Weather or Not

Severe Outflow by R. Edwards

NY Times’ Awful Journalism: Blood Libel?

by Leave a Comment

On Friday the 25th, the New York Times plunged to a new low in journalism, even for itself. The front cover featured this image, top and prominent:

NY Slimes - Front Page

In case the screen capture is too small or smudgy, this was the caption, retyped verbatim: “Muhammad Zakaria al-Mutuwak, about 18 months, with his mother, Hedaya al-Mutuwak, who said he was born healthy but was recently diagnosed with severe malnutrition. A doctor said the number of children dying of malnutrition in Gaza has risen sharply.”

However: an independent journalist (David Collier) determined from a local medical report that the boy had genetically influenced, pre-existing conditions harming musculature and posture, including poor blood oxygen and cerebral palsy, requiring special nutrition supplements since birth.

If a measly, singular “independent journalist” can figure this out within days, how couldn’t a giant corporate operation as massive in resources and connections as the Times, before even running with the image and caption? Did they even want to do due diligence? Caught red-handed in its ridiculous psyop attempt, the paper then rolled back on the bogus context, but quietly, weakly, in a forum with far fewer eyes.

OSINT screencap

Former Israeli Prime Minister Neftali Bennett rightly was skeptical, and his indignation was shared by millions of Israelis and Jews worldwide.

Neftali Bennett response

The mother and (cropped off) brother also appeared well-fed. If there were a lot of starving Gazan children, the Times would have had no trouble finding others to use as rage bait. Nope, they had an agenda, and journalistic integrity be damned, they were going to push it. The walk-back? Feeble, token, deliberately cranny-hidden, bullshit! If the “correction” were sincere, it would have been given every bit the exposure as the “error.” That’s the litmus test.

What about this: get it right the first time. What a weird concept, eh! How? By waiting—yes, waiting—that’s right, waiting, for independent verification, as we were taught in high-school and college JMAC-101 classes. But alas, holding off for truth didn’t conform to the predetermined agenda. It’s clear now: the Times wanted to use an emaciated child, any one they could dredge up in Hamas’ Gazan hellhole, as propagandistic rage bait.

Years ago, even after Jayson Blair (yes, that’s a low blow, but factual, and they deserve it, every time)…that paper ran off its few remaining high-caliber journalists like Bari Weiss. Bari, despite being a classical liberal and openly lesbian Jew, still somehow wasn’t extreme-woke enough for their toxic, bullying newsroom culture of hardcore leftist mouth-foamers. Now they’re just a glorified dirt sheet with a big name and an unashamed, open, far-left agenda somewhere between Mother Jones and Jacobin, and an occasional dollop of antisemitism thrown in for good measure.

The Times has been hemorrhaging readership since 2000, and now, desperately flails for attention and clicks from a shrinking audience of:
1) Sycophantic, bloodthirsty radicals of elite East Coast privilege, and
2) Holdover geezers older than me who haven’t yet figured out that their youth-calcified notion of the Times as standard-bearing Gray Lady of the news is woefully outdated.

As Bari herself said in her resignation letter: “Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.”

Scattershooting 231216

by Leave a Comment

Scattershooting while wondering why it’s been so long since I wielded the scattershooting arsenal here!

HOW to LEARN HOW to DRIVE: I cut my driving teeth in the Metroplex in the ’80s. This turned me into an “assertive” city driver in a hurry. My version of defensive driving: the best defense is a good offense. It was survival of the fittest, amongst (in any particular order): lost/confused northerners turning left from the right lane and vice versa, hyper-aggressive natives driving 95 in 55, tin-can Datsuns cutting you off then stopping on a dime for no apparent reason, illegal drivers from across the border going at random angles with respect to the road, blue-haired old ladies with bad vision puttering along at snail’s paces while leaned way forward almost to the windshield, wrong-way drunks, green-light sitters who’d wait 5-10 seconds to go, red-light runners at any stage of the cycle, johns on the whore corners looking at women instead of the road, street racers at any hour of day or night, low-rider Lincolns bouncing hydraulics and booming loud music while crawling at 5 mph, 18-wheeler “rulers o’ the freeway” who didn’t care at all about the concept of right-of-way, insurance fraudsters who would try to back into you on purpose at stoplights, crotch-rocket jockeys weaving between cars and lanes at dizzying speeds, gangbangers with .22 & .38 pistols sometimes raised, and other gauntlet obstacles to arriving alive and well. Gives one perspective, makes one adaptable and tough. Ahh, the memories…

RETAIL VACANCIES — A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE: Norman, like a lot of cities and towns, has had a sizable population of long-empty stores and restaurant spaces over the last decade—more lately. It’s easy and devoid of critical thinking for someone to blame “greedy landlords”, as I’ve seen and heard many times. Look deeper. The variables involved are many, and often related to local policy—such as the vacancies created on Ed Noble Pkwy by stores flocking to the University North Park TIF district starting about a decade ago. Others—such as profit loss from theft off already slim margins (in their case, also combined with a gimmicky pricing scheme) can doom a tenant, as appears to have happened with the Cost Saver store on Lindsey & 12th, in an increasingly blighted area. Other times, large tenants or small businesses (most of whom don’t last more than a few years anyway) pull out due to profit-margin analysis.

How retail spaces get vacant is messy. How they stay vacant is, too. Oftentimes, landlords are caught in a vise between commercial lenders and the rent/lease levels of supply and demand. Since most landlords don’t own their facilities outright, mortgage-free, they are beholden to banks and other lenders, who can dictate minimum-rent rates above prevailing. This leaves stores vacant and costs landlords a lot of money, which they have to make up elsewhere, else sell properties or go bankrupt. Not as simple as “greedy landlords” or even “greedy banks”. These are all businesses—not charities! This article summarizes the issue really well—even if it is coast-centric. [One of the glaring biases of elite corporate journalism is treating the coasts with greater importance than areas between. For another, see below.]

JOURNALISM PHOTOS as PROPAGANDISTIC PSYOPS: The strong leftward bias in journalism is self-evident to anyone who reads stories critically for keywords often used by one side but not the other. “Homophobia”, “climate crisis”, “social justice”, “his husband”, “transphobia”, and similar leftist words appearing in stories are dead giveaways of that bias, of course. That goes without saying; it’s so obvious. The bias is simply a manifestation of the political leanings of the profession, wherein self-declared Democrats outnumber Republicans 4-1. [And if you think the “Independents” are evenly split, I’ve got prime land 20 miles east of downtown Miami to sell you.]

This article from the BBC straight-up admits journalistic psyops via choice of images. A shorter word for such a practice is: propaganda. And yet members of the profession wonder why revenue is down and layoffs are rampant. Part of the problem is outdated business models in the tech age. Another part is destroying any notion of objectivity (and therefore credibility) through editorializing, and propaganda tactics such as freely admitted in this “story”. Journalism is supposed to be about reporting the facts and only the facts, remaining sociopolitically neutral, and letting the audience decide their implications and meaning for themselves, not practicing emotional manipulation of readership, nor using subjective editorial words like “crisis” that are mathematically immeasurable. Yet reporters consistently, arrogantly, think they should make up readers’ minds for them. [News flash: based on the poor quality of stories overall, this reader — who has taken courses in journalism and has read daily news since age 6 — thoroughly overwhelms the vast majority of reporters on total awareness of large numbers of issues, vocabulary size, and writing skill. Try me.] The story is about climate, but that’s not my concern here; the issue could be anything controversial. It’s that the propaganda tactics and lack of neutrality are so culturally ingrained in journalism now that they don’t even try to hide the biases anymore. Treat the stories you read accordingly, and with a more critical and skeptical filter than ever.

PLAGIARIST HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT: Of all people, the president of an (increasingly disreputable) Ivy League university should lead by example with a sterling clean academic and professional record, utterly free of plagiarism. Yet here we are. Meanwhile the NY Times tries to obfuscate and impart false nuance by excusing her academic dishonesty as “degrees of plagiarism” (paywalled, thus no link). This is rich, coming from the (increasingly disreputable) newspaper that employed Jayson Blair, among several more who have passed off others’ work as their own. But isn’t it always about goalpost-moving progression when “our side” does it? This follows a recurring pattern, obvious to the observant:
1. Denial: “No plagiarism happened!”
2. Minimilization: (oh s**t, optics optics!, PR damage control on aisle 4, we have to back off some): There was a little bit of plagiarism. And it wasn’t that bad.
3. Bad is good (per Isaiah 5:20): “Multiple instances of plagiarism occurred, but here’s why it’s fine.”
4. “Systemic oppression by the capitalist patriarchy forces the subjugated class to resort to plagiarism, as an act of resistance. Stick it to The Man!”

[We’re stuck stage 2 with the current Plagiarist in Chief. Journalism quit there, then in a dereliction of duty all too common to the sycophantic Fourth Estate, ignored the past in hopes it would be forgotten. It largely was, except by those of us old and aware enough to remember.] Notice the increasingly unhinged irrationality at each step. Instead, how about this: Thou shalt not lie. End of story.

PORNOGRAPHIC SODOMY in the SENATE FACILITY: With the behavior of the politicians in Congress seemingly reaching new lows by the month (example), is it any wonder the staffers follow suit? Recently came news of an unsurpassed absurdity that epitomizes the level of cultural moral decay in DC. What kind of deranged morons would have butt sex in the Senate hearing room at all, much less make a pornographic video of it?!?!?!? This is truly diabolical, pathological behavior, and entirely unbecoming the traditional dignity of the chamber. Get your favorite version of the story (Fox, CNN). I won’t direct link the main story from the Daily Caller, which broke it, due to nasty, grotesque, NSFW imagery, even in blurred-out form. The staffer (of Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin) tried to portray himself as some sort of victim of bigotry against “love”. Unmitigated bullshit! You don’t have sex of any nature, nor film porn, in a federal office facility! Simple as that. Not only has he been fired, and should have been, but may (and should) face criminal charges.

Critical Thinking as Applied to an Overseas News Item

by Leave a Comment

This should go without saying, but a reminder can’t hurt: Don’t take “news” stories on their face. Examine critically. It’s a good brain exercise, as well as a needed and healthy self-defense mechanism for the mind. Consider sourcing, context, possible agendas, motivations, angles, and as appropriate, what’s not said about a story. This includes unstated aspects regarding the subject(s) of a story, in context of who they are, how they live, and past statements and actions. It’s easier to do for stories promoting themes you don’t like, but should be done for those with which you agree as well.

I’ll offer one recent example among countless many possibilities. A few critical thoughts on Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro’s criticism of European response to Koran burning…

* As for the subject of Maduro’s ire: I personally don’t approve of Koran burning and won’t be doing so — not because I’m afraid of anyone or anything, but because I see no productive point in it. The thought of doing so really hasn’t occurred to me, much as I have condemned many aspects of radical Islamism taken straight from the Koran’s most hideous teachings and violent verses.

* Freedom of expression and religion are duly and rightly codified in the very first amendment to my nation’s Constitution. As a staunch proponent of liberty, I ardently support and agree with the First Amendment in its literal, black and white words. That includes the freedom to write everything I write here today. I personally don’t approve Koran burning, but I support the freedom of others to do so as a means of expression. Same goes for Bible burning (my own good book!), which I intensely oppose morally, but which is a protected means of expression for some. I personally don’t approve of much of the Koran itself, but I support the freedom of others to express and worship from it peacefully, whenever and wherever they wish. I personally don’t approve of much of what the Left endorses, nor statements of truly racist people on either end of the sociopolitical spectrum, but I support all their freedom to make awful statements. [As I often write: The First Amendment doesn’t say “except” or “unless”! Expressions of leftism or racism, much as I detest both, are, and should be, Constitutionally protected.] I also expect to exercise my freedom of expression without governmental restraint: to approve or disapprove of anything…to oppose parts of the Koran, to attack leftism and collectivism as I often do, and to discuss freely anyone’s statements or other behavior regarding any topic. Maduro’s endorsement of governmental restrictions on expression fly in the face of the ideals of liberty, so I oppose them. Were he a U.S. citizen, Maduro would be fully, legally entitled to his expressions, as I would be equally to rebuke them.

* This specific story is common in headlines from sources such as Sputnik, Tass, RT, and others known to be sympathetic to socialist and communist regimes. I won’t click on a TASS, RT or Sputnik link, or any other state-controlled media like Xinhua or People’s Daily, nor offer one to you, in case it delivers malware or trackers. I recommend you avoid them too if digging further into this specific story. But I have read of Maduro’s quotes elsewhere.

* Critical thought is…critical! It starts not with the story, but the source. One question I often ask is, “Why is this medium pushing this story?” From the outside looking in, it’s pretty easy to see (for example) TASS or Al Jazeera selectively publicizing this for propagandistic manipulation. Those or Xinhua aren’t alone, mind you; most modern media, including right here in the USA, have descended into this practice. I grew up in the inner city and learned to watch or shield my back habitually. Unfortunately, we now have to do so mentally with media stories.

* On the face, and taken alone in a rigidly impermeable silo with no context at all, he makes a compelling point. After all, what good comes from burning another religion’s good book, even if you don’t agree with it? However, as I often say, “Consider the source.” Maduro, like many famous populist leaders selectively wielding their stated faith for rhetorical leverage, acts purer than he is, in terms of living it out. [This reminds me of bible-holding Trump for one evening with his military accompaniment to the DC church, or Biden and Pelosi supporting mass abortion while claiming the mantle of Catholicism for the sake of public show. Using their good books as publicity devices without living by them!] The thoroughly devastating results of Maduro’s and his beloved mentor/predecessor’s programs in Venezuela bear it out. He ought to take the plank out of his own eye before dealing with the speck in another’s. That’s Biblical. Live it more than talk it.

* He criticized Koran burning by “racist sectors”. What didn’t he say? For one, that the public Koran burning was done by a native Iraqi, Salwan Momika, who immigrated to Sweden. Hardly “racism”! The burner has been labeled Christian but described himself on social media as “atheist and enlightened politician, thinker and author”.

* Maduro allied with Iran for economic reasons. He is pandering to extreme Muslims here. I doubt that’s coincidental. I wonder when Maduro will discuss the modern torture, summary executions and vigilante-style killings of hostages, “apostates” and “heretics” in Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, or throwing homosexuals off buildings in Iraq, Syria and Libya, or the gang rape, torture and murder of Christians in parts of North Africa. Considering his regime’s own brutalization of dissidents, I won’t hold my breath waiting.

* Maduro the “Christian”…his being one of the most notorious human-rights abusers around today, with his Helicoide political prison and “The Tomb” torture center, it’s an understatement to say his actions make me skeptical about his alleged “Christianity”. Still, only God can judge for sure. Nobody is perfect. All sin. All will have to answer for themselves at Judgment Day. “All” includes me. And yes, we’re all created different but equal in God’s eye. God loves Nicolas Maduro and wishes to grant him salvation and forgiveness, even as evil as his practices have been. The same can be said for each of us, and anyone engaging in behavior you or I (or even God Himself) don’t approve of. That’s Biblical.

* With those due caveats stated: Still, in a pragmatic sense, the errors and sins of people in positions of high power have greater consequences for society as a whole than those of the average guy waiting on the corner of Commerce and Akard for a bus home. Therefore, the powerful should be held to expectations commensurate with their positions and influence, and yes, that means higher performance standards than you or me. It’s their intrinsic duty to live up to a loftier standard for what they do and say than the downtown bus passenger, by virtue of far vaster consequences. With greater power comes greater responsibility.

* His results at home belie his preaching about yahoos burning Korans somewhere thousands of miles away, an item totally irrelevant to his duties. It strikes me as a purposeful distraction tactic as well as pandering. He’s misguided, but not stupid…kill two birds with one stone (or statement, in this case).

Other critical thoughts certainly are possible, but those are some immediate examples, arising from just one little story that the great majority of Americans will miss completely.