#41
russia is a smokescreen raised by terrified dem operatives relying on xenophobia and the boomer enemy to delegitimize trump
#42

Urbandale posted:

russia is a smokescreen raised by terrified dem operatives relying on xenophobia and the boomer enemy to delegitimize trump


it's not truly about deligitimizing trump, imho. if they wanted to prioritize undermining trump even an organization as confused as the shattered dems could do better. the trump presidency is just a career setback for them, part of playing the game, what they're really afraid of is the public conception of their own political bankruptcy (which just so happened to pave the way for trump.) they couldn't possibly have failed so fundamentally, so catastrophically, to appeal to actual human beings. it must be the fault of a foreign interloper. so they're trying to cover up for their own failure first, by any means necessary, with the actual material consequences of the political situation they have created taking a distant back seat. as usual, they fail to understand the gravity of the situation and tilt at windmills because the consequences won't really affect them.

#43

cars posted:

i think it was very nice of her to hastily add those question marks to her sign

betteridge's law of protest signs

#44
anti-russian sentiment, propaganda, whatever is very rooted in actual material reasons. European example: the required expansion of (primarily) german capital into eastern europe, in part due to the collapse of the economies of the southern european states requires driving wedges between eastern europe and russia etc etc blah blah blah
#45
The fake liberal idiot I keep in my brain in order to test Owns on has come up to ugh something that flummoxed me...if the Russia story is something that the Democratic Party and their friends in the press made up whole cloth in order to "deflect attention" or something how come the three letter agencies all seem to think it's worth investigating and pursuing? how beholden to party politics are they
#46
the alphabet soup wants to force trump's hand & prevent the detente with russia he flirted with during the campaign. note that tillerson talked shit about russia during his confirmation hearing & trump "admitted" that russia was responsible for the hacks during his first press conference.
#47

littlegreenpills posted:

The fake liberal idiot I keep in my brain in order to test Owns on has come up to ugh something that flummoxed me...if the Russia story is something that the Democratic Party and their friends in the press made up whole cloth in order to "deflect attention" or something how come the three letter agencies all seem to think it's worth investigating and pursuing? how beholden to party politics are they



IIRC the FBI at first contested the CIA's account, then a couple of days later did a 180. Maybe Obama strongarmed them the way Bush strongarmed the CIA in 2003. Not sure if he would've been able to do that as a lameduck.
More importantly it doesn't even really matter. If the hack/leak was just a "hey, it looks like this happened, fyi" news item then the complete lack of evidence wouldn't be worth caring about, but in the context of the radically aggressive posture the US pop is being told to adopt, the fact that there's even less public evidence than there was before the Iraq War should just automatically be troubling even to liberals.
It also doesn't matter because even if Russia did hack the DNC, who cares? It wasn't consequential, it didn't affect the outcome of the election, it's a good troll and it's funny.

#48
look, if the worlds leading authority on foreign powers intervening in democratic elections on behalf of rightwing strongmen says that a foreign power intervened in a democratic election of behalf of a rightwing strongman, who are we to question?
#49

littlegreenpills posted:

The fake liberal idiot I keep in my brain in order to test Owns on has come up to ugh something that flummoxed me...if the Russia story is something that the Democratic Party and their friends in the press made up whole cloth in order to "deflect attention" or something how come the three letter agencies all seem to think it's worth investigating and pursuing? how beholden to party politics are they





all they need is one or the other.

#50
btw the accurate way to look at this, because it's what happened, is that the Democrats and their friends in the press had their hands on this fake-as-shit report and this british ex-spy's self-promoting claims about it for months. they knew it was all ludicrous and knew they'd be isolated as kooks if they displayed it without some sort of official go-ahead from the taste-makers in Washington, so they just hinted darkly about some mysterious compromising information wielded by the "KGB" and left it at that.

it became a story because, in the wake of Trump's refusal to publicly mumble assent to the CIA's soft challenge to his legitimacy like almost anyone else would do to ease transition, the intelligence agencies first arranged a "briefing" to "warn" both trump and obama about the document's "imminent release", then leaked the fact that the briefing happened to the news press, turning the contents of the bullshit document into "news" so that it was just a race to the bottom as to which Web site would run the thing first (Buzzfeed, surprising no one).

The "briefings" for obama & trump were arranged, then leaked, for the purpose of making the bullshit document, previously not news worth reporting, into news worth reporting. Predictably, it's on these grounds that the debate-club-minded liberals in the press have justified printing it, including Glenn Greenwald. they were played by a fairly old dirty trick and even the ones who saw it happening couldn't stop it because, well, now it's "news" because the people have the right to see what Obama sees in high-level national security briefings (an odd and sudden change in outlook on that question for most of the news outlets that eventually repeated the allegations).

The proximate cause for the "story" happening at all was the manipulation of the press by the intelligence agencies, not the Democrat surface-level P.R. people or the press themselves. The news media were cultivated exactly as that old CIA/FBI/NSA saw about journalists describes, like mushrooms: fed shit and kept in the dark. the Democrats had obvious reason to pump up the story, and it certainly served the CIA's purpose to ignite a sudden explosion of Red-baiting xenophobia from what was already a powder keg given the constant anti-Russian propaganda issuing from the Obama White House. What the agencies' motives were, that's the point where speculation begins. i think it's enough that Trump had talked about them like no person in his position had ever dared to talk about them. They have turf to defend.
#51


Having fun asking (my fellow) liberals what is supposed to be bad about this
#52
was it with turkish aircraft
#53
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SYRIA_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-01-23-14-26-59

"The attack followed a joint raid in the same area flown by Russian and Turkish jets on Saturday."
#54
FBI Director James Comey to stay on in Trump administration
#55

Backus posted:

FBI Director James Comey to stay on in Trump administration



lol

#56
cute how they had Comey soft-peddle the implied threat like he's Trump's secret pal, which is a good way to make sure that an aged egotist like Trump wouldn't necessarily realize it was a threat from Comey as well and could later maintain Comey as a current Republican favorite. also cute how the Washington Post in its aggressively post-Bernstein/Woodward era both knows all about a one-on-one conversation between Trump and the head of the FBI about a national security issue and is happy to print it in contravention of its current standards for what should and should not be public knowledge. I'm sure everyone here has seen that strategy before at a smaller scale in the workplace, where the big boys apply pressure to someone by having a "friend" tell him what "no one else will".
#57
"War Declared on Iran" Placeholder Post
#58

tears posted:

"War Declared on Iran" Placeholder Post


http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/democrats-war-iran-trump-alcee-hastings#.WJyNP7MWcuM.twitter

It's coming

#59
woke twitter has identified the real issue with the latest wave of anti-russian chauvinism:

#60
that is one reason those pictures are bad, yes.
#61
Tony Norfield: The Anti-Russia Syndrome

I normally cast aside explanations of events based on the psychology of the actors, but this has been hard to do in recent months. How else, apart from signs of paranoia, can one explain the never-ending stories in the mainstream media about the Russian menace?

A constant tirade against Russia emanates from television and radio channels, and from all the ‘quality’ newspapers and reporters. (See this Youtube video of Putin explaining that the BBC’s John Simpson has no ‘common sense’). Only the topic changes with the times. One early focus was Russia’s intervention in Crimea/Ukraine, which upset US and European strategy. The next was how Russia’s support for Assad in Syria unravelled and sidelined disastrous western policy. One of the latest is the election of Trump, billionaire-in-chief of the US hegemon. A shocked US political elite can only put down Trump’s election to the nefarious Russkies, not to domestic political reaction. Right on cue, a British ex-MI6 agent provided a dossier of ‘evidence’ to ‘demonstrate’ that Putin was in a position to blackmail Trump! If that were not bad enough to show how the commies were undermining western liberal democracy, new stories are about Russian support for Marine Le Pen’s Front National in France and other rightwing parties in Europe.

The anti-Russia syndrome reflects two things outside the realm of psychosis. Firstly, it is a sign of big power frustration with a permanent member of the UN Security Council that can veto US-led UN resolutions and which can also back up its policies with military firepower. Secondly, the chronic phase of the crisis persists, and this is straining the political infrastructure, as most clearly seen with the Brexit and Trump votes. ‘Anti-communism’ is one of the few comfort blankets that the western powers can cling on to in these troubling times and pretend that they are all still in the same gang.

Take the UK government, for example. No longer invited to any EU soirées, the UK has to grandstand at NATO. The UK Ministry of Defence today declared that one of its key objectives for this week’s NATO summit in Brussels was

“to ensure the Alliance continues to make progress on taking forward the ambitious agenda agreed at Warsaw, in particular on modern defence and deterrence towards Russia. On that front (literally), the enhanced forward presence of NATO battlegroups is deploying this Spring to the Baltic States and Poland, with the UK proud to be leading the formation in Estonia, one of our most effective Allies in the Helmand campaign.”

The anti-Russian strategy has been a hallmark of British imperialism ever since the October revolution of 1917, and it has helped shape, or has been used in, almost all of its other policies. From the late 1930s/early 1940s, Britain focused upon splitting India into two countries, so as to make the new Pakistan a bulwark against any Russian incursion into its interests in the Indian subcontinent and the Persian Gulf. Britain also feared Soviet involvement to stymie its attempts to re-establish its colonial empire (and those of other powers) in the late 1940s. Britain went out of its way to support Moslem fundamentalism in the Middle East and North Africa as a counter-weight to local demands for freedom from foreign domination, usually put forward by secular nationalists, and it justified this by using the fear of ‘communist subversion’, even when that was completely unfounded. Similarly, Britain used the Soviet threat as a way to get the Americans to back its policies, as with the US involvement in the 1953 coup that overthrew Mossadegh in Iran. There were many other such initiatives, as documented in Stephen Dorrill’s MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations.

Russia has completely embarrassed British and American political strategy at a time when Britain wants to hold on to its role as facilitator for that strategy in European and beyond. Now, post-Brexit, the Brits are high and dry, but Theresa May hopes to continue to hold hands with Donald Trump over NATO. Expect more


#62

marlax78 posted:

Tony Norfield: The Anti-Russia Syndrome

I normally cast aside explanations of events based on the psychology of the actors, but this has been hard to do in recent months. How else, apart from signs of paranoia, can one explain the never-ending stories in the mainstream media about the Russian menace?

A constant tirade against Russia emanates from television and radio channels, and from all the ‘quality’ newspapers and reporters. (See this Youtube video of Putin explaining that the BBC’s John Simpson has no ‘common sense’). Only the topic changes with the times. One early focus was Russia’s intervention in Crimea/Ukraine, which upset US and European strategy. The next was how Russia’s support for Assad in Syria unravelled and sidelined disastrous western policy. One of the latest is the election of Trump, billionaire-in-chief of the US hegemon. A shocked US political elite can only put down Trump’s election to the nefarious Russkies, not to domestic political reaction. Right on cue, a British ex-MI6 agent provided a dossier of ‘evidence’ to ‘demonstrate’ that Putin was in a position to blackmail Trump! If that were not bad enough to show how the commies were undermining western liberal democracy, new stories are about Russian support for Marine Le Pen’s Front National in France and other rightwing parties in Europe.

The anti-Russia syndrome reflects two things outside the realm of psychosis. Firstly, it is a sign of big power frustration with a permanent member of the UN Security Council that can veto US-led UN resolutions and which can also back up its policies with military firepower. Secondly, the chronic phase of the crisis persists, and this is straining the political infrastructure, as most clearly seen with the Brexit and Trump votes. ‘Anti-communism’ is one of the few comfort blankets that the western powers can cling on to in these troubling times and pretend that they are all still in the same gang.

Take the UK government, for example. No longer invited to any EU soirées, the UK has to grandstand at NATO. The UK Ministry of Defence today declared that one of its key objectives for this week’s NATO summit in Brussels was

“to ensure the Alliance continues to make progress on taking forward the ambitious agenda agreed at Warsaw, in particular on modern defence and deterrence towards Russia. On that front (literally), the enhanced forward presence of NATO battlegroups is deploying this Spring to the Baltic States and Poland, with the UK proud to be leading the formation in Estonia, one of our most effective Allies in the Helmand campaign.”

The anti-Russian strategy has been a hallmark of British imperialism ever since the October revolution of 1917, and it has helped shape, or has been used in, almost all of its other policies. From the late 1930s/early 1940s, Britain focused upon splitting India into two countries, so as to make the new Pakistan a bulwark against any Russian incursion into its interests in the Indian subcontinent and the Persian Gulf. Britain also feared Soviet involvement to stymie its attempts to re-establish its colonial empire (and those of other powers) in the late 1940s. Britain went out of its way to support Moslem fundamentalism in the Middle East and North Africa as a counter-weight to local demands for freedom from foreign domination, usually put forward by secular nationalists, and it justified this by using the fear of ‘communist subversion’, even when that was completely unfounded. Similarly, Britain used the Soviet threat as a way to get the Americans to back its policies, as with the US involvement in the 1953 coup that overthrew Mossadegh in Iran. There were many other such initiatives, as documented in Stephen Dorrill’s MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations.

Russia has completely embarrassed British and American political strategy at a time when Britain wants to hold on to its role as facilitator for that strategy in European and beyond. Now, post-Brexit, the Brits are high and dry, but Theresa May hopes to continue to hold hands with Donald Trump over NATO. Expect more




#63

cars posted:

btw the accurate way to look at this, because it's what happened, is that the Democrats and their friends in the press had their hands on this fake-as-shit report and this british ex-spy's self-promoting claims about it for months. they knew it was all ludicrous and knew they'd be isolated as kooks if they displayed it without some sort of official go-ahead from the taste-makers in Washington, so they just hinted darkly about some mysterious compromising information wielded by the "KGB" and left it at that.

it became a story because, in the wake of Trump's refusal to publicly mumble assent to the CIA's soft challenge to his legitimacy like almost anyone else would do to ease transition, the intelligence agencies first arranged a "briefing" to "warn" both trump and obama about the document's "imminent release", then leaked the fact that the briefing happened to the news press, turning the contents of the bullshit document into "news" so that it was just a race to the bottom as to which Web site would run the thing first (Buzzfeed, surprising no one).

The "briefings" for obama & trump were arranged, then leaked, for the purpose of making the bullshit document, previously not news worth reporting, into news worth reporting. Predictably, it's on these grounds that the debate-club-minded liberals in the press have justified printing it, including Glenn Greenwald. they were played by a fairly old dirty trick and even the ones who saw it happening couldn't stop it because, well, now it's "news" because the people have the right to see what Obama sees in high-level national security briefings (an odd and sudden change in outlook on that question for most of the news outlets that eventually repeated the allegations).



Matt Taibbi's latest:








#64
to be clear that post from long long ago has 23 upvotes so this is collective gloating. always shall I be faithful to the LF hivemind, always shall I just post what we're all thinking
#65

gyrofry posted:

sure, that is the vehicle du jour, but it could literally be anything. it's a pretext, not a driver. like much effective propaganda, it has the appearance of being grounded in a moral claim

also, I would suggest that the kind of nationalist fervor we're witnessing will eventually (if it hasn't already) take on a life of its own as it did during the depths of the cold war, and hating russia will begin to simply be popularly regarded as good and right for its own sake. this will still be manipulated and leveraged for geostrategic objectives, but it will make it a lot easier when the need for pretexts to catalyze this begins to wither away.



this also happened and is well into its prime at this point. people are risking their careers by being insufficiently anti-Russian & i doubt that will change for the foreseeable future.

#66
gj cars i retroactively upvoted your prescience, alas I was only a lurker at the time
#67

dimashq posted:

gj cars i retroactively upvoted your prescience, alas I was only a lurker at the time



I think we were all prescient on this one, I don't think I saw a single poster doing anything more wrong than suggesting hopefully that there might really be a tape of a bunch of prostitutes peeing on a bed for Trump somewhere, and I mean, tfw

#68
i kept summarizing that post for other people irl and what they did in response was very interesting. they basically nodded for a few seconds, although i could not really place the look in their eyes at that moment, and then just out of no where and completely inexplicably they would vomit onto their bibs and cough up these long tentacles that would then spin around, like a propeller cause little droplets of spit and vomit to fly out in every direction like a dog shaking itself off. i'm not quite sure how to interpret this but always the tentacles would recede, and they would wipe the blood from their eyes and just very calmly say "well, let's wait for the facts to come and then we'll see". hopefully everyone is doing okay now, though
#69
rip to other people irl
#70
check out these totally cool NYT liberal comments about a russian journalist

#71
I regretfully inform the nation that spies are not respectable people but are, in fact, seedy squalid little bastards who lie for a living. Now, my next guess on Real Time is the former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper!