Zinn misuse of Columbus journal

 

 
Howard Zinn isn’t the first crank to come up with crack pot theories about Columbus.
Columbus’ journal – perhaps of the most important documents dealing with the discovery of the Americas – is the primary source for nearly all scholarship concerning his first voyage, even crack pots like Zinn had to rely on it.
Radicals, past and present, have attempted to discredit the journal, some claiming it was fake or that he didn’t write it, pointing to minor discrepancies in the copy such as mistaking east for west in the navigation portions.
It has been the target of every writer with a peculiar theory,” wrote Samuel Eliot Morison in his Pulitzer Prize winning biography, and who considered the most reliable Columbus historian (and who Zinn frequently disparaged even to the point to naming his book after Morrison’s).
Some of these crack pot theories include that Columbus was never seeking the Orient when he set sail, that he had been to America before under a different name, and that another person actually did the discovery, not Columbus.
So, it was only natural that Zinn would build his crack pot theories on these Journals, too, although for large tracks he quoted the journals by stealing them from other crack pot writers who had preceded him.
Some of these other theories include the paranoid tale that Columbus got secret information from the Scandinavians in Iceland – a popular myth spouted from the mouths of the contemporary Woke crowd.
As with Zinn, some of these other crack pots sought to discredit the authenticity of these journals even as they perused through them looking for fodder to attack him.
Zinn followed a long line of people desperate to pain Columbus in a bad light, using Columbus’ own words to convict him as a mass murderer.
Zinn, Critical Race Theory people and 1619 Project may have resorted to sources from the time known as the “Black Legend,” a massive anti-Spanish propaganda campaign waged by seafaring competitors such as the Dutch and England, both of whom later raided Spanish ships and absconded with gold.
The most outrageous claims made against the Spanish about torture and murder in the New World came from these sources. While there is significant truth to Spanish cruelty, the figures quoted are often extremely exaggerated. Zinn, who stole from other radical historical studies, quoted the death of Native Americans (mostly due to disease) in the area where Columbus landed at about three million, when more reliable sources claim fewer than one million lived in the region at the time.
Even Morison, appears to have used some of “Black Legend” material in his accounts, although it is clear he relied heavily on the journals as well.
But the only reliable information about Columbus’ first voyage of discovery, and from which 98 percent of everything written, comes out of these journals.
Columbus recorded everything from the day’s work, course taken, lands discovered to long descriptions of people, places, fauna and flora, conclusions and possible future colonial policies as well as other things.
Unfortunately, the original document was lost, but several copies of it were made, from which an abstract was created by Bartolome de las Casas, a Spanish priest, historian and missionary, which was checked against the copies for accuracy.
Las Casas left out many of the nautical details and sometimes inserted comments of his own, clearly disguisable from Columbus’ comments.
More contemporary historians – especially those dealing with navigation – attest to the authenticity of the journal, attributing the minor mistakes to scribes who copies off the original.
It is this abstract that is the primary source for the first voyage – although some historians, including
Some errors such as reporting seeing an island that later turned out to be low clouds, Columbus did not change from his journal.
“Columbus always let his mistake stand,” Morison noted. “Crackpot critics of Columbus always base their theories on a presumed going-over of the journal by Columbus or Las Casas.”
Zinn, when he used the journal, routinely misquoted the accounts, breaking up things, sometimes using segments of the journal written days apart to imply things Columbus never said or meant and to use the journal as proof of Columbus’ alleged motives, which in full context would have exonerated him



Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

Zinn and Chomsky are two rogues of Social Justice

 

 

 Nearly all of the contemporary woke movement appears to have derived its Philosophy from two washed out old radicals from the 1960s who have revived the failed philosophies of Marxism.

I met each of them at different times in the early 1980s after I returned to college thanks to a radical professor who knew many of the same radicals from the 1960s as I did.
Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky became the rock stars of the anti-establishment movement of the early 1980s, featured frequently in underground media such as the Pacifica radio network, where they pontificated theories carried over from the height of the radical left movements two decades earlier.
Both, by sheer endurance, have evolved to become the darlings of mainstream media which celebrates them as heroes of anti-racism when their real aim is not racial diversity by a desire to bring about the race war Karl Marx said would be necessary to bring down capitalism in America.
Most of the misinformation that woke operates on comes through their literature especially Zinn – hairbrained theories no more valid now than when they were conceived in the early to mid-20th Century by the people from whom these two stole all their ideas.
Very few serious scholars took these ideas seriously back then, but in today’s climate, these two have become massively influential in steering scholarship away from legitimate study and into the never never land of conspiracy theory. While both of these men talk about systemic racism, their real motivation is to use race conflict as a cover for their agenda to destroy western culture in order to create a Marxist state.
Neither one of these two actually is qualified to do what they claim to be doing. Chomsky was a brilliant in linguist, overstepped his professional credits to take on ideas and philosophies of Marxism of which he had very little qualification to espouse.
But he was a brilliant public speaker, a powerful orator who could captivate an audience and sway it -- provided there was no one to actually challenge his ideas while he's doing it.
He became the patron saint of extreme radicals such as WBAI and other Pacifica stations that unceasingly aired his diatribes.
Once confronted with actual experts Chomsky tended to shrivel up unable to manipulate the audience when there was a more objective point of view.
Zinn is to writing what Chomsky is the oratory, able to manipulate language to seem reasonable while he is manipulating you into thinking he actually knows what he's talking about.
Despite Zinn ability in rhetoric, his history is extremely weak and the fact that people are so gullible that to accept this as truth, says something about contemporary society that Zinn zealots by taking advantage of.
For the most part, Zinn repeats conspiracy theories long ago debunked by legitimate scholars, whose work unfortunately – thanks to Zinn’s popularity – is largely unavailable for contemporary readers to consult.
Like Chomsky, Zinn is completely unqualified as a historian and yet for some reason has been taken seriously after having stolen almost all of his material from other sources or worse made up and manipulated real history to support his Marxist philosophy.
The goal of these two men is not to make better race relations but to make them worse. to inspire an uprising that will ultimately lead to the overthrow of capitalism. Their goal is to tear down the icons of American culture in order to pave the way for a Soviet-like state that Marx envisioned.
This requires a total breakdown of contemporary society in order to build the foundations of socialism on in the rubble.
As with a lot of woke people inspired by Rules for Radicals, anything goes as long as the ultimate aim is achieved, explaining much of the last four years where Woke influenced Democrats and Woke controlled media spouted lies and deception to advance their aims.
Both of Zinn and Chomsky would be utterly laughable (and were for several decades) until they began to inspire a new generation of young people who did not have the expertise or even the education to see through there smoke and mirrors.
Although they pretend to be Scholars neither one really is they just build their case on misinformation and repackaged ideas from the 1960s knowing that the new generation have not heard this rhetoric before.
Zinn zealots, of course, have infiltrated the schools and media reshaping the landscape more conducive to their idea of revolution.
A once-close friend actually authored several books to simplify and justify the theories of these two quacks. I quote a journal entry about my friend from ten years ago
“He treats Zinn as if the word of god, desperate to bring back the long-discredited sixties, not quite mouthing the word ‘comrade’ but strongly implied, still waving his Marxist flag the way Hanoi Jane waved one from the Viet Cong. He is driven by the desperate need to save his faith the way Columbus once did when he discovered America, my friend needing to be part of that revolution we all craved when we were kids, but which most of us grew out of, not him. He lives in perpetual self-delusion, grasping at light weight pseudo intellectuals like Zinn and Chomsky, to show how he differs from his father and his father’s father. He props up this phony ideology because it props him up, telling him he’s still the cool rebel we all admired, looking at himself in the mirror thinking how this belief allows him to stand apart from the bourgeoisie when all he is doing is conforming to a lesser and degraded faith, a godless except for self-declared gods like Zinn and Chomsky, pretending his is a free thinker because he cannot see his chains.”
The fact that almost all of what Zinn and Chomsky are proposing is based on a lie and the ultimate goal has nothing to do with improving the world but destroyed Western Civilization in which they offer nothing positive except in their own twisted logic.
They are tearing down statues figuratively of icons that stands in the way of their ultimate goals.
They hide behind the shadow of movements that tear down Confederate statues and icons claiming they are racist, then suddenly shift so that they also teardown legitimate icons of Western Civilization such as Columbus, Lincoln, Washington and other founding fathers who helped create the dynamic that eventually brought down slavery and created a much fairer world for everybody.
Fair is not in their vocabulary although they frequently claim they are about social justice.

Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

Howard Zinn's mythical native Americans

 

Thursday, May 20, 2021
 
An artist from the town where I live posted a photo of a very Noble Native American along with a large passage about love and peace and harmony.
When I responded saying I wish he would not romanticize a culture that was hardly peaceful. I pointed out that for the most part Native Americans were just as vicious before the Europeans came, slaughtering each other and having wars -- if not as massive as European campaigns -- often just as bloody.
The only difference was that Europeans when they came over had better weapons than the Native Indians did.
he shot back and said I should learn my facts. In his response I could almost hear him sputtering with shocked that anyone would actually question the idea of the noble savage.
I pictured him thumbing through his well-worn copy of Howard Zinn to provide him confirmation, much in the way early Christians must have sought out favorite portions of The Bible.
This vision of the American Indian, of course, his nearly a complete fabrication by a man unqualified to pass himself off as a historian – yet who has become the icon of the Woke movement, who literally take his work as gospel.
Zinn, whose masterwork came out in 1980, capitalized on a trend that took place with hippies in the late 1960s, bridging the gap between radical philosophy and communal living.
Unfortunately, both the radicals as portrayed by the likes of my friend Abbie Hoffman and the hippies as seen in Woodstock could not made their model of society work, both scrambling to find a new symbol of harmony they could idolize.
Zinn, who is a hardcore Marxist, exploited this need, a remanufactured history in order to take advantage of a needy and gullible portion of the population, basing his vision of the Native American on an already disavowed concept as the noble savage.
Although based partly on fact, Zinn – as he does with all his work – left out important passages that would have provided a better, deeper and more comprehensive picture of what Native American life was like, instead building a fictional character to which needy wannabe hippies are attracted, a perfect communal society where women have equal rights and people live in harmony. If there is evil, it was – in Zinn’s vision – thrust upon them by invaders from Europe, who wanted to exploit the natives as slaves to acquire gold.
All Zinn’s work is about greedy capitalism, and so he paints Indians and blacks as victims of European greed.
Zinn like his counterpart Norm Chomsky – both of whom I met at one point when I returned to college in the early 1980s but have become well versed in having heard countless interviews and lectures by them on WBIA – is totally unqualified as a history, a two-bit professor with big ideas but almost no expertise to actually back up his theories. Where he isn’t completely fabricating his version of history, Zinn is stealing from other equally unqualified 1960s Marxists radicals or misquoting legitimate historians to reshape their ideas to fit his skewed an inaccurate portrayal of American history.
I lived through much of the failings of the 1960s, watched radicals like my friend Abbie, turn to criminals or outlaws. I watched the communal model fail because like all such efforts, they were filled with the greed and lust of humanity, creating disharmony and despair.
My artist friend wasn’t old enough to be a hippie or to witness the failure of the Marxist left as charlatans like Zinn exploited the innocence of the baby boom generation. With all that in the rearview mirror, Zinn was able to remanufacture himself and become a voice of still new Marxist movement and his work – as utterly flawed as it is – the New Testament of the Woke movement.
Nearly everything that the Woke believes about the American Indian and its relations to the Western world comes out of the misguided and often dishonest pages of Howard Zinn book – as does much of the recent research that uses Zinn as the foundation.
The devious Marxist Zinn recreates the Americas as an idea Garden of Eden before the arrival of the Europeans, despoiled by the greed of western culture within Zinn’s twisted mind, Columbus as the forerunner of this cultural conquest. Zinn not only inaccurately saddled Columbus with the genocide of Native Americans but slavery as well.
Very little of what Zinn says about Columbus is true or even accurate, nor was Zinn’s perception of Columbus’ motives.
To the Marxist Zinn, everything is about greed and capitalistic lust for gold.
Leaving aside Zinn’s obsession with gold for another chapter on his psychological problems, nearly everything Zinn says about Columbus is wrong, and in some cases, exactly opposite.
Zinn boasted about finding new information about Columbus that showed him as an exploiter, but in reality, Zinn created this illusion by leaving out details that completely exonerated Columbus – clearly intentionally in his Marxist zeal to undermine the American culture Zinn so despised.
This rewriting of history has been repeated over and over again in such things as Critical Race Theory and Project 1619 which in all or part base their work on the corrupt theories of Zinn.
My former friend – who I thought of as intelligent – has written three books on Marx, Chomsky and Zinn, never bothering to check the validity of any of their claims.
Zinn did a good job covering his tracks, attacking the work of more qualified scholars in where the truth could be found.
This not to say Europeans were innocent. Many came to America seeking riches and deeply racist when it came to the “savages” they encountered. Even many who sailed with Columbus sought gold and abused natives to get it.
But Zinn paints the Indians Columbus encountered as innocent victims (a philosophy well adapted to other uses in contemporary woke society), but often, the natives were engaged in conflicts Columbus’ arrival interrupted. Some natives sought to ally themselves with Columbus against other natives. Natives prior to his arrival, murdered, enslaved and even ate their enemies.
Even those who admire Columbus admit he was arrogant, aloof, brash even deceitful, but he was also a Christian – whose motives came out of his faith, not lust for gold, and for the most part, he had a paternal affection for the natives, and frequently intervened on their behalf, ordering his men not to harm them, orders often disregarded by the Spaniards, who hated Columbus because he was Italian.
Zinn’s questionable history paints a simplistic picture of relations between Europeans and natives, an “us vs. them” dishonest portrait that unfortunately has been adopted as legitimate scholarship with so-called institutions of higher learning.
Zinn, Chomsky and even my friend, attempted to salvage the failed Marist ideology from the 1960s that had ridden the back of the baby boom until baby boomers grew up and realized they had been suckered into an illusion.
This Marist brain trust, however, has managed to sucker a new generation into putting faith in lies and falsehoods, selling the same old snake oil we mistaken bought for a brief time in the 1960s.
My artist friend never actually lived in a commune the way I did, so had no point of reference to understand communal living by Native Americans as painted by Zinn could not possibly exist or if it did, survive, since natives being human beings bring all the greed and lusts of being human to the mix.
Zinn not only deliberately remanufactured and distorted hit reality when rewriting history on Columbus almost every one of his statements on Indians in the West were wrong from the Aztecs to the Iroquois often ignoring the absolute viciousness of those cultures prior to the arrival of people from Europe. This vision of an Adam and Eve like World of simple and passive communist like Indians has become the pervasive theme and has infected many other books evoking the history of Native Americans in it in America.
Zinn blurred the lines between native and European, neglecting to point out the many instances where the two cultures thrived side by side. Zinn claimed whites came to America for gold, most came because of religious freedom and access to land.
This last became the friction that eventually led to conflict, Europeans encroaching on native hunting grounds.
Zinn claims Europeans forced natives off land by violence, another distortion. Most natives sold their lands willingly and studies show that for the most part early on, these agreements were fair and mostly honored.
This is not to say European tour innocent either as pointed out to that misguided artist.
Europeans wear no better or worse than what they found here, they were simply more advanced in their machinery of war, and even the most aggressive tribes could not complete. European technology might be akin to the landing of Star Trek’s USS Enterprise today.
Zinn a devout Marxist blamed everything on hunger for gold.
But deliberately misled people into understanding what that gold was for especially in regard to Columbus who needed to pay back the king and queen of Spain for funding his voyages.
But his voyage was more motivated by finding a way to Asia and to get out from under the economic thumb of the Muslims who controlled trade routes. He also hoped to find a military ally in Asia that might help Christians retake the Holy Land.
Zinn’s deliberate misinformation has caused a backlash against Columbus, but this is a model Zinn used again and again to describe relations between Europe and natives.
He deliberately depicted Europeans as evil in regard to the Aztecs, The Iroquois, the Hurons and others, when in fact, those tribes were extremely violent long before Europeans came, and lesser tribes allied themselves with Europeans – culminating in the French and Indian Wars in which native Americans made up a huge part of the British and colonial military.
Zinn takes advantage of the naïve 1960s belief that all Indians were victims of European exploitation, noble savages to be admired and even emulated. Zinn says that had Europeans not arrived, America would have been nirvana – deliberately ignoring the routine wars between tribes that slaughtered natives long before the first sail from Europe was on the horizon.
Zinn’s sins against legitimate scholarship are magnified as other equally deluded scholars and teachers accept his version of history of accurate, when it is not, a history that paints Europeans as exploiters and native as innocent victims, a history that ignores the ability of natives to torture each other, enslave each other and slaughter each other long before they saw a white face.
Unfortunately, Zinn vision of the world has so pervaded the new woke movement that it is hard to untangle the tentacles from their grip on our culture, especially in the education system which has adopted his version of history. Legitimate scholars seem to have been hoodwinked by the Zinn cult, or perhaps are too scared to voice their outrage since careers have been ruined by questioning this faith.
 
 
 
 
Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

How to lie like Howard Zinn

 

Howard Zinn appears to have started a pattern of new intellectual dishonesty in America.
It is an infection worse than the covid-19 pandemic in that it has spread to almost every Institution we used to rely on as honest – media, science, even the medical profession.

Under Zinn’s model, it is legitimate to distort facts, plagiarize other people’s scholarship, even make up or take out of context facts as long as you have a moral purpose for doing so.

His questionable scholarship has become so pervasive it is nearly required reading in most colleges and has infected the curriculum of public schools even when it is not official sanctioned.

Zinn appears to have invented the concept of leaving out inconvenient facts in order to promote his woke agenda – a model that has been duplicated in many other areas of scholarship, in particular global climate change science.

Zinn’s advocates like Zinn do not dispute this distortion of facts; they claim objective fact is not real or valid and is drenched in racism and exploitation of the masses – in other words, if Zinn said something is true, then it is true, even when it isn’t.

While Zinn’s influence is massive – a Bible for the Woke Movement, Black Lives Matters, Antifa, the New New Left, and Climate Change advocates, not everybody agrees with his shoddy, dishonest scholarship – even some scholars on the left who would otherwise agree with his objectives.

Several good studies have shown how Zinn misrepresented facts, especially in his signature work on Christopher Columbus, where he claimed he had done research, but actually based much of his conclusions on work he stole from a close socialist associate who was anti-Columbus in the 1960s, who in turn stole his work from an extremely biased, but better respected historian Samuel Eliot Morrison, from whom Zinn stole directly as well.

Zinn’s lack of ethics did not stop him from becoming one of the most popular historians in modern times, an influence that has completely perverted history and is largely responsible for the perverted history we see being taught in nearly every college. He is the orchestrator of the cancel culture movement, and almost everything he said is either a distortion of truth or a down right lie.
What makes Zinn so dangerous is that his work has become the New Testament for the new woke movement and so has his methods.
The new green deal largely does exactly the same things Zinn does, repacking information so that it support climate change hypotheses even when there is clear information that contradict those conclusions.
Under the Zinn model it is okay to slice and dice up information and put it together in a manner that supports the conclusion, taking things out of context off and twisting facts to make them fit whatever conclusion Zinn or the new green deal wants.

This has become the scholarship standard in many colleges where Zinn’s work is taken as legitimate.

Still even more dangerous is how Zinn has infected media and reported where it has become common to distort facts to create stories that are just simply not true.

This may be a result of modern journalists having gone through universities where they have been exposed to Zinn’s work, and so have adopted Zinn’s methodology, thus doing to journalism what Zinn has done to legitimate studies of history.

We have seen the new breed of journalists who has been trained in Zinn mythology college and high school and twist fact in stories which now become so-called fact.

This has become most obvious in the misreporting by the Washington Post and the New York Times during the Trump era, when these news organizations quoted some of what Trump said, but taking statements out of context, or as in the case of the Jan. 6 protest or the Georgia runoff election, completely fabricating fact.
The fact that many major media Outlets including see and then the Washington Post the New York Times and others have been forced to retract stories suggest that Zinn’s model has become the standard operating procedure for journalism as well as science.
Most recently the January 6th protest in Washington has become the perfect example of misrepresentation of facts for political purposes as is the current conflict in Israel and Gaza
Howard Zinn became notorious for cutting paste history as even some of his admirers admit.
His history has become the supporting documentation for various socialist movement in the United States from black lives matter to antifa and is responsible for project 1619 as well as critical race theory – all largely using Zinn’s work as their starting point and using his tactics for distortion as well -- which is  to cut out anything that disagrees with the intended conclusion and therefore becomes dishonest.
The problem is dead Zinn supporters have been pushing this agenda into the schools and into people's lives even though most of the information that is in produced its flawed if not complete lies.
Most notorious of course he has his conclusions on Columbus which left out and doctored some of Columbus's diary which Zinn never actually read but quoted from other sources without actually checking see original documents.
When legislators seek to stop Zinn misinformation from spreading through  public schools , his army of zealous rise up and use political connections and even other tactics to prevent it.
Zinn has become the foundation of most college studies of history, as lesser intellectuals seek to carry on his cancel culture legacy, using him as justification for their own misinformation campaigns, even though in most cases, Zinn did very little actual research, and came to extremely flawed conclusions based on very little legitimate information.

He made up what he could not prove or changed his source material to support his lies.

Al Gore – who rose to fame with “An inconvenient truth,” followed this model – although he largely repeated what United Nations climate change scientists were doing in the Zinn traditional, leaving out or outright banning any information that disagreed with their foregone conclusions.

Since it's now become a standard practice for journalism, you have to think that the Zinn model will it continue to spread like an incurable disease since journalists will rely on Zinn as a legitimate historian when he is largely a hack. Worse, will be the belief by kids who are now forced to accept Zinn as actual fact without having the means to understand just how inaccurate his version of history is.

Zinn and his advocates are reinventing history, not from bottom up, but from inside out, twisting it into what they believe is true rather than what is factually accurate.

Main Menu

email to Al Sullivan

Is media Israel’s enemy?

 

 

  

In move that guarantees media to hate Israel even more than it already does, a building in which several media outlets in Gaza were targeted for attack, raising a howl from the indignant Associated Press – whose reporters have become the latest WOKE people to hop on the “I’m a victim, too,” bandwagon.
Clearly Israel mistook AP’s non-stop rhetorical attacks as provocation for retaliation, mistaking AP and other western media outlets as the propaganda machine for Gaza terrorists.
It is really difficult to tell the difference between free media and this insane need to side with the humble people who just happened to want to destroy Israel and have always wanted to do so.
Somewhere in the midst of AP’s wounded wail, we learned that Israel had warned AP ahead of time that by locating their offices in the middle of a war zone and so near the terrorist missile launching pad, these offices might be at risk – since these terrorists lobbed missiles into Israel with the apparently approval of the AP assignment desk.
Perhaps AP believed that the First Amendment would be as effective at protecting them from retaliation as the Iron Dome is in protecting Israel from Iran-paid-for missiles.
Since people in the United States really do not have reliable information sources, nobody here really knows what is going on over there, except for the propaganda we get from news organizations such as AP, and since media tends to circle the wagons whenever anybody questions the validity of their reporting (much as they did when defending the Trump hit piece by Atlantic last year), we may never know the truth.
We are seeing a revision of the world and reaction to Israel partly because Trump had embraced them and obviously anything Trump embraces media is going to be against.
This is largely why Trump never got proper credit for the COVID vaccine, or why radicals have torn down statues of Civil War heroes – nobody is tearing down statues of Al Gore (if there are anyway) for his staunch opposition to Civil Rights, or his lying about Global Warming, or even his fake news about his inventing the internet.
None of this is news fit to print, so AP and other media doesn’t print it.
Most of the radicals supporting Palestine against Israel know nothing about the region’s history and condemn Israel for annexing land – such as the Golan Heights – which was conveniently used to attack Israel in the 1967 war. Nor do these purveyors of misinformation recall when Israel gave back land – such as the Gaza from which terrorists are waging their attack in the company of AP reporters.
The Israelis of course are not Saints and some of their policies for curtailing the rights of Palestinians may seem odious to Americans especially to the liberal left who are desperate to equate Israeli policies with Apartheid. None of these WOKE people have ever lived through an air raid or risked anything more than a hangnail when posting their diatribes on social media.
The left’s left fascination with the Palestinians as a victim highlights its own twisted logic about victimization: if you're not a victim; you're not cool
Left-wing media like Associated Press deliberately overlooks the abuses of the Palestinians and the Gaza terrorists in order to promote an agenda that Israel is out of control when it is largely reacting to terrorist organizations promoted by Iran who are paying for the missiles the terrorists use with funds Biden is sending to Iran
It is clear that the bombing of the Associated Press building has hiked up the volume in this misinformation War being promoted by International media.
But it is clear that if Israel deliberately attacked the AP building after giving the inhabitants warning that they might be at risk, then Israel clearly knows who their enemy is and it isn't just the Palestinians.

Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

Media continues to spin webs of deceit

 

 
The Washington Post never gives up on a good lie.
Media continues to paint the events on Jan. 6 as an insurrection when it becomes clearer day by day with the events taking place in Arizona that the Democrats did steal the 2020 election – in much the same way as the Democrats accused the Republicans of doing in 2016.
So it's no big surprise that media and the Democrats lied about how the capital city officer died on January 6th
Media the Democrats have been making up stories about Trump and their supporters for years in an effort to undermine a legitimate movement questioning the power grab underway.
The people who went to Washington on that day had legitimate concerns about whether or not the Democrats manipulated the election – and the lack of corporation in the Arizona recount by a very suspicious software company suggests these people on Jan. 6 may have had legitimate concerns.
After all the Democrat conspiracy theories had invented the whole plot to start with in 2016 when they claimed the Russians did exactly the same thing
So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together to come up with the fact that maybe the Democrats thought this was a great idea for them to use in reality in 2020.
Unfortunately the GOP has yet to prove conclusively that the Democrats stole the election even though there is a huge amount of apocrypha to suggest they did. Arizona could provide the proof of the political coup even the Supreme Court is reluctant to deal with and may explain why the software company and Democrats are conspiring to keep a lid on it all.
But a lie is a lie, and these Democrats and media certainly manufactured the death of the Capitol officer into an indictable an impeachable offense which turned out to be bullshit.
More than 400 people have been charged with offenses related to the Jan. 6 protest – a drop in the bucket compared to the number arrested during the 1968 Democratic Convention protest, but media has a short memory when it’s convenient.
At the end of the day all we are getting is constant rhetoric from media and not accurate information.
Clearly the New York Times retraction about the death of the officer shows just how manufactured the reporting was.
The New York Times was forced to retract the fact they claimed that the capital officer was hit in the head with a fire extinguisher
As it turns out the officer went home and died of a stroke
Even the always questionable Washington Post was forced to retract on its election hit piece about Trump’s call to the Secretary of State in the run up to the runoff election in Georgia.
Clearly, Orwell was right when he said newspapers can only lie up to a certain point before people realize they’re being lied to.
This constant Lying by media is nothing new we have seen it over and over again for the four years of the Trump presidency, but it has existed going back generations even to Watergate when that illustrious Washington Post Duo that presented itself as Batman and Robin turned out to be frauds.
Media clearly has become partners in the political process. Recently police report showed that reporters for The Guardian -- a very questionable media source out of England -- hunted down people who were contributing to the defense fund of a conservative man charged with shooting looters.
The bate of retractions concerning the election and the Jan. 6 protests, however, has caused media to double-down on its mythmaking, perhaps like the software company’s actions in Arizona, seeking to cover its own culpability in taking part in a political coup.
 
 
Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

Feeding flies

 

 

  
Wednesday, May 12, 2021
 
My Ex-wife actually believes that Biden created the vaccine against covid-19.
This is partly because the only information source she has comes from major media, TV and radio, in the town where she lives.
She also believes that gas prices were low because of covid-19 last year and that they went up now that the Cure is around.
Living in one of the battle ground states, she of course voted blindly for Biden because she didn't like Trump's personality.
And because everything that she knows about Trump comes from one of the three major networks, she is completely misinformed about every aspect of who Trump is, what he’s done, and how much worse her world will become when Biden manages (with Obama pulling his strings) to create a nanny state.
This Blind Faith in major media is a problem across the country where people who do not have the resources to double-check the facts that they are being handed.
These are not the deluded guilt-ridden spoiled middle class college kids brainwashed by their professors into thinking they ought to surrender their future to some socialistic vision, but rather meat and potato people who actually believe the race is narrative that media selling and the anti-Trump narrative that a corrupted media is constantly spewing.
It’s difficult to convince people who have no way of knowing what is real when their only sources of information through the distorted lens of a biased media.
People like this believe as they always have, living with the illusion that we still have the Walter Cronkite-like media we can rely upon, when clearly, we do not.
There is a disconnect between what media is telling us and what people see for themselves; it just takes time for ordinary people like my ex-wife to get over the propaganda she’s been fed to see it.
It is rather ironic that Biden went to visit Jimmy Carter (nobody wearing a mask of course), since Biden’s shutting down the pipeline (combined with a hacker shutting down another pipeline) has caused us to see gas lines again.
This is something some of us haven't seen since the 1970s
Of course, my ex-wife would be appalled by this idea that Biden would eliminate gasoline cars because she has to rely on what she calls “a junker” and she would never be able to afford an electric car worth the cost of charging it.
The only people who can afford electric vehicles are elite, mostly white liberals spouting slogans about saving the world.
Yet being subjected to propaganda is something that does not work when it comes down to actually having to get to and from work or when grocery prices are going through the roof.
And that's the problem but it's so out of touch with average Americans that he needs major media to plow the way with bullshit and to completely confuse people about what the facts are.
George Orwell once claimed that newspapers lied less than other media, but he pointed out that when it comes to television and radio people do not check their facts and often take the media's word at face value.
We know newspapers lie, he said, they just lied less blatantly than other newer media
But judging from my ex-wife this is not true
People who have no ability to check fax will believe what they're told
It's sort of like that old joke
What do you feed a fly?
Pull its wings off and you can feed it anything you want.
Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

Shakespeare was right about Arizona

Main Menu

email to Al Sullivan

Colleges as institutions of higher oppression?

 

 
Tuesday, May 11, 2021
 
“I have a lot of big ideas; they just don’t seem to work out,” Will Rogers once wrote. “There must be a bit of college professor in me somewhere.”
We always knew that colleges were very suspect when it came to actual freedom of thought and speech.
Not long ago going onto a campus was like going on to Mars devoid of anything remotely human but a lot of rules about what can be said and not said.
The idea is we need to create safe spaces for everybody and nobody should ever confront a thought that disagrees with them or makes them feel bad.
So pronouns in the English language seemed to be avoided as where a lot of other words necessary to make the language work.
This week the University of Massachusetts at Amherst suspended students because they did not wear masks -- when they were off campus
Obviously some woke student clearly reported them since even the overrated, high tuition Universities can't afford to hire Gestapo over to watch all the students all of the time and must rely on finks like these to do their dirty work.
Teaching kids to turn in other kids seems to be the primary function of our institutions of higher learners.
Professors on these universities who are constantly raising flags of warning about potential fascism; obviously they know what fascism is first-hand since they are engaged in it.
There is a reason why whenever there is a radical shift in the nation the intellectuals are the first to lose their heads because they incite this kind of rhetoric that inspires would be reaction.
More importantly the universities are teaching compliance in a way that is really radical in that it makes people less able to deal with change and alternative views rather than more so.
But then it's clear that we are recreating culture in a way that's very comforting for those who rely on history to actually be accurate
George Orwell back in the 1930s and early 40s predicted this kind of insanity,  noting that even then we were watching the radical left and the radical right rewriting history in a way that there is no such thing as history.
So it is clear that the college's need to either tear up their existing textbooks or create new ones that are going to tell us all what the new culture is going to look like so that students don't get suspended thinking they have freedom of choice on or off campus
Will Durant and his and his wife's amazing work pointed to the fact that much of what we call democracy is an illusion, something clearly proven by the last election in which we watched a political coup take place and all of the institutions that would normally prevent it, throwing up their hands to surrender.
Durant went to the same Woke schools in Greenage Village that pathetic Howard Zinn did, only came out of the school with a bit more common sense, understand that if you don’t build history to be accurate and protect culture, you get no history or culture to speak out, just a mob with pitchforks and torches.
Durant didn't quite predict the collapse of the college system the way Orwell did, but he might as well have.
These radicals on campus may be good at pontificating about the real world of which they know nothing, but they also do not realize that politics is like physics, there is always an opposite and sometimes even more power reaction to anything they do today.
The danger with the colleges is that they are determined to destroy all the safeguards that prevent mob rule on the phony belief that they can create the narrative that will last the test of time when no narrative does.
Ultimately what they do to suppress people's freedom of speech today will be used against them in the future.
That is the ultimate Danger.
 
 
Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan

Media lies are unbelievable

 

 

May 10, 2021

 

George Orwell once pointed out that a lie becomes the truth once you win.
This has been the logic behind the Democratic campaign for the last four years against Trump only it doesn't completely jive with reality -- even though media has completely co-opted itself to that lie
Orwell also pointed out that newspapers tend to lie a lot but tend to stop short of completely fabricating reality.

Of course, this was at a time when publications like the New York Times and the Washington Post pretended to be objective.

Unfortunately, newspapers haven fallen into the same pattern that Orwell accused new media such as radio and television of (online media as well), fabricating stories so outrageous no sensible human being would take them seriously, although most people do – because they tend to take these versions of reality to heart without bothering to fact check. By fact check, I don’t mean the phony biased crap we get from Facebook and Twitter, whose goal is to support whatever lies the Democrats are telling and to discredit whatever truth the GOP is spouting.

Facebook and Twitter's primary role is to pretend that they are fact-checking well they support the lies that conventional media tell.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, it's not working.
CNN, New York Times, The Washington Post, MSNBC have completely lost credibility much in the way LBJ lost credibility when reality didn't match what he was claiming was real.
So lately we have CNN broadcasting the fact that people who still support Trump must be a cult because they do not believe what media has been selling.
This desperate need to turn on January 6th into an Insurrection is a perfect example.
That's real facts begin to emerge we get to see how media helped create the big lie not just about covid-19 or the Russia collusion but about almost everything it reports on especially race relations.
New York Times, for instance, has created a whole new fictional reality about slavery in the United States that the Democrats trying to force down the throats of school children, but which is about as an accurate depiction of history as Jules Verne’s Trip to the Moon depicts an actual moon landing.

All of this phony rhetoric that Trump once called “fake news” is supposed to become reality because the Democrats have won the election.

With Obama – The Ultimate Puppetmaster -- pulling Biden strings, you would think everything should fall in place.

The problem is at least half the country isn’t buying the media bullshit.

This is part of the reason CNN is claiming Trump supporters are part of a cult, when it is actually the left that seems to have all of the attributes of Jonestown, drinking lattes instead of Kool Aid.

If you don’t accept the narrative media is selling, you must be part of a cult.

Media is bending over backwards to celebrate Biden as much as it did to destroy Trump and that isn't working either -- which may explain why the Democrats after Bringing Down the economy with covid-19 felt the need to cheat in the election something that they have been accusing Trump of in 2016.
Sometimes when you tell a lie such as the Russian collusion and the vote stealing in 2016 it gives you an idea that maybe you can pull it off in 2020.
But you have to win to make it happen and you can have a bunch of people in Arizona actually checking the facts to find out if you cheated or not.
This of course explains why the Democrats put up so many roadblocks to actually finding out whether the Arizona vote was legitimate or whether the software company in which prominent Democrats have ownership actually did steal the election.

Main Menu

email to Al Sullivan