NYT Forced to Acknowledge U.S. Spy Efforts due to Third Party Release of Leaked Documents

In Daniel Ellsberg's day, the NYT was seen as a place friendly to whistle-blowers and those who have documents exposing secret government activities. No longer. Further, the NYT refuses to post a link to the leaked documents, only linking to its own hand-wringing articles. Nowadays, secret documents are leaked elsewhere and the NYT needs to play catch-up, coupling its reluctant acknowledgement with a warning about the damage that could be caused by leaks about secret U.S. activity:

The leak has the potential to do real damage to Ukraine’s war effort by exposing which Russian agencies the United States knows the most about, giving Moscow a potential opportunity to cut off the sources of information. Current and former officials say it is too soon to know the extent of the damage, but if Russia is able to determine how the United States collects its information and cuts off that flow, it may have an effect on the battlefield in Ukraine.

The leak has already complicated relations with allied countries and raised doubts about America’s ability to keep its secrets. After reviewing the documents, a senior Western intelligence official said the release of the material was painful and suggested that it could curb intelligence sharing. For various agencies to provide material to each other, the official said, requires trust and assurances that certain sensitive information will be kept secret.

On the other hand, if you are part of the U.S. security state, the NYT is more than happy to post your propaganda, as it did in the case of the Nord Stream Pipeline. Unbelievably, knowing that it's "explanation" of the pipeline destruction is bullshit, the NYT suggests it's not a good idea to dig further into who destroyed the pipeline:

It's a good day to celebrate the immense good fortune of NYT reporters who get to draw big salaries while not having to do the difficult work of actually practicing journalism.

Proposed new Mission Statement for the New York Times: Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain.

Joe Biden promised to disable the pipeline prior to its destruction:

Biden's neocon crony, Victoria Nuland, helped to lead the post-destruction cheerleading, as Aaron Maté reminds us, but, again, Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain.

No wonder the corporate media and their U.S. government partners hate Twitter 2.0...

Continue ReadingNYT Forced to Acknowledge U.S. Spy Efforts due to Third Party Release of Leaked Documents

The Little Sailboat that Destroyed the Nord Stream Pipeline

1. Joe Biden promises he will make Nord Stream pipeline inoperable. Someone then destroys the pipeline. Biden then denies that he had anything to do with this act of war. 2. Next, Seymour Hersh publishes detailed investigative article showing how the U.S. destroyed the pipeline. 3. Germany, co-owner of the pipeline, displays what has got to be the most vivid case of Stockholm Syndrome in human history. 4. U.S. news media ignores the Hersh story. 5. The CIA cooks up an absurd alternative story that not-Joe-Biden destroyed the pipeline. The pipeline was destroyed using "Pro-Ukrainian" group that uses a 49 foot sailboat. 6. The NYT, which has now begrudgingly acknowledged Hersh's blockbuster story, laps up the CIA story. 7. Seymour Hersh destroys the NYT-CIA story with a handful of simple questions.

Excerpt from Hersh's newest story, "THE NORD STREAM GHOST SHIP: The false details in the CIA's cover story":

My initial report received coverage around the world but was ignored by the major newspapers and television networks in the United States. As the story gained traction in Europe and elsewhere abroad, the New York Times on March 7 published a report quoting US officials asserting that American intelligence had accumulated information suggesting that a pro-Ukrainian group sabotaged the pipelines. The story said officials who had “reviewed” the new intelligence depicted it to be “a step toward determining responsibility” for the pipeline sabotage. The Times story got worldwide attention, but nothing more has been heard since from the newspaper about who did what. In an interview for a Times podcast, one of the three authors of the article inadvertently explained why the story was dead on arrival. The writer was asked about the involvement of the alleged pro-Ukrainian group: “What makes you think that’s what happened?” He answered: “I should be very clear that we know really very little. Right?”

Continue ReadingThe Little Sailboat that Destroyed the Nord Stream Pipeline

White House is Funding More Powerful Censorship Technologies

From Mike Benz at Foundation for Freedom Online:

SUMMARY of "The National Science Foundation’s “Convergence Accelerator Track F” Is Funding Domestic Censorship Superweapons":

The US government is giving millions to university labs and private firms to stop domestic US citizen opinions on social media.

The National Science Foundation is taking a program set up to solve "grand challenges" like quantum technology and using it for the science of censorship.

Government-funded projects are sorting massive databases of American political and social communities into categories like “misinformation tweeters" and "misinformation followers."

Continue ReadingWhite House is Funding More Powerful Censorship Technologies

Nashville Shooting is a Tale of Two Media Ecosystems

Whatever the story of the day, it will immediately hit the "go" button, causing the two corporate media tribes to roll up their sleeves to reverse-engineer what happened, turbo-charging certain convenient facts and suppressing other inconvenient facts. That is what has happened in the case of 28-year old Audrey Hale, who murdered six people at a Nashville Christian school. In a perverse way, it inspires a feeling of awe to behold the contortionist work product of the two well-oiled media machines. Oh, to be a fly in the wall in the back offices of those two teams!

