The New McCarthyism

167 posts / 0 new
Last post
swallow

That is an article about how to make sure your favourite web site shows up in your facebook feed. It could have been written identically 2 years ago. In fact, I think George Takei made a simialr post when facebook first changed its algorithms in ways designed to leverage more money from some contributors. 

It's about capitalism, not the Cold War and certainly not about McCarthy. 

In this case, it's also about the Duran's desire to keep its clicks up. 

NDPP

Obama's Christmas Gift To Trump: A Ministry of Truth

http://counterpunch.org/2016/12/29/obamas-christmas-gift-to-trump-a-mini...

"On the Friday before Christmas - the kind of time politicians pick to do things they hope you won't notice - US president Barack Obama signed the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. (NDAA)

Along with the usual terrible, horrible, very bad, no good NDAA stuff (all the little mandates involved in continuing to operate the most irresponsibly bloated and expensive military machine on the planet), the NDAA included an ugly little Christmas gift for incoming president Donald Trump:

The Countering Foreign Disinformation and Propaganda Act.

It's Orwell's Ministry of Truth in drag. Overt censorship might not be far behind..."

 

Just watch the msm-made Russophobic paranoia panic grease the wheels and manufacture consent for more...

 

6079_Smith_W

From the article:

Quote:

No, it’s not quite that, at least in theory, but the prospect shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. And in some ways it’s actually worse.

In other words, the legislation doesn't say any of these things, but it doesn't say they AREN'T going to do it, so we'll just pretend that is what they mean.

This fake news story has been making the rounds a lot.

All that section 501 of the legislation does is authorise the government to identify propaganda as propaganda. It also covers other measures the president might want to take, but none of it is carte blanche. If Trump wanted to shut down media or round everyone up and send them to prison camps he would still have to work within his powers and within the law.

And if he did want to use executive power to try that, would he really go after those who helped him get elected, or would he go after those he previously banned, like the Washington Post and Mother Jones?

 

NDPP

The only 'fake news' is your contention that the passage of NDAA by the outgoing kill list peace laureate prez is nothing to worry about.

6079_Smith_W

If there is a problem, please show us the relevant section, and make your case.

Even your article was more forthcoming than many in saying "Its not quite that".

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

So I should be reassured that; "All that section 501 of the legislation does is authorise the government to identify propaganda as propaganda." That is very Orwellian of you Mr. Smith.  Imagine how the US could have progressed if it had banned yellow journalism in the Gilded Age because it was all war propaganda. Who determines the line between propaganda and bad journalism. You seem to think its okay if it's spooks advising the POTUS. What could go wrong? 

I wonder if Trump will formalize the process like his predecessor did for the extrajudicial kill list.

6079_Smith_W

This law doesn't give him the power to censor or ban, k.

Even the counterpunch article admits that. Of course, the author immediately reminds everyone that the facts are no reason to not set your hair on fire.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

This law doesn't give him the power to censor or ban, k.

Even the counterpunch article admits that. Of course, the author immediately reminds everyone that the facts are no reason to not set your hair on fire.

So who determines what is propaganda and is that going to be made public? If it is made public will there be anyway to disprove the US spooks claims or will it be like a no fly list that is almost impossible to get off of once your publication is named.  

You don't think that would lead to people like you not only not reading it but also telling other people everything they write is a lie?

Truly a brave new world of truth and freedom.

ygtbk

kropotkin1951 wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:

This law doesn't give him the power to censor or ban, k.

Even the counterpunch article admits that. Of course, the author immediately reminds everyone that the facts are no reason to not set your hair on fire.

So who determines what is propaganda and is that going to be made public? If it is made public will there be anyway to disprove the US spooks claims or will it be like a no fly list that is almost impossible to get off of once your publication is named.  

You don't think that would lead to people like you not only not reading it but also telling other people everything they write is a lie?

Truly a brave new world of truth and freedom.

Both of you are making sensible points, I think.

(* Ducks barrage of rotten fruit *)

At this point it seems clear that reflexively disbelieving every single thing you read in both the mainstream and alternative media, and then trying to setlle down on the 10% or so of the content that might possibly not be obviously disprovable, is kind of the way to go. But it is pretty tough since so many people have motives to influence or mislead you.

I know that Alan Watts said "Reality is a Rorschach inkblot", but times have changed since then.

6079_Smith_W

Oh or heaven's sake, kropotkin.

