MSM, Still Living in Propaganda-ville

Exclusive: The stakes in U.S.-Russia relations could not be higher – possible nuclear conflagration and the end of civilization – but the U.S. mainstream media is still slouching around in “propaganda-ville,” says Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

As much as the U.S. mainstream media wants people to believe that it is the Guardian of Truth, it is actually lost in a wilderness of propaganda and falsehoods, a dangerous land of delusion that is putting the future of humankind at risk as tension escalate with nuclear-armed Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses a crowd on May 9, 2014, celebrating the 69th anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany and the 70th anniversary of the liberation of the Crimean port city of Sevastopol from the Nazis. (Russian government photo)

This media problem has grown over recent decades as lucrative careerism has replaced responsible professionalism. Pack journalism has always been a threat to quality reporting but now it has evolved into a self-sustaining media lifestyle in which the old motto, “there’s safety in numbers,” is borne out by the fact that being horrendously wrong, such as on Iraq’s WMD, leads to almost no accountability because so many important colleagues were wrong as well.

Similarly, there has been no accountability after many mainstream journalists and commentators falsely stated as flat-fact that “all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies” concurred that Russia did “meddle” in last November’s U.S. election.

For months, this claim has been the go-to put-down whenever anyone questions the groupthink of Russian venality perverting American democracy. Even the esteemed “Politifact” deemed the assertion “true.” But it was never true.

It was at best a needled distortion of a claim by President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper when he issued a statement last Oct. 7 alleging Russian meddling. Because Clapper was the chief of the U.S. Intelligence Community, his opinion morphed into a claim that it represented the consensus of all 17 intelligence agencies, a dishonest twist that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton began touting.

However, for people who understand how the U.S. Intelligence Community works, the claim of a 17-agencies consensus has a specific meaning, some form of a National Intelligence Estimate (or NIE) that seeks out judgments and dissents from the various agencies.

But there was no NIE regarding alleged Russian meddling and there apparently wasn’t even a formal assessment from a subset of the agencies at the time of Clapper’s statement. President Obama did not order a publishable assessment until December – after the election – and it was not completed until Jan. 6, when a report from Clapper’s office presented the opinions of analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency – three agencies (or four if you count the DNI’s office), not 17.

Lacking Hard Evidence

The report also contained no hard evidence of a Russian “hack” and amounted to a one-sided circumstantial case at best. However, by then, the U.S. mainstream media had embraced the “all-17-intelligence-agencies” refrain and anyone who disagreed, including President Trump, was treated as delusional. The argument went: “How can anyone question what all 17 intelligence agencies have confirmed as true?”

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (right) talks with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office, with John Brennan and other national security aides present. (Photo credit: Office of Director of National Intelligence)

It wasn’t until May 8 when then-former DNI Clapper belatedly set the record straight in sworn congressional testimony in which he explained that there were only three “contributing agencies” from which analysts were “hand-picked.”

The reference to “hand-picked” analysts pricked the ears of some former U.S. intelligence analysts who had suffered through earlier periods of “politicized” intelligence when malleable analysts were chosen to deliver what their political bosses wanted to hear.

On May 23, also in congressional testimony, former CIA Director John Brennan confirmed Clapper’s description, saying only four of the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies took part in the assessment.

Brennan said the Jan. 6 report “followed the general model of how you want to do something like this with some notable exceptions. It only involved the FBI, NSA and CIA as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. It wasn’t a full inter-agency community assessment that was coordinated among the 17 agencies.”

After this testimony, some of the major news organizations, which had been waving around the “17-intelligence-agencies” meme, subtly changed their phrasing to either depict Russian “meddling” as an established fact no longer requiring attribution or referred to the “unanimous judgment” of the Intelligence Community without citing a specific number.

This “unanimous judgment” formulation was deceptive, too, because it suggested that all 17 agencies were in accord albeit without exactly saying that. For a regular reader of The New York Times or a frequent viewer of CNN, the distinction would almost assuredly not be detected.

For more than a month after the Clapper-Brennan testimonies, there was no formal correction.

A Belated Correction

Finally, on June 25, the Times’ hand was forced when White House correspondent Maggie Haberman reverted to the old formulation, mocking Trump for “still refus[ing] to acknowledge a basic fact agreed upon by 17 American intelligence agencies that he now oversees: Russia orchestrated the attacks, and did it to help get him elected.”

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

When this falsehood was called to the Times’ attention, it had little choice but to append a correction to the article, noting that the intelligence “assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.”

The Associated Press ran a similar “clarification” applied to some of its fallacious reporting repeating the “17-intelligence-agencies” meme.

So, you might have thought that the mainstream media was finally adjusting its reporting to conform to reality. But that would mean that one of the pillars of the Russia-gate “scandal” had crumbled, the certainty that Russia and Vladimir Putin did “meddle” in the election.

The story would have to go back to square one and the major news organizations would have to begin reporting on whether or not there ever was solid evidence to support what had become a “certainty” – and there appeared to be no stomach for such soul-searching. Since pretty much all the important media figures had made the same error, it would be much easier to simply move on as if nothing had changed.

That would mean that skepticism would still be unwelcome and curious leads would not be followed. For instance, there was a head-turning reference in an otherwise typical Washington Post take-out on June 25 accusing Russia of committing “the crime of the century.”

A reference, stuck deep inside the five-page opus, said, “Some of the most critical technical intelligence on Russia came from another country, officials said. Because of the source of the material, the NSA was reluctant to view it with high confidence.”

Though the Post did not identify the country, this reference suggests that more than one key element of the case for Russian culpability was based not on direct investigations by the U.S. intelligence agencies, but on the work of external organizations.

Earlier, the Democratic National Committee denied the FBI access to its supposedly hacked computers, forcing the investigators to rely on a DNC contractor called CrowdStrike, which has a checkered record of getting this sort of analytics right and whose chief technology officer, Dmitri Alperovitch, is an anti-Putin Russian émigré with ties to the anti-Russian think tank, Atlantic Council.

Relying on Outsiders

You might be wondering why something as important as this “crime of the century,” which has pushed the world closer to nuclear annihilation, is dependent on dubious entities outside the U.S. government with possible conflicts of interest.

President Donald Trump being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017. (Screen shot from

If the U.S. government really took this issue seriously, which it should, why didn’t the FBI seize the DNC’s computers and insist that impartial government experts lead the investigation? And why – given the extraordinary expertise of the NSA in computer hacking – is “some of the most critical technical intelligence on Russia [coming] from another country,” one that doesn’t inspire the NSA’s confidence?

But such pesky questions are not likely to be asked or answered by a mainstream U.S. media that displays deep-seated bias toward both Putin and Trump.

Mostly, major news outlets continue to brush aside the clarifications and return to various formulations that continue to embrace the “17-intelligence-agencies” canard, albeit in slightly different forms, such as references to the collective Intelligence Community without the specific number. Anyone who questions this established conventional wisdom is still crazy and out of step.

For instance, James Holmes of Esquire was stunned on Thursday when Trump at a news conference in Poland reminded the traveling press corps about the inaccurate reporting regarding the 17 intelligence agencies and said he still wasn’t entirely sure about Russia’s guilt.

“In public, he’s still casting doubt on the intelligence community’s finding that Russia interfered in the 2016 election nearly nine months after the fact,” Holmes sputtered before describing Trump’s comment as a “rant.”

So, if you thought that a chastened mainstream media might stop in the wake of the “17-intelligence-agencies” falsehood and rethink the whole Russia-gate business, you would have been sadly mistaken.

But the problem is not just the question of whether Russia hacked into Democratic emails and slipped them to WikiLeaks for publication (something that both Russia and WikiLeaks deny). Perhaps the larger danger is how the major U.S. news outlets have adopted a consistently propagandistic approach toward everything relating to Russia.

Hating Putin

This pattern traces back to the earliest days of Vladimir Putin’s presidency in 2000 when he began to rein in the U.S.-prescribed “shock therapy,” which had sold off Russia’s assets to well-connected insiders, making billions of dollars for the West-favored “oligarchs,” even as the process threw millions of average Russian into poverty.

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders.

But the U.S. mainstream media’s contempt for Putin reached new heights after he helped President Obama head off neoconservative (and liberal interventionist) demands for a full-scale U.S. military assault on Syria in August 2013 and helped bring Iran into a restrictive nuclear agreement when the neocons wanted to bomb-bomb-bomb Iran.

The neocons delivered their payback to Putin in early 2014 by supporting a violent coup in Ukraine, overthrowing elected President Viktor Yanukovych and installing a fiercely anti-Russian regime. The U.S. operation was spearheaded by neocon National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman and neocon Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, with enthusiastic support from neocon Sen. John McCain.

Nuland was heard in an intercepted pre-coup phone call with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt discussing who should become the new leaders and pondering how to “glue” or “midwife this thing.”

Despite the clear evidence of U.S. interference in Ukrainian politics, the U.S. government and the mainstream media embraced the coup and accused Putin of “aggression” when ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, called the Donbas, resisted the coup regime.

When ethnic Russians and other citizens in Crimea voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to reject the coup regime and rejoin Russia – a move protected by some of the 20,000 Russian troops inside Crimea as part of a basing agreement – that became a Russian “invasion.” But it was the most peculiar “invasion,” since there were no images of tanks crashing across borders or amphibious landing craft on Crimean beaches, because no such “invasion” had occurred.

However, in virtually every instance, the U.S. mainstream media insisted on the most extreme anti-Russian propaganda line and accused people who questioned this Official Narrative of disseminating Russian “propaganda” – or being a “Moscow stooge” or acting as a “useful fool.” There was no tolerance for skepticism about whatever the State Department or the Washington think tanks were saying.

Trump Meets Putin

So, as Trump prepares for his first meeting with Putin at the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, the U.S. mainstream media has been in a frenzy, linking up its groupthinks about the Ukraine “invasion” with its groupthinks about Russia “hacking” the election.

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. (Photo credit: Aude)

In a July 3 editorial, The Washington Post declared, “Mr. Trump simply cannot fail to admonish Mr. Putin for Russia’s attempts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election. He must make clear the United States will not tolerate it, period. Naturally, this is a difficult issue for Mr. Trump, who reaped the benefit of Russia’s intervention and now faces a special counsel’s investigation, but nonetheless, in his first session with Mr. Putin, the president must not hesitate to be blunt. …

“On Ukraine, Mr. Trump must also display determination. Russia fomented an armed uprising and seized Crimea in violation of international norms, and it continues to instigate violence in the Donbas. Mr. Trump ought to make it unmistakably clear to Mr.Putin that the United States will not retreat from the sanctions imposed over Ukraine until the conditions of peace agreements are met.”

Along the same lines, even while suggesting the value of some collaboration with Russia toward ending the war in Syria, Post columnist David Ignatius wrote in a July 5 column, “Russian-American cooperation on Syria faces a huge obstacle right now. It would legitimize a Russian regime that invaded Ukraine and meddled in U.S. and European elections, in addition to its intervention in Syria.”

Note the smug certainty of Ignatius and the Post editors. There is no doubt that Russia “invaded” Ukraine; “seized” Crimea; “meddled” in U.S. and European elections. Yet all these groupthinks should be subjected to skepticism, not simply treated as undeniable truths.

But seeing only one side to a story is where the U.S. mainstream media is at this point in history. Yes, it is possible that Russia was responsible for the Democratic hacks and did funnel the material to WikiLeaks, but evidence has so far been lacking. And, instead of presenting both sides fairly, the major media acts as if only one side deserves any respect and dissenting views must be ridiculed and condemned.

In this perverted process, collectively approved versions of complex situations congeal into conventional wisdom, which simply cannot be significantly reconsidered regardless of future revelations.

As offensive as this rejection of true truth-seeking may be, it also represents an extraordinary danger when mixed with the existential risk of nuclear conflagration.

With the stakes this high, the demand for hard evidence – and the avoidance of soft-minded groupthink – should go without question. Journalists and commentators should hold themselves to professional precision, not slide into sloppy careerism, lost in “propaganda-ville.”

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

186 comments for “MSM, Still Living in Propaganda-ville

  1. July 15, 2017 at 09:01

    Well, you’ve had to unpack alot of info since this worthless “article” was written. Pretty sure YOU are the propoganda machine, douche bags.

  2. Santo igorski
    July 15, 2017 at 08:32

    Fake crap. You are the fake stream media.

  3. Amy
    July 14, 2017 at 15:32

    It is all very sad when you find out how delusional this country and the world is, but then all the Kings Men wouldn’t be very relevant. Or the poem Humpty Dumpty. We are here, in a time when both parties are broken and not to be fixed. I have seen the American Legislative Exchange Council, you can Wikipedia that, then PRWatch…, for a time. It is even in the churches, which has it’s own propaganda to put forth.

    Time for real thinking about Buddhist Economy, E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful, because there is no sense in the GDP that they all speak of, the employment rates that are not real. I can go on and on and don’t even get me going on the Go Green, or Identity theft they spin. All about power and control, that when noticed is really falling apart, but that will be in my book.

  4. Mickey
    July 13, 2017 at 23:12

    When I see the term msm I think of truth and the person who railed against it as a fox faux liar.

  5. July 11, 2017 at 09:01

    The January 6 report published by the DNI clearly states that it is the work of the CIA, the FBI and the NSA – thus all the journalists asserting its “assessment” was the work of all seventeen intelligence agencies were either lying or they had never read the document. The notion that the corporate media employs journalists is a (sick) joke. The corporate media employs propagandists.

  6. July 10, 2017 at 18:40

    As long as there are propaganda creators like ignatious paid for by who knows what–there will be media whores—-ANYTHING for money and or imagined position—thank you with heart–Mr. Robert Parry–for helping everyday people to see the light.

  7. Dana
    July 10, 2017 at 15:36

    Mr. Parry has done an excellent job providing evidence that we live in “Propagandaville” To understand HOW we got here, please read this important historical context about the repeal of the propaganda ban, the Smith-Mundt Act and its negative effects. Keep in mind that Jeff Bezos of the Washington Post/Amazon received $600 million from the CIA. Why?

  8. Bill Cash
    July 10, 2017 at 13:51

    You don’t go to Alex Jones for truth. You go there for conspiracies. Robert, you do yourself no favors appearing on shows like his.

    July 10, 2017 at 12:47

    What is wrong even if Putin fully supported Trump in elections and even before elections said between the two my choice is certainly Trump. US imperialist coteries who meddled in the elections of almost every country and even toppled many regimes and assassinated its heads of state, blatantly invaded and conducted genocidal atrocities have the temerity to accuse Russia of hacking the computers of one particular party to help another particular party and project it as an unpardonable and gigantic crime! Have they not openly gloated that it was due to their intervention that Yelstin got elected in Russia and communists were defeated? Shameless fellows.

  10. David
    July 10, 2017 at 10:22

    Thank you for this very interesting, timely and thought-provoking piece. The “group-think” you describe plays out on the Sunday morning talkers, where hand-picked journalists gather round a table and expound on the nuances of the story, but seldom are opposing views aired.

  11. Juan del Sur
    July 10, 2017 at 08:55

    I think the problem with the MSM is the same problem found with all western governments, all big businesses, and all banks – the hidden rulers don’t want peace – they want war, and their every effort is designed to prevent peace from happening anywhere on earth. These quotes are not mine – they are quotes from the hidden ruler’s own mouths.

    “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government, I just care that we get to keep running them.” Jewish columnist Joel Stein, Los Angeles Times, December 2008.

    “The Jewish Question is being discussed by statesmen in a way more acute and compelling than ever before in the history of the world. They can do whatever they want, but the nations of the earth well never be able to get away from this question. The Jewish serpent will show its hydra’s heads everywhere, blocking the way to a relaxation of international tensions. We Jews will not allow peace in the world, however hard statesmen and peace advocates try to bring it about.” — Georg Bernhard, Jewish Chronicle, 3 March 1939

    “The JEWISH SERPENT will show its hydra’s heads everywhere, blocking the way to a relaxation of international tensions. WE WILL NOT ALLOW PEACE IN THE WORLD, however hard statesmen and peace advocates try to bring it about.” — London Jewish Chronicle, March 3, 1939

    “You have not begun to appreciate the real depth of our guilt. We ARE intruders. We ARE disturbers. We ARE subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the bottom not merely of your last great war but of nearly all your wars; not only of the Russian but of every other revolution in your history. We have brought discord and confusion, and frustration into your public life. We are still doing it. Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours had we left you alone?” — Marcus Eli Ravage, Jew, The Century Magazine, January, 1928, Page 347.

    We live in dangerous times as long as these people control our lives.

    July 10, 2017 at 08:30

    you can write all you want the msms can and do have the ear of the insouciant fact nearly 60% of republicans still insist sadam hussein /iraq had wmd s . and not mentioned here was a cnn firday night massacre PUTIN and russiagate. they ran a one hr diatribe by fareed zakaria on putin .zakaria demonized him as the wealthiest oligarch in ht world worth 200b ,[[not provable]] then a dramatized [[with music and videos]] hour on exactly what mr parry wrote. they made it sound as though all 17 agencies had solid proof and no questions asked. and to make matters even worse if thats possible., trumps own adm is divided on what the did or did not say to putin over hacking. priebus on fox sunday said he pressed putin not once but 3 times and does not believe putin denial. then munchin and one other cab,member said he did believe putin s denial. it seems ridiculous that a nation that claims to be superior on technology with 17 agencies that is there bus . was unable to stop even notice that some entity was spying on the electoral system.might want to check the mossads computers if you dare !!!!! good luck!!!!!

      July 10, 2017 at 08:35

      i forgot to say as if election hacking means anything to those of us who haven t voted in 25yrs. and prey tell what did they do to change anything and how.the ignorant msms are just admitting that the voting machines are hackable.and don t even start with the paper ballots .those of us from chicago know how that problem is solved we have lake michigan!!!!!!!

  13. Tim
    July 10, 2017 at 07:34

    Lewis Carroll would have been proud of the story being disseminated by the likes of Mr Ignatius.
    But perhaps we should ask ourselves; even assuming that Russia did hack the DNC, was that such a bad thing?
    Are we not better off knowing the truth about that seedy and perverse organization, and its paedophile protagonists, than not?

  14. Laura Kiner
    July 9, 2017 at 16:42

    It is not just the journalists and commentators, it is the owners and producers of the news that push government (or new world order) propaganda. Haven’t you noticed how the various news shows use the exact same lines for the same story. It is a script written for the purpose of disinformation to the public. It is no longer journalism at all, with few exceptions.

  15. James Swint
    July 9, 2017 at 14:41

    Good article but fake news by MSM is not new. It started with the Nayirah caper to get public support the first Iraq war. Then Clinton used the phony Racak massacre that wasn’t a massacre to get support for the Kosovo war and then finally Saddam’s non existent WMDs. Of the three, the Racak massacre was the most blatant lie and Reuters and CNN were never held responsible. Bill Clinton is a war criminal for that one and it is where the Deep state learned what it could get away with.

    But with the others, those who reported the lies were never held accountable.

      July 10, 2017 at 08:44

      just a short reply to your start time .the problem is the entire public has no historical education and thinks everything happening now is new!!! how ignorant!!! better look back in history and what the msms of the time [[mostly news papers and magazines]] did to lincoln teddy roosevelt fdr truman jfk etc all demonized by msm s .col mc cormick owner of the chicago tribune and his wall street pals tried to hire gen smedley butler to militarily run a coup to forcefully take over the nation in 1933-4-5 and 3 attempts on fdr life ,one where mayor cermac of chicago lost his life taking the bullet for fdr. the american public is the most ignorant morons on the planet!!

  16. David Walters
    July 9, 2017 at 09:39

    Solutiion? Well, do as I have done and stop reading anything the MSM prints. It’s rubbish anyway.

  17. Geezer Butler
    July 8, 2017 at 13:12

    Article of the year!

  18. RickrInSF
    July 8, 2017 at 10:07

    “As much as the U.S. mainstream media wants people to believe that it is the Guardian of Truth”
    It does not want to believe this, it wants YOU to believe this.

  19. Abe
    July 7, 2017 at 21:09

    “in virtually every instance, the U.S. mainstream media insisted on the most extreme anti-Russian propaganda line and accused people who questioned this Official Narrative of disseminating Russian ‘propaganda’ – or being a ‘Moscow stooge’ or acting as a ‘useful fool.’ There was no tolerance for skepticism about whatever the State Department or the Washington think tanks were saying.” – Robert Parry

    Major think tanks are hugely invested in fabricating propaganda “narratives”, funding “storytelling” by fake “independent journalists”, and channeling fake news and disinformation via the MSM and new online media.

    On the occasion of Trump’s first visit to Poland en route to the G20 Summit in Hamburg, the Atlantic Council hosted a “Global Forum” in Warsaw.

    The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Lab hosted a two-day media event called “360/OS” in Warsaw.

    A “propaganda-ville” circle jerk, Atlantic Council echo chamber featured Eliot Higgins and his Bellingcat team of “open source” and “digital forensics” scam artists, all congratulating one another on their brilliance in foiling alleged “Russian disinformation”.

    Facebook posts, photos, video, and adulatory Tweets spewed non-stop

  20. Michael K Rohde
    July 7, 2017 at 20:41

    It is often reported that there are only 6 major news outlets now, minus Fox. I’m sure there are readers who know these 6 companies names by heart. It occurs to me that of these 6 outlets, there is no doubt a small number of people within each company that manages or controls what actually gets out there, either printed, audio or in video. In fact that number could be only 1 within a given company depending on management.

    With such a small data base, why do we not know the names of these people who command such power over what we hear, see, and read? Is it that hard to discover who these influence peddlers are? I’m guessing it is not as I believe they are all publicly traded and certainly written about often enough that the movers and shakers names would be in the public domain. Why aren’t they known and challenged? Is it that dark of a corporate secret? Anybody out there interested in the identity of these folks that control the information that we consume and that influences how we act and live and vote? Where are the Communication majors out there that study this stuff? The professors that teach it? Does no one know or care who they are? I’d like to know just because I’m curious. Anybody?

    • Gregory Herr
      July 7, 2017 at 23:26

      “Media corporations share members of the board of directors with a variety of other large corporations, including banks, investment companies, oil companies, health care and pharmaceutical companies and technology companies.”

    • Cal
      July 8, 2017 at 03:45

      ”…..why do we not know the names of these people who command such power over what we hear, see, and read? Is it that hard to discover who these influence peddlers are?”

      No one generally looks into the “individuals” who have the say so over media content. IOW who the media employees don’t want to piss off by saying the wrong thing and get fired

      Here you go…the big five. whew! this was a lot of work.

      # Comcast- Family owned. CEO Brian Roberts. Roberts was born into a Jewish family in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the son of Ralph J. Roberts, the founder of Comcast Corporation, and Suzanne Fleisher, a former actress and playwright


      Universal Pictures
      Focus Features
      USA Network
      The Weather Channel
      Golf Channel
      Esquire Network
      Universal HD
      Comcast SportsNet
      Universal Parks & Resorts
      Universal Studio Home Video

      # The Walt Disney Company– CEO Bob Iger. Iger was born to a Jewish family in New York City. Iger co-chaired a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign on August 22, 2016


      ABC Television Network
      The Disney Channel
      Marvel Entertainment
      Walt Disney Pictures
      Pixar Animation Studios
      Disney Mobile
      Disney Consumer Products
      Interactive Media
      Disney Theme Parks
      Disney Records
      Hollywood Records
      Miramax Films
      Touchstone Pictures

      #News Corporation – Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch was born on 11 March 1931 in Melbourne


      Fox Broadcasting Company
      Fox News Channel
      Fox Business Network
      Fox Sports 1
      Fox Sports 2
      National Geographic
      Nat Geo Wild
      FX Movie Channel
      Fox Sports Networks
      The Wall Street Journal
      The New York Post
      20th Century Fox
      Fox Searchlight Pictures
      Blue Sky Studios

      # Time Warner – Owner Steven Jay Rechnitz deceased. Current President Jeffrey Lawrence “Jeff” Bewkes. Bewkes was born in Paterson, New Jersey,


      The CW
      Cartoon Network
      NBA TV
      Turner Classic Movies
      Warner Bros.
      Castle Rock
      DC Comics
      Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment
      New Line Cinema
      Sports Illustrated
      Marie Claire
      People Magazine

      #Viacom- Same as CBS Owner – Sumner Murray Redstone. Formerly Sumner Murray Rothstein born in Boston, Massachusetts,


      Comedy Central
      Paramount Pictures
      Paramount Home Entertainment
      Country Music Television (CMT)
      Spike TV
      The Movie Channel
      TV Land
      CBS Corporation- Same as Viacom
      CBS Television Network
      The CW (along with Time Warner)
      CBS Sports Network
      CBS Radio, Inc.
      CBS Television Studios
      Simon & Schuster
      Infinity Broadcasting
      Westwood One Radio Network

      • Tim
        July 10, 2017 at 07:41

        I think we could safely add “Born into a jewish family” to most of these biographies.
        Brother Nathanael Kapner ( also “born into a jewish family” ) will enlighten you even further as to the ownership of the US public mind, via these media outfits.

  21. Bill
    July 7, 2017 at 17:26

    The MSM is on-message with what they’ve been told by the likes of Hillary Clinton, Obama, Biden, Brennan, and Comey. That whole cast of characters knows full well that they’ve been serving up a big load of lies. The “report” they released to the media is just pure garbage, it’s an amateur job at best. The keeper of secrets, Brennan, is still on TV all the time pushing his agenda. You press him for answers and he goes into “I can’t tell you that” mode. It’s a sad day for the Democrats.

  22. Tom
    July 7, 2017 at 16:48

    Key point in this. Corporate media only cares about money and power. This means they’re put on ANYTHING. Actual facts? That’s boring hard rolling news. Nobody cares about that anymore. Infotainment is all that matters.

  23. AnthraxSleuth
    July 7, 2017 at 16:20

    We’ve known since the Church hearings that MSM is nothing more than CIA propaganda. And, we’ve known since the days the CIA was called OSS which at the time was jokingly referred to as “Oh So Social” b/c it was nothing more than a bunch rich families. Thos rich families have evolved into oligarchs today.
    The real question is do these oligarchs really believe they can survive a nuclear exchange?

  24. Sr. Gibbonk
    July 7, 2017 at 16:00

    Several days ago a New York Times article about Trump’s pending meeting with Putin appeared in The Sacramento Bee. Here is an excerpt:
    “Aides expect Trump to focus on matters involving Syria, including creating safe zones, fighting the Islamic State and confronting Putin’s unwillingness to stop the government of President Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons.”

    Of course the NYT will not publish or even mention any articles skeptical of the chemical weapons claim. Just ask Seymour Hersh. It is clear that Vladimir Putin is not a rash man nor is he a fool. In spite of the provocations of the U.S. and its European vassals he has acted cautiously and deliberately. Would Assad act unilaterally and deploy sarin gas on the insurgents and, collaterally, on the civilian population and risk alienating their most important ally, especially when the Syrian state was winning the conflict? Hardly. So the conclusion, hand delivered to the MSM by the so called Deep State, is that Putin did indeed give Assad permission to gas his own people thereby revealing to the world yet again their deeply vicious criminal natures .
    Hmm, seems they overlooked another possibility, that being that Syria targeted a meeting of insurgents, using conventional bombs, that was taking place in a building that housed fertilizers, chlorine and other chemicals which were then dispersed by the wind thus killing nearby civilians. But no, Putin is a rash fool with no strategic sense that clearly wants to antagonize the West just for the ducks of it by giving the Syrian government permission to commit war crimes. Still the MSM is intent on portraying Putin as Tony Soprano and Assad as Christopher Moltisanti. Come on! Do you think Tony would let Christopher assault the New York mob and risk reprisals just to screw with them? Clearly the MSM is the propaganda arm of The Empire. Rest in peace democracy.

    • Cal
      July 8, 2017 at 01:25

      @ Sr. Gibbonk

      GREAT comment!

  25. Bart in Virginia
    July 7, 2017 at 15:46

    Concerning Robert’s comments on the Ignatius article, you ought to read today’s (Friday) Kristoff column in the NYT, especially the very first paragraph. One claim after another that are either wrong, dubious or unproven. Plus there is the complete lack of any feeling that we do in spades what he claims the Russians do. He did manage to leave out “annexed Crimea”, probably because his post-it note reminder had slipped off his computer screen.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 18:21

      Bart – “…probably because his post-it note reminder had slipped off his computer screen.” That’s funny, Bart!

  26. July 7, 2017 at 15:41

    However, a sticky point according to Tillerson: “No long term role for Assad, his family, in Syria” and what does that mean? Sounds like an open door for further problems. (This on Zero Hedge.)

  27. July 7, 2017 at 15:27

    What, is that for real, a ceasefire in southwestern Syria? What will Israel and the neocons pull off now? And what is Nikki Haley’s next rant? (I wonder if she is under some mind control?)

    And, yes, SteveK9, the server could be wiped clean (“you mean, with a cloth or something?”– Hillary Clinton) but that itself should be grounds for suspicion, except to the Democrazies.

  28. SteveK9
    July 7, 2017 at 14:39

    Minutes ago: Presidents Trump and Putin agree to ceasefire in Southwestern Syria at the G-20 meeting (they met for more than 2 1/2 hours and it seems it was Putin, Trump, Lavrov, and Tillerson, no neocon morons), to be monitored by Russia, US and Jordan. We could have had this sort of progress, and probably more, six months ago, if not for the despicable Russia-gate idiocy.

    • Skip Scott
      July 7, 2017 at 15:44

      It will be interesting to see if there is a repeat of Deir-Ezzor. Obama ordered the pentagon to share intelligence with the Russians, so the pentagon sabotaged the whole arrangement by killing Syrian troops last September. No one was held accountable. We’ll see if Trump has any better luck bringing the pentagon to heel.

    • Lisa
      July 7, 2017 at 17:21

      It seems the ceasefire agreement was reached before the meeting and only announced after it. I think I saw this announcement already when the presidential meeting was still ongoing. They couldn’t have discussed the question at the meeting only, such things must be carefully prepared with exact wording long before the publication.
      Slight unimportant correction: the meeting lasted 2 hours 16 minutes.

      We’ll see if Trump accepted Putin’s word of honour of Russia’s non-meddling in the election. If he did, the cries about puppet, lap-dog etc. will be heard again.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 18:20

      SteveK9 – if true, that just made my day, week, month and year!

    • Cal
      July 8, 2017 at 01:21

      Ah….none of the usual neos and zios involved. Good! We have had enough special interest interference in US policy.

      Remines me of when Nixon and Kissinger tried for detente with Russia in the 70s’. If they hadnt been side swiped by the Zios and their employees in congress the USA and the world would likely be very different now.

      The Forward article:
      ”This 1973 conversation (between Nixon and Kissinger where Kissinger calls Jews traitorous) is in response to a popular Jewish groundswell of support for the Jackson-Vanik amendment, legislation that offered assistance to Soviet Jews and at that moment posed a threat to Kissinger’s entire foreign policy strategy, detente. He was frustrated and angry that Jews were the ones sabotaging, as he saw it, his delicate attempt at stabilizing the world through weaving “an intersecting web of interests” between the two Cold War enemies.
      The bill quickly gained support among the grassroots activists of the Soviet Jewry movement, and eventually in the so-called Jewish establishment. By the time of that March 1973 meeting between Nixon and Kissinger, it had a majority of Congress behind it. In fact, Kissinger’s comments followed a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir in which both Kissinger and Nixon pleaded with her to tell the American Jewish community to back off the bill. “You must understand my situation,” Meir told the two men. “I cannot tell Jews in the United States not to concern themselves with their brethren in the Soviet Union!”

      What Kissinger did not know on March 1, 1973, was that almost three weeks later, on March 20, in Moscow, Leonid Brezhnev would conduct a meeting in the Politburo that showed the palpable effect that Jackson-Vanik was having on the Soviet leadership. Brezhnev told the Politburo, “At this particular time, when the Zionists have incited a campaign around the Jackson amendment and around granting us [Most Favored Nation] status, we need to let them out.”
      Brezhnev demanded that there be more thought given to how to appease the “Zionists.” He chided his comrades that they were going to lose the benefits of detente. “Zionism,” he said, “is making us stupid.”

      While Kissinger was trying to eliminate the pressure that the Soviet Jewry movement and the Jackson-Vanik amendment were applying, Brezhnev was clearly being affected by it. The day after the Politburo meeting, the Soviets canceled the diploma tax and invited cameramen to film Soviet Jews getting their exit visas without being forced to pay the tax.
      This did not stop Jackson and Perle, who persisted with their amendment until it passed at the end of 1974. By that time, the Watergate scandal had brought an end to the Nixon administration, but Kissinger was still secretary of state under President Ford.

      Kissinger opposed the amendment until the end.

      When it finally passed, and the Soviets, with a great pique, rejected the entire trade bill, Kissinger wrote, in a letter to a Jewish leader, “When the Soviet Union looked at the totality of what it had to gain from the trading relationship we were able to offer, as against what it considered intrusions in its domestic affairs, it drew the balance sheet of which we have the results today.”

  29. backwardsevolution
    July 7, 2017 at 14:18

    Jessica K – yes, what is on that server? My guess is it would show Russia was not involved, but that an insider was, which would open up a whole can of worms. For once Lindsay Graham is making sense. Since when did it become correct procedure to go around accusing someone (Russia) without presenting the evidence? So far all we have is Crowdstrike and Christopher Steele’s word. That’s it. These are NOT credible witnesses.

  30. Gregory Woods
    July 7, 2017 at 14:08

    ‘But seeing only one side to a story is where the U.S. mainstream media is at this point in history. Yes, it is possible that Russia was responsible for the Democratic hacks and did funnel the material to WikiLeaks, but evidence has so far been lacking. And, instead of presenting both sides fairly, the major media acts as if only one side deserves any respect and dissenting views must be ridiculed and condemned.’ – hmm, sounds a bit like global warming and deniers…

  31. July 7, 2017 at 13:43

    And still, no one has seen the DNC server. Mueller is not even being given access to it. What is hidden on that server? Even Lindsay Graham, no impartial party when it comes to Putin and Russia, and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, thinks the server should be examined. Something big is hidden on that server.

    • SteveK9
      July 7, 2017 at 14:40

      Don’t you think it has been wiped clean by now? Of course, that would also tell a story, if it were true.

      • backwardsevolution
        July 7, 2017 at 18:17

        SteveK9 – yes, but I believe William Binney said that the NSA collects everything and would have all of that information in their “archives”. IOW, I think it’s retrievable.

  32. Dave P.
    July 7, 2017 at 13:06

    I read most of the books Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote, including three volume “Gulag Archipelago”. In addition to failure of centralized Soviet Economy, his writings played some part in bringing down communism. He was lionized when he lived here. Like most people, he was a Nationalist. When he returned to Russia in ruins, and saw the loot going on there, he was moved. I read at the time somewhere , talking to some Western reporter who was blaming the Revolution and Soviet Union. He shot back at the reporter: Russians did not make this revolution, Jews did it. The big guns in Lenin’s politburo were all Jews, including the famous Trotsky. Solzhenitsyn was immediately villified as anti-semitic. He became a person non-grata in the West. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was a great writer. I did not find a word in his writings which one can call anti-semitic. He wrote the Truth as he saw it.

    This is where the things are in The West. The Truth is: All the Finance, Media, and Entertainment is owned by this small group. There are no real Journalists or talk show hosts left in MSM – in the entire West indeed. They are simply well rewarded mouthpieces of their Masters. They do whatever they tell them to do. Since Bill Clinton, the foreign policy, finance, and media has been run by these very powerful forces, headed by people like Rubin, Kagans, Victoria Newland, and others. They are bent upon bringing Russia under their control, by whatever means. The only thing people can do is hope and pray that it does not lead to nuclear catastrophe. I do not think people have any power left.

    It is hard to tell how it is going to end. Russians are proud people. They have had a rich culture, and unique Slavic Civilization. I remember just a few lines of this poem, by Aleksandr Tvardovsky, that famous Russian Poet , the editor of Novy Mir who published “one Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”. I read this somewhere many years ago.

    In the History’s book of fame

    Not an inverted comma

    Nor a crooked line

    Will cast a shadow on our name

    What is done is done

    All their tumulutous history; Czars, revolutions, Stalin. What is done is done. In spite of the fact that Aleksandr Tsardovsy’s parents were hauled away as being Kulaks by Stalin during the collectivization period. Like the West, Russians have every reason to be proud of.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 13:44

      Dave P. – a most excellent post. I like John Keats’ line too:

      “Beauty is truth, truth beauty
      That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know”

      The truth is beauty. Call it what you will – anti-semitic, anti-capitalist, anti-whatever – it makes no difference. It’s still the truth.

      • Dave P.
        July 7, 2017 at 17:02

        backwardsevolution: Keats and Byron were my favorite poets when I was young. They were in the curriculum, as a part of British Literature paper. I have to read them again to refresh my readings of youth. You mentioned Tolstoy’s stories one day. I read Tolstoy’s stories, in signet classic edition, translated by Aylmer Maude – an excellent translation. “Master and Man” is also very good story. I love Gogol’s stories too.

        Regarding Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, he was not a Nationalist in the sense they portray him here now. He so much longed for three Slavic brothers, East Ukrainians, Byelo- Russians, and Russians live together in one State with a common Orthodox church with some spiritual values. Criticizing the Soviet System very passionately, Solzhenitsyn also wrote of Nikita Khrushchev who was born during nineteenth century before revolution, son of peasants from Donetsk area: Nikita had a peasant soul, he always talked about our common humanity, our common destiny on Earth. He failed to recognize his true soul. Nikita would have been a good benevolent Czar.

        In those times, leaders like Kennedy and Khrushhev had these feelings of our common humanity, and the need to live together. They worked towards reaching at some common understanding. It is very disheartening to think of these leaders in the West today. I wonder sometimes; are they really humans?

        • backwardsevolution
          July 7, 2017 at 17:30

          Dave P. – yes, I read “Master and Man” too. I enjoyed it. Tolstoy’s favorite author (mine too) was Dickens. I love Dickens’ sense of humor. To me, that is what sets him apart from the rest, plus his characters are amazing. Tolstoy’s wife always said she knew when Tolstoy was about to write a novel; it was when he would start reading Dickens, reading excerpts of Dickens to the family around the supper table. She said Dickens inspired him. I also read that the only thing Dostoyevsky wanted to read in prison was Dickens. Just some trivia.

          I haven’t really read anything about Khrushchev. Sounds like a benevolent man. Like you say, that’s what we need right now. In my spare time (LOL!) I’ll read up on him. Thanks, Dave P.

    • Bob Van Noy
      July 7, 2017 at 16:19

      Dave P. I think that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is crucial reading especially for American audiences because he was a keen social observer. While studying him, I discovered that he had written a very controversial book called “Two Hundred Years Together’’ that has been reprinted in five languages but not English. Apparently it is seen as highly anti-Semitic as he writes about the complex mix of Jewish and Russian Culture. Whether his views are accurate or not should be up to the reader, I think. I will post a link to some PDF chapter links but the translation may be questionable.

      One thing is for sure, we Americans are largely unaware of the truly complex mixture of religion and political philosophy that made up Eastern Europe, both pre and post WWII.

      • Dave P.
        July 7, 2017 at 17:19

        Bob Van Noy: I had read somewhere about this book “Two Hundred Years Together” Solzhenitsyn wrote to state his views on the Russian – Jewish relations in Russian History. I would like very much to read this book. As you said Translator is very important when translating from Russian or French into English.

        I have read many of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s books. I did not find anything in his writings being anti-semitic. It is just an attack on Solzhenitsyn, like what they are doing now to Russia and their President Putin.

        • backwardsevolution
          July 7, 2017 at 17:58

          I want to read it too. Good God, I’m going to need another 100 years to read all of the books I want to read. I’d better get busy.

    • Cal
      July 7, 2017 at 17:37

      great post Dave

    • Cal
      July 7, 2017 at 18:56

      At the time everyone knew or believed the Jews were the main force for Bolshevism including Churchill. Churchill called them the ‘international Jews ‘. Later Charles Lindberg in campaigning against US entry into WWII used the term ‘international Jews’ for those who were pushing the US to get into the war and was labeled an anti-Semite. In rewriting history the Zionist then declared him a hero for Jews for promoting Zionism and a state for Jews. The truth is Churchill always considered Jews a ‘political tribe’ and a ‘problem’ and thought getting them their own state would solve the Jewish problem for England.

      ‘Bolshevism among the Jews is nothing new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.’
      Churchill, Winston (8 February 1920). “Zionism versus Bolshevism”. Illustrated Sunday Herald.

      I read all the available chapter translations of 200 Years Together some years ago on the ethnopolitics site and saw nothing anti-Semitic in it. .

      I think this refers to his last interview:

      In his latest book Solzhenitsyn, 84, deals with one of the last taboos of the communist revolution: that Jews were as much perpetrators of the repression as its victims. Two Hundred Years Together – a reference to the 1772 partial annexation of Poland and Russia which greatly increased the Russian Jewish population – contains three chapters discussing the Jewish role in the revolutionary genocide and secret police purges of Soviet Russia.

      Solzhenitsyn argues that some Jewish satire of the revolutionary period “consciously or unconsciously descends on the Russians” as being behind the genocide. But he states that all the nation’s ethnic groups must share the blame, and that people shy away from speaking the truth about the Jewish experience.

      Solzhenitsyn, awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1970, spent much of his life in Soviet prison camps, enduring persecution when he wrote about his experiences. He is currently in frail health, but in an interview given last month he said that Russia must come to terms with the Stalinist and revolutionary genocides – and that its Jewish population should be as offended at their own role in the purges as they are at the Soviet power that also persecuted them.

      “My book was directed to empathise with the thoughts, feelings and the psychology of the Jews – their spiritual component,” he said. “I have never made general conclusions about a people. I will always differentiate between layers of Jews. One layer rushed headfirst to the revolution. Another, to the contrary, was trying to stand back. The Jewish subject for a long time was considered prohibited. Zhabotinsky [a Jewish writer] once said that the best service our Russian friends give to us is never to speak aloud about us.”

      • Bob Van Noy
        July 7, 2017 at 19:58

        Thank you Cal, your input is invaluable. The better we can understand Word Complexity; the better informed our decision making process can be…
        Also, a fine article at global research that includes Robert Parry, linked below.

      • Dave P.
        July 7, 2017 at 20:15

        Cal: Thanks for all this information. ” . . . discussing the Jewish role in the revolutionary genocide and secret police purges of Soviet Russia.” Yes. And Solzhenitsyn also did include some facts on this in his “Gulag Archipelago”. And I had read about it, many years ago in some other publications too.

        ” . . . But he states that all the nation’s ethnic groups must share the blame, and that people shy away from speaking the truth about the Jewish experience”. Very true.

        ” . . . he said that Russia must come to terms with the Stalinist and revolutionary genocides – and that its Jewish population should be as offended at their own role in the purges as they are at the Soviet power that also persecuted them”. Very well said. All through his writings, I did not doubt anywhere that Solzhenitsyn had strayed away from Truth – The Truth. That is what a great writer does.

        Stalin was a very cunning man. He used as well as punished every ethnic group in all the horrific crimes he committed during his rule. Russians may have suffered even more than other ethnic groups during his rule.

        • Cal
          July 8, 2017 at 00:08


          In several chapters in 200 Years Together Solzhenitsyn, in order to explain the historical pattern of the kind of Jews that led the Jewish wing of Bolshevism went way back in Jewish history as far as 1640 in Russia,Poland and other parts of Europe—-that was very interesting. I dont know that he ever said this outright but my impression is that if Russia had not annexed Poland and its 2 million Jews and other discontenteds there would not have been Bolshevism. I think that is what he mean when he said ….
          “You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russian. They hated Russians. They Hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of remorse… More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history.”

          The aim of the ‘Reds”, the Bolshevks, was to ‘dismantle’ Russia ..iow to do away with ‘nationalism’, any unity that fostered patrioism to the state. The ‘Whites’ (Russians) fought the Reds to preserve Russia as a nation ‘of (assimilated) Russians”.so his statement that ‘they, the Bolsheviks, were not Russians’ makes sense.

          • Dave P.
            July 9, 2017 at 03:20

            Cal: Yes, I had read many years ago about the October revolution, civil war which followed, and the Whites. And also read about some of these early theorists of this philosophy. Most of this ideology developed in Germany and Western Europe. Unfortunately, Russians became the victims of this very cruel experiment – and went through immense suffering and incalculable loss.

    • Abe
      July 7, 2017 at 22:40

      An advocate of traditional Russian culture, Solzhenitsyn expressed his disillusionment with post-Soviet Russia in works such as Rebuilding Russia (1990), and called for the establishment of a strong presidential republic balanced by vigorous institutions of local self-government.

      Russian President Vladimir Putin awarded Solzhenitsyn the State Prize of the Russian Federation for his humanitarian work, and personally visited the writer at his home on 12 June 2007 to present him with the award.

      In a July 2007 interview with Der Spiegel, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn commented: “Putin has inherited plundered and downtrodden country with demoralized and grown poor majority of the population. And he took on its possible — to be noted, gradual, slow — recovering. These efforts were not right at the moment noticed, not speaking about being appreciated. And can you point on examples in history when measures for recovering strength of governmental management would be benevolently met from beyond the country?”

      Solzhenitsyn died in August 2008 at the age of 89.

      • Cal
        July 8, 2017 at 00:41

        I admire Putin….it would be a grave mistake for anyone to underestimate him. The fact that he paid off all of Russia’s debt is a miracle in itself. It was tough on the ordinary Russians to do this as it required economic cut backs but Putin held them together.

        “[This payment] completes the settlement of the external public debt of the former USSR, which is a historic event,” said Russia’s deputy finance minister Sergei Storchak.

        After the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991, Russia assumed responsibility for its foreign debt of some US$70 billion. This was mostly contracted during the difficult perestroika-era from 1985 to 1991, a time of failed attempts to reform the USSR’s dysfunctional political and economic system.

        This commitment proved a painful burden in the 1990s as Russia faced catastrophic economic problems that culminated in a humiliating default on its foreign debt in 1998. But in 2006 – thanks to a steady influx of petrodollars since the early 2000s – Russia was able to pay off its debts to 17 major creditor-countries in the so-called Paris Club.
        A payment of more than US$20 billion – or 95 per cent of the value of all Soviet-era loans – was made eight years after the 1998 default. Russia has also allowed itself the luxury of cancelling some country’s debts, with Cuba the latest in 2014.

        Yudenkov contrasted this with Kiev which has refused to repay a US$3 billion loan Moscow gave the pro-Russian government of former president Viktor Yanukovych before he was ousted from power in 2014”

      • Bob Van Noy
        July 10, 2017 at 09:58

        For all in the above link, my sincere thanks for educating us in this necessary history. And Abe, the video on Putin and Solzhenitsyn is terrific…

  33. July 7, 2017 at 12:19

    The greatest troubles maker in the World has been for the last 70 years America. When will we be smart enough to decrite a total embargo of everything made in America. This until the decent US people will have waken up and cleaned up the mess made by a tiny minority of its Citizen. Fuck that mentally sick Trump and fuck America (as she is now: the new Nazi Empire of planet Earth)…

    • Michael K Rohde
      July 7, 2017 at 21:04

      There is no doubt that since the end of the second world war, the U.S., in its’ virtual safety on our side of the ocean, emerged as an economic power house which did not get bombed to oblivion during the war like most of western Europe and Russia. We came out as a fully employed economy with 8 million men in uniform. We were well equipped to go anywhere and do anything we wanted, except in Russia and western Europe, where Stalin had 300 divisions in uniform, almost double our number. We apparently felt it was our job to change the world and we did. And look how it turned out. We could have created a just world and instead, we allowed the greedy guys in pin stripes to create a subservient world that made us richer. Not our best day.

    July 7, 2017 at 11:41

    A very old Jewish proverb, saying that eventually becomes a part of religions tenets and evolves into an integral part of its adherents justification of self, A meme..
    “In the best of lies there , there is a kernal of truth.”
    The propagandist in US and elsewhere have used that process in order to dupe the majority of their target audiences , but only the portions that listen can be reached by technologicly enhanced means, for US purposes the vast majority pay no attention to the propagandist spiel, and that after all is but the proof of the lies effectiveness.
    In US we seem to have a fair sized minority whose cognitive abilities recognize truth from fiction but the vast amounts of data that is deliberately put forth by the power structure has so divided their ability to form any real united front to wage a conflict with those powers.
    As an uneducated lout I have read much of what others here have but I cannot reach beyond my economic and social environment So I will retreat to my hard shell of self and read, listenand sort through the words and thoughts of those who would be far more able to form a grouping that has real reach.
    I hate to admit it but every successful social evolutionary leap forward does not and never has originated from worlds underclasses and that holds true of religions evolution as well, they all began by thoughts of elite¿¿¿ minds, minds that were educated beyond the training their social structures imposed upon them.
    Good Luck.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 13:25

      Hide Behind – good post. Thanks.

    • Michael K Rohde
      July 7, 2017 at 20:57

      No offense to your proverbs or beliefs, but Stalin and Hitler are just a couple of people who could be described as evolutionary in their time and neither sprung from the “elite” in their respective homes. The fact that literacy was restricted to people who could afford to purchase books or pay to school their children for much of western history certainly restricted access and who eventually became leaders across the world, but you make it sound like only the elite were capable, or this fair sized minority you reference in the U.S. I don’t think Rousseau came from the nobility either, another game changer. I suppose the word “elite” is where I take issue. Maybe “well born” would be more accurate. Talent is not restricted to the “elite” or the wealthy.

      • Dave P.
        July 8, 2017 at 13:18

        Very good Michael. I have met some people, who have never gone to school or may have just have elementary education, are much wiser. Only difference is that no body puts their thoughts on the paper – what they say

  35. Abe
    July 7, 2017 at 11:27

    “As the Syrian army prevails on the ground, capturing territory from the militants in the process, hundreds of thousands of Syrians are returning to their homes. As Andrej Mahecic, the spokesperson for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the UN Refugee Agency, said in a press briefing at the end of June, many Syrians are returning ‘to their homes’ partly due to a ‘real or perceived improvement in security conditions’ in many regions recently liberated:

    “'[The] UNHC is seeing a notable trend of spontaneous returns to and within Syria in 2017. Aid agencies estimate that more than 440,000 internally displaced people have returned to their homes in Syria during the first six months of this year. In parallel, UNHCR has monitored over 31,000 Syrian refugees returning from neighbouring countries so far in 2017.’

    “‘The main factors influencing decisions for refugees to return self-assisted mostly to Aleppo, Hama, Homs, Damascus and to other governorates are primarily linked to seeking out family members, checking on property, and, in some cases, a real or perceived improvement in security conditions in parts of the country.’

    “Although the conflict is far from over, and the rebuilding of Syria will likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars, many Syrians can now see the light at the end of the tunnel. The defeat of foreign-backed mercenaries and the stabilization of Syria has always been of central importance to help solve part of the refugee/migrant crisis that has gripped Europe in recent years.

    “Short of any extremely reckless action by the West and its allies, the Syrian army will continue to liberate large parts of the country from the foreign-backed militants, paving the way for more internally and externally displaced Syrians to return to their homes. In their desperation however, the enemies of Syria may again stage a false flag chemical weapons attack and blame it on the Syrian government, in an attempt to justify a major military intervention to turn the tide. […]

    “the evidence that proves that the enemies of Syria want to Balkanize the country, with the Brookings Institution being another US think tank that has advocated this strategy, in one form or another, ad nauseam. Officials in Syria are well aware of this plan”

    Syrians Return Home as the Terrorists are Pushed Out
    By Steven MacMillan

  36. July 7, 2017 at 11:10

    A brilliant analysis and commentary, by America’s greatest, living investigative reporter.

  37. Herman
    July 7, 2017 at 08:46

    I admit to being closed minded about the American media. Was suspicious regarding its propaganda MO before the Iraq debacle, am certain after it. Watched the tv news for a few minutes which contained soundbites about the Putin-Trump meeting. One of the Secretary of State mentioned how Poland is being threatened by Russia and I switched to reruns. I know I should seek balance how can you do that when the MSM shows none. Just soundbites with the message that Trump is on dangerous ground if he seeks better relations with Russia.

    The hypocrisy we display regarding charges that Russia is meddling in our elections is astounding. Meddling in elections is the way we conduct business, spending billions to do it and yet the powers that be express their righteous indignation at someone doing the same to us, even when their assertions are unproven.

    A fanciful scenario, Putin and Trump stand before the world and announce the Cold War is over. All hell breaks loose and a national debate breaks out. Why, the “public” asks are we fighting the Russians, and it goes on from there. Impeachment begins immediately and it creates a forum for fresh viewpoints and media solidarity begins to crumble.


    • Skip Scott
      July 7, 2017 at 09:01

      I have about the same timeline as you Herman regarding my realization that the MSM was nothing but propaganda. I really started to see through it when Phil Donahue and Dan Rather got the boot. They have been consolidating their hold on the entire narrative ever since. Orwell was right, and 1984 is upon us.

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:44

        They got the boot, even though ratings were high for Donahue, and Brian Williams, the liar and prevaricator got rehired.

        People, it is a business. And lies sell. Twain once said: Ä lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.”

        It is all lies now, all the time or confusion is the end game, making people so confused they either drop out or go insane.

  38. E. Leete
    July 7, 2017 at 03:49

    From The Devil’s Daughter’s Pressroom:

    Yesterday’s headline in the Big Picture Real World reView: Wealthpower Giants DO, what Wealthpower Giants DO
    Today’s headline in the Big Picture Real World reView: Wealthpower Giants DO, what Wealthpower Giants DO
    Tomorrow’s headline in the Big Picture Real World reView: Wealthpower Giants DO, what Wealthpower Giants DO

    Will humans ever see the quite clear pattern and begin to act in accord with what everybody already believes – or is it to be history on repeat on steroids KABOOM for us and our pretty planet?

    Inquiring minds want to know

  39. jaycee
    July 7, 2017 at 02:45

    Politifact has responded to the downgrade from 17 agencies to 4, claiming that it means little because the 4 agencies are the most relevant and important:

    What is interesting is how this fact-checking organization missed entirely the crucial information shared by Clapper that it was hand-picked individuals from the 4 agencies, not the agencies themselves, which developed the “high confidence” opinion. And that similar instances of narrow politicized findings have created costly damaging boondoggles for America (if not criminal disasters – i.e. CIA’s Team B from the 70s and Cheney’s Iraq office).

    Still, woe to the average American who sincerely wants to know what is going on but is stuck with the mainstream news media.

    • Adrian Engler
      July 7, 2017 at 05:18

      Yes, it is obviously a big difference about whether an agency as a whole gives an assessment (which would, in many cases, mean that dissenting opinions have to be mentioned) or whether agents were handpicked in order to reach a certain conclusion.

      Furthermore, the intelligence agency that would probably have the best specialists for Russia and Russian intelligence services seems to be the DIA, which was not involved at all. The January report got so many basic facts about Russia wrong (see my longer comment above), which indicates that hardly any serious Russia specialists were involved.

    • Skip Scott
      July 7, 2017 at 08:56

      Apparently ABC has not gotten the memo. They reiterated the same “17 agencies” lie just last night. There is no hope at all for anyone seeking truth if they rely on the MSM. Politifact is just an MSM shill, they have no credibility whatsoever.

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:42

        They don’t care. Corporate media is a money making machine. Lies seel, see WMD in Iraq and then the controversy over the lies, sells again. Everything is commodified under capitalism.

    July 7, 2017 at 01:39

    Apologize mis-spell puntuation sentence paragraph structure but when seeing red over 60 years of knowledge spills out faster than my arthritic figers can handle.
    Gramps told me”When questioning a federal or state connectex figure ask the question and then question the answer. I
    In todays Facist Police State and uniform nationalist sychophants , that is the only mindset that mainline employees can be, inside the beltway does not lead to mindchange, and the system is so strong only those on outside looking at overall can fight it.
    Mainline print ,oral, or visual outlets only hire presstitutes.

    July 7, 2017 at 01:29

    NPR, Nations Pentagon Radio, for almost its full existence.
    Sorry but as an amature polical student who began education in Maine one room school house, I learned early on to watch for patterns in our media and way politicos moved and talkand I am afraid I see the very same pattern now as when the Scadels of Arizona land and money laundering by Senators and US hero John Glen got caught and were saved by “Hanoi Songbird “” McCain.
    with full blown all out disinfo by all media outlets that had network affiliations.
    Went frommajor theft of federal housing loans HUD, both FHA’s GI Bill loans and money laundering reduced by press into o minor inside trading and fibbing on loans.
    John Glen later on ran US coverup and was rewarded a free ride into spce.
    Nixon and Kissinger negotiating outside of official channels kept Viet War ongoing until Tricky Dick would become President, watergate the cover story for Dicks dismissal Nd kissingers papers sealed until after his death.
    Johnson found out about it but was afraid to bring into opening as he fely in his words”It could bring down the Republic.
    Ford kept mouth shut and gave a pardon, as if he did not have inside, and his reward was a funeral in DC that would of made a Pharo proud.
    Clinton initial investigatio went from fraud towRds government rezlty(they learned from Arizona 5) Hud, Fanny Maeand Freddy MacHud etc. And lots of unexplainable accidents, GOT REDUCED TO LYING ABOUT A BLOW JOB.
    The honeys reward was fame and fortune but she lost her blue dress to FBI.
    Trumps name came up during money laundering investigation of Russian Oligarchs theft of Rubles and through Trump Hotels and Rusdian Jewis and USnorthodox help.
    AAain all cases press aided by bringing to fore something so catchy to soap opera crowds as to remove public attention from real issue.
    This aricle takes public even further away from truth.
    But our Supremes ruled Thw media is under no obligation to be truthfull.

  42. July 7, 2017 at 01:07

    The attitude towards Putin reminds me of the attacks on DeGaulle in the 60’s for holding a dissident foreign policy. Constructive criticism is something that isn’t well digested by Washington or the cheerleaders in the mainstream press.

    • Danny Weil
      July 7, 2017 at 09:40

      Yes, and the CIA jackals under Dulles tried to assassinate DeGaul as well. They failed.

  43. Andrew Nichols
    July 7, 2017 at 00:44

    It would be instructive to examine media behaviour against Germany in the leadup to WW1. My grandma 1896-1982 often told me of the lurid anti german stories that were common in that era from politicians and media alike.She knew most of it was ludicrous from her time as an English woman student a Uni Heidelberg in 1913. Never finished her degree.

  44. July 7, 2017 at 00:10

    Have you considered the possibility that:

    > Trump is a willing participant?

    > the ‘fake news’ show is a BI-PARTISAN distraction?

    Why didn’t Trump shut-down the “Russian meddling” charges earlier? He could’ve easily done that with the simple observation that other countries are WORSE (Israel and Saudi Arabia). By not confronting these allegations early and effectively, he has allowed bogus charges to morph into an investigation into obstruction of justice.

    Faux populist Presidents need EXCUSES for their betrayals.


    • July 7, 2017 at 00:13

      This comment was meant to be a reply to Helen Marshall’ comment @ 7:31pm (above).

    • July 7, 2017 at 00:43

      Trump made a lot of noise opposing the Neo McCarthyites. Trump is a distraction.

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:39

        That is why he is president. He is the greatest showman the ruling elite have had. A buffoon, appeals to the TV set and their viewers and will take the venom and wrath of the useless bread eaters so that the ruling elite can take with one hand and ploay Trump with the other,.

    • Skip Scott
      July 7, 2017 at 08:45


      I think Trump has had his “trip to the woodshed”. All evidence now points to him caving to the Deep State. He hasn’t shut them down because he can’t. In the end, he wants to live, so he’s all aboard with Russia stealing Crimea, Saudi’s buying Billions in weapons, and anything else they want him to say or do. You are right that Russia-gate is a distraction, and the Deep State is a bi-partisan institution.

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:40

        They are all subject for blackmail, they are all dirty and yes, they all have to be taught by the US/National Crime Syndicate exactly how to roll. And they know what happens if they do not.

  45. bill phillips
    July 7, 2017 at 00:08

    Robert Parry is the best.

  46. roksob
    July 7, 2017 at 00:00

    David Ignatius may have done some good reporting in days gone by, but he really has become a joke. He epitomizes the political hack.

  47. July 6, 2017 at 23:42

    Trump has accepted that Russia interfered. Now (finally!), on his overseas trip, he has mentioned that other countries have also interfered. He wouldn’t say who. USA media will simply ignore this inconvenient truth.

    But those who not incurious may well ask questions like:

    > Why hasn’t he said this before?

    > Why won’t he say this in the USA or on his twitter?

    > Why doesn’t he name the worst offenders?

    > And so on…

    It seems that few want to consider the ulgy possibility that the collusion wasn’t Trump-Russians but Trump-Clintons.


  48. Josh O'Bryant
    July 6, 2017 at 23:39

    If the DNC was hacked we would’ve been shown evidence of hacking last year. The default position is a leak because the emails were not released by Wikihacks and it remains a leak because the DNC is unwilling to let anyone they aren’t paying to lie for them to examine their servers and far more compelling evidence points directly at Seth Rich as the source of the leak.

    • Skip Scott
      July 7, 2017 at 08:38

      Exactly, Josh. William Binney said that if there had been a Russian hack the NSA would have known it in real time, and he should know, he wrote the program.

  49. July 6, 2017 at 23:35

    CONFIRMED: DNC paid the ‘Russian’ founder of CrowdStrike to hack its server so it could be blamed on Russia!

  50. Oakland Pete
    July 6, 2017 at 23:10

    While Mr. Parry’s points are correct, and are the most important aspects of this story as they emphasize the danger of war, another aspect should be brought in, as it is relevant: What Russia has been accused of doing is facilitating the exposure to the U.S. public that actual meddling in its electoral process did take place. That was done by the DNC for whose interests the mainstream media, especially the Washington Post, speaks. If Russia did what it is accused of it merely was the messenger of bad news for our country, that is that Donald Trump stated the most important truth in his campaign: The whole system is rigged. And it’s his accusers who have done the rigging. It’s a sad day for the U.S. when an emperor like Trump has to tell us the real emperor – the U.S. political establishment – has no clothes.

    • Skip Scott
      July 7, 2017 at 08:35

      Spot on, Oakland Pete. I have said the same thing in an earlier thread. This whole Russia-gate thing is to deflect the public from looking at the contents of the leaked e-mails themselves, which show the DNC to be an utterly corrupt institution and Hillary to be a lying shill for the globalizing warmongers.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 13:14

      Oakland Pete – very well said. Thank you.

  51. Mild-ly Facetious
    July 6, 2017 at 22:50



    The Racial and Religious Paranoia of Trump’s Warsaw Speech

    When the president says being Western is the essence of America’s identity, he’s in part defining America in opposition to some of its own people.


    In his speech in Poland on Thursday, Donald Trump referred 10 times to “the West” and five times to “our civilization.” His white nationalist supporters will understand exactly what he means. It’s important that other Americans do, too.

    The West is not a geographic term. Poland is further east than Morocco. France is further east than Haiti. Australia is further east than Egypt. Yet Poland, France, and Australia are all considered part of “The West.” Morocco, Haiti, and Egypt are not.

    The West is not an ideological or economic term either. India is the world’s largest democracy. Japan is among its most economically advanced nations. No one considers them part of the West.

    The West is a racial and religious term. To be considered Western, a country must be largely Christian (preferably Protestant or Catholic) and largely white. Where there is ambiguity about a country’s “Westernness,” it’s because there is ambiguity about, or tension between, these two characteristics. Is Latin America Western? Maybe. Most of its people are Christian, but by U.S. standards, they’re not clearly white. Are Albania and Bosnia Western? Maybe. By American standards, their people are white. But they are also mostly Muslim.

    Steve Bannon, who along with Stephen Miller has shaped much of Trump’s civilizational thinking, has been explicit about this. In a 2014 speech, he celebrated “the long history of the Judeo-Christian West struggle against Islam” and “our forefathers” who “bequeathed to use the great institution that is the church of the West.”

    • mike k
      July 7, 2017 at 13:31

      Great points about defining the “West.” White skinned Christians are the deadliest entities on this planet.

    • Cal
      July 7, 2017 at 14:25

      @Mild-ly Facetious

      You don’t get the propaganda/agenda in Beinart’s article do you?

    • Abe
      July 7, 2017 at 21:44

      Trump also referred 10 times to “God”.

      The “beautiful country”, “warm welcome” and “generous hospitality” were praised by “our beautiful First Lady”. That was very nice.

      Trump came to deliver a very important message: “America loves Poland, and America loves the Polish people.” Very nice.

      While he did refer to the “tremendous warmth and kindness for which Poland is known around the world”, Trump made no explicit mention of the quality of Polish sex workers. Apparently that wouldn’t be nice. Guess it hasn’t been “verified” if they are “safe, strong and free”.

  52. F. G. Sanford
    July 6, 2017 at 22:45

    Sung to Margaritaville, by Jimmy Buffett, 1976

    Political straw man,
    That story The Times ran;
    All of those Russians invading Ukraine.
    The Evil Empire and Trump would conspire,
    They could be hacking
    The Clinton campaign.

    Faking the news again in Propagandaville,
    Searchin’ for a Russian cyber assault.
    Some people claim that Wikileaks is to blame,
    But I know it’s not Putin’s fault.

    Don’t know the reason,
    Must be some treason.
    Contents of speeches to bankers disclosed,
    Bill on the tarmac, extorting a payback,
    The Clinton Foundation
    Would soon be exposed.

    Faking the news again in Propagandaville,
    Searchin’ for a Russian cyber assault.
    Some people claim her secret server’s to blame,
    But I know it’s not Putin’s fault.

    Crimea was annexed,
    Uganda could be next,
    David Ignatius is quick to report.
    Those classified emails,
    With top secret details,
    Would never put Clinton in Federal Court.

    Faking the news again in Propagandaville
    Searchin’ for a Russian cyber assault
    Some people claim that there’s a Russian to blame
    But I know, it’s Hillary’s fault
    Yes and some people claim that there’s a Russian to blame,
    But I know, it’s Hillary’s fault.

    Mr. Parry, I know some will have harsh words about your appearance on Infowars, but Jones at least has the courage to air the stories the mainstream won’t touch. All in all, he’s hands down right more often than the mainstream outlets, despite the fact that he occasionally hosts a crackpot. So, good on you, and thanks for having the guts to put the truth ahead of the venue. Well done!

    • CitizenOne
      July 6, 2017 at 23:45

      Great improvisation with the lyrics. You should be on a stage. I can’t get it out of my head.
      Some people would claim
      there’s a Russian to blame
      but I know, it’s the media’s fault.

      Sadly, there is a very real threat to our collective consciousness posed by all of the fake news foisted on us by the main stream media which cannot break itself away from talking points fed to democrats who have swallowed the hook and are now being reeled in to the net to be eaten by the republicans. Poor stupid democrats. The course they are on is a polar opposite to the Carter Doctrine of basing foreign policy on human rights rather than political affiliations. Obama and Hillary might as well be Nikki Haley at the UN fomenting war and blaming Russia and Iran for every wrong.

      Trump appointed her and she left the state legislature to become the mouthpiece for warmongering in the United Nations. You could put Obama or Hillary Clinton in her place and they would ape the same words.

      We have to ask a deeper question. That question is how did Trump come to become like Obama and Hillary Clinton in supporting sanctions against all or our former enemies? He did not start out on that path. But he has turned down that path and soon he will face Putin with an unknown outcome. Will he sign onto the conspiracy that Russia hacked the election or will he greet Putin as a fellow victim of the media’s manipulations?

      If he has a spine, he will stand up to the MIC and try to forge an alliance based on economic trade. If he follows Obama’s and Hillary’s lead he will try to define Russia as a threat towards the West continuing in the path of the cold war which the media seeks to push him into.

      I would love to be a fly on the wall during his meeting with Putin. A whole bunch of international bankers will no doubt be sitting on his shoulders wiggling back and forth to get him to bend towards a continuation of the cold war.

      Will he be a horse pulling the load for military contractors or will he be a bucking bronco like Nixon to forge alliance with a former foe?

      It will come down to which side of the bread he sees as buttered. The side sticking to old geopolitical war positions with the greatest enemy the USA ever faced or the upside where we can pick up the pieces of the old war and find a common ground where cooperation and economic relations are forged.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 13:10

      Sanford – wow, excellent job! “Faking the news again in Propagandaville, Searchin’ for a Russian cyber assault.” Too good! Thanks, Sanford.

    • Bob Van Noy
      July 7, 2017 at 14:38

      F. G. Sanford, Thanks for the infowars tip. I visited the site which I will link here because Robert Parry has some very important things to say about contemporary journalism. Thank you…

    • Joe Tedesky
      July 7, 2017 at 14:52

      F.G. if this comment board were a show on Comedy Central you would be a frequent, but not overly used, guest spotlighted headliner with your recreated lyrics. Love it, very creative and always spot on. Joe

      Ps the producers would no doubt tell you to only use songs that were warmly family friendly, and white-guy easy to dance to. Then that’s when your agent gets you the million dollar an episode contract…why you’d be bigger than U.S. Steel. I would be your closest friend, and your money manager, and trust me ‘everything would be fine’…yeah, yeah, fine indeed. Just kidding I don’t want your money, I have so much I don’t know what to do with it all, not.

      F.G. see ya at the Grammy’s Joe

      • F. G. Sanford
        July 7, 2017 at 15:37

        Joe, it’s more likely we’d both starve to death. Somebody told me a long time ago…”Don’t quit your day job.” But thanks for the encouragement!

        • Joe Tedesky
          July 7, 2017 at 17:03

          All true, but then there is Elvis being rejected by the Ted Mack Amateur Hour, and what about Decca records who thought that since guitar bands were on the way out, then why get behind this little band from Liverpool…Decca Records turned down the Beatles for crying out loud. Yeah don’t tell me about talent agents, but seriously F.G. you are an outstanding entertainer like it or not. Joe

    • Abe
      July 7, 2017 at 21:25

      “Citizen journalists” in Propagandaville.
      Pave the way for US/NATO assaults.
      Bellingcat “verifies” that Russia’s to blame.
      Higgins “knows”: It’s all Putin’s fault.

    • Gregory Herr
      July 7, 2017 at 23:04

      What a refrain!

  53. Joe Tedesky
    July 6, 2017 at 21:59

    After hearing how the sore losers of the Democratic Party has used this ’17 Intelligence Agencies’ falsity to spin a clever talking point out of it to discredit any worthwhile debate where evidence is lacking, I appreciate Robert Parry’s delving into the reports correctness, and it’s origins. Since the ‘Russia Hacked Us’ crowd has used the 17 IntelAgency assumption report to no end, it has by their insistence become a benchmark argument to be made when discussing to what real or unreal evidence has been produced, since this Russian Hacked Us witch hunt has begun. So yes Robert Parry is staying the course to the ever evolving 17 Intelligence Agencies story, and to what is in my estimation quality journalism at it’s best.

    • Joe Tedesky
      July 6, 2017 at 22:51

      Since the subject of media truthfulness is on the table, allow me to submit this link to a story concerning the many deaths surrounding the DNC email leaks, and regarding how the fiancé of Ambassador Chris Stevens is fighting back trying to reveal the truth to what lead up to her not to be future husbands untimely death at Benghazi.

      It’s a little off the main subject, but I felt it was within the range of what we are talking about here, plus I didn’t want to let it pass by without your knowing about it. Hope you enjoy the article, if you decide to read it.

      • July 7, 2017 at 00:36

        The deaths go back to their coke smuggling days in Arkansas. 100 requests for security per work rings absurd.

        • Joe Tedesky
          July 7, 2017 at 00:57

          Mena is very dark, and hidden within plain sight.

          • Gregory Herr
            July 7, 2017 at 23:02

            Bush-Clinton crime family

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:37

        There has been few times when the corporate media have told the truth, the full truth about anything. Americans have been living in a lie they are no complicit in for decades if not centuries.

        • Joe Tedesky
          July 7, 2017 at 14:07

          That’s probably where the saying, ‘I’m better off not knowing’ comes from.

    • Virginia
      July 7, 2017 at 10:34

      Hi Joe,

      The Democrats’ continued use of the 17 agencies lie clearly speaks to how disingenuous they are, and some Republicans as well. It’s like standing up and saying, “I am a liar! You’re crazy to believe a word I say. But I know you’re too stupid or apathetic to care, so I’ll keep on spreading my propaganda.”

      • Joe Tedesky
        July 7, 2017 at 14:43

        I think you are right Virginia. The arrogance in D.C. is so thick you need a hatch, not a knife, to cut through it…a power saw would be a better attempt.

        Why at this moment there is a 53 year old woman carpenter working here, that told me how she went off the grit back in the days when Clinton bombed the hell of Yugoslavia, and with that she withdrew to concentrate mostly on how best to stay alive. Seriously, I had to explain to this rather appearing intelligent woman all about this Russia-Gate fiasco, as she prefers to stay out of knowing any of this stuff which is going on in our nations capital. Certainly this fine woman I am referring to isn’t the consensus of every man, woman, and other, American, but she certainly proudly by her own words represents ‘flyover America’. BTW, this woman always though Donald Trump was a dumbass, and Hillary Clinton is a turd.

        Point to be made, all these quietly involved American people are fed up with the system so much so, that these fine Americans are running for shelter. What these voiceless people are really saying by retracting themselves from all public debate and referendums, is how they will rejoin our system only and when these lying swamp creatures in our nations state and federal capitals decide to start telling us poorly informed citizens the truth.

        Have a well informed day Virginia Joe

  54. CitizenOne
    July 6, 2017 at 21:40

    My feeling is that some of us are natural detectives. Natural investigators. We are that by nature not nurture. What drives Mr. Parry to perform the public service he performs? I would guess he is driven to do it just like a thief is driven to steal.
    There are two polar opposites always. One is on one side or the other.

    Some seek truth while others scheme to deceive.

    Some demand accountability and justice while others try to skirt the law and get away with anything they can.

    Some care about others and some despise everyone else in the World except themselves.

    The rich selfish greedy sociopaths are always scheming how to get rich by any nefarious means. Basically legal crooks. They usually end up making it worse for everyone else and they could care less about that.

    Inevitably these two opposite kinds of people, those with a vision and an unselfish heart, and those with a greedy eye and sharp elbows will find themselves on opposite sides.

    Over and over again until the end of the World. An endless battle. A world we are born into filled with every kind of opportunity and free will where we can choose what we think and feel and care and love and hate and despise.

    Somebody has to pony up on the side of the truth. We have too much BS all around us and it is getting worse. There are many admirable folks who have done a courageous job to speak truth to power but very few who have the underpinnings of true investigative journalism with the years of experience and skill to eloquently narrate a story so as to lay bare the corruption which we are smothered in by our main stream media propaganda machine.

    This is a time of dwindling resources like Mr. Parry with the skill and the restraint to both piercingly reveal the corrupt nature of our public, government and media space and yet not fall victim to the many traps set for those not too attuned to fake news. A skill he no doubt honed in the old school media where a Woodward and Bernstein or a Bartlett and Steele could captivate the masses with truthful reporting and speaking truth to power and also bring in profits for their employer.

    Speaking of which, I think there is no doubt that the disappearance of subscriber based news and the appearance of fake news for free have as a root cause the same issue. That is, if you want to get information that is relevant to you, then you need to pay for it. If you want to have your brain twisted into a pretzel then by all means fill up on all of the free stuff on the internet.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 14:25

      CitizenOne – “My feeling is that some of us are natural detectives. Natural investigators.”

      Yes, born researchers, truth seekers. Good deductive reasoning.

    • Joe Average
      July 8, 2017 at 23:48

      “… the disappearance of subscriber based news and the appearance of fake news for free have as a root cause the same issue. … if you want to get information that is relevant to you, then you need to pay for it. If you want to have your brain twisted into a pretzel then by all means fill up on all of the free stuff on the internet.”

      The NYT still sells its hardcopy for money. You can also subscribe to them – also for money – online. I’m not too familiar with US media, but I doubt that many are giving away their products for free. Some may make a profit by selling space / time for advertising, others by selling their product (subscription, per view, etc.) So, if I want to get information that is relevant for me, I need to pay for a copy of the NYT? Correct?
      This way of thinking reminds me what’s wrong nowadays. Everyone is focused entirely on $$$. People think that someone driving a large Mercedes has more money in the bank account than a person driving a Prius. (No one would ever think that the Mercedes might be financed whilst the Prius had been paid for in cash.)

  55. Miranda Keefe
    July 6, 2017 at 21:16

    Mr. Parry wrote, “If U.S. government really took this issue seriously, which it should, why didn’t the FBI seize the DNC’s computers…”

    I can only suppose that the DNC asked them not to. I can only suppose that was because there was more material on the computers that they didn’t want the FBI seeing. I can only suppose that the FBI realized this and had the attitude about the DNC that Sgt. Schultz had towards Hogan’s Heroes: “I know nothing.” I mean they didn’t want to be forced into another investigation where they couldn’t go where the facts led. Oh well.

    • July 7, 2017 at 00:57

      Good point…will we ever know what was on Seth Rich’s laptop?

      • Virginia
        July 7, 2017 at 10:26

        Miranda’s comments called to my mind, too, Seth Rich’s computer AND his cell phone. These are somewhere. Someone has them. Where are they? Why kept secret?

  56. Unfettered Fire
    July 6, 2017 at 21:03

    Mainstream media, the self-proclaimed “resistance”, doth protest too loudly:

    “The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.”

    An article in the New York Times, April 9, 1944.
    From Henry A. Wallace, Democracy Reborn

    (H. Wallace was FDR’s VP, 1941-45.)

    • Brad Owen
      July 7, 2017 at 04:20

      Truman got the VP nod in the 44 election. That is why he became Prez when FDR died. He was in Wall Streets pocket, which means he was in City-of-London’s pocket, which means he could be steered by the Synarchists, which means those “economic Royalists” of The Street and The City gained he upper hand in the post-war forties. JFK tried to steer back to FDRs vision for the post-war World. He was killed for it. Presently, the Russo-Chinese B&R initiatives are the latest chance to steer back to FDRs vision. Trump meets Putin today. If he signs us on to B&RI, becoming strong allies with Russia and China, FDRs vision will have been retrieved from the grave, after Truman lost it for us, in those post-war forties.

      • Brad Owen
        July 7, 2017 at 04:47

        Had Wallace become the VP in FDRs 4th admin, there would have been no Red Scare, there would have been no Cold War, there WOULD have been a thorough airing of the Synarchist threat to the World, there would have been a corralling of the “boardroom NAZIs” NOT just the battlefield NAZIs, Wall Street and City-of-London would have been further reined in and hog-tied permanently, made to,perform banking as a Public Service. The B&R initiatives would have been launched in the forties, we would have had exploration bases on the Moon and Mars by now, and 2017 would be like what is imagined for 2117. So much progress was lost with the Truman VP coup. Truman wasn’t evil, just small and clueless (steerable).

        • Danny Weil
          July 7, 2017 at 09:36

          Hardly clueless. A very staunch and intelligent supporter of Tammany Hall and the mob

          • Brad Owen
            July 7, 2017 at 11:47

            your 1961 Truman quote suggests to me he was just another player in a dirty system…clueless about the ultimate ramifications of his actions, that he just did a lot of “going along”. FDRs policies were, and are, NOT doomed to inevitable failure. Far from it. They have already been reborn in China’s Belt & Road initiative, and are taking the World by storm…FDR’s revenge upon the “economic Royalists” (as he referred to them) of Wall Street, and their senior partners in City-of-London. Actually what is doomed to failure is the Trans-Atlantic corporate fascist Empire that the European colonial Empires (primarily Britain’s Empire, and their Tory/Loyalist assets in Wall Street) have morphed into. They’re already dead financially…been so since 2008, on bailout/bail-in Life Support ever since with NO SIGN of a heartbeat of its own. Actually the only thing that has ever worked to revive a dead economy is the dirigist, credit-based, American System of Political Economy that Hamilton created (what all the wars have been about: the Empires trying hard to snuff it out), to get the dead post-Revolution economy going again, that Lincoln resorted to, via his Greenbacks, toget a dead post-war economy going again that FDR resorted to, via a re-tooled RFC and his CCC/WPA/PWA/TVA policies, to get a dead US economy going again,and what the Marshall Plan resorted to, to get a dead European economy going again, and what Trump can also resort to, via China’s B&R policies, to get the dead Trans-Atlantic (on indefinite Bailout/Bail-in Life Support) going again. The next few days will tell the tale.

          • Joe Tedesky
            July 7, 2017 at 13:30

            Brad I thoroughly enjoy reading your account to the end of the FDR anti-colonialists dreams and how they were all but dashed to the side, and of how this ideology was once again but not to be. I agree that a Wallace led America after the end of WWII would have brought us to a much different place, than what we now find ourselves in. Man’s fate was sealed that rather than Churchill being laid to rest, that unfortunately we loss Roosevelt.

            There is no more good reason to hate the Democratic Party’s political machine any more, than to hate this corrupt political society for how they schemed and cajoled there way through the 1944 Democratic National Convention to dump Wallace, as for for them to force through their preferred candidate Harry Truman onto the international stage. The fix was in, Roosevelt’s health was ailing and in terrible shape, and the nation was starved for peace, but to the cabal of monied interest now was a time to put in a weak and compliant front man into thea Oval Office, so why not Harry?

            Is it any wonder that Roosevelt never wanted to meet Truman? In 1944 would have not any alert thinking war planner but given the duration of the WWII another two years at most? Wasn’t it apparent, especially to those in the know, that with Midway behind us in the battle of the Pacific and with the heavy Russian advance which was rolling onwards towards Berlin, that peace was not just waiting for us around the bend but it was worth it to take a optimistic view of what was yet to come? You can place bets on the fact, that for those who were inside of this knowledge would have by 1944 known and seen clear to what awaited the newly christened worldwide peace, and been able to plan for it’s maturity to reveal itself. In plain world, these Truman backers, and speech loving Churchill supporters, knew exactly what they were doing when shoving aside good people to install Harry into the worlds most powerful position.

            So Brad thanks for bringing this episode up, and I will look forward to any more Wallace/Truman history it is you want to share with us. Joe

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:35

        Truman worked with organized crime before becoming a Senator. He was part of the Pendergast organized crime machine in Missouri. He was always connected with the ruling elite and organized crime.

        This is why he worked to get Lucky Luciano out of the penitentiary, for a 35-50 year stint for 80 counts of prostitution. In return, Luciano assured Sicily would be occupied by the allies and there would be no labor strife on the docks of Marseillse or the US.

        Truman unleashed Dulles on the post war world.

        FDR’s policies were always doomed to fail. FDR only gave us these policies due to tremendous organizing by socialists, communists, and unionists. But you cannot regulate a criminal enterprise, and that is what capitalism is.

        The rulers were pleased: they feared an uprising in the US, with FDR they got a saved capitalist system.

        • backwardsevolution
          July 7, 2017 at 13:03

          Danny Weil – excellent post.

          “FDR’s policies were always doomed to fail. FDR only gave us these policies due to tremendous organizing by socialists, communists, and unionists. But you cannot regulate a criminal enterprise, and that is what capitalism is. …with FDR they got a saved capitalist system.”


          • Brad Owen
            July 7, 2017 at 14:06

            With FDR they got a saved Dirigist, Mixed Economy system, bent towards promoting the General Welfare, which the Wall Street Tories considered a “Treason” to their class of predatory Free Enterprisers. So they promptly set out to “capture” the machinery of Government to safe-guard their predatory, parasitical, privateering, “free” (from regulatory interference on behalf of the 99%ers) enterprise system. This is the Synarchist Vision, more likely recognized as the corporate fascist capitalism that it is…and it always fails in the end…leaving the Dirigists to once again pick up the broken pieces to reboot a Mixed Economy (if we can ever get our Champion to live past the Predator Class’s exclusionary politics, or the character-assassin’s pen, or assassin’s bullet).

          • Sam F
            July 9, 2017 at 09:04

            Good to hear more of the FDR-Wallace/Truman issues, but a Tory conspiracy is implausible:
            1. I find very few UK people in US business; nearly none are Tories;
            2. I have never heard an assertion of a rationale for British supremacy;
            3. US forces have been greater than those of the UK since the Civil War;
            4. UK was completely crippled financially by WWII;
            5. There are almost zero UK products in the US; not a single UK machine or auto;
            6. There is no UK bank significant in the US, nor even a Canadian bank;
            7. I have seen no evidence of significant UK influence on US mass media or elections;

            Most UK influence is cultural, and that is very positive. Whatever Tories may wish to do, it appears that they have little influence here, and they could not take over US business and politics after WWII. The difficulty of tracing banking influence does not warrant any theory. Some may think the Tory theory a spoiler to hide zionist control of US finance, mass media and elections. But I will check new sources if identified.

      • July 7, 2017 at 16:37

        Brad,…I noticed your frequent references to the City of London…for those who might not be familiar with its significance here is a video clip interview with Nicholas Shaxson, author of Treasure Islands(it’s from 2011 but still relevant).

        • Ronald Reed
          July 10, 2017 at 10:40

          The Great Red Dragon website, “”, has a section put together in 2012 that traces “who controls what” based on controlling interests by financial institutions. Given the fast-paced changes and consolidations of the present day, it may require updating, but it is a good and useful place to begin.

      • Gregory Herr
        July 7, 2017 at 22:59

        Stephen Cohen appeared on Tucker Carlson and had some very encouraging things to say about the Putin-Trump meeting…he even referred to Trump as an “emerging statesman”.

  57. July 6, 2017 at 21:01

    as usual, thanks for your great work..but even without it i’d not believe for a micro second that russia would be so incompetent that it would infiltrate our glorious democracy but leave untouched its absolute essential core: fundraising…
    attempted humor aside, while accepting the “3 0r 4, but not 17 ” agencies point, how many people know or care about the 13 (?) others, given that the cia, fbi and nasa are most known to generally mis and dis inform already confused citizens and evidence (?) from these holy places would seem to be enough to convince many that jesus, moses and the three stooges are behind the conspiracy? seriously, what-who are the 13 left out and what power and influence do they have over – or beside? – the big three?

    • July 6, 2017 at 21:02

      meant nsa, not nasa..sorry…

    • Sam F
      July 6, 2017 at 21:55

      Homeland Security and subagencies, FBI, a satellite surveillance agency, an IRS unit, specialized military agencies, and others.

    • Adrian Engler
      July 7, 2017 at 04:47

      Of course, the whole “all 17 intelligence agencies” line was rather absurd, anyway. What could, for example, the Coast Guard and the Geospatial Intelligence agency contribute to the assessment of hacking claims about Russian intelligence services? Probably not too much.

      On the other hand, I don’t necessarily agree that the three agencies from which handpicked agents were involved are the most relevant ones. One relevant one that was not involved was the DIA, the defense intelligence agency. They seem to have specialists for the Russian intelligence agencies (and particulary the Russian military intelligence agency GRU against which hacking claims were made). The report from January seems rather clueless about the situation in Russia, just judging on what seems plausible on the basis of publicly know information. For example, statements by the excentric Russian anti-mainstream politician Zhirinovsky are treated as if they were relevant for assessing the intentions of the Kremlin, statements by Putin about Trump were misrepresented in order to let them seem more pro-Trump than they actually were, building on a translation error of the word yarki whose literal meaning is “bright”, but whose figurative meaning is far less positive than in English, and there are basic errors in the section about RT’s program that makes up a large part of that report. One of the best critiques of that flawed intelligence report has been written by Masha Gessen, who is a staunch Putin foe and certainly does not like Trump: After the end of the Cold War, the number of Russia specialists in the US secret services has been drastically reduced, but there are probably still some of them, and if the DIA had been involved, they would possible not have gotten wrong so many basic facts about Russia (in my view, this idea is confirmed by a recent DIA report that describes the Russian perspective with the US that is seen as a threat quite realistically). The non-involvement of the DIA is certainly a problem. Perhaps they did not find any people for handpicking there who would have supported the desired conclusion.

      The other agency that is certainly relevant for the assessment of claims about hacking is the NSA. The NSA was involved, but this was the agency that only ascribed “moderate confidence” to some of the claims.

      So, from the most relevant agencies, the DIA was not involved, at all, while the NSA only had “moderate confidence” in the conclusions of the report. The two large and politicized agencies CIA and FBI in which it probably was not difficult to find agents who would support a desired anti-Russian conclusion added their “high confidence” in the assessments.

      • Joe Tedesky
        July 7, 2017 at 11:58

        The detail you point out, is what is lacking, and Americans, even if you count the better informed ones, are missing out on the functions of these these specific Intelligence Agencies, and left to ignore the much unidentified word usage of the so-called intelligence report which goes unrivaled, to where all the confusion emanates from. So Adrian your posting here gains even more relevance than it would if it were just a matter of mistaken group think, or a poorly run investigation were the result of the intelligence community as a whole.

        Americans have no idea, that by the intelligence report referencing statements from outrageous attention seeking Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinosky is like quoting John McCain as every Americans representative for worldwide war and destruction. Also what little I know about Zhirinosky, is that his defensive angry remarks have only been voiced by him at those specific moments in time when the U.S. aggression against Russia has been seen as on it’s fullest display to disrupt the peaceful Russian existence. Like I said the American intelligence community is picking some obviously low hanging fruit, when quoting Zhirinosky since his outlandish remarks are meant for headline seeking attention, and often nothing much more. Some consider Zhirinosky as a Russian version of his being a Donald Trump, but without the crazy comb over. Lastly, Zhirinosky no matter what he says, should not be seen in this U.S. 17 Intelligence Agencies report. Incidentally what I have read stated by Zhirinosky I found amusing, and yet I feel as though we Americans should take him seriously for what he says, but Zhirinosky should not be seen as the voice for all of Russia, nor the Russian government.

        So Adrian thanks for the detail, I think I will read once more, so as to let it all sink it. Great comment. Joe

  58. July 6, 2017 at 20:25

    Excellent article by Mr. Parry. I believe: The G20 is an example of “MSM” censoring information on terrorism that Putin exposed a few years ago.

    The G20 meeting in Hamburg July 7and 8, 2017, will reportedly have amongst its member governments some that “financed,” support, train, and arm terrorists….
    [read much more at link below]

  59. exiled off mainstreet
    July 6, 2017 at 20:21

    If the consequences were not so serious, the black comedy of the yankee propaganda anti-Russian propaganda would be zany in its absurdity. The deep state walks and talks like a 21st century version of a fascist duck, and the last shreds of legitimacy of the yankee imperium are long gone.

  60. Pierre Anonymot
    July 6, 2017 at 19:59

    As usual, Mr. Parry, I agree with you, but there is one item that I’d like to point out, because, perhaps, you cannot say it.

    You refer to Clapper and Brennan by their agency titles. In actual fact, these two men have been co-President, because that is what their title means. The Directors of the CIA and National Intelligence know where all of the Washington skeletons are and how to use them. I personally suspect that the FBI was bested by the CIA quite some time ago as the triumvirate that determined all foreign policy, but the men we elected from Bill Clinton to Obama were mere talking heads who said what they were told to say (or not to say.) They were handsomely rewarded for their obedience. Their mindset is that of the MIC, the shape-shifting, amorphous group that determines policy.

    Sanders was a renegade they easily handled, but Trump was and remains one they haven’t figured out yet how to deal with so until they can find something better than the fake Russion election nonsense, they will blunder around, fearful and striking out blindly at anything that doesn’t obey them. What their Trump appointed successors will do remains to be seen..

  61. Abe
    July 6, 2017 at 19:58

    The unchallenged Queen of “Propaganda-ville” is Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat.

    Read the many comments at is you care to.

    • Abe
      July 6, 2017 at 22:00

      “We’ve been targeted by Russia. Bellingcat has been targeted by the Fancy Bear hackers, backed by the Russian government, who did the DNC leaks.”

      How do we know? ‘Cause fake “citizen investigative journalist” Higgins’ lips are moving

    • Abe
      July 6, 2017 at 22:20

      Higgins, the Post-Truth “One Man Intelligence Agency” propped by magical Kickstarter campaigns, now financed by major US military contractor Google, and paraded around the world by the Atlantic Council “regime change” think tank

    • Abe
      July 7, 2017 at 14:12

      Despite their claims of “independent journalism”, Eliot Higgins and the team of disinformation operatives at Bellingcat depend on the NATO-funded Atlantic Council to promote their “online investigations”.

      The Atlantic Council donors list includes US military and government agencies, foreign government agencies, corporations (both domestic and foreign), other think tanks and think tankers, and former government officials.

      – US government and military entities: US State Department, US Air Force, US Army, US Marines.

      – The NATO military alliance

      – Large corporations and major military contractors: Chevron, Google, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, BP, ExxonMobil, General Electric, Northrup Grumman, SAIC, ConocoPhillips, and Dow Chemical

      – Foreign governments: United Arab Emirates (UAE; which gives the think tank at least $1 million), Kingdom of Bahrain, City of London, Ministry of Defense of Finland, Embassy of Latvia, Estonian Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Defense of Georgia

      – Other think tanks and think tankers: Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Nicolas Veron of Bruegel (formerly at PIIE), Anne-Marie Slaughter (head of New America Foundation), Michele Flournoy (head of Center for a New American Security), Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings Institution.

    • Abe
      July 7, 2017 at 14:55

      Higgins and the Atlantic Council’s “Digital Sherlocks” propaganda collaborative convened in Poland to “harness the power of open source, social media, and digital forensic research” for pro-NATO propaganda purposes.

      Higgins and Bellingcat-style “new journalism” dispenses with actual ” fact-checking” and substitutes disinformation “narratives” that get people “engaged”.

    • Abe
      July 7, 2017 at 15:28

      During the Atlantic Council’s disinformation “story time” in Poland, Higgins finally managed to verify one fairly obvious fact: his Bellingcat “storytelling” is designed to appeal to children

    • Joe Average
      July 8, 2017 at 22:50


      there are a lot of Higgins’ (is that the correct plural for more than one Higgins?) in the world – always have been. With all the events happening right now the spin doctors lost control of the situation. Another difficulty for them had been added by the internet and its rapid spread. In the past people people may have wondered about some news that didn’t make any sense. They didn’t know where to look for additional information on certain topics. Nowadays all you have to do is to enter the “correct” keywords or search term and you get to read and watch a lot of very smart alternative perspectives. Those alternative perspectives and some basic logic almost automatically show you the most probable course of events.