As a citizen who is not naive, you might be thinking "But what actually happened? Just tell us the facts, please." Instead of becoming well-informed, however, you will be presented with an intensely processed/sterilized/lede-burying/contorted story that will give you, at best, about half of what happened. When we see this results of this process, story after story, week after week, it should challenge all of us to stop trusting any one "news" account. It should remind us that they are preaching to us, not teaching us about the real world. It should deeply insult us that they are coddling, as though we are children. They are convinced that we can't deal with the raw data, the who/what/when/where/why and how of the real world. Even worse, they are motivated by hubris; they think that they are so uniquely intelligent and courageous that only they can deal with harsh reality and that they are protecting us, commandeering the American Project to mold it into their own image and likeness. That has always been the mindset of censors. They self-appoint themselves because they convince themselves that they much smarter than the rest of us. They do this even though censorship is antithetical to free speech and even though, thoughout history, censorship has never worked.  That is the central lesson of Robert Corn-Revere's 2022 book: The Mind of the Censor and the Eye of the Beholder, well summarized at Reason.

The only solution is for each of us to start piecing together what happened bit by bit, from a wide variety of sources from a wide variety of perspectives. That is our plight, yet most people don't have the time to cull through this mess. We have jobs and families and for months, we have put off fixing that leaky faucet in the bathroom. Most of us thus give up in one of two ways.  A) We pick our favorite corporate news shop, assuming it to be credible, perhaps out of habit or perhaps because it is comforting to read that version of of news, thus feeding the confirmation bias.  Or B) We give up on spending time to independently figuring out what is true, thus giving up on being informed citizens, meaning that we will be blindly throwing darts on Election Day, if we vote at all. By giving up entirely, we either avoid "political discussions" or we mutter something like: "It's all a bunch of bullshit." The fact that so many Americans keep picking one of these two paths is reason to believe that the 39 long-dead signatories to the 1787 Constitutional Convention constantly spin in their graves.

Most of us feel this dysfunction with corporate media, as shown by surveys:

Where to turn? One of my favorite writers is Nellie Bowles, who publishes TGIF at The Free Press. Week after week, she does a great job of crystallizing the hypocrisy that runs through the veins of America's news corporations. She does this, writing with aplomb and more than a touch of humor. In today's TGIF, she does what she does best:

An inconvenient killer: The killer, Audrey Hale, was a biological female who identified as a man. My takeaway from this is murderous lunatics come in all shapes and sizes. And it seems likely that this person had some special animosity toward the religious school where they’d been a student.

But the mainstream media became obsessed with obscuring the situation and denying that the killer was trans.

Here’s the Reuters headline: “Former Christian school student kills 3 children, 3 staff in Nashville shooting.” Hmm. Or: “CBS News is still working to confirm Hale’s gender identity.” From the NYT: “The suspect appeared to identify as a man in recent months.” Appeared to identify!According to the New Rules, followed strictly by the Times in all other cases, you’re actually not allowed to say someone “appears to identify as a woman.” The person simply is a woman. At worst, if you’re feeling heretical, you say they are a trans woman. Hale had his pronouns in hisbio, for godsake (he/him). But the NYT throws all that out, distancing the shooter from anything trans-related.

Eli Erlick, one of America’s most prominent trans activists, argued that sometimes shooters only take on a trans identity for convenience: “The Colorado shooter only temporarily took on the identity to avoid hate crime charges.” Weird to see Eli admitting that some people might take advantage of gender self-ID for their own nefarious purposes. Now, let’s talk about a 45-year-old male convict who suddenly identifies as a woman. . . wait, where are you going, Eli?

Others blamed Nashville for bringing the slaughter on themselves. Here’s New York Times contributor Benjamin Ryan on the situation: “Nashville is home to the Daily Wire, where @benshapiro & @mattwalshblog have led an ideological war against trans people.” Many deranged people online echoed this notion that Nashville had it coming. A few hours after the Nashville shooting, Arizona governor Katie Hobbs’ press secretary, Josselyn Berry, posted an image of a woman wielding two guns and wrote: “Us when we see transphobes.” She’s since resigned, though I’m sure she will pop up with a much better-paying job soon.

Anyway, the most important thing to happen in an inconvenient situation is to suppress it quickly. And that’s what has happened. Soon after the shooting, it had fallen from the top story slot. And within a day or two, it was all about gun control efforts and how Republicans were getting in the way.

Bad timing for your Day of Vengeance: It was very awkward that this week is the planned Trans Day of Vengeance. Days before the Nashville school shooting, leftist media personality Cenk Uygur had encouragedtrans people to get tons of guns: “If anyone should get guns, it should be trans Americans.”

How do we break out of these silos?  Jonathan Haidt urges us to reach out to those with whom we disagree in order to to have a more robust understanding of what is going on around us.

More . . .

Continue ReadingNashville Shooting is a Tale of Two Media Ecosystems

Naomi Wolf Notices the Ubiquitous Lack of Courage to Tell the Truth

Gut wrenching essay about the conspicuous lack of truth-telling by Naomi Wolf. She names many names. Will they listen? Do they care? Her article is called "The Death of Culture: How Lies Killed Books." An Excerpt:

The bizarre thing about this moment in culture, is that the really important journalism, and the really important nonfiction books about the history, the racial and gender injustice, the economics, the public policy, of the “pandemic” years — are being written by — non-writers; by people who are trained as doctors, medical researchers, lawyers, politicians, and activists.

And their books are not displayed or even stocked in bookstores such as Jackson McNally.

So there is a massive hole in the central thought process of our culture.

The courageous non-writers have stepped in to tell the truth, because the famous writers, for the most part, can’t.

Or won’t. Or, for whatever reason, didn’t.

This is because the public intellectuals are by necessity, for the most part, AWOL to the truth-telling demands of this time.

You cannot be a public intellectual whose work is alive, if you have participated in manufacturing, or even accepting quietly, state-run lies.

Continue ReadingNaomi Wolf Notices the Ubiquitous Lack of Courage to Tell the Truth