Asymmetrical Polarization

[Atticus Pinecone]

Thank you for laying that out (really). And Iraq wasn't the first American war started on lies & won't be the last.

One of the things that frightens me is what is omitted. Mexico? Ukraine? If you want outrage (more than our present politics) look into those... 

As for turds being stopped, a clogged toilet can delay one... maybe that device for Crohn's disease? Where it goes into a bag, not out through your rear... I'd say that's one case.

As for journalism, you can probably make a case for Januarius MacGahan. Need more of that. 

> On Dec 15, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Thomas <uzs7lz at uni-bonn.de> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 09:17:42 -0500
> Atticus Pinecone <atticuspinecone at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> And however you cut it, the NYT remains the paper of record, for better or worse & does have buried in it some real investigative journalism. But again, that's comparing apples to torn apart Iraqi children. And when that's given due consideration, I feel feelings that are hard to describe.
> 
> 'In 2002, reporting by Gordon and Judith Miller played a key role in raising public support for the Iraq War. Their article, "Threats and Responses: The Iraqis; U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts", asserted, "Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb." Anonymous "American officials" and "intelligence experts" are the only sources.'
> 
> Wikipedia, "Michael Gordon"
> 
> Gordon is a proven liar and warmonger who shares responsibility for each and every Iraqi child torn apart by US bombs or killed in the course of the sectarian warfare that broke out as a consequence of that war. Lest we forget: The war was an illegal war of aggression, the supreme international crime of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. And it was based upon lies. Here is Harold Pinter:
> 
> "As every single person here knows, the justification for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein possessed a highly dangerous body of weapons of mass destruction, some of which could be fired in 45 minutes, bringing about appalling devastation. We were assured that was true. It was not true. We were told that Iraq had a relationship with Al Quaeda and shared responsibility for the atrocity in New York of September 11th 2001. We were assured that this was true. It was not true. We were told that Iraq threatened the security of the world. We were assured it was true. It was not true."
> 
> https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lecture-e.html
> 
> This is hardly disputable. Needless to say that nobody of any importance was ever taken to account for this monstrous crime.
> 
> Powell's lies, Bush's lies, Rice's lies, Cheney's lies, Judith Miller's lies, Michael Gordon's lies... Together with Miller, Gordon channeled the government's war propaganda and sold it to the world as independent reporting by the "paper of record."
> 
> Until very recently, Michael Gordon wrote for the NYT about, amongst other things, chemical weapons attacks in Syria as chief military correspondent. That is really all you need to know about the credibility of that paper's coverage of geopolitical events.
> 
> How otherwise intelligent and knowledgeable people can uncritically believe anything the NYT writes on the subject of geopolitics (Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Russia) after the debacle of the Iraq War, while at the same time accepting the fact that Seymour Hersh cannot publish in the US anymore and Robert Parry and Counterpunch are on a McCarthyite WP-published ProPorNot list of "bona fide'useful idiots'" of Russian propaganda" without question is beyond me -- which is perhaps due to the fact that I am living neither in the United States (or the Federal Republic) of Amnesia nor in Oceania.
> 
> The NYT cooking section, on the other hand, is quite good.
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l