NYT’s Absurd New Anti-Russian Propaganda

Exclusive: The New York Times is so determined to generate hate against Russia that it has lost all journalistic perspective, even portraying Russia’s military decoys – like those used in World War II – as uniquely evil, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

If the dangers weren’t so great – a possible nuclear war that could exterminate life on the planet – The New York Times over-the-top denunciation of all things Russian would be almost funny, like the recent front-page story finding something uniquely sinister about Russia using inflatable decoys of military weapons to confuse adversaries.

The Oct. 13 article, entitled “Decoys in Service of an Inflated Russian Might,” was described as part of a series called “DARK ARTS … How Russia projects power covertly,” suggesting that the nefarious Russians aren’t to be trusted in anything even in the case of “one of Russia’s lesser-known military threats: a growing arsenal of inflatable tanks, jets and missile launchers.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin after the military parade on Red Square, May 9, 2016 Moscow. (Photo from: http://en.kremlin.ru)

Russian President Vladimir Putin after the military parade on Red Square, May 9, 2016 Moscow. (Photo from: http://en.kremlin.ru)

The bizarre article by Andrew E. Kramer, one of the most prolific producers of this anti-Russian propaganda, then states: “As Russia under President Vladimir V. Putin has muscled its way back onto the geopolitical stage, the Kremlin has employed a range of stealthy tactics. … One of the newer entries to that list is an updating of the Russian military’s longtime interest in operations of deceit and disguise, a repertoire of lethal tricks known as maskirovka, or masking. It is a psychological warfare doctrine that is becoming an increasingly critical element in the country’s geopolitical ambitions.”

What is particularly curious about Kramer’s article is that it takes actions that are typical of all militaries, going back centuries, and presents them as some special kind of evil attributable to the Russians, such as Special Forces units not dressing in official uniforms and instead blending in with the surroundings while creating deniability for political leaders.

American and European Special Forces, for instance, have been deployed on the ground in Libya and Syria without official confirmation, at least initially. Sometimes, their presence is acknowledged only after exposure because of casualties, such as the death of three French soldiers near Benghazi, Libya, in July.

Indeed, one could argue that the United States has excelled at this practice of stealthily entering other countries, usually in violation of international law, to carry out lethal operations, such as drone assassinations and Special Forces’ strikes. However, rather than condemning U.S. officials for their sneakiness, the Times and other mainstream Western publications often extol the secrecy of these acts and sometimes even agree to delay publication of information about the covert attacks so as not to jeopardize the lives of American soldiers.

U.S. Propaganda Network

The U.S. government also has built extensive propaganda operations around the world that pump out all sorts of half-truths and disinformation to put U.S. adversaries on the defensive, with the American financial hand kept hidden so the public is more likely to trust the claims of supposedly independent voices.

New York Times building in New York City. (Photo from Wikipedia)

New York Times building in New York City. (Photo from Wikipedia)

Much of that disinformation is then promoted by the Times, which famously assisted in one major set of lies by publishing a false 2002 front-page story about Iraq reconstituting its nuclear weapons program as a key justification for the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Yet, the Russians are called out for activities far less egregious than what the U.S. government – aided and abetted by the Times – has done.

You could even view the Times’ article citing inflatable weapons as proof of Moscow’s perfidy as itself an example of another U.S. psychological operation along the lines of the Times’ article accusing Iraq of obtaining aluminum tubes for nuclear centrifuges, when the tubes were actually unsuited for that purpose. In this new case, however, the Times is heating up a war fever against Russia rather than Iraq.

Yet, as in 2002, this current psy-op is not primarily aimed at a foreign adversary as much as it is targeting the American people. The primary difference is that in 2002, the Times was helping instigate war against a relatively small and defenseless nation in Iraq. Now, the Times is whipping up an hysteria against nuclear-armed Russia with the prospect that this manufactured outrage could induce politicians into further steps that could lead to nuclear conflagration.

As German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier wrote in a recent opinion piece, the current tensions between Washington and Moscow are “more dangerous” than during the Cold War.

“It’s a fallacy to think that this is like the Cold War,” Steinmeier wrote. “The current times are different and more dangerous” because there were clear “red lines” during the Cold War where the rival nuclear powers knew not to tread.

Though Steinmeier, as a part of the NATO alliance, puts most of the blame on Moscow, the reality is that Washington has been the prime instigator of the recent tensions, including pressing NATO up to Russia’s borders, supporting an anti-Russian putsch in neighboring Ukraine, and helping to arm rebel groups fighting in Syria alongside Al Qaeda’s affiliate and threatening Russia’s allied Syrian government.

‘Regime Change’ in Moscow?

Further feeding Russia’s fears, prominent Americans, including at least one financed by the U.S. government, have called for a “regime change” project in Moscow. Yet all Americans hear about is the unproven allegation that Russia was responsible for hacking into Democratic Party emails and exposing information that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has tried to keep secret, such as the content of her speeches to Wall Street investment banks and other special interests.

Vice President Joe Biden addresses a J Street conference in 2013.

Vice President Joe Biden in 2013.

Vice President Joe Biden has announced Washington will retaliate with some information-warfare strike against Moscow. But the reality is that the U.S. government, working hand-in-glove with the Times and other mainstream American publications, has been waging such an information war against Russia for at least the past several years, including promotion of dubious charges such as the so-called Magnitsky case which was largely debunked by a courageous documentary that has been virtually blacklisted in the supposedly “free” West.

The Times also has embraced the U.S. government’s version of pretty much every dubious claim lodged against Moscow, systematically excluding evidence that points in a different direction. For instance, regarding the shootdown of the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, the Times ignored a published Dutch (i.e. NATO) intelligence report stating that the only powerful anti-aircraft missiles in the area capable of hitting MH-17 were under the control of the Ukrainian military.

While it may be understandable that the Times opts to embrace claims by a Ukrainian-dominated investigation that the Russians were responsible – despite that inquiry’s evidentiary and logical shortcomings – it is not journalistically proper to ignore official evidence, such as the Dutch intelligence report, because it doesn’t go in the preferred direction. If the Times were not acting as a propaganda vehicle, it would at least have cited the Dutch intelligence report as one piece of the puzzle.

The Times’ relentless service as the chief conveyor belt for anti-Russian propaganda has drawn at least some objections from readers, although they are rarely acknowledged by the Times.

For instance, Theodore A. Postol, professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, tried to lodge a protest with the Times’ editors about the “inflatable weapons” story.

In the email, a copy of which he forwarded to me, Postol wrote: “This article is a very good example of the misleading foreign policy reporting that has unfortunately become a hallmark of the New York Times. 

“The complete lack of sophistication of this article, coupled with the implication that the use of such decoys is somehow an indication of a Russian cultural bias towards deception is exactly the kind of misleading reporting that cannot possibly be explained as a competent attempt to inform Times readers about real and serious national security issues that we are today facing with Russia.”

An inflatable tank used by Allies in World War II to deceive German intelligence regarding the location of military forces.

An inflatable tank used by Allies in World War II to deceive German intelligence regarding the location of military forces.

Postol attached to his email a series of photographs showing decoys that were used by the Allies during the Battle of Britain and the D-Day invasion. He noted, “There is a vast popular literature about this kind of deception in warfare that is available to even the most unsophisticated nonexperts. It is simply unimaginable to me that such an article could be published in the Times, yet alone on the front page, if the oversight mechanisms at the Times were properly functioning.”

Postol, however, assumes that the editorial system of the Times wishes to provide genuine balance and context to such stories, when the pattern has clearly shown that – as with Iraq in 2002-2003 – the Times’ editors see their role as preparing the American people for war.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).

image_pdfimage_print

111 comments for “NYT’s Absurd New Anti-Russian Propaganda

  1. Swedish guy
    October 24, 2016 at 14:22

    The neocon policy pursued by the US and the West is a moral disaster. The peoples of the USSR liberated themselves from Communist rule, having high expectations and noble ideas about peace and cooperation. And what do they get?
    What could have become a common free Europe for all is now a hypocrite EU where politicians and MSM compete to tell the most daft lies to the citizens, made up by US neocon institutes. We are flooded with immigrants because of the US aggression against Syria, which has cost 400,000 lives and forced millions to flee.
    In Sweden, too, where I live, the MSM are as trustworthy as Neues Deutschland at the time, probably mimicking the NYT.
    It is truly sad.

  2. Hans Meyer
    October 20, 2016 at 19:02

    Good article as usual.

    I think the take-home message is that one has to read the corporate press with a grain of salt, as it is just propaganda for their policies.
    The thing that is most important are the room last big messages that the Russian sent to the West. 1. a vast military and civilian exercice to prepare the military for a response to a nuclear attack, but most important a desire to shelter as large as group as possible to try and survive the absurdity of a nuclear exchange. That last point cannot be said of the US,France,UK or Germany as far as I know.
    2. the goal of inflatable dummies is obviously to confuse the enemy about the location of military hardware. These gentlemen of the so-called free world (I am trying not to laugh) should remember that the Nazies had a pretty good mapping of Soviet military positions before launching their attack. And to restate your article, they are just copying the idea of the ghost division before D-day,

    Now, are these two messages there to wake up the civilian population in the West (what can pass as a leader, in our case, does not give a crap. Remember there is still a nuclear reactor spitting radioactive waste in the ocean in Japan, a serious event that will lead any sane person to reconsider the use of such system civilian and military anywhere in the world) or does the Russians beleive seriously that nato is getting ready for attack (which in that case would certainly mean an alignment of China with Russia).

  3. John XYZ
    October 18, 2016 at 18:09

    One gets the sense that if one were to replace “Russia” with “the real world” in a contemporary political discussion, one would be left with a far more enlightening discussion.

  4. bozhidar balkas
    October 18, 2016 at 08:27

    Hatred, envy, fear of russia causes privately-owned journos to speak against much of what russia does and stands for. Russia and China act like a firewall to american will and ability to obtain directly or indirectly all of the planet.
    US had almost all of the planet in its iron fist until China and Russia were able to protect selves from a direct attack from the nation gang, aka Nato!
    As any gang’s purpose, so is the nation gang’s sole or main purpose to do gangsterism. And it does a lot of it in spite of Chinese and Russian efforts and wills to stop it!!!

  5. Carroll Price
    October 18, 2016 at 06:51

    When it comes to lying and deception, the US and Israel hate competition.

  6. Lofty
    October 18, 2016 at 06:43

    Yes I remember our military in Serbia, poorly equipped and vastly overpowered, making mock tanks and other military vehicles during NATO’s 1999 war of aggression against us, and then NATO earnestly bombing these cardboard and wood targets with high precision weapons, wasting millions upon millions of U.S. and other Western tax players’ money… yes this unthinkably evil trait of defending ourselves against evil in whatever resourceful way we can, it’s not just Russian. It must run in the family.

  7. Claus Eric Hamle
    October 18, 2016 at 04:01

    The real problem is 468 missiles in Poland and Romania on the border to Russia. And on 32 ships in the Mediterranean. Why? Yes, to defend us from Iran ? Suicidal bloody fools !

  8. October 17, 2016 at 18:33

    when it comes to US journalism…heres some refreshing good news…
    http://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/17/breaking_riot_charges_against_amy_goodman

  9. dahoit
    October 17, 2016 at 17:46

    Repeat after me;”Berlin,Grozny,Aleppo,Berlin,Grozny, Aleppo,Berlin Grozny Aleppo”.
    Sidebar at the Lying Times.
    No Hiroshima,Hue or Fallujah,huh?And we helped level Berlin.And a thousand others.
    Absurdity from mentally deformed humans.

  10. Zbig
    October 17, 2016 at 17:23

    In psychology Kramer’s argumentation is known as “projection”

  11. ENM
    October 17, 2016 at 16:39

    A link to the website for “The Ghost Army,” a very interesting documentary on the Allies’ use of deception in World War Two.

    http://www.ghostarmy.org/

  12. David G
    October 17, 2016 at 15:51

    I actually thought this Times article was aimed at making the Russian military look weak and ridiculous, rather than “uniquely evil”, with the average reader meant to think, “ha, those Russians can only face our mighty tanks and planes with inflatable fakes”.

    Of course, that sort of disinformation is dangerous as well, and can happily co-exist in our Orwellian doublethink era with dark warnings of the menacing Russian bear.

    My confession: Aside from the gratuitous asides in Kramer’s article about miscellaneous Russian perfidies, I thought the actual reporting on the balloon decoys was informative and interesting.

  13. October 17, 2016 at 14:02

    Thanks for the presentation and all the other good info provided by the readers.

    RUSSIA is NOT our Enemy;: the Zionist Neo-Conservatives (foreign and domestic) are. I am thankful for the good sense showed by Patin and Lavrov., and for their resistance to taking the bait offered by our MSM.They seem to be the only adults out there. Really now, who is doing the most damage to this country? Not Russia. Rather we have a good old-fashioned fifth-column spreading $billions of hasbara (propaganda). What do all those AIPAC organizations do every week in their weekly meetings? Organize bake sales?
    Of course, they are aided and abetted by our Congress and clueless and gullible citizenry. Our Pentagon is providing hyped-up hypocrisy. You heard about how Russis’s planes buzzed our ships cruising off the suburbs of St. Petersburg (Russia), but you didn’t hear about how American planes have been buzzing Russian ships, not off our California coast, but off their Siberian coast (Kamchatka). since way back in the fifties. I can personally vouch for that (1956-9) as a U.S.Naval Aviator with Mig-17s flying on my wingtips. I like them because they didn’t shoot me dowm.

  14. backwardsevolution
    October 17, 2016 at 13:57

    A good article entitled “D-Day: Dummies and Decoys”:

    http://elinorflorence.com/blog/d-day-decoys

    The Allies certainly used these dummies and decoys during World War II. Mr. Parry, this is a great article. The article you linked to by Gilbert Doctorow, “Destroying the Magnitsky Myth”, was also a good read. Would be great to see that documentary. Truth has a way of eventually trickling out. It’s always fascinating to watch someone (in this case the documentarian) who sets out with one thing in mind and then slowly starts to see something else – the truth – rearing its inevitable head. That hedge fund manager sounds like a bad dude, and shame on the politicians who are keeping everyone from seeing this.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/21/destroying-the-magnitsky-myth/

  15. Alexandr
    October 17, 2016 at 12:57

    GUYS, come to Russia someday! I will gladly meet You all =)))) Will visit some bar or anything else…

  16. Alexandr
    October 17, 2016 at 12:54

    GUYS, come to Russia someday! I will gladly meet You all =)))) Will visit some bar or something…

  17. Jay
    October 17, 2016 at 11:23

    mike kel:

    Take your cliched anti-Semitism elsewhere.

    • Sam
      October 17, 2016 at 12:37

      Take your racist zionist propaganda elsewhere. You will fool no one here.

      • Jay
        October 17, 2016 at 17:20

        Sam:

        Provide some examples of my “racist zionist propaganda”?

        NB: Lose the attitude that anyone who complains about anti-Semitism doesn’t have a valid point.

        • Sam
          October 19, 2016 at 10:23

          See my comment above. There is no such thing as your propaganda concept, and you have no evidence of it. Forget the idea that your group deserves something special, it is racism. You owe the US hundreds of billions in reparations.

          • Rikhard Ravindra Tanskanen
            October 20, 2016 at 18:34

            No such thing as anti-Semitism? Are you a fucking idiot? You’re just like those American conservatives who say racism is no longer a problem in the United States.

  18. Jay
    October 17, 2016 at 11:19

    ZS:

    Here, two copies held by the New York Public Library, one of 3 big public library systems in NYC.

    http://catalog.nypl.org/search (you’ll have to enter the terms)

    • Zachary Smith
      October 17, 2016 at 11:30

      I wish I lived near a big-city library! Way out here in the wilds of rural Indiana I must rely on mail-order booksellers, for there is only one bookstore within driving distance, and it sells only second-hand paperback fiction. Needless to say, my copy of the Cruickshank Deception book arrived via my mailbox.

      The output of the Neocon NYT would undoubtedly improve if they used their local library.

      • Jay
        October 17, 2016 at 17:25

        ZS;

        Get a library card from your nearest big town library and use interlibrary loan.

        Also check Bookfinder (I believe owned by Amazon) and ABEbooks for for used copies of books worldwide. (I know for a fact there is some huge used book dealer, via ABE, near South Bend. I have no idea if it’s a retail store like say Powell’s in Portland OR.

        • Bill Bodden
          October 17, 2016 at 19:19

          abebooks.com and alibris.com coordinate with contracted used-book stores and are great resources for out-of-print books and bargains.

  19. Kim Dixon
    October 17, 2016 at 10:55

    The NYT is actively censoring comments which challenge these anti-Russian propaganda pieces. I’ve attempted to post more than one comment, intelligently challenging an article’s content – and that comment never posted.

    The same thing happens if one challenges the Times’ endless pro-Clinton articles, BTW.

    • Realist
      October 17, 2016 at 15:54

      The same thing happens to me on other sites–ones that don’t require a “social media” membership which I refuse to join. When the war comes, it will be too easy to round all those people up. Besides, my biography is of no relevance to my analysis. One used to be able to post on Disqus sites as a guest, but no more… not even commentary on freakin’ comic strips! “If you’re not guilty, you’ve got nothing to hide” seems to be the accepted attitude by the (apologies for using the term) “sheeple.” But you are right, Kim, most of the newspaper forums do have filters which will not allow your post no matter how many times you try to reword it. I think they blackball certain IP addresses.

      But, back to the NYT. I get the impression that their on-line subscriptions must be way down, and the fools don’t seem to understand why. I used to post there every day. Would very often receive the most “recommends,” “likes” or “upvotes” (whatever the term used now) on a given topic and the Times commonly selected my posts as one of their “NYT Picks.” But ever since Obomber and the Times turned to the Dark Side, I’ve refused to go there and certainly will not pay to resubscribe no matter how great a deal they keep offering me. I’ve recently also cancelled my subscription to Time Magazine, after personally subscribing for 50 years and reading that rag for nearly 70, as my parents always took the magazine. These mass media outlets, along with many others, have drastically transmogrified into nothing more than fascist pamphlets parroting the propaganda demanded from the White House, Langley and the Pentagon. I explicitly told their publishers WHY I was cancelling: because of their disturbing departure from truth-telling and inexorable drift towards authoritarianism and warmongering. However, if they even have any trained monkeys manning the keyboards capable of rational debate, they did not bother to challenge my assertions, though they did want my continued business (and still do!).

      One last thing: if Hillary is pleased at the entirely one-sided support she gets from the entire corporate media, she needs to give her husband Slick Willy an appreciative “thank you” for pushing and signing the “Telecommunications Act of 1996,” which essentially turned the entire American media establishment, which till then had been highly diverse and dedicated to collecting and disseminating facts rather than accruing profits and spreading propaganda, over to about five or six mega-corporations with no competition left whatsoever. One wonders what favors the Queen of Chaos has in mind to reward these lap dogs in her service once she’s in power. What more can they be given from the federal coffers? Maybe Carlos Slim (major shareholder of the NYT) has some ideas. I mean besides TPP and TTIP which she will once again flip-flop on–guaranteed!

  20. mike keleher
    October 17, 2016 at 10:05

    When one reada anti-Russuan screeds in the corporate MSM, one must marvel at the massive, wild over-representation of Jews (2.2% of the pop.) amongst the authors… And the fact no one cares to say so, just asno one cares to note that almost all of the Yeltsin-era oligarchs who raped Russia were Jewish, as are the ‘neocons.’

    Must not be relevant.

    • Sam
      October 17, 2016 at 12:35

      The MSM are more than 50 percent directly controlled by people with Jewish surnames, and almost all of the rest are indirectly controlled. “Ziocon” says it better than “neocon,” but they actively subvert democracy, hardly conservatism; they’re just zionist, the Jewish version of racist and fascist.

      • Jay
        October 17, 2016 at 17:25

        Sam–

        Take your cliched anti-Semitism elsewhere.

        • Sam
          October 19, 2016 at 10:13

          That racist zionist propaganda scam hasn’t worked in a generation, “Jay.” No one is fooled now that Jews are the only group that deserves a special word for discrimination, nor that they have a special right to commit wrongs by pretending that they are owed something for their group’s losses in WWII. Nor that they have any historical claim on Palestine.

          1. Do you even know or care about the losses of 20 million Russians and 13 million Chinese in WWII?
          2. Do you care about the greater losses of European states in general?
          3. Do you know that most Germans never supported Hitler? Do you care about their losses?
          4. There are no remaining survivors of the concentration camps. So why are Jews unconnected with that problem owed anything?
          5. Do you know that all of humanity migrated through the area of Palestine for a million years BPE,enroute from S Africa? There were no doubt thousands of empires there before the Jews. So you have no more claim there than anyone else.
          6. Do you think those who work for subversion of US democracy through takeovers of mass media and buying of elections have a right to US citizenship? That is tantamount to treason, and should be punishable as treason, or by deportation.

          Extreme racist attitudes will come crashing down on Jews in general before long. You zionists do your own kind no service in seeking injustices on their behalf.

          • Rikhard Ravindra Tanskanen
            October 20, 2016 at 18:18

            No remaining survivors? You pulled that out of your ass. and 2% is hardly significant.

  21. Jay
    October 17, 2016 at 09:46

    Jill:

    “Hard to fault the NYT for not wanting to jeopardize the lives of American soldiers.” The NY Times sold the Iraq war, that killed America soldiers.

    Also, not everyone one who is anti-Obama-Hillary-Kerry-McCain delusions about those sneaky Russians supports Trump.

  22. October 17, 2016 at 05:59

    Government is out of control; media is out of control; this world is out of control. You may not like it, but the best idea is to put on the armor of YEHOVAH and stand. https://testimony4yeshua.wordpress.com

  23. Realist
    October 17, 2016 at 01:44

    Not only do Western media, like the NYT and WaPo, consistently fail to cite relevant facts favorable to the Russian side of any story, they and the Washington political establishment want to go so far as to deny Russia the ability to present any fact, interpretation or opinion over the airwaves or internet by “banning Russian news media channels from satellite platforms and the internet.”

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45687.htm

    (“West is Gunning for Russian Media Ban” By Finian Cunningham)

    That’s right, if American style “democracy” is to have its way, Russia will be given no freedom of expression whatsoever. Whatever they may want to say in response to American propaganda, they won’t be allowed to say it and you won’t have a right to hear it. As far as America is concerned, the new rule is “there’s only one side to every story.” If you are not satisfied with the officially dispensed American Groupthink, you should move to Russia.

  24. Joe L.
    October 17, 2016 at 01:38

    For me, I just find it utterly amazing that the country which is bombing in 7 countries, covert operations in 75 countries, around 1,000 military bases worldwide, that is invading countries that did nothing to them resulting in 1 million plus people dead, continues to this day to train dictators meanwhile overthrowing democracies for their own interests, and ultimately is responsible for the creation of the Mujahideen which would become Al Qaeda, the Taliban and ISIS – is so eager to throw stones at other leaders and counties, what a messed up, Orwellian world we live in now.

  25. Joe Tedesky
    October 17, 2016 at 01:30

    Below is one of Hillary’s Goldman Sachs speeches that I got off of zerohedge. I also left the link so you could read it in it’s entirety.
    ……………………………………………………………………….
    “Some thoughts on Putin:

    Look, I would love it if we could continue to build a more positive relationship with Russia. I worked very hard on that when I was Secretary, and we made some progress with Medvedev, who was president inname but was obviously beholden to Putin, but Putin kind of let him go and we helped them get into the WTO for several years, and they were helpful to us in shipping equipment, even lethal equipment, in and out of out of Afghanistan.

    So we were making progress, and I think Putin has a different view. Certainly he’s asserted himself in a way now that is going to take some management on our side, but obviously we would very much like to have a positive relationship with Russia and we would like to see Putin be less defensive toward a relationship with the United States so that we could work together on some issues.

    We’ve tried very hard to work with Putin on shared issues like missile defense. They have rejected that out of hand. So I think it’s what diplomacy is about. You just keep going back and keep trying. And the President will see Putin during the G20 in Saint Petersburg, and we’ll see what progress we can make.”

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-15/here-are-hillary-clintons-three-speeches-goldman-sachs-which-she-was-paid-675000

    ………………………………………………………………………..

    Listening to what Hillary told the Goldman Sachs people sounds a bit tame. I’m not sure of the timeline of when Hillary said this, but we all know how she feels about Putin now. Unless this is her private conversation, and she demonizes Putin to us under her public conversation speaking voice. Possibly Hillary is a big bluffer, I don’t know, but if you read the whole article at zerohedge.com you may decide for yourself what to make of her. In my opinion Hillary should only be judged by her actions, and never by her word. You may ask why, so I’ll tell you, Hillary is a Clinton.

    • Joe Tedesky
      October 17, 2016 at 16:13

      Read what David Swanson has to say, as he interrupts Hillary Clinton’s words.

      I know my comment here doesn’t quite fit what the NYT article was about, but I thought that commenting on Hillary’s Goldman Sachs speeches would be of some interest, and compliment the discussion. So read what David Swanson has to say about those speeches of Hillary’s.

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/17/what-hillary-clinton-privately-told-goldman-sachs/

  26. Bill Bodden
    October 17, 2016 at 00:18

    Supporting going to war is nothing new for the New York Times. A hundred years ago it helped Woodrow Wilson get into the First World War.

    • Zachary Smith
      October 17, 2016 at 00:39

      Do you have a link or reference book for that claim? Everything I’ve read indicates Wilson was extremely stubborn with a better-than-you attitude in trying to avoid entry into WW1.

      • Brad Owen
        October 17, 2016 at 04:06

        Go to Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) Zach, and type in “Woodrow Wilson” in their search box. It’ll turn up tons of “low-down” on ole Woodrow. It’s shocking. He was a full-on servant of that “Anglo-American Establishment” that Dr. Carroll Quigley talked about…and in the Era when such folks championed weird Race theories and eugenics practices (culminating in Hitlers’ bizarre ideas).

        • Zachary Smith
          October 17, 2016 at 08:56

          1) make google search of Executive Intelligence Review.
          2) discover it’s a publication of Lyndon LaRouche (uh oh)
          3) notice ‘Global Warming’ Scare Is Population Reduction, Not Science (uh oh X2)
          4) type Woodrow Wilson in search bar.
          5) click on result Behind LaRouche’s Assassination Forecast

          sample:

          Virtually every assassination I know of, of a President, or attempted assassination of any significance, was done by the British. Lincoln was assassinated by the British. There’s no doubt of that; the whole conspiracy was outlined, unless some details were kept out of the public view there. Who assassinated McKinley? It was by the British. Why did they assassinate him? Aaah! Why? To get in Teddy Roosevelt. Why? In order to prepare for the King of England’s intention, or what was to be the King of England soon—his intention to have World War I. And it would not have happened under McKinley.
          ~~~~~~~~~~
          As a matter of fact, Teddy Roosevelt was the nephew of the former head of the British intelligence service in charge of the Confederacy. And he trained Teddy Roosevelt, and catered his backing. Teddy Roosevelt was succeeded by Taft; but then he was succeeded by another President, Woodrow Wilson. Woodrow Wilson came from a family which was the founding of the Ku Klux Klan, and when Woodrow Wilson was in the White House as President, he refounded the Ku Klux Klan on a national basis, with a ceremony in the White House itself. So, you have two characters who are British assets—Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt—who are both sent in as a part of a British front operation, because the Confederacy was a British operation, of Lord Palmerston. So, therefore, you understand these things.

          6) belatedly review my Consortium News Deniers file. (uh oh X3)

          • Brad Owen
            October 17, 2016 at 16:16

            And your objection is? At least you saved me a lot of typing of historical incidents and facts (I guess you think the Revolution ended at Yorktown? It never stopped. The “Tories” never went away. They just set up shop as Wall Street financiers, and shipping magnates, while the plantation oligarchs just continued carrying on their trade with The Mother Country. And the ruling class oligarchs in City-of-London never relinquished “Title” to The States as their “Colony”. Look around you. who’s on top?). Thank you. BTW, I disagree with Lyn on climate changes being false, but he’s correct that a certain FACTION among the environmental movement that’s just basically anti-human and works for the Oligarchs (eugenicists one-and-all) “500 million cavemen” policy of population reduction. Simplest way to do that is with war scare tactics justifying austerity policies and overall immiseration (Great Depression) and denying any policies that would promote the general welfare of the population such as healthcare, gainful employment, affordable education, infrastructure such as clean water and air, etc…in a century or so we might just make it to the 500 million surviving, hardy,miserable peasants, from which they can recruit their 5 million warrior caste and 50 million technologist caste.

          • Brad Owen
            October 18, 2016 at 07:03

            The reason I began entertaining the thoughts of the LaRouche organization is BECAUSE he is so vilified and censored by The Establishment (he’s right. They are just effing Tories. It’s also why I’ve gone Green, because they’re censored too). I got tired of my own Pavlovian responses and decided to actually LOOK at “the forbidden fruit”. It rings true for the most part. I’l take insight where I find it. I know Establishment-approved info isn’t going to reveal anything of value.

      • Bill Bodden
        October 17, 2016 at 19:12

        Reference “The Politics of War” by Walter Karp – http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Walter_Karp/Walter_Karp_page.html – in which he describes how the US got into the Spanish-American War and the First World War. I have touted Walter Karp on several occasions here and elsewhere. He was an eye-opener for me when Lewis Lapham wrote an article in Harper’s commending the four-volume retrospective of Karp’s writings. Used copies are available at alibris.com and abebooks.com and are among the best bargains available in my opinion.

        Karp makes a point common to McKinley and Wilson not making any public statement about getting into these wars other than trying to create the impression they were not in favor of doing so.

        Smedley Butler held the opinion that the US got into the First World War to protect Wall Street loans to Britain. Karp makes a reference to these loans but didn’t say outright they were a reason for getting into the war.

  27. Zachary Smith
    October 17, 2016 at 00:06

    Regarding propaganda, here is an interesting story from Information Clearing House.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45687.htm

    It would be monumental, but Western states seem to be moving, ineluctably, towards banning Russian news media channels from satellite platforms and the internet. That outcome – albeit with enormous ethical and political implications – seems to be a logical conclusion of the increasingly frenzied transatlantic campaign to demonize Russia.

    This is something the NYT and WP would love – the total absence of competition. Their own propaganda would necessarily go unchallenged, for stories from the Evil Russians would be illegal, blocked, or both.

  28. ltr
    October 16, 2016 at 22:06

    https://twitter.com/neeratanden/status/787659966161248256

    Neera Tanden ?@neeratanden

    @TyHealey no one wants war with Russia, but if they sent military over here to steal property, would you see US as aggressor or them?

    7:22 AM – 16 Oct 2016

    [ Good grief. ]

  29. jak
    October 16, 2016 at 21:49

    I don’t think any of you know much about Vladimir Putin, (at least, that’s what your replies tell me) so I suggest you research first before commenting.

    • Zachary Smith
      October 16, 2016 at 22:24

      My browser word search function declares the term “putin” was used 9 times till now, not counting this post. One was by “jak”, three were by “Jill”, and two instances in the post replying to “Jill”.

      jak and Jill, that’s pretty darned cute.

      BTW, I didn’t notice any links by either of you.

  30. Lois Gagnon
    October 16, 2016 at 21:21

    The mainstream press has been absorbed into the oligarchy. It is inseparable from the ruling cabal so we can count on the war mongering and disinformation to continue. The only thing that will help is if a large majority tunes them out. We are still far from that happening at this point.

  31. Zachary Smith
    October 16, 2016 at 20:54

    Here is an image of an inflatable F-16.

    hXXps://d262ilb51hltx0.cloudfront.net/max/800/0*xgQc_PZOp0t0AbWZ.jpg

    (change the XX to tt)

    http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR900/RR968/RAND_RR968.pdf

    That’s a free 101 page scholarly paper about protecting airbases, and deception is a big part of it. The USSR got hammered by the Germans at the start of WW2, and on a smaller scale the US caught it at Pearl Harbor and 24 hours later in the Philippines.

    • evelync
      October 17, 2016 at 11:43

      oy

      the closer image looks just like how cheap plastic toys look…..
      and i’m no expert, lol
      Thank you Zachary Smith!
      we’re spending way too much money on this.

      I’m fully in support of saving the lives of people who serve and saving planes from being blown up. I spoke out against sending our soldiers into harms way in local town halls ’cause I knew this was trumped up stuff in 2003 – it was so clearly propaganda.
      And yet they had some people absolutely wrongly terrified who one could not talk to about this they were so hysterical.
      The answer, though is well explained for me by Andrew Bacevich, retired colonel, history prof at boston college, and bereaved parent who lost his son in Iraq – even though he himself spoke out against launching the Iraq War from the beginning. He came from a military family and of course his son was also part of that “tradition”.

      Here’s a link to his brutally honest, sobering talk at the opening of the Pardee School for anyone who hasn’t watched it and may be interested.:
      http://www.bu.edu/pardeeschool/2016/04/20/bacevich-gives-talk-on-americas-war-for-the-greater-middle-east/

      Bacevich says that the military cannot be expected to be the answer to all this and we’re creating a mess with each new regime change.
      I strongly believe that our elected officials holding federal offices should sign an oath not to send people into harms way unless this country is under imminent threat.
      I think we have a delusional foreign policy – I’m no military expert but Bacevich makes a helluva lot of sense to me…

      Thanks again for this photo….
      phew, once again Jon Ronson – “The Men Who Stare at Goats” comes to mind…

    • Doan Logan
      October 19, 2016 at 16:40

      Please don’t try to minimize US involvement and losses in WWII.

  32. John
    October 16, 2016 at 20:45

    American citizens choose to -not see what’s going on- world wide. And also what’s going on inside their own country…Meanwhile the cockroaches flourish…..Cowards !……When is the release of the new i-phone ?

    • Lois Gagnon
      October 16, 2016 at 21:14

      That pretty much sums up the problem.

  33. F. G. Sanford
    October 16, 2016 at 19:53

    While these revelations may represent topics of concern to the uninitiated Times reader, a Pentagon insider has revealed to me – in strictest confidence that he remain anonymous – that our military industrial complex definitely has developed effective countermeasures. Russian technology, he assures me, is way behind our avant garde innovations when it comes to these weapons systems. For example, Russia has developed inflatable tanks, planes and missile launchers. Scientists at Locheed-Martin in cooperation with Monsanto have actually developed inflatable decoy Soldiers which may be deployed to hostile environments thereby reducing casualties. Fascinated with this revelation, I pressed him for details about combat theaters where such weapons had been successfully fielded. “Capital Hill and The Pentagon”, he replied, “Those are high-stress environments where operational tempo is most likely to cause stress-induced battle fatigue and PTSD.” Asked to identify an example, he claimed that the highly successful Mark I Mod I Field Expedient General Breedlove was the first barometric temperature modulated atmospheric compensated gas envelope mechanized warrior decoy the Pentagon fielded. That model was successfully deployed to NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. A newer model, the Mark II standard issue General Milley, was an upgrade with minor software problems. It functioned reasonably well in combat conditions, but faced with press conferences, it occaisionally spoke of “human-alien hybrids” and “little green men”. That caused quite a stir, but has been successfully remedied. It could have spoiled drawing-board plans for a faked “alien invasion”, should such a false-flag operation ever become necessary. Other decoy armaments include the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which despite its non-mission capable performance, actually is capable of powered flight. Teams are working on a decoy inflatable pilot to prevent fatalities. The Littoral Combat Ship is another successful innovation. While it actually does float, it is not yet mission capable. So, the “blow-up gap”, as some have called it, is really greatly exaggerated. We are way ahead of the Russians in tactical field-expedient inflatable military devices. We can blow them up better than the Russians have ever blown up anything before.

    • John
      October 16, 2016 at 20:51

      Thank you so much…..I feel much better for the people you care about……

    • evelync
      October 16, 2016 at 21:36

      roflmao
      I needed a good laugh. Thank you F G Sanford
      this reminds me of:
      Jon Ronson’s “The Men Who Stare at Goats”
      http://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Men-Who-Stare-at-Goats/Jon-Ronson/9781439181775

      Here’s a little tidbit about General Breedlove
      https://theintercept.com/2016/07/01/nato-general-emails/

    • Sam
      October 17, 2016 at 08:12

      Thank you for this hoped-for revelation (see comment above). I understand that an early generation of this technology is deployed by the oligarchy left and right using inflatable politicians able to follow short scripts, and easily repaired or replaced after assassination attempts. Newer models can assert whatever is convenient as fact, and hide behind general authorizations and veils of secrecy. A secret project to have the experimental Mark III model be granted a nobel peace prize while making war was seriously impaired by the prize committee, when it made awards to Mark II models engaged in secret warmongering.

  34. Bill Bodden
    October 16, 2016 at 19:12

    Meanwhile in North Dakota: “Filmmaker Faces 45 Years in Prison for Reporting on Dakota Access Protests: ‘They threw the book at Deia for being a journalist.'” By Nika Knight, staff writer – http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/10/15/filmmaker-faces-45-years-prison-reporting-dakota-access-protests

    • Realist
      October 17, 2016 at 02:13

      Wow, Barack Obama’s Amerika just keeps getting more and more oppressive. Not only does he go after whistleblowers, but also journalists simply recording the actions of protestors and the government agents who abuse those demonstrators. Following your links, I see that three prize-winning journalists are being prosecuted as tantamount to war criminals for simply observing and recording facts. Clearly Big Oil does own this country and the authorities are there to do its every bidding. I can see that the protestors knowingly put themselves at legal risk from their actions, but this heavy-handed suppression of the press is outrageously unconstitutional. Apparently, Obomber shares Dubya’s opinion that the constitution is just a piece of paper, something to be ignored when expedient for the 1%. Skip the issue of global warming and all that, this is an attack on human rights and free speech. And, Obama thinks we should all vote for Hillary to continue his grand term of office? Go to hell, Barack.

      • Bill Bodden
        October 17, 2016 at 19:00

        And, Obama thinks we should all vote for Hillary to continue his grand term of office? Go to hell, Barack.

        They are in league with the same ruling cabal.

  35. Compassion
    October 16, 2016 at 18:38

    Thank you Robert Parry for providing outstanding journalism, truth in media.

    The electorate has the right to be well informed, to know the truth and nothing but the whole truth. What should be “Daily Headline News” is instead flooded with propaganda, critical key important information is being withheld and the narrative twisted by corporate media.

    I am deeply troubled by massive corporate media propaganda, which is the most troubling about these elections. Deflections, scapegoats, withholding critical key important information regarding many grave issues. Hillary is a neoconservative who has no shame, who boast about “Regime Change,” and she is making unfounded claims about Russia. She is by far the most dangerous (extremely careless) candidate regarding foreign policies, security, global stability (peace) and trade deals.

    Hillary is also a neoliberalist, which means; “To Empower the Elites, the 1%,” she is so heavily invested (in debt) to crony capitalist. The 3T (TPP, TTIP and TISA) is the foundation of the NWO agenda that she and others such as Obama and the Bush family strongly support. The major problem with this is that other nations such as Russia and China are strongly apposed to such injudicious ideology, and they have already formed their own (BRICS). For starters, 3T basically gives crony capitalist protection, puts them above the law, and already signs of this happened i.e. “Big Banks Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Jail.” Such injudicious trades and services deals (3T) would also be harmful to the environment and life. — For example, you need massive amounts of fossil fuels to power the M.I.C.

    What wikileaks exposed is the fact that Hillary holds two positions (two-faced), she is in debt (sold out) to crony capitalist (elites), and is unlikely to respect democracy. I am deeply concerned that the environment, human rights, laws, international laws will be abused, this will cause further hardship and loss of life.

    Both Trump and Hillary are terrible candidates, they will not get my vote.

    I support Jill Stein. Respect for the environment and life.

  36. Bill Bodden
    October 16, 2016 at 18:07

    One of the great deceits regarding the US military is that Congress provides civilian oversight.

  37. Helge
    October 16, 2016 at 17:31

    I have come to the conclusion that most of the western media is obviously financially that hard pressed to be profitable that they can easily be opressed and manipulated to prodcue whatever those “financiers” want the media to write. It’s a total sell out of our democracies, the current election campaign= between Trump and Clinton is a perfect example, there is nothing genuine about it. We are sinking to a level which we attributed to the USSR in the 1960s and 70s.

  38. ltr
    October 16, 2016 at 16:15

    I am surely grateful to Theodore Postol for making his voice heard, no matter the lack of a response by the editors at the NY Times.

  39. October 16, 2016 at 16:04

    Bertolt Brecht’s lyrics just keep running through my brain:

    All the gang of those who rule us
    Hope our quarrels never stop
    Helping them to split and fool us
    So they can remain on top.
    [from “Solidarity Song”]

  40. evelync
    October 16, 2016 at 15:15

    I’d like regime change, all right.
    Regime change right here!
    – where’s Bernie!!!
    Bernie Sanders’ honesty – Noam Chomsky called him a “decent, honest, New Deal democrat – would be refreshing.
    I think these MSM writers are trying to frighten and distract the public during the election season?
    Trying to distract the public from failed policies of “regime change” in the Middle East where thousands of our’n and hundreds of thousands of their’n have been sacrificed because the Cheney’s of the world have been allowed to run amok in the State Dept and run our foreign policy?
    I think, hope, that maybe the Times has cried wolf once too often?
    Is this all they’ve got to offer in order to distract people from the difficulties in their daily lives – more war mongering?
    Is our economy too fragile to recover without giving the MIC cover to gin up more “preventive” wars?
    Bernie’s platform was for a trillion dollar infrastructure plan. That was part of a common sense policy package that addressed financial sustainability for working americans not to mention much needed repair of bridges and roads.
    Washington is filled with delusional people.
    I mean even our so called liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is overwhelmed by Washington bubble think.
    She finally withdrew her puzzling attack on Colin Kaepernick’s courageous leadership on the football field.
    Thank you Colin for doing something more important – horrors! – than taking SF to the superbowl – sorry sports guys – if football were a bit less violent I’d admit it can be an exciting game……
    My husband tells me Kaepernick’s back on the field playing today – I wondered why he wasn’t there last week. Am I a conspiracy theorist? Maybe….
    Climate change may be the biggest threat to the planet. Working people in this country are hurting thanks to the Stumpfs in our banking system driven to cheat people to achieve unsustainable profits by/for Wall Street.
    I think we have Trump as one of two people remaining to become “leader” of the “free” world because people have lost complete confidence in their political candidates to solve problems thanks to their endless costly wars and an economy that rips people off. Lost jobs and foreclosed homes.
    I can no longer stomach reading either the Times or the WAPO with their war propaganda. I think i quit not long after reading Judith Miller’s ridiculous aluminum tubes nonsense. Thanks Robert Parry for your sacrifice to try to keep them honest.
    I don’t have a problem reading Consortium News, The Intercept, the Financial Times or the Guardian. Democracy Now is really good.
    Geeeez
    Where’s the integrity? Bernie was one of the few successful politicians who came close to being elected to president who showed respect for the intelligence of voters.
    He was attacked during the Miami primary for daring to express feelings for the lives and well being of indigenous people in Central and South America.

    I respect that Consortium News is not a political blog and shies away from any hint that CN is shilling for any candidate.
    Sorry if I’m violating any unwritten rules by suggesting that Bernie is a rare politician who values the truth and respects average people. I’m just tired of all the lies, like I think most people are.

    • Bill Bodden
      October 16, 2016 at 18:54

      Sorry if I’m violating any unwritten rules by suggesting that Bernie is a rare politician who values the truth and respects average people

      Bernie Sanders’ virtue was in revealing there is a sentiment among a large segment of the American people for a change of course to a decent, humane and civilized society. Unfortunately, he abandoned the quest he started and placed the interests of the Democratic Party ahead of the nation. If he had joined the Green Party he might have helped create a democratic (not Democratic) version of the Tea Party in its ability to sway Congress to some degree away from its undemocratic habits. However, if he had become president the oligarchs of the Democratic and Republican Parties would have ganged up on him as they did to Jimmy Carter.

      • evelync
        October 16, 2016 at 20:58

        “Bernie Sanders’ virtue was in revealing there is a sentiment among a large segment of the American people for a change of course to a decent, humane and civilized society.”

        Yes indeed – I think he was as surprised as most of us that there is such a huuuuuuge hunger for this and a disgust for the status quo.

        “Unfortunately, he abandoned the quest he started and placed the interests of the Democratic Party ahead of the nation.”
        I’m less certain about this. I suspect that he felt he had bean defeated by the machine and sacrificed his campaign because he was made to believe that in addition to being done for in the primary that he would return to the Senate persona non gratis and lose the platform from wish to continue to push Clinton and build a progressive Democratic Party.
        I feel I’ll never know what went on. Or whether he could have accomplished more by fighting till the end like his supporters were desperately hoping he would – including moi at the time.
        But now I think he did the only possible thing he could do to continue to help push for reform.
        His brother said that Bernie was always an athlete and a verrrry competitive guy. I believe that and so I admire his sacrifice of personal ambition to be able to continue serving the people who he felt were being screwed big time by the establishment.

        “If he had joined the Green Party he might have helped create a democratic (not Democratic) version of the Tea Party in its ability to sway Congress to some degree away from its undemocratic habits.”
        Maybe – but also maybe a real long shot given your last comment:

        “However, if he had become president the oligarchs of the Democratic and Republican Parties would have ganged up on him as they did to Jimmy Carter.”
        Oh yeah…..they hang onto their power like barnacles cement themselves onto a whale. We got a taste of the ugly underbelly of this boil on the body politic by how the courageous Nina Turner was treated by the Clinton campaign at the convention.

        Bottom line, he did indeed create a space for the discontent in the country to express itself and to consolidate against the source of that discontent. And we had a chance to see thoughtful courageous articulate young people speak out who seem to have better leadership qualities than the hacks we have in office.

  41. Bart in Virginia
    October 16, 2016 at 15:14

    This just out at the NYT: “Sneaky ISIS using only the beige colored pickups so as to hide in the desert. Will camo uniforms be next?”

    • Gregory Herr
      October 17, 2016 at 22:01

      Yeah, as if satellite surveillance combined with other technologies can’t track shit.

  42. Sam
    October 16, 2016 at 15:08

    Aha!. Now we know how those Russians managed to sneak armored divisions and Buks into Ukraine without being photographed, even by antique Kodaks in a biplane: they smuggled them in backpacks and inflated them in secret! The US will have to spend trillions to catch up. Now we can have the Killary ziocons fight it out with Russia using inflatables at the funny farm, concluding with an exchange of fireworks and mutual declarations of victory.

    Or perhaps we can encircle them with massive inflatable armored divisions and missile bases to contain their imperial ambitions. This will work even better in the South China Sea with inflatable carrier task forces.

    • Kiza
      October 16, 2016 at 21:36

      During US and NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999, the Serbians used hundreds of decoys. Of more than 300 “military” targets reported destroyed officially by NATO, 90% were decoys. Such high effectiveness of decoys was possible because the Western alliance planes were never flying below 16,000 feet, to avoid MANPADs. Unfortunately, this tactics of NATO also had a second side-effect, which was high civilian casualties, including a column of Albanian refugees being identified as a military vehicle column (firstly blamed on Serbian MIGs, of course). It was hard to properly identify targets when flying at such high altitude.

      The Serbians produced all kinds of military equipment decoys, mostly from plywood and packing left-over timber: MiG29s, hellicopters, tanks, radar stations, missile batteries, pieces of artillery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQx33rpBffs. Yet, the most strange were black plastic roll sheets used to imitate roads and bridges. The US and NATO bombers were targeting roads and bridges to prevent military transportation of the defenders. Thus, they wasted literally tens of millions of tax-payers funds on semi-intelligent bombs of the time to hit plastic sheets spread over unimportant land and rivers.

      The only thing the Serbians could never understood is that US MIC could not care less if it was wasting funds on real targets or on decoys – profit is profit, destroying expensive pieces of enemy’s weaponry or plywood decoys, thank you very much.

    • John
      October 17, 2016 at 18:12

      And as everyone knows the only jetliner a balloon Buk missile launcher can shoot down is a balloon jetliner piloted by a balloon pilot. It is now obvious that we are fighting a balloon proxy war with Russia. In fact our entire administration is probably made up of nothing but balloon people. This proves definitively that Obama and Kerry and Biden are full of hot air.

  43. ltr
    October 16, 2016 at 14:54

    This ceaseless Cold War-style smashing at Russia is as frightening as unwarranted. How discouraging.

  44. Jill
    October 16, 2016 at 14:39

    “Indeed, one could argue that the United States has excelled at this practice of stealthily entering other countries, usually in violation of international law, to carry out lethal operations, such as drone assassinations and Special Forces’ strikes. However, rather than condemning U.S. officials for their sneakiness, the Times and other mainstream Western publications often extol the secrecy of these acts and sometimes even agree to delay publication of information about the covert attacks so as not to jeopardize the lives of American soldiers.”

    Hard to fault the NYT for not wanting to jeopardize the lives of American soldiers. The NYT is pro-U.S., and not uniformly pro-Russian, as Trump’s supporters, Libertarians, and many Right Wing media sources including this site seem to be nowadays. Neither stance is objective, of course.

    But it’s kind of amazing to me how the Right Wing has suddenly turned on a dime, from believing Putin to be a dangerous enemy of the U.S., to believing that he is always right on every issue. I guess this began as a way to put down Obama for being weak, by comparing him with the “strong”– that is, authoritarian– Putin. And then Trump’s love for Putin has certainly spread to his supporters.

    • backwardsevolution
      October 16, 2016 at 17:17

      Jill – “Hard to fault the NYT for not wanting to jeopardize the lives of American soldiers. The NYT is pro-U.S., and not uniformly pro-Russian, as Trump’s supporters…”

      Trump’s supporters are not pro-Russian; they’re pro-truth and tired of the endless lies. This article would have been fine had the author mentioned that the U.S. had indeed used the same tactics in the past, but then it wouldn’t have been front-page news, would it? You would have gotten to the end of the article and said, “So what? They’ve done it, we’ve done it. Gladys, cancel our subscription, this is crap.” No, this article was meant to scare, to attempt to win by leaving out information, telling half-truths, omitting critical information. We’ve all known people who have done that, left out critical parts of stories, sometimes to our own detriment, and it doesn’t feel very good. The truth eventually comes out, but in some cases not before there’s been critical damage done.

