Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 06, 2021

New York Times Editors Lie, Obfuscate Facts, To Reinforce Their False Russia Narrative

It is amusing to what extent the editors of the New York Times resort to lying in their attempts to portray the incarceration of the right wing racist Alexei Navalny as a best thing that happened since the invention of sliced bread.

Today's editorial is as delusional as it can get.

Aleksei Navalny Is Resisting Putin, and Winning
The opposition leader was sentenced to prison, but he has mobilized a vast movement that’s not done growing.

Beyond being delusional the editorial is full of lies and disinformation:

A Russian court on Tuesday opened a new and fateful stage in the gripping power struggle between Aleksei Navalny, Russia’s tough-talking and internet-savvy opposition leader, and President Vladimir Putin, by sentencing Mr. Navalny to his first serious stint in prison.

On the face of it, this would appear to be a clear victory for Mr. Putin, who has effectively proclaimed himself president for life.
But in this David v. Goliath saga, the 44-year-old Mr. Navalny has succeeded through raw courage and perseverance in putting Mr. Putin on the defensive. The imprisonment was Mr. Navalny’s move. Mr. Putin had tried for years to give him only brief sentences to avoid making him a martyr.
The Kremlin attempted to give the court proceedings a veneer of legitimacy by moving them to a large courtroom in central Moscow and allowing Mr. Navalny to do all the talking he wanted to. But the outcome was preordained: Mr. Navalny was accused of violating parole from a 2014 conviction that the European Court of Human Rights had debunked as “arbitrary and manifestly unreasonable.” The accusation served to underscore the main reason Mr. Navalny couldn’t make the requisite visits to the authorities: Evidence suggests he was nearly poisoned to death in August by the secret police. He was subsequently evacuated to Germany.

The sentence in bold is an outright lie. On January 17 the Russian Foreign Ministry relayed a statement (in English!) by the Moscow Directorate of Russia's Federal Penitentiary Service which debunked that claim:

Earlier, on 30 December 2014, Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow sentenced Mr. Navalny to serve 3 years and 6 months in prison and pay a fine of 500 thousand rubles on the charges of fraud and money laundering. The court ruled the sentence to be suspended with a 5-year probation term. On August 4, 2017, Simonovsky District Court of Moscow extended Mr. Navalny’s probation period by twelve more months.

However, Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia has registered multiple violations of the probation terms by Mr. Navalny during the year 2020; namely, Mr. Navalny has failed to check in for registration at the Department of Corrective Services of the Federal Penitentiary Service’s Moscow Directorate twice a month as per the assigned schedule. There were two registration appointments missed in January 2020, and one in each of the following months: February, March, July and August, 2020. Last time Mr. Navalny checked in with the Department of Corrective Services was on August 3, 2020. All this time the Department of Corrective Services has been warning Mr. Navalny that these violations could lead to his suspended sentence being revoked and replaced with an actual prison term.

Department of Corrective Services suspended the requirement for Mr. Navalny to check in for registration for the duration of his treatment at the Charité Hospital in Berlin, Germany. However, Charité Hospital’s official statements indicated that Mr. Navalny’s treatment there was completed on September 23, 2020. Later, Mr. Navalny confirmed this fact in a notification he sent to the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia. In the apparent absence of any valid reasons Mr. Navalny has not appeared for any of the regular check-in appointments with the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia from October 2020 until the end of his probation period, thus violating the probation terms again.

Either the editors of the New York Times do not know the facts or they are avoiding them because they do not fit their narrative:

It was Mr. Navalny in the glassed-in prisoner’s dock. But it was Mr. Putin and his corrupt cohort who were on trial behind the army of riot police officers gathered in central Moscow to prevent the sort of mass protests across all of Russia that followed Mr. Navalny’s return to his country on Jan. 17. “Hundreds of thousands cannot be locked up,” Mr. Navalny declared from court to his millions of followers on social media. “More and more people will recognize this. And when they recognize this — and that moment will come — all of this will fall apart, because you cannot lock up the whole country.”

There were, at max, some 40,000 people protesting all over Russia when Navalny returned. Many of those were school children. In total there were way less protesters than on other occasions.

Nina Byzantina @NinaByzantina - 15:11 UTC · Jan 23, 2021

Neon sign on the building above these anti-govt protesters in Russia reads: “Circus: trained animals.” Yes, yes they are.


The following week less than half took again to the streets. Navalny's organization has since stopped all calls for further demonstrations. They know that no one would follow them. The "vast movement" the NYT claims to see does not exist.

Massive police repression and winter frosts may quell the demonstrations. But the vast movement Mr. Navalny has mobilized is quantitatively different from earlier opposition forces, and still growing. The opposition now has 40 offices across Russia, and most of its millions of followers are young people who have not challenged the Kremlin before. Among people ages 18 to 24, Mr. Putin’s popularity has slid from 36 percent in December 2019 to 20 percent.

The last sentence is an outright and intentional lie. The link provided goes to a Washington Post story which does not include any such numbers.

There are however fresh poll numbers from Russia. The New York Times ignores these because, again, they do not fit its narrative:

Something has changed, we are told again and again. After two decades of misrule, Russians are getting increasingly fed up with Vladimir Putin and his ‘regime’. The recent protests caused by the arrest of Alexei Navalny are just the tip of the iceberg, underneath which is a huge wave of dissatisfaction just waiting to burst loose.

But is it?
To answer that question, we turn to the Russian sociological organization known as the Levada Centre. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, Levada has been doing surveys for a long time, so one can compare data over a prolonged period. And second, Levada is well known for its liberal, anti-government orientation, and so cannot in any way be accused of biasing its surveys to favour the Russian state.

Today, Levada published its latest set of indicators. So, let’s take a look at these, starting with the one that everybody is always interested in – Vladimir Putin’s approval rating.

This records that when asked the question ‘do you approve of Vladimir Putin’s activities as President?’, 64% of respondents said yes. That’s down from 69% in September of last year, but up from the 60% recorded in July at the peak of the first wave of coronavirus.

If there is any reason for Putin to be concerned it is that his approval rating is lower among younger people than older ones. Whereas 73% of people aged 55 or over approve of him, only 51% of those aged 18 to 24 do so. But then again, 51% is still a majority.

The New York Times claims that Putin's popularity with younger people has 'slipped' down to 20%. It deceivingly gives a link, which few will follow, as source of its claim even when the linked page fails to support it. This when current polls show that a majority of Russian youths approve of Putin.

The Times and other 'western' media are constantly and intentionally building a narrative of Russia that has little to do with reality. That is dangerous as the false narrative over time forms the basis of 'western' policy making towards Russia.  When Russia reacts harshly to unrealistic 'western' demands and policies the outcry and disappointment is great. But no lesson is ever learned from it.

Posted by b on February 6, 2021 at 12:33 UTC | Permalink

next page »

All the fake news that’s fit to print ...

Posted by: DG | Feb 6 2021 12:38 utc | 1

We are not seeing PR for Navalny. We are seeing PR for the plotters whose massive expenses need to show some return. Navalny is being burnt. "Success" is being claimed. Usual story for any US foreign adventure, years of non-success or failure followed by a declaration of victory and retreat.

Posted by: Michael Droy | Feb 6 2021 12:54 utc | 2

Of course Navalniy had to return to Russia: Otherwise he would by and by be dissapeared - just like the British did to father and daughter Scrouples!

Posted by: Tadlak Davidovitsh | Feb 6 2021 13:09 utc | 3

You can't cure stupid

Posted by: Covergirl | Feb 6 2021 13:13 utc | 4

I get that the western alphabet organisations are against Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela and North Korea. What I don't understand is what benefit do they get for it, except to justify their tax dollars and existence. Is there another group who benefit? I simply do not understand this collective western insanity that allows them the moral right to interfere in matters that are none of their business.

Posted by: Kaiama | Feb 6 2021 13:15 utc | 5

The right wing racist Andrej Navalny had to reappear in Russia in order to boost Atlaticist propaganda lies. And it is much safer for him to stay in and broadcast from (!) a Russian jail then to be disappeared by US and GB secret services like happened to father and daughter Skrouples.

Posted by: Tadlak Davidovitsh | Feb 6 2021 13:23 utc | 6

The vilification of Russia and China serve several useful purposes. Similar to eras past, it distracts people from their own suffering in their present economic paradigm, it keeps money flowing to the merchants of death, and it displaces rational with emotional thinking.

The first is the ultimate "what aboutism", as it reinforces the misconception that the Empire is the moral center of the planet, irrespective of rational analysis, and contradictory data.

The second is obvious, and the third is the most insidious as it allows the blindness to reality of humanity's most precarious current situation regarding two fundamental fatal flaws of neo-classical economics, ie not forgiving debt and not monetizing the social and environmental costs of the model.