This is no different than the CIA pointing out that Russia hacked the DNC and RNC. And plenty of you don't believe that, so who cares.

The only way in which this might authorize something that is not being done already is uncovering and exposing covert support for media by a foreign power. Everyone already knows who runs RT and Sputnik, and everyone has pretty much made up their minds about them.

 

NDPP

The Guardian's Summary of Julian Assange's Interview Went Viral and Was Completely False - by Glenn Greenwald

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of-julian-assa...

 

"This article...is about a report published this week by The Guardian that recklessly attributed to Assange comments that he did not make.

This article is about how these false claims - fabrications really - were spread all over the internet by journalists, causing hundreds of thousands of people (if not millions) to consume false news.

THe purpose of this article is to underscore, yet again, that those who most flamboyantly denounce Fake News and want Facebook and other tech giants to suppress content in the name of combating it, are often the most aggressive and self-serving perpetrators of it..."

Almost always

6079_Smith_W

Hold on a sec though.

Jacobs's article includes the direct quotes from Assange about Trump, and the passage from the la Reppublica interview. So there is no misrepresentation.

If someone doesn't want to agree with the "guarded praise" comment, fine, (and I am sure plenty of apologists would refuse to do that), but it is fair comment.

Sorry, but I think Greenwald protests a bit too much.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Oh or heaven's sake, kropotkin.

This is no different than the CIA pointing out that Russia hacked the DNC and RNC. And plenty of you don't believe that, so who cares.

The expelled diplomats. The Russian workers hurt by the sanctions. 

 

NDPP

Details Still Lacking on Russian 'Hack'  -  by Robert Parry

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/29/details-still-lacking-on-russian-h...

"Amid more promises of real evidence to come, the Obama administration released a report that again failed to demonstrate that there is any proof behind US allegations that Russia both hacked into Democratic emails and distributed them via Wikileaks...

The NYT which has been busy flogging the latest reasons to hate Russia and its President Vladimir Putin assessed:

'The FBI and Department of Homeland Security released a report on Thursday detailing the ways that Russia acted to influence the American election through cyber-espionage.'

 

 

NDPP

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Hold on a sec though.

Jacobs's article includes the direct quotes from Assange about Trump, and the passage from the la Reppublica interview. So there is no misrepresentation.

If someone doesn't want to agree with the "guarded praise" comment, fine, (and I am sure plenty of apologists would refuse to do that), but it is fair comment.

Sorry, but I think Greenwald protests a bit too much.

 

 

Oh come on Smith. They used a favourite technique of yours..

But never mind, and not to worry. As you will know from experience, the pathology of Russophobia is immune and impervious to facts or contradictions and the brainwash generally endures safe and sound..

Fake News: Guardian Caught Deceptively Editing Quotes From Julian Assange Interview

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/12/29/fake-news-guardian-caught-decep...

"Jacob's article is comprised of quotes from an interview that Assange did with La Republica, an Italian newspaper which published the full transcript of the interview online. Either Jacobs or an editor then mixed and matched quotes in order to construct the desired narrative.

Assange never actually praised or stated his support for President-elect Trump. 

Assange was not even asked his personal opinion of Trump..."

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Quote:
In Syria and elsewhere the US government has increasingly resorted to the tools of 'information war' to manipulate the political narrative in order to advance its agenda. The campaign of disinformation concerning recent events in Aleppo is a case in point. That the US government is now pressing ahead with legislation to suppress critical voices is a clear indicator that its priority is to achieve total information dominance.

The U.S. establishment is not happy. They are not content with largely dominating media narratives on Syria and other critical foreign policy issues; they want total dominance.

Thus we now have the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act signed into law on December 24 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2017. The bill will mandate the U.S.Secretary of State to collaborate with the Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence and other federal agencies to “create a Global Engagement Center to fight against propaganda from foreign governments”.

The bill directs the future Center to be formed in 180 days and to share expertise among agencies and to “coordinate with allied nations”.

Ironic, then, that the barbarous US regime is the greatest purveyor of odious propaganda in the whole world. The Planet is literally drowned in obscene, violence-drenched, misogynistic, hate-filled, death-loving, necrophiliac US propaganda. Oceans of it.

The example of disgusting Yanqui propaganda wrt Syria is also an excellent case in point. Even so-called left media like Democracy Now - while covering other, domestic issues well enough -  have failed miserably wrt Syria, re-gurgitating the MSM vomit with school-boy enthusiasm.

Quote:
The Coming New McCarthyism?

U.S. propaganda and disinformation on Syria has been overall effective in misleading much of the population. Most Americans are unaware how many billion tax payer dollars have been spent on yet another “regime change” attempt. Many liberal and progressive news outlets have failed to challenge the propaganda and disinformation on Syria. It has been left to RT and a host of smaller media outlets to challenge the government and mainstream media.

The passage of HR5181 “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation”, suggests that the ruling powers seek to escalate suppression of news and analysis which runs counter to their narrative. 

Despite their current dominance in the media and information arena, that is not enough. They seek to further squelch opposing voices. The bill calls for “countering” and “refuting” what they deem to be propaganda and disinformation. A slush fund of $20M is provided to hire or reward “civil society groups, NGOs, journalists and private companies “ who participate in the campaign.

Progressives need to prepare for the escalation of the information war. 

It's sometimes highly entertaining to read the vomit here, some babblers alleging that I, or others, are paid trolls of foreign governments, etc. I guess that does as a replacement for good arguments. One has to laugh at such intellectual "prowess".

But it now looks like the monstrous US regime is planning this sort of thing themselves.

Check out the slush fund, Russophobes. Maybe you can get some cash from the evil, Sauron-like US government. Then you can continue to attack people like me and get paid for it!

Get some! And then ... Get Some! lol.

The Duran: The US Information War on Syria and beyond

6079_Smith_W

Well here it is from the horse's mouth, kids:

Quote:

It is a new patronage structure which will evolve rapidly, but at the moment its looseness means there are opportunities for change in the United States: change for the worse and change for the better.

I think characterizing that as "guarded praise" is fair. And if you disagree the source quote is right there, so to call it deceptive is false.Same goes for the other quote. Do you really think he left anything out by not including that people speak Russian in Russia?

Like I said, I think Greenwald is protesting a bit much.

Good to know you are broadening your perspective in accepting breitbart as a perspective worth citing.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Monthly Review weighs in on the (non-existent according to some babblers) New McCarthyism.

Monthly Review wrote:
There can be no doubt that this is part of an attempted new McCarthyism. In terms of its overall orientation, the alt-right strategy here resembles the Gleichschaltung (“bringing into line”) in 1933–35 in Hitler’s Germany, where intimidation was directed at all the major cultural institutions, including universities, with the object of getting them to align with the new dominant views. Among those on Turning Point’s Professor Watchlist is MR editor John Bellamy Foster, a professor of sociology at the University of Oregon. Foster was on the earlier Horowitz list as well, and the comments with regard to him by the Professor Watchlist are lifted from Horowitz’s book The Professors. A number of other MR writers are also included on the Professor Watchlist, such as William Ayers, Zillah Eisenstein, and Richard Wolff.

J B Foster makes some points as well ...

Quote:
What is the purpose of the satire, then? Is it to defend those who do not need defending, or ideas that are somehow on the edge of acceptability, but still acceptable? Then in the second attack that will inevitably follow we will no doubt ratchet things back further. This is exactly what Gleichschaltung (the “bringing into line,” as the Nazis called it) is designed to accomplish. This is how it works. The intimidation is aimed at making us all seek to “sound reasonable,” and to “tame” (or cast aside) those who are not. To accede to this is akin to the vital center strategy in the McCarthy Era where various people tried to separate themselves from the radicals rather than directly opposing and denying any legitimacy to the inquisition. In my opinion, we cannot afford to play games at this point, we should not be talking about the intellectual/political positions individual professors take within the academy, as this is not the point here. The point is whether self-appointed conservative thought police are to be allowed to commence a witch hunt, targeting particular academics....

This is no joke. We are in a difficult political era. What makes this different than the Horowitz list is that there is real political power here and people are being targeted by figures connected to the incoming administration. There is a clear alt-right agenda which requires bringing the universities in line. We should turn the tables, and fight with courage and integrity. If we are going to stand with professors who are under attack, we have to defend their right to express their views. And that means attacking the witch hunt.

Nothing to see here say the self-appointed guardians of the "Truth".

6079_Smith_W

Except ikosmos, that Monthly Review article isn't talking about going after Russians or supposed sympathizers. It is about the list of professors being targetted by the alt right.

You might have remembered to mention that.

http://monthlyreview.org/2017/01/01/mr-068-08-2017-01_0/

Yes, there are lists; I just mentioned two of them. They just aren't the ones you claim, and not directed at the people, or compiled by the people you imply.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

The New McCarthyism is now widening and deepening, aiming at ever wider targets and victims. It is no longer merely foaming Russophobia, or guilt by association, etc., but new, richer targets in academia, social life, and so on. 

Meanwhile, the usual geniuses say that there's nothing to see here, we've got it all wrong anyway, and our underwear is, in any case, probably dirty.

Keep trying. Your loud protests just prove the point.

 

bekayne

ikosmos wrote:

Monthly Review weighs in on the (non-existent according to some babblers) New McCarthyism.

That the alt-right harasses and bullies those that do not bow down to their ideas and their God (Trump)? Most here would agree that it exists. However, that is not what you started this thread about. 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Well, it's morphed hasn't it?

It started as a kind of Russophobic guilt-by-association or something like it, in which anyone who thought Russians shouldn't all die in a pool of their own blood should also die in a pool of their own blood, and just got wider and wider.

Nothing changes until it changes, and then, when it changes, it's nothing new. What a bunch of philosophical geniuses.

NDPP

Trump's Neo-Fascism Will Be Built On Neo-Fascism Of Obama and Democrat Party  -  by Ajamu Baraka

http://blackagendareport.com/obama_and_trump_neo-fascism

"White 'radicals' and Black 'nationalists' join with corporate Democrats and 'latte liberals' to mouth nonsense about Russians. Clinton Democrats attack Trump from the right -- and sweep know-nothings of all stripes along with them.

Collaboration from the left with the new McCarthyism is providing an opening for the isolation and repression of those of us who were going to have to fight no matter who would have been elected."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
It started as a kind of Russophobic guilt-by-association or something like it, in which anyone who thought Russians shouldn't all die in a pool of their own blood should also die in a pool of their own blood, and just got wider and wider.

Wat?

Quote:
Nothing changes until it changes, and then, when it changes, it's nothing new.

Huh?

NDPP

Then, try this one...

Message To The Movement Against Donald Trump: Let the Empire Die   -  by Danny Haiphong

http://blackagendareport.com/let_the_empire_die

"This is a message to the movement against Donald Trump. More specifically, this is a message to those within the movement who decry Trump's bigotry but not imperialist war. To those who are ashamed that a racist billionaire is president of the US, but completely satisfied with a servant of Wall Street and the Pentagon in his place.

This message is directed at the section of the movement that has declared the state of fascism and simultaneously ignored the two-party system responsible for its rise.

At no other moment have these errors been so dangerous for humanity. The US Empire is dying, and any attempt to revive it will mean global catastrophe for the rest of us. 

The Obama Administration has used Trump's ascendancy as a reason to escalate war with Russia. There are few people in the US anywhere, let alone movement circles who are discussing the gravity of US aggression toward Russia.

Thus, the initial leadership inside of the movement against Trump will likely ignore this pressing question. Or worse, it will gladly participate in the Russo-phobic, Cold War style red-baiting of the Democratic Party and Republican Party war hawks.

Those who fight this reactionary political trend will be deemed an agent of Putin and a racist Trump supporter..."

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

What is a terrorist?

Increasingly, any dissenter is viewed by the US police state as a terrorist.

That church group that makes quilts for peace? "Terrorists!" says the US military regime.

BDS activist? Terrorist! This includes McCarthy-style online blacklists.

Peacenik? Terrorist!

Environmentalist? Terrorist!

etc.

josh

President-elect Donald Trump views the focus on Russian interference in the 2016 election a "political witch hunt" against him. 

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-russia-focus-political-witch-hunt?utm_content=buffer77c93&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer 

 

Gee, this sounds so familiar.  Poor Trump.  Seems to be another victim of "McCarthyism."

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Hmm. Well, given that it is public knowledge that key DNC advisors (John Podesta comes to mind) made it their election strategy to try to discredit their GOP rival by alleging a connection, and a subservient one, to the Russian President VV Putin, this is stating the obvious by Trump.

What's remarkable is how he was able to turn the tables on the accusers and really whup them in the election.

Of course, voter suppression - something that the Democrats and GOP alike never talk about - helped Trump enormously.

josh

ikosmos wrote:

Hmm. Well, given that it is public knowledge that key DNC advisors (John Podesta comes to mind) made it their election strategy to try to discredit their GOP rival by alleging a connection, and a subservient one, to the Russian President VV Putin, this is stating the obvious by Trump.

What's remarkable is how he was able to turn the tables on the accusers and really whup them in the election.

Of course, voter suppression - something that the Democrats and GOP alike never talk about - helped Trump enormously.

 

Whup them?  You mean by losing by nearly 3 million votes?

It wasn't an election strategy. it was a fact.  But I'm sure Trump appreciates your tea and sympathy.

josh

ikosmos wrote:

It's not really relevant to the discussion of foaming McCarthyism or of same, according to Trump, in the recent US election, but it's nevertheless interesting how the Russian public - quite knowledgeable about US interference in innumerable elections, coup d'etats, assassinations, war crimes, genocides, etc. - looks at the allegations of hacking as something to be proud of. This, in the sense of electronic and information warfare, shows to them, they think, that their own government can whup the Empire at its own game.

Not that that is relevant. The goalposts on the above "fact" (josh) keeps shifting and for very good reasons. They have already retreated from the claims of voter tampering (though neo cons like John McCain haven't got the memo) and now are claiming that it was information warfare only, bascally interference in public debate, etc., something which, as the public in other countries are aware (eg Russia itself) , is something the barbarous US regime has been doing since they killed a million Filipinos in the late 19th century, claimed it was "liberation from the Spanish yoke",  and lied about it ever since.

 

 

So now you're conceding that the hacking did occur?  And there was no serious or credible charge of voter tampering, if by that you're referriing to the actual voting or counting.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

It's not really relevant to the discussion of foaming McCarthyism or of same, according to Trump, in the recent US election, but it's nevertheless interesting how the Russian public - quite knowledgeable about US interference in innumerable elections, coup d'etats, assassinations, war crimes, genocides, etc. - looks at the allegations of hacking as something to be proud of. This, in the sense of electronic and information warfare, shows to them, they think, that their own government can whup the Empire at its own game.

Not that that is relevant. The goalposts on the above "fact" (josh) keeps shifting and for very good reasons. They have already retreated from the claims of voter tampering (though neo cons like John McCain haven't got the memo) and now are claiming that it was information warfare only, bascally interference in public debate, etc., something which, as the public in other countries are aware (eg Russia itself) , is something the barbarous US regime has been doing since they killed a million Filipinos in the late 19th century, claimed it was "liberation from the Spanish yoke",  lied about it ever since, and convinced the Filipino public that it never happened.

The claims of the the DNC and its supporters, in fact claims of domestic interference in US politics by ANY outside parties, is, of course, rather idiotic on the face of it, given the long, inglorious history  of the US regime in a rich variety of such practices for over a century over the entire globe.

But, of course, if discussion of history is cause for Democrats to "reach for their sidearms", then we all know whatever warmonger was "elected" POTUS, the US regime would, inevitably, continue on the same, blood-soaked path.

I look forward to publication of the "evidence". lol. But I won't be holding my breath.

 

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

The Russian public  thinks so, or doesn't care. Since when is the opinion of the public of a foreign country a substitute for facts?

Who's the Russian dupe now? lololololololololol

josh

I asked you what you thought. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I think that it is strange that the DNC would have to worry about their e-mails being hacked. If there had been nothing there to see we would never have know they were hacked because you only leak dirt. Apparently the DNC culture included openly discussing semi-legal dirty tricks.  America has come a long way from Watergate in some respects but not in others. Its politicians still actively use dirty tricks on their opponents and they haven't quite got the idea that e-mails can't be erased once they've been sent out.

I am sure someone hacked the DNC but I sure as hell don't know if it was a Russian hacker or a Republican hacker or a FBI/CIA hacker or an Iranian hacker or a Chinese hacker. Of course if it was a Russian hacker he was most likely set up in Putin's private office because we know he's evil incarnate. 

NDPP

The Jimmy Dore Show (podcast)

http://jimmydorecomedy.com/jimmy-dore-show/the-jimmy-dore-show-podcast-4

Extended interview with Glenn Greenwald

"The Democrats have gone completely insanse..."

josh

NDPP wrote:

The Jimmy Dore Show (podcast)

http://jimmydorecomedy.com/jimmy-dore-show/the-jimmy-dore-show-podcast-4

Extended interview with Glenn Greenwald

"The Democrats have gone completely insanse..."

Yes, they should be sent to the Serbsky Center for their views.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Great Josh keep up the proof that you have nothing to add to debates except Soviet era propaganda.

In BC the equivalent unit is called Colony Farm.

josh

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Great Josh keep up the proof that you have nothing to add to debates except Soviet era propaganda.

