A Daily Dose of NYT Russophobia
It’s a near daily feature by the self-styled newspaper of record – functioning as a US imperial press agent on geopolitical issues, feeding its readers pure rubbish, hard truths on vital ones suppressed.
One of my objectives is taking the Times to the woodshed on a regular basis, hammering on other media scoundrels the same way, notably the neocon/CIA-connected Washington Post.
A same-day article whacks Langley’s house organ the way it hurts most – by truth-telling exposing its Big Lies.
Here’s how the Times covered Trump’s rejection of new sanctions on Russia for now.
Saying he contradicted Nikki Haley’s public announcement, as well as overruling his advisors, the Times cited unnamed sources, claiming his “whipsaw policy shift once again highlighted an administration struggling to find a coherent and consistent voice in dealing with Russia…”
The Times then rattled off a list of Big Lies it harps on repeatedly, saying:
“(I)n the past four years, (Russia) annexed Crimea, intervened in eastern Ukraine, sought to influence the American election in 2016, allegedly poisoned a former Russian spy living in Britain and propped up the murderous government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.”
All of the above is pure rubbish, malicious disinformation, issues I’ve written much about, explaining what media scoundrels like the Times suppress – featuring hate-mongering Russophobic Big Lies instead, the official narrative turning truth on its head.
The Times: “Mr. Trump was annoyed with Ms. Haley for getting out in front of the policy…and the president’s decision to reject sanctions left her hanging in public with her credibility on the line.”
Why he appointed her to a sensitive post and hasn’t sacked her for Russophobic rage, as well as against other sovereign independent countries is the issue the Times ignored.
She kept a low profile on Monday, issuing no comments.
The Times: Unnamed administration officials “could not explain how Mr. Trump would make Russia pay a ‘big price’ for enabling Syria’s use of chemical weapons, as he promised to do last week after a suspected gas attack killed more than 40 people and sickened scores more outside Damascus on April 7.”
Fact: No Douma CW attack occurred. It was fabricated, explained in previous articles.
Nor does any evidence suggest Syria retains banned toxic weapons, its entire arsenal destroyed in 2014.
Global Research.ca quoted journalist Robert Fisk. He visited the Douma hospital where alleged CW victims were treated, saying the following:
“(S)enior Syrian doctor” Assim Rahaibani explained patients treated for the alleged CW incident “were overcome not by gas (or other toxins) but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm,” adding:
“There are many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had ‘never believed in’ gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups.”
Read his London Independent report report in full on the alleged CW incident for hard truths the official narrative suppressed – including by the New York Times.
A same-day Times propaganda piece headlined “US and UK Warn of Cybersecurity Threat From Russia,” saying:
On Monday, Washington and Britain “issued a first-of-its-kind joint warning about Russian cyberattacks against government and private organizations as well as individual homes and offices in both countries, a milestone in the escalating use of cyberweaponry between major powers.”
Similar false accusations were made earlier, including about Russia attacking the US and UK power grids. Last month, Nikki Haley disgracefully warned of a Russian CW attack “in New York or in cities of any country that sits on this (Security) Council.”
Leading UK Russophobe Boris Johnson turned truth on its head, accusing Moscow of “producing and stockpiling Novichok” nerve agents “very likely for the purposes of assassinations.”
Not a shred of evidence suggests these accusations, or anything indicating a Russian cybersecurity threat to America or Britain.
The Times is a leading proliferator of malicious Russophobic rubbish – truth-telling on major geopolitical issues abhorrent to its editors.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."