The people of the planet have been waking up to this reality, just as President Putin recently outlined in his speech at Davos. This reality will only go away with abandonment of this model or humanity's extinction. Neoliberalism is a pathway to planetary self destruction.

IMHO the delineation of socialism vs capitalism is a false dichotomy, as it used to divide the people, and ignore the problem. This is about a broken model and the corruption that it breeds.

Posted by: Michael | Feb 6 2021 13:24 utc | 7

I still can't believe they really sent that dude back in.
I mean, wow.

Posted by: Josh | Feb 6 2021 13:27 utc | 8

The school children were lured there by TikTok and Instagram messages promising a cool party. One of the children, a 14 year old girl, was interviewed at the demonstrations, in the video linked by this article:



“Say, please, how old you are and what are you doing at this rally?“

“My name is Kristina, I’m in the 10th class. I was told that there would be a cool party. I saw it on TikTok and Instagram. I came to see it.”

“I.e., you don’t understand what is going on here?”

“No, people are standing, waiting for the promised party, but it turns out to be a rotten egg.”

Posted by: Heironymous Dosh | Feb 6 2021 13:36 utc | 9

Is the US intelligence community a sort of hoax? They miss the fall of the Berlin wall, 9/11, and the Capitol riots. Across decades, they have been neutered by moles. They get an alcoholic in need of employment to invent an anti-Trump dossier. China and Russia grab databases left and right - and the Soviets supposedly had 'phone books' of who's who for CIA agents in all US embassies.

There needs to be an accounting as to national interests - not being served.

Posted by: Eighthman | Feb 6 2021 13:37 utc | 10

"who has effectively proclaimed himself president for life."

and those guys call themselves "journalists"?

The Duma changed the law restricting any incumbent to two terms. He can now be elected for two more six year terms. Those changes were approved by a majority of 78% of voters.

"Mr. Putin had tried for years to give him only brief sentences to avoid making him a martyr."

They must really know the function of the Russian courts. A multiple year sentence for fraud was meted out but he was released on bail. He violated his bail conditions multiple times and now has to finish his present sentence.
He now faces another charge for defamation and likely a charge further down the road for being a foreign agent, considering his working together with US agencies (see Helmer:

With regards to the protests: It is also a fact that the group around Navalny during negotiations did not want the protest to happen on a much larger space in Moscow because they likely were scared the lack of support would become obvious, they insisted on a smaller space that however was likely to cause more traffic disturbances. They were denied this venue and subsequently organized the demonstration without permit.

Posted by: Peter Moritz | Feb 6 2021 13:56 utc | 11

i think the us intel community has always been something of a hoax, at least after the oss morphed into the cia. they're good at funneling vast sums of money, and arms, to people who will use them to overthrow governments the us doesn't like; assuming that takes competence. they're also good at propaganda.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 6 2021 14:04 utc | 12

@Posted by: Eighthman | Feb 6 2021 13:37 utc | 9

Great point, Eighthman. Entire intel community seems to
have missed the preparations for the Jan 6 Capitol disorder.
Their complete and staggering failure tells one that they didn't
actually miss anything and wanted it to happen and
most likely assisted in making it happen.

The head of the Proud Boys, we now know thanks to Reuters,
had been informing the FBI for years of the Proud Boys
plans. The FBI knew.

There are many times the FBI has purposely failed.
They stood down so violent events could happen.

9/11 is a big one.
One that is often overlooked was the shooting in Garland Texas.

Pamela Geller had sponsored a yearly draw Muhammad cartoon contest.
Her incitement to violence was plain as day. It was the clear purpose
for the contest. Whether violence would actually
materialize or not, it demanded the presence of FBI to monitor the event.

The FBI under Comey did not arrest Pamela Geller before or after because,
either they were her active partner, or they failed with a purpose just like on 9/11.

Pamela Geller was inciting violence - intentionally, successfully and with clear purpose.

Her purpose has been repeated numerous times by Benjamin Netanyahu:
"9/11 was good for Israel".

Pamela Geller's org has made clear her loyality to Israel, to hate and to violence.
Her organization had posted this billboard in many locations:

"In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad."

("9/11 was good for Israel" - Benjamin Netanyahu.)

Being loyal to hate and to violence and to publicity, what did Pamela Geller do, with the full knowledge of the FBI?

She deliberately provoked hate in order to incite violence by Muslims
by deeply insulting their religion. Her purpose was
violent publicity that benefits a foreign country - Israel.

In Garland Texas, she sponsored an ****annual**** "insult Muhammad" contest ("First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest").

Her baiting of violence caught a fish with the FBI in tow.

It was common knowledge that the Insult Muhammed contest could provoke violence, so the presence of FBI at the contest was a given - a very strong given for a competent FBI. Under Comey the given fact was the absence of FBI agents - a stand down.

The only FBI presence known to the public is the FBI plant, a provoker of violence himself, who urged the gunmen to "Tear up Texas".

This was Comey in action ("9/11 was good for Israel" - Benjamin Netanyahu), an FBI stand down, an FBI plant urging the gunmen to be violent and arriving at Pamela Geller's contest in the car behind the gunmen.

And to complete his task Comey did not arrest Pamela Geller for intentionally inciting violence.

Posted by: librul | Feb 6 2021 14:15 utc | 13

When I entered the newspaper business way back in April 1969 as a copy boy at the now gone Cleveland Press, the New York Times and the Washington Post stood at the peak in terms of reputation in the journalism industry. A reporter who worked at those papers could go no higher. Well, times have changed. Judging by the amount of journalistic crap that is now vomited by their respective editorial and news gathering departments, it seems that readers of the Times and Post would be better informed by by going to that electronic global conduit for crap known as the Internet. At least with the Internet one can find news sites that are serious about informing the people. Considering the decline in reporting standards at the Times and Post, it won't be long before both papers are merely considered high-class supermarket tabloids, if they are not already there.

Posted by: GeorgeV | Feb 6 2021 14:29 utc | 14

The Times and other 'western' media are constantly and intentionally building a narrative of Russia that has little to do with reality.

I have been observing this phenomenon for a long time. In fact, this is an interesting and at the same time strange phenomenon, when the policy of the state (in this case, the United States) is based on the perception of an absolutely illusory, virtual, false, invented image of its counterpart (in this case, Russia). Moreover, this virtual image that does not exist in reality is painstakingly created by the United States itself.

It would seem that in order to conduct a successful effective policy, you must know, understand and perceive the opposite side as accurately and objectively as possible. Only on such a perception can a qualitative analysis be based, some predictions can be made, a strategy can be built, etc. But the United States is doing everything exactly the opposite, refusing as much as possible and avoiding perception and understanding of the real state of Russia, the reasons for her actions, intentions, and so on. Thus, the United States, in essence, voluntarily deprives itself of the opportunity to succeed in politics in the Russian direction. It's amazing.

That is dangerous as the false narrative over time forms the basis of 'western' policy making towards Russia.

I agree that this is dangerous. Moreover, this danger has a purely practical aspect.
Remember the assassination of Russian ambassador Andrei Karlov in Turkey at the end of 2016.
At that time, it was largely through Russia's efforts that Aleppo was finally liberated, and the Western media and diplomats literally fought in hysterics.
Western mainstream media played an important role in this killing. They pumped the society up with false information, slander, fakes about Russia's actions in Syria, thereby inciting hatred, intolerance and rage. Individuals in society can be very susceptible to such propaganda. And it can end up killing a person.

I remember very well how, after the tragedy, the MSM wrote that, in a sense, Russia "deserved it." I remember how some media wrote about the "stylish costume" of the killer.
The death of a Russian diplomat is also on the conscience of the Western mainstream media. Albeit indirectly, they are responsible for what happened.
This is what the spread of lies and the deliberate creation of a false, invented image can lead to - whether it be an entire country or an individual person.

Posted by: alaff | Feb 6 2021 14:33 utc | 15

Re: New York Times Editors Lie, Obfuscate Facts, To Reinforce Their False Russia...

In other news, water is still wet... (18 sec)

Posted by: gm | Feb 6 2021 14:39 utc | 16

Compare and contrast the treatment of Navalny VS Assange.

The very different treatment of these 2 individuals by the "media" propagandists and government officials says it all.

Posted by: James Cook | Feb 6 2021 14:40 utc | 17

publication of alleged disinformation admissible for tort actions?

This could sort out who was telling the truth about election machine vote fixing fraud in machine supervised elections.

three hosts named by Smartmatic, an election technology company, in a defamation case.

The lawsuit alleges defendant engaged in a disinformation campaign that had a devastating impact on Plaintiff 's ability to conduct business. What about the damages caused citizens in whole populations that were misled into war.. or to allow the military of their nation state to engange in foreign actions?

IMO This action has far reaching implication and might actually get to the bottom of whether or not
misinformation is a cybercrime and a tort or not and advance injured plaintiff ability to seek damages and redress in a civil and even a criminal proceedings..

