View Single Post
Old 2020-06-28, 22:50   #166
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

23·1,427 Posts
Default

This Russia-Afghanistan Story Is Western Propaganda At Its Most Vile | Caitlin Johnstone
Quote:
All western mass media outlets are now shrieking about the story The New York Times first reported, citing zero evidence and naming zero sources, claiming intelligence says Russia paid out bounties to Taliban-linked fighters in Afghanistan for attacking the occupying forces of the US and its allies in Afghanistan. As of this writing, and probably forevermore, there have still been zero intelligence sources named and zero evidence provided for this claim.

As we discussed yesterday, the only correct response to unsubstantiated claims by anonymous spooks in a post-Iraq invasion world is to assume that they are lying until you’ve been provided with a mountain of hard, independently verifiable evidence to the contrary. The fact that The New York Times instead chose to uncritically parrot these evidence-free claims made by operatives within intelligence agencies with a known track record of lying about exactly these things is nothing short of journalistic malpractice. The fact that western media outlets are now unanimously regurgitating these still 100 percent baseless assertions is nothing short of state propaganda.

The consensus-manufacturing, Overton window-shrinking western propaganda apparatus has been in full swing with mass media outlets claiming on literally no basis whatsoever that they have confirmed one another’s “great reporting” on this completely unsubstantiated story.
I believe one term for this kind of orchestrated-by-the-Intel-services-and-blared-by-the-MSM propaganda-gasm is, by way of reference to the pipe organs used in old silent movie theaters, "The Mighty Wurlitzer". Those of you who may still be clinging to the hope that the world might be a slightly safer place under a Biden presidency, note his appearance in the article.

And this could make for a cross-posting in the neighboring Unclear Security thread:
Quote:
And indeed, the unified campaign to shove this story down people’s throats in stark defiance of everything one learns in journalism school does appear to be geared toward advancing pre-existing foreign policy agendas which have nothing to do with any concern for the safety of US troops. Analysts have pointed out that this new development arises just in time to sabotage the last of the nuclear treaties between the US and Russia, the scaling down of US military presence in Afghanistan, and, as Haas already openly admitted, any possibility of peace in Syria.

“This story is published just in time to sabotage US-Russia arms control talks,” Antiwar‘s Dave DeCamp noted on Twitter. “As the US is preparing for a new arms race — and possibly even live nuclear tests — the New York Times provides a great excuse to let the New START lapse, making the world a much more dangerous place. Russiagate has provided the cover for Trump to pull out of arms control agreements. First the INF, then the Open Skies, and now possibly the New START. Any talks or negotiations with Russia are discouraged in this atmosphere, and this Times story will make things even worse.”
And of course providing Afghan guerilla forces with weapons and cash to attack a foreign occupation force is exactly what the US and CIA did during the 1979-89 Soviet occupation of the country, which has now lasted a mere half as long as the ongoing US one has. Classic propaganda jiu-jitsu: accuse the Other Guys of doing the same dirty deeds as oneself.

Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 2020-06-28 at 23:10
ewmayer is online now   Reply With Quote