Thursday, March 03, 2016

TimesWarp:
"The New York Times serves as Benjamin Netanyahu’s stenographer in a story this week that reports his latest rant against critics of Israeli policy, repeating his claims at length but making no attempt to verify or even question the distortions in his response.

The Israeli prime minister was reacting to comments by British Prime Minister David Cameron, who criticized Israel’s settlement construction in and around East Jerusalem during a session in parliament Wednesday, saying that he found the situation 'genuinely shocking.' The Times, which made no mention of Cameron’s remarks at the time, now presents us with an article by Isabel Kershner framed around the official Israeli response.

Her story, 'Benjamin Netanyahu Rebukes David Cameron for Criticizing Israel,' gives much space to the prime minister’s assertions and allows him the final word. It also quotes Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat and lets the comments of both men to stand without challenge." 

-->This isn't really news, but The NYT has long employed Israeli propagandists to write news about Israel and Palestine. Read more about Isabel Kershner's distortion of the news on TimesWarp.

———

Mother Jones:
"Hillary Clinton Oversaw US Arms Deals to Clinton Foundation Donors. An investigation finds that countries that gave to the foundation saw an increase in State Department-approved arms sales.

In 2011, the State Department cleared an enormous arms deal: Led by Boeing, a consortium of American defense contractors would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns over the kingdom's troublesome human rights record. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, Saudi Arabia had contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, and just two months before the jet deal was finalized, Boeing donated $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to an International Business Times investigation released Tuesday.

The Saudi transaction is just one example of nations and companies that had donated to the Clinton Foundation seeing an increase in arms deals while Hillary Clinton oversaw the State Department. IBT found that between October 2010 and September 2012, State approved $165 billion in commercial arms sales to 20 nations that had donated to the foundation, plus another $151 billion worth of Pentagon-brokered arms deals to 16 of those countries—a 143 percent increase over the same time frame under the Bush Administration. The sales boosted the military power of authoritarian regimes such as Qatar, Algeria, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman, which, like Saudi Arabia, had been criticized by the department for human rights abuses."

-->Our newspaper of record somehow missed this story of the gross corruption that fattened Hillary's war chest. Weapons sales for campaign contributions is a big story, and one we will all hear from Trump during the general election. That is why Hillary's candidacy is taylor made for an outsider willing to expose the Washington's corrupt oligarchy. 

———

Common Dreams:
"A new Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Bernie Sanders ahead of Hillary Clinton by six points nationwide, his biggest lead in the presidential race so far. The survey, released Tuesday [Feb 27], shows Sanders polling at 41.7 percent among 998 likely Democratic voters, while Clinton got 35.5 percent.

As Salon points out, Reuters' daily tracking feature 'illustrates that Sanders has led Clinton nationally for a majority of days in February.'

The figures come just ahead of the Democratic primary in South Carolina on February 27, where Sanders is still trailing the former secretary of state. According to Bloomberg, the senator has 200 paid staffers on the ground in South Carolina, making it his biggest state operation thus far."

-->No mention of this poll by The NYT, and the newspaper used its "Opinion Blog" to bury a Fox poll severals days before that showed Sanders ahead of Clinton nationwide. The "liberal" NYT? Not when it comes to endangering Wall Street or US weapons makers, Hillary's major sources of campaign funding.

No comments: