Who Has Been Running Ukraine Since 2013? The United States.

Glenn Greenwald details how we know that the United States has been running Ukraine since 2013. The story is a long one, but Greenwald lays out the evidence and it's not difficult to connect the dots. You can watch the entire show on Rumble. You can read the transcript here. And here's a long excerpt from that transcript:

But the entire idea that we weren't involved in Ukraine intimately and directly and aggressively since the change of government in 2013 is long been so preposterous that it's amazing that anyone could say it with a straight face, in part because let's remember the scandal of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and Burisma energy – not the part of the scandal that people like to talk about, the part of the scandal that even Biden administration supporters admit is genuine. Namely, you have this energy company, Burisma, that was facing serious legal problems with a prosecutor in Ukraine and another legal jeopardy as well and they did what American companies often do when they're facing legal jeopardy, which is they thought to themselves, let's try and get on our side, by paying them, someone with access to power so that we're protected. That's a common thing for a company to do. But no, the Burisma did not go looking for the son or a relative of a Ukrainian official, which is what you would do if Ukrainian officials were running Ukraine. They instead went and looked for the son of the United States Vice-President Joe Biden. Why would Burisma, an energy company facing legal problems in Ukraine, try and curry favor with Joe Biden to protect itself from prosecutorial pressure if Ukraine is a sovereign and democratic country in which the United States plays no role? Obviously, they did that because the real country running Ukraine for the last eight years, right on that side of the Soviet mob, the Russian border, has been the United States. And anyone who knows anything about that series of events knows that that's true. And that alone proves it, that Burisma's actions reflected their recognition of who the real power in Ukraine was. It wasn't Ukraine. It wasn't the elected leaders of Ukraine. It was the United States. [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingWho Has Been Running Ukraine Since 2013? The United States.

NPR Ignores Gender Dimorphism When Commenting on Transgender Sports

NPR Tweet today: "The international governing body for track and field will ban trans women athletes from elite women's competitions, citing a priority for fairness over inclusion despite limited scientific evidence of physical advantage."

I'm "sure" that NPR reporters fact-checked the above claim with the NPR Science Department before publishing its Tweet  . . .

More seriously, what about the images below, which clearly demonstrate dimorphism between the two sexes?

And I also notice that NPR did not interview any of the many female athletes who have been deprived of awards, scholarships and competition slots because male-bodied competitors were allowed to compete. Nor do they mention, for instance, that the U.S. Woman's National soccer team sometimes gets ready for competition by playing games against high school boys. Nor do they mention that in 1998, the 203rd ranked male tennis player, Karsten Braasch, beat Serena Williams and Venus Williams in back-to-back matches.

My intent in writing this is to belittle NPR. I am a big fan of female sports and I want to preserve them as female sports featuring the finest female athletes.

Continue ReadingNPR Ignores Gender Dimorphism When Commenting on Transgender Sports

What it Takes to Get a High Paying Job in Corporate Media

Yes, Jen Psaki will do well at MSNBC. "Doing Well" means saying whatever it takes to please her corporate masters, who also pull the strings at the DNC.

Whether it's FOX on the right or left-leaning corporate media, the product is the viewers, who are being played.  BTW, here is a list of dozens of countries where the United States has interfered with democratic and constitutional election choices by the citizens of those other countries.

Psaki is no longer at the White House, but she will do what it takes to succeed at MSNBC, which is promoting her as follows:

Those who really know Nicolle Wallace know that this comparison is vicious. Wallace was the focus of a 2022 article by Glenn Greenwald: "The Typhoid Mary of Disinformation": Nicolle Wallace. Nobody Spreads it More Relentlessly: From her days as Bush/Cheney propagandist, to her stint on The View, to her role as beloved-by-Democrats MSNBC host, Wallace has perfected the art of sociopathic lying. Watch our original video."

Wallace has employed those personality traits in service of the most toxic and insidious of all tasks: a happy, relentless purveyor of official disinformation. When the CIA wants the American public contaminated with its lies and disinformation, Nicolle Wallace's lips begin moving. She delivers the anonymous disinformation campaigns of the U.S. security state with a tone of empathy, compassion, and liberal elegance, all in the language and with the affectations which affluent liberals most admire.

She has an unsurpassed ability to broadcast to audiences outright lies whispered to her by Deep State operatives — one after the next — without flinching or betraying the slightest sense of a conscience or moral compass. She lies like only a sociopath can: exuding charm and warmth yet utterly vacant on the inside, except for a soul festering in rot. Over the last twenty years — from her perches at the White House, on The View, and now at MSNBC — nobody has made liberals eat up Pentagon and neocon war propaganda more eagerly and uncritically than Nicolle Wallace.

There is literally not a single liberal/CIA disinformation campaign over the last six years that she did not fully and uncritically embrace. Each time the U.S. Security State and Democratic Party fabricated blatant lies and embarked on injecting their poisonous brew into the American bloodstream, Nicolle Wallace was at the forefront. Using the skills she harnessed to help lead Americans into one of its most destructive and immoral wars in U.S. history — the invasion and 15-year destruction of Iraq — the former Bush/Cheney shill, now a DNC and CIA shill, has played a starring role in virtually every lie American liberals have been led to believe.

Continue ReadingWhat it Takes to Get a High Paying Job in Corporate Media

How Do I Choose the Topics I Write About?

I have a day job and a lot of other things that I pursue other than my writing at this website. Thus, I am selective about the topics I write about. How do I choose my topics? One of my rules of thumb is to avoid writing about the things that are already getting lots of attention by corporate media. I often have nothing to add to that coverage.

I write about things that concern me, especially things that are not getting much widespread coverage. I gauge that lack of widespread coverage by talking with friends and acquaintances, many of whom are quite busy with their jobs and raising their families. They don't have much time to tap into the "news." They tend to get their "news" by browsing headlines of corporate media. Often, when I mention something I've learned from social media, they are surprised or confused. This brings to mind a quote from the Stoics:

A highly relevant warning from one of the Stoics from Ancient Rome:

If a person gave away your body to some passerby, you’d be furious. Yet you hand over your mind to anyone who comes along, so they may abuse you, leaving it disturbed and troubled—have you no shame in that?

—Epictetus, Enchiridion , 28

[We interrupt this article with a public service announcement]

Browsing headlines and articles from corporate media (on either the left or the right) is "handing over your mind" to people with an agenda. They are often acting as the paid PR department for the Democrats or Republicans. What is their main quest? To get re-elected. What's the best and most efficient way to get re-elected? To lie to the public. To claim that they are doing a GREAT job. To claim that the other party is evil. To argue that it is an existential imperative to vote for them. To divide us. To refuse to admit that on most issues (e.g., warmongering and being obeisant to their corporate masters and to Wall Street) they serve as a uni-party.

And they are very good at fooling us, especially when they strike up close partnerships with U.S. security state (FBI, CIA, DHS) and social media corporations to censor U.S. citizens, which the Democrats have excelled at. This censorship has been proven many times over by the Twitter Files.

Therefore, a gentle reminder: Resist the temptation to hand over your mind to enticing headlines. Read widely. Read the "enemy." Read independent media, reporters who are financially supported by their readers, not by the people they are purportedly reporting on.

[Now back to the article]

Why do I write about the things I write about rather than other things? Jesse Singal recently published an excellent post on this issue: “Why Do You Write About This Rather Than That?” Is Almost Always A Lazy And Unserious Derailing Tactic." An excerpt:

One of my main critiques of left-of-center intellectual life is that it feels like there’s been a surge of energy spent not on developing and debating specific arguments and counterarguments, but on developing derailing tactics — ways to avoid even having potentially edifying conversations in the first place.

Some derailing tactics involve simply responding not to the claim being made, but to another, much sillier claim. A says “Some dogs bite people,” and B responds “A is saying we should euthanize all dogs in case they bite people!” Yawn. B will always get 100 times the retweets, unfortunately.

Other forms of derailing involve impugning someone’s very interest in the subject they’re talking about. One very common, very annoying version of this is to accuse them of being interested in the wrong thing — basically a form of zoomed-out whataboutism. I’ve obviously encountered this and you’ll see a ton of it everywhere. Maybe the most common version is lobbed at individuals on the left who are concerned about illiberalism on the left, who are accused of ignoring the more pressing threat of right-wing illiberalism or fascism or whatever...

When I see this coming from academics or journalists, which I do a lot, I find it quite frustrating and anti-intellectual. To the extent this claim is undergirded by any actual thought — and I do think the point is to derail rather than to raise genuine questions — the theory seems to be that intellectual or journalistic inquiry should be guided by utilitarian calculations. You shouldn’t spend your time, or at least not much of it, on a particular beat or concern if there are more “important” concerns elsewhere.

Jesse then sets out some of the problems with common derailing strategies:

What you decide what to focus on as a writer is based on a complicated swirl of variables." I follow my interests each day and I often pick from a vast set of notes and ideas that I have accumulated over the years. On other occasions, I comment on something interesting I spotted on Twitter.

"Journalists and academics also are concerned with finding a niche."

"Journalists and academics are also allowed to get tired of things! I’m tired of Trump. I don’t want to write about him anymore."

"[I]t isn’t always clear which stories will and won’t turn out to be important until journalists actually take the time to look into them."

"“Only a small number of people are affected by this” is, more broadly, a frequently callous argument."

"[T]here is often a fundamental level of bullshit — or at least hypocrisy — to these arguments, because the people making them often have rather niche interests themselves."

All of these thoughts resonate with me. Jesse is an excellent writing and his article is a good read - I recommend you go to Jesse's website to read his entire article.

Continue ReadingHow Do I Choose the Topics I Write About?

Earth-Shaking Congressional Testimony of Former Head of the CDC Mostly Ignored by Corporate Media

Where are the bold headlines in the corporate media when the former Director of the CDC, Dr. Robert Redfield, testifies that: A) Gain of Function Research has not ever created any life-saving vaccines or therapeutics, B) Gain of Function Research probably caused the COVID pandemic, and C) there are no tangible benefits to Gain of Function Research?

As Saager Enjeti notes, it is "madness" that this testimony has failed to generate big headlines or to result in dramatic new restrictions on this type of research. In the meantime, Anthony Fauci did his damndest to hide that this research was going on and that he was responsible for funding it. Nothing about this testimony from CNN, MSNBC, NPR or WaPo. NYT does mention Redfield's testimony, but buries the lede.

Continue ReadingEarth-Shaking Congressional Testimony of Former Head of the CDC Mostly Ignored by Corporate Media