The Ukraine invasion that never arrives is showing us once again that when it comes to Russia you really can just completely ignore all the so-called experts in the mainstream media.
That way nobody needs to pretend they’re doing news reporting instead of intelligence agency stenography and the public is clear they’re being fed whatever story about reality the C.I.A. wants them to believe.
The sudden chorus of outrage at the prime minister for impugning the reputation of the opposition leader, Sir Keir Starmer, is strange in many ways, writes Jonathan Cook.
Ten years after 9/11 the U.S. and Middle East allies weaponized jihadist groups in Syria, writes Andrew Hammond, and the result was an utter disaster. But don’t expect any self-reflection from the cheerleaders.
The wall of propaganda that towers over us, resting on an insidious culture of irrationality that has come to suffuse the American polity, is weakening.
A subject alternative sites like Consortium News have been writing about for years is now being approached by The New York Times and CNN, writes Joe Lauria.
It’s been more than a month since the “imminent” invasion was coming so a new threat needed to be cooked up in the bowels of Foggy Bottom and Langley, writes Daniel McAdams.
The invisible evidence presented by the United States that Russia is plotting a provocation to justify an invasion of Ukraine is that the government says so.
The U.S. media class is saying whatever it wants about Ukraine because five years of Russia hysteria have taught them that they will suffer zero professional consequences when they are proven wrong.
Rather than examining the perspective of Russian national security interests, U.S. officials wrongly think the fate of European peace is in the hands of a single man: Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, writes Scott Ritter.