In BC the equivalent unit is called Colony Farm.

Hey, I didn't bring up mental health. Instead of admitting the obvious, that the the Russians hacked the DNC, some resort to mockery and questioning sanity. Because they have nothing else.

NDPP

Intelligence Report on Russian Election Influence Is A Flop

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/01/intelligence-report-on-russian-elec...

"It is indeed a public relations disaster for the Intelligence Community. But it is worse: yesterday's 'Russian hacking' claims failed to convince even its most ardent and anti-Russian supporters..."

NDPP

Irrationality Reigns: After the Lies, Some Folks Still Believe the CIA

http://blackagendareport.com/black_agenda_radio_jan23_17

"Ajamu Baraka, the Green Party's vice 2016 presidential candidate, said he is appalled at the spectacle of 'progressives' and even self-styled radicals 'parroting the Democratic line that the Russians are a threat' to US democracy. This new McCarthyism is 'a strange diversion' and a demonstration of the irrationality of politics in the US', said Baraka, who is also an editor and columnist for Black Agenda Report. 

It represents 'the complete abandonment of critical thought, embracing the State and propping up the intelligence agencies as authoritative sources even after years of deception, disinformation and psychological operations that we know is the modus operandi of the CIA. It is absolutely bizarre."

 

 

NDPP

Fake News of 'Interests' And 'Intervention'

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/01/fake-news-of-intervention-.html

"US and other media continue their strong move towards baseless, aka fake, news. We recently caught the New York Times claiming that Russia started the war in Georgia, something the NYT had earlier debunked itself. The Washington Post claimed that Russian hackers were sneaking into the US electricity grid. The story fell apart within a few hours. Nothing in it was true..."

6079_Smith_W

Surprisingly, a case of actual McCarthyism:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/nyregion/a-principal-is-accused-of...

A New York principal tries to integrate her school and finds herself under investigation by the Department of Education and accused of being a communist. Her reaction: "What decade are we living in?"

josh

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Surprisingly, a case of actual McCarthyism:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/nyregion/a-principal-is-accused-of...

A New York principal tries to integrate her school and finds herself under investigation by the Department of Education and accused of being a communist. Her reaction: "What decade are we living in?"

And so-what if she were a communist?  Not the 1950s when the party was declared illegal.

6079_Smith_W

No there is nothing wrong with that in itself. One of the things they are accusing her of is getting her students involved  in party politics. But really the whole thing is a smear.

NDPP

The Deep History of US, Britain's Never-Ending Cold War on Russia

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/05/04/deep-history-us-britain...

"American-British collusion with Nazi Germany finds its modern-day manifestation in NATO collusion with the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine and jihadist terror groups..."

NDPP

Top Democrat "Has Seen No Evidence of Trump-Russia Collusion' (and vid)

https://on.rt.com/8aub

"Referring to a briefing Feinstein attended at a CIA headquarters in Langley on the alleged Russia meddling on Tuesday, host Wolf Blitzer asked: 'Do you have evidence that there was in fact collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?'

'Not at this time,' Feinstein replied.

'Well that's a pretty precise answer,' Blitzer said, quickly bringing the interview to an end."

NDPP

In Massive Spending Bill, US Lawmakers Back Several Measures Targeting Russia

http://ow.ly/L7iZ30bsxZY

"Congress has authorized a new $100 Million effort to counter 'Russian influence and aggression' and to support civil society organizations in Europe and Eurasia."

Russophobia: a growth industry

6079_Smith_W

Oh well. Here's something else you could call McCarthyism, I suppose:

Or this:

At least the name would be accurate.

6079_Smith_W

California may end a decades-old ban on members of the Communist Party working in its government, after the state Assembly approved a bill that would delete references to the party from its employment requirements.

The bill's sponsor, Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland, said that California's laws should focus on individuals' actions and evidence rather than political affiliations and what he termed "empty labels."

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/09/527586682/california-a...

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
One of the things they are accusing her of is getting her students involved  in party politics. But really the whole thing is a smear.

Curious question though:  if she was, indeed, promoting partisan politics, is it still a "smear"?

To be clear, I would hope we all agree that school is where our young'uns should be told to get involved, and to care about their own governance, but that's not the same as "and this should be your opinion".  In the same way that I expect none of us to oppose schools asking students to consider religion (or the lack of it) in their own lives, and to form their own opinions, but that's not at all the same as "... and I hope you can come to understand that Jesus died on the cross for your sins".

Pages