I was reading in today’s newspaper some journalists having a laugh at people in social media outlets getting it wrong, spreading bad information, and in general jumping to conclusions. Funny, I thought, that eventually many people will know more of what happened, but that the last in that line would be the journalists who do not seek truth, but rather transcribe it has handed down by official sources.
See if in your reading and viewing that any American journalist questions the official story now of the guilt of the Tsarnaev brothers. It’s an amazing display of blind and uncritical loyalty to power.
That said, the Czech Ambassador having the explain to the American public the difference between Chechnya and the Czech Republic was funny.
Piece of Mindful 
It was funny that the both the boys and the mom were 911 truthers.
Quote: “During this facial session she started quoting a conspiracy theory, telling me that she thought 9-11 was purposefully created by the American government to make America hate Muslims. “It’s real,” she said, “My son knows all about it. You can read on the internet.”
LikeLike
You so easy to fool. You so easy!
LikeLike
Got some bitcoins for you! And a bridge. Call me!
LikeLike
Here’s some talking points for ya Mark.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/04/20/299247/us-most-obvious-false-flag-attack-yet/
LikeLike
No one ever fools the swede. No one. Ever.
LikeLike
Yeah, how about those bitcoins! I hear Swede is an economist now and making a killing.
Here’s a couple of honest journalist, Mark. I wonder when Swede will start calling for justice for the 100s of thousands murdered by his favorite US President’s Administration and his Latin Lackey’s? Did you hear that journalist say to Elliot Abrams that he might well face Nuremberg Tribunal Type Justice for his role in genocide in Guatemala?
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/4/19/exclusive_allan_nairn_exposes_role_of?autostart=true&get_clicky_key=suggested_next_story
I have no idea who is guilty of setting those bombs in Boston. I just know who got arrested for it. I also don’t know who bombed Judi Bari, and neither does the FBI, apparently. I just know who got arrested for bombing Judi. Until they dropped the whole thing. For lack of evidence. So I’m not one to jump to conclusions. I didn’t run out and buy a bunch of bitcoins, for instance.
LikeLike
You guys laugh at my small foray into virtual currency while processing all your payment transactions via debit and credit cards.
I find it even more ironic that the very government and bankers you mistrust are the ones you rely on with your store of wealth.
LikeLike
It’s not just the bitcoins we are laughing about, Swede. Honest.
LikeLike
A fellow out in Booneville, California that publishes a small local newspaper, Bruce Anderson, made a fairly solid case at one time that Judi Bari was done in by her husband, an opportunist. Anderson wrote long screeds in his newspaper defaming the guy, who never sued for libel. Been a long time since I heard that name.
Swede, we are all hostage to the Fed regarding our money, and oil is the only thing propping up the dollar, which is one reason we attack Iraq, Iran and Venezuela. But most people who are paranoid about it invest in gold, and not bitcoins. That looks like a Ponzi scheme.
LikeLike
http://www.liarunlimited.com/
How do you mean “fairly solid?” Like floating “solids,” as in full of shit?
To my knowledge, the web page I linked to hasn’t resulted in a libel suit against the author.
LikeLike
I guess you’d have to go back to the AVA’s from that time. I have not subscribed to them for over a decade. Bruce Anderson was close friends with Alexander Cockburn and Jeff St. Clair, who allowed AVA to publish his weekly column for a fee of $25. In the WSJ at that time, where Cockburn had a weekly column, he mockingly listed himself as a weekly columnist for AVA, and from there I subscribed.
Anderson did go on tirades against perceived injustice. But I thought he was a damned good writer, a smart dude even if probably not a little alcohol soaked. I left in 2003 when he was all pro-Iraq invasion, as the guy was a contrarian, which is why he turned on Bari, who had managed to become very wealthy via the bombing.
He pursued Sweeney relentlessly, publicly accusing him of attempting to murder his own wife, giving Sweeney more than enough ammo to put him out of business. That is libel by definition, but Anderson went into the nuts and bolts of it, as Sweeney had some experience with explosives and timers during his EF! Days, if not military service, as I recall. Anderson even explained how Sweeney would have managed to set up the bombing so that he had an alibi. From this timeframe today, he looks like an op. EF! discredited the environmental movement irreparably.
So I don’t know. Anderson is a character. But that screed from Sweeney you just linked to, if that is Sweeney’s response to being publicly accused to attempting to murder his wife, is pretty weak sauce. His best venue was court, to put AVA out of business.
LikeLike
Where do you get the idea that Bari became wealthy as a result of the bombing? Got a link?
Cockburn claims man made global warming is a hoax. I kind of doubt that, but what do I know? so from where i stand he’s been wrong before, why should I trust him on Anderson?
What evidence do you have that leads you to accuse Sweeney of being an opportunist? (in your last post)
I’m skeptical about these claims you are making.
Will you loan Sweeney the money to go to court? I imagine he could do the deed for $50,000 to $75,000 if he got a sympathetic lawyer to work cheap. And if he wants to spend the next few years tied up in court. So he can prove to you that Anderson lies. I wouldn’t do it. Would you? Are you thinking about suing Rob or Norma? They lie about you almost daily. So what?
And why hasn’t Anderson sued Sweeney for libel? If that’s the test of truth, then why does it only go one way?
What evidence has Anderson printed that leads anyone to believe Sweeney might have been able to get to Oakland to plant the bomb? His girl friend and his and Bari’s kids all claim he was with them in Mendocino.
Cherney, the other victim in the bombing and Bari, don’t believe it was Sweeney, for obvious reasons, since there is no evidence to suggest that.
In an original post concerning the public’s gullibility about what they read in the press, i think you are demonstrating the problem quite well.
If they read it in the paper they automatically assume it’s true without much hesitation or critical thinking. Just like you and me, apparently. :0
At any rate, here are some interesting exchanges from 2002 with people claiming to be principles. If you read all of what Sweeney wrote above in his self defense against charges thrown around at him, and you read what’s being said in these back and forth discussions, at least the Bari crew seem to be pretty consistent. The Anderson/ side is all over the place. Anderson has claimed that everyone involved with the case, at some point, bombed Judi Bari. Also, if Anderson is a contrarian, as you say, then he’s is the functional equivalent of a gullible non-critical follower. That is to say that neither position is arrived at by thought consideration of the evidence, and testing, but rather by personality.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/05/04/1261961.php?show_comments=1
It’s fascinating reading because it’s stuff from over ten years ago and it is telling.
LikeLike
From above steve w
There was a settlement for Bari as i remember, she and Cheney. Highly unlikely to be FBI behind bomb. Too crude and no patsy. Again, BA set it out in a plausble manner, explosive with timer, had mm&o. Cockburn was his own man, don’t care if he did not truck in conspiracy. He had incredible insight. Do you demand ideological purity? Many in public avoid this stuff as it ruins careers. If i was wrongfully accused of murder i would sue, pro se if i had to.
LikeLike