A Note to Our Readers

As Consortiumnews.com forges ahead with publishing incisive articles offering fresh takes on current events, we also continue to develop a long-term strategy to ensure that Robert Parry’s vision for independent journalism lives on.

By Nat Parry

For the past few weeks, since Robert Parry’s health issues led to his hospitalization and to his untimely passing, his assistant editor, Chelsea Gilmour, and I have been handling the daily editing and upkeep of this website. We greatly appreciate the committed group of writers my dad has worked with over the years, who have continued to contribute quality content and offer unique perspectives on the most pressing issues of the day.

With Robert’s passing, Consortiumnews lost not only its editor but also its most prolific writer. Therefore we have tried to not only uphold his high editorial standards, but also to fill the gap in content by reaching out to new contributors, who have for the most part been warmly received by this website’s dedicated readership. Naturally, with any changes also come criticism, and we have experienced our share – including from a small but vocal clique of trolls on Twitter.

I suppose this comes with the territory when publishing a website that covers controversial topics, and particularly in the overheated political environment in the United States these days, it should be expected that any contrarian views will be met with hostility from various sectors.

Even with that in mind, it has been surprising to see some of the vitriol, which I can’t help but chalk up to the general state of hysteria that is gripping the United States these days. This is the result, it seems, of both the Russiagate controversy and the general trauma of the Donald Trump presidency. I have lived in Denmark the past ten years and don’t get back to the U.S. as much as I used to. The last time I was there, before heading back in mid-January to be with my dad as he dealt with his health issues, was during the election in November 2016. The atmosphere at that time was of course pretty heated with Americans coping with a highly divisive election campaign and coming to terms with the reality of a Trump presidency.

Following the news closely since the election, even from abroad, it was obvious that the Russiagate story was taking on a hysterical tone reminiscent of the Joe McCarthy era of the 1950s. We were seeing independent political movements like Black Lives Matter, the Standing Rock water protectors, and the Green Party being dragged through the mud and tarred with the “Russian agent” epithet. It was also clear that Russiagate was claiming a disproportionate amount of attention in the U.S., even as major issues like climate change and questions of war and peace were downplayed or ignored.

It wasn’t until I visited in January, however, that I realized how all-encompassing the Trump/Russia story is within the context of U.S. politics. Dividing my time between hospital visits to see my dad and working on the upkeep of Consortiumnews.com, I didn’t have a lot of free time for TV watching, but every time that I did turn the TV on and flipped to a cable “news” channel, it was nothing but nonstop Russiagate coverage.

No matter how long I watched – whether 15 minutes, an hour, or two hours – the subject matter was always the same: all Russia, all the time. And of course, the coverage was highly slanted – always taking at face value the underlying allegations made by the intelligence community, despite their well-known track record for deceit. It’s not clear to me whether Americans realize how abnormal this environment is.

Robert Parry did realize it though, and it was in this environment that he tried to build a home for independent journalism that took a fresh look at the big issues. His approach was always in the spirit of trying to present at least two sides to the story – and sometimes more than two sides. As he recalled in Consortiumnews.com’s mission statement, as a young reporter, he was “expected to seek out those alternative views, not dismiss them or pretend they didn’t exist.”

“But the major Western news outlets began to see journalism differently,” he wrote. “It became their strange duty to shut down questioning of the Official Story, even when the Official Story had major holes and made little sense, even when the evidence went in a different direction and serious analysts were disputing the groupthink.”

In this spirit, Consortiumnews has attracted a talented and knowledgeable team of writers who contribute from a variety of perspectives – as journalists, activists, academics, whistleblowers, and former intelligence officials who have grown weary of the politicization of their profession. This site has always been about the right of people to know what’s real and what’s not, what’s proven and what’s unproven. We hope that even in Robert’s absence, this independent approach can carry on.

Although Chelsea and I are now handling the editing and day-to-day operations of the website, the Board of the Consortium for Independent Journalism – which publishes Consortiumnews.com – is currently conducting a search for a full-time editor-in-chief who would take over the responsibilities on a more long-term basis.

During this transition period, we appreciate the continued support of readers who engage in lively debates on these pages and the writers who provide such interesting content on a daily basis. We will try to keep readers in the loop regarding next steps.

Thanks for your support.

image_pdfimage_print

104 comments for “A Note to Our Readers

  1. Richard T.
    February 14, 2018 at 5:53 pm

    Consider Dr. Paul Craig Roberts. He is not afraid of a fight.

  2. February 14, 2018 at 5:32 pm

    Thanks Nat, and pleae don’t let Consortium News disappear.
    We need you now more than ever.
    Cathy Sultan

  3. February 12, 2018 at 7:20 pm

    G’Day Nat,

    Great to hear yourself and Chelsea will be keeping the Consortium News ship afloat. You’re right about the nature and the substance, such as it is, of current political discourse. Along with many others I shared your father’s bewilderment and disgust that it has reached this point, a nadir by any measure. And I have a feeling it is going to become even worse. Hard to imagine for some I suppose, but as you would’ve discovered in the wake of your father’s passing, there seems no limit to certain folks ability or willingness to tap into their most vindictive selves, and vent their spleen accordingly.

    At the end of the day though this ugly propensity says so much more about them than it could ever say about the targets of their vitriol. We should keep in mind herein FDR’s oft quoted response when told of the true measure of feeling of the Wall Street mavens and their fellow travellers over his, in many quarters much reviled, New Deal policies, which as we all know were mostly implemented to counter the catastrophic impact their own greed-driven, self-serving recklessness had on the economy, the Great Depression being the prime exemplar: “I welcome their hatred!”

    Nevertheless we owe it to Rob and those before him to battle on, and I for one hope to continue from where I left off last year. For what it is worth, you will have my continued support, both by way of reposting Consortium content, referencing it in my own work when and where appropriate, and as privately indicated to you earlier, by way of content contribution.

    Regards,

    Greg Maybury
    Editor,
    poxamerikana.com

  4. Kelli
    February 12, 2018 at 5:43 pm

    Maybe the wonderful Ray McGovern? Or perhaps Phil.. …is it Rothrock? I’m sorry if I’m assassinating the name.
    I miss Robert. I think of him often and what he would say about all of this going on today as there seems to be need developments all the time.

    Still, happy to see need articles here nearly every day. You have fab writers. Miss Phil though too.

    Glad you brought Ms. Caity on board.

    I know you will make the right decisions….

    • Kelli
      February 12, 2018 at 5:53 pm

      And need is *new* autocorrect.

  5. Don Durivan
    February 12, 2018 at 3:46 pm

    Next steps at my end will be a contribution! Sooner than later, and a bravo to you for your determination to keep Robert’s vision alive and well.

    Don
    Boston

  6. February 11, 2018 at 12:59 pm

    i would like to suggest getting authors from other countries of the world, for a less american centric or even less Western centric outlook…

    Robert Parry created Consortiumnews….the best works always outlive the man…

    regards

    D

  7. Antiwar7
    February 11, 2018 at 12:39 pm

    Nat and Chelsea,

    You’re doing a great job! I’ve been a loyal reader and supporter for years, and I’m impressed with both the quality and the rate of new articles you’ve been publishing. Keep it up! Thank you.

    • Antiwar7
      February 11, 2018 at 12:59 pm

      Of course, the strong written voice of Robert Parry can never be replaced, only aspired to.

  8. jose
    February 11, 2018 at 10:18 am

    Dear Mr. Nat Parry: I imagine that it is not easy to fill the shoes of your late father even temporarily: Nonetheless, As a reader of Consortiumnes.com, I understand that with time changes will take place regardless of any circumstance. The only issue here to grapple with is how to adapt to them adequately. I have no doubt that you will find an honest and knowledgeable replacement for your father with a resume beyond reproach. I wish you good luck for the stakes are very high indeed.

  9. Matt Rubenstein
    February 11, 2018 at 9:19 am

    Sorry, but the person who wrote this piece of garbage about how “there’s no way to know” if a 40-year-old cleptocracy run by a single family as a police state is good or bad (https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/you-only-hate-assad-because-your-tv-told-you-to-5e3c9a9d17f9) shouldn’t be appearing on this or any other serious platform. (This has nothing to do with the veracity of the chemical weapons charges, a drop in the bucket of well-documented Baathist war crimes.) Caitlin Johnstone makes a mockery of the important journalism your father stood for. If she becomes a regular contributor, I’ll stop being a regular reader.

    • Martin - Swedish citizen
      February 11, 2018 at 10:26 am

      I read the article out of curiosity, not in detail and without checking any links.
      Just a concerned citizen, I agree there could and probably should be more facts about the rule of Assad with plusses and minuses, if that is your point. Facts are important! Johnstone in my interpretation does not say he is all good, however.
      Still, I like the article. She points to the difficult position of us citizens in taking a stand, speaking out against msm and government, which is scary, and something we should not have to do.
      She also points out the aggression of the West in Syria, with its terrible results.
      It seems to me also, but I may be wrong, that there is also the argument to be realistic and pragmatic and see the whole picture: which other countries around the Middle East are also run by families (most, right, and can that change overnight?), how did people fare in Syria compared with eg Saudi Arabia? Not least the women half of the population. How have minorities fared in Syria, eg the Christians and Kurds, under Assad? She rightly questions whether Assad is only an evil person with personality disorders, or if his purposes and goals may have some good sides as well. Such an analysis would be interesting!

      • Martin - Swedish citizen
        February 11, 2018 at 10:43 am

        Sorry, something went wrong and my comment appears twice.
        Please disregard the first one (unedited). If there is a way for mgmt, please delete the first one.

      • Matt Rubenstein
        February 12, 2018 at 7:26 am

        Martin, thanks for you reasonable reply, but Johnstone’s agnosticism about Assad is phony. She explicitly rejects an attitude of “all sides are bad,” which is in fact the only sane position on Syria. She also pretends there isn’t a 40-year body of scholarship and journalism about Baathism and Assadism in Syria, which there is. If you don’t know about it, look into it. Patrick Seale and Joshua Landis might be people who’d interest you. It’s one thing to support Western intervention in Syria–which I don’t–and quite another to adopt a pro-Baath (and pro-Putin) position, which is clearly what Johnstone is up to. Cynically, in her most recent piece on Syria (two days ago), she even quotes Landis, who has been a consistent critic of Assad’s torched-earth torture-state policies. Johnstone is the very picture of an ideologue. Her presence on this site only does it descredit.

        • February 12, 2018 at 6:53 pm

          Matt Rubenstein,

          You wrote: “… 40-year-old cleptocracy run by a single family as a police state.” Please provide facts and/or evidence to substantiate your assertion.

          You wrote: “… veracity of the chemical weapons charges, a drop in the bucket of well-documented Baathist war crimes.” Please provide facts and/or evidence to substantiate your assertion.

          You wrote: “It’s one thing to support Western intervention in Syria – which I don’t – and quite another to adopt a pro-Baath (and pro-Putin) position …” Please share with readers of Consortium News your plan or views of what it will take to finally end the war in Syria, and the immense suffering inflicted on the men, women and children of that country.

          Thank you.

      • Skip Scott
        February 12, 2018 at 1:37 pm

        Hi Martin-

        Just like Saddam Hussein, Assad’s Syria protected minority populations, and sectarian differences were minor. Sunni and Shia were intermarrying under Saddam, and Christians were/are protected by Assad. I notice that Mr. Rubenstein makes no mention of the Yinon plan, or the end result of our regime change operations in Iraq and Libya.

        As a side note, I went to sea with a Croat from former Yugoslavia who was a big fan of Tito. His point was the same that I am making here, that sectarian differences were a minor issue under Tito, and Yugoslavia’s diverse population lived in peace under his rule.

      • February 12, 2018 at 2:30 pm

        Stephen Gowans’s book on Syria, “Washington’s Long War On Syria,” is a must and it looks at the issue of the Alwaite Assad rule. It’s a must read book in my opinion. It’s accessible and really helped me to cut through the fog surrounding all that’s happening in there. You can’t go wrong examining the offerings on his website as well.

    • Martin - Swedish citizen
      February 11, 2018 at 10:37 am

      I read the article out of curiosity, not in detail and without checking any links.
      Just a concerned citizen, I agree there could and probably should be more facts about the rule of Assad with plusses and minuses, if that is your point. Facts are important! Johnstone in my interpretation does not say he is all good, and rightly questions the perception of him as all evil. A fact-based account of his priorities and realistic alternatives, how people have fared, put in perspective with other Arab countries, would be interesting.
      Still, I like the article. She points to the difficult position of us citizens in taking a stand, speaking out against msm and government, which is scary, and something we should not have to do.
      She also points out the aggression of the West in Syria, with its terrible results.