Posted by: snake | Feb 6 2021 14:44 utc | 18

It seems that Russian authorities have a very sound strategy to keep Navalny's movement in a narrow margin of the society. The West and "westerniks" (zapadniki" in Russian, -I makes it plural) have the paradigm how to oppose inept and deeply corrupt autocracy, while Russia seems to have relatively open system with seemingly mild corruption (my impression is that most of the West is at least as corrupt, and aptitude (is it the correct antonym of ineptness?) of the governments is widely doubted, at least for USA and UK.

While the scope of Navalny's neglect of the rules of his suspended sentence can be hidden in the West, it is surely well explained on Russian TV. Similarly with the shortage of veracity in the monumental "Putin's Palace" video. Now Navalny is slapped with a slander suit that cannot make him look good -- for YouTubed invectives against a decorated war veterans in his 90-ties. There is a legal dispute if it is enough that Navalny had no shred of reason to conclude that the veteran is a "sycophant seeking monetary rewards", or if sentencing would require that Navalny knew that he was not. Legally, it is a minor matter, from PR point of view it may be a heavy blow. It is harder to prove that the "confession of a poisoner" was simply a trick, but given that Navalny gained reputation of an intemperate liar, it is very plausible.

In short, Western propaganda is increasingly predicated on a sheltered informational space, while Russia has a more robust strategy, keeping closer to the facts.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 6 2021 14:45 utc | 19

Another classic NYT puff piece: using an influence piece to decry an alleged Russian “influence campaign.”

The US media has long denigrated the Russian Sputnik vaccine and gets really annoyed at the idea the someone else would supposedly start playing the same game, particularly it is when Latin America has the chutzpah to buy Sputnik.

Posted by: JohnH | Feb 6 2021 14:46 utc | 20

"The Kremlin attempted to give the court proceedings a veneer of legitimacy by moving them to a large courtroom in central Moscow and allowing Mr. Navalny to do all the talking he wanted to. But the outcome was preordained:"

Classic propaganda tautological rhetoric; a point made with the conclusion assumed. Only countries we don't like have corrupt elections and sham legal proceedings, whereas we on the other hand are boy scouts.

Posted by: A. Pols | Feb 6 2021 14:47 utc | 21

The New York times is gonna New York times.

Random : Video: MMA Fighter Fallon Fox, Who Identifies As A “Trans Woman”, Enjoyed Fracturing Biological Woman Skull, Called It “Bliss”

FBI criminal complaint on Capitol incursion used Photoshopped 4-chan hoax picture as evidence

Posted by: Dogon Priest | Feb 6 2021 14:56 utc | 22

Et tu, Bloomberg?

Putin’s Once-Scorned Vaccine Now Favorite in Pandemic Fight
By Henry Meyer
February 6, 2021, 12:30 AM EST Updated on February 6, 2021, 9:55 AM EST

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 6 2021 15:00 utc | 23

To make any sense of the NYT editorial stance it is necessary to know something about who reads it.

I am in the middle of the country, just outside (2km) city limits of Chicago and often in Chicago. There are still many readers of the dead tree edition of the Times. That artifact is treated with reverence. Being a Times reader is a statement of identity. Criticizing anything that appears in the Times is same as personal criticism of the person who reads it. When in a home where the physical paper is proudly displayed anyone and everyone knows that many subjects are just not discussed, not mentioned. Even the maid who does not speak English sees the Times and knows that heavy manners are in force.

If ever in a political discussion—which happens less and less because they are minefields, and most know nothing anyway — once the NYT is mentioned the discussion is over. NYT is holy writ. Mention of NYT establishes that the speaker is a superior person who must be given deference. Deference to class is absolute.

People who read the Times are not entirely dopes. It can happen that a Times reader will have subject matter knowledge about a particular field and can see that on this or that topic the Times is simply wrong. It will never happen
that establishment of error in one field could imaginably impugn the authority of the holy Times in any other field.

Times was always a propaganda rag and always had a bias to upper class. Once that meant it was at least well written and well edited. It was occasionally possible to get some information in those pages. Now it is simply Pravda, issuing orders to an elite. That elite does not and cannot see how diminished their newspaper is.

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 6 2021 15:03 utc | 24


". Is there another group who benefit?"

The public's expectations are being managed with a view to destabalising Russia so that the American elite can restart the looting they were able to do under Yeltsin.

Posted by: Johny Conspiranoid | Feb 6 2021 15:05 utc | 25

All lies fake news.

Posted by: Andrew | Feb 6 2021 15:09 utc | 26

The opposition now has 40 offices across Russia...

I wonder who's paying the rent on those.

Posted by: farm ecologist | Feb 6 2021 15:31 utc | 27

Still wildly ironic that the Western press is so keen to demand Navalny's release from jail over his offence of bail-jumping, but so deathly silent about Julian Assange's incarceration in Belmarsh for his offence of bail-jumping. Assange, of course, has not been convicted of anything, much leas fraud and embezzlement. Perhaps that's the key. Navalny, after all, commits good capitalist crimes. He has a conscience and he's willing to sell it. Assange, however, is not a capitalist. Like American native tribes at a Potlatch ceremony, his sin is that he is giving away what he should be selling. That is inexcusable.

Posted by: loftwork | Feb 6 2021 15:42 utc | 28

It will be hard for the West to get Russia because the country is becoming more and more integrated with Asia and is moving away from the West. The trade with Asia is increasing, with Europe is dropping. The top 3 destinations for inbound and outbound tourism for Russia are now non-western.

There are now more Asian than European consulates in Russia. China became the biggest trading partner on a country by country basis. Energy flows are being redirected away from Europe.

The money people whose businesses are asian related are unlikely to be pro-western. And the trend of moving away from the West is ongoing.

Posted by: Passer by | Feb 6 2021 15:56 utc | 29

oldhippie@22 pretends that reading the Times is a statement of "identity," as if this says something about class. Education bears on socioeconomic status more than class, which is always about property and what income you get from it. But as might be expected from a fraud, even this is wrong. The real marker of "class" even in the superficial, confused consumption/lifestyle pseudopconcept way meant are reading things like...the New Yorker. Now that makes a statement about what you pretend too. Or, even better, reading the Wall Street Journal. If you really want to get trendy in asserting upper-class, you have your copies of the Economist or the Financial Times.

The New York Times became a mainstay for information because it was one of the few newspapers that attempted wide coverage, including of world affairs. Most papers relied on the press services. Only a few like the Times maintained a network of bureaus. Once it had the reputation, many bought the paper because of the reputation, not to make a statement. oldhippie's powers of mental telepathy don't really exist, so the conviction that collective mindreading can pronounce the allegedly true motive is just an expression of reverse snobbery.

There is one thing to add, which is that historically politically conservative newspapers and journals, like most political conservatives, are exceedingly prone to lying, to mindless conformism, subservience to authority, shameless promotion of vested interests and so forth. This gives "liberal" newspapers like the NYT an advantage in the long run. Anyone expecting "liberal" to mean opposing the ruling class has no idea what liberalism is, I think. Liberal is not a synonym for "left." Using "liberal" like that is a sure symtpom of terminal confusioin or total dishonesty.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Feb 6 2021 16:03 utc | 30

This is the same New York Times that recently called for the appointment of a "Reality Czar."

You know, they had a "Drug Czar" to wage a war on drugs.

Now, they want a "Reality Czar" to wage war on reality.

Posted by: Mike from Jersey | Feb 6 2021 16:05 utc | 31

I will take the random insults from stj as an indication I said something right.

Posted by: Oldhippie | Feb 6 2021 16:19 utc | 32

Reminds me of the scene from the first Godfather film, where the character, Michael Corleone, states that they have friends in the newspapers who can drum up a story to make a guy look bad. This US government is run like a racket. I always say that if you use the RICO statutes, the one applied to the 5 families of the Mafia, and apply that to every single member of Congress, Executive and Judicial branch, three quarters of the US government would have to be shut down.

Posted by: Jose Garcia | Feb 6 2021 16:24 utc | 33

#29 Mike from Jersey

To be more precise, the "war on drugs" led by the "drug czar" was actually a war on (some) people, who either used, or tried to profit from, (some) drugs. So by analogy, the job of the "Reality Czar" would be to wage war on some people who either use some aspect of reality, or even tried to profit from those aspects of reality. Since the NYT is in the business of promoting lies and fantasies, it's understandable that they would wish to make the discussion of certain aspects of reality illegal.

Posted by: Fnord13 | Feb 6 2021 16:34 utc | 34

Access journalism is a double entendre.



Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 6 2021 16:35 utc | 35

Well, the more things change... There are no secrets or mysteries to what is going on vis a vis Russia, and it has been pretty thoroughly discussed among these parts. I guess the question is what is or can anyone do about it until the USA collapses as did the USSR under the weight of relentless propaganda, dysfunctional management of society, and a demoralized people.

The USA has three paths from which to choose:
1. Issue unconditional apologies and funds to the billions abused by imperial policies over the last century.
2. Destroy the world in the name of 'freedom'.
3. Collapse utterly into its own footprint.

And out of the ashes... once more from the breech... another civilization of man vs man will rise and fall.

Posted by: gottlieb | Feb 6 2021 16:49 utc | 36

Next to the NYT, the BBC still enjoys a reputation of seriousness despite... its abyssal record.
A recent example
about Biden's announcements over Yemen, where the reader is told that "Under Mr Biden's two predecessors, the US backed a coalition led by Saudi Arabia against Houthi rebels in Yemen"

I refuse to believe that the journalist who wrote this twisted sentence did not know that Obama/Biden was one of these two "predecessors".

Posted by: Mina | Feb 6 2021 17:01 utc | 37

Posted by: A. Pols | Feb 6 2021 14:47 utc | 19

Yup, they pull that shit all the time on the Countries We Should Hate(tm). Even when ignoring the obvious propaganda angle, news reporting should be 100% on presenting verifiable facts without an inkling of the opinion-as-fact storytelling.

Posted by: J W | Feb 6 2021 17:13 utc | 38

Is the US intelligence community a sort of hoax?
Posted by: Eighthman | Feb 6 2021 13:37 utc | 9

Sort of...
I'd describe the IC as a "potent urban myth" as Russell Brand might say.
Look at the factoids. There 17(?) members, each with umpteen employees and all engaged in Top Secret Stuff. Their only voice is the DNI's mouth and the DNI NEVER produces and points to one of his experts when telling porkies with a straight face.
If we were told tomorrow that all 17 agencies were shut down last Wednesday, nothing would change because there is no tangible evidence that they ever existed, except as a convenient rumour:-)
I'll never forget Brennan's "Not wittingly" when quizzed in a Senate Hearing about spying on US citizens. Or Colon Powell's "We have it on good authority that Saddam has WMDs!!!

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 6 2021 17:16 utc | 39

How can you have "Fake news" if there is not a "True News" as a reference ? All you have to do is control the "True news sources".

Several once reliable sources have been "taken" over to give a veneer of respectability to otherwise false information (incl. BBC). HOW they did this is interesting.

Before 9/11 and when the internet was younger, (newspapers and sources generally still had principles), there were suddenly created a series of "watch" NGO's/groups; MediaWatch, UniversityWatch, UNWatch, (journalistWatchers) etc. These groups, funded by a Lobby and rich donors, had discovered that to change the news into what they wanted, it was easier to attack lone Journalists personally than the organs of news "dispensers". Financial pressure, lawsuits that were not to be won, but cost a fortune in lawyers, slurs etc. were used to silence specific troublemakers. The papers had to follow suit.

By and large, these tactics are still used but perhaps not so directly.
NaughtY Times, FooTsie, and the Econoheist are prime examples. Twits and Farcebook overseers can (theoretically) refer to them, if need be. But they are obliged to lie simply to have something to say about the "cause du jour" (Navel-looker). The truth is too dear to publish.
Oldhippie | Feb 6 2021 16:19 utc | 30 got it right - that the object of controlling snob news sources was to influence "deciders" and so on. Thickies, who identify with a class they would love to belong to, will take their cue from the posh papers. "Vogue" and similar are all aglow with gender undefined L....., eerr models, with jewellry and hinted at perverse pleasures (although they had to clean up their act). Providing a high standard for conspicuous consumption.

Posted by: Stonebird | Feb 6 2021 17:25 utc | 40

"not wittingly" was James Clapper, another easily confused professional lying treacherous deepstate scumbag:

Posted by: gm | Feb 6 2021 17:27 utc | 41

oldhippie@30 thinks the statement the New Yorker has snob appeal is a "random insult." It wasn't the only true statement in my comment but feeling insulted by true statements is an accidental confession. It's a confession not only to the fact oldhippie can't tell the difference in alleged snob appeal between the NYT and, say, Architectural Digest, or the class appeal of, say, Medical Economics, but the the fact that oldhippie apparently can't identify insults, and also doesn't know the meaning of the word "random." Pointing out oldhippie cannot actually read minds may insult oldhippie's vanity but it's not a genuine insult---the petty malice is the insult, randomly inflicted on anyone who ever subbed the NYT.*

This is all so drearily commonplace with the reactionary nuts who like to pose as salt-of-the-earth, no-nonsense, one of the people with a healthy distaste for effete upper-class twits fearful of being looked down on by somebody somewhere for something.

*But, what about people like me, who had in an ill-spent youth subbed the WSJ?

Posted by: steven t johnson | Feb 6 2021 18:07 utc | 42

Hilariously, the WaPo article the NYT linked to in the article b pointed out also had a graphic pushing the "Putin's palace" disinformation video put out by Navalny. Of course, actual photography of the building in question shows it to be an empty shell, seemingly intended to be a luxury hotel but never completed even after 15 years, but no need for the WaPo to update the "news" story with facts.

Posted by: worldblee | Feb 6 2021 18:19 utc | 43

@ Mike from Jersey (29)

"You know, they had a "Drug Czar" to wage a war on drugs.

Now, they want a "Reality Czar" to wage war on reality."

Good one !!

Posted by: MarkU | Feb 6 2021 18:21 utc | 44

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has demanded an apology from the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) for its recent coverage of COVID-19, saying the BBC used a clip about an anti-terrorism exercise, claiming it was for pandemic control. The BBC responded: it will continue to uphold the "principle of justice". For more on this, CGTN talked to Martin Jacques, a senior research fellow at the London School of Economics.

Posted by: Mao | Feb 6 2021 18:22 utc | 45

"Under Mr Biden's two predecessors, the US backed a coalition led by Saudi Arabia against Houthi rebels in Yemen"

I refuse to believe that the journalist who wrote this twisted sentence did not know that Obama/Biden was one of these two "predecessors".

Posted by: Mina | Feb 6 2021 17:01 utc | 35

THAT is not misleading, VP has no power in USA, he is more like an errand boy with sufficiently high rank to attend funerals and bark orders at the vassal heads of state.

What IS MISLEADING is that the halt of sending fresh armaments is equated to the "halt of support". Will USA work for one of listed main aim, "freedom of navigation", and frustrate the blockade of "rebel part of" Yemen? If not, then USA supports the blockade and the war. They just want KSA to use the ammunition wisely, and not to bankrupt themselves.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 6 2021 18:26 utc | 46

Good timing b. rebroadcast Episode 1 of a 2018 doco called Fourth Estate: NYT And Trump, last Wednesday. I stumbled on a copy of it when searching my archived videos for The Putin Interviews. I watched the first few minutes to ensure that My Episode 1 was SBS's Episode 1. I've appended '1 of 4' to my record and can't recall why I've only got Episode 1 but it's probably because of the theatrically pompous presumption of NYT Staffers.

There's an early scene in which NYT staffers are watching and listening to a Ground Floor TV from their lofty balconies inside the NYT Glass House as Trump is delivering his "The forgotten People of the United States will be forgotten no more" speech. They're all looking stunned and are exchanging helpless glances similar to people whose hair is on fire. And that attitude persists for the whole doco. They're on a Mission, and the thing that's getting their Knickers in a Knot is that they have NO Control of Trump's 'narrative' because He's more ubiquitous in the Media than the effing NYT!
Anyhow, my Inner Masochist is looking forward to a memory refresh of Episode 2.

Btw, the NYT cite contains a minor grammatical error...

"To answer that question, we turn to the Russian sociological organization known as the Levada Centre. There are a couple of reasons for this."

A couple is one thing. So the sentence should read "There is a couple" unless there's more than one couple in which one would say "There are X couples.
I put it down to careless insinuation. i.e. NYT wishes, or wants the reader to assume, that there's more than a couple of reasons.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 6 2021 18:32 utc | 47

The Decline and Fall of the American Empire

Instead of opening doors for American big business or supporting America’s diplomatic position in the world, the U.S. war machine has become a bull in the global china shop, wielding purely destructive power to destabilize countries and wreck their economies.

In 2004, journalist Ron Susskind quoted a Bush White House advisor, reportedly Karl Rove, as boasting, “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.” He dismissed Susskind’s assumption that public policy must be rooted in “the reality-based community.” “We’re history’s actors,” the advisor told him, “…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

Sixteen years later, the American wars and war crimes launched by the Bush administration have only spread chaos and violence far and wide, and this historic conjunction of criminality and failure has predictably undermined America’s international power and authority. Back in the imperial heartland, the political marketing industry that Rove and his colleagues were part of has had more success dividing and ruling the hearts and minds of Americans than of Iraqis, Russians or Chinese.

The irony of the Bush administration’s imperial pretensions was that America has been an empire from its very founding, and that a staffer’s political use of the term “empire” in 2004 was not emblematic of a new and rising empire as he claimed, but of a decadent, declining empire stumbling blindly into its agonizing death spiral.

Posted by: Mao | Feb 6 2021 18:35 utc | 48

The NYT just published this Op Ed called, "It's time to trust China's and Russia's vaccines."

The authors are right.

Posted by: Prof K | Feb 6 2021 18:40 utc | 49

"not wittingly" was James Clapper...

Posted by: gm | Feb 6 2021 17:27 utc | 39

Right face, wrong name. Thanks for the correction:-)

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 6 2021 18:45 utc | 50

@ Hoarsewhisperer (45) Re:

Btw, the NYT cite contains a minor grammatical error...

"To answer that question, we turn to the Russian sociological organization known as the Levada Centre. There are a couple of reasons for this."

There are situations where grammatical correctness is usually ignored because the 'correct' form sounds wrong. There are plenty of substantial reasons to criticise the NYT, why pick on something so trivial and debatable?

Posted by: MarkU | Feb 6 2021 18:46 utc | 51

b - thanks for highlighting this.... thanks also the many relevant comments..

i agree most strongly with @ James Cook | Feb 6 2021 14:40 utc | 15
"Compare and contrast the treatment of Navalny VS Assange."

a few of us have been saying this the past few threads... bottom line - russia really needs to capitalize on this hypocrisy.. it is outstanding! there would be a hell of a lot more then 40,000 protesting on this and there have been over the course of years... the west ought to be very afraid... i blame usa, uk, sweden and australia on assanges fate, in that order... they are all scared shitless too which is why they have resorted to dragging assanges life out as they have... they are first class losers - all these countries... and some of them are the main ones pushing the ''get russia'' memo too... loons...

pamela geller ( hat tip to @11 librul)- is an unsophisticated zionist, just as the nyt - is a sophisticated zionist outlet.. both spout trash 24-7... both get cover from the intel agencies, or are direct outlets for these intel agencies.... the usa is in such a pathetic place, i am not sure it can ever get back on track..

@ 30 oldhippie... i think you are right about that! here is some james booker for you! - On The Sunny Side Of The Street

Posted by: james | Feb 6 2021 18:47 utc | 52

I think many people are in disbelief the NYT is capable of such propaganda because they believe in the Statecraft Theory - a theory that affirms the State is an alien institution to capitalism that exists since immemorial times.

Even in a purely capitalist nation such as the USA, centralized formations of societal organization always arise, according to the necessity of the system. The most notorious example of this is the Fed - which is not a public, but a private bank, an amalgamation of 13 banks - which arose organically as the system matured. Another very illustrative example was the Hays office - the law firm that, through a series of free market competition movements, organically became the de facto regulatory institution for the entire Hollywood films industry in the 1930s (Hays Code), to the point they negotiated directly the imports of films with foreign governments. In the case of the Hays Office (whose fantasy name became "Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America - MPPDA" after the consolidation of the Hays Code), there was zero intervention from the Federal Government - it was a pure creation of the free markets.

Another classic institution that exemplifies the free markets doesn't free one from "evil central government" is the mafia (Cosa Nostra), which, obviously, had zero influence of the central governments in both Italy and the USA, but instead arose as a co-operative system of familial businesses that amalgamated through a process of capitalist competition and consolidation during the end of the 19th Century and beginning of the 20th Century.

But there are cases where the official capitalist central government (in the USA's case, it's called the Federal Government or simply the US Government - USG) gets involved and fuses with the free markets to form a more perfected central governance institution. The Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) is the the most glaring example, but this is also the case with the so-called MSM (Mainstream Media). More precisely, that's the case with the NYT and the WaPo.

The NYT is a capitalist business just like any other. From an economic point of view, there's absolutely no difference between the NYT and your local sausage factory: they have to hire and invest, exploit human labor (surplus value), produce a given amount of commodity-capital, sell it in the free market and realize the profits. Make no mistakes: the NYT has to sell to survive. Since Bill Clinton, the USG has offered those consolidated newspapers and TV networks official briefings on the daily policies of the White House. Those briefings allowed those newspapers to both have privileged primary source material before anybody else - with official status, therefore a monopoly guaranteed by the State - and, therefore, to save a lot of money and effort with investigative journalism. In exchange, the USG killed investigative journalism - the same investigative journalism that unmasked the My Lai Massacre.

With time, this purely capitalistic relation evolved and became more intimate. The USG begun to charge more for the privilege of becoming the extraofficial central government's newspapers. The most spectacular case came with 9/11 and the consequent invasion of Iraq, where even the UN was trampled. The MSM mutated forever after 9/11, going through a path with no return.

The problem with this system, however, is that capitalism's soft power comes from the illusion of free will: it sells the idea all of its subjects are free individuals - family and property being just the extension of the individual, the lebensraum of the soul (a man is not just himself - but everything he consumes). The is no place for official or extraofficial government newspapers in capitalism; it has to sell itself as your daily dose of the absolute truth, in order to compete in the free market (of ideas and facts). The only legitimacy a newspaper can have in the free market is by offering the most facts, thus the most informative content to the consumer (who is spending money to buy one of its copies). If the individual wanted to consumer fiction, he would go to the free market to buy a fiction novel or read it in the fiction novel section of the newspaper.

As the lies pile up and the facts begun to deviate from the official stories to a point it doesn't even match observable truth anymore, those newspapers and TV stations begin to lose credibility, therefore they begin to lose in the free market (in Marxist terms, we say the use value of the commodity is destroyed, i.e. the commodity doesn't exert its necessary function for the consumer anymore). In a capitalist system, the only way to keep the consumer consuming a commodity without use value is by forcing him to consume it, by whatever means necessary.

That's why the NYT et caterva are beginning to talk about "reality czars", "ending internet neutrality", "partitioning the social media enterprises", clamping down foreign newspapers and TV stations (see the UK's recent censorship of the CGTN) all the while ramping up the lies, the propaganda and the virulence of the political discourse. They are, first and foremost, trying to preserve their market shares, their dominance in the market - the market of truths.

Posted by: vk | Feb 6 2021 18:48 utc | 53

First in response to this weak attempt at journalism which b carefully dissects, I again post the link to the discussion moderated by Mohammed Murandi of Iran involving three journalist figures who are often mentioned on these forums, which is extremely pertinent to comments above.

This link was first posted on an open forum two days ago, and I've only been able to view it this morning. It's long but I do wholeheartedly recommend that others set aside time to absorb what each is saying. The fullness of agreement between different approaches is a positive aspect of the conversation, and a salient point on which all four agreed, and which applies here was that the US in its outward manifestations of leadership have noticeably descended to mediocrity. And that this could be considered an interregnum period - weaknesses are apparent, signified particularly by the kinds of diplomats, politicians,media - even eruptions against the regime which are occurring now.

Michael @ 6 above writes of the NYT approach:

" distracts people from their own suffering in their present economic paradigm..."

I disagree. The king has no clothes, as Pepe says during the above linked conversation. And Max Blumenthal points out - the CHECK! the CHECK! Where is it? The American public is not distracted!!

Another mantra: "The public's expectations are being managed." No, they are not! In your dreams! What the public sees is that it is all rigged. We don't even have to investigate the particulars - it's all rigged! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Well, it's very hard not to; because the curtain is full of holes.

But I can't do better than recommend highly the above link. Even to us sad souls living at the heart of the labyrinth, it's an entertainment. And maybe the minotaur is shrinking in size. For it seems we are back to a Pussy Riot scenario, and it's the US government pussy rioting away, so Happy Dystopia to all!

Posted by: juliania | Feb 6 2021 18:56 utc | 54

It's very obvious to see the lies in western journalism.

And if you study journalism in an American university you will be taught the proper fundamentals of objective journalism that allow you to see those lies.

You will understand well the 1st Amendment in regards to print and broadcast, as well as the sanctity of verifiable sources and the many other foundations and roles of the press. You will understand the billionaire ownership of media and the negative effects of that on news and the dangers abusing this power of information. You will fully realize how advertising dictates content and you will be warned that this is a bad thing.

And yet the journalism student is not taught how one is to function in the real world if they expect a paying career in their profession. Rather, the student is left to discover what types of ideas make print in the West and they must consciously choose to ignore many of the fundamentals they studied in order to participate in this type of journalism.

To put it another way, every student of journalism is taught that Julian Assange is a hero of journalism and his ideals are exactly what all journalists should strive for, but only the students who support Assange being imprisoned get jobs.

Peer pressure is a powerful thing.

Posted by: Rutherford82 | Feb 6 2021 18:56 utc | 55

@ 52 juliania.. that is the link suzan posted - very good. yes! hey - i am about 200 pages into brothers karamazov! it is a thick book!