      The whole of U.S. history has been one great big lie! The biggest piece of propaganda ever undertaken. The exceptional country! Read up on Bernays and U.S. history, and then read Orwell’s “1984”. They were successful for a very long time in pulling the wool over uneducated eyes, but that isn’t working anymore. The lies are becoming evident, and people have lost trust.

      These people didn’t “suddenly turn on a dime”. It’s a slow process and a difficult one. It’s hard to take in that your country has been lying, omitting important information, orchestrating coups and murdering sovereign leaders all over the world. And then you also have to realize that it wasn’t done for you, for love of country, but for business interests.

      “Iran (1953); Guatemala(1954); Thailand (1957); Laos (1958-60); the Congo (1960); Turkey (1960, 1971 & 1980); Ecuador (1961 & 1963); South Vietnam (1963); Brazil (1964); the Dominican Republic (1963); Argentina (1963); Honduras (1963 & 2009); Iraq (1963 & 2003); Bolivia (1964, 1971 & 1980); Indonesia (1965); Ghana (1966); Greece (1967); Panama (1968 & 1989); Cambodia (1970); Chile (1973); Bangladesh (1975); Pakistan (1977); Grenada (1983); Mauritania (1984); Guinea (1984); Burkina Faso (1987); Paraguay (1989); Haiti (1991 & 2004); Russia (1993); Uganda (1996);and Libya (2011); plus Ukraine.”

      Add Syria to the list.

      Russia lost 20 million people during World War II; the U.S. came in at the end when Germany was on its last legs. Yet to hear the story told, you would think that the U.S. saved the day!

      Obama HAS been weak; there has been some serious damage inflicted on the world during his time in office (Afghanistan, Iraq, Ukraine, Syria, Libya). Time will tell whether he had much of a choice. Could be he tried, but couldn’t fight the military/warmongers, Hillary. We will see. He just stopped the momentum for U.S. airstrikes in Syria.

      http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/obama-stepped-back-from-brink-will-hillary/

      I don’t think Trump has a love for Putin, but a love for the truth. He knows what the U.S. is doing, trying to take out another sovereign leader, Putin is stopping them, and they’re pissed off about it, so they’re going to spread some lies, create some false flags, same old, same old.

      Open your eyes before it’s too late. Russia has had enough of the lies already. If the U.S. keeps surrounding them, keeps poking them, keeps telling lies, don’t be surprised when they react, like any caged animal would. If they do react, you’ve got 20 minutes.

      • backwardsevolution
        October 16, 2016 at 17:40

        And it’s “hard to fault the NYT”? They dripping in fault. They are aiding and abetting the warmongers in Washington, which is going to get more good American boys killed.

      • Cheryl
        October 17, 2016 at 08:34

        Don’t poke the Bear

      • Alexandr
        October 17, 2016 at 12:35

        WOW! Thanks a lot, man or girl! Whoever you are. For this – “Russia lost 20 million people during World War II; the U.S. came in at the end when Germany was on its last legs. Yet to hear the story told, you would think that the U.S. saved the day!” – it’s really really pleasurably to hear. As Russian (both of my grandpas fought in Great Patriotic War, a.k.a. WWII) I am very appreciated. You have said an absolute truth! Noone understand through what the Soviet people went. Americans didn’t feel that war, it was faaaar away, except Pearl Harbor, as well as some European countries which had capitulated rapidly, but then showed themselves so important. Exactly, when America saw what will happen if they don’t interfere. As always. Came to divide the pie! I have started to translate for You, guys, one of the recent series of Soloviev’s talkshow, where, one of our most respectful orientalists, Satanovskiy is answering on Aleppo’s theme, war crimes’ theme. But I am not sure, should I continue, because you actually already know everything what he is saying.

        • Luke
          October 18, 2016 at 15:11

          Most of educated Europeans know this, but of course it is never told in history classes. However those 20.000.000 dead Russians were not all killed by the fighting quality of the German army. Russians had very bad generals who found the loss of material worse than the loss of human life. Soldiers ran in front of their tanks with “Hurrahhhhhh” only to be killed en masse, by stepping on mines. General Zjukov told after the war to an American collegue “What a difference makes it if ones steps on a mine or is killed by a bullet?” Maybe the better generals were killed by Stalin himself in the purges just before the war?

      • Adolph Putler
        October 17, 2016 at 15:56

        “Trump’s supporters they’re pro-truth” youve been moved on like a b__ch.

        Ya he’s leading in the polls, he never said he was for invasion, it’s rigged, and he could shoot someone on fifth ave..

        Your post screams numb, isolated half wit,

        Here’s a reality check from the NYT:

        Donald Trump has virtually stopped trying to win this election by any conventional metric and is instead stacking logs of grievance on the funeral pyre with the great anticipation of setting it ablaze if current polls turn out to be predictive.

        There is something calamitous in the air that surrounds the campaign, a hostile fatalism that bespeaks a man convinced that the end is near and aiming his anger at all within reach.

        As his path to victory grows narrower, his desperation grows more pronounced.

        • backwardsevolution
          October 17, 2016 at 17:45

          Gee, thanks, Adolph. I agree, there is something calamitous in the air. This, just in:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

          If any of this is even remotely close to being true (which it sure looks like it is), then the DNC WAS AND IS CULPABLE, along with the bought-and-paid-for media, of some very dirty tricks: stirring up trouble at Trump rallies.

          Oh, yeah, Trump is just another conspiracy theorist, another whiner, crier, is he? Check out the video!

          If you want me, I’ll be out back stacking logs on Hillary’s funeral pyre.

          • backwardsevolution
            October 17, 2016 at 17:51

            Adolph – “Here’s a reality check from the NYT”. Thanks for the laughter! It really is the best medicine.

          • F. G. Sanford
            October 17, 2016 at 22:55

            Wow – this is some shocking stuff! But, you have to keep in mind, they managed to co-opt Loretta Lynch and Jim Comey over a National Security issue which included bribery, malfeasance, obstruction of justice, mishandling classified information, probably suborning perjury and a whole host of other felonies. It shouldn’t be too hard to squash accusations of election fraud. I mean, in for a penny, in for a pound.

        • Tru
          October 20, 2016 at 07:16

          It’s obvious the U. S. elections are rigged. George H. W. Bush was riding Reagan’s popularity to an easy win till they brought in Ross Perot to throw it to Billary (two for one) until it looked like Perot would win, so he quit (because haha the Republicans threatened to disrupt his daughter’s wedding). Then Bush started getting numbers again, so Perot jumped in again, and two-on-one piled onto Bush and they got Billary in the WH.

          They gave us the most boring candidate possible in 1996 (Bob Dole). In 2000, the Press slipped a bit and yelled against the results, they were so close, so they finally got Dems to sue, and it was back and forth.

          2004 Kerry was a Country Club Democrat, pwaah. Because HRC was the Anointed Queen for next in line for Dems.

          2008 was supposed to be a shoo-in for HRC for the Dems but they thought they might lose to Republicans but along comes the knight in shining brown skin. Both McCain in 2012 and Romney in 2012 were throwaway candidates meant to lose, and did their anemic campaigns. Romney was Obama-lite, Romney Care against Obamacare? Really?

          2016 Americans are fed up with leftist Republican party boss picks. “Shoo fly” didn’t work on Trump. They lost a lot of control of the Internet, the narrative. Talk show hosts put a crimp on the Billary story in the 1990s and jammed up the phones in Congress demanding impeachment, but it wasn’t enough.

          Ron Paul made PEACE NOT WAR respectable again. Trump is riding in on that open door. Leftists used to complain that America should not be the world’s policeman, but now that the regime supports leftists and radical Muslims looks like that changed.

      • Stephen Sivonda
        October 17, 2016 at 22:03

        Thank you so much for informing “Jill” of the realities of American Exceptionalism …..a myth. Our Corporatist Govt. screws both foreign countries and the usual domestic victims , our indigenous Indians , as witnessed by the stunning news coming out of North Dakota over another big oil pipeline on the Indian reservation. But I digress… your mention of the Russian casualties from WW2 was spot on. So when the 3rd. Reich was in it’s death throes and the rapidly advancing Russians swept across eastern Europe….it’s no small wonder that post war they kept those countries under their control , even if that control was oppressive. The USSR wanted a large buffer from any possible invaders….. Gorbachev should have gotten the NATO agreement in writing.

        • backwardsevolution
          October 18, 2016 at 01:49

          Stephen – yes, you can really understand why Russia wanted a buffer. They’ve been attacked so many times throughout history. You are right about Gorbachev; I’m sure he kicks himself for not getting it in writing. A handshake and a hope for trust are not enough. Good comments, Stephen.

    • Bill Bodden
      October 16, 2016 at 18:34

      The NYT is pro-U.S

      The Times certainly wasn’t pro-US when it help promote the war on Iraq that has been estimated to have an eventual total cost of as much as five TRILLION dollars. Trillions of dollars absolutely wasted while our national infrastructures are allowed to decay and tens of millions of children live in poverty. Then there are tens of thousands of young American men and women who have been killed and maimed physically and psychologically for life. Thanks in part to the “pro-US NYT” and its presstitutes. The price paid by the Iraqis and the other “dominoes” that have fallen or are in the process of disintegration is beyond any measure from a fiscal or humanitarian point of view.

      • dahoit
        October 17, 2016 at 12:44

        The NYTs is part of the ZNN,the zionist news network,definitely an enemy of America and Americans.
        It exists throughout the West.

      • Gregory Herr
        October 17, 2016 at 21:47

        “…beyond any measure from a fiscal or humanitarian point of view.”

        Absolutely way beyond…

        The pretzeled rationalizations and blatant ignorance peddling has reached depths of depravatity. How morally unhinged can it get? Sanctioned and blessed by the U.S., the Saudis openly murder mourners at a funeral in the capital city and it’s chalked up to “bad information”. Oh well, we thought they were all militants (posing a grave threat) down there.

        My God, how forsaken!

      • Gregory Herr
        October 17, 2016 at 21:52

        “…beyond any measure from a fiscal or humanitarian point of view.”

        Absolutely way beyond…

        The pretzeled rationalizations and blatant ignorance peddling has reached depths of depravity. How morally unhinged can it get? Sanctioned and blessed by the U.S., the Saudis openly murder mourners at a funeral in the capital city and it’s chalked up to “bad information”. Oh well, we thought they were all militants (posing a grave threat) down there.

        My God, how forsaken!

      • Doan Logan
        October 19, 2016 at 16:21

        The NYT is pro-Israel. Those dead US soldier-children in Iraq were fighting for Israel.

    • jdd
      October 17, 2016 at 10:52

      How is pushing this country toward a nuclear WWIII “pro-U.S.”?

    • Gregory Kruse
      October 17, 2016 at 11:30

      If you don’t already work for some propaganda mill, maybe you should apply for a job at the NYT. Does everything have to be one extreme or the other, with no regard for what might be somewhere in the middle?

    • Joe Tedesky
      October 17, 2016 at 14:18

      Jill although I regard your opinion as a valid one according to your political beliefs, I must say that when people who feel all patriotic start using our troops as an excuse for whatever, you lose me. George W. Bush always used the troops to get more money in order for our country to go commit more war crimes. I feel for our men and women in the armed services, for this country’s leaders have without a doubt abused these fine uniformed people for over to long a period of time. If these wars were truly being fought to win them then we would have been out of Afghanistan within six months, and we would have never invaded Iraq, Libya, and now Syria. Being patriotic doesn’t mean we have to lie about the truth, or deploy our military at every drop of the hat. If the NYT did what it was supposed to do, then we would being reading many different points of view, and possibly even hear the truth once in awhile.

    • Anna
      October 17, 2016 at 17:41

      “The NYT is pro-U.S”
      Not at all. The NYT’ loyalty belongs to a different country.

      • Doan Logan
        October 19, 2016 at 16:29

        Say it! The NYT is pro-Israel, above all.

  45. Jay
    October 16, 2016 at 14:34

    Or watch the movie Patton, he was given command of one of these fake tank units, this as punishment.

    I’ve come to think of the Times as being “edited” by wide-eyed 22 year olds, who think whatever their history or political science professors told them at Harvard must be true and the full extent of the story.

    And reporters like Kramer seem to be like the FoxNews “correspondents” who thought it their job to push the invasion of Iraq in the second half of 2002.

  46. ltr
    October 16, 2016 at 14:27

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/world/africa/obama-somalia-secret-war.html

    October 15, 2016

    Somali Strategy Reveals a New Face of U.S. Warfare
    By MARK MAZZETTI, JEFFREY GETTLEMAN, and ERIC SCHMITT

    The Obama administration has intensified a clandestine war against Islamist militants in the anarchic Horn of Africa nation over the past year.

    The campaign, partly designed to avoid repeating the debacle of the “Black Hawk Down” battle in 1993, is a model the United States employs across the Middle East and North Africa.

    • ltr
      October 16, 2016 at 16:17

      Explaining my post, the United States is covertly at war in an array of countries and these wars appear interminable.

    • Doan Logan
      October 19, 2016 at 16:01

      Israel is unhappy with Russia, therefore, the NYT is also unhappy with Russia.
      Israel is what it’s all about.

  47. Zachary Smith
    October 16, 2016 at 14:09

    That NYT author is a freaking idiot, but I’ve got to say his supervisor is even dumber. You’d suppose they’d try to hire people with a bit of history education at the NYT Do they even allow them access to the internet? Has this dingle never heard of the term “Quaker Cannon”?

    There is a wiki on military deception. In case the NYT folks haven’t learned to use The Google, I’m going to provide a link.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_deception

    Supposing the warmongering neocon propagandists at the NYT learn about their local library and decide to visit it, I can suggest a book titled “Deception in World War II”

    Good Lord, but what a bunch of maroons.

    • Adolph Putler
      October 17, 2016 at 15:55

      “wiki” scholar! Youre in the right place.

  48. Abe
    October 16, 2016 at 13:57

    The New York Times remains a key player in the latest Propaganda 3.0 campaign that undergirds Washington and NATO’s “hybrid war” against Russia, Syria and Iran.

    Joining fake “citizen investigative journalist” Eliot Higgins and neocon “regime change” think tanks like the Atlantic Council, Andrew E. Kramer and Michael R. Gordon of the Times are tugging away furiously in one great propaganda circle jerk.

    Following the bogus “open source” pretense of Higgins, the Atlantic Council and the Times persistently conflate “social media documents” with actual “intel”.
    https://twitter.com/gordonnyt/status/603870722214252544

    Higgins was co-author of Atlantic Council “reports” on Ukraine (May 2015) and Syria (April 2016), both predominantly based on Higgins’ repeatedly debunked Bellingcat “investigations”.

    Footnotes in the Atlantic Council reports cite NYT articles by Gordon and Kramer that ostensibly “confirm” the “findings” of Higgins.

    Returning the “favor”, Gordon, Kramer, and other “reporters” at the Times write articles to promote the “findings” of the “independent” Higgins and Bellingcat.

    Like some maniacal mantra, Higgins and Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council, and the Times constantly repeat the word “confirm”.

    Undismayed with Higgins’ flaccid “findings”, Gordon and Kramer frequently give the Bellingcat and Atlantic Council authors a generous reach around, unquestioningly enabling the infirm Higgins to keep it up.

    Today, fake news reports are published in increasingly convincing and sophisticated ways by fake “independent citizen journalists” like Bellingcat.

    But now it’s even more obscene.

    Thanks to Google, Propaganda 3.0 has metastasized.

    Google, an enthusiastic supporter of Higgins despite his track record of baseless claims about Syria and Russia, helped form the First Draft Coalition in June 2015 with Bellingcat as a founding member.

    In addition to the fake “independent investigators” at Bellingcat, the First Draft “partner network” includes the New York Times and Washington Post, the two principal neocon “regime change” propaganda media organs.

    In a triumph of Orwellian Newspeak, this Propaganda 3.0 coalition will “work together to tackle common issues, including ways to streamline the verification process”.

    Following the lead of Higgins and Bellingcat, the new Google Minitrue (a self-appointed Ministry of Truth) will unleash a pack of social media “journalists” prepared to say 2 + 2 = 5 when the situation warrants.

  49. Babeouf
    October 16, 2016 at 13:54

    The irrationality of this approach,towards Russia, is easily demonstrated. There is not much point in the NYT carrying endless propaganda for war with Russia since 99.9% of its readership won’t survive the first 30 minutes of such a conflict.

Comments are closed.