Russiagate kritiek: Tulsi Gabbard (VS democratisch presidentskandidaat) gedemoniseerd door Democratische Partij en de massamedia

Naar aanleiding van een Twitterbericht dat Tulsi Gabbard de wereld instuurde en waarin zij stelt dat kortzichtige politici en hun hulp in de massamedia, de laatste 2 jaar bezig zijn geweest Trump neer te zetten als een marionet van Putin, schreef Caitlin Johnstone het hieronder opgenomen artikel..... 

Van Russiagate is intussen geen spaan meer heel, zoveel is wel duidelijk uit de rapportage van Mueller (die nog steeds niet helemaal openbaar is gemaakt), waar de hysterie over 'Russische manipulaties' ervoor hebben gezorgd dat de nieuwe koude oorlog verder is opgetuigd, met de daarmee gepaard gaande peperdure wapenrace en inperking van de privacy, plus censuur op het internet...... Let wel die censuur en inperking van de privacy werden en worden doorgevoerd in zogenaamde westerse democratieën, terwijl dat soort maatregelen 'thuishoren' in een dictatuur.....

Gabbard voegde aan haar Twitterbericht toe dat Trump er alles aan heeft gedaan niet langer te worden gezien als marionet van Putin, juist door een veel harder beleid tegen Rusland te voeren, waarbij hij zelfs de kans op een kernoorlog niet uit de weg is gegaan en zo'n oorlog nog steeds niet uitsluit......

In het Twitterbericht van Gabbard is 'geen woord Spaans' opgenomen, bovendien een waarheid als een koe! Echter de reacties op dit bericht waren niet misselijk. Gabbard wordt figuurlijk afgemaakt door die massamedia, politici en opiniemakers van diverse rechtse denktanks....... (de laatste zijn in de VS altijd rechts, 'maar goed..')

Zoals gezegd: Caitlin Johnstone publiceerde op haar site het hieronder opgenomen artikel en als conclusie stelt ze dat de welgestelden niet voor niets zoveel geld steken in het beheren van de media, immers als je de media beheerst, beheers je en regisseer je het denkbeeld dat bij het volk leeft...... 

Plutocraten beheersen de westerse: -media, -politici en -denktanks, zij hebben belang bij de huidige inhumane neoliberale status quo, ja zelfs bij de nieuwe koude oorlog en alle andere illegale oorlogen die de VS voert, immers dit geteisem heeft veel aandelen in de wapenindustrie, waaronder ik ook de fabrikanten reken die rollend, varend en vliegend oorlogstuig produceren, een industrie die zoals je begrijpt baat heeft bij zoveel mogelijk oorlog en spanningen in de wereld......

Gezien het voorgaande kan je dan ook stellen dat elke claim vals is die de VS maakt als het weer een illegale oorlog voert, of als het een opstand dan wel coup organiseert en regisseert, de claim dat dit is om democratie te brengen en een bloedige dictator af te zetten...... In werkelijkheid heeft VS schijt aan democratie en bloedige dictators, zolang het bewuste land maar de hielen van de VS likt, VS bedrijven toelaat en in de VS grote 'defensie orders' plaatst.... Sterker nog: de VS steunt een aantal dictators, niet in de laatste plaats de reli-fascistische dictaturen van het Midden-Oosten.... (Saoedi-Arabië, de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten >> VAE, Egypte en buiten het Midden-Oosten: Marokko)

Intussen is bekend dat Mueller de hele Russiagate leugen heeft afgeschoten, daar er geen bewijs voor is te vinden..... Met Russiagate werd zoals gezegd niet alleen de vrijheid van meningsuiting zwaar geweld aangedaan middels censuur op het internet, maar werd ook de Koude Oorlog 2.0 opgetuigd..... 

Aan het voorgaande hebben de reguliere media grote steun verleend, met een enorme berg aan fake news (nepnieuws), waarvoor deze media niet worden gestraft middels de al eerder genoemde censuur, hoewel de bewijzen daarvoor letterlijk voor het oprapen liggen...... Waar sociale media die aantoonbaar echt nieuws brengen, worden afgemaakt in die reguliere westerse media en door de westerse politiek en ze worden geblokkeerd op Facebook en Twitter........

Responses To This Tweet Show How People Fixate On Narrative Over Fact

by Caitlin Johnstone

Last month I published an essay about the importance of understanding the difference between fact and narrative, and I just want to quickly highlight a perfect illustration of this importance in a controversy arising from a recent Tulsi Gabbard tweet. The tweet reads as follows:

"Short-sighted politicians & media pundits who've spent last 2 years accusing Trump as a Putin puppet have brought us the expensive new Cold War & arms race. How? Because Trump now does everything he can to prove he’s not Putin’s puppet—even if it brings us closer to nuclear war."

Now, all the facts say that Gabbard's claim that Trump has been bringing the world closer to nuclear war with Russia is indisputably true. It is perhaps possible to dispute the notion that Trump has escalated tensions with Russia to try and "prove he’s not Putin’s puppet"; maybe an argument could be made that he's simply reckless and violent or that he's particularly beholden to cold war profiteers, or that despite all his rhetoric he just really, really hates Russia for some reason. But it is absolutely not disputable that Trump has greatly escalated tensions with a nuclear superpower by implementing a Nuclear Posture

Review with a much more aggressive stance against Russia, withdrawing from the INF treaty, bombing and illegally occupying Syria, arming Ukraine, staging a coup in Venezuela, and many, many other hawkish actions taken against the interests of the Russian Federation which his predecessor Obama never dared to take.

Moon of Alabama@MoonofA

New on MoA:
Putin Asks And Trump Delivers -
A List Of All The Good Things Trump Did For Russiahttps://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/01/putin-asks-and-trump-delivers-here-is-a-list-of-all-the-good-things-trump-did-for-russia.html …

270

8:15 PM - Jan 15, 2019

These facts are all well documented in the mainstream press and are entirely beyond dispute. The facts say that Donald Trump has escalated nuclear tensions with Russia more than any other president since the fall of the Berlin Wall. But if you go to Gabbard's tweet and read the responses right now, you'll find thousands and thousands of

Democratic establishment loyalists calling her a liar for saying so.

"Gabbard staking out a bold 'Trump is *too* tough on Putin' lane in the Democratic primary," tweeted former NSA attorney Susan Hennessey of CNN and the Brookings Institution. "As predictable as it is absurd."

"Tulsi Gabbard’s is the only Twitter account other than Trump’s that I routinely have to check to make sure it’s actually hers, because the tweet is so absurdly ridiculous," tweeted #Resistance pundit John Aravosis. "Now she’s defending Trump on Russia. Why is she a Democrat? And she’s actually using Kremlin talking points (nuclear war!). Unbelievable."

"Tulsi, you aren’t the first American politician to cozy up to foreign dictators and to serve as a Putin mouthpiece," tweeted former CIA officer Evan McMullin. "While you, Putin and Trump fear monger about nuclear war, we’ll protect our democracy and hold corrupted politicians accountable."

Susan Hennessey

✔@Susan_Hennessey

Tulsi Gabbard

✔@TulsiGabbard

Short-sighted politicians & media pundits who've spent last 2 years accusing Trump as a Putin puppet have brought us the expensive new Cold War & arms race. How? Because Trump now does everything he can to prove he’s not Putin’s puppet—even if it brings us closer to nuclear war.

4,214

12:45 PM - Mar 17, 2019

There are many, many more, but you get the picture. The deluge of responses to Gabbard's undeniably true statement about Trump's dangerous escalations against a nuclear superpower are largely predicated on two assumptions: (1) that Trump has not in fact made the escalations that he has made, and (2) that the danger of nuclear war is not a real or significant thing. These are both, obviously, bat shit insane.

The primary risk of nuclear war is not that one will be planned out and deliberately started in an attempt to win, but that a warhead will be deployed amid the chaos of escalating tensions as a result of miscommunication, misunderstanding or technical failure, as nearly happened on more than one occasion during the last cold war. Once one nuclear weapon has been deployed in an already tense situation, it's unlikely that the full arsenals of both sides won't be unleashed upon each other. As journalist Glenn Greenwald pointed out in response to the uproar over Gabbard's tweet, "The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists' doomsday clock is at 2 minutes before midnight. By far its two greatest threats to *humanity's existence* are climate change & US/Russia nuclear war. Yes, how crazy and treasonous to want to avoid ratcheting up tensions."

The US and Russia are by an immensely wide margin the two biggest nuclear powers on the planet, which makes for a lot of small, unpredictable moving parts with mounting tensions steadily increasing the probability of something going catastrophically wrong.

Dismissing a congresswoman's attempt to point at this potentially world-ending risk as a "Kremlin talking point" is about the stupidest, craziest thing that a human brain could possibly come up with.

And yet here we are.

Ploughshares Fund

✔@plough_shares

There are still more than 14,000 nuclear weapons left on the planet. Join us in reducing and eliminating nuclear threats today https://www.ploughshares.org/world-nuclear-stockpile-report …

11

10:33 PM - Sep 4, 2018

World Nuclear Weapon Stockpile

Twenty-nine years after the end of the Cold War, the world’s combined stockpiles of nuclear weapons remain at unacceptably high levels.

ploughshares.org

So what's up with that? Why is an indisputably true claim about an indisputably real danger being treated as a lie by Democratic Party loyalists, even though it attacks the same president they themselves claim to oppose?

The answer is because it doesn't fit the narrative. A consensus has been built over the last two years that Trump is a Kremlin puppet, so the indisputable fact that his administration is endangering the life of every organism on this planet by escalating tensions with Russia looks like a lie against that backdrop. The facts say one thing, the narrative says another, and they go with the narrative. For most people, narrative takes precedence over fact.

And what's interesting is that these same facts could have remained exactly as they are and allowed the exact opposite narrative to be constructed. If her plutocratic owners had wished it, Rachel Maddow would have spent every night over the last two years warning everyone that Donald Trump is taking dangerous actions against Russia that threaten to wipe all life off the face of the earth, and it would have worked. If Trump had continued making these escalations in our hypothetical alternate timeline while the mass media was constantly selling the "Trump's going to get us all killed in a nuclear war with Russia" narrative, all the same blue-checkmarked Twitter pundits you see yelling at Tulsi Gabbard today would be yelling about the dangers of nuclear war in our alternate timeline.

Narrative really is that powerful. You see it in the behavior of social media users, you see it in the behavior of governments, you see it in religions, and you see it in abusive relationships which continue because of the narrative "He's a good guy underneath it all and he really loves me" even though the facts say "He beats you and cheats on you all the time." If you can control the stories that people tell themselves about a given situation, then you control those people on all matters pertaining to that situation. Regardless of facts.

Which is why the plutocratic class funnels so much money into buying up media influence, funding think tanks, and other means of narrative control: if you can control the narrative, no amount of facts will deter the mainstream public from going along with your agendas. This is why the behaviors of governments so consistently move in alignment with the interests of this same media-buying, think tank-funding, politician-owning plutocratic class. Whoever controls the narrative controls the world.

_________________________

Thanks for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin Johnstone | March 18, 2019 at 10:50 pm | Tags: #Trump, cold war, Politics, Russia, Tulsi Gabbard, tweet | Categories: Article |

URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1Bd
==================================
Zie wat betreft de Nederlandse valse profeet van Russiagate, D66 leeghoofd Ollongren:
'Kasja Ollongren (D66 minister) en de Russische manipulatie van de Provinciale Statenverkiezingen'

'Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Ollongren (D66 minister) schiet een levensgrote bok met fake news show'

'Ollongren gesteund door Thomas Boesgaard (AD), 'Rusland verpakt het nepnieuws gekoppeld aan echt nieuws.....' Oei!!'

Zie verder: 
'Russiagate gelovigen krijgen nieuwe klap: WikiLeaks kreeg de DNC mails van een klokkenluider, niet van Rusland.....' (zie ook de links naar de 'jongste berichten' over 'Russische manipulatie' in dat bericht)

'Russiagate: de westerse massamedia gebruiken propaganda om het volk te manipuleren, precies waar ze Rusland van beschuldigen'

'BBC: Rusland 'misbruikt humor' om Russiagate te ontkrachten..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Uitgelekte telefoongesprekken tussen Trump en Putin bewijzen dat 'Russiagaters gelijk hebben......''

'WikiLeaks belooft The Guardian 1 miljoen dollar als het haar leugens i.z. Assange en Russiagate kan bewijzen.......'

'The Guardian: ondanks een enorme misser (fake news) gaat men door met de valse beschuldigingen t.a.v. Assange......'

'Russiagate? Britaingate zal je bedoelen!'

'Facebook gebruikte 'fake news' beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden'

'New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!'

'Noord-Koreaans 'bedrog met nucleaire deal' is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times'

''Fake News' misbruikt door dictaturen en de reguliere (massa-) media'

'Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert'

'Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax' (Russiagate, de enorme leugen op basis waaraan we de huidige censuurgolf te danken hebben......)

'Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen' (zie ook de links in dat bericht)

'De Israëlische manipulatie van de VS presidentsverkiezingen, gaat veel verder dan wat men Rusland in de schoenen schuift.....'