Posted by: james | Feb 6 2021 19:13 utc | 56

Politically, there’s not much breathing space between Vladimir Putin and Alexie Navalny. Both are committed neoliberals and Islamophobes. One currently has a police force at his command, the other doesn’t…

Posted by: thomas | Feb 6 2021 19:14 utc | 57

Weimar’s Lessons for Biden’s America

In recent months, Germany’s Weimar Republic has been increasingly invoked as an analogy to the present political moment in the United States. Some have described former President Donald Trump’s supporters as fascists, while a recent editorial in the New York Times labelled their refusal to accept the legitimacy of Biden’s election victory as a modern-day version of the “stab-in-the-back” myth— the legend that “internal enemies” caused Germany’s defeat in the First World War.

The temptation to make these comparisons is understandable. How better to express the fear that the American republic is in danger, and that political violence on the streets might become more widespread, than by comparing today’s situation to the best-known historical example of a “failed” democracy that ceded to fascism?

There is, of course, nothing wrong with seeking inspiration from the past, as long as we don’t forget that Weimar’s ultimate demise was anything but inevitable and that Hitler’s rise to power was owed to very specific historical circumstances. (At least until late 1929, when the impact of the worst economic crisis in modern history was magnified by the German government’s decision to impose strict austerity politics, the Nazis were no more than a fringe group in German politics.)

Without wanting to belittle the problems that the United States is facing today, however, it’s important to recognize the ways that America’s current predicament still isn’t comparable to Germany’s in the 1920s and early 1930s. Some of these differences are exonerating for the United States—but others should serve as warnings.

Posted by: Mao | Feb 6 2021 19:24 utc | 58

There are situations where grammatical correctness is usually ignored because the 'correct' form sounds wrong. There are plenty of substantial reasons to criticise the NYT, why pick on something so trivial and debatable?
Posted by: MarkU | Feb 6 2021 18:46 utc | 49

Because strict adherence to formal rules of grammar, and scrupulous editing, formed part of NYT's cachet in The Good Old Days. In the early Noughties I observed several instances of NYT defending its approach to grammar - and 'winning' the debates, imo. But I almost agree. The triviality is in the same bucket as 'different to' vs 'different from'. I usually keep my nitpicking gene on a tight leash on the www...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 6 2021 19:30 utc | 59

Putin’s Once-Scorned Vaccine Now Favorite in Pandemic Fight

President Vladimir Putin’s announcement in August that Russia had cleared the world’s first Covid-19 vaccine for use before it even completed safety trials sparked skepticism worldwide. Now he may reap diplomatic dividends as Russia basks in arguably its biggest scientific breakthrough since the Soviet era.

Countries are lining up for supplies of Sputnik V after peer-reviewed results published in The Lancet medical journal this week showed the Russian vaccine protects against the deadly virus about as well as U.S. and European shots, and far more effectively than Chinese rivals.

At least 20 countries have approved the inoculation for use, including European Union member-state Hungary, while key markets such as Brazil and India are close to authorizing it. Now Russia is setting its sights on the prized EU market as the bloc struggles with its vaccination program amid supply shortages.

Posted by: Mao | Feb 6 2021 19:31 utc | 60

I have no doubt that Biden does not need to appear officially when France and Prince are actively on the sides of KSA and UAE.

Posted by: Mina | Feb 6 2021 19:33 utc | 61

Farm Ecologist @ 25:

I would not be too concerned about who is paying the rent for the 40 offices that The NYT claims that Navalny's "opposition movement", if it exists, runs. They are probably as real as the delivery company that Navalny and his brother Oleg ran to transport goods for Yves Rocher Vostok back in 2008: the company existed only on paper, the Navalnys instead hired another company to do the work at a price much less than what they themselves charged YRV. The brothers walked away with huge profits. It was for this scam that Alexei Navalny received 3.5 years' home arrest and brother Oleg got 3.5 years in jail.

Levada's own polling done in Sept 2020 shows Navalny has very little support among the Russian public. No way this support can prop up 40 far-flung offices over 12 or 13 time zones.

In all likelihood, if Navalny does have a network of offices, their addresses probably correspond to the addresses of embassies and consulates set up by Western govts. They're paying his costs - and expect him to do something for them, which is why he had to return to Russia even at risk of arrest and imprisonment. Navalny is a tool after all.

Posted by: Jen | Feb 6 2021 19:38 utc | 62

The thing about plagiarism- this is a direct quotation from St Clair's Counterpunch column on Friday- is only to steal something of value.
In this case St Clair is being cheap-he frequently is- and piling on a Democratic Party target. The real difference between Putin and Navalny is that Putin is employed by the Russian people and Navalny by NATO.

Posted by: bevin | Feb 6 2021 19:38 utc | 63

good there is at least one other person reading reasonable news instead of RT and FoxNews. But I give as little to the average russian "people" as to the american who just scored a new world record:

The US now incarcerates Black people at 6 times the maximum rate of apartheid-era South Africa

Posted by: thomas | Feb 6 2021 19:45 utc | 64

steven t johnson @28 likes an argument. And enjoys dishing out abuse.
How else can one explain the energy with which he attacks one of our posters on the ground that class and socioeconomic status are quite separate?
"oldhippie@22 pretends that reading the Times is a statement of "identity," as if this says something about class. Education bears on socioeconomic status more than class, which is always about property and what income you get from it."
In fact and increasingly, education is a function of class: in part because if you want it you have to have the resources to pay for it. And in part, too, because it is little more than a ticket into the ranks of the choirs that hymn the system and its rulers' praises.

Posted by: bevin | Feb 6 2021 19:53 utc | 65

So, the new trade pact China started covers 30% of global population - and seeks to exclude the dollar as a goal? Meanwhile, dollar use in SWIFT drops to 38%? Sanction deranged fools in Congress are sawing off the branch the nation sits on. Time is on Russia's and China's side and the Neo Cons seem oblivious to it.

Posted by: Eighthman | Feb 6 2021 19:54 utc | 66

I am in the middle of the country, just outside (2km) city limits of Chicago and often in Chicago. There are still many readers of the dead tree edition of the Times. [Buying NYT there makes you different.]

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 6 2021 15:03 utc | 22

Years ago, in Hyde Park (part of Chicago) I got NYT around midnight (next day edition). As I was standing in line, the purchases were: condoms, next client, condoms, next client, condoms, next client (me), NYT. I really stood out as a person who lacked other diversions that night.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 6 2021 20:18 utc | 67

The good thing is that only the Western readers of the NYT could be fooled by this lie; and they cannot do anything to change anything in Russia. The desperation of the West as its sun is setting is piteous. Even as the number of the citizens distrusting their governments in the West continues to grow, the West power-holders continue to double-down on their discredited narratives and ways.

Posted by: Steve | Feb 6 2021 20:25 utc | 68

A Hollywood “docu-drama” is in the making, complete with tragic orchestral music, stark lighting, torture scenes and flashback to Magnitsky’s torture in a dreary cell block, courtroom “outrages” and impassioned pleas from a wife who gets dragged to an interrogation room, and allusions to Russian “aggression” in various foreign lands.

Posted by: norecovery | Feb 6 2021 20:31 utc | 69

Putin would do better to let Navalny go, and then put him over the border. Navalny raving abroad is less of a danger, than Navalny in prison.

Posted by: Laguerre | Feb 6 2021 20:39 utc | 70

From an economic point of view, there's absolutely no difference between the NYT and your local sausage factory [vk]

In USA, there is something called "Polska kielbasa", but in some places, you can find a Polish butcher shop where there will be at least 10 kinds of kielbasa and other cold cuts too. Back in the old country, there is something quite close to "Polska kielbasa", it is the cheapest grade good to add to a soup etc. but never in a sandwich or hors d'oevre. In other words, sausage makers makes stuff according to the taste of customers.

That said, NYT has a good crossword, bridge column, chess column, gardening tips, while the business section often has genuine news. In fact, it is a good place to learn how economy works. E.g. when price competition starts, it means that it is time to sell the related stocks, a good investment is in a company that lacks competition, or even better, has a good shot of getting rid of competion (and thus ballooning its stock price). Competition is for losers.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 6 2021 20:41 utc | 71

@ Eighthman | Feb 6 2021 19:54 utc | 64 who wrote about China methods to get away from the dollar

I agree that Russia and China are linked at the hip at this time so an attack on Russia is an attack on that axis of our world.
I just wanted to add to your China/SWIFT info that those two are currently working on an interface between them as I recall reading in the past week somewhere. I chuckled as I read the piece thinking about China coming to the private SWIFT organization and asking if they want to build an interface between each others systems.....the times they are a changing but the NYtimes is not the place to read about it.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 6 2021 20:42 utc | 72

@Posted by: james | Feb 6 2021 18:47 utc | 50

Thanks, james.

I wanted to stress the similarity of pattern between the shooting in Garland, Texas
and the Capitol building disorder.

In Garland there was clear warning of the danger of violence, and the FBI stood down.
No agents that the public is aware of were at or near the event in Garland ready to
intercept the gunmen. Acting behind the scenes in the lead up to the Garland event
was an FBI informant who not only knew of the upcoming violence
(he followed behind the gunmen in his car for hundreds of miles,
arriving and parking directly behind them at the event)
but who also encouraged the violence - "go tear up Texas".

Proud Boys were arrested after the Capitol building disorder. The leader of the Proud Boys
was a long standing informant for the FBI and would let the FBI know beforehand of the Proud Boys plans.
The leader, so we are told, was ordered out of Washington DC by a judge a couple of days
before Jan 6. We don't know yet what part the informant played in encouraging and planning
the Proud Boys' incursion into the Capitol building. One should wonder if the leader of
the Proud Boys will be a surprise witness at Trump's next impeachment trial.

Posted by: librul | Feb 6 2021 21:12 utc | 73

Posted by: thomas | Feb 6 2021 19:14 utc | 55

And i have seen many claiming that Putin is too friendly to Islam and muslim states. To Turkey, to Iran, to Paksitan, etc. Officially opening mosques. Russia having observer status in OIC. Being against cartoons of Islam. Actually former russian opposition Nemtsov criticised Putin that he is helping muslim families with his generous child payments.

Posted by: Passer by | Feb 6 2021 21:37 utc | 74

The Jewish run 'democracy' is really Shlomocracy

Posted by: Andrea Ostrov Letani | Feb 6 2021 21:40 utc | 75

Posted by: thomas | Feb 6 2021 19:14 utc | 55

Btw, the state sector in the Russian economy is growing constantly. They just started nationalising ports. Some are bemoaning Russia becoming France on steroids, with its rising state sector.

Posted by: Passer by | Feb 6 2021 21:41 utc | 76

bevin@63 reads oldhippie@22 writing "Even the maid who does not speak English sees the Times and knows that *heavy manners are in force.*

If ever in a political discussion—which happens less and less because they are minefields, and most know nothing anyway — once the NYT is mentioned the discussion is over. *NYT is holy writ.* Mention of NYT establishes that the speaker is a *superior person who must be given deference.* Deference to class is *absolute.*

*People who read the Times are not entirely dopes.* It can happen that a Times reader will have subject matter knowledge about a particular field and can see that on this or that topic the Times is simply wrong. It will never happen
that establishment of error in one field could imaginably impugn the authority of the *holy Times* in any other field."

And Stonebird@38 follows this up with a similar example, perfectly understanding the innuendo with "Thickies, who identify with a class they would love to belong to, will take their cue from the posh papers. "Vogue" and similar are all aglow with gender undefined L....., eerr models, with jewellry and hinted at perverse pleasures (although they had to clean up their act)." Making the hint of queerbaiting more explicit is nicely indicative of the politics.

Amazingly, bevin somehow imagines *I* am the one dishing out abuse. The delusion that insulting an entire group or humanity at large is not insulting anyone relies on the covert but self-flattering premise that "we," the clique or commenters (sometimes called the forum's commentariat.) The conclusion is that insulting *them* is not insulting people (rather randomly I might add.) Trolling strangers is good sport but disagreeing with other, instead of mutual self-congratulation is, well, trolling. I've never subscribed to the NYT but I guarantee you that someone who pretends to peer into the very souls of NYT subscribers to find the foul motives for them all, is full of it. Perhaps readers of MoA should follow a collective blog/forum called Lawyers, Guns and Money to see how self-proclaimed "lefties" share the contempt for humanity so typical of reactionaries.

The real purpose of bevin's post is to defend the practice of sneering at other people for the evil motives you make up---this is *not* the same thing as anger at someone for what they actually did!---but there is an attempt to justify sneering at all NYT subscribers as motivated by snobbery. "In fact and increasingly, education is a function of class: in part because if you want it you have to have the resources to pay for it. And in part, too, because it is little more than a ticket into the ranks of the choirs that hymn the system and its rulers' praises." This is very confused. Class is about having property and income from property, about owning a business rather than earning a wage. bevin is correct that "education" is not an entry ticket into being an owner of the country, big or small. Most people do not get to be true bourgeois. Even most genuine professionals, such as physicians, lawyers, engineers, clergymen are rarely more than petty bourgeois. (Do not be confused by numbers, the big bourgeoisie has hundreds of millions and billions, but even a doctor who owns their owns their own building is not in that category.) Most teachers are not working class because they aren't making an owner of the school a profit, but they are not petty bourgeois in the same sense as a "preacher" from a shady bible college operating an after-life insurance franchise.

bein is not required to be a Marxist, and accept that class refers to the position in the system of economic production and social reproduction (family, for one, which is still not quite a libertarian enterprise.) Which means, as I said in shorthand, is property. But by the same token, not one person is required to accept the anti-Marxist reduction of class to SES, socioeconomic status, where consumption/lifestyle/invisible and intangible spiritual essence and/or mysterious ideas from God knows where determine "class." Most people are anti-Marxist but disagreeing with anti-Marxism isn't trolling, it's disagreeing.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Feb 6 2021 21:49 utc | 77

Meanwhile in the rational press we find some clear analysis of issues for the people.

juliania #52 thank you for the repost of a priceless discussion and your comments. Stay well in the beast and may peace reign.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 6 2021 21:51 utc | 78

librul #71

One should wonder if the leader of the Proud Boys will be a surprise witness at Trump's next impeachment trial.

"I don't recall"
"I don't recall"
"I don't recall"

If he did recall then one of Semion Mogilevich special visitors would call on him.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 6 2021 22:00 utc | 79

Eighthman #64

Time is on Russia's and China's side and the Neo Cons seem oblivious to it.

I doubt they are really oblivious to it. I see their persistent screeching about 'hate russia, hate china, hate iran' as being a constant pressure to whip up acceptance of the enemy without mindset.

This is more than propaganda - it is brain washing: the constant repetition of a mantra of fear.

IMO the nyt is a criminal enterprise trading in brainwash while the corporate social media oligarchs are free to go chasing small fry with divergent opinions. The nyt is a sinister rag.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 6 2021 22:11 utc | 80

Good for you, james @ 54! Yes it is a thick book but by my reckoning the heavy going is behind you - - you will enjoy the next segment as Ivan starts to make himself known. My teacher would always say how much he envied anyone starting the book for the first time, and he had great respect for Ivan, (as did Father Zossima.)

Indeed, many thanks to suzan as well!

Posted by: juliania | Feb 6 2021 22:19 utc | 81

I agree that Russia and China are linked at the hip at this time so an attack on Russia is an attack on that axis of our world. [...]

Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 6 2021 20:42 utc | 70

My impression is that China and Russia do not cooperate so closely to say that they are linked at the hip. But they have deep common interests in the face of maniacal American hostility.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 6 2021 22:26 utc | 82

I was just cracking a joke when I suggested that it might not be in a nation's best interest to allow foreign controlled media to announce its president, on tv, with big silly smiles.
They pulled that shit on their own.
Not my call.

Posted by: Josh | Feb 6 2021 22:35 utc | 83

On a more humanitarian note,
Hopefully, that poor dumb fucker is ok... ish...

Posted by: Josh | Feb 6 2021 22:36 utc | 84

The obsession with hatred towards Russia, China and Iran looks childish. They can hate them all they want and accomplish nothing to support their empire.

IMHO, the end result will be a cascade of defeats for the US - if a compromised dollar won't pay for 800 - 1000 military bases globally, nor allow for $700 billion defense budgets. China will blockade Taiwan, the US will be forced out of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria - and perhaps even Korea and Europe. The US will be forced inward looking - while stuck with an inflated currency. Glad I don't live near a major city....

Posted by: Eighthman | Feb 6 2021 23:08 utc | 85

The Reality Thought Police at NYT are sufficiently hot and bothered by the PillowGuy Mike Lindell's 2 hr homey infomercial video, to have written *TWO* hit pieces on the video and him in just the past 24 hrs:

Here is the link again to the video, which GoogleYoutube and Vimeo have censored, and Fakebook and Tweeker bans linking to.

Personally, I think they are trying to stop it from being seen because it succeeds pretty well in being both quite detailed and interesting on a technical level, yet still be understandable and able to hold the attention of laypersons for most of the length.

It does do some gratuitous China-fingerpointing without backing it up with any direct evidence, in my opinion , but the video's main thrust is on the multifaceted election rigging system and machinery in place in Nov 2020, and how it was done by "domestic traitors" according to the well-chosen people Lindell interviewed with during the video.

"Absolute Proof: Exposing Election Fraud and the Theft of America",

Posted by: gm | Feb 6 2021 23:16 utc | 86

Made a longer post about this article in the previous Navalny thread, but by the time I did I think people had moved on to the newer threads.

NYT is a joke if you're looking to them for real news anymore. It's basically a CIA/Intelligence Community messaging apparatus at this point. They aren't even trying very hard to hide it.

Russia's vaccine is looking like a big success.

Posted by: _K_C_ | Feb 6 2021 23:32 utc | 87

The delusional certainty epitomized by this NY Times editorial is not far removed from the prose of “Baghdad Bob”, who was the subject of such derision during the Iraq War by precisely the same corporatist mainstream media hacks. Self-awareness is not in their playbook.

Posted by: jayc | Feb 6 2021 23:39 utc | 88

I am adding The - who do you expect - Guardian:

I laughed heartily and did not read it past the subheading. That's because I know what it says.
But do not follow my example if you have the stomack and still marvel at how never-ending this genre of fable is.

Posted by: JB | Feb 6 2021 23:44 utc | 89

Posted by: gm | Feb 6 2021 23:16 utc | 84

The problem with Lindell's video is that it's merely rehashing every previously debunked allegation and/or unsuccessful lawsuit intended to overturn selective election results. Without even cross checking, I was able to spot at least two provable lies as I scanned through it via your Rumble link. Two that come to mind are the "indefinite confinement" status in Wisconsin, which the Republican Supreme Court of that state previously ruled is entirely up to registered voters to declare and the statement that 66,000 under-aged persons registered to vote in Georgia, when in fact there were only 4 and I think 3 of them became 18 by the November election date.

Just a PSA - I really discourage anyone from watching the whole thing (it's rather long at 2 hours) and I haven't read the NYT's rebuttals (don't plan to) unless you fact check everything he or his supposed experts claim after or during viewing.

Posted by: _K_C_ | Feb 6 2021 23:48 utc | 90

Here is what looks like a very good original report from Gateway Pundit:

IGNORED BY THE MEDIA ELITES AND FBI: List of 20 Individuals at the Capitol on January 6th – All Appear to be Connected to Antifa or Far Left Groups

It is looking more and more like the Jan 6 Capitol riot was a preplanned FBI/CIA choregraphed special event, with trained/experienced/paid provocateurs/Maidan-style 'escalators' (accompanied by official fake media 'documenters'/narrative spinners) posing as Trump supporters.

Posted by: gm | Feb 6 2021 23:55 utc | 91

The clear aim is to discredit Putin through continuous smears so that few within the Outlaw US Empire read what he has to say so they can get the unbiased other half of the story. Imagine newsboys on street corners hawking a samizdat version of the Davos speeches by Xi and Putin for $1 Yelling,

"Extra, Extra!! Putin and Xi say only proper economy is one that supports public over oligarchs!! Read it all here!! Extra, Extra!!! ...."

Yeah, that might be a reference to an earlier time, but there are still crowds of people in major cities for whom this would certainly be alternative news and spur curiosities. The key being the content of the program that Xi and Putin are proposing--It's Old Fashioned Social-Democratic New Dealer Liberalism, which is what I've been comparing them with for years, as I just recently did with FDR's Four Freedoms and Henry Wallace's Century of the Common Man. The actual Authoritarians are those Neoliberals running the Federal Reserve and the Wall Street Parasites, and the NY Times just can't have any of those truths revealed to the public. So, It just lies and lies, and then lies some more, all of which is parallel with the Government Narrative and lies flowing from its orifices.

As for Russia and China not acting in coordination, some people must be blind or just aren't keeping up with events. But perhaps the best explanation for the continuous lies from government and media is in this important Patrick Armstrong article: "The West Is Losing Its Soft Power," which I repost again for the many who seem to have missed it.

It's one thing to lie and distort when you're ahead in the game, while it's something completely different when you're losing. Most parents become rather good at detecting the lies their children tell and eventually become well versed in detecting lies from other sources. Children often get numerous chances to mend their ways; but media and government employ adults, and most adults know that when adults lie it's to hide something important from prying minds. And as adults, they ought to know better than to lie since you lose your own credibility, which is very hard to earn back.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2021 0:07 utc | 92

@ _K_C_ | Feb 6 2021 23:48 utc | 88

I have been paying pretty close attention since Nov 4, and had heard nothing before the Lindell video about the offshore voting systems compiling/tabulation temporal data flow volumes and bursts coming thru the SCYTL server nodes in Frankfurt, Barcelona, etc., voting night, in relation to when counting shut down.

-Before the Lindell video I had not heard any clear explanation of the weirdness/big fuss/ SoS pushback that went down in Antrim Co. MI election night (and I know the area and its political demographics).

-Before the Lindell video, I had no inkling of the voting machine hanky-panky that happened in Texas in 2018, leading to the state banning Dominion Sys, not to mention the other states 2018 results.

There is a LOT of other stuff they address in that video too that has been hugely suppressed (not debunked) by the controlled mockingbird media.

Posted by: gm | Feb 7 2021 0:26 utc | 93

"Putin would do better to let Navalny go, and then put him over the border. Navalny raving abroad is less of a danger, than Navalny in prison.

Posted by: Laguerre | ''

I disagree. How is he a danger?
I think they are correct to let the west know that they are a sovereign nation and the citizens are subject to their laws.
The US does not make or interpret their laws and it is about time they realized that.

Posted by: arby | Feb 7 2021 1:06 utc | 94

PS: @ _K_C_ | Feb 6 2021 23:48 utc | 88

LOL! I just checked google news "TOP COVERAGE" for Lindell video:

BORG media HATING ON the PillowGuy

[Just think how much money they are spending on this 'Wall of Hate' PR campaign against the PillowGuy[?] to shut his message up!?]

Posted by: gm | Feb 7 2021 1:07 utc | 95

By jailing Nalvany they are showing the US and the west that Russia does not care what you think.
What are you going to do about it?

Posted by: arby | Feb 7 2021 1:10 utc | 96

Russia should say they'll release Navalny if the U.S. drops charges against Assange.

Posted by: lysias | Feb 7 2021 1:16 utc | 97

The BORG can count too, and I guess this is why they don't like the PillowGuy's video:

Mike Lindell to Bannon War Room: “Absolute Truth” Film Was Seen by Over 10 Million People After Friday Release – Five Million Completed the Film

As I thought, above...

Posted by: gm | Feb 7 2021 1:35 utc | 98

Last week I could not turn on public radio without some sycophant parroting the empire dramaturge’s Navalny work at every news break. Its repetition was as relentless as the Maddowian Russia Russia Russia hysteria over Trump — which I experienced while visiting extended family some years ago. Rush Limbaugh continues to drone on endlessly on mainstream farmer/sports radio in flyover country, spewing hatred toward so-called chicoms and the “radical left” ( he’s referring to centrist Democrats) — while the media liberals hate on Putin. There’s no substance, only emoting encouraging popular discontent and hatred.

As USG soft power wanes, the functionaries of empire frantically spread lies and fairy tales parroted by a captured media to a captured public. Empire’s mediocre melodramatic terminal elaborations may not be successful in manipulatively deflecting popular anger outward. Some abroad, meanwhile, are slipping the leash.

...the old U.S.–E.U. relationship will not now revert to a comfortable status quo ante in which the U.S. is the senior partner...”

“Fears of increased American and Chinese competition seems to be at the forefront of Germany’s growing opposition to market fundamentalism, at least among some leading policymakers in the country.

As Professor James Galbraith noted in a recent tribute to his father, John Kenneth Galbraith, “One can now map out the rise and decline of nations simply by distinguishing between those that have continued along the lines that once defined U.S. economic success as [J.K.] Galbraith saw it and those that fell under the spell of illusions about free, competitive, and self-regulating markets and under the dominating power of finance.” Over the last half century, the U.S. clearly fell under those market fundamentalist illusions. Galbraith père, a profoundly important intellectual and policy-making figure, ultimately saw his ideas shunned in America.  

By contrast, while Germany half-heartedly paid lip service to the operation of a fully free market and the corresponding reduction of state involvement in the formulation of economic policy, Berlin never fully abandoned the Galbraithian principles implicit in its “social market economy.” This structure entailed (in the words of Galbraith fils), “a mixed economy featuring corporations with long time horizons, stable relationships with their bankers and countervailing power,” although it has in more recent times succumbed to the depredations of finance capital, to its vast cost. 

As Merkel’s tenure as chancellor comes to an end, it seems apparent that Germany’s future leaders are showing themselves open to the idea of an apparent renewed embrace of a development model of the sort advocated by Friedrich List and Galbraith that effectively counters the so-called “Washington Consensus.” And it is inconceivable that much of the rest of Europe will not follow Berlin’s lead, given Germany’s increasingly powerful role as the E.U.’s first-among-equals. “

Posted by: suzan | Feb 7 2021 1:44 utc | 99

@90 Karlof1
Thanks for the link to the Armstrong article. Tried to post it to my Facebook page and just found out Strategic is banned by Facebook... frightening times!

Posted by: Jason | Feb 7 2021 2:03 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.