One of the very few Iraq War advocates to pay any price at all was former New York Times reporter Judy Miller, the classic scapegoat. But what was her defining sin?
NYT: "All of the 'news' that's shit to print."
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Running as parallel or metaphor to the premise of "food for thought," just as 90% of today's food products harbor bio-genetic traces with many asserting that they are "all natural" or "whole," the intellectual diet presented by the New York Times--paper "of record," then end up EVERYWHERE else to effective taint "intellectual dietary content."
Like the children's game of "telephone," the mutated message moves down the line and around the circle until its connection with truth--if that connection EVER existed--is entirely absent. And due to the "chain reaction," no singular agent can be assigned culpability (or responsibility).
This is how the manufactured consent takes hold. It's the American home-grown version of Goebel's LIES told often.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
The article by Schmidt and Hubbard reminds me of mainstream "faux news" that is created to promote a particular product or service such as when a false story is used to create a change in the stock market or to sell some item in a manner that appears that the company had no knowledge of the praise it was receiving.
In this case the special interest groups are promoting fear via their paid puppets in government so as to convince the general public for the need to spend obscene amounts on our military. The genius behind this is that the average reader of the NYT does not realize that the article is a plant and instead choose the opinion that the authors are actually unbiased and well informed. In reality the authors are both misinformed and very biased. I would go so far as to suggest that their jobs depend on them being misinformed and biased.
As our school system quickly abandons skills such as critical thinking and independant research, it would appear that this dishonest practice will only expand in the near future as the special interest groups are banking on the ignornace of the general public to reinforce the status quo. Every corporation out there knows this instinctively.
I have no idea how many people currently see through this advanced form of propaganda, but I feel that a majority of Americans still don't pick up on these subtle tricks employed to manipulate public opinion. Some people I have spoken to actually feel incredulous when I suggest that this form of public spin is common place. Hedges, Greenwald and others know all too well how evil and prevalent this propaganda is, but like me they're unable to expose it.
The N.Y. Times has been for a long time and will continue to be, nothing but a war mongering rag for the economic elite. The N. Y. Times should change their mantra from: All the news that fits to: ALL THE NEWS THAT FITS THE AMERICAN WAR AGENDA!
I would go so far as to say that many NYT reporters are CIA....
The NYT takes instructions from AIPAC regarding anything relating to Israel. An American president should tell Bibi where to go. But as Sharon has stated, '.....we control the U.S.' thanks to the lies printed in their organ mouthpiece, the NYT.
Yes, and I somehow keep letting that very important point slip my mind-
I have recently been reading "JFK and the Unspeakable" and have CIA imprinted in my mind-
CIA and Mossad, like rust, never sleep...
BEAUTIFULLY said, Susan! Brava! Brava! I'm sitting here giggling. Perfect comparison. Denatured frankeninformation indeed.
Every well put.
There is an air in the wind that is blowing across the world today that says people are not happy with their governments. This wind does not stop at our, US, borders. The super rich of the world will be dismantled. Such is history. Our only question this time is "will it be soon enough?"
Orwellian NYT, true so true.
There are times when I wonder if sites like commondreams.org are not our own "Brave New World" the opiate or salve that allows us to vent for relief so that we don't have to act.
"That the New York Times mindlessly disseminates claims from anonymous officials with great regularity is, at this point, too well-documented to require much discussion."
The use of the word "mindlessly" here is what merits discussion. In the first year of the Bush II regime there was much discussion of forming an official government agency to disseminate misinformation or propaganda. This plan met much resistance from both sides of the isle, particularly because it would be an admission on the part of our government of lying to the people of the world. The articles written by Judith Miller were to introduce information that our intelligence community had already disproven or dismissed as propaganda. Her key sources were not government officials but the Iraqi National Congress and Ahmed Chalibi who later admitted lying to support regime change in Iraq. This campaign of misinformation was highly coordinated by State and Defense Department officials (read Karen Kiatowski, Ray McGovern and Scott Ritter). The articles would be published on Friday and then Sunday morning Bush Administration officials would be all over the TV talk shows using the NYT articles as evidence of WMDs in Iraq and/or a clear connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. Newspapers across the country would then parrot this information and develop "opinions" based on this information. This was far from "mindless". The dissemination of lies from "false flag 9/11" to the invasions that followed and the degradation of legal rights of US citizens was accomplished far from mindlessly and planned and carried out by some not even official to our government (read Rebuilding Americas Defenses by the Project for a New American Century). Glen Greenwald does truth a disservice by implying so.
The NYT sets the mold for this propaganda practice for all other major media, whether newspapers, new magazines, TV news, online new coverage. This obviously in turn affects the coverage of smaller media (with a few progressive or occasionally very local coverage).
A good example is that almost all the major coverage of Sandra Bland emphasizes the suggestive and damning info (any they can get their hands on) about her mental instability without ever questioning the terrorizing and way over the top rage of the arresting officer. Which was enough to drive any clear-headed person to thoughts of suicide. “According to the police...” is the most common expression in these reports--even absolving them of doctoring their own footage of this arrest.
Anyone seeking truth in news reporting certainly isn't going to look at the NYT or any other corporate media and I doubt any will change their ways no matter how often they are caught misleading or outright lying to the public, since it is what they are in business to do, as part of this great propaganda nightmare machine found in all walks of life, I would expect nothing less than for them to toe the party line and report accordingly. Did any of their reporters write a story concerning the $200 million (tongue in cheek) DONATED to senators to pass fast track authority? If so, I'd love to know who got fired for allowing such a story to be printed. Of course, I no longer know what goes on in the lamestream media since I never read it, so when they do report something that is real, I trust someone here will keep me posted so I can give them a pat on the back.
More likely the Mossad. The NYT has been the "house organ" for Zionism for more than 100 years!
Yes, I would not put anything past these Israeli thugs-
Never forget the motto of Israel's spy agency, Mossad, is, according to recently defected Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky: "By way of deception thou shalt do war."