  10. Abi
    February 11, 2018 at 8:49 am

    I have been reading consortium for about three years now and I strangely felt at home here. This place has provided a safe space for truth seekers to be heard and I couldn’t be more grateful. It takes a lot of courage and boldness to stand tall like Robert Parry did, I admired him so greatly and my hope is to one day also champion the truth as courageously and as boldly as he has. My deepest condolence to the Parry family, I pray that God comforts you through this time.

  11. Virginia fiocca
    February 11, 2018 at 4:28 am

    I am happy to hear that this site will continue. I know it is not easy. Robert Parry was one in a million. I live in Europe too and it’s strange and difficult to go back and see the state of affairs in the US. People are being influenced by propaganda to a dangerous degree. Someone wrote on Face book they cried over a tv show and yet everyone seems to be oblivious to the continuous war and destruction the US is doing throughout the world. I hope this site will continue and my prayers for Robert Parry and his family

  12. Zachary Smith
    February 11, 2018 at 12:23 am

    Although Chelsea and I are now handling the editing and day-to-day operations of the website, the Board of the Consortium for Independent Journalism – which publishes Consortiumnews.com – is currently conducting a search for a full-time editor-in-chief who would take over the responsibilities on a more long-term basis.

    Picking a full-time editor – now that’s bound to be a challenge. Have you considered some sort of “Committee”? There have been a lot of respectable authors here who might volunteer. Perhaps set up a system where proposed articles/essays would be previewed by a few of them. A rejection would be mean everybody would vote on that particular submission. In extreme cases Mr. Nat Parry might make the final decision.

    Just a thought. :)

    • Martin - Swedish citizen
      February 11, 2018 at 6:46 am

      It is a task of possibly decisive importance, with many aspects to consider. Zachary’s idea seems wise, to make sure the purpose and control is retained. Yet, evolution is inevitable. I trust the work is in the best possible hands, and cross my fingers for this immensely important job.

      • jose
        February 11, 2018 at 10:22 am

        You are correct sir when you state that evolution is inevitable. Personally, I believe that Consortiumnes.com will grow in both strength and reach worldwide even though its creator is no longer with us. Good comment.

      • February 12, 2018 at 2:26 pm

        Hopefully he is pro people. We don’t need elitists who only use establishment, deep state-connected ‘experts’. I’m not against expertise, depending.

  13. Novus Ordo Seclorum
    February 11, 2018 at 12:12 am

    Empires are living processes – they’re born, they grow, age and then die. If you read the history of this planet since ~5000BC (best place to look is the ATLAS website in pictures and video if you subscribe to their service) you’ll find something curious: they almost always die from the same disease (military adventures bleeding them to death) and at a time when they believe that they are the masters of the universe. At that point they use mind control techniques to zombify their population so that they can patritically support their adventures (mis-) abroad.

    What’s happening today in the last empire on the planet is that the Neocons (the new master of the universe) have taken over the most powerful country in the world and have bought out all security agencies and corporate medias to zombify the population (sorry the Patriots).
    Americans are already living in a Virtual Reality world (the one created by the different Perceptions Management programs of the neocons and its CIA/FBI affiliates). It’s funny to see companies investing in virtual reality (VR) technologies as if they were living in a real world!

    Unfortunately, people around the world seem to understand the new American reality (I mean virtual reality), but less than 0.5% of Americans seem to get it. And those 0.5% are the ones that read alter media sites like Consorsiumnews.com

  14. Delia Ruhe
    February 10, 2018 at 10:22 pm

    I, too, have puzzled over why the American mainstream news media—which deserves scepticism even at the best of times—is so abnormally abnormal at this time. I mean, there is almost always some issue that the media are disgracing themselves over—the OJ Simpson trial; Bill Clinton’s sex life; the 2000 recount in Florida that ended in Baby Bush’s appointment to the presidency —all the stuff that provides those dozens of late-night and late-late-night comedians with a wealth of material.

    But reading the morning papers and sampling Wolf Blitzer’s brayings on CNN—and doing that alongside the blog-posts and articles and scholarship of academics and public intellectuals who approach the media lunacy from the perspective of a deteriorating hegemon in denial of its deterioration—is to understand that the US, both domestically and in its foreign policy, has been in crisis for a fairly long time now.

    Imperial decline-and-fall always begins at the bottom, so during the last couple of decades of the 20C, when it was “only” those made miserable by the flatlining of wages, the wave of job loss thanks to global outsourcing, and the explosion of homelessness together with the emergence of more or less permanent tent cities across the US—when decline was confined to this voiceless part of the working class, it was not so obvious that those unfortunates were evidence of a larger “decline and fall.” Today, you wouldn’t easily find anyone outside the US who isn’t convinced that they’re watching the end of American leadership on their television sets.

    The media are obsessed with scandal, not just because scandal sells papers and pumps up ratings, but also because it would be treason to spend an equal amount of time on the real issues, which are these:

    Despite having the most expensive military on the planet, American can’t win wars.
    Despite having the power to print money indefinitely, it’s gonna take more than playmoney to pay off those trillions and trillions of dollars (and counting) that constitute the American national debt.
    Citizens United (i.e., a group of American multi-millionaires and billionaires) have convinced the Supreme Court to acknowledge that the US is not a democracy—and the only two political parties the Deep State allows to exist have been celebrating it ever since.
    The world’s economic centre of gravity shifted to China about twelve or thirteen years ago, and it ain’t coming back this way again.

    If the media addressed those issues at length, too few Americans would listen.

  15. Jan
    February 10, 2018 at 9:41 pm

    I nominate Professor Stephen Cohen as Editor-in-Chief. He knows the real deal on US actions against Russia and other countries.

    • February 12, 2018 at 2:23 pm

      Why did he ever consent to join the Council on Foreign Relations? Yes, He’s resigned. Still…

  16. February 10, 2018 at 9:31 pm

    With persistent, determined and dedicated focus on contributing to the building of a better, more truthful and peaceful world for humanity, Consortium News and its supporters will create positive conditions, well-earned respect, gratitude and admiration, and the happiness derived from recognition of a job well done at the end of the day. All the best.

