After US Media’s Campaign To Link Trump To Russia, Obama’s Secret Deals With Russia Are Revealed

March 29, 2017

Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova, Moscow, March 23, 2017

translation provided by Russian Ministry of InformationTable of contents

  1. The assassination of former Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov
  2. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s talks with Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano
  3. Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund to be chaired by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
  4.  Russian-Turkish interdepartmental consultations on combating terrorism and organised crime
  5. The situation in Syria
  6. Western media silence regarding Mosul
  7. Situation on the Korean Peninsula
  8. UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs approves Russian anti-drug personnel training initiative
  9. Publishing recommendations on standards of conduct in various countries on the Foreign Ministry’s websites
  10. Cases of prosecution of Montenegrins favouring stronger ties with Russia
  11. Yet another anti-Russia Western media campaign in connection with the FIFA World Cup 2018 
  12. Answers to media questions:
  13. Russia-US collusion to deliver “strikes” against Hillary Clinton’s campaign
  14. Evaluating the US-led coalition’s successes in the fight against ISIS
  15. The Turkish Foreign Ministry summons Russian charge d’affairs ad interim
  16. Returning to Poland the wreckage of the plane that crashed near Smolensk in 2010
  17. Russian-US relations
  18. Settlement of the Syrian conflict
  19. The assassination of former State Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov
  20. Statements by the US Secretary of State on the situation in the Korean Peninsula
  21. Russian-Turkish relations
  22. Vandalism
  23. The Moscow conference on the settlement of the Afghan conflict
  24. The assassination of former State Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov

The assassination of former Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov

Moscow has been stunned by the reports of the cold-blooded murder of former State Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov today, March 23, in central Kiev.

Evidence suggests it was a contract killing that, by all indications, was meant to send a message. As soon as the media reported this assassination Moscow hoped that Ukrainian law enforcement agencies would be able promptly to solve this crime and identify the masterminds behind it and of course its perpetrators, without any politicisation and based on objective data. However, after Ukrainian President Poroshenko announced that this assassination was “an act of terror perpetrated by Moscow,” naturally, there was no more hope left that the investigation would be impartial or objective. We have no doubt about that. By all indications, this time as well the “killer regime” (as it is already being referred to) will do its best to make sure that no one will ever know the truth about what happened in Kiev.

We would like to express our condolences to Mr Voronenkov’s family and friends.

Back to top

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s talks with Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano

On March 27, Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano will make a working visit to Russia at the invitation of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. It will be his first visit to Moscow in this capacity since the new Italian government was formed in December 2016.

The talks are expected to address the status of and prospects for Russian-Italian political, economic, scientific and technological ties. Special attention will be given to advancing successful cooperation in culture and education, as well as contacts between civil societies.

The ministers will address key international issues, including the situation in Syria, Libya and Ukraine, the fight against international terrorism, cooperation with Italy at the UN Security Council and Russia-EU relations.

During his visit to Moscow, Mr Alfano, as co-chair of the Russian-Italian Council for Economic, Industrial, Currency and Financial Cooperation, will hold talks with Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich. The officials are expected to discuss the implementation of the decisions made at the council’s 14th meeting in Rome on October 5, 2016, including measures to overcome negative trends in bilateral trade.

Back to top

Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund to be chaired by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov

On March 29, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will chair a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund devoted to the results of its activities in 2016 and plans for the near future.

I would like to remind you that the Alexander Gorchakov Fund was established at the initiative of the Foreign Ministry (co-founder) in 2010, under the President’s directive to support public diplomacy, promote Russian non-profit organisations’ participation in international cooperation and involve civil society institutions in the foreign policy process.

Back to top

Russian-Turkish interdepartmental consultations on combating terrorism and organised crime

As Russian-Turkish relations are gradually normalising, the resumption of dialogue on combating terrorism, which is relevant for the whole world and our two countries, has become an integral part of the bilateral agenda. Particularly in view of the important role that Russia and Turkey play in the context of the very complex processes that are taking place in the Middle East and North Africa, primarily in relation to the conflict in Syria and the fight against ISIS.

On March 29, another round of Russian-Turkish interdepartmental consultations on fighting terrorism and organised crime will take place in Moscow under the auspices of the foreign ministries of both countries. The previous consultations were held in Ankara in October 2016.

The Russian delegation, with a wide circle of representatives from relevant ministries and departments, will be headed by Deputy Foreign Minister Oleg Syromolotov.

Back to top

The situation in Syria

On March 23, the next round of intra-Syrian talks based on UN Security Council Resolution 2254 will begin in Geneva under the auspices of the UN. The delegations of the Syrian government and Syrian opposition groups invited by the UN will continue consultations in keeping with the agreed-upon agenda, including forming trustworthy, inclusive and non-confessional governance, drafting a new constitution, using it as the basis for holding elections, fighting terrorism and other topical issues. In our view, combating terrorism is a priority topic, because, as evidenced by the recent terrorist attacks in the Damascus suburbs and Hama Province, terrorism remains the main impediment to peace in Syria.

The decisions that will be made in the context of a peace settlement in Syria should be worked out by the Syrians themselves and approved by all of the country’s political, ethnic and religious forces. Otherwise there is a high risk of the disintegration, breakup of the state.

We welcome Damascus’s constructive approach toward achieving practical results at the Geneva talks. We hope that representatives of the Syrian opposition will also demonstrate their willingness to come to agreement and most importantly, their commitment to restore peace and order in Syria.

We unfortunately must note – and this is obvious – that not all parties are pleased with the fact that the political process has restarted. We regularly record attempts to stymie its progress through certain representatives of the opposition who are continuing to make all sorts of preconditions verging on ultimatums. The militants are continuing to receive arms and ammunition, new members of criminal groups and, above all, funding from abroad.

Moscow is disappointed with the position of its Western partners in the UN Security Council. Their refusal to condemn the bloody terrorist attacks in Damascus in March and the suppression of these events, as well as of the use of chemical agents by ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq, point to their reluctance to take effective steps to confront the terrorist threat, which remains extremely high.

On March 19-21, Jabhat al-Nusra terrorists carried out a series of attacks in Damascus suburbs. Clearly, all those attacks were militarily futile. It seems that they pursued quite different goals: to complicate the situation as much as possible, derail the efforts to consolidate the ceasefire in Eastern Ghouta, assisted by the Russian centre for reconciliation in Syria, and prevent the cessation of hostilities at the local level in Berze and Kabun, the suburbs of the Syrian capital.

These terrorist attacks were thoroughly planned. We took note of the remarks by Abu Jaber, a Nusra field commander, who, in a statement on the occasion of the sixth anniversary of the “revolution” that the opposition marked on March 15, vowed to step up the fight against government forces “on all fronts” and threatened new large-scale terrorist attacks.

The Syrian army gave a fitting rebuff to the terrorists.

Clearly, not all parties want peace in Syria, unfortunately. Nevertheless, for our part, we are continuing our focused work in Astana, Geneva and other venues to bring closer the long-awaited peace through a political settlement and the elimination of the terrorist hotbed in Syria, which is our friend.

Back to top

Western media silence regarding Mosul

I would like to draw your attention to a fact that we have repeatedly mentioned earlier when discussing the situation in Mosul and its coverage by Western media, government agencies and officials.

We have said that reading Western mainstream media makes you think that civilians and children have been killed only in certain cities, particularly in Aleppo. Not one of the Western media outlets has dug deeply into what is happening in Mosul. In fact, it is even worse. There is no need for digging; all journalists need to do is to stop hushing up or ignoring stories like that of five-year-old Havra from Mosul, who was gravely wounded in an air raid by the US-led coalition. Leading Western political commentators, journalists, and analysts are not there holding images or pictures of that girl. For some reason, neither her name, nor her photos have made it into briefings or news conferences in Western capitals. Havra is virtually non-existent even though questions are being asked about her. However, even when answering questions, Western representatives are doing their best trying to minimise the media impact, as they call it.

Back to top

Situation on the Korean Peninsula

We are watching closely the developments on the Korean Peninsula, where tensions are rising, much to our chagrin, following the North Korean missile tests and large-scale military drills to practise offensive operations against North Korea that were held as part of US-centred military and political alliances in Northeast Asia. The continued US military build-up in the region, including the deployment of the THAAD system in South Korea, is a serious destabilising factor.

Decreasing military activities is becoming a more pressing task. We consider it unacceptable to take advantage of the current situation in order to gain a unilateral military advantage or to massively “push” new types of weapons into the region. We are certain that progress towards peace and stability in Northeast Asia is impossible without a comprehensive resolution of current issues solely through political and diplomatic dialogue that takes into account the concerns of all parties involved. We see no alternative to a joint search for a new and constructive strategy out of the current deadlock in the context of general military and political deescalation and dismantling of the architecture of confrontation in the region. Does it sound too complicated? I don’t think so, because even though “wrapped” in a diplomatic parlance, this formula reflects our consistent stance on the issue that we have repeatedly explained and communicated to our partners.

To this end, Russia is ready to work as closely as possible with all interested parties.

Back to top

UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs approves Russian anti-drug personnel training initiative

The UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs held its 60th session in Vienna on March 13-17. It was a landmark event for the Russian inter-agency delegation led by Deputy Foreign Minister Oleg Syromolotov. It was the first-ever joint session of SCO member states and leaders of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, which gathered under the aegis of the CND to discuss the key aspects of the global anti-drug strategy and its implementation. The CSTO member states made a special statement in Vienna to voice their readiness to work together against trans-border drug threats, including the Afghan threat.

The session unanimously approved the Russian delegation’s draft resolution “Enhancing capacity of law enforcement, border control and other related agencies to counter illicit drug trafficking through training.” Building on Russia’s experience with Central Asian, Afghan and Pakistani drug police training, the resolution makes an important contribution to the practical implementation of decisions adopted at the special session of the UN General Assembly on the global drug problem, held in New York in 2016.

During its current four-year Commission membership, Russia has advanced a number of widely approved initiatives to promote Olympic and other athletic ideals as  a means of combatting drug addiction, establish a network of scientific consultations to find the most effective anti-drug tools, and shut down illegal drug-related finance.

We expect the Russian contribution to international anti-drug cooperation to promote Russia’s full-fledged participation in the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs following the elections to that interstate agency, due at the April ECOSOC session.

