> > https://hive.blog/news/@corbettreport/how-to-read-the-news?fbclid=IwAR2gKMTcMJaVg8KRj25pEv63AwEaoIfxJHxUdURqCHezCnQwDq7IPTRtpkI > > How To Read The News > *corbettreport (73) <https://hive.blog/@corbettreport>* > in #news <https://hive.blog/trending/news> • yesterday > > <https://www.corbettreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/nif_readnews.jpg> > > *by James Corbett* > *corbettreport.com <http://www.corbettreport.com/>* > *September 05, 2020* > > It's not the most original observation you'll read this week, but it's one > of the most important: the news lies to you by omission. > > Shocked? I thought not. But let's really interrogate what this means. > > All of us (presumably) would agree with the observation that "the news is > lying to you." But most people hearing that statement immediately interpret > it to mean that the news is lying by *commission*, i.e., deliberately > spreading information that they know to be untrue. > > While this is certainly true sometimes (and we can all think of examples > of the news outright lying about the facts of a case), blatant lies about > verifiable facts represent only a tiny fraction of the media's mendacity. > Most of the time, the talking heads of the corporate mouthpiece media are > not telling fibs, per se; they're just leaving out vital pieces of the > story. > > Often, this type of lying—lying by *omission*—is a more effective means > of duping the public than telling provably untrue statements about > independent reality. When the talking heads of the corporate media leave > out the proper context for a story, the audience can be led to incorrect > conclusions about the world. And, since these perfidious presstitutes > haven't technically said anything that's untrue, they can never be caught > in their lie. They maintain plausible deniability about whether they knew > the missing parts of the story. > > In the interest of learning how to *really* read the news, then, let's > look at an example of a news story where the media is hiding key > information from the public and see what that news story looks like when we > add the relevant context. > > Hopefully you'll remember the Novichok nonsense that took place in > Salisbury in 2018. If not, you'll definitely want to go back and re-read my > article on how "The Russian Poison Story is WMD 2.0 > <https://www.corbettreport.com/the-russia-poison-story-is-wmd-2-0/>" and > follow that up with a deep dive into the archive > <https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/?s=skripal> of Craig Murray's coverage of > the subject and The Blogmire's excellent summary > <http://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisonings-two-years-on-a-riddle-wrapped-in-a-cover-up-inside-a-hoax/> > of the story. > > In case you need a refresher, you can do what the normies do: turn to > Wikipedia! Here's the first paragraph of the wiki summary > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_Skripal> of > the story: > > On 4 March 2018, Sergei Skripal, a former Russian military officer and > double agent for the UK's intelligence services, and his daughter, Yulia > Skripal, were poisoned in the city of Salisbury, England with a Novichok > nerve agent, according to UK sources and the Organisation for the > Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). After three weeks in a critical > condition, Yulia regained consciousness and was able to speak; she was > discharged from hospital on 9 April. Sergei was also in a critical > condition until he regained consciousness one month after the attack; he > was discharged on 18 May. A police officer was also taken into intensive > care after attending the incident. By 22 March he had recovered enough to > leave the hospital. > > While everyone who was following the news at the time has likely heard > various pieces of this narrative as it was being reported, only those > obsessives who were really following all of the twists and turns in the > case will know the incredible absurdities that were casually revealed and > quickly buried in the weeks and months after the story fell out of the > limelight. Those absurdities include: > > - That the military just happened to be running a military > exercise—dubbed "Toxic Dagger > > <http://www.warfare.today/2018/03/11/ex-toxic-dagger-prepared-royal-marines-for-op-morlop/>"—involving > responding to chemical, biological and neurological weapons attacks at the > exact time of the Skripal poisoning and in the exact same city. > - That the first responder at the scene just happened to be the Chief > Nursing Officer for the British Army > > <https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-21/skripal-story-just-got-weirder-first-responder-revealed-chief-army-nurse> > . > - That the poisonings took place just miles down the road from Porton > Down, the site of the UK military's biological and chemical weapons lab > that would itself identify the nerve agent as "novichok." > - That this "novichok" poison that the crack Russian spies > used—allegedly the deadliest nerve agent ever developed—somehow failed to > kill either Sergei or Julia. > - That government officials and the dutiful stenographers in the > corporate press immediately began using the phrase "of a type > developed by Russia > > <https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/>" > to associate the chemical with the Russian government in the popular > imagination, despite the fact that novichok was originally developed in > Uzbekistan and is capable of being created and deployed by any chemist in > any country anywhere in the world. > - That Trump was prompted to blame the Russians and kick out a raft of > Russian diplomats in response to the incident because he was shown some > (fake) photos of dead ducks > > <https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/04/cia-director-used-fake-skripal-incident-photos-to-manipulate-trump.html> > . > > I could go on. And on and on. (Trust me, we've only scratched the surface > of the absurdity here.) But if you're reading this article in the first > place, you likely know the drill by now: a spectacular event takes place, > it's shoved down the public's throat as part of a campaign to demonize the > bogeyman du jour, and it's promptly dropped as soon as contradictions or > uncomfortable questions start to arise about what really happened. > > In this case, the propagandistic value of the Skripal case is hardly > difficult to divine. It was those dastardly Russians, sending their spies > into the heart of enemy territory to kill an old retired double agent who > hadn't been relevant to them in years because . . . reasons? And they did > it in the most incredibly complicated (and ultimately ineffectual) way > possible because . . . Putin wanted everyone to know that he was capable of > (not quite) poisoning people in foreign countries? > > . . . Or something like that. Just don't think too deeply about it. > > But just when you thought that particular piece of absurdity had played > itself out, it's back! That's right, there's been *another *high-profile > novichok poisoning! This time the target was a person that the corporate > lapdog press is referring to as the "leader" of the Russian "opposition," > Alexei Navalny. Apparently, Putin didn't think he made his point well > enough with the Skripals so he has once again resorted to using an arcane, > elaborate, and ultimately ineffective poison to (not quite) kill his enemy > in a way that would inevitably be immediately tied directly back to > himself. The fiend! > > . . . Or so the MSM would want you to believe. The truth, as always, is a > little more complicated. Kit Knightly over at Off-Guardian breaks it down > expertly in his article > <https://off-guardian.org/2020/09/02/navalny-novichok-poisoning-the-very-unlikely-story-so-far/> > on the story: > > - Alexei Navalny has never held any elected office, his political > party doesn’t have a single MP in the Duma, and he polls at roughly 2% > support with the Russian people. > - Despite this, and in the middle of an alleged “pandemic”, Vladimir > Putin deems the man a threat and orders him killed. > - The State apparatus responsible for unnecessary and seemingly > arbitrary acts of political murder decide to use novichok to poison him. > - This decision is taken in spite of the facts that* a)* Novichok > totally and utterly failed to work in their alleged murder of the Skripals > and *b)* It has already been widely publicly associated with Russia. > - Rather unsurprisingly, the novichok which didn’t kill its alleged > target last time, doesn’t kill its alleged target this time either. > - Compounding their poor decision making, the Russians perform an > emergency landing and take Navalny straight to a hospital for medical care. > - Despite Navalny being helpless and comatose in a Russian hospital, > the powerful state-backed assassination team make no further attempts on > his life. > - In fact, seemingly determined to under no circumstances successfully > kill their intended victim, the Russian government allow him to leave the > country and get medical help from one of the countries which previously > accused them of using novichok. > - To absolutely no one’s surprise, the Germans claim to have detected > novichok in Navalny’s system. > - Vladimir Putin and the Russian government are immediately blamed for > the attempted murder. > > Sigh. Here we go again. An incredibly unlikely narrative is being shoved > down the public's throat in order to blame that arch-bogeyman, Vladimir > Putin. > > Never mind that the story makes no sense on its face. > > Never mind that Moscow granted permission for Navalny (who is barely a > blip on the Russian political radar) to leave the country for medical > treatment, thus ensuring that their super secret plan to poison him with > novichok would be uncovered and publicized to the world. (As Luke Harding > helpfully explains in *The Guardian* > <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/02/using-novichok-against-navalny-is-a-russian-message-of-menace>: > "The logical conclusion: Moscow wants the world to know.") > > Never mind that it would make no sense for Putin to kill his opponent in > such a way (namely, using a mysterious nerve agent that he had been blamed > for using in the past and would inevitably implicate himself). > > Never mind that this super deadly nerve agent failed to kill the last > opponents that he supposedltried to use it on (and never mind that it has > apparently failed once again). > > Never mind any of this. The answer to any and all questions about the > logic of this story is the same answer that the MSM offers to anyone who > dares question why Assad would use messy and horribly ineffective chemical > weapons on his own people when his military is on the brink of complete > victory over the CIA-supported terrorists in his country. The answer is > that Putin, just like Assad, is an insane, bloodthirsty, suicidal monster > <https://www.corbettreport.com/why-is-assad-an-insane-suicidal-monster-propagandawatch/> > . > > . . . And yet, that hardly seems like a satisfying answer to anyone with > two brain cells to rub together, does it? It's almost like there's another > part to this story, a missing puzzle piece that would help us to understand > what's really happening here. And there is: > > "Germany pressed to rethink Nord Stream 2 pipeline after Navalny poisoning" > <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-politics-navalny-germany-nord/calls-mount-for-germany-to-rethink-nord-stream-2-after-navalny-poisoning-idUSKBN25U0UF> > > Surprise, surprise. It looks like the Navalny case is giving all the > opponents of Nord Stream 2 another excuse to derail the project. > > If you've been following the pipeline politics that are reshaping > diplomatic relations in Eurasia, you'll know that the US has used every > trick in the book to halt the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas > pipeline. And if you *haven't* been following those pipeline politics, > you'll want to re-read my 2017 article on "US Battles Russia for Heart of > the EU > <https://www.corbettreport.com/us-battles-russia-for-heart-of-the-eu/>," > in which I noted: > > Nord Stream 2 <https://www.nord-stream2.com/> is, as the name suggests, > an extension of Nord Stream, the natural gas pipeline connecting the > Russian port town of Vyborg to the German university city of Greifswald. > Nord Stream currently consists of two parallel lines with a capacity of 1.9 > trillion cubic feet, but the Nord Stream 2 expansion is expected to > increase that capacity to 3.9 trillion cubic feet. > > As I reported at the time, the US imposed a new round of sanctions against > Russia in 2017 and, surprisingly, the EU actually pushed back on those > sanctions. Of course, they only pushed back because the sanctions were > targeting European business interests, specifically any and all companies > working with Russia in developing the Nord Stream 2 project. But however > self-serving that pushback may have been, the incident *did* demonstrate > there is a significant and rising faction in the EUreaucracy who favour > building EU independence from the US and pursuing EU business interests, > even if those interests are linked to Russia and/or China. > > But now the latest dirty trick is being played to scuttle the pipeline > project: the poisoning of Navalny with novichok, the nerve agent Absolutely > 100% Guaranteed to Be Used Exclusively by the Russian Government or Your > Money Back. > > And it appears this ploy is working. As Rothschild Reuters reports > <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-politics-navalny-germany-nord/calls-mount-for-germany-to-rethink-nord-stream-2-after-navalny-poisoning-idUSKBN25U0UF> > : > > Pressure mounted on German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Thursday to > reconsider the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which will take gas from Russia to > Germany, after she said Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny had been poisoned > with a Soviet-style nerve agent. > > But even here we can detect the "lie by omission" strategy that is skewing > our perception of this event. The only two people cited in the article as > "pressuring" Merkel to end the pipeline deal are Norbert Roettgen, > descirbed as "the conservative head of Germany’s parliamentary foreign > affairs committee," and Wolfgang Ischinger, described as "chairman of the > Munich Security Conference and a former ambassador to Washington." > > What Reuters fails to inform its readers is that Norbert Roettgen is a > co-chair > of the European Council on Foreign Relations > <https://www.ecfr.eu/article/ecfrs_new_governance_and_new_focus> and a > committed Russophobe who has been calling for a more aggressive German > foreign policy against the Russians for years. Also missing from the > Reuters report is that Wolfgang Ischinger is also a consummate globalist > insider, sitting on the board of the Atlantic Council, the World Economic > Forum's Global Future Council on the Future of International Security and a > raft > of other globalist bodies > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Ischinger#Non-profit_organizations> > . > > So, to summarize: Merkel is under "mounting pressure" to scuttle Nord > Stream 2 because of the phony-as-a-three-euro-bill Navalny novichok > incident. This "pressure" is coming from precisely two men, both > well-connected globalist insiders, and neither particularly influential in > German politics. Merkel herself, as Reuters admits "has been unwavering in > her support for the [Nord Stream] project" and has shown no sign whatsoever > that she is even thinking of stopping the pipeline over the incident. But > Reuters makes it a headline story and implies that her government is on the > brink of succumbing to the pressure. > > *This* is how the news is really reported. In bits and pieces, like a > puzzle with only enough pieces there to give the audience an (often > mistaken) impression of the events in question. Other pieces of the puzzle > may be provided later as the story unfolds, but only for the purpose of > further misleading the public with even more poorly reported information > lacking in key details. > > Sadly, this is the status quo of modern corporate mainstream dinosaur > media. And the fact that this context-poor, misleading reporting is the > norm these days means it falls on the readers of the news to fill in the > gaps in these stories themselves. This often involves independent research > and the ability to fit together disparate pieces of information reported in > bits and pieces over many months and even years. > > Naturally, it isn't feasible for every individual to do this with every > story they ever see in the media. But at least keep this in mind: if you > have only read one report on a major news event, you not only don't know > the full story of that event but you may be even worse off than if you had > never read it at all. > > Alexander Pope may have meant it as a warning when he penned the famous > line "A little learning is a dangerous thing." Unfortunately for humanity, > the globalists and their media mouthpieces have managed to turn that > observation into a business model. > > #eu <https://hive.blog/trending/eu> #pipeline > <https://hive.blog/trending/pipeline> #russia > <https://hive.blog/trending/russia> > ---
Support News from Underground: http://bit.ly/NFUSupport You received this email because you are subscribed to News from Underground. To unsubscribe from this email list, please go to: http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=pIdjNUgiG2h8yxbhC54SSy4SEskAoEMs For archives, please go to: http://archives.simplelists.com/nfu
