponents of the Nazis. Conservatives, reactionaries, *did not* fight Hitler. The claim is yet another Mao Cheng Ji lie.
AS this brief review shows, bullying the Congress and re-running elections with a state of emergency, as the failed autogolpe apparently intended, are precisely the kinds of fascist tactics Mao Cheng Ji wants to use. Accusing others of what you want to do is an appropriate tactic for a malicious villain who wants to swindle people.
Additionally, the notion that Trump-worshippers like Mao Cheng Ji are the majority, or are “working class,” are also Mao Cheng Ji lies. Millions more really did vote for Biden, not Trump and all the idiotic “arguments” and fake news facts the Mao Cheng Jis can produce don’t change that. The fake leftist Mao Cheng Ji is apparently deciding that anyone who makes less than $50 000 per year is a lumpen loser, so that the higher income brackets can congratulate themselves on being the good, hardworking decent people. This is viciously reactionary BS, contemptible from beginning to end. So much for the vicious nonsense about the American working class favoring Trump. Quite aside from the plurality of the electorate that rejected Trump, “they” or Republican cheating put Republicans into many state houses and legislatures and has a strong presence in both House and Senate (Joe Manchin is probably deciding whether to change registration as I comment!) proving the election was not, was not, was not some liberal conspiracy. Conservatism was well represented, not least because Biden was possibly the most conservative Democrat running (which is why the strenuous efforts to make sure he was the Democratic Party nominee!) Again, Biden is not a lefty of any sort, that’s another damned lie. Even worse, the implicit notion that those who still didn’t vote are Trumpersw would be insane were it not so blatantly self-serving BS.
Given the ever more threadbare pretense of not being a conscious fascist attempted by Mao Cheng Ji, the incoherent reference to “changes” instituted by “global finance” is almost certainly meant to refer to the Jewish conspiracy. (Not even hard-core Zionists are running the US, at least not the Jewish ones, though Christian Zionists crazed by false prophets swilling Revelations have a lot to say…Israel is the tail and the tail does not wag the dog.) In practice, “global finance” is the US banking system, guided by the Federal Reserve and US banks operating in the City of London. Even the EU central bank is following the Fed’s lead. When the current recession first broke in December 2019 with a financial crisis, Trump did not “make” the Fed turn all the spigots to full to support the banks and the stock market…but insofar as he helped, it proves Trump is an anti-people, pro-Wall Street fraud. The stock market is not the economy, it’s the rich people’s casino. And Trump services rich people in his day job. That’s why he’s always specialized in luxury hotels, condos, casinos, etc. except when he’s straightforwardly swindling people like with Trump Foundation and Trump University.
What prompted this meltdown? At a guess, the reference to using section two of the Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids the service in Congress of those who abetted insurrection. It also requires that representation in the House be proportional to the number of citizens allowed to vote. As should be well known, enforcing the Fourteenth Amendment has been a spotty business at best. Likely enough Mao Cheng Ji is among those who hate and detest the Civil War Amendments, the Thirteenth, the Fourteenth and the Fifteenth, with a passion. Reactionary judges, like those trained in the Federalist Society, have dedicated years of their lives to undermining the clear meaning of the Constitution. Conservatives applaud this kind of judicial activism, of course.
Mao Cheng Ji is invited to explain the Marxist rationale for rejecting the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amerndments, or breaking ranks with MoA peers to support them.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Jan 17 2021 21:43 utc | 32
|
