Posts
It is always a sight to watch the New York Times slant the news to suit Israeli imperatives.
Brazil's president Rousseff gave an important and diplomatically arresting address to the General Assembly, in which she denounced U.S. electronic snooping and called upon the world to erect electronic barriers to the overweening power of the US imperial security apparatus.
In what the Guardian characterised as a "scathing" and "blistering" speech, Rousseff denounced U.S. snooping as an affront to the Comity of Nations and a violation of international law. She also spoke out, for the civil rights of ordinary people.
Brazil's president Rousseff gave an important and diplomatically arresting address to the General Assembly, in which she denounced U.S. electronic snooping and called upon the world to erect electronic barriers to the overweening power of the US imperial security apparatus.
In what the Guardian characterised as a "scathing" and "blistering" speech, Rousseff denounced U.S. snooping as an affront to the Comity of Nations and a violation of international law. She also spoke out, for the civil rights of ordinary people.
"As many other Latin Americans, I fought against authoritarianism and censorship and I cannot but defend, in an uncompromising fashion, the right to privacy of individuals and the sovereignty of my country"
Nor was this simply a Brazilian concern. As reported by RT News
US relations with all of Latin America have recently soured. In addition to Brazil, Mexico, Bolivia and Venezuela have all voiced anger with the US over the NSA’s surveillance of their countries this year. Bolivia has been especially bitter.
Even the USophile BBC carried the report of Rousseff's speech on its front page
And the Times? On the Times... it was nowhere to be found. Not on the front page, not on the World page,
not even on the America's page ...
until the very bottom in small print, after stories on drug hauls and the like.
In short, the news was suppressed, albeit with the usual and tiresome buried, fine-print exception designed to give a colour of good faith to hypocricy.
Of course as the US flagship propaganda organ, it stands to reason that the Times would wish to suppress how disgusted -- desde las pelotas hasta las cejas -- the rest of the hemisphere is with United States bullying arrogance -- or prepotencia as it is called in Spanish.
But of equal note is what the Times considers to be "fit to print" --
Of course as the US flagship propaganda organ, it stands to reason that the Times would wish to suppress how disgusted -- desde las pelotas hasta las cejas -- the rest of the hemisphere is with United States bullying arrogance -- or prepotencia as it is called in Spanish.
But of equal note is what the Times considers to be "fit to print" --
Iran, Iran, Iran, and more Iran.
Now Iran's alleged nuclear arms programme is certainly not not news. It does indirectly affect U.S. interests to the extent that any proliferation of nuclear arms impacts U.S. interests and the stability of world. As indeed, Israel's "illegal" (non-signatory) acquisition of nuclear weapons has destabilised the Middle East.
But Iran's possible acquisition of nuclear weapons is really only an urgent concern to Israel whose destabilising and imbalanced nuclear hegemony in the region is upset by a challenge.
The true interests of the United States, from a national perspective would be to make the Middle East nuclear free and to induce Israel to destroy it's nuclear weapons.
But Iran's possible acquisition of nuclear weapons is really only an urgent concern to Israel whose destabilising and imbalanced nuclear hegemony in the region is upset by a challenge.
The true interests of the United States, from a national perspective would be to make the Middle East nuclear free and to induce Israel to destroy it's nuclear weapons.
Oh but mum on that. Instead endless dross on Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran.
Qui bono?