  17. February 10, 2018 at 7:52 pm

    very cool…i am looking forward to more consortiumnews…thank you so much

    d

  18. KiwiAntz
    February 10, 2018 at 5:51 pm

    It’s becoming abundantly clear that the American people & all people, Worldwide, are being deliberately & mentally brainwashed & “gaslighted” to exhaustion by the non stop, devious & unprecedented, negative propaganda & the 24/7 Russiagate lies. It’s a form of mental & psychological torture & I don’t know how we can stomach this nonsense, it’s horrendous? This constant, negative stream of lies is meant to confuse, befuddle & obscure the truth from the American people who are like shellshocked deers caught in the headlights & this is designed to rachet up & keep the population in perpertual fear of a enemy that doesn’t exist? Joseph Goebels & his nazi propaganda machine was nothing compared to the American Political & deepstate elite with its evil intelligence agencies & fakestream Media? The solution is simple? Organise & protest to your Congressman or Political lackeys & bombard them & these fake news outlets with massive complaints to discredit & fight back against this brainwashing propaganda? Then turn off the TV, disengage from fake social media sources & ignore & not read or view any of the cable & newsprint Corporate media! The next step is to seek out & get your news from alternative news outlets such as truthseekers in Consortium news, the RT channel, Sputnik & Wikileaks which will help you get the true picture of what’s really happening in the World in realtime & keep you informed about what the American deepstate, War- ocracy are up too? I live in NZ & yet as far away as I am, we are also bombarded with this fake news propaganda which are foisted on my own people by our own local media in lockstep with this Worldwide fakestream media groupthink narrative! It’s sickening & nauseating to read & watch so I choose to seek out alternative news sources for my own sanity & mental health? I suggest all readers do the same thing?

  19. S McLaren
    February 10, 2018 at 4:48 pm

    My thoughts and prayers with all those close to Robert. My only hope is that the new editor in chief takes on the torch of truth and continues in the manner Robert did. Consortium is a place of enlightenment. As for the rest of the contributors, please keep at it, please keep uncovering, please keep exposing.

  20. Hopeless
    February 10, 2018 at 4:45 pm

    Sy Hersh and David Sirota would be excellent additions. I also like the idea of hearing more from the VIPS members as the writing I have read here from those contributors includes the facts on which they are basing their analysis. There are many other sites which provide distilled interpretations of someone else’s opinion on rumours or unattributed information. I hope this site does not become one of those.

    While some seem pleased that Caitlin Johnstone’s writing has appeared here, I consider it a negative. It is opinion and conjecture (some of which I agree with or find interesting), but it is not journalism. The standard on which I base my judgement is this: Robert Parry did not publish her work.

    Thank you for the update on changes taking place here.

    • JWalters
      February 10, 2018 at 10:30 pm

      It seems to me the controversy over Caitlin Johnstone’s articles at Consortium News reflects two separate factors in articles. One factor is the content, the second is the style. Robert Parry’s articles are in a classic news report style. He dives right into the subject of the article, and quickly presents specific, relevant facts. For example, the recently re-published
      “Did Al Qaeda Dupe Trump on Syrian Attack?”
      https://consortiumnews.com/2018/02/06/did-al-qaeda-dupe-trump-on-syrian-attack-2/

      Caitlin Johnstone’s articles are in what has been called an “essay” style. This is a much looser form, allowing the the writer to imbue the presentation with their feelings. For example, in a recent CN article she opened the article writing about herself. “I sat down with my coffee this beautiful Australian morning to watch two of my favorite independent media figures jam together in a Corbett Report interview of renowned independent investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley. About two-thirds of the way through, I nearly fell out of my chair.”
      “Syria’s White Helmets Go Global”
      https://consortiumnews.com/2018/02/08/syrias-white-helmets-go-global/

      When the writer imbues the entire article with their feelings, to that degree the entire article is about themself in addition to the main topic.

      The feeling-filled essay style is potentially more entertaining, and more easily engages the emotions of the reader. For readers who agree with the writer’s viewpoint and conclusions, these can be cathartic and enthusiastic feelings. For readers who disagree however, their feelings can quickly become annoyance and disgust. Therefore, this style is a poor way to convert people to the writer’s viewpoint.

      The classic news report style, on the other hand, by being free of personal feelings, makes it much easier for a new reader to focus on the facts and logic of the case. Thus it is a better way to get through to people who do not already share the writer’s conclusions.

      The news report style is based on the style that evolved in scientific writing. Only facts and logic are allowed in a science report. This makes it much easier for other scientists to zero in on what is truly relevant to the issue at hand. It is an highly practical approach for a community discussion to efficiently home in on the truth.

      By contrast, a discussion in which all the participants are lacing their analyses with personal feelings will be continually knocked off track as people respond to perceived personal insults from the “other side”.

      Feelings can be discussed in science and news reports when they are explicitly part of the story. For instance, an abuse victim might describe their feelings caused by the abuse. In a science report there might be a survey of such feelings.

      The essay style has its place. Comments on a news report are often of this form. They usually do not involve the extra work it takes to pare writing down to the bare facts and implications. Also, a publication may specialize in essays, which have a long history in community discourse.

      The question for Consortium News going forward regards what sort of role it wants to play in the community discussion. Does it want to continue Robert Parry’s mission as a provider of fact-focused reporting that new readers can easily respect? Or does it want to branch out into essays that will cause some readers to whoop, but will quickly turn others off? My choice of strategy would be the former, because there are plenty of essayists out there on the web, but relatively few doing the more fact-focused, more useful, more difficult, and more valuable work of providing a highly objective and trustworthy source of information and analysis.

      • Skip Scott
        February 12, 2018 at 10:14 am

        JWalters-

        A very cogent analysis. However, I think there is room for both types of writing here at CN. I’m sure I like Caitlin mainly because I almost always agree with her. Her viewership has undoubtedly increased significantly since getting published at CN, and maybe she’s even making a few bucks. Those who don’t agree with her views can and do say so in the comments section, and I think it is good to have opinions like Caitlin’s spread around as much as possible to counter MSM propaganda spewers like Elliot Higgins and Rachel Maddow.

        • JWalters
          February 12, 2018 at 5:51 pm

          I also mainly agree with Caitlin’s views. But I think she would be more effective in convincing new people if she presented her analyses in an objective manner, without the clutter of name-calling and emotional side trips. Her style of presentation will help discredit the very analyses she is trying to promote. Just as the similar styles of Alex Jones and Rush Limbaugh quickly discredit them in the eyes of serious people. Including this kind of writing at CN degrades the effectiveness of CN. I would welcome Caitlin writing for CN in an cleanly objective manner.

      • Marcus
        February 14, 2018 at 11:39 pm

        Agreed – there’s a feeling of dumbing down about having the superficial personal opinions of CJ here on Parry’s once great serious news site. Sadly, no one ever went broke making something more stupid (sorry, “accessible”)

    • February 12, 2018 at 2:21 pm

      Robert Parry was not perfect. Nor should he be worshipped.

      • JWalters
        February 12, 2018 at 5:53 pm

        I agree. But Robert Parry was an expert, HIGHLY effective reporter. That’s why he won multiple prizes for journalism.

        • February 12, 2018 at 6:43 pm

          No argument here on that point.

  21. J. von York
    February 10, 2018 at 4:39 pm

    I echo what others have said about what a valuable site this is. I’m concerned that the business of “perception management” and “manufactured consent” is going into overdrive as outlined in Chris Hedges’ essay ‘Thought Police for the 21st Century.’

    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/thought-police-21st-century/

    Here is one snippet of this essay which reveals the startling scale of this activity-

    “Monika Bickert, head of global policy management at Facebook, told the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in a hearing Wednesday that Facebook employs a security team of 10,000—7,500 of whom “assess potentially violating content”—and that “by the end of 2018 we will more than double” it to over 20,000. Social media companies are intertwined with and often work for U.S. intelligence agencies. This army of censors is our Thought Police.”

    This just underscores that we need to support independent journalism more than ever. I hope Consortium News survives!

  22. Rael Nidess, M.D.
    February 10, 2018 at 4:20 pm

    First, deepest & sincere condolences for your loss Nat (and Robert’s significant others too).

    Second, while there’s always going to be criticism, keep in mind: “Illigitimati Non Carborundum!”.

    Third, your observations of the current U.S. political circus, from an ‘offshore’ vantage point are useful in helping us to remember, it doesn’t have to be like this.

    Keep up the good work!

  23. ranney
    February 10, 2018 at 4:20 pm

    I think you’re doing a great job! and I appreciate the fact that you are giving us updates on what is happening at CN. Robert’s death has left a huge hole in our ability to comprehend the utter chaos that surrounds us politically, economically, and environmentally these days. Thank you for continuing to work the problem – and doing it so well.
    And yes, like other commenters, I like Caitlin Johnstone too. She’s a breath of fresh air.

  24. Realist
    February 10, 2018 at 4:14 pm

    Keep up the good work, Nat. You are making your father proud. A permanent new editor will have huge boots to fill, as Robert was so incredibly talented and indefatigable. He was just brilliant, the very top of his profession whether appreciated or not by his own country.

  25. Patty C
    February 10, 2018 at 3:23 pm

    David Sirota is also looking for work.

  26. Paul G.
    February 10, 2018 at 2:53 pm

    Your service is invaluable, essential in the wasteland that is US-and Western-news keep up his tradition. Robert is sorely missed.

    Consider Seymour Hersh for the job; then he wouldn’t have to publish in the London Review of Books. When an investigative reporter has to look abroad for a publisher; he must be doing a knock em dead job.

    • February 10, 2018 at 2:54 pm

      Oh man that would rule. Seymour Hersh Is no nonsense for sure.

      • February 12, 2018 at 2:16 pm

        So is Douglas Valentine (author of “The Phoenix Program”), who calls Seymour Hersh CIAmour Hersh and I’m sure he has his reasons. My problem with Hersh is that he is deep state-connected. (Caitlin Johnstone has an interesting, revealing article on Hersh that folks here should read.) Sure, Deep state-connected journos can bring insights. And other stuff too, Right? But I do believe in judging a book by it’s cover. I absolutely was floored by Hersh’s “The Dark Side Of Camelot.” (Listening to him talk about out, I can’t help but feel that he lacks the courage of his convictions. Also, I don’t like Hersh personally. He’s nasty.) I also liked his (lop-sided) book “The Killing Of Osama bin Laden. Chomsky calls Hersh a fantastic reporter and Hersh calls Chomsky’s “Rethinking Camelot” brilliant.

    • jose
      February 11, 2018 at 10:32 am

      I concur totally with your recommendation of Mr. Seymour Hersh for the job. I think that Consortiumnews.com will be well served. Good post.

  27. February 10, 2018 at 2:53 pm

    Any transition is uncertain. You are doing a great job. Thank you for carrying on in what clearly must be hard times.

  28. Michael Miles
    February 10, 2018 at 2:46 pm

    Thank you for your heroic efforts. I have followed Consortium News since 2012, and have found it a great source of unbiased news.

    I tend to read many sources, left, right, foreign and domestic. Based upon what I’ve read it has always seemed to me that Robert Parry, despite all of the emotion and biased language flowing through most news sources, had always been able to keep a level head which made him very unique and set him apart from almost every other publication. At times he would sound frustrated or a bit cynical, but he would always thoroughly and thoughtfully examine each issue.

    The collective insanity that is gripping our country, I believe is very unique, as the numerous events that are besetting us have left many realizing their loss of innocence, mourning of certain cataclysmic events that threaten our existence, and a subsequent sense of helplessness.

    I think the difference I’ve seen since you took over is that you are actually more timely with your stories, and with the addition of Caitlan Johnstone, who I read separately, has more emotive opinion, which may upset some readers. Inasmuch as I try to read everything I can get my hands on, and automatically edit out emotionally charged verbiage, it makes little difference to me. I always look for new perspectives, as life is a learning experience.

    In my opinion you will always be balancing the opinion and information. The trick in any regard is to attempt to keep that brilliant tone that you father brought to this publication.

    Keep up the good work. We need this publication.

  29. Lois Gagnon
    February 10, 2018 at 1:18 pm

    I will echo what others have said above. I’ve read Consortium News for years and value it as among my top sources of true journalism. I am also so very grateful for your efforts to keep this site going and adding Caitlin Johnstone who I have been following for the past year or so.

    I also think it would be wonderful to see Seymour Hersh published here since he has been blacklisted by corporate media. A travesty of epic proportions.

    I’m sure you will find an editor worthy of your father’s legacy. There are many talented writers out there. Sometimes it takes a while to find them due to the oppressive nature of information control we are living under.

    Thank you again for your great work. We are all indebted to you for keeping this community together after the devastating loss of your beloved father.

  30. Zim
    February 10, 2018 at 12:30 pm

    Thanks Nat for the update. This site is indispensable. Keep up the good work.

  31. February 10, 2018 at 12:27 pm

    Thank you for the update. I am so glad you’ve added Caitlin Johnstone as a contributor.

  32. February 10, 2018 at 12:26 pm

    Nat,…the difficulty of your dilemma is understandable especially to longtime readers of CN. However, with many blacklisted good journalists I’m sure you will find someone capable of taking over editorial responsibilities. In my opinion you have already taken the website in the right direction by expanding topic matter. Russia-gate, of course. is of major importance and, thanks to your dad that spotlight was never removed. Nevertheless, I believe the format should be respected as it is uncluttered and conducive to comments. Relevant videos are complimented by other responsible websites(e.g. Newsbud, OffGuardian) often linked here. I suspect your principal criteria involves someone who is adept at financing and faithful to the integrity of the website. My best wishes for an enduring solution.

  33. john wilson
    February 10, 2018 at 11:38 am

    Nat Perry doesn’t need to worry about the trolls on twitter as most of us never use this silly site or face book. Your good work is probably more widely read than you may think. I watch RT as my main source of news and comment and consortium news is regularly referred to in glowing terms my such luminaries as Peter Lavell (not sure of the spelling) on Cross Talk. More and more people are now turning to alternative news media and sites like yours. I believe RT now has comments and acknowledgements in the billions per year. Perhaps Robert Parry’s editorship is the foundation stone of a great edifice of news and alternative comment to come.

    • geeyp
      February 10, 2018 at 4:53 pm

      I want to endorse the fact that on here commenters don’t have to sign in using Twit., Face., Disqus, or any other means. I hope that this practice remains, as I don’t wish to join those means to an end. Keep on keepin’ on!

      • Joe Tedesky
        February 10, 2018 at 8:40 pm

        I second that. No Facebook no nuth’n.

      • February 11, 2018 at 12:53 pm

        i third that….

        speaking of facebook and google…does anyone recommend any of the search engines as being more open and useful….typically im still using yahoo…

        • Anon
          February 11, 2018 at 1:58 pm

          Try DuckDuckGo, Yandex, and StartPage. I use them only occasionally.

          • February 12, 2018 at 7:36 am

            thanks anon…all 3 looked good

            d

        • February 12, 2018 at 2:09 pm

          “open and useful”?

          I only know that I’m always looking for the best (safe, private, anti-tracker). I’m not loyal to any particular browser or search, but when I know that a browser or search engine is nasty, I move on. I used Firefox forever until I came across an article in the business press talking about Mozilla’s jumping on the fake news bandwagon. I will never use another Mozilla product. Pale Moon is a Firefox replacement and I only use it because it looks familiar. I have no idea whether that company is the enemy. I’ll one day know. I actually use two browsers at the same time: Epic (Paul Harris at Axis Of Logic recommended it to me) and Pale Moon. When Pale Moon craps out, Epic makes it way. Epic is utterly stripped down. And there’s an Epic Search that I’ll wager is decent. I’m using it now. I was using Gibiru. Duck Duck Go just doesn’t work well. Ixquick is an option.

  34. John Barth jr.
    February 10, 2018 at 11:37 am

    Thanks very much to Nat Parry and Chelsea Gilmour for your excellent work so far.
    Many readers much appreciate this unique “home for independent journalism” that takes “a fresh look at the big issues.” I hope that you find a good selection of editor candidates able to build on CN’s history of nonpartisan and skeptical journalism. Unusual strengths of investigation, analysis, self-criticism, tolerance, maturity, knowledge, and presentation are needed. Perhaps contributors and readers can offer suggestions.

  35. Joe Tedesky
    February 10, 2018 at 11:05 am

    Thanks Nat for the informative update to ‘the Consortium’.

    First thing I love the reprise of your dad’s prior work, as it’s even more now refreshing to read the works of one of the world’s greatest reporters who will remain with me a legend of what’s good and reliable about honest people. I could only remind you about your father’s talents being diverse, and recommend reprinting his articles on the many various subjects he wrote about, like about history. The first time I visited this site, I spend a whole weekend reading Robert Parry’s rendition on various historical people,and events. The only other thing I can suggest, is to have a Robert Parry section, with everything about him you can find, like interviews, old photos of your dad with various people he met, and of course a archive of his great works.

    When it comes to writers, may I suggest having all the members of the VIP group write articles? Is Sy Hersh available? How about the up and coming writer, could ‘the Consortium’ provide a platform for these unread authors? Nat you already must know who and what you don’t want to grace the pages of this wonderful website, so do what you do best, and don’t look back.

    I grew up in a family business, and now my children run the day to day affairs. Nat if you are like my kids you no doubt have the mission of consortiumnews business plan embedded into your head, so run with that confidence the best way you know how. Writing a ‘Note’ like this one from time to time, and for you to read the comments to get reactions, is a fantastic way to include ‘the Consortiums’ readers into the mix of things.

    Carry on Nat, we are all behind you. Joe

    • Skip Scott
      February 10, 2018 at 12:00 pm

      I was hopeful that Nat would become the new full time editor, but it seems that he has other plans. He and Chelsea have done a great job upholding Robert Parry’s high standards. I wish them luck finding an editor in chief who can continue to make CN the best site for real journalism.

      • Joe Tedesky
        February 10, 2018 at 12:36 pm

        I hear you Skip. We will both need to control our emotions while Nat figures all of this out. So far Nat seems quite capable at guiding his father’s website. Patience is what we need, and Skip I know you have it, as well as I. Keep it dry and give it plenty of sunlight shipmate, for whatever that means…something a longtime ago I heard John Oates of Hall & Oates say. Joe

    • Joe Tedesky
      February 11, 2018 at 3:16 am

      Nat …idea; if you would like to have a round table discussion, and are looking for a conversation and there is no one around, write an article and publish it on the Consortium and then read the comments. We wouldn’t even know we were interacting in your business head banging meeting. Joe

  36. johnny reader
    February 10, 2018 at 9:55 am

    With conservative lies from Fox News and liberal lies from CNN/MSNBC and mainstream media, the only way to get any semblance of truth is from independent journalists like Consortiumnews. Truthseekers absolutely depend on you guys to carry on your vital work. Good luck in working things out, and I’ll stay tuned!

  37. Bob Van Noy
    February 10, 2018 at 9:54 am

    I can’t thank you enough Nat Parry and Chelsea Gilmour. Nat your father Earned my total loyalty through his flawless reporting and and high ethics. You’ve been doing a remarkable job and I will follow (and contribute) as long as you publish.

    Too, this kind of public feedback is extremely valuable. Your Dad developed an extremely decent and dedicated readership, rely on it as you see fit. Many Thanks…

  38. February 10, 2018 at 9:48 am

    I’m not a troll, and I’ve still critiqued, here and on my blog, part, though not all of your recent coverage — specifically your two-siderism on the Nunes Memo.

    And, whoever your permanent full-time editor becomes, they already should know that I don’t like one of the additions since your dad’s death.

    That’s a straightforward non-troll critique. Do with it, or not, as you will, or won’t.

    • Skip Scott
      February 10, 2018 at 11:53 am

      I think Caitlin Johnstone is a great addition.

      • John McCarthy
        February 10, 2018 at 12:30 pm

        I agree!

        • ToivoS
          February 10, 2018 at 10:57 pm

          me too

          • February 12, 2018 at 1:48 pm

            Me too.

      • Antiwar7
        February 11, 2018 at 12:34 pm

        Agreed!

    • February 10, 2018 at 3:12 pm

      Oh, yes, I LOOVE Caitlin’s idea of how the American left should unite in cause with the alt-right.

      Fantastic.

    • February 10, 2018 at 8:28 pm

      i can see where not everyone will enjoy Caitlin’s style, but her topics are always pertinent to our world….

      also i dont want to see CN become another echo chamber for our particular form of angst…

      Discuss, disagree, debate, argue, find consensus and what truths are available…as long as we arnt hurting one another, a little sparring here just helps sharpen the knives, for the real fight with the big, bad rest of the world…

      regards

      D

      • ML
        February 11, 2018 at 4:04 pm

        Derek, how right you are. A few days ago, there was a commenter named Cold N. Holdfield, his pen name, obviously one he thought to be a clever play on the protagonist from the great novel Catcher in the Rye. His comments were demeaning, belittling and degenerated into some of the worst vile I have seen. CN seems to have thankfully, deleted his most hateful comment. He also belittled Joe T, one of my favorite commenters, who has always been nothing if not gracious, insightful and deeply kind, a true gentleman. I hope that CN can continue its mission and I’ve no doubt they will succeed. I fervently hope that “trolls” will be ignored and then deleted, as that sort of “commentary” has no place anywhere, much less here at Consortium News.

        • Skip Scott
          February 12, 2018 at 10:04 am

          ML-

          I just checked and the comment where he wants to make Rob and I into “hamburger meat” is still up. BTW, I do regret the remark I made about his mother, but I can be a bit of a hothead at times, and I was trying to make a point about calling Putin a “cold blooded killer” without providing any evidence. I sometimes get sucked into debate with commenters that may be described as trolls, but at times it is hard to draw the line between debating an honest difference of opinion and feeding a troll. I have said in the past to Joe T that I admire his civility. Again and again I find myself not quite measuring up to his fine example.

          • ML
            February 12, 2018 at 10:56 am

            Hi Skip S, yes, it is difficult not to respond sometimes. Those types can really push buttons. I have to stop, take a breath, laugh at it, then just go on my way. Joe T does an excellent job. So do you. I had not seen the comment again and am sorry to hear it is still up, but he promised us (haha) that he would never post on this site again. Let’s hope he meant it! Thanks for your kind reply, Skip and cheers!

          • February 12, 2018 at 1:06 pm

            when its just a random sniper that comes on here tossing insults and making hateful statements…i like to smack em around a little too…:>)

            d

      • February 12, 2018 at 1:52 pm

        I enjoy her style but not her potty mouth. If that’s part of her style, then that’s a part of it I don’t like. But I can take it. Also, I don’t agree with all that she promulgates. I don’t agree with her about God, for example. Again, I can take that. There’s almost no one (in fact, I can’t think of anyone) who I agree with 100%, which isn’t the same as betrayal, which there’s lots of. I could go through the list, but you all know the list without my presenting it here. The list grows, frighteningly. But it is what it is.

    • Abby
      February 12, 2018 at 3:12 am

      The easiest solution is not to read her articles if it’s Caitlin whom you are referring to.

  39. JWalters
    February 10, 2018 at 9:05 am

    Robert Parry’s reports and analyses were based on an objective effort to gather all the relevant facts, and to present those specific facts and their logical implications with uncluttered clarity to the reader. This is the helpful service wanted by any reader interested in knowing the truth. It is the type of presentation that stands solidly amidst disinformation and half-baked flame-throwing. It is the type of reporting that has the power to truly advance the discussion and benefit society. In an era when corruption is obviously widespread, it is especially important. My deep thanks and best wishes to Nat Parry, Chelsea Gilmour, and the dedicated team of reporters and analysts who are committed to carrying on this mission.

    • Gregory Herr
      February 10, 2018 at 1:27 pm

      So true and well-spoken. My thanks & best wishes as well.

    • Rob Roy
      February 12, 2018 at 3:20 am

      Jwalters, so true. Thank you. I still can’t believe Robert Parry is gone. I hope the search for an editor is extensive and thorough because to take his place is monumental. He was the best of all. Thank you, Nat Parry, for your help in finding someone you can respect as much as your father. We appreciate your writing as well.

  40. mike k
    February 10, 2018 at 9:00 am

    Let me express my heartfelt gratitude for all you are doing to keep this precious resource alive and well. The intense criticism from the brainwashed and uninformed is actually a testament to the dedication to the truth, however unpopular, that characterizes these pages. Those who live in darkness react to beams of light with anger and attacks.

    Without the refuge provided for the real truth of our situation by Consortium and other sites, we would only slip inexorably into greater darkness………

  41. alley cat
    February 10, 2018 at 8:50 am

    “It’s not clear to me whether Americans realize how abnormal this environment is.”

    It’s clear to me that most Americans don’t have a clue how abnormal this environment is. How can they, when they know only what the neocon-controlled news media want them to know?

    The resulting mass insanity, the world’s worst nightmare, is the neocons’ dream come true: a world ruled by lies and violence, but most of all, by neocons.

    They have to be resisted and defeated, or at least contained, for democracy to survive.

    People forget that democracy is not just an abstract idea that you can keep on a shelf and take down when needed. It’s a process, and it’s the only process that produces democratic results. You can’t get democratic results from undemocratic methods, such as, for example, overturning an election on the basis of unproven allegations and smears.

    Breaking the rules that make a democratic society function produces chaos, not reform, and then dictatorship, when a strongman (or woman) steps in to restore order (but not democratic government).

    There’s no way to overstate the importance of what you’re doing.

    • Skip Scott
      February 10, 2018 at 11:51 am

      I am no fan of Hillary, but she did win the popular vote. The electoral college is an undemocratic entity. That said, most of the subversion of our democracy (actually democratic republic) comes long before the general election. The vetting process of our two parties and the role of Big Money, ensures that we get to decide between corporate sponsored warmonger from column A or column B.

      The current structure is designed to protect the Oligarchy. Even our founders were concerned about protecting the privileged from “mob rule.”

      I am all in favor of democracy, the rule of law, and a free press, but we’ve got a long ways to go on all those fronts.

      • alley cat
        February 10, 2018 at 2:10 pm

        “I am no fan of Hillary, but she did win the popular vote.”

        If we lived in a direct democracy we would all be debating and voting on all legislation and wouldn’t have time for much else. Apparently a few Greek city-states tried it but they soon devolved into mobocracies. Anyway, that’s the argument that led Aristotle to conclude in The Politics that the best form of government overall was some mixture of democracy and oligarchy.

        Under the rules (as adopted, mostly by oligarchs, in our Constitution), the electoral college determines the outcome of elections. Although we didn’t make the rules, we can change them, but I guess that elections where the electoral college vote and popular vote diverged have been infrequent enough that people soon lose interest in doing anything about it.

        Yes, our government is a long way from perfect (what government isn’t?), but the bottom line is that Trump won the election according to Hoyle, and if the neocons and Clinton dead-enders won’t accept it, they, not the Russians, are the ones undermining our democracy (or democratic republic, if you prefer).

        • Skip Scott
          February 10, 2018 at 5:05 pm

          I don’t mind the structure of our government, but I do mind very much that all the branches have been utterly corrupted. I also mind very much that the electoral process has been corrupted to the point where any real change has become impossible, that legislators no longer represent their constituents, and that the judiciary has abandoned the Constitution.

          I do believe that the electoral college should be abolished. I think we can trust the public enough to have one man, one vote determine who should be our president. As it is now many voters realize that their vote doesn’t count. I live in Arizona, a solidly red state that continually elects warmonger John McCain. My vote for President is basically pissing into the wind because Arizona always goes to the Republicans. People in swing states are the only ones whose votes might count for something, and even then the choice is meaningless since the Deep State rules in the end.

          • Bob Van Noy
            February 11, 2018 at 9:21 am

            Skip Scott thank you for the insight about Arizona politics. I live in California supposedly a deep blue state but I have long argued that that image is a facade. Big business (those involved in resource extraction and management, have never really been affected by local politics. My argument would go along the lines of: neither party really serves The People…

            Nice string going here alley cat. Thank You.

        • Sam F
          February 10, 2018 at 8:34 pm

          Aristotle distinguished between what he called a “democracy” (small city states with direct vote) and a “constitutional republic” whereas all modern democracies have constitutions. So the Repub line that a democracy must be the degenerate primitive case has no basis in fact. They attempt to legitimize kleptocracy, which they pretend is aristocracy, by pretending that the alternative is mob rule, which is of course nonsense. No oligarchy is needed or desirable. Democracy (Greek) = Republic (Latin).

          The framers of the US Constitution were well aware of the classical distinctions and attempted to set up a democracy that would be more stable and to prohibit aristocracy. But of course with time, economic power became concentrated and gradually more able to control the press and election budgets, soon consolidated into oligarchy, and now a dictatorship of the rich, preserving only the forms of democracy. Only by protecting these institutions from money can we restore democracy.

          • Bob Van Noy
            February 11, 2018 at 9:11 am

            Sam F., I think you’ve just summarized in a paragraph both our problem as a Hopeful Democracy, and the potential political solution. I congratulate you for this clarity of mind and I sincerely look forward to more exchanges like this. Many Thanks…

          • Bob Van Noy
            February 11, 2018 at 9:42 am
          • Sam F
            February 11, 2018 at 9:09 pm

            The linked article well expresses legitimate concerns about the real causes of the JFK/MLK/RFK murders and the theories of 9/11, and the frustration between those inclined to avoid the “conspiracist” label and those already persuaded of common causes. I cannot yet conclude more than that the official stories reveal only a soothing fraction of what is known, and that the absence of further investigation has left the field open to reasonable strong suspicion. It is certainly remarkable that the JFK/MLK/RFK murders eliminated great hopes for peace rather than warmongers, and that 9/11 has such strong Saudi ties without consequences vs. the Iraq WMD consequences without evidence. But I won’t open such an endless discussion here.

      • February 10, 2018 at 9:05 pm

        Her winning the popular vote is as irrelevant as a football team having more conversions than the team that won the game.

        You see it is irrelevant because all candidates running knew that the electoral college determined the winner, not the popular vote, going into the campaign. We have no idea what the popular vote results would have been if the system had already been set up before the election that the popular vote winner would win the election because we have no idea what the candidates would have done with their campaigns.

        For instance, the GOP did not put a lot of effort into solid blue states and two real big populous states fit that category: New York and California. We have no idea what the results would have been if they had put a GOTV effort in those states. On the other hand the same with the Democrats in red state Texas.

        So it is entirely possible that if the election had been a popular vote election, everyone knowing that from the start, that Trump still could have won. We just don’t know.

        • Skip Scott
          February 11, 2018 at 7:43 am

          Very good points Miranda.

        • Bob Van Noy
          February 11, 2018 at 9:25 am

          Add to all of this the actual manipulation of the counting process and one has an excellent assessment of our current predicament; or failure of Democratic Government. Thank You Miranda Keefe.

      • Rob Roy
        February 12, 2018 at 3:16 am

        Skip, I found an interesting statistic recently.
        Of the voters in the 2016 election 30% were Democrats, 30% were Republicans and 40% didn’t vote. Then I heard today that 39% of voters registered now are Independents. Sooooooo, if that 39-40% had voted we could have had Jill Stein as president. Even though she didn’t have much of a chance, she was scary enough for the PTB to smear her as a Putin person simply because she was in the same place as he one time (she was there on a peace mission). I know people who don’t vote and are rather elitist about it, sort of “above the fray,” i.e., superior, because, “It’s doesn’t make a difference.” But, geez, 40% of voters could actually made a difference.

        • Skip Scott
          February 12, 2018 at 9:49 am

          Rob Roy-

          Yes, I think those statistics are very telling indeed. TPTB have a vested interest in keeping the Republicrats unchallenged. They’re both bought off, so it’s win-win. Controlling the televised debates, keeping our choices pre-vetted by the Oligarchy, making election day on a work day, and a thousand other manipulations, keep third party candidates at bay and keep many people from voting at all. My one hope for our current mess is that it wakes enough people up to the charade of the two-party system, and it blows up in 2020. That 40% is a time bomb waiting to explode.

Comments are closed.