The Factuals versus the OABS (Old Age BullShit)

​

 

The State of Liberal Professorship in America!


Racist sentiments from the Emerald City!

​

​

 

A true feminist speaks!




​

 

A “Mini Ice Age” Is Coming Soon Says Math Professor’s Solar Cycle Model That’s 97% Accurate

Arjun WaliaFebruary 4, 2017

This has nothing to do with human impact on climate change, but instead the activity of the sun and how solar cycles impact our climate as well. It’s based on a mathematical model that shows the sun might “quiet” down in the coming years thus impacting our climate as well. This is not a climate change denial article, please read it before commenting.
A few months ago, NASA published a study showing that Antarctica is actually gaining more ice than it is losing. They made the announcement after using satellites to examine the heights of the region’s ice sheet. The findings contradict the prevailing theory that Antarctica has actually been shrinking, however. The paper is titled “Mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet exceed losses” and was published in the Journal of Glaciology.

The authors of this study are from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, and the cause of this ice gain isn’t entirely known, but a number of theories are mentioned in the paper. It is worth mentioning, however that NASA was blasted by dozens of their own scientists regarding their global warming stance, even though a number of the world’s top scientists have questioned just how much an impact greenhouse gases have on climate change. You can read more about that here. (source)

Perhaps there are other factors contributing to climate change?

Just a few years ago, Antarctic ice extent had reached an all-time high. (source)(source)
There are many theories as to why this is so, and one of them includes the effects of supposed global warming, but not everyone agrees. That’s a completely separate topic, however, and you can learn more about it in the articles linked at the end of this article.
When it comes to climate change, a lot of emphasis is put on human activity, and rightfully so, as our ways here need to change. Perhaps in our fervour to discover our own culpability in this shift, however, we missed a few things along the way? What about the natural cycles of climate change Earth experiences, and has experienced? It’s a scientific fact that fluctuations in the solar cycle impact earth’s global temperature, as do other massive bodies flying in and around our solar system.

Related: Why We Are Living In The Most Important Time In Our History

The most recent research to examine this topic comes from the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales, where Valentina Zharkova, a mathematics professor from Northumbria University (UK), presented a model that can predict what solar cycles will look like far more accurately than was previously possible. She states that the model can predict their influence with an accuracy of 97 percent, and says it is showing that Earth is heading for a “mini ice age” in approximately fifteen years.
According to the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS):
​

A new model of the Sun’s solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun’s 11-year heartbeat. The model draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone. Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the ‘mini ice age’ that began in 1645. (source)​

​

Zharkova and her team came up with the model using a method called “principal component analysis” of the magnetic field observations, from the Wilcox Solar Observatory in California. Looking forward to the next few solar cycles, her model predicts that from 2030 to 2040 there will be cause for a significant reduction in solar activity, which again, will lead to a mini ice age. According to Zharkova:​

In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other – peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun. Their interaction will be disruptive, or they will nearly cancel each other. We predict that this will lead to the properties of a “Maunder minimum.” Effectively, when the waves are approximately in phase, they can show strong interaction, or resonance, and we have strong solar activity. When they are out of phase, we have solar minimums. When there is full phase separation, we have the conditions last seen during the Maunder minimum, 370 years ago. (source)​

​

Pretty interesting to think about it, isn’t it? With so much attention being paid to the warming of our planet, it would be quite a shocker to suddenly enter into an ice age.
Again, this has nothing to due with human impact on climate change, more so the activity of the sun and how solar cycles impact our climate as well. This is not a climate change denial article. It’s basically bringing up the fact that there are more factors to consider that play a role in climate change.What are your thoughts? Please feel free to share in the comments section below.
Related CE Articles About Climate Change & Global Warming:

NASA Says Antarctica Is Gaining More Ice Than It’s Losing & Here’s Why It’s Confusing
Australian Prime Minister’s Chief Business Advisor & His Shocking Comments About The New World Order
UN Climate Talks Completely Ignore The Biggest Greenhouse Gas Producing Industry? ​

---

 

Elites Protest a New Revolution

"Inside Every Progressive Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out" @horowitz39, David Horowitz

“We deserve to be in in charge.”

February 6, 2017
Daniel Greenfield


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.


The revolution will not be brought to you by Xerox. It will be brought to you by BMW. The German luxury automaker is a key advertiser at GQ. And GQ is the headquarters of the Resistance. That's a vlog by Keith Olbermann who returned from his exile at an ESPN Elba to denounce Trump.

"I am Keith Olbermann," Keith Olbermann barks to the peasants and workers of GQ who are taking a break from reading an article on '$100 Cologne that Smells Like Nothing', "This is the Resistance."
The Resistance is Remy Martin and Coach. It’s the ‘Best Silver Nail Clippers for Men to Buy Now’ and ‘7 Skincare Treatments Men are Asking for in 2017’. It’s the SAG Awards and the Golden Globe Awards.
It’s the self-important people and the beautiful people rising up against the democratic oppression of the working class and proclaiming courageously in one voice, “We deserve to be in in charge.”

When the revolution isn't at GQ (The Most Radical Dress Socks to Wear Right Now), it's at Vanity Fair where Graydon Carter denounces Trump (Donald Trump: A Pillar of Ignorance and Certitude) with a byline photo of himself taken by Annie Leibovitz smiling smugly from his skyscraper office.
Maybe the resistance is Reed Hastings, the billionaire CEO of Netflix, who used his wealth catering to the tastes of urban elites, to lobby to raise the taxes of the middle class. Hastings whined that President Trump's moves to protect Americans were "so un-American it pains us all.”

Who are these 'us'? It might be Warren Buffett, Google's Eric Schmidt and Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg, with whom Hastings had joined to support Hillary Clinton. Or it might be the CEOs of Lyft, Airbnb and Twitter, to name a few, who have jointed the anti-Trump “resistance” of wealthy elites.
It's no coincidence that the most vocal outcries against President Trump's measures have come from urban elites and the corporations that cater to their whims. It's easy to spot the class divides in the scoffing at Andrew Puzder, CEO of the company behind Carl's Jr. and Hardee's, getting a cabinet position instead of Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg who had been tipped for Treasury Secretary by Hillary.

Carl's Jr and its 4 Dollar Real Deal are a world away from Facebook's Gehry designed Menlo Park headquarters. As much as a WWE tournament is from Conde Nast's Manhattan skyscraper.
It's hard to imagine a clearer contrast between coastal elites and the heartland, and between the new economy and the old. On the one side are the glittering cities where workforces of minorities and immigrants do the dirty work behind the slick logos and buzzwords of the new economy. On the other are Rust Belt communities and Southern towns where working people actually used to make things.

Facebook's top tier geniuses enjoy the services of an executive chef, treadmill workstations and a bike repair shop, all walled off from East Palo Alto's Latino population and its crime and gang violence. But who works in Facebook's eleven restaurants or actually repairs the bikes in the back room? Or looks through the millions of pictures posted on its timelines to screen out spam, pornography and violence?

Behind the illusion of a shiny new Facebook future are Mexicans getting paid a few dollars an hour to decide if that Italian Renaissance painting you just shared violates its content guidelines.
If you live in the world of Facebook, Lyft, Netflix and Airbnb, crowding into airports and shouting, "No Borders, No Nations, Stop The Deportations" makes sense. You don't live in a country. You live in one of a number of interchangeable megacities or their bedroom communities. Patriotism is a foreign concept. You have no more attachment to America than you do to Friendster or Myspace. The nation state is an outdated system of social organization that is being replaced by more efficient systems of global governance. The only reasons anyone would cling to nations and borders are ignorance or racism.

The demographic most opposed to President Trump is not a racial minority, but a cultural elite.
This isn't a revolution. The revolutions happened in June and November. Brexit and Trump were revolutions. The protests against them are a reaction by the overthrown establishment.

Somewhere along the way the political projects of the left ceased to be revolutionary. The left won. It took control of nations and set about dismantling them. Its social and economic agendas became law. It ruled through a vast interconnected system of bureaucracy, media, academia, non-profits and corporations. In Europe, democracy nearly vanished. In America, there were still elections, but they didn't matter very much. A Republican president could tinker a little, but he couldn't change things. The left would throw its ritualistic tantrums if he limited abortion funding or invaded Iraq. But around the isolated controversies, everything else would go on moving further to the left.

The left had come to envision its victory as inevitable. Its leaders enjoyed a secular right of kings bestowed on them by historical materialism. And so they couldn't see the revolution coming.
The inevitable elites and their power were overthrown. The little people they had been stepping on stormed the castle. All their pseudoscience polls had failed to predict it. Suddenly the future no longer belonged to the City or to Palo Alto. And its denizens poured out into the streets to protest.

The protests are taking place in the name of oppressed minorities, but like any dot com logo, that's branding. They are actually an angry reaction by an overthrown elite to a people's revolution.
This isn't really about Muslims. The angry protesters know as little about Islam as they do about rural Iowa. But borders and airports are an important metaphor. President Trump said, "A nation without borders is not a nation." And that's exactly what the left wanted. No borders and no nations.

If you make tangible goods or have a mortgage, you are more likely to want borders and a nation. If on the other hand you deal in intangibles, in strings of numbers, in data on global servers, in movies and music, then borders are an unreal abstraction. If you get your rides from Uber, your house from Airbnb, your entertainment from Netflix and your dates from Tinder, if you don't actually own anything, and have no plans for a family or anything more permanent than a virtual existence, who needs a nation?

Nations are ideals grounded in real things. Our elites exist in an unreal world filled with unreal things. Their system is based on using communications technology to organize the world in new ways. They have grown so dazzled by the potential of that organization that they ignore what is underneath.
That metaphor became reality with Brexit and Trump. The country rebelled against the city. People who were in the business of making and doing real things rose up against a virtual economy.

The elites are unable to understand the nationalistic and territorial impulses of either their own citizens or Islamic terrorists. Their strange social-plutocratic fusion of Marxism and technocracy sees it as a problem of sharing the wealth. All the popular uprisings can be put down with a bigger welfare state. Redistribute more of the profits from Facebook to Muslims and Trump voters. Problem solved.

But the problem can't be solved by enlarging the welfare class. It's a gaping cultural chasm.
People need meaning. It is meaning that gives them a sense of worth. The angry leftist reactionaries find meaning in their post-everything world. The shattering of this world has driven them into the streets. And yet they can't grasp that it was the shattering of their world that drove so many working people to vote for Brexit or Trump. They refuse to comprehend that nations have meaning to more people than their post-national world order of interchangeable multicultural megacities does or that most people want something tangible to hold on to, including land and family, even if it requires labor and sacrifice.

It was a war between Davos, Conde Nast, GQ, Soros, MSNBC, Hollywood, Facebook and America. And America won.

The "resistance" is a collection of elites, from actors at award shows to fashion magazines to tech billionaires, decrying a popular revolt against their rule. They are not the resistance. They are dictators in exile. They had their chance to impose their vision on the people. And they lost.

The protests aren’t a revolution. They’re a counterrevolutionary reaction by a fallen establishment.
The revolution will not be brought to you by BMW, by a Davos conference, by $100 cologne that smells like nothing or by Facebook lobbying. It will be brought to you by making America a free nation again.


About Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
Read More


Caroline Glick
· 14 mins ·


Back in 1999, I took a course on "Globalization," at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government with Prof. Joseph Nye, who was then the dean of the school. I had ne...ver heard the term before but it was all anyone was talking about at the Kennedy School back then, so it was clearly the class to take.
I remember being amazed and alarmed by the texts we were reading. They described a world of transnational, rootless denizens who had more in common with people from other countries than they had with people of their own country. One article, I remember talked about people in California's Silicon Valley and Microsoft's Seattle having more in common with people in Vancouver than with people in eastern California.
We talked about the rise of multiculturalism and the era of post-nationalism where "soft power," that is, cultural power would be more important than national power.
I remember a particular exchange with Dean Nye where I finally put together what I thought was wrong with the whole concept of a post-nationalist world.
I said that this whole thing reminded me of a line from T.S. Eliot's Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock.
The narrator talks about changing the world and all of his plans and declarations and only to hear a response from his beloved, "If one, settling a pillow by her head should say, "That is not what I meant at all; That is not it, at all."
I explained that I didn't understand who would want to live in a world like this that is predicated on the notion that the things around us have no meaning, where it is all in our heads and online. I said I feel like there is a stunning lack of humanity in all the plans for a global, post-nationalist world. There is no intrinsic meaning to what we see, to what we feel with our fingers, in our family and our physical – rather than imagined communities, and there is no significance in our long-standing values and faith. Indeed, everything is viewed as a throwback.
Dean Nye I think was a bit taken aback, but to his credit, he allowed that there was something to my point. Later he told me that if he were still in government, he would want to hire me because I was willing to stand up for things that I believed and make cogent points that made people think. I remember feeling exceedingly flattered by that exchange.
That was nearly 20 years ago. I think that in the intervening years, the supporters of post-nationalism who ignored what was happening on their own streets, in their own cities and communities in the US, in Europe and even in Israel, turned off their ears, pressed the mute button to concerns like those that I voiced that day. They didn't listen. They wouldn't hear. They dismissed and degraded the other side. And humanity is the worse for it.
If we could have found a way back then to maintain connection to the real world while discovering the virtual one, then we would be in a better place now. But instead of listening and appreciating and caring about their own cultures, and keeping their eyes open to the good and bad in different cultures – or even accepting that they exist – the mavens of technology developed an alternative reality. The result is playing out today in elections and in mob demonstrations of the spurned globalists who will not listen, who lost long ago the habits of listening, and have replaced them with the habits of hatred, disguised as enlightenment.

Daniel Greenfield, my estimable colleague at the David Horowitz Freedom Center gets it, as is his wont in the article linked below.



Elites Protest a New Revolution
“We deserve to be in in charge.”
frontpagemag.com



Alexander Maryanovsky
Caroline, you're wrong, and unfortunately the other side is wrong too. It would be wonderful to be able to live in a multicultural world, where people respect each other's culture, where one really could be a citizen of the world.

Unfortunately, this is not what "the left" is about nowadays. The left is no longer liberal. The root of their error is that they fail to recognize that you can't have multiculturalism and mutual respect with cultures that aren't ready to accept other cultures, but instead seek to destroy and replace them. Tolerance to intolerance is not a positive force.



Daniel Kerlinsky
International corporations have long been more effective than national governments and international agencies and international treaties. They prove it with every quarter's financial statement. We see it with the wreckage of the world's strongest democracy... and the near- collapse of global banking in the 2008 collapse of inflated derivatives (started in the US).
And we see it in the moral bankruptcy of the UN and the ethical confusion of the transnational brotherhood of Islam.
And our paralysis in the face of global warming and the imminent approach of the next Great Flood.



Sheryl Gore
Well said Caroline spot on!




Brian Huggett
The events seen in The Revelation come to mind...



Jerry Vittorio
Yo, as they say..




Richard Acker
I love Caroline Glick

 

trolled by main stream media trolls ???

FAKE NEWS WEEK: Exposing The Mainstream Consensus Reality Complex

FEBRUARY 7, 2017 BY 21WIRE 9 COMMENTS

In response to the establishment media’s contrived ‘fake news’ crisis designed to marginalise independent and alternative media sources of news and analysis, 21WIRE is running its own #FakeNewsWeek campaign, where each day our editorial team at 21st Century Wire will feature media critiques and analysis of mainstream corporate media coverage of current events – exposing the government and the mainstream media as the real purveyors of ‘fake news’ throughout modern history…

Patrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire
Some things never change. In the 21st century, people in power are still attacking independent voices for speaking up for what they believe, and for sharing their opinions.
The first time I heard the term ‘fake news’ uttered in unison from the mouths of mainstream media pundits, the irony was overtaken by the absurdity of it. It was beyond outrageous, and hearing it coming from the mainstream media was bordering on vaudeville. After watching and analyzing decades of media deception and government-issued press releases masquerading as hard news, and then to see the establishment attempting to force-feed this meme down our collective mainstream feeding tube, I suppose that would make the old editorial board at Soviet Izvestia wince (not that they were any worse than CNN is today).
Sure it’s laughable, but it’s also incredibly sad to watch otherwise well-educated, smart and intelligent media professionals get so caught up in the political comedy-tragedy that was the 2016 Election – they volunteered en mass to abandon their senses and any semblance of journalistic objectivity, in order to join in a virtual witch-hunt. This was a new low-point for mainstream media, and for America.
This topic is vast and growing more controversial by the day. There’s a lot to unpack and we know, based on past performance, the mainstream media can’t be trusted to do an objective job, much less critique itself. Their conversation is completely out of order. To help right this process, 21WIRE has launched Fake News Week to help educate the public on aspects of this important issue which will most certainly be ignored by the establishment media. Throughout this week, we will present a number well-researched articles cataloguing actual fake news and demonstrating this is a mainstream problem, and one as old as the media itself.
The Story of Fake News
Since the dawn of mass media in the 20th century, media propaganda has been steadily advancing in western societies. This process is being accelerated through technology. If you are waiting for the mainstream media to finally get together for some mass-mea culpa or have one giant come to Jesus moment, then you’ll just be waiting for Godot. No, instead of reigning itself in, they have constructed an elaborate straw man instead, which they are calling “fake news.”
With the passage of the US presidential election, many thought that the ‘fake news’ meme would die off. Instead, the Establishment is doubling down on it, in hysterical fashion.
We’re told that the real problem started because of an unlikely ‘fake news’ cottage industry, supposedly run out of the Balkans, in a little Macedonian village called Velles (if we are to take The Guardian and BuzzFeed’s word for it, anyway), where enterprising eastern European teens started pumping out countless fake news articles, making use major social media platforms to propel their articles. That’s right, there was actual fake news circulating on Facebook, but calling it news is a bit of an overstatement. If one were to accurately label it, it would just be called junk.
It was in late September that I first noticed all of these fake news posts pouring into nearly every Facebook news groups I subscribed to. I began collecting links from about 50 URLs in a vain attempt construct a database in order to work out where it was coming from, who was behind it, and what was the object of the exercise. At first thing I thought, ‘how could anyone take any of these seriously?’ Everyone is used to junk on Facebook, but these were ridiculous like, “Hillary Clinton Buying Illegal Weapons – Kremlin Reports.”
As it turns out, the only people who took these stories seriously were the mainstream media and Clinton supporters – both of whom are insisting that these spoof stories somehow swung the US election. Sure, there is a radical minority of short attention span web surfers and 3am Reddit junkies who would grab and run with these type of stories, but I would think that most normal people would have thought, “What idiot would believe any of these.” By November, my database of fake news and “election news” websites was approach 300. It became clear that new websites were being launched almost daily. These sites had a few things in common; all were over-loaded with Click Bait pop-up ads, and many of them carried malicious malware. Undoubtedly, the owners of these faux news sites had been raking-in a fortune in CMP ad revenues based on traffic that was not so much driven by genuine interest, but rather out of entertainment-based curiosity, and possibly a depraved desire to shock friends and loved ones with crazy online stories. The real damage was subtle – by flooding social media with junk, they would rapidly push real independent news and alternative media articles down the page’s timeline, and into cyber limbo.
Qui bono? Certainly, the establishment media, watching their main competition – real independent media outlets, drowning in a cesspool of internet flotsam and jetsam of fake Trump and Hillary ‘articles.’ Just like those cheap Chinese knock-offs at your local flea market, someone aped the alternative media, devaluing and damaging it in the process. If only it had ended there…
On Nov 18, 2016, I woke up to an inbox full of friends and colleagues informing me that this website, 21stCenturyWire.com, had been featured in the L.A. Times exposé on ‘fake news’ – the first major blacklist of ‘fake news’ websites featured in the mainstream media entitled, “Want to keep fake news out of your newsfeed? College professor creates list of sites to avoid.” A number of these blacklists have appeared online for a number of years, but this was the first time such a list was given credence by a mainstream publication.
The list was created by Dr Melissa Zimdars, an academic and radical liberal activist from Merrimack College in Massachusetts. The story was quickly syndicated all over the globe, including spinoff reports by CNN and The Guardian. Not surprisingly, the author of the article was another liberal activist, a journalist named Jessica Roy. Like Zimdars, Jessica Roy is a feminist activist, and had previously used her position as a mainstream journalist to produce hit pieces promoting a radical liberal social agenda. Both Roy and Zimdars appear to support many of the same causes and are pushing similar political campaigns on social media, and were likely committed Hillary Clinton supporters too. With that in mind, both Roy and Zimdars were probably very unhappy about 21WIRE’s harsh criticism of Secretary Clinton’s tenure as head of the US State Department under Obama from 2009-2013, and probably were not chuffed either that we called the establishment’s official ‘Russian Hack’ conspiracy theory a hoax during the presidential campaign. Both of those articles went viral in the week before the election.
Many other excellent and reputable independent news sites were also on the list, but were intentionally placed alongside well-known satire websites, as well as with obvious poorly crafted ‘fake news’ sites. I seriously wondered if Dr Zimdars, a professor in media studies, thought so little of her own students that they should require her professional guidance to tell them that the The Onion is not a real news site. She also lists other satirical websites like Britain’s Private Eye on her list. Less than two days after the article appeared, Zimdars removed Private Eye from the list (probably after getting an email from their legal department). Here we can see she has thrown a variety of people into one giant basket (of deplorables), thus branding everyone with the same derogatory label of ‘fake news’ or its progenitor, ‘conspiracy theory.’
What’s worse however, is that Merrimack College’s Melissa Zimdars appears to have lifted her celebrated list from a wacky left-wing blog site who had haphazardly cobbled the original list together (no visible methodology as to the selection process) and which had been fermenting up online for quite some time, long before Dr Zimdars was elevated by the LA Times and CNN. Not exactly academic, but the culture cops don’t seem to care.
Regardless, one would hope that any conscientious professional would agree that Zimdars’ effort, or lack thereof, was a foolhardy attempt at passing off a politically-motivated virtual book burning list as a ‘study.’ It would be unacceptable for any undergraduate, or graduate student, much less something submitted as course material by a professor. And, to think that her students would pay thousands of dollars in course fees for Dr. Zimdars to teach them how to surf the internet. Is the bar really that low? I can’t help but wonder how many of those students also signed-up for Critical Thinking 101.
Judging by the amount of right-wing websites on her list, it’s clear this was a political hit piece. That was the intention of article author Jessica Roy, evidenced by the fact that she offered no specifics of why any of these sites were on the list, nor did she challenge Dr Zimdars. Whatever it was, it was not journalism.
A few days later, after the article in question was published in the LA Times, the paper removed the PDF image of the list, stating ‘fears and threats’ as the reason for its disappearance. Their editor issued this statement:
“The professor who created the list has taken down the Google doc. She said it was a safety measure in response to threats and harassment she and her students and colleagues had received. She is continuing to work on it and plans to release it in the future in a format other than a Google doc.”
It’s hard to keep up with Dr Zimdars’ definitive guide to the internet because she has revised and changed so many times. Here is a version from January 2017:
2017-DR ZIMDARS – False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and Satirical “News” Sources – Google Docs
Soon after, I contacted the LA Times, asking their editorial board for the right to reply in my own defense in their opinion section, citing my belief that Roy and Zimdars had created a politicized piece which was hardly fair and balanced, and was designed to slander and discredit all of the websites on their list. I finally received a reply from Larry Ingrassia at the LA Times. The paper’s excuse for denying me a right of reply was weak and evasive. Ingrassia stated to me that:

Ingrassia’s claim that my website is not mentioned in the article was not true. In fact, 21stCenturyWire.com appeared at the very top of the list in the database table image of Zimdars’ list in the article. Just because it wasn’t in the text of the article doesn’t mean it wasn’t still visible to millions of readers. Likewise, just because the LA Times had later removed the database table image from the article, and replaced it with a hyperlink to Zimdars’ Google Doc, is no excuse either – because the list was up on the LA Times website, and was widely syndicated during that time.
As it happened, I did email Dr Zimdars immediately after seeing Jessica Roy’s LA Times article asking her why she had included my website on her list, and to cite any specific news articles which she thought were ‘fake’ or ‘conspiracy’ and asked her to please remove 21stCenturyWire.com from her list. Not surprisingly, she did not reply to my request. Perhaps she realized that every one of the thousands of articles on our website contain either secondary, or primary source, and include more reference links than you will find on most mainstream media reports. For an academic who purports to hold so many persons and their websites accountable for being ‘fake news’ – when confronted about her work, she acts aloof and completely unaccountable. This further proves the point that this was not a study, but rather an activist campaign, done on the Merrimack College’s dime.
My experience with the LA Times was a disappointing one – seeing a paper running with a cheap politicized hit piece, and then being dismissive when asked for equal time on the issue. Such is the state of many leading American media institutions. If this is what passes for the Fourth Estate in today’s America, then the country is in deep trouble.
Mainstream Trolling
A few days later, I was then contacted by one of the US mainstream media most established investigative news programs, NBC Dateline. It was clear from their correspondence that they wanted to draw me into another fake news hit piece. This is one of NBC Dateline’s email to me:

If was bad enough to be slandered by a major national news outlet, now I was being trolled by the country’s largest broadcast TV network?
My reply to NBC’s Calabrese was long but polite, and at the end I simply asked her for specifics – in other words, what exactly were these “unconfirmed reports” she was accusing 21st Century Wire of publishing? As a reporter for a major outlet like NBC, I should rightly assume that she might be able to provide me with some substance, and not just an ad hominem accusation. Here is part of my reply:
“Our content is not “fake” and anyone with a basic understanding of geopolitics and media should be able to tell that. Many people like our work, and many I am sure do not like it. But the content should speak for itself. If you find some articles on our site that you feel are “Click Bait-y” or “fake news” – then let me know and I would be more than happy to help and discuss your findings.”
Just like with Dr. Zimdars, I received no reply from NBC. This led me to conclude that they were not at all interested in having a candid discussion about the state of the media today, a discussion I offered to have. But NBC wasn’t looking for a real conversation on media. Maybe they were just looking for an easy mark, someone to set-up and frame in a exposé on the scourge of ‘fake news.’ Another drive-by, hit-and-run piece.
This wasn’t the first time. We’ve had similar approaches before by the BBC and others, sometimes through a third party, and always looking to draw us into one of their discomfiting ‘conspiracy’ features on their network.
Whatever it is that NBC thought we did that warranted an NBC Dateline hit piece, surely it can’t be any worse than NBC’s disgraced anchorman Brian Williams, now widely regarded as a serial liar. If you expected the company would want to preserve some integrity by letting him go after that embarrassment, you’d be wrong. The same with CNN, after it was revealed how many of their staff were colluding with the Clinton campaign. Was anyone fired? The only person they let go was Donna Brazile, who was only a contributor and not a real member of staff.
This begs the question: are big mainstream media outlets really capable of policing themselves? The answer to that question might tell us why the mainstream media have a 14% approval rating according to a recent Gallop poll.
Take the big network’s Syria coverage for instance. What about its ridiculous coverage of the 7 year old human agit-prop Twitter sensation, Bana of Aleppo? What about NBC getting its reports exclusively from Nusra Front (al Qaeda in Syria) occupied East Aleppo, and then spreading exaggerated false claims of “a complete meltdown of humanity” when in reality the terrorist-held part of the city was being liberated by the Syrian government? Unlike NBC, a billion dollar media operation, little 21WIRE actually had journalists like Vanessa Beeley reporting from on the ground in Aleppo during this period. Unlike NBC, we were able to give our readers and listeners an accurate depiction of events – although maybe not the pro-terrorist, or ‘activist’ version of events which the western mainstream media have relied on through six years of war in Syria, consistently and conveniently feeding the mainstream media what it wanted – a regime change’ narrative which was streamlined with US State Department, CIA and British Foreign Office policy. Did it ever occur to them that someone should go and talk to Aleppo’s residents? It did to us. We figured the terrorists already had plenty of media coverage, what with NBC, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, BBC, Channel 4, the New York Times, The Guardian and others all in tow.
These mainstream outlets would never give any any credit to 21WIRE and Vanessa Beeley for its coverage in Syria, no matter good the reporting is – because we’re not conveying the ‘right’ narrative, which is the Establishment’s narrative. In that sense, we out-performed the entire mainstream media on one of the biggest stories of the last five years – the Liberation of Aleppo. Maybe that’s why they are coming after us.
Channelling McCarthy
Clearly, the corporate mainstream media in America has attempted to blame Hillary Clinton’s loss on ‘fake news.’ Clinton herself called it ‘an epidemic.’ Indeed, it is an epidemic, however the unwashed masses on the internet are not the source of that pandemic. They should be looking in the mirror – for colluding behind the scenes with the Clinton campaign, first to kill-off the Bernie Sanders nomination, before colluding in the general election, too, thus betraying the fundamental principles of a Fourth Estate.
As bad as those outlets appear to be, they almost pale in comparison to this next incident…
On November 24, 2016, The Washington Post descended deep into the lower detritus of the DC swamp. This piece of propaganda was simply breathtaking. The journalist who drew the short straw for this job was none other than Craig Timberg, who is also a John S. Knight Journalism Fellow at Stanford University. It sounds impressive, until you see his work.
In his feature entitled, “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, Experts say,” Timberg placed The Post into a leading role in waging a new McCarthy-style witch hunt, targeting hundreds of independent websites and blogs, most of them American, accusing them of being part of a giant Russian conspiracy to undermine American democracy on behalf of the Kremlin.
“Experts say”? Did they really? Only, in this case, Timberg would name his ‘experts’ – a cadre of secret sources operating under the anonymous collective brand of PropOrNot. We’re told that these patriots had to protect their identity for fear of retribution from Putin’s equally secret army of hackers. What was this, other than a propaganda piece run by The Post, one which could just as easily be classed as actual “fake news.”
“The flood of “fake news” this election season got support from a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy, say independent researchers who tracked the operation,” wrote Timberg.
Way back when, if a piece this bad managed to escape out into the public sphere, either the editor or the reporter would get the sack. No such luck here.
Timberg’s cloak and dagger source managed to slandered some 200 websites, including many well-established, popular alternative news outlets like AntiWar.com, Counterpunch, Information Clearing House, OpEd News, Activist Post, Global Research.ca, Oriental Review, Truth-Out, Truth Dig, Zero Hedge, Consortium News (run by award-winning investigative journalist Robert Parry), Ron Paul Institute (headed by former US Congressman and Presidential candidate, Dr Ron Paul)) and Paul Craig Roberts (former Cabinet member under President Reagan), to name only a few from PropOrNot’s list of alleged ‘Russian propaganda’ collaborators, in an attempt to reverse engineer a virtual conspiracy – trying to link 200 popular alternative websites with a theoretical Russian plot.
When you read the content on most of these websites, you can see a few common themes – nearly all of them were highly critical of U.S. foreign policy under the last three US Administrations of Clinton, Bush and Obama. Most were also critical of Hillary Clinton’s chequered record as Obama’s Secretary of State. They also challenged the prevailing anti-Russian party line in Washington. Here, The Washington Post is channelling the spirit of Joe McCarthy by promoting a ‘Blacklist’ of independent journalists and commentators. A political hit piece by The Post, that’s all.
Soon after the publication of Timberg’s fictional feature, The Washington Post caved-in to pressure by critics, printing this retraction soon afterwards:
Editor’s Note: The Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets of researchers who have examined what they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American democracy and interests. One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions. The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.
They must hold their readership in such utter contempt as to not care what people think about the paper. How sad. What kind of paper would run a gargantuan fake news story like that? Are they still a ‘paper of record’?
Here at 21WIRE, and unlike the Washington Post, we recognize that our readership is intelligent enough to spot what the LA Times and the Washington Post are serving up and calling news. Unlike the Washington Post, we are not trying to bury under endless column inches government-issued propaganda. Instead, we are trying to expose those lies of the mainstream’s multibillion dollar consensus reality complex.
Tune in, as each day this week we’ll give you an original inside look into the inner workings of the mainstream media’s fake news empire. Aside from showing you how to spot their lies, we’ll also demonstrate how truly dangerous their propaganda mill truly is.
By this time next week, we hope you’ll be even a smarter media consumer.
***
Author Patrick Henningsen is and international journalist and current affairs analyst, and Executive Editor of 21st Century Wire, as well as the host the SUNDAY WIRE radio show on Alternate Current Radio, and also host of Patrick Henningsen LIVE on Independent Talk 1100 KFNX AM in Phoenix.
READ MORE ABOUT MSM FAKE NEWS AT: FAKE NEWS WEEK
SUPPORT 21WIRE – SUBSCRIBE NOW & BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/02/...ing-the-mainstream-consensus-reality-complex/

comments:

• Gary Youree • a day ago
  I don't know how anyone with half a mind or any interest in the truth could trust anything that comes from the corporate owned mainstream media when nearly all the unnatural death and suffering in the world start with those who own this media.
  It is just so obvious.
  
• 
  
  
  Analyze_This_88 • 2 days ago
  That's a bit rich of NBC News to be trolling anyone with their disgusting record of lies and defense industry propaganda.
  These people have no shame.
  
• 
  
  
  PopperlinRosebud • a day ago
  So how do we stop this? How do we change course? How do we beat the MSM?
  
  
  • 
    
    
    HanzP PopperlinRosebud • 15 hours ago
    Good question. We must transcend the Hegelian dialectics...
    get off the 'divide and conquer' hamster wheel...
    self-examine...
    educate one's own self...
    hermes-press.com/education_fir...