Back to top

Publishing recommendations on standards of conduct in various countries on the Foreign Ministry’s websites

I would like to draw your attention to information that will be of interest to our citizens travelling abroad, tourism operators and tourists. Our Ministry constantly places priority on assistance to Russian citizens who travel abroad or stay there with short-term or long-term goals. In this context, the Foreign Ministry’s experts asked themselves how to prevent misunderstandings and undesirable incidents with citizens of a particular country. With the help of the Russian embassies in various countries, a great deal of work was done to collect and analyse information on unwanted gestures and behaviours abroad, that is, simply, what we should not do in those or other places, where seemingly inoffensive words, expressions, gestures and movements can be perceived negatively, and even hostilely, taking into account the traditions of this locality, region or country.

As a result, the Ministry published a set of recommendations on its Internet resources, including general advice in various fields (religious life, everyday communication, informal contacts, etc.) and the specifics of conduct of certain peoples or social groups.

The full list of these recommendations can be found on the Crisis Management Centre Department’s website, sos.mid.ru, in the For Tourists section. You will be able to find any information about any country there. Also, this information will be posted on the consular website. We strongly advise everyone going abroad to read this information, as the holiday season is coming. You will certainly learn many new things. I would also ask everyone who does not find the necessary information or finds disputable information to write to us – you know how to do this: via email, in the social media and to the addresses on our websites. We will be happy to make the necessary additions. We will also make changes if you find an inaccuracy. We are open to dialogue on this issue. Of course, I would also like to draw bloggers’ attention to this section. We are waiting for a flashing response.

Back to top

Cases of prosecution of Montenegrins favouring stronger ties with Russia

We have taken note of reports of a sentence handed down by the High Court of Podgorica to Mayor of the Plav Municipality Orhan Sahmanovic, a member of the Bosniak Party.

Sahmanovic’s case, in our opinion, once again demonstrates that justice “a la Montenegrin” is fairly selective; rather it is more of a tool for a politicised struggle against dissent than for combating corruption and crime. This is an obvious sign of a vicious practice of instituting legal proceedings and organising political trials against Montegrins favouring, among other things, stronger ties with Russia.

I would like to remind you that, two months ago, Orhan Sahmanovic, in his capacity as the head of the Plav Municipality, together with leaders of the Democratic Front Adrija Mandic and Milan Knezevic, against whom the Special Prosecutor’s Office of Montenegro has brought charges of suspected involvement in an alleged coup attempt, were visiting the Chechen Republic to establish fraternal ties between the two regions and strengthen friendly contacts between the peoples of our countries. A question arises whether it was this that has given an additional impetus to the routine case that has been in the hands of the Montenegrin Themis since 2014.

The obvious disproportion between several thousand euros worth of damage caused by the official and a one-year prison sentence for him arouses big questions. It is no secret that, in the past, the Montenegrin justice system sentenced a high-ranking ruling party functionary accused of multi-million embezzlement to just two years of house arrest. Against this background, Sahmanovic’s case is a graphic example of the absolute puppetry of Montenegrin justice.

Back to top

Yet another anti-Russia Western media campaign in connection with the FIFA World Cup 2018

Yet another spiral in the anti-Russia Western media campaign concerns the FIFA World Cup 2018. We still remember the Western press innuendos about the “shoddy organisation” of the Winter Olympic Games in Sochi and the “absolute failure” that had been predicted for a long time until the athletes and guests came to Sochi and saw everything with their own eyes. We remember the “black PR campaign” in the run-up to the Sochi Olympics and a similar campaign based on allegations that Russian athletes used doping, etc. Currently the media are fulfilling a new order related to the FIFA World Cup 2018. In a short while, we all will witness the Western world’s vigorous actions in this area. They will be taking serious steps with regard to the event to be held by Russia. It goes without saying that their aim is to disrupt it. The full information capability will be used to influence public opinion; there will be various surprises. Regrettably, the #мидзнал hashtag (the Foreign Ministry knew) will not lose its relevance.

So far, the mercenary media are attempting to do all they can to smear the World Cup organisers’ image. You may recall that not long ago the BBC released a film, Russia’s Hooligan Army, dedicated to football fans. We evaluated this “blockbuster.” Later the British media began whipping up passion in the run-up to the Rostov-Manchester United game in the final sixteen of the Europa League. A few days ago, a British tabloid, the Mirror, published a story alleging that Russia was training fighting fan groups meant to provoke fist fights with foreigners. I just can’t understand what they are hoping for. Do they hope that we will not see all this or that all the elements of a single campaign will not come to light? It can’t be ruled out that we will not see a certain comprehensive Western-developed document on starting this propaganda campaign. But that’s now; later all these things will certainly come to the surface. A clear mainstream line is emerging even without the publication of materials providing unequivocal evidence of launching the propaganda campaign. It has been ordered and paid for, because it costs a lot to make films of this sort. The same allegations migrate from film to film, from material to material, from story to story…

We again hasten to disappoint the PR teams that make this information trash. The media have exposed these stories. You may have seen that the author passed off the Maslenitsa (Shrovetide) fist fights near the walls of the Izmailovo Kremlin as the drills of “fighters” and that the “frightened residents” were several old woman vendors from the nearby Vernisazh market. In principle, every cloud has a silver lining, as the saying goes. We invite everyone who comes to this sports event to visit the Izmailovo Kremlin, and the Vernisazh exhibition folk fair of decorative and applied arts. Anyone who visits these places will see how they drill fighters and football hooligans and buy souvenirs too. Quite likely, you will recognise one or two characters from British media stories.

I would like to advise foreign football club fans, primarily British clubs, considering that their country has taken up this PR campaign with so much zeal, calling into question traditional Russian hospitality, I would like to advise them to be more attentive, to refrain from inventing these farfetched stories, and just listen to the opinion of their fellow countrymen, who were not afraid, despite your – I am addressing the British media – scaremongering, to come to Russia in March 2017.  Manchester United is reported as thanking FC Rostov and its fans for a warm reception. Sky News had to admit that the fears of the English fans did not come true. Even the BBC reported that the hosts had given MU fans a warm reception, and literally a “warm reception.” You may have heard that Russian volunteers were distributing blankets, because our climate, unlike our hospitality, can be harsh.

Instead of misleading stories in the run-up to FIFA World Cup 2018, check your information and use specific life situations and logic rather than mainstream sources alone. All of this is exposed and revealed and one feels ashamed to read it.

Back to top

Answers to media questions:

Question: According to CNN, officials working for Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump had colluded to coordinate actions damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. How could you comment on these reports?

Maria Zakharova: We keep talking about CNN. Unfortunately, this is becoming commonplace for this television channel. They are approaching the moment of truth. All of us know about the political leanings of the CNN TV channel and the civic position of its employees. It is necessary to distinguish between the civic position, electoral activity and propaganda and involvement in the domestic political competition, which, in principle, undermines the democratic foundations of a state that has openly told the whole world that it will spread democracy to the most remote corners of the globe. Current developments obviously highlight the subjective bias of media outlets and their involvement in political games and blackmail. In fact, this has gone beyond games: it is blackmail plain and simple. All of this certainly deals a huge blow to the pillars of democracy.

For many years, the United States remained an exemplary democratic system. Current developments in the United States are a tremendous blow to democratic values. Why are CNN and other media outlets becoming involved in the political tug-of-war? This question should be addressed to them, rather than to us. It defies all reason. People, organisations and, of course, the media work a lot to earn a certain reputation and status. Gaining confidence is the most important thing; but confidence can be undermined in no time at all. Confidence in CNN was undermined long ago, but the problem is that confidence in all media outlets is also being undermined. This trend is very dangerous.

Back to top

Question: The US Department of State estimates that the United States and the US-led coalition has liberated 60 percent of Iraqi territory and 30 percent of Syrian territory that was previously controlled by ISIS militants. US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says that the coalition’s operations have reduced the influx of foreign militants by 90 percent. What can you say about the US-led coalition’s success? And what do you think about their future plans to create security zones?

Maria Zakharova: It’s up to military experts to evaluate progress on the ground. Regarding political assessments, we should say (and we are saying this all the time) that it is important to think about the price of these successes, the fight against terrorism and civilian casualties. The United States has been urging us to think about this. What we can see in Mosul amounts to unprecedented brutality and a tragedy affecting civilians, women and children. We have absolutely no doubts concerning the need to combat terrorism, but the civilian population should not be forgotten either. It is people and their destinies that should top the agenda. As I see it, US representatives should reread their own theses and statements dating to September-October 2016 and be guided by the advice they have offered to the world.

Back to top

Question:The Russian charge d’affaires ad interim in Ankara has been summoned to the Turkish Foreign Ministry in connection with the murder of a Turkish soldier, presumably by a Kurdish sniper. How would you comment on this?

Maria Zakharova: Our Turkish colleagues have invited Sergey Panov, the Russian charge d’afaires ad interim, to discuss the current situation, which remains complicated in the context of the Syrian peace settlement. As you know, Turkey is one of our main partners in resolving the Syrian crisis. I would like to note that you should directly contact the Defence Ministry on all issues linked with military aspects, in any context.

Back to top

Question: What is your comment on Poland concluding a contract with a former chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in the Hague Mr Luis Moreno-Ocampo, under which he is to help the country retrieve the wreckage of the plane that crashed in Smolensk in 2010? Do you consider this move by Poland reasonable?

Maria Zakharova: I have not seen this information, and I will ask our experts to prepare a comment.

Poland is a free and sovereign nation, and it can make such steps if it likes. I believe the question may be more about what Poland wants from Russia as far as the wreckage is concerned. As you may know, we have repeatedly made it clear during our briefings and bilateral contacts with our Polish partners, not to mention  other statements and interviews, that our Polish colleagues are free to analyse without limits everything associated with this tragic event. We have repeatedly called on them to come to Russia by agreement with relevant ministries and agencies and at any time convenient to them to work on this. If they need to go through some details that have not yet been made clear to them regarding this tragedy, nothing is preventing them. It is another matter if this is politically rather than forensically motivated. In this case, we have nothing to do with it. It is a domestic Polish issue, which it is sad to comment on, to tell you the truth. This is the stance of not only the Foreign Ministry but of all the Russian ministries an agencies that are directly or indirectly associated with this matter. If our Polish colleagues need to clarify any issues or to continue to analyse the wreckage and documentation, they are always welcome to Russia. All they need to do is to file a request, telling us about their intentions, and we will provide them with what they need as we always have.

I would like to repeat that regarding your question I will make inquiries as to the official position of the Foreign Ministry.

Back to top

Question: How do you see the future of Russian-US diplomatic relations in the context of the current atmosphere in Washington? Can you confirm that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will come to Moscow in April?

Maria Zakharova: Apparently, many volumes have been written about the development of Russian-US relations. I announced the release of the Foreign Ministry’s yearend Diplomatic Bulletin and even showed it at the previous briefing. I believe that about 20 per cent of that bulletin was devoted to Russian-US relations, the way we see them, how we want them to develop, what we expect from Washington, what we are willing to do with the United States, the priority areas of cooperation, areas where our cooperation should be revived without delay and the areas where this can wait, at least for a limited time. This issue has been covered in interviews by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, comments by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov and in numerous statements made at all levels by representatives from various Russian agencies, political analysts and politicians, as well as officials from the legislative and executive authorities. We can talk about bilateral relations with a different degree of mastery, but we would like to start implementing our relationship at long last.

We provided our views on bilateral relations and the reasons for blocking them under President Obama. We said that we were willing to work with the new US administration, under President Trump. I don’t think we need to invent anything in this respect, because so much has been said before. Simply, we should start concrete practical work. We are ready for this.

You know that we always invite our American colleagues and diplomats to join bilateral or multilateral dialogues on issues in which the United States has traditionally played a big and active role, such as Syria, the consultations in Astana and many others. We expect Washington to formulate its foreign policy approaches in the form of a concept. We are ready for pragmatic and specific work on the principles that we have described many times.

As for the visit by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the information about it, this is what I can say. It’s not a secret that preparations for any visit include the coordination of the time when it can be announced. Visits by foreign ministers are public events that are never kept secret. At least, I don’t know about any secret visits by foreign ministers in Russia or the United States. Preparations for such a visit also include the coordination of the format, agenda and the date it can be announced to the public. It is a matter of propriety and respect for each other’s interests. One side proposes a date, and the other side is expected to accept it. This date should be acceptable to both sides, because the foreign ministers have packed schedules. The issue also concerns the coordination of the agenda by experts. One side informs the other side of the issues it plans to discuss, and the other side needs to respond that the agenda is acceptable. In other words, the sides need to reach agreements on many issues, after which they can announce an upcoming visit. This is how we work with our colleagues.

To tell the truth, over the past few years we’ve seen many strange things happen in Washington in connection with preparations for visits or talks by our foreign ministers. The US Department of State has more than once asked us not to announce planned visits until the last minute. This is not our tradition. We have been operating openly for years, but we have respected the requests we have received from our colleagues in Washington in the past few years. But what happened after that? First, the US Department of State asked us to keep the planned visit quiet and not to announce it until the last possible minute, until we coordinated the date. We did as they asked. But a day or two later the information was leaked by the US State Department and sometimes by the US administration. Frankly, this put Russia and the media in a strange situation, because they didn’t know who to believe – the official agencies or the many leaks.

It is difficult to say if this diplomatic communication is a US tradition or the latest technique. But it definitely doesn’t correspond to our traditions. We believe that everything we coordinate should be made available to the media in accordance with diplomatic procedure. When we coordinate a visit and the date for announcing it, the information should be made public calmly and as agreed. This is what we do in relations with our colleagues from other countries.

As I said, such cases in our relations with the US Department of State have become a bad tradition over the past few years. So, I can say in response to your question that we will make the date and format of contacts between the Russian and US foreign ministers public after we coordinate them. We won’t keep them quiet. At this point, I don’t have any information I can share with you. I can say that this visit and such contacts are possible in principle, but it would be premature to talk about timeframes.

Also, I would like to say that if the practice of leaking information that concerns not just the United States but also Russia, which has become a tradition in Washington in the past few years, continues, there will come a day when the media will publish leaks about the things that Washington asked us to keep secret, for example, things that happened during President Obama’s terms in office. Believe me, this could be very interesting information.

Our American colleagues must decide if they respect the diplomatic procedure, if they keep their word on the arrangements made between us, primarily arrangements made at their own request, or we create a few very nice surprises for each other.

Back to top

Question: You said that four issues are on the agenda of the Geneva talks: governance, constitution, elections and fighting terrorism. Will the Russian-proposed draft constitution for Syria be discussed there? In Astana, the Russian partners proposed creating a working group to draft a constitution. Will this proposal be included in the Geneva talks’ agenda? Sergey Lavrov said yesterday that Russia and Turkey would try to find a way to include Kurdish representatives in the Geneva talks. Will Kurds participate in these talks? An anti-ISIS coalition meeting of 68 nations has been held in the United States. It reaffirmed the US plan to establish “interim zones of stability” in Syria and Iraq. What is Russia’s opinion of this initiative?

Maria Zakharova: I can say in answer to your first question that the agenda and organisation of the Geneva talks is the UN’s responsibility. So you had better ask UN representatives about this. I know that debates on drafting a new constitution will include the discussion of the Russian proposals that have been presented to the concerned parties. It is not a draft but separate proposals and ideas that are designed to encourage an analysis and preparations for drafting a new constitution. We will be happy if they are discussed in Geneva. As I have said, it is not a final document. It is not a document we would force on others either in its form or essence. This is not what we wanted. It is a set of proposals that should encourage the intellectual process. I believe that these proposals can be discussed as separate elements. Maybe the parties concerned have used Russia’s proposals to formulate their own proposals. The Russian proposals will probably be discussed [in Geneva], but they are not on the agenda as a separate issue.

As for the [anti-ISIS] conference in the United States, Russia did not attend it because it is not part of this format. We don’t take part in such meetings, but we do analyse their results and put forth our position on the Syrian settlement without any connection to the agreements that have been reached without Russia’s involvement. There are formats in which Russia is involved alongside many of the countries that attended the conference in the United States. Therefore, if new agreements have been reached at this meeting and if they are of concern for the attending countries, these agreements can also be discussed in the formats in which Russia is involved. They can present these decisions or use them to formulate their proposals; we are ready to discuss and work on them. As I said, there are formats that have been created for this purpose, such as the UN and the International Syria Support Group (ISSG). We are ready to discuss anything that can be useful for the Syrian settlement and for bringing it closer.

Back to top

Question: Speaking about Syria, are there any visible indicators showing that Russia’s diplomatic and other efforts towards a settlement in Syria are attaining their goal?

Maria Zakharova: You question merits a doctoral thesis titled The Indicators of Success in the Efforts to Settle an International Conflict. I think your question has both theoretical and practical components. One of them is ceasefire and its effectiveness and stability. I am sure you know that it is a very important indicator.

A political settlement, including its launching and progress, is extremely important. We are very optimistic about the political settlement, because the Syrian opposition and the Syrian government have agreed to negotiate. The possibility of holding these talks looked unrealistic six months ago. Today, these talks have moved from theory to practice. Unfortunately, not everyone likes this, as we have said today. Active attempts have been taken to prevent a political settlement. If all parties concerned contributed to a settlement in Syria, we would have achieved very good results and forgotten about this problem long ago. It is regrettable that huge efforts are being made to impede progress towards a political settlement that has taken so long to start.

I believe that another indicator is the activity of the concerned international players at different platforms. Their influence on the warring parties is a major factor and an indicator of progress. Just one example: you probably remember that a year or two ago, the large global players who supported Syrian opposition groups and those who supported the Syrian government’s counterterrorism efforts did not talk with each other. Today, those who did not hear and seemed unable to hear each other even half a year ago because their positions were so widely different, are not only discussing things but are also working together on the ground. The Defence Ministry regularly informs you about this. I believe that this is also a very important indicator. Stability, or at least the desire and attempts to stabilise the situation in the country and ease the suffering of civilians, as well as the involvement of humanitarian agencies and organisations in helping people in Syria and other countries torn apart by conflicts are vital indicators of movement towards a settlement.

This is a short answer. I believe that you can also find theoretical writings on this issue and learn more about it.

Back to top

Question: Following the assassination of former State Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov, the Ukrainian authorities, followed by Western media outlets, began to accuse Russia, saying that a certain mythical “Kremlin’s hand” was behind the attack. Could you comment on these allegations?

Should other “defectors,” not only in Ukraine but also in other countries, who were put on an international wanted list by Russia (but for some reason, nobody is trying to catch them), fear for their lives and health?

Maria Zakharova: The second part of your question should be addressed not to me but to the relevant agencies.

As for the reaction from Kiev and global media outlets, which unequivocally held Russia responsible within an hour of the attackq, I have already commented on this, and I can say it again. The most terrible thing is that this shows that there can be no unbiased and objective investigation into the killing. We have not seen any objective investigation into many high-profile cases in Ukraine: the killings of journalists, public figures or politicians or the mass killings and executions in Odessa and other cities. The most terrible thing is not the accusations against Russia or the loss of image. The most terrible thing is that this “bloody flywheel” is gaining momentum in Ukraine. Whether anybody will be able to stop it is an open question. There is only one thing that can put an end to this series of bloody crimes: following the law and conducting an objective, unpoliticised and fair investigation. Then there would be a chance for Ukraine to return to the realm of law in some way or other. I’m referring to the ruling regime, the nationalists and militants, who are illegal armed groups. However, this will only be possible if the state – even under the existing regime – declares, in no uncertain terms, that there is a need for a full-scale, fair and objective investigation. Statements of this kind within minutes and hours of such tragedies are an indication of a state’s real intentions. Either a state is interested in conducting an investigation and does its utmost to that end, or there is every reason to say that a corresponding trend and tone is set for yet another bloody crime. How can the head of state, within minutes [of the attack], say things that are not based on any expert findings? Experts have not even examined the nearby area. They have written no reports, have not studied what happened. However, the head of state does not say that everything will be done to ensure an impartial and objective investigation, but makes accusations and issues statements addressed to a specific country. This is what I started with. Frankly, at first we were shocked by what happened, but we were shocked even more by Ukrainian President Poroshenko’s remarks.

Back to top

Question: US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has already visited Japan and South Korea, where he commented on North Korea’s missile tests. He said there will be no talks because of North Korea’s aggressive nuclear missile test policy. He also said he could not rule out US military intervention in the event of a threat to its allies, Japan and South Korea. Could you comment on this?

Maria Zakharova: I’ve already commented on the situation in the region and offered our clear-cut vision of how the situation should develop. We have given our assessment of North Korea’s actions and the way the situation in the region should evolve, including in terms of security and stability. We have also described the negotiating format that we believe should receive priority as the most effective format. We have offered our assessment and recipes that, from our perspective, should lead to the appropriate result.

Back to top

Question: Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said relations between Russia and Turkey have been restored, their divisions overcome and that the two countries are cooperating in dealing with the Middle East problems. How does the Foreign Ministry assess the current level of relations with Ankara?

MariaZakharova: We regard our relations with Ankara as a process of restoring full-scale relations to the level they were at before the incident with the downing of a Russian aircraft and the death of Russian servicemen.

Back to top

Question:  There are two Bulgarian patriots, two cultural figures in Russia, both of whom are People’s Artists of Russia: Filipp and Bedros Kirkorov. During the past 30 years, these Bulgarian patriots have not received a single commendation from Bulgaria. Perhaps this question would be better addressed to the Bulgarian authorities. Bedros Kirkorov was the first to perform the song Alyosha in Russia. I hope the Bulgarian authorities will mend their ways.

Maria Zakharova: I can assure you that the Kirkorovs are not considered foreigners in Russia.

Back to top

Question: Our news agency in Bulgaria has been attacked by many other media outlets, which accused us of engaging in “Putin’s propaganda,” although Media Most Bulgaria is a small news agency. We work with all open news agencies. We sought to provide information on what was going on in Syria. I risked my life as I spent a month in Iraq near Mosul. I have a lot of material and reports, but, regrettably, no one was interested. Attacks are made on my Bulgarian partners who represent Media Most in Bulgaria, but that’s nothing. Vandals have destroyed the grave of my partner’s father in the cemetery, and all this happens in the European Union! If we have foreign correspondents here, I’d like to ask them how they would feel if someone destroyed their fathers’ graves.

Maria Zakharova: I think it would be unfair to put questions to journalists who come here to ask questions. So please put your questions to me, and I will answer them. And if you have a discussion, let it be held after the briefing.

There are no countries without problems. Regrettably, outrages committed against graves and monuments and the desecration of graves are a common misfortune. This happens all over the world, and the question is how we respond to this. I don’t think that this issue should be politicised in any way until we see that there is no reaction from the official authorities, who should make appropriately tough statements about the inadmissibility of such things. Until that moment, I have the hope that this horrible incident (that’s how we should refer to this event) will evoke an appropriate response in your country. If this does not happen, and if you, moreover, think that this is a case of political pressure and a threat to you as a journalist, there are the related organisations, including the OSCE, which have relevant institutions. You can appeal to them and submit this as evidence, if, as you say, all of this is linked to your professional pursuits.

There are people who engage in such things. As human beings, we must condemn them. To reiterate: if you feel that your professional activity is under threat, an investigation should be held and a judgment issued.

Question: I would like to add that I saw such things only in Syria, where Christian cemeteries were vandalised in this way.

Maria Zakharova: Oh no, Syria is not the only country where such things occur. There are many others, and Christian burial sites, relics and places of worship are not the only targets. Places of worship, graves and monuments are desecrated all over the world. This is related to religion and historical memory. I can assure you that, regrettably, this is a common evil and misfortune. The question is how we, and the countries in question, respond to this.

Question: In April, Moscow will host a conference on conflict settlement in Afghanistan. Will Russia welcome the Taliban’s attendance?  

Maria Zakharova: I would need to check regarding the participation of a particular country. I know that Washington has not confirmed its participation in the April 14 conference. I must ascertain the information about the delegation of Afghanistan and other delegations, and then I will inform you.

Back to top

Question: Is Russia planning some measures for the protection of Denis Voronenkov’s widow?

Maria Zakharova: I do not think this issue is within the Foreign Ministry’s purview. This question should be addressed to law enforcement agencies and be decided with the participation of the Russian citizen you mentioned.

RELATED POSTS:

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]

[ Ian at Facebook ]

How The Left Maipulates Language To Make Dangerous Ideass Seem Benign

March 24, 2017

<!– Authored by ReturnOfKings.com via The Burning Platform, –>

The political left, as they like to style themselves because it sounds less threatening than the more honest ‘authoritarian control freaks, bases much of its campaign rhetoric on conflict-mongering. Left wing political movements have always had as their raison d’ê that they are against something; capitalism, monarchy, religion, inequality, injustice, whether real or fantasized. In the past, when the social orders of the developed world were dominated by rigid class systems that prevented social mobility, left wing politics masked the real nature of what it stood for, replacing the old oppressive elite with a new, often more oppressive elite, by posing as something positive or progressive, the defenders of the working class (or more emotively, ‘the downtrodden masses’. To this end, generations of communists, socialists and paternalistic liberals twisted language to make themselves appear benign while the demon of the day (capitalism, conservatism, religion etc. was pained as something evil and threatening.

Eighteenth century libertines claimed to defend “freedom” while faith became “fanaticism” and “superstition.” In reality they demanded total freedom for the rich from all moral constraints. Double standards and hypocrisy was rife among these ‘liberals.’ A young female servant who fell pregnant after an (often coercive) encounter with the master’s son was classed as morally deficient and condemned to a life of shame and infamy, while the man could evade any responsibility, simply on the basis that the word of a gentleman would always be believed over the word of a ‘low born’ person.

Later, Karl Marx paved the way for emotionally needy virtue signallers to pose as “intellectuals” siding with “the masses,” against authority. The problem there was the intellectuals only cared about the social kudos they could gain by presenting themselves as defenders of the defenceless. Their self image depended on the masses remaining as ignorant, grovelling and eternally grateful for the patronage.

Some manipulated the media into pretending they were part of the “oppressed,” Jews, Roman Catholics, homosexuals or lesbians and thus entitled to sympathy when they were actually hateful, anti-middle-class Marxists who believed their delusions of moral superiority entitled them to be part of a new, academic elite, a meritocracy.

The whole theory of “progress” as it exists in liberal democracies of the developed world where a consensus has formed around the ideology dubbed Cultural Marxism Marx—society ought is that a society should move from capitalism to a collectivist utopia in which the individual interest is subsumed under the desire to serve the community. This is wishful thinking, look what happened in Sovie yett Russian under the communist tyranny of Lenin and Stalin, in communist China under they tyranny of Chairman Mao and his Red Guard, in Cuba, the Soviet satellite states of Europe and most of all in Cambodia under the murderous regime of Pol Pot.

While casting themselves as liberators of the working class and rewriting history to present a self-favoring view of their rise to power, Marxist regimes have always quickly become dictatorships prepared to kill millions of innocent people in order to quash dissent. History seems to have forgotten that in 1870 the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin warned Karl Marx that a future communist government would rapidly become more oppressive than the old monatchies of Russia and central Europe. History has proved him right.

Just as globalist corporatism destroys communities and enslaved poor and middle income families through debt, cultural Marxist ‘progressivism’ serves to destroy not only nations but cultures and communities. homelands. As long as people can be deceived by buzzwords into belieing some kind of utopia can be achieved if humans surrender their individual sovereignty to collective interests, the confidence trick that both socialism and communism are based on will retains its grip over their minds.

Socialism and communism are in fact the most extreme form of elitism. ‘The Controllers’, (as Aldous Huxley called them in brave New World) or ‘the inner party’ of George Orwell’s big Brother regime in the novel 1984 live in the greatest extremes of privilege and splendour while the masses labour in squalor.

Here are some of the buzzwords that are actual political ploys used by the left in their sinister schemes to worm their way into power.

1. Equality

Perhaps the most massive totem pole of it all. Written, shouted, used as a talisman an indefinite number of times, “equality” has been put forth to justify various mass killings from eighteenth century terror to twentieth century Bolshevism, and closer to us served to unleash female hypergamy and alien millions of young straight-white-males from the societies they should belong in.

Equality exists in mathematics. A number can be equal to another because an abstract unit can be replaced with another abstract unit without change. Mathematical equality exists because abstract units are identical with each other. Outside from the realm of pure quantity, qualitative differences emerge, and thus equality ought to be defined negatively as the absence of difference both in quantity and quality.

It is easy to see that equality between individual beings—not numbers—is a fiction, an attempt to perceive individuals as abstractions or numbers, void of any quality, personality or specificity. Equalitarianism stems from a rather incomplete view of the beings it pretends to apply to, and gets quickly used as a mask for envy or the will to grab something or exert power over someone.

Although equality can enter into the definition of true justice as equanimity—see Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, quote—, more than often, the word is used to foster particular interests at the expense of the wider social equilibrium, to fan the flames of division and sedition, and later, to deny vocations, human biodiversity, complementarity as it implies differences in nature and functions, not to mention ugly tradeoffs where some manipulative group plays the victim or claims rights to what doesn’t belong to them.

2. “Social” “justice”

Are you a victim? Are you victim of a particular inequality? Then you are living an injustice, and this wrong ought to be compensated. This simple framing has been widely used by anti-white, anti-male, anti-Western leftists to create a feeling of victimhood among various social categories. They used this powerful feeling to mount new social identities, inspired from Marxist classes—feminism isn’t about femininity but about women identifying as a separate, adversarial group, whose interests would be antagonistic to men’s—, and perpetual charges hung over the majority’s heads: Racist; Sexist; homophobe; Islamophobe; nationalist; And so on.

“Social justice” covers a blending of several features: an accusatory, anti-white, anti-male, anti-Western narrative, that taints and darkens past history; a feeling of victimhood and class identity for so-called “minorities” integrated into the wider narrative; the systematic, and very real, disenfranchisement and displacement of the majority that finds itself condemned to play the role of the bad guy—and hence charged—in said narrative. In this sense, “social justice” is deeply divisive, defamatory, aggressive, and amounts to a Moloch that eats families, nationhood, and most men.

Actual justice, call it social or not, is of course far from such a terrible conception. Methinks true justice should acknowledge the fact that we are the sons of the Western civilizations, its human substance and legitimate heirs, and that we have a prime right over it. We should have jobs, freedom of speech, protection over violent crowds, a right to fair judgment instead of getting screwed over by HR, “minority” impunity and pussy pass, a right to chances to thick relationships with at least some women instead of clowning our ways through hypergamy… Don’t forget we need to formalize at least some of our intuitions about what’s fair or not to replace the wicked theory of “justice” the Left shatters us with.

3. “Progress” (and the “reactionaries”)

This overrated buzzword has been straightforward long ago. Its Latin root, progressus, stems from the root verb gradior (walk, advance) and was mostly used in a military context, as in the sentence “the army is progressing into enemy territory.” Since then, it has been used analogically to qualify any advancement, even purely relative or fantasised ones.

The Left, following the pompous philosophies of Marx, Tolstoy, Lenin, Bertrand Russell and harold Laskey enshrined its own notion of progress into a general theory of history, thus making it absolute rather than relative. When various strands of modernity clash—for example, individual freedom and collective well-being, which one is “progressive”? Each can be used to fulfill a particular notion of progress. Aside perhaps from technological breakthroughs, “progress” is deeply relative. Even the most shining realizations of genius imply the sacrifice of thousands of potential choices that have been discarded during the process. The Left chose to forget this truth in order to judge everything and everyone from its own authoritarian and binary perspective.

If you do some research about such characters as, say, Ayn Rand and Lothrop Stoddard, you’ll notice they have been widely labelled “reactionary.” Yet each of them was a progressive in his own right. Rand considered industrial development and individual freedom as obvious landmarks of progress: she opposed vehemently to the environmentalist and collectivist—that is, anti-industrial, anti-economic growth, anti-conservative right as a “return of the primitive.”

<!– As for Lothrop Stoddard, he rebuffed Bolshevism and environmentalism as pre-scientific ratiocinations that willingly ignored human differences and the proper value of civilization. These “mistakes”, he said, are older than biological discoveries and stem from “degenerate” elements who would rather destroy civilization than letting it progress without them.

The only new thing about Bolshevism is its ” rationalizing ” of rebellious emotions into an exceedingly insidious and persuasive philosophy of revolt which has not merely welded all the real social rebels, but has also deluded many misguided dupes, blind to what Bolshevism implies. (Stoddard, Revolt Against Civilization, chap.8)

I also remember an old-fashioned Marxist who claimed feminism was “reactionary” because, he said, it comes from the wealthy and urbanized bourgeoisie, and hijacks the attention and care given to working classes for the benefit of actual exploiters. This guy’s progressivism has fallen out of grace, likely because it showed unable to destroy Western countries, but he is no less right according to his own logic.

Now, of course, we could say that MRAs are the real progressives as men’s rights are a progress, or that asserting our identities and associated rights are a progress, perhaps more so than SJW savagery and unrestrained hypergamy.

4. Openness or open-mindedness

We all heard about how being “open to new ideas” and possibilities, or being “open-minded” was good. In practice, what the liberals mean when they talk about openness or open-minded is “be a Leftist and believe in our notion of progress.” You have to be uncritical, hyper-sympathetic towards the last tranny or BLM activist that whines about how mistreated and misunderstood he is—and if you are “open” to wasting your money on the latest trendy fashion, it is even better.

But try being open-minded towards what the Left tags as “far right” or “extreme”, for example men’s right, race realism, skepticism on their dogmas such as anthropogenic global warming, or tradition… and it won’t be long before they shriek at you, in a typical display of rather irrational dirtiness psychology. “These ideas are impure! They are contagious!”

Open-mindedness along their lines means being gullible to media and college propaganda. You have to let the managers and social engineers fabric your consent, as Chomsky would put it. They want your mind to be open so they can fulfill it with self-hate and garbage. When it comes to better things libtards suspend open-mindedness, to the point of refusing any objective inquiry and hiding behind their biased, accusatory rhetoric.

In itself, openness or open-mindedness is a double-edged sword. It can, and should be used by those who are intelligent or morally structured enough to toy with potentially dangerous ideas. As to the others, those who are too easily tempted or misdirect by demagogues, especially women—who by their vote always favoured an anti-family, economy-devouring Big State—, the low-IQ and the unhinged, I think they should follow the lead of more qualified individuals.

5. Modern nationhood and citizenship

Since time immemorial peoples have been ethnocultural groups. Romans used the term natio to refer to a particular people, say, the Gaul, the Goths or the Basque. They also used the term civis to refer to a man as a member of his city, thus belonging to it.

Both words have been emptied of their substantial meaning. “Nation” is now mostly used to denote an abstract, bureaucratized State whom anyone can be a national if the bureaucrats hand him a stamped piece of paper. “Citizenship” refers to the pretense to identify with a particular public responsibility or to a world under globalist power: Leftists often claim to be “just citizens” or speak “in the name of the citizens of X place” when they are actually carrying cultural warfare. Remember when a bunch of hateful swindlers tried to rob Sherry Spencer, Richard Spencer’s mom, of her real estate by forcing her to sell it at a cheap price? Complacent media said they were just citizens, or that “the town” was doing it. Yeah, sure.

Citizenship today is a mean to virtue-signal when you are an urban elf. It has become empty, fictitious—it refers to a world of nowhere and more subtly to belonging to a globalist class that abandoned its actual fellow citizens or ethnic brothers long ago.

6. “Social struggles” and “achievements”

When they referred to actually good causes, such as trade unions maintaining a high standard of living for most workers and fostering a meritocratic middle-class, these words ringed well. Today, they seem to refer more to the unwarranted privileges of State officers—when theft through taxes and economic rent are presented as something “social.”

The heroic epic of “social achievements”, which conveniently forgets that there is no free lunch and that if a particular segment of population benefits much from them it must be at the expense of the others, covers a host of barely examined ill effects. When it is used to glorify the welfare State, it forgets how such a State tends to disintegrate organic social life by taking away charity or generosity, how it fosters a big parasitic and paternalist State, how it allows females to destroy their families, or how it attracts immigrants eager to get a check and imposes unfair burdens on the productive citizens—I’m thinking about, say, the middle classes who paid for Obamacare, not about cutting taxes for Monsanto.

Conclusion

From fake smiles and cute façades to seemingly innocuous buzzwords such as “you go girl”, “sex positivity” or “self-acceptance” – which sounds better than complacency – the culture conflict-mongerers managed to push their disruptions and degeneration into normality. One step at a time, from actual normalcy to an alien nation, all this believing they were cool or on the good side of history.

Shatter the illusion by explaining what stands behind and unveil the inner vacuity or potentially polymorphous use of the word. May progress not be “progress” and may the mainstream view of justice not be the anti-white, misandric “social justice.” They aren’t smarter than we are, just more manipulative. –>

RELATED POSTS:

Greenteeth Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Writerbeat ] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] … [ Minds ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]
[ Ian at Facebook ]

Freedom Of Thought And Information: Quotes.

March 22, 2017

If the ruling elites want to establish global control they need to be able to control all information the general population have access to. The idea of controlling information in order to limit the ability to think and develop ideas served Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and many other dictators well but was completely exposed by George Orwell in the novel ‘1984’.

In recent decades the technique for controlling thoughts and ideas has been more subtle, but that has not prevented many commentators higlighting what is going on.

“If those in charge of our society – politicians, corporate executives, and owners of press and television – can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves.” — Howard Zinn, historian and author

“The corporate grip on opinion in the United States is one of the wonders of the Western world. No First World country has ever managed to eliminate so entirely from its media all objectivity” – much less dissent. Gore Vidal

“Understand that all battles are waged on an unconscious level before they are begun on the conscious one, and this battle is no different. The power structure wishes us to believe that the only options available are those which they present to us, we know this is simply not true.” – Teresa Stover

“People in the West need to understand that if the news they receive bears on the interests of the US military/security complex, the news is scripted by the CIA. The CIA serves its interests, not the interests of the American people or the interests of peace.” – Paul Craig Roberts

In the years the USA could claim with some credibility to be the only global superpower, the elites managed to gain control of print and broadcast media throughout the developed world. Unfortunately the technology developed as a tool to to enhance the ability of the elite to control information while maintaining the illusion of freedom, The Internet, backfired on them. The General public forever despised by intellectuals and derided by the elite and the media proved to be a lot more intelligent and adaptable than ‘the controllers’ suspected.

RELATED POSTS:

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]

[ Ian at Facebook ]

We will have cracked secret of ETERNAL LIFE by 2029 says GOOGLE chief

March 19, 2017

Most people who have made big money in Silicon Valley share two qualities. a) The are con artists, getting rich by screwing taxpayers money out of politicians.
b) They are all totally insane, stark raving bonkers in the head.

A fine example of this is Google executive Ray Kurzweil, who has for several years led the fascistic technology corporation’s team of mad scientists investigating ‘transhumanism’, which can mean creating human / animal hybrids ostensibly for the purpose of growing spare organs for use in transplant surgery, but in the case of Google, a company led by nerds, is about transplanting processors in our brains so that we can benefit from having our thoughts controlled by google software via the internet.

Kurzweil believes that in only little more than ten years from now humanity will ready to take major steps towards achieving immortality (http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/781136/IMMORTALITY-google-ray-kurzweil-live-forever).

The technical specialist, who leads Google’s research into transhumanism (the merging of mortals ans machines,) is a log term believer in the the idea that science can conquer death and grant us immortality, has said medical advances and improved technology in the coming 12 to 15 years will result in humans having the option to live forever should they so choose.

Mr Kurzweil said: “I believe we will reach a point around 2029 when medical technologies will add one additional year every year to your life expectancy.

“By that I don’t mean life expectancy based on your birthdate, but rather your remaining life expectancy.”

Kurzweil believes that we are little more than a decade away from taking major steps towards immortality.

The tech specialist, who has long supported the notion of immortality, says that medical advancements and improved technology in the coming 12 years will see humans being given the option to live forever.

Mr Kurzweil said: “I believe we will reach a point around 2029 when medical technologies will add one additional year every year to your life expectancy.

“By that I don’t mean life expectancy based on your birthdate, but rather your remaining life expectancy.”

And now we come to the hidden agenda.
“Another step will be connecting our brains to the internet or a cloud network,” Kurzweil said,  “which will be as big of a step in evolution as when our ancestors developed the frontal cortex 2 million years ago.He added: “We’ll create more profound forms of communication than we’re familiar with today, more profound music and funnier jokes.

“We’ll be funnier. We’ll be sexier. We’ll be more adept at expressing loving sentiments.”

Well it’s not hard to make a nerd funnier and sexier, how hard is it to improve on zero. As for being better at expressing loving sentiments, this is a guy who thinks turning us into humandroids controlled by machines will make us better human beings. Have you ever had any contact with a machine (or a nerd) capable of experiencing any emotion fully, let alone expressing it in words?

RELATED POSTS:


The Internet Of Things: A Dystopian Nightmare Where Your Entire Life Will Be Monitored On The Internet

We have reported many times on the Internet of Things an idea planned by the big technology companies and bevoled of control freak mainstream politicians and the creepy people who run global corporations. Those who love the idea of technology controlling us are cheering the idea …

Google’s Eric Schmidt Greases Skids For Internet Brain Chip Google CEO Eric Schmidt greased the skids for an Internet brain chip during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland earlier today when he predicted the end of the world wide web as an external concept. Asked how he saw the Internet developing in future years, Schmidt responded, “There will be so many IP addresses…so many devices, sensors, things that you are wearing, things that you are interacting with that you won’t even sense it.”

The Robotification Of Human Society Is being Implemented

Are you ready to surrender your humanity to science, accept having computer chips implanted in your skull that will link your brain to the internet (via a Google server) and let your life be controlled by machines? That’s what The Controllers are planning for you …

Transhumanism: The Elite’s Agenda For Total Control
Robot lovers, indestrictible soldiers with no mercy or compassion, everlasting life for beings that are part human, part machine, genetically modified humans with supernatural strength and endurance competing in future ‘hungrer Games’ style Olympic tournaments: the plot of some dystopian novel? No, actual items in the elite’s agenda for total control.
Transhumanism and Eugenics
We have said many times that the science community is at war with humanity. Scientists are out of control, evry day we hear of some new scheme to try to control nature, be it human nature or the climate. Given what we ought to have learned from all previous attempts to control nature we can only conclude that scientists are insane psychos willing to risk destroying life to show off how clever they are.
Transhumanism: Join The Resistance
Transhumanism, the creation of – or turning us into – part human, part machine cyborgs is generating a lot of discussion and a lot of spontaneous ejaculations in the scientific community as they contemplate having their brains replaced by a computer. There are no limits on the ambitions of scientists fantasies, they even envisage creating robots that can interbreed with us, but how much is realistic?
Transhumanism: They will get under your skin
We seem to be talking a lot about transhumanism, the process of turning us into human – animal or human -machine hybrids recently. The Daily Stirer thinks such technological visions are nothing more than the fantasies of sick minds, but politicians and corporate leaders, ever eager for more power and control, seem willing to stump up infintie funding.
Technology and Transhumanism
Prof Mark Post, a researcher at the University of Maastricht, has spent several years developing a technique for growing meat in the lab. Yesterday, he unveiled the product of his work: a petri-dish beefburger, grown from stem cells. Genetically, it is beef, but it has never seen a cow. The eye-watering price tag represents the cost of the whole project (Google’s Sergey Brin was picking up the bill). The shamburger was cooked via a live video stream on the internet, and was pronounced as basically meat-like (if lacking salt and fat) by a panel of chefs, who for some reason ate it without ketchup.

Artificial Intelligence: Will It Kill Human Society?
The media, the so called ‘experts’ and politicians hail every technological advance as if it will btransport us from reality to a utopian paradise. but does Artificial Intelligence and related internet and computer technology pose theats to human society that far outweigh any possible advantages? Whateve, Google plan to put machines in our place on top of the food chain.

When Algorithms Rule The World
It must seem to many people that technology is taking over the world and our lives. The internet is everywhere and algorithms filter information to control the news and influence behaviour. But is the technology takeover as solid as it seems or are the hyperbolic claims based on some very dodgy logic?

Is Technology Creating Physical and Psychological Hazards In The Digital Age?
Scientific research used to be the area of work that trailblazers, those with an unquenchable desire for new experience and a hyperactive sense of adventure wanted to be involved in. Now those who label themselves ‘scientists’ seem to have become the high priests of an ultra – conservative religion, determined at all costs to block progess that may lead to understanding that the dogmas of the past are just wrong

The Mummers: The Controlling system And The Illusion Of Freedom
We live in a world of deception, where truth is an ephemeral thing, slippery as an eel and shadowy as a spectre. What we are expercted to perceive as reality is just spin and misinformation designed to ensure the elite maintain their control. There’s eff all you can do just get on with your life, say the shills for big government and authoritarianism. But are we really nothing more than slaves of the system?

Transhumanism
The Geepees – A Cautionary Tale
A Computer With Human Abilities
IBM’s thinking computer
Will your brain interface with a computer
Google’s evil technology
Transhumanism in Google’s ambitions
Humanitas
Science and technology
Beautiful Children With No Love In The Eyes
Alien In My Bed

Greenteeth Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Writerbeat ] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] … [ Minds ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]
[ Ian at Facebook ]

Lack of Diversity?

February 28, 2017

Doesn’t happen often but sometimes Facebook throws up something really amusing in a discussion. Once such instance happened when a liberal and fellow traveller of the anti – Trump hate mob tendency decided to redefine bigot. Now this lad likes to style himself a ‘scientist’ (physicist to be exact although his physics falls into the category that is all equations and mathematical speculation with not one demonstrable fact in sight. This is typical of modern science of course, theories which are impossible to test are treated as facts, while inconvenient facts that challenge the theory are ignored.

It seems that to such people the same rules apply when rewriting the dictionary so that the meanings of their favourite words (bigot, racist etc.) are changed to fit their warper world view.

GM Jackson wrote, yesterday (27 February 2017) at 6:11am ·
https://www.facebook.com/n/?william.pinn%2Fposts%2F10154458444585749&comment_id=10154459375575749&reply_comment_id=10154460265550749&aref=1488237937875971&medium=email&mid=5498b1c0ad931G2de3f150G5498b65a0dc03G37&bcode=1.1488237937.Abl-ZPt24D3Qol_6&n_m=ianrthorpe%40yahoo.com

Is so-and-so really a bigot? These days it’s hard to tell. Bigots are more subtle and clever than they were in days of old when they could just come out and say, “Those people are subhuman scum and should be sent back to the shithole they came from.”

Now days suspected bigots qualify their statements with words like “most,” “some,” “nearly all.” They are careful not to say “all” or “every.” So how can we tell who is a bigot and who isn’t? Consider minority group X. Bigots always go negative on group X. They never ever list one positive thing group X has done.

Chances are excellent that group X has made major contributions to human progress and/or has done many acts of charity–but the guy who insists he’s “not racist!” will never go positive on group X. Never ever! If he did, his head would twist 360 degrees and he would hurl a fountain of green slime out of every orifice.

So next time you hear someone say, “I’m not a bigot,” ask a simple question: “Tell us what you love about group X.”

Ian Thorpe One cannot say groups are responsible for major contributions to human progress. Were ‘Catholics’ responsible for medieval art? Of course not, a small number of highly talented individuals were. Were ‘The English’ responsible for Shakespeare’s plays? N…See More
Like · Reply · 2 · 21 hrs

GM Jackson Oh, nice spin!
Yes, individuals do things too. But that does not mean they can’t cooperate with other individuals to achieve a common goal. Re: your examples. Catholics sponsored a lot of art and architecture. Shakespeare was English and it would be wrong of us to say that English are incapable of any great literary works. It would also be wrong to claim that Jews are incapable of inventing fractional reserve banking.
Like · Reply · 14 hrs · Edited

Ian Thorpe
Ian Thorpe But nobody has said the English are incapable of any great literary works or that the Jewish community would be incapable of creating the banking system. And it is true that some Catholics sponsored works or art. So who is spinning now? The case is that these things are not ascribable to identity groups. When groups collaborate to achieve a common goal they are invariably groups of diverse individuals contributing a wide range of skills.
One of the problems with ‘liberal’ (or more correctly Marxist) thinking is that it lumps people together in identity groups and fails to see the diversity of individuals. Which is of course illiberal.

In another thread under the same post this rather amusing discussion unfolded between someone name Clarence who obviously has a good knowledge of history and some considerable life experience to inform his opinions and ‘Stef’ a liberal bigot who ‘identifies’ as a scientist and shows all the sheep like tendencies of that sub species:

Clarence Woodworth group x can of course encompass white people.

 

Liz Ellis
Liz Ellis You can be a bigot and not a racist. The most basic definition of a bigot is someone intolerant of other opinions. From Google:
Bigot
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.See More
Like · Reply · 1 · 23 hrs

 

GM Jackson

GM Jackson Google doesn’t even know how to spell googol.

Definition of bigotSee More

a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person;…
merriam-webster.com

 

Stephanie Barr In my opinion, any time *what* you are is more important than *who* you are, you’re dealing with bigotry and prejudice.

 

Clarence Woodworth You need to add clarifiers, there, Stephanie. “What” as referring to things you can’t change like sex or race. Things you were born with. Otherwise you are condemmning me for having “bigotry and prejudice” against murderers and rapists.

 

Stephanie Barr Well, *who* you are is what you make of yourself, so I’d include murderers and rapists (also bigots and abusers) in that category.
What you are might not just be things you can’t change: you can change religions, for instance, but they tend to be labels someone else picks thinking they define you. And they don’t. Christian doesn’t make one a good person any more than it guarantees you’re a bad person. Televangelist, however, is something you chose that makes it clear what you, as an individual, worship most.

 

Clarence Woodworth Murderer, and Rapist are categories, hence my confusion. But otherwise, well said!
Stephanie Barr Clarence Woodworth But they are based on what you’ve done (which makes who you are) not what you happen to be. No one is born a rapist. You have to go out and make that of yourself.

Stephanie Barr Most labels have nothing to do with anything you’ve done, but either factors you can’t change or aspects that really indicate nothing about who you are as a person (immigrant, transgender, particular religion, for example).

Being a rapist says a great deal about *who* you are as an individual.

 

Clarence Woodworth I disagree: Particular religion does say something about you as an individual. There is a tremendous difference between the beliefs of various forms of Christianity and Islam, for an example. And there are differences between an illegal immigrant and a legal immigrant as an example. One followed the law, one (for whatever reason good or bad) is still a lawbreaker.

 

Clarence Woodworth In short, we may rightly distinguish groups by certain properties such as WHAT they believe or how they treat other groups. The average German soldier (often drafted or joined merely to defend his homeland which was being invaded on both sides and the Russians were out for revenge) was not criminalized at the end of WW2, even though he (and in a few cases, she) fought for the Nazis. The SS, on the other hand, was made a criminal organization and mere membership was a strike against you. This was based on belief and behavior of those groups of people.

 

Stephanie Barr Well, for the more part, I’ll have to disagree with you. There are some very compelling reasons to be an illegal immigrant and, UNLESS THEY ARE HURTING SOMEONE, I don’t put itin the same level AUTOMATICALLY, with a criminal act. Anymore than I equate prostitution to make sure your children are fed equates with a sex crime. While I’ll grant you not every sect is the same in any religion, to imply that Islam or Christianity equate with virtue or vice is, in my opinion, disingenuous.

Now, if you want to argue that you are unlikely to be a nice person as a member of Al Qaida or Westboro Baptist church, I can agree with that.

One’s choices are a reflection on who you are. However, someone on the outside, who was not faced with those same choices, should be careful about what they think that really says about that person.

 

Stephanie Barr There is a good point to be made that allying yourself with groups that distinguish themselves with hateful attitudes does reflect who you are. Not just the SS, but also KKK or other White Supremacists groups for example.
Stephanie Barr Trump supporter.
Clarence Woodworth I’m a Trump supporter 🙂
Stephanie Barr Well, hoist in your own petard, then. Cant support a man with Hitler’s agenda and methods without the stink rubbing off on you.
Clarence Woodworth As for your defense of breaking the law as an illegal immigrant, I wonder what other laws you feel ok with people breaking
Clarence Woodworth Thank you I haven’t laughed so hard in a very, very , very long time 🙂

Stephanie Barr Circumstances and motivations matter. You mentioned “rapists and murderers” – so all soldiers are villains in your book? Or are there justifications for murder?

Y’see?

Clarence Woodworth Words have meaning. “Murderer” has never applied to shooting someone who is trying to kill you or even take you captive and torture you. As for rape, in WW2 we hanged the rather few of our soldiers caught or convicted for rape.
Stephanie Barr Are you going to say that every soldier (just on our side) are shooting in self-defense and the others are all aggressors? Really?
Stephanie Barr How about bombs
Clarence Woodworth So long as they are aimed at strictly military targets, nope. Now if aimed at civilians, its basically state sponsered terrorism. Problem is, in any big war both sides do it.

 

Clarence Woodworth
Clarence Woodworth Stephanie Barr : And no, I’m saying in war BOTH SIDES are trying to kill each other, so both sides get self defense. War is, after all, what happens when things can’t be resolved peacefully.

 

Stephanie Barr The point isn’t is it justified. Even military targets have non-militant people in them. The point is, it’s murder. And there are times when it’s justified.
That’s my point. Blanket statements without knowing the specific circumstances was the issue and I gave you an example.

 

Clarence Woodworth Murder is defined legally. And self-defense and accidents are defenses against murder.

 

Stephanie Barr The notion that a war is filled with everyone firing in self-defense is whacked. If you think planning to drop a bomb on city and then doing so doesn’t count as murder, you’re part of the problem.

 

Clarence Woodworth ‘hint’ accidents…as you mentioned Military bases

 

Stephanie Barr Hiroshima was not a military target. Nor was it an accidentt
Clarence Woodworth Hiroshima was a military target. It’s obvious you know nothing about Hiroshima, who died (about 1/3 of the casulties were soldiers) or about Hiroshima’s importance as the main organizational base for the defense of all of southern Japan in the event of the expected American invasion. The “Targetting Commission” that chose the Atomic bomb targets was specifically looking for military targets, and Hiroshima was by far the best still available.

Stephanie Barr I’ve read multiple books on Hiroshima. And we weren’t out to break the military. The military, in fact, argued against it. We were out to break Japan.

And we’re done here. Rules apply to everyone or they’re meaningless.

 

Clarence Woodworth You’ve read nothing on Hiroshima, or at least nothing honest. That’s quite obvious. Do you have any idea just how hard it was to get the Japanese to surrender? Even after TWO atomic bombs and the Russian destruction of one of their main armies in China, the Emperor STILL had to break a 3 to 3 tie. And then the next day there was an attempted coup.

 

Clarence Woodworth These were people willing to kill themselves and take 100 million of their countrymen with them rather than suffer what they considered dishoner. Such a mindset is totally alien to you.
Clarence Woodworth And I just love your ‘rules apply to everyone’ but appparently not tens of millions of illegal immigrants. I was about to argue some of the secondary effects(mostly bad ) of having such a totally open border, but since you ran off with your tail between your legs when I showed you up on Hiroshima, I guess I can save my breath

 

Stephanie Barr I read what the generals at the time had to say. Or maybe you think you know more.

 

Stephanie BarrAnd none of it addresses my point. Even people who feel strongly that “murder is wrong” will stand up and defend i a blatant example of it under the “right” circumstances.

You can’t change the rules on what’s fair for your side does and then blame others who are also driven what by what they see as mitigating circumstances.

Well, you can, but you’re a total hypocrite to do so.
Clarence Woodworth No, you didn’t read ‘what the generals at the time had to say”. All you read were some quotes of some after the fact (think I haven’t read those quotes?) and about the Bombing Survey report. You are vastly uninformed, but I guess you can be forgiven because you are female and most females do not focus on military history. I was reading anti- A bomb opinions in the 70 and early 80’s when I was 10 to 15. Since then alot more information has come out: Here’s what I recommend you do: Read about Tarawa. Read about Iwo Jima and read about Okinawa. Consider the cost of a land invasion (the Joint Chiefs of Staffs reports as well as many other studies from that time are available). Read about Operation Ketsugo , the Japanese plan to repel the American invaders (lots of use of suicide planes, boats, and civilians armed with things like molotov cocktails and ancient bows and muskets) and General Hata and his Second Army and what they were tasked with. Their headquarters was Hiroshima. Note we had the Japanese home Islands surrounded. We had control of their air, we had mined both their ocean ports and most of their interior waterways. We didn’t have to invade: we could starve them out. The Japanese h ad a plan for that, and it didn’t involve surrender either. I dare you to read all that and then say that Operation Downfall or starvation wouldn’t have resulted in more casulties on both sides than 2 Atomic bombs

 

Clarence Woodworth Oh, and keep in mind that the United States -mothers and fathers- lost 400 THOUSAND men to death, and over a million to life changing wounds. And tell me how comfortable you are from your freaking armchair, 75 years later, condemmning them for trying to use a new weapon to end a war and spare themselve more heartbreak.

Was It Wrong for Scientists to Create a Pig-Human Hybrid Embryo?

January 29, 2017

from Anonymous

Scientists at the Salk Institute in California have created a part-human, part-pig embryo. Bioethicist Arthur Caplan told us about the ethical concerns involved in mixing human and animal DNA.

An experiment reported on Thursday in Cell, a peer-reviewed scientific journal, announced a purported breakthrough in bioengineering: the successful creation of an embryo with both human and pig DNA (and to be clear, the artwork above is just a photo of a sculpture). The results, “raise the possibility of xeno-generating transplantable human tissues and organs towards addressing the worldwide shortage of organ donors,” according to the paper. But while the embryo was only allowed to develop for a few days, the genesis of this early-stage creature revives an uncomfortable debate about whether animal-human hybrids are, well, horrifying monsters waiting to happen.

In November 2015, shortly after the National Institutes of Health (NIH) put a hold on its own experiments that combined human and animal cells, the federal government hosted a meeting of the minds to discuss that very question. More specifically, the NIH feared “the specter of an intelligent mouse stuck in a laboratory somewhere screaming ‘I want to get out,” NIH ethicist David Resnik, told Technology Review magazine. Read more >>>

 
RELATED POSTS:

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [Ian at Minds ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]
[ Ian at Facebook ]

How Trump Has Rewritten The Rules – Tim Montgomerie

January 22, 2017

Tim Montgomerie is a British journalis and blogger best known outside the news industry and politics for founding the Conservative Home blog. In spire of what some people may choose to believe, this blog is not run by conservatives (we’re not Labour supporters either) but we want to share an excellent article from Mr. Montgomerie which puts the Trump phenemenon in perspective vis – a – vis globalism and the rampant authoritarianism of the ‘left’.

How Trump has rewritten the political rules

By

Tim Montgomerie spent much of the past year in the United States covering one of the most extraordinary presidential elections in history. This is the second in a three-part series, summarising what he learned. (The first part can be found here.)

The weaknesses of the mainstream American media have reached a critical, democracy-endangering stage

The mainstream media plays a vital role in democracy. It educates the public about what politicians are doing (and not doing). And almost as importantly, it educates politicians about what is happening in the country they seek to serve, and what they might be missing.

But for year after year, in this age of hugely disruptive internet-based competition, the mainstream media – especially what online insurgents call the “dead tree press” – has been in a fight for its economic survival. Newsrooms have shrunk as reporters have been fired to cut costs, and it’s often the higher-paid and more experienced reporters who get dropped first. Some of the best journalism has become hidden behind paywalls.

At the same time, the tendency of media organisations based in New York and Los Angeles – both bastions of liberal leftism – to employ like-minded people has accelerated. Hard data about the ideological composition of newsrooms is difficult to come by, but research during the recent campaign by the Center for Public Integrity found that 96 per cent of political donations by journalists were to the Clinton campaign.

The executive editor of The New York Times recently admitted that “we don’t get religion”. Not getting religion in one of the most religious nations on earth is not a minor journalistic failing. And what about not getting people with guns, or people who work in coalmining, or veterans who’ve served in the military?

Some newsrooms have been so busy recruiting more women and ethnic minorities – very correctly – that they have forgotten other forms of diversity which ensure that groupthink doesn’t compromise editorial decisions. The result is the equivalent, if we were to put it into a British context, of an editorial conference full of Remainers: they can try their best to reflect the views of the rest of the nation, but it won’t be easy or complete. On top of which, such journalists often choose to think the worst of people they don’t naturally agree with, or even mix with. This is one reason why wanting your country to govern itself – the dominant motivation of Leavers in the UK – is regularly and disproportionately portrayed as racist or xenophobic.

These two key trends, of tough revenue models and ideologically monochrome newsrooms, have reached a point in America (and the London-based media may not be so very far behind) where the press can’t afford to do its work of reporting the nation – a nation which it doesn’t even know half of as well as it should.

An environment is created where large numbers of voters stop trusting the media and choose instead to read fringe alternatives: the Age of Breitbart.

 ‘Liar, liar, liar’ turns into ‘Yawn, yawn, yawn’

One of my favourite moments during the confirmation hearings now taking place on Capitol Hill (and I know I shouldn’t laugh) was when Rex Tillerson, the ex-Exxon chief, friend of Vlad-the-Bad and nominee for Secretary of State, was asked by one Senator about lobbying against sanctions on Russia by the company he ran until very recently.

Tillerson, wearing a face as straight as a pipeline, replied by saying that he had not been aware of any lobbying. Er, said Senator Corker, the foreign affairs committee chairman, I remember you lobbying me at the time. Read more >>>

RELATED POSTS:
Obama‘s Legacy
Deep State In Trouble
How Elites exempt themselves from ideologically driven agendas
Racist professor calls for white genocide
The President Who Was Not Present
US Democrats Can Protest All They Want, here’s Why They lost

America Is Lost: Rigged election, Rigged Media, Rigged Candidate says Assange

The Unreported Scandals Of The Obama Administration

Obama’s Farewell – The World Breathes A Sigh Of Relief

Obama and The End Of Utopia

While We Have Been Distracted By Trump Hysteria, Obama Has Been Easing The West Towards War With Russia

Europe Rejects Obama Doctrine – US Exceptionalism Is Not Acceptable

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [Ian at Minds ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]

[ Ian at Facebook ]

Obama Has been An Inspirational President?Well He Probably Inspired More Suicides Than Any Other.

January 18, 2017

The Slate is one of those American political magazines that likes to pretend it presents and unbiased and objective view of world events. This is why for the past eight years the editorial policy has been objectively sucking Barack Obama’s cock. And why now Slate writers are still heaping praise on the inept and divisive man and the scant achievements of his failed administration.

Obama’s greatest achievement perhaps it to have put Donald Trump in The White House. Whether you think this is a good or bad thing depends on your political stance. This blog is neutral, our view being that Trump can’t be a worse president than any of the three that preceded him.

But let’s have a look at what The Slate has to say (and better still, some of the readers comments which have Obama’s legacy sussed out far better than the author of the main article.

Obama’s Legacy Won’t Be His Political Achievements

He wanted to be a transformational president. He’ll be an inspirational one instead.

Bill Francis 2 hours ago

Obama has done more to damage America than any previous President.  One of the worst issues is his bringing America to the brink of financial collapse with over regulations, the making illegal changes to laws, increased taxation and extraordinary increases of the costs of the “nanny” state.

Not only these issues but his constant apology tours, bowing to foreign leaders and international give – aways to Russia and Iran have destroyed America’s reputation in the world.  His “leading from behind” is the best example of a failed international policy.  What he should have been saying is “IF IT TO BE IT IS UP TO ME” and lead by example.

Chris Campbell 2 hours ago

I really just don’t understand the instinct to praise Obama.

He was definitely a transformational president. He transformed a huge Democrat majority into a completely ineffective and irrelevant minority. Democrats should be very angry about that. But instead they praise him.

The GOP praises him as well, in private. Not only has he handed them the best position they have had in nearly a century, but he and Harry Reid have created tools that will make that position even stronger. They are having a very difficult time containing their glee.

Phrank 1 hour ago

@Chris Campbell  If Obama was white, there is NO WAY Democrats would be heaping the kinds of adulations on him and his “legacy” that we see every day and despite all the contrary data showing what an abominable failure he/it has been.  It is embarrassing, unseemly, and fundamentally RACIST — because the Left simply cannot have what they incessantly call the “First African-American President” to be (or have been) anything less than a demi-god.

Unfortunately, thanks to their completely deluded (or willfully blind) mindset, they may have also made Obama the last “African American President.”

Paul Keith: Civil but Disobedient Member1 day ago

GWB, when asked where his Presidency would rank in history wisely – for him that was huge – said that he would let history be the judge.  Wherever President Obama ranks when the histories are written a generation or two from now, he may not be at the top but I am confident he will be nowhere near the bottom where Donald Trump will be competing with Richard Nixon for that spot.

Christopher1988 1 day ago

In all sincerity–and this is coming from a liberal Democrat–what hope does he give us? The ACA is not a great accomplishment, even if it lasts (it protects the industry it was supposed to compete with, and people like me are stuck not being able to afford it but penalized every year for not participating in it), and it’s his only accomplishment. We can’t take hope in terrible election results for Democrats across the country paralleling his years in office, or his inabilty to get Hillary elected, or break the opposing party’s block on his SCOTUS nominations. Reagan did pretty much all of that, so we know it can be done in the modern age. We can’t take hope from his rewarding Wall Street crooks rather than opening proceedings against them, or using the internet to spy on all of us, or demonizing whistleblowers.

We thought–and maybe it was racist of us–a black man would be different. But he hasn’t been. And he’s done basically nothing for minorities in America. SCOTUS gave us gay marriage. Military intelligence took down Bin Laden.

The guy is a good looking speech maker. Are we supposed to hope for more of those?

celtic 1 day ago

Obama kind of mocked B Clinton as non-transformational, but he really should have learned from him. After Clinton over-reached with Hillary care and lost the Congress, he started working with Repubs, finding middle ground and got some things done. (He did have luck with the Cold War having ended, and the tech boom).

With Obama it was always strictly his way or the highway – even Dem leaders indicate he seemed too above it all to work with them – causing increased bad feelings all around, and after he lost Congress not much getting done.

Clinton wasn’t transformational, but he was a good president, and Obama wound up being neither.

Pharmgrl 1 day ago

“With Obama it was always strictly his way or the highway..”

You are Spot.On.

IMHO it’s a cop out to say it was Obamas race that lead to the unraveling of his legacy.

It was his abuse of executive power and marginalizing elected reps of half the country, right out of the starting gate with Obamacare.

After losing first the house, then the senate in historical blowbacks as the American people tried to reign him in, instead of the conciliatory third way approach that Clinton wisely adopted, an undeterred and yes-arrogant to the point of Shakespearean “tragic flaw”-Obama proceeded to stomp all over Article II, using every possible end run around Congress and its alleged power of the purse, to keep his agenda afloat.

From my chair I’d say the moment the reality TVideologue buffoon Trump saw his opening was just after 2014 midterms. Obama declared he had “a pen and a phone” and passed immigration reform by executive fiat, less than 2 weeks after the biggest electoral blowback since WWII, and over the vociferous objections of the new senate majority leader.

Trump is simply a Newtonian equal and opposite reaction to Obamas running roughshod over elected reps of half the country for 8 years.

RELATED POSTS:
American exceptionalism
America warmongering
Failure of American leadership
Obama’s Al Qaeda allies
Obama doctrine
Obama’s ideological war on freedom
Obama’s Jihad
Obama and Kerry shills for war
Obama the real danger
ISIS is a US creation
Obama’s bizarre background
NWO regime change
The Unreported Scandals Of The Obama Administration
In The End Days Obama’s Bizarro World Gets Crazier
Demonizing Trump For Obama’s Failures
Obama and The End Of Utopia
How Hope And Change became Fear And Loathing
Out Of Touch Elites Are Clueless About The Anger Of The Masses Towards Them
Obama Promises UN His Legacy Will Be Global Authoritarian Dictatorship
Obama’s Economy Is Bad; Clinton’s Would Be Worse
Obama Bids To Persuade Britons To Sacrifice Their Nations Independence To Serve US Geopolitical Interests
Low And Middle Income Whites and Blacks Feel Threatened As Crime Soars Under Obama
Total Opacity Of ‘The Most Transparent Administration Ever’
The Unreported Scandals Of The Obama Administration

Without His Teleprompter Obama Becomes A Gibbering Idiot

Fact Checker Snopes Lie About Obama ‘Birther’ Smear.

Obama Is No Friend Of The British

Cameron Begged Obama ‘On Bended Knee’ To Help Bully Britons Into Staying In EU

Universal Emperor Obama Wants To Take Britain To The Dark Side

Crazy Obama Administration Claims It Brought Peace And Security To Syria In 2015

Putin response To Obama Attempt To Claim Credit For Stopping ISIS In Syria ..

Obama Trumped

Keynans Tell Obama: Don’t Mention gay Rights

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [Ian at Minds ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]

[ Ian at Facebook ]

January 13, 2017

Go Ask Alice

Have we short circuited kids’ life imagination
Through indiscriminate use of digitalization?
Show, don’t tell is the writers’ exhortation,
But there’s nothing left to tell with virtual visualization,
No roads less traveled to embark upon
With sense imprinted on graphic representation.
Go ask Alice, but be sure she’s print consulted.
Tweedledee and Tweedledum noise and light
Leave sense and senses senselessly assaulted.
With no books to read or nature’s seed,
Fantastic flight may be permanently stunted.
Peter Pan would have quite a bit to say
About techno kidnapping of kids’ creative play.

Chris Brockman
Illustration: Marjorie Torrey from 1950’s edition

This poem from Chris Brockman made me think:

Not long ago I read a comment by a silicon valley billionaire (can’t remember the name) who, on being challenged on his company’s focus on replacing language with icons said he is trying to make a more visual world.
Now I’m not a religious person but it brought to mind the opening lines in The Book of John, “In the begining was the word, and the word was with God. And the word was God.”
Loads of philosophical connotations there, but for now I invite people to consider that without language (the word) we are on the way back to equality with the animals.
I used the standard KJV bible translation, dig a bit and it gets more interesting. The Word in Zoroastrian, Syriac and Armenian texts is El or Ea, and to Ethiopian Christians (and Rastafarians) Jah, all of which mean “I am”
Once we get our heads round “I am” the rest of the words follow.
Digital technology is a fine tool, a means to an end, but when the tool becomes the end we are in dangerous territory.

Deep State Is In Deep Trouble

January 10, 2017

From Sputnik News
10 January, 2017

US ruling power is in deep trouble because there are growing signs that the mass of citizens are no longer beholden to the supposed authority residing in Washington.

Once the legitimacy of would-be authorities begins to collapse in the eyes of the people, then profound political change is in the offing, as history shows us through countless empires that came and went – often ignominiously.

The so-called American Deep State comprising the military-intelligence apparatus and its operatives in the political and media establishment has put its credibility on the line over allegations of Russian interference in the US elections.

Those allegations are threadbare, indeed baseless, despite concerted, overweening attempts by the Deep State to conjure up something of substance.

The latest high-level intelligence report from the CIA

, NSA, FBI and other US spy agencies on alleged Russian cyber hacking may have “wowed” President Barack Obama, various members of Congress and the corporate-controlled news media.

Not so for ordinary Americans. Among rank-and-file citizens the reaction has been underwhelming to say the least. And that should be a matter of anxiety for the ruling establishment. If the people can no longer be commanded, then the whole foundation for power begins to erode like a sandcastle.

As a New York Times report put it: “What’s the big deal? asks Trump’s supporters on Russian hacking report”.

Among ordinary voters far removed from the Washington Beltway Bubble the consensus is one of derision towards the once-revered US intelligence community.

“Sore losers”, “sour grapes”, “crybabies” and “absurd” were just some of the disbelieving responses from ordinary folks about claims that Russian agents directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin had tipped the US November election in favor of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.

“I don’t believe the [US] intel report,” said one man in Louisiana. “Why is everybody so afraid of Russia? I’m not against Putin.”

Another man, a retired US air force officer, added: “From the parts of the [US intel] report I’ve seen it seems silly.”

President-elect Trump, once again, seems more in tune with the real, pressing concerns of common citizens. He emerged from his so-called “briefing” by US intelligence chiefs last Friday and pointedly refused to join the Washington blowhards accusing Russia of “an act of war”. Trump in fact followed up with a comment that it was only a “stupid” person would not want to have good relations with Russia. >>

RELATED POSTS:

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] … [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]…[Little Nicky Machiavelli]… [ Ian’s Authorsden Pages ]… [ It’s Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]…[Wikinut] … [ Boggart Abroad] … [ Grenteeth Bites ] … [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] … [Latest Posts] … [ Tumblr ] … [Ian at Minds ] … [ Authorsden blog ] … [Daily Stirrer Headlines]
[ Ian at Facebook ]