      • reddox
        July 9, 2017 at 11:32

        Since you asked, no. There is never any use for an apostrophe in changing a word to the plural form. Higginses. Sounds awkward, but that’s what has to be done with words that end in the letter s.

  62. Zachary Smith
    July 6, 2017 at 19:56

    After this testimony, some of the major news organizations, which had been waving around the “17-intelligence-agencies” meme, subtly changed their phrasing to either depict Russian “meddling” as an established fact no longer requiring attribution or referred to the “unanimous judgment” of the Intelligence Community without citing a specific number.

    Earlier today as I was trying to find some decent music on the car radio I listened to a few minutes of NPR “reporting” – if you care to dignify their propaganda broadcasts by using such a term.

    HORSLEY: Well, you know, the uncomfortable backdrop for that first meeting with Vladimir Putin is the – an ongoing investigation of Russian meddling in last year’s presidential election. And the president was asked point-blank today to acknowledge what U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded, that Russia interfered in the election with an eye towards helping the Trump campaign.

    With these carefully chosen words they give listeners the impression the entire issue is a slam dunk.

    • Patrick Lucius
      July 6, 2017 at 20:22

      Three years ago I respected npr. Not sure who has changed more, them or me, but I now see, and hear, a lot of propaganda from them. I believe it was their columnist David Green spouting anti Russian, Ukrainian, and Crimean nonsense a month ago that has irked me the most. At least study up on the matter before you spout off! Can’t stand ignorance from know it all journalists.

      • July 6, 2017 at 23:25

        The are paid to be (or pretend) ignorant.

    • exiled off mainstreet
      July 6, 2017 at 20:23

      No person of good will should give a dime to NPR, and the Trump regime should cut off any residual federal funding they have since, as exponents of the uncompromising cold war they are enemies of survival and civilization.

      • Dave P.
        July 6, 2017 at 21:29

        exiled: Add PBS to the list too. They jumped on NeoCon bandwagon long time ago.

        • July 7, 2017 at 00:01

          “If the DNC is in possession of actual tangible evidence that could prove once and for all that Russians hacked their servers and attempted to undermine the campaign of Hillary Clinton, why not share that evidence with investigators and enjoy the blissful vindication that its public release would provide? Might it have something to do with this “purely coincidental’ meeting on a tarmac in Phoenix and/or Loretta Lynch’s ‘assurances’ that the FBI’s investigation (or, “matter” if you prefer) of Hillary Clinton “wouldn’t go too far”?
          Simple Qs for the presstituting PBS:
          “1. How does the DNC deny the FBI and Mueller?
          2. Has anyone actually asked for the server?”

        • July 7, 2017 at 00:17

          And BBC

    • Desert Dave
      July 7, 2017 at 00:30

      NPR has become woefully predictable. When it comes to N. Korea they go out of their way not to mention that there is a serious non-military option on the table, and in fact it has been on the table for years. What’s that? The US ceases provocative military exercises on N. Korea’s border and removes THAAD, and N. Korea freezes its nuclear program. N. Korea has been proposing this in different ways for a long time. They are in fact willing to cease development of these fearsome weapons.

      But NPR and the others won’t mention it. Perhaps that’s because this otherwise sensible idea is coming from our “enemies” Russia, China, and N. Korea.

      It seems that disarming N. Korea isn’t the actual goal.

      • backwardsevolution
        July 7, 2017 at 05:30

        Desert Dave – thank you for that. Now I’ll have to read up on THAAD.

    • Libby
      July 9, 2017 at 13:19

      Joan Walsh, in an article on the Trump-Putin meeting in The Nation magazine, re-stated this morning, in the opening paragraph, that ’17 intelligence agencies’ have confirmed the ‘Russian hacking story’. Trump, she asserted, had fallen into ‘Putin’s trap’.

      It seems impossible for the truth to enter into this (or so many other) MSM narratives. And there is no shame about it.

  63. turk151
    July 6, 2017 at 19:42

    I am clear that Putin did not rig the elections.

    What I am unclear on is whether Trump was involved in Russian mafia deals in which Putin gives tacit approval and the depth of mafia involvement with either leader.

    • Dave P.
      July 6, 2017 at 20:43

      turk151: The mafia deals and all these things – if there were any – you are talking about would have been aired out long time long ago before the election. With Obama in power, the Clinton Machine, intelligence agencies, and everybody else with them against Trump, they would have taken Trump down before the election. Also, lot of this Wall Street, and other Financial Oligarchies are some kind of Mafia too. All these very big time developers, most of them are jews, are all involved in this Mafia Financial World. Of course, Trump must have had dealings with Mafia Type Financial Oligarchies. What they did to Russia during 1991-2000 has no parallel in History – on that scale. There was so much of that Financial loot from Russia done mostly by The Jewish Oligarches, and there were all these vultures around to get some part of it. May be, Trump people were in it too, to get some share of it. And only by around 2006, the situation was was brought under control by Putin – most of it.

      All these Trump connections, with Russians, and officials from their banks are bunch of nonsense. Russians have some banks, but it is nothing like The Wests’ Financial Institutions. They have this total control all over the World, and lot of underground financial activity. They, the NeoCons, have these plans about Russia, and they are going to carry them out. If Hillary would have been elected, U.S. would have been far along in this project. Now, it may have some temporary halts along the way.

      • Mild-ly Facetious
        July 6, 2017 at 22:33

        There’s a great possibility you’ll be proven wrong on the collusion issue, Dave P. It’ll depend on how much evidence will be allowed into the investigative record. — We have this stupendous history of covering up pertinent facts in gov’t inquiries.

        • Dave P.
          July 6, 2017 at 23:15

          Facetious: I do not have any faith in these so called investigations they do in U.S. and Western Europe. They have been doing these shows for a very long time now going way back during the days of their colonial empires. Killing couple of thousand people, who were just peacefully protesting to gain freedom, and then have their investigations in London or Paris to show that they have this great justice system. Nothing ever came out of those investigations. No body was ever punished. Justice system, for whom!

          All the people involved in this investigation which is going on now in Washington are beyond redemption – they have degenerated into some kind of such evil beings.

          • Skip Scott
            July 7, 2017 at 08:11

            Dave P-

            I am wondering if they are doing the old bait and switch on the Russia-gate thing. If Trump has ties to the Russian Jewish mafia, the Deep State doesn’t want to offend the Jewish Russian mafia. They want to demonize Putin (who has largely reeled them in) and allow the jewish oligarchs to renew their raping of Russia. So they try to tie Trump to Putin instead in an effort to bring them both down, or at least keep them from reaching detente.

        • July 6, 2017 at 23:23

          You mean, we need to be more respectful of MSM? – Are you Mr. Ignatius in disguise?

      • Danny Weil
        July 7, 2017 at 09:28

        Go to and you will see all the organized crime connections Trump has, that we know of.

        What You Should Know About Oleg Deripaska

        And if you want to put blame on Zionists, that is one thing but to single out an entire group, Jews is anti-Semitism and ignorance. Orthdoxox Jews, both in the US and in Israel, are dead set against a Jewish state and always have been.

        There are Zionists and there are Bormann Jews. Look the latter up. Soros is one.

        • turk151
          July 7, 2017 at 12:50

          Danny, thank you.

          I find your comments about Jews very interesting and appreciate hearing about the nuances and thoughts of orthodox Jews. I agree that it is very unfair to blame Jews, the overwhelming majority who have nothing to do with the nefarious activities of their aristocracy.

        • Enels
          July 10, 2017 at 12:25

          That’s a good reasonable take (umbrage) to bring out to the open. But why in hell isn’t there more who will speak to that? Could it be that it is extremely dangerous for MOT to do so?

          Who were them in particular who really paid the actual price when there were genocide/pogroms? Maybe not the ”elites” but maybe the lower down orders of ordinary folks and any stragglers or inconvenient members of that group, who were then ”well gotten rid of”… two for one, as the victim class needed some sacrificial lambs, (what a concept!). Jeesus, come to think of it, who among the ancients more recently talked of that?

          My point is: that it is very dangerous to go off the ”reservation” an make that distinction, that not ALL JEWs are in agreement with the Zionist operations, but they know to STFU there. But I am an only am guess about it.

  64. Danny Weil
    July 6, 2017 at 19:39

    “”How many lies can you allow yourself to believe, before you belong to the lie?” –Mort Sahl”

  65. Cord
    July 6, 2017 at 19:33

    Robert, your work on this topic has been heroic in undermining group-think certitudes. Thank you very much for the tremendous journalism you provide so consistently.

  66. Helen Marshall
    July 6, 2017 at 19:31

    What is worse, Trump has been taken down and is charging Russia with aggression in Ukraine and Syria in his remarks in Poland…

    • July 7, 2017 at 00:11

      See my reply below.

    • Danny Weil
      July 7, 2017 at 09:23

      That is because the same game plan for the Ukraine and Syria and VZ etc. is the same plan for the whole world. Full spectrum dominance, total power

  67. Danny Weil
    July 6, 2017 at 19:17

    The following excellent article by Prof. Mark Chussodovsky not only lists the proofs for the assertion that this is a Nazi regime, but also proves it with photos. Here is the Racist Tanybuk giving the Nazi salute, and here is a beaming Nuland standing smiling with the Nazi racist Scum. Obama has legitimized Fascism, and here is the proof.

    The Confederate Stars and Bars is now disgustingly displayed in Kiev Square, and Peace Street has been renamed after the mass murder’s Nazi a batallion.

    That is right. Nuland and the neo-cons midwifed a Nazi regime in the Ukraine that is in power now. David Duke moved to the Ukraine, though the story is he left. The editor of the Daily Stormer, the fascist on-line blog, Andrew Andrew Auernheimer
    lives in the Ukriane now.

    Make no bones about it, what Bob calls journalism is not journalism, it is propaganda and highly controlled propaganda.

    And it is very, very dangerous.

    Truman stated:

    I never would have agreed to the formulation of the CIA back
    in ’47, if I had known it would become the American Gestapo.
    —Harry S Truman (1961)

    Alas, he represented the ruling elite as well and allowed Allan Dulles, the Benedict Arnold of post-Modern America, to team up with the Nazis, especially Bormann. All the Nazi loot was taken out of Germany and given back to the US in exchange for allowing Argentina to support and house high ranking Nazi officials, including, according to BBC reporter, Gerrard Williams, Hitler who he says escaped.

    When facts get in the way of irrational minds they are labeled a conspiracy theory.

    America lives in a continuous conspiracy theory, a nightmare, promulgated by many of the same corporations that supported Hitler.

    • Cal
      July 7, 2017 at 16:31

      Nazi leanings in the Ukraine go back to Bolshevism which was associated with Jews….hence Nazi popularity. The Ukraine people were literally ‘ starved’ to death by the Bolsheviks. What Solzhenitsyn wrote— –> ” The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the ”global media” itself is in the hands of the perpetrators” —-is true in most cases..

      “You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people.
      More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators.” –

      Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Nobel-Prize-winning novelist, historian..

  68. July 6, 2017 at 18:37

    Know your scoundrels: “In June 2017, several emails from the email account of the UAE’s ambassador to the United States, Yousef Al-Otaiba, was released to the media. The highly influential top Emirati diplomat heaped praise on Ignatius for writing pro-Saudi propaganda, a leaked email shows: “Yousef al-Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates’ ambassador to the United States, applauded journalist David Ignatius for his writing on Saudi Arabia. Ignatius is notorious for fawning coverage of the kingdom, promoting its supposed efforts at reform and taking its line on regional conflicts without a shred of skepticism.”
    D. Ignatius – a born opportunist.

  69. Anna Granfors
    July 6, 2017 at 18:31

    Dude, I’ve enjoyed your stuff throughout the years, but hearing you on Infowars last night was a bit of a shock. And “MSM” or “drive-by” media was co-opted by conservatives years ago. Call it what it is…multinational megacorporate media.


    • Erik G
      July 6, 2017 at 19:00

      Indeed, Consortium News has set a standard for professional precision in journalism, to which the New York Times and Washington Post would do well to return.

      Those who would like to petition the NYT to make Robert Parry their senior editor may do so here:
      While Mr. Parry may prefer independence, and we all know the NYT ownership makes it unlikely, and the NYT may try to ignore it, it is instructive to them that intelligent readers know better journalism when they see it. A petition demonstrates the concerns of a far larger number of potential or lost subscribers.

      • lexy677
        July 7, 2017 at 00:48

        The New York times is a Zionist “rag” and will always remain so. There’s no “going back” to independent journalism; it’s never been independent.

    • Abe
      July 6, 2017 at 21:45

      Robert Parry discusses the Russia-gate myth that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies agreed that Russia hacked into and distributed Democratic emails, a falsehood that The New York Times has belatedly retracted.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 12:53

      Anna – you’ve got to go where you can be heard, and Robert Parry would have reached a ton of people by going on Alex Jones’ show. These people will use Mr. Parry’s segment and link it to other sites. This is how truth is spread.

      Mr. Parry has a very straightforward way of presenting the facts. He’s calm, clear and concise. I thought it was very well done. Let’s just hope that other shows start having him on.

      Mr. Parry, excellent job!

    • Dennis
      July 9, 2017 at 13:19

      HAHAHA Rush Limbaugh coined the words…On Wednesday, part one of Sean Hannity’s interview with Rush Limbaugh was aired on the Fox News Channel, and amongst other things, they discussed a term the conservative talk radio host coined years ago:

      The Drive-By Media. It’s a like a drive-by shooter except the microphones are the guns, and they drive into groups of people they report a bunch of totally wrong libelous stuff about people. But I doubt if you were even ALIVE then. heh heh

Comments are closed.