"...Idealism is great unless it sours into fatalism. Or if it demands more than people are willing to give. I worry that the current young generation of Greta Thunbergs is merely going to spawn the next generation of cynics and reactionaries. It reminds me of the great Philip Larkin poem, “This Be The Verse”:
They mess you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
And add some extra, just for you."
+++
AND THEN:
Worst. President. Ever.
FINALLY:
HANG THE BASTARD BUT NO THEIR STOCKING:
That little baby is better off being as far away from that dysfunctional family as possible. The mother has reportedly married a military vet and they are living a low-key life in Arkansas.
Joe and Jill are such hypocrites.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Media Stonewalls on the Steele Dossier
News companies are even more reluctant than other businesses to come clean about their misbehavior.
By Eric Dezenhall
‘Why don’t they just fess up and say they’re sorry?” That is the question journalists have asked about the corporate and institutional clients of my crisis-management business. It’s a question media companies should be asking themselves amid the implosion of the Steele dossier. Here we are, a few weeks after the dossier was discredited, and no one has paid a price.
Having had media companies as clients, I’ve found that when they’re under fire, they behave no differently from chemical or drug companies. Why? Because they don’t see coming clean as being in their self-interest.
Among other things, the truth can tarnish the brand and jam them up in court. So they often deny, stonewall, close ranks, and attack their critics. Two things media companies have that other businesses don’t is the ability to deliver news instantly and the mantle of moral authority.
The crisis confronting the news media post-dossier is rooted in disinformation. In the crisis business, we often do detective work to uncover the sources of disinformation leveled at our clients. The first factor in a successful disinformation campaign is an audience that desperately wants to believe something. Then you find a plausible allegation that fits the marketplace. Next, you implant an outrageous allegation within the plausible one. Finally, you find a trustworthy person, someone simpatico with media organizations, to let it rip.
The merchandising of the Steele dossier fits this template. First, there was fertile ground for an anti-Trump narrative. Donald Trump’s rise was especially odious to journalistic and cultural elites. Then there was the shiniest object in the dossier, the infamous “pee tape” that no one credible has claimed to have seen. Finally, there were operatives with strong ties to the media, including Democratic Party consultants and former journalists billed as “marketplace intelligence” researchers who are, in reality, press agents.
When nonmedia companies make unforced errors, the fallout is punishing—lost sales, congressional hearings, lawsuits and management shakeups. When journalists fumble in the manner of the Steele dossier, however, the immediate reaction is rewarding—blockbuster stories, clicks, ratings and ad sales.
The longer-term consequences tend to manifest as a vague generational erosion in credibility, which is happening now in the acceptance of the “fake news” battle cry.
Then there is the power of the First Amendment and impotence of American defamation law, which affords the media considerable free rein. New clients are often stunned when I explain that there is no law enforcing journalistic accuracy; there are only laws against engaging in a demonstrable conspiracy to injure a target by knowingly or recklessly injuring that target through false reporting—something that’s almost impossible to prove.
Finally, there is the self-regard of some journalists convinced that theirs is a chosen profession. They are incapable of thinking that they could be as wrong as the people and institutions they cover.
On the few occasions where I have played a role in encouraging a media outlet to kill a proposed story, the disappointed journalists often allege that their story was spiked because their target lied or used its vast power to intimidate the press. You rarely hear the more likely explanation, which is that the reporter couldn’t nail down the story and an ethical editor stopped it.
It is in the short-term interest of a media company to stand by its reporting—and behind the First Amendment—rather than say it was wrong and face the consequences.
In the Steele case, when the media would normally be screaming for an apology, only some, such as the Washington Post, have bothered to correct their stories. But the Post didn’t really examine why it got the story wrong in the first place.
The New York Times is in an even deeper credibility crisis: The newspaper would have to admit it was wrong; in addition, a Times reporter helped turn the collusion story in one direction. The rest of the media, including the Times, followed because the tale was too good to resist.
The reluctance to correct course is often justified with the logic: Well, our hearts were in the right place or Something rotten still happened there. Imagine executives of a pharmaceutical company responding to claims that their drug injured or killed people by conveying that they tried hard to make a good drug, but—oops.
Journalists are right to dig for malfeasance. But with all the hand-wringing over the decline of good journalism, it turns out that one reason why someone like Donald Trump could win a political knife fight by shouting “Fake news!” is that, on the Steele dossier, he was right.
Mr. Dezenhall is CEO of Dezenhall Resources Ltd., a crisis management firm, and the author of the novel “False Light.”
++++++++++++++
Israel Has ‘Free Rein’ to Deal With Iran’s Precision Weapons, Not Its Nuclear Program
by JACOB Jacob Nagel
JNS.org – Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz recently revealed details from an incident in 2018, in which an Iranian drone was shot down upon entering Israeli airspace after being launched from the T4 airbase in Syria. The drone’s mission was to deliver explosives to terrorist groups in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). The interception of the drone, which is also a type of precision weapon, marked another chapter in the war against Iran’s efforts to smuggle weapons through Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon, and to other terrorist groups as well.
According to foreign media reports, the number of Israeli attacks in Syria has increased significantly recently, and not a week goes by without reports of one or more such strikes. Most of the attacks are aimed at Iranian infrastructure and forces in Syria, and target efforts to transfer precision components to Lebanon.
This is the “campaign between the wars” launched by Israel several years ago to enforce its “red lines” in Syria and damage Iran’s nuclear program. Israel has made it clear it won’t allow Iranian forces and proxy militias to operate and establish a foothold in Syria, and won’t allow Syria to be used as a transit hub for game-changing weapons earmarked for Hezbollah. Precision weapons are not just rockets, but also unmanned aerial vehicles, cruise missiles, and multi-rotor drones.
Israel initially adhered to a policy of ambiguity but changed its mode of thinking, and since 2019 government and military officials have revealed that thousands of Iranian targets have been destroyed in recent years. The message was devised for a specific audience: Iran, Russia, and Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Since 2009, Iran has been focused on developing precision weapons under orders from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, based on the understanding that such weapons are “game-changers.” Accordingly, the IDF chief of staff determines that these weapons and their components are the second-greatest threat to Israel, after Iran’s nuclear program. Israel understands that the plans are intertwined, as part of a long-term Iranian plan, and that both must be stopped.
The interesting recent twist is that while the alleged Israeli attacks are ongoing, the Russians and Syrians are not complaining. Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and current Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have invested tremendous energy in convincing Russian President Vladimir Putin that Russia’s interest is to remove Iran from Syria. Israel stressed that as long as the threat persists and Iran violates Israel’s red lines, the attacks will continue, there won’t be stability in Syria, and Russia’s investment in the country will be in jeopardy. Russia understands and accepts this narrative. Whether Putin takes active steps to remove Iran from Syria is another question, but he is permitting Israel to act freely.
Assad, for his part — who likely wouldn’t be in power without Russian and Iranian intervention in his country’s civil war — recently joined the Russians in tacitly coming to terms with the Israeli airstrikes. The Iranians have begun overstepping their bounds, and Assad realizes that they are exploiting Syria and violating its sovereignty. He understands that without dislodging them from Syria, he also won’t be welcomed back into the family of Arab nations. Iran’s precision-weapon program also poses a threat to Lebanon, which is on the verge of economic and social collapse. If weapons keep being smuggled to Hezbollah, and particularly if precision weapons keep being manufactured and converted in factories on Lebanese soil, Israel will have no choice but to attack in Lebanon. This could escalate into all-out war, which would put the final nail in the coffin of the beleaguered country.
All this is happening against the backdrop of renewed nuclear talks between Iran and world powers in Vienna. Israel wants a good, comprehensive deal that terminates Iran’s ability to acquire a nuclear bomb, forever. US President Joe Biden and his special Iran envoy Robert Malley have adopted an approach that is very much conflicting. The precision weapons are not part of the negotiations — and it’s uncertain whether this is a bad thing at this stage — in order to focus on the nuclear program. The precision-weapons issue should be addressed parallel and separate to the nuclear issue, while the campaign between the wars should be intensified.
The American desire for a “less for less” deal has led to a “more for less” framework. The lifting of American sanctions, even if partial, will allow Iran to rehabilitate its economy and continue supporting terror, as it does with its precision weapons operations, and at the same time would send a message across the globe that doing business with Iran is again worthwhile. Ergo it is “more for less,” because Iran would have to give up “far less.”
The Iranian doctrine is predicated on four pillars: The United States has the ability to attack — but Biden is weak and won’t do it; Israel understands the United States is weak and won’t attack alone, because it can’t; Iran believes its economy can withstand the pressures at their current level; and finally, the Iranian leadership senses there is no credible threat against the regime, the lives of its officials, or their personal assets.
As long as these four pillars stand, the Iranians think they can come to Vienna with maximalist, absurd demands, and at the same time do as they please in Syria and elsewhere in the region. They are only willing to discuss sanctions relief, American assurances that any future administration will abide by an agreement, even if that demand contradicts American law, and the cessation of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s open investigations. The Iranians have not agreed to discuss what they will give in return, in terms of their nuclear program, violations, or regional behavior.
Washington understands Israel’s position regarding the precision weapons, hence the White House is quietly ignoring the campaign between the wars, but it insists on returning to negotiations with a poorly conceived approach. Israel has “free rein” to deal with the precision weapons, but not the nuclear program, not even through its considerable cyber capabilities — which of course is unacceptable from Israel’s perspective. The actions against the precision weapon threat will continue under Washington’s approval and virtually open support of the Russians and Syrians; Israeli actions against the Iranian nuclear program could lead to a conflict.
IDF Brig. Gen. (res.) Jacob Nagel is a former national security adviser to the prime minister and a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
This article first appeared in Israel Hayom.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I FIND IT MOST IRONIC, ONE OF THE MOST PATHTIC AMERICAN PRESIDENT'S, IN MY LIFETIME, IS HAVING A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH PUTIN, ON DECEMBER 7TH ABOUTTHE LATTER'S POTENTIAL INVASION OF UKRAINE.. PUTIN IS A COLD BLOODED STRATEGIST AND KNOWS EUROPE, AND MOST PARTICULALRLY GERMANY , THANKS TO THEIR FORMER PRIME MINISTER., IS DEPENDENT UPON RUSSIA FOR THEIR ENERGY NEEDS.
PUTIN,THEREFORE, IS IN A POSITION OF EXTREME LEVERAGE FOR SEVERAL REASONS:
A) HE CAN RUB BIDEN'S FACE IN A DECISION ALLOWING RUSSIA TO INVADE.
B) HE CAN BET SAFELY EUROPE WILL DO NOTHING TO HELP UKRAINE BECAUSE OF THEIR ENERGY DEPENDENCY. PUTIN HAS EUROPEOVER HIS BBL.
C) PUTIN CAN UNMASK NATO AND REVEAL IT IS A PAPER TIGER.
D) EVEN THOUGH NATO HAS NO FORMAL TREATY OBLIGATION TO DEFEND UKRAINE IT IS A BORDERING EUROPEAN NATION, A DEMOCRATIC NATION AND AN IMPORTANT GENERAL ALLY ASSCIATED WITH THE WEST.
E) A SUCCESSFUL TAKE OVER OF UKRAINE SIGNALS TO THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE PUTIN IS POTENTIALLY CAPABLE OF REKNITTIG THE FORMER RUSSIAN EMPIRE AND THAT WILL GIVE A BOOST TO HIS HIS LEADERSHIP
F) IT SIGNALS THE CONTINUED DECLINE OF AMERICAN DOMINANCE, PARTICULALRY AFTER OUR DEFEAT AND WITHDRAWAL FROM AFGHANISTAN..
G) FINALLY, NO DOUBT PUTIN HAS INFORMED CHINA OF HIS INTENTIONS AND, AS THE CONSEQUENCES UNFOLD, IT COULD ENCOURAGE XI TO TAKEACTION AGAINST TAIWAN SIGNALLING AMERICA'S FURTHER IRRELEVANCE AND WEAKNESS SHOULD CHINA'S THREAT TURN INTO A SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT.
H) ANYTHING POSITIVE COMING FROM A POTENTIAL SUCCESSFUL INVASION BY RUSSIN AND THEN CHINA AND FAILURE OF AN AMRICAN REPONSE WOULD NOT BE LOST ON IRAN.
OBVIOUSLY, A LOT DEPENDS ON BIDEN'S MESSAGE TO PUTIN. PUTIN WILL NOT BE DETERRED BY RED LINES THREATENING ECONOMIC SANCTIONS BECAUSE HE OWNS THE ENERGY CARD.
BUT THEN WHAT DO I KNOW. I AM JUST A BELIEVER IN PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH .
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MORE CHEEZY NONSENSE FROM WISCONSIN DEMOCRAT.
Wisconsin Dem Frontrunner Sponsored Bill To Eliminate Cash Bail
++++++++++
GREAT BUT STILL NOT "OL' BLUE EYES" VERSION.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CHICAGO KNOWS HOW TO KILL, THE BLACK FEMALE DEMOCRAT MAYOR DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO GOVERN AND CHICAGO'S POLICE REMAIN HANDCUFFED AND HELPLESS . AND SO IT GOES.
CHICAGO SEEMS TO BE A MODEL CITYFOR DEMOCRAT GOVERNANCE AND THEY REPEAT THE SAME MISTAKES IN CITY AFTER CITY THINKING IT WILL ALL GET BETTER BY ITELF.
Murder and Mandates in Chicago
Violence in the city soars as Mayor Lightfoot feuds with police.
By TH EDITORIAL BOARD
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment