I can only hope that those readers/viewers who search for Truth,
question Democracy Now with as critical an eye as they do with the
Wall Street Journal.
And yes, that added insult telling me that the following news contains
images of violence, raises questions in my mind as to the level of
understanding by the program producers.
Imagine, the world's most violant nation telling viewers that what
follows might be upsetting! Shame on Amy and Juan.
I cut short what I was trying to say last night, due to other goings
on. But my point was that we are all contaminated to one degree or
another by the vast amount of propaganda being spewed out by the
Establishment, 24/7.
In the commercial sector news and information are packaged, when
possible, as entertainment, and it is sold for two purposes. One is
to sell for a profit. Second, and most important, is to capture the
minds of the public. In Public Broadcasting and Publications, profit
is replaced by Survival, but the information and news still includes
smatterings of Establishment Propaganda.
My method, which works for me, is to take in as much as I can, with as
open a mind as possible, and let it all simmer until the issues begin
to become clear. But no matter how strongly I become convinced of an
issue, I always remind myself that there are no absolutes in Human
Activities.
But that is enough for now.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/20/21, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I thought that probably I had, but wasn't sure when I stumbled on it. It
confirmed what I've been saying about Democracy Now for a long time. Every
day, in her intro, Amy Goodman talks about how DN is different from
mainstream media, and it was different until approximately 2010 or 2011. I'd
love to know what happened to make the change. The corruption of what are
supposed to be our trusted sources of information, becomes more and more
evident as each day passes. The Intercept took only a few years to become
swallowed up. There is an interesting and very complicated thing happening
on Substack.com now, the place where all the writers end up when they can no
longer have their independent journalism and opinions accepted on any media
that pays writers. Everyone on Substack is financed by their followers. But
now, there have been some more traditional leftist writers who have demanded
that Substack get rid of other writers whom they find to be controvercial.
The issue at stake at the moment concerns people who are discussing the
complexities of transitioning for trans gender young people. Anyone who
points out that permanent physical alterations may not be appropriate for
every young person and explains why, is being accused of spreading anti
trans propaganda. But this is just a specific example of the limits that are
put on people's discussion these days. It's a widespread and complicated
phenomenon. At its edge is the practice on every radio and TV program of
warming people that the next item to be discussed, might be upsetting
because it involves descriptions of violence. This is interesting in a
society that has no problem with dropping bombs on people all over the world
and having cops murdering people of color if they do something that a white
bystander finds suspiscious.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2021 8:32 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Democracy Now: Have I posted this before?
On 3/20/21, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Democracy Now amplifies State Department propaganda campaign againstMiriam,
China behind progressive cover DANNY HAIPHONG.FEBRUARY 22, 2021
While Democracy Now hosts US gov't-funded pundits to spread
humanitarian interventionist propaganda about Xinjiang, an analysis by
The Grayzone found most of the outlets's China coverage is sharply
negative The U.S. has claimed a humanitarian "Responsibility to
Protect" to justify military operations in the name of saving civilian
lives from evil dictators. Most notable have been the brutal U.S.-led
wars in Libya and Syria which destabilized entire regions in the name
of "civilian protection"
and "promoting democracy." These operations relied heavily on
self-described human rights NGO's and media outlets to cultivate
support among liberal sectors of the US intelligentsia. Sadly,
Democracy Now has been among the most influential and insidious
outlets carrying water for the humanitarian interventionist agenda.
The flagship program of the left-wing Pacifica radio network,
Democracy Now
(DN) and its founding host, Amy Goodman, are regarded as standard
bearers of grassroots progressivism. However in recent years the show
has become a reliable platform for uncritical regime change
propaganda, demonizing targets of US empire from Syria to Nicaragua
while sending a correspondent to embed with US-backed "rebels" in
Libya. Now that China is in the crosshairs of the US, DN is playing
host to virtually any piece of humanitarian agitprop that Washington
can conjure up, while publishing a regular serving of sharply negative
stories about Chinese government and society.
A review by The Grayzone of every China-related report and interview
Democracy Now aired in the past year found that 3 out of every 4
painted China in a decidedly negative light, often echoing narratives
emanating from the US State Department. Perhaps its most inflammatory
and factually questionable report appeared this February amid an
escalating wave of anti-China propaganda.
Democracy Now amps up Cold War fever with dubious cast of US
govt-sponsored guests On February 4th, DN aired a story on the latest
moral outrage out of China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. It was
a report from the BBC, the British Foreign Office-funded media giant
that was exposed by The Grayzone as a UK intelligence contractor.
Instead of questioning the BBC's report, which appeared
custom-tailored to generate public support for the new Cold War,
Democracy Now uncritically amplified it.
DN's story opened with the BBC's interview of Tursunay Ziawudun, the
singular source for accusations of "mass rape" in so-called
re-education camps in Xinjiang. Democracy Now repeated the US-based
exile's claims as fact without any investigation into the credibility
of the source. Ziawudun is no stranger to the Western press. In fact,
prior interviews with Ziawudun reveal several glaring inconsistencies
that place her credibility as a source into question.
Ziawudun was first interviewed by a human rights organization in
Kazakhstan called Atajurt. The group possesses no formal website or
information about donors, only social media accounts. In 2018,
directors of Atajurt junketed to Washington DC to meet with the
National Endowment for Democracy and various anti-China influencers.
Neither Ziawudun's interviews with this organization nor her testimony
to the CIA-created Radio Free Asia mention rape at all. In a feature
with Buzzfeed in February of 2020, Ziawudun stated, "I wasn't beaten or
abused.
The hardest part was mental. It's something I can't explain - you
suffer mentally. Being kept someplace and forced to stay there for no
reason. You have no freedom. You suffer."
Ziawudun's reflection on her experience changed character after she
became involved with the Uyghur Human Rights Project (UHRP). The UHRP
was created and is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy
(NED), a US intelligence passthrough that was established under the
watch of former CIA director William Casey.
The Grayzone exposed the Uyghur Human Rights Project as part of a
consortium of groups operating under the World Uyghur Congress (WUC)
umbrella, and funded to the tune of tens of millions of dollars a year
in US government money to promote the narrative of a Uyghur genocide
carried out by China's government.
In September 2020, the UHRP resettled Ziawudun in the United States,
flying her from Kazakhstan to the Washington DC area. "Ms. Tursunay is
a critical witness.," the US government-funded organization declared
in a press release. "Her testimony will be vitally important for
future atrocity-crimes determination processes and tribunals."
In a CNN report based on her contradictory claims alleging a Chinese
policy of "systematic rape," her Chinese passport briefly appeared on
screen. It showed that after all her alleged travails, she was granted
a ten year visa to travel abroad as she pleased. Yet CNN reported she
"walked across the Kazakh border" in 2019, creating the impression she
had to escape from China to tell her horror story. In a subsequent
broadcast of its report, CNN blurred out Ziawadun's passport issue
date.
Democracy Now did not mention Ziawudun's apparent recruitment by the
US government or her dramatically shifting story in its coverage.
Instead, it invited a cast of guests from the Washington's anti-China
echo chamber on to discuss her story.
Among them was so-called "linguist," Abdulweli Ayup, who spent two
years in the United States as a fellow for the Ford Foundation and has
interviewed more than a half-dozen times with Radio Free Asia, a US
government propaganda network founded by the CIA. Ayup's biography was
published in a lengthy report by the Uyghur Human Rights Project, the
same NED-backed organization which helped Tusurnay Ziawudun resettle in
the United States.
U.S. academic Darren Byler rounded out Democracy Now's panel on the
BBC report. Byler is a fellow at the Wilson Center, a DC-based think
tank funded by the US Congress, the Embassy of the United Arab
Emirates, and a host of Wall Street big banks including Bank of
America and J.P. Morgan Chase.
Former U.S. General and CIA director David Petraeus and BP share
important council positions for the organization.
Byler is a regular source of quotes advancing the US government's Cold
War posture against China. He has framed Beijing's counter-terrorism
policy in Xinjiang as the political and military equivalent of the United
States'
post
9/11 War on Terror, omitting the historical context of dozens of
documented mass casualty attacks by the separatist Al Qaeda affiliate
known as the East Turkestan Islamic Front in the region between the
years of 1990 and 2016.
He
was even quoted in an article by the State Department-funded Coda
Story attacking The Grayzone alongside other US government sponsored
anti-China pundits.
An email to Democracy Now staff requesting a comment on its relentless
parade of anti-China coverage and steady stream of dubious, US
government-sponsored guests went unanswered.
Content analysis: 76% of Democracy Now's China coverage is sharply
negative Democracy Now's coverage of China over the past year has been
almost entirely negative. A content analysis by The Grayzone of DN
headlines directly referencing China from February 1st 2020 to the
present reveals that 54 of 69 (78 percent) presented a sharply
negative spin on events. The vast majority of the stories focused on
"human rights" in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, echoing narratives generated by
the US national security state.
Some emanated directly from hardline Trump administration officials
like Mike Pompeo and John Bolton.
The other fifteen DN stories could be considered "neutral" in tone.
They centered on developments surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. Even
here, however, DN's bias toward China stood out. For example, in a
headline about a small outbreak of Covid in China in April 2020, DN
editors placed scare quotes around the word "imported" in order to
cast doubt on Beijing's claim that the virus originated abroad.
Meanwhile, the outlet has offered nothing but praise for the pro-US
government of Taiwan's successful pandemic response.
While Democracy Now appears to have deemed the US's Cold War-style
policies toward China as unworthy of criticism, the flagship
progressive program found time to host so-called Xinjiang expert
Adrian Zenz in 2019. Zenz, a far right Christian fundamentalist member
of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation who claims to "led by
God" against the Communist Party of China, is an odd guest for a
supposedly left-wing program.
Adrian Zenz Uyghurs China Christian fundamentalist Democracy Now
describes Zenz, a far-right employee of the Victims of Communism
Foundation, as an "independent researcher"
In analysis of Zenz's research paper accusing China of forced
sterilization and genocide in Xinjiang, The Grayzone's Gareth Porter
and Max Blumenthal found wanton manipulation of data, major errors and
a number of missing footnotes. Despite his clear credibility issues,
Zenz is without question the most cited source in the U.S. and West on
all matters relating to Xinjiang.
Democracy Now provided Zenz a platform despite the fact his most
constantly repeated claim that over one million Uygurs are being
detained in "concentration camps" was based on a mere two sources: a
total of eight interviews conducted by the NED-backed, Washington
DC-based Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders and a single
television report from a Turkish-based Uygur exile organization.
Under the Trump national security doctrine, which has been largely
retained by the Biden administration, the US proclaimed China and
Russia to be the greatest threats it faces on the global stage. The
truth is that China's emphasis on poverty alleviation, multilateral
cooperation, and economic growth coupled with its growing political
independence is seen as an existential threat to the United States'
continued hegemony. As the US charts a dangerous course toward war
with China, authentically independent investigative journalism and
activism is required to prioritize peace over access to the powerful.
Unfortunately, while Democracy Now has marketed itself as "the
exception to the rulers," it is functioning as little more than a
force multiplier for the State Department, amplifying Cold War
narratives on China behind progressive cover.
Yes. I believe you posted this bbefore. I had nort commented on the
article because it is pretty self explanatory.
It would be interesting to see a response from Democracy Now. Irt should be
understood that we are all tainted by the constent propaganda of the
American Corporate Empire.
Carl Jarvis