''Russiagate': Intel-raport over Russische bemoeienis met verkiezingen opgebouwd met leugens en is politiek gemotiveerd, aldus Matlock, voormalig VS ambassadeur in Moskou'

'The Attack on ‘Fake News’ Is Really an Attack on Alternative Media'

'The Lie of the 21st Century: How Mainstream Media “Fake News” Led to the U.S. Invasion of Iraq'

'FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web........'

'Mocking Trump Doesn’t Prove Russia’s Guilt'

'CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8.....'

'WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia'

'Hillary Clinton en haar oorlog tegen de waarheid........ Ofwel een potje Rusland en Assange schoppen!'

'Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd'

''Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd' door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich......... AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!'

'Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks....!!!!'

'VS 'democratie' aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!'

'Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump'

'Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump........'

'Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election'

'FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information'

'Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election'

'Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media'

'CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Russische 'hacks' door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence'

'Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen........'

''Russiagate' een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC...........'

''Russiagate' een verhaal van a t/m z westers 'fake news.....''

'Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht............' (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: 'Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie' en 'Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary')

'Clinton te kakken gezet: Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte'

'RT America één van de eerste slachtoffers in een heksenjacht op westerse alternatieve media en nadenkend links......'

'Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt.......'

'Alarm Code Geel: Lara Rense (NOS) voedt Rusland-haat'

'Mediaorgaan Sinclair dwingt 'TV ankers' propaganda op te lezen (Sinclair bedient rond de 70% van de VS bevolking van 'lokaal nieuws')'

'Ex-CIA agent legt uit hoe de VS schaduwregering en deep state werken, ofwel de machinaties achter de schermen......'

''Russiagate' een nieuwe ongelooflijke aanklacht van de Democraten.......'

'VS demoniseert Russiagate critici als Jill Stein.....'

'De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers.........'

'Britse en VS manipulaties van verkiezingen en stimulatie van conflicten middels psychologische oorlogsvoering' (voor VS manipulaties van verkiezingen elders, liggen er 'metersdikke' dossiers, o.a. in te zien op WikeLeaks)

Stephen Colbert probeerde zonder enige humor Tulsi Gabbard in het rechtse kamp te drukken n.a.v. de illegale VS oorlog tegen Syrië

De show van Stephen Colbert is een propaganda orgaan voor de rechtse democraten en is dat in feite al heel lang. Daarmee staat Colbert ook achter de illegale oorlogen die onder de democratische 'vredesduif' Obama werden aangegaan, dit onder regie van zijn rechterhand destijds Hillary Clinton (minister van BuZa), een oorlogsmisdadiger van formaat.....

Colbert had onlangs de democraat Tulsi Gabbard in zijn show en in tegenstelling tot de omgang met andere politici van de Democratische Partij, was dit geen gesprek met opgeklopte 'humor'.

Colbert probeerde Gabbard zelfs in het kamp te duwen van fascist David Duke (voormalig Ku Klux Klan top), en dat van rechtse rotzakken als Steve Bannon en Matt Gaetz......

Wat betreft de illegale oorlogen van de VS, liet Colbert ten overvloede in zijn gesprek met Gabbard blijken dat hij die volledig steunt, ondanks het enorme aantal doden en landen die in puin achterblijven als de VS klaar is met haar grootschalige terreur tegen in feite de bevolking van de landen die het illegaal aanvalt.....

Ook de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen het bewind van Assad kwam ter sprake, waar Gabbard Colbert fijntjes liet weten dat de CIA in 2011 de 'opstand' tegen Assad heeft georganiseerd en geregisseerd en dat de oorlog van de VS in dat land niet gericht was tegen IS, maar tegen het bewind van Assad, waar ze ook de wapenleveringen aan terreurgroepen als IS en militaire training door de VS aan die terreurgroepen noemde..... 

Jammer dat ze Assad wel een dictator noemt, terwijl hij met grote meerderheid democratisch tot president werd verkozen in 2014, een verkiezing die door internationale waarnemers als eerlijk en goed werd beoordeeld...... 

Vergeet voorts niet dat onder Assad alle geloven hand in hand naast elkaar leefden, een zaak die door handelingen van de VS bijna de nek werd omgedraaid.... Gelukkig leven de teruggekeerde vluchtelingen, in de gebieden die door het reguliere Syrische leger worden gecontroleerd, weer vreedzaam naast elkaar, ongeacht het geloof dat men aanhangt......

Helaas voor Colbert, maar hij is geen partij voor Gabbard die hem flink bij de lurven had >> lezen en zien mensen!!

Colbert Smears Tulsi Gabbard To Her Face While Telling Zero Jokes

by Caitlin Johnstone

Hawaii Congresswoman and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard recently appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, where instead of the light, jokey banter about politics and who she is as a person that Democratic presidential candidates normally encounter on late night comedy programs, the show's host solemnly ran down a list of textbook beltway smears against Gabbard and made her defend them in front of his audience.

Normally when a Democratic Party-aligned politician appears on such a show, you can expect jokes about how stupid Trump is and how badly they're going to beat the Republicans, how they're going to help ordinary Americans, and maybe some friendly back-and-forth about where they grew up or something. Colbert had no time to waste on such things, however, because this was not an interview with a normal Democratic Party-aligned politician: this was a politician who has been loudly and consistently criticizing US foreign policy.

After briefly asking his guest who she is and why she's running for president, Colbert jumped right into it by immediately bringing up Syria and Assad, the primary line of attack employed against Gabbard by establishment propagandists in American mainstream media.

Colbert: Do you think the Iraq war was worth it?

Gabbard: No.

Colbert: Do you think that our involvement in Syria has been worth it?

Gabbard: No.

Colbert: Do you think that ISIS could have been defeated without our involvement and without our support of the local troops there?

Gabbard: There are two things we need to address in Syria. One is a regime change war that was first launched by the United States in 2011, covertly, led by the CIA. That is a regime change war that has continued over the years, that has increased the suffering of the Syrian people, and strengthened groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS, because the CIA was using American taxpayer dollars to provide arms and training and equipment to these terrorist groups to get them to overthrow the government. So that is a regime change war that we should not have been engaging.

Colbert: So, but if it is someone like Bashar al-Assad, who gasses his own people, or who engages in war crimes against his own people, should the United States not be involved?

Gabbard: The United States should not be intervening to overthrow these dictators and these regimes that we don't like, like Assad, like Saddam Hussein, like Gaddafi, and like Kim Jong Un. There are bad people in the world, but history has shown us that every time the United States goes in and topples these dictators we don't like, trying to end up like the world's police, we end up increasing the suffering of the people in these countries. We end up increasing the loss of life, but American lives and the lives of people in these countries. We end up undermining our own security, what to speak of the trillions of dollars of taxpayer money that's spent on these wars that we need to be using right here at home.

Like I said, this is not a normal presidential candidate. How often do you see a guest appear on a network late night talk show and talk about the CIA arming terrorists in Syria and the fact that US military interventionism is completely disastrous? It just doesn't happen. You can understand, then, why empire propagandist Stephen Colbert spent the rest of the interview informing his TV audience that Tulsi Gabbard is dangerous and poisonous.

Caitlin Johnstone  ⏳‏ @caitoz

Caitlin Johnstone  ⏳Retweeted Suzann

This was unwatchable. Colbert just went down the list of scripted Gabbard smears (Assad, David Duke) then sermonized about how US military intervention is a force for good in this world. All without telling a single joke. Late night "comedy" shows are propaganda for livestock.

Caitlin Johnstone  ⏳added,

Suzann @cmputrwiz

Colbert twice interjected the State Dept.’s line about the alleged Assad chemical attack on his own people; Tulsi then corrected him saying several of the groups, including al Qaeda & ISIS, had been trained by the US and had been reported as being a part of those alleged chemical https://twitter.com/DraftTulsi/status/1105323025489121280 …

3:33 PM - 12 Mar 2019

Colbert: You got some heat for meeting with Bashar al-Assad. Do you not consider him a war criminal? Why did you meet with that man?

Gabbard: In the pursuit of peace and security. If we are not willing to meet with adversaries, potential adversaries, in the pursuit of peace and security, the only alternative is more war. That's why I took that meeting with Assad. In pursuit of peace and security. 

Colbert: Do you believe he is a war criminal? Do you believe he gassed his own people or committed atrocities against his own people?

Gabbard: Yes. Reports have shown that that's a fact.

Colbert: So you believe the intelligence agencies on that. Because I head that you did not necessarily believe those reports.

The reason I call Colbert a propagandist and not simply a liberal empire loyalist who happens to have been elevated by billionaire media is because these are carefully constructed narratives that he is reciting, and they weren't constructed by him.

Trying to make it look to the audience as though Gabbard is in some way loyal to Assad has been a high-priority agenda of the mainstream media ever since she announced her presidential candidacy.

We saw it in her recent appearance on The View, where John McCain's sociopathic daughter called her an "Assad apologist" and demanded that Gabbard call Assad an enemy of the United States. We saw it in her recent CNN town hall, where a consultant who worked on Obama's 2008 campaign was presented as an ordinary audience member to help CNN's Dana Bash paint Gabbard's skepticism of intelligence reports about an alleged chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government as something that is weird and suspicious, instead of the only sane position in a post-Iraq invasion world. We saw it in her appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe last month, where the entire panel piled on her in outrage that she wouldn't call Assad an enemy of the United States. It's such a common propaganda talking point that the New York Times' Bari Weiss famously made a laughingstock of herself by repeating it as self-evident truth on The Joe Rogan Experience without having the faintest clue what specific facts it was meant to refer to, just because she'd heard establishment pundits saying it so much.

This is an organized smear by the mass media attempting to marry Gabbard in the eyes of the public to a Middle Eastern leader whom the propagandists have already sold as a child-murdering monster, and Colbert is participating in it here just as much as the serious news media talking heads are. It's been frustrating to watch Gabbard fold to this smear campaign by acting like it's an established fact that Assad "gases his own people" and not the hotly contested empire-serving narrative she knows it is.

Gabbard is being targeted by this smear because she challenges US political orthodoxy on military violence (the glue which holds the empire together), so no amount of capitulation will keep them from trying to prevent the public from trusting her words.

(de video in het volgende Twitterbericht kan ik niet overnemen, zie hiervoor het origineel)

Rania Khalek‏Verified account @RaniaKhalek

The journalist interrogating Tulsi seems to believe that US forces in Syria are fighting Assad. Tulsi corrects her, says those troops were deployed there to fight ISIS. These people don’t even know what’s happening in the places they want the US to occupy

 Tom Elliott

2:11

640K views

8:10 AM - 6 Feb 2019

"I don't know whether America should be the policemen of the world," Colbert said after Gabard defended her position.

"It is my opinion that we should not be," Gabbard replied, causing Colbert to launch into a stuffy, embarrassing sermon on the virtues of interventionism and US hegemony that would make Bill Kristol blush.

"If we are not, though, nature abhors a vacuum, and if we are not involved in international conflicts, or trying to quell international conflicts, certainly the Russians and the Chinese will fill that vacuum. And we will step away from the world stage in a significant way that might destabilize the world, because the United States, however flawed, is a force for good in the world in my opinion. Would you agree with that?"

Again, this is a comedy show.

Gabbard explained that in order to be a force for good in the world the United States has to actually do good, which means not raining fire upon every nation it dislikes all the time. Colbert responded by reading off his blue index card to repeat yet another tired anti-Gabbard smear.

"You've gotten some fans in the Trump supporter world: David Duke, Steve Bannon, and, uh, Matt, uh, Gaetz, is that his name? Matt Gaetz? What do you make of how much they like you?"

This one is particularly vile, partly because Gabbard has repeatedly and unequivocally denounced David Duke, who has a long-established and well-known history of injecting himself into the drama of high-profile conversations in order to maintain the illusion of relevance, and partly because it's a completely irrelevant point that is brought up solely for the purpose of marrying Tulsi Gabbard's name to a former Ku Klux Klan leader. Colbert only brought this up (and made Newsweek totally squee) because he wanted to assist in that marrying. The fact that there are distasteful ideologies which also happen to oppose US interventionism for their own reasons does not change the undeniable fact that US military interventionism is consistently disastrous and never helpful and robs the US public of resources that are rightfully theirs.

This interview was easily Colbert's most blatant establishment rim job I've ever seen, surpassing even the time he corrected his own audience when they cheered at James Comey's firing to explain to them that Comey is a good guy now and they're meant to like him. Colbert's show is blatant propaganda for human livestock, and the fact that this is what American "comedy" shows look like now is nauseating.

When Tulsi Gabbard first announced her candidacy I predicted that she'd have the narrative control engineers scrambling all over themselves to kill her message, and it's been even more spectacular than I imagined. I don't agree with everything she says and does, but by damn this woman is shaking up the establishment narrative matrix more than anybody else right now. She's certainly keeping it interesting.

__________________________

Thanks for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin Johnstone | March 13, 2019 at 12:38 pm |

Tags: Colbert, Late Show, MSM, Politics, propaganda, Tulsi Gabbard | Categories: Article, News | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1AH

====================================

Zie ook: