Mola Yam posted:

why not give the interview?

i mean, mayyyybe this prince andrew thing will go somewhere and prove me wrong, but it's not like these people generally face consequences for anything they say in the public domain.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

I've been trying to tell people on here, and everywhere generally, that "outlets" do not matter. They never did but less now than ever in my life, certainly. All the old formerly good left media like DN!, New Inquiry, Black Agenda Report, CounterPunch, Globalnews.ca, et al have dropped precipitously in quality and have started tacking towards mainstream outlet positions. I remember listening to Amy Goodman beat the Putin/Russiagate in 2016 or 2017, felt something out of Twilight Zone.

But no you could never really just read and uncritically accept any outlet at all. Jacobin is extremely reactionary, for example, always has been (if you notice I didn't include them under formerly good...) with only Red patina. Intercept is new and needs very critical reading (Omidyar, lol), Off-Guardian ditto but a little better than Intercept (very similar), MintPress has a Zizekian pseud-left bent but not disastrous (still requires you to read critically!!). Actually BAR isn't currently disastrous but really trending in horrid directions with Kimberley and Haiphong notably - with the deaths of Bruce Dixon (2019) and Glen Ford (2021) the outlet is basically done as a rigorous ML platform.

There is no Trusted Source. Even if you have a historically good outlet that remains strongly good it's not as though some pseud author can't trick them into publishing some garbage article with little, hard-to-catch reactionary or stupid argumentation/posturing/position. No you have to always, always think materially and critically about the news you receive - author, outlet, audience, motive, etc. Which is why in this thread we can say yes New York Post is publishing the most Epstein-critical articles and breaking Maxwell stories and so on but we don't also turn around and say that the outlet is good, without faults, furthering the interests of the working class, or any such non-sense. Rather we think, hey, why the New York Post, of all outlets? I forget what we discovered, there's a Barr connection in there I think?

Anyway I think you know this well enough Tubgoat but it's always worth repeating for any who don't. Stop relying on ~institutions~ you trust or even intellectuals you trust or any of this junk, trust none of it and figure out what the gently caress is really going on by reading "between the lines" (as it were) (reading critically; thinking dialectically; thinking materially) and doing your own homework (if someone makes a claim, verify it!).

comedyblissoption posted:

gates spends a lot of resources cultivating his public image so to torpedo it personally himself is really funny

comedyblissoption posted:

you can dismiss anyone pushing russiagate as a hard media filter

this leaves you with uh...*checks notes* welp

gradenko_2000 posted:

start at page 789, and again at about page 812

nut posted:

Of course both of these show it was very rare and so the “myth” works by framing it as something common or “significant”. But it did happen despite overwhelmingly being called myth. admittedly, I am curious about a case in the 60s where the ~creator~ of LSD confused a pile of strychnine for it…

Remulak posted:

Goddamn nice twitter thread today:
https://twitter.com/hallam/status/1440304453341507592

Unrolled:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1440304453341507592.html

staticman posted:

child rapist, demon cracker genocide nation
https://twitter.com/lakotalaw/status/1440664734571778051
https://twitter.com/lakotalaw/status/1440664738929643524

quote:

In particular, it critically changes the definition of “quarantine” from that in the 1969 IHR. There, it is used only in the expression “in quarantine” defined to be a “state or condition during which measures are applied by a health authority to a … means of transport or container, to prevent the spread of disease, reservoirs of disease or vectors of disease from the object of quarantine”.[i]

The 2005 revised IHR use the term by itself, and define it as “the restriction of activities and/or separation from others of suspect persons who are not ill or of suspect baggage, containers, conveyances or goods in such a manner as to prevent the possible spread of infection or contamination”.

This represents a subtle but critical shift from protection of the community to restriction of individual liberties.

The implementation of quarantine and other coercive measures on all, including surveillance and vaccination, is legalized: the expression “suspect persons” criminalizes every individual, both healthy and unhealthy.

Indeed, it covers anyone “considered by a State Party as having been exposed, or possibly exposed, to a public health risk and that could be a possible source of spread of disease”. Of significance is the use of “possibly” and “possible”, hence not just anyone definitely known to be a risk factor.

quote:

This said, the treaty would presumably also make clear the idea expressed in the 2007 CDC “Interim Pre-pandemic planning guidance”,[i] namely overruling the need of a pandemic to implement restrictive measures. All that would be needed would be for an event to be declared a “public health emergency of pandemic potential”.

Given that any future event is always hypothetical, does this enable the maintenance of the measures for an indeterminate period? For it can always be claimed that a pandemic will occur especially were the measures lifted. This raises many questions, all the more so as the event would no long need to be of “international concern as in the current IHR”. “Measures”, as advised, should also go beyond the current scope of IHR”, in particular to cover the production and supply of vaccines, diagnostics, and treatments”.[ii]

The treaty would unlike the IHR also go beyond sanitary issues and allow the implementation of measures against “social and economic disruptions” as well as “broader disaster risk”.[i]

Perry Mason Jar posted:

Oh sorry I should've mentioned one source which is still solid, which is Moon of Alabama. Although their focus is almost entirely on imperialism/geopolitics with not much to say on domestic programs (either in US or abroad).

But that's a good challenge, finding media not pushing Russiagate. Hmm... I don't know, really, I'm not that on-the-pulse with outlets as I once was. I feel like Intercept doesn't push it? Bit of a shot in the dark. CounterPunch is broad spectrum submissions without its own particular goals (per se) so that one probably ends up a mixed bag - mostly I'm anti-Counterpunch these days because of the reactionary poo poo they print now that they used to refuse and also they've taken to declining or even removing articles which are too-left or overly 'conspiratorial' (read: heterodox). Globalnews.ca is set up in much the same way as Counterpunch. I think Off-Guardian fucks off the Russiagate stuff, I don't recall them pushing it.

Stevie Lee posted:

wait i thought he killed himself

StratGoatCom posted:

https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1438962527648559110

StratGoatCom posted:

https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1438920582331047948
https://twitter.com/Grady_Booch/status/1438983046758236161
https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1438962527648559110

Perry Mason Jar posted:

Perry Mason Jar posted:

Kahlil Gibran posted:

“Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth, follow only beauty, and obey only love.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

Wraith of J.O.I. posted:

what..... the........ gently caress.................

https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1441470021310504960

Wraith of J.O.I. posted:

what..... the........ gently caress.................

https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1441470021310504960

Brain Curry posted: