Carl,
I think that unfortunately, public broadcasting is no longer different from
commercial broadcasting. Yes, I know they are asking for listener support and
they get government support, but they are also funded by corporations and
private foundations. And our government no longer represents the people, if it
ever did. It represents corporate interests. After all, when this country
attacks other countries, whatever reasons it gives, the real reasons are to
provide funding to military contractors or to get control of natural resources
for the use of our corporations. That has always been true. Even with the
second world war. We went to war to support Great Britain and to help it
maintain control of the world's resources. We also wanted to prevent Japan from
becoming an economic power. The entry of America into that war certainly had
nothing to do with saving anyone from Nazism, whatever the successful
propaganda said. I attempt to gather nuggets of truth about what we are doing
in the world from articles from The Grayzone and Mint Press News and podcasts
from The Analysis.Net. The other problem with most of our news outlets is the
orthodoxy, and that's true of the left wing outlets as well. I have been
reading and listening lately, to material about all of the taboos, but I was
aware of them before I discovered that there are some very intelligent people
who are being, "cancelled", for writing and speaking out about them. Bizarre
things keep happening. Remember when that New York Times editor was fired for
allowing Tom Cotten to write an op ed in the Times? Somehow it's OK for other
conservative people to be on the staff, but someone got fired for letting him
write something. On this list, there was once hysteria over the phrase,
"mentally retarded", a description that was once perfectly acceptable, but is
now unacceptable because some people have used the word, "retard", as an
insult. The descriptive phrases that are now considered acceptable
substitutions for that one, do not describe the condition accurately.
Interestingly, if someone thinks another person is stupid, they insult him by
saying, "Are you deaf and blind?" But luckily, no one has yet decided to firbid
the use of the words, "deaf", and, "blind". There is a new podcast that I
discovered, after listening to a video discussion about this subject that Glen
Greenwald had with one of the podcasters and a Useful Idiots podcast with both
of them. It's called Blocked and Reported, and it's about the media and how
certain subjects and people are now being censored by people who are
considered to be Liberals and by other sections of the Left. I suppose that the
moral of this story is that one doesn't have to be an Evangelical Christian or
a Catholic or a member of any other religion to determine that only certain
thoughts are pure and only certain of these may be uttered out loud.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2021 11:01 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Democracy Now: Have I posted this before?
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