Robert Parry, patriot/journalist extraordinaire, under attack on DU

[grasswire]

Absolutely shameful that DU members apparently ignorant of Parry's body of work and history are attacking him viciously today.

From wikipedia:

Parry joined the Associated Press in 1974, moving to its Washington bureau in 1977. After the 1980 presidential election he was assigned to its Special Assignment (investigative reporting) unit, where he began working on Central America.[1] In 1982 Parry noted the treatment received by the New York Times' Raymond Bonner, who was vilified and pushed out after reporting on the El Mozote massacre, an incident deeply unhelpful to the US government's effort to support the El Salvador government.[1]

Parry was awarded the George Polk Award for National Reporting in 1984 for his work with the Associated Press on Iran-Contra, where he broke the story that the Central Intelligence Agency had provided an assassination manual to the Nicaraguan Contras (Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare).[2][3] In mid-1985 he wrote the first article on Oliver North's involvement in the affair, and, together with Brian Barger, in late 1985 he broke the CIA and Contras cocaine trafficking in the US scandal,[4] helping to spark Senator John Kerry's interest in investigating Iran-Contra.[5] The Associated Press had refused to publish the drug trafficking story, and only relented when its Spanish-language newswire service accidentally published a translation.[3] Barger and Parry continued to press their investigation of North even as most of the media declined to follow it up, eventually publishing a story in mid-1986, based on 24 sources, which led to a Congressional committee asking questions of North. After North denied the allegations, Barger was pushed out of Associated Press, and Parry was unable to publish any further follow-ups to the story until after Eugene Hasenfus' plane (Corporate Air Services HPF821) was shot down in Nicaragua in October 1986.[1] After finding out that his boss had been "conferring with [Oliver] North on a regular basis", Parry left AP in 1987 to join Newsweek.[3] At Newsweek an early story concerned United States National Security Council staff being ordered by the White House to cover up aspects of the Iran-Contra affair, which Newsweek, under great political and media pressure, asked Parry to retract, despite his source holding firm. Parry refused, and he eventually left in Newsweek in 1990.[6]

In August 1990 PBS' Frontline asked Parry to work on the October Surprise conspiracy theory,[1] leading to Parry making several documentaries for the program,[6][7][8] broadcast in 1991 and 1992. He continued to pursue it after a Congressional investigation had concluded the story was untrue, turning his Frontline research into a book published in 1993,[9] and in 1994 he unearthed "a treasure-trove of government documents" supporting the theory,[6] "showing that the [Congressional] task force suppressed incriminating CIA testimony and excluded evidence of big-money links between wealthy Republicans and Carter's Iranian intermediary, Cyrus Hashemi".[3] In 1996 Salon.com wrote about his work on the theory, saying that "his continuing quest to unearth the facts of the alleged October Surprise has made him persona non grata among those who worship at the altar of conventional wisdom."[6]

When journalist Gary Webb published his newspaper series Dark Alliance in 1996 alleging that the Reagan administration had allowed the Contras to smuggle cocaine into the US to make money for their efforts, Parry supported Webb amidst heavy criticism from the media.[10]
Consortium News
See also: Consortium News

In November 1995, Parry established Consortium News as an online ezine dedicated to investigative journalism, describing it in 2004 as "a home for important, well-reported stories that weren't welcome in the O.J. Simpson-obsessed, conventional-wisdom-driven national news media of that time". From 2000 to 2004, he also worked for the financial wire service Bloomberg.[11]

Subjects of Parry's articles and reports on Consortium News include the presidency of George W. Bush,[12] the career of Army general and Bush Secretary of State Colin Powell (with Norman Solomon),[13] the October Surprise controversy of the 1980 election,[14] the Nicaraguan contra-cocaine investigation,[15] the efforts to impeach President Clinton,[16] right-wing terrorism in Latin America,[17] the political influence of Sun Myung Moon,[18] mainstream American media imbalance,[19] United States Secretary of Defense Robert Gates,[20] the presidency of Barack Obama,[21] the influence of Sarah Palin,[22] efforts to rewrite history[23] as well as international stories.[24]
Books

Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, The Press & Project Truth (1992)
Trick or Treason: The October Surprise Mystery (1993)
The October Surprise X-Files: The Hidden Origins of the Reagan-Bush Era (1996)
Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq (2004)
Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush (2007)
America's Stolen Narrative: From Washington and Madison to Nixon, Reagan and the Bushes to Obama (2012)

[Mass]

1. K&R for Parry

Is he attacked because of his report yesterday of what he was hearing from some people in the intelligence community?

If yes, this is crazy. He put so many caveats there that this should be an example for all these reporters reporting rumors as facts.

[grasswire]

3. Team Dear Leader does not approve.

The insults against Parry today are shameful and ignorant.

I doubt that Obama himself would appreciate the claptrap and propaganda being waged against Parry today.

[nashville_brook]

24. Results of your Jury Service

Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Mon Jul 21, 2014, 02:48 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Team Dear Leader does not approve.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5270912

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Kim Jong Il was Dear Leader. Kim Jong Un is now Dear Leader. Comparing Obama to the leaders of North Korea is over the top and inappropriate on a purportedly Democratic website.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jul 21, 2014, 02:54 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Wow, that was a stretch. I didn't get the comparison of Obama to Kim Jung anyone at all.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: So sick of the cranks and crackpots, hide it.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Really now-- alerting on this?

Get a life.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Looking for the insult but cannot find it.

[sabrina 1]

53. Good jury decision. Apparently most DUers know Parry, we have a small

group who are thrashing journalists, whistle blowers and even good Democrats here. I'm not sure why considering their total disdain for people like Parry they continue to come here. It IS a Democratic Forum where truth has always been more important than anything else for most people. They certainly aren't changing any minds, so what is the point?

[nashville_brook]

63. journalistic denialism -- like climate denialism

[sabrina 1]

90. Yes, fear of the truth. It is an old and sad reality. I don't think they've missed a single

journalist so far to try to smear. I would love to know who THEY trust, they never say, just attack some of this country's most credible journalists.

[rhett o rick]

95. Often the truth is too difficult to deal with. It's soo much easier to use scapegoats and

live in denial.

Authoritarianism plays a big part. The "reality group" wouldn't believe it if George Bush (someone else's authoritarian leader) said it, but if their authoritarian leader says it, they fall in line and lash out at all that are skeptical. Skepticism is an important aspect of being politically liberal. Those here that claim to know "reality" claim they are liberals but lack skepticism (at least when it involves their authoritarian leaders, e.g., Gen Clapper).

[nashville_brook]

141. spitballing -- authoritarianism seems to be a part of it

There's also something that I'm trying to put my finger on that seems a little different than straight-up authoritarianism. It's a kind of irrational sports team-like fealty. the home team can do no wrong, or else there's a risk of *causing a losing streak.*

the problem is that policy-making is not a sport. it's not an entertainment. it's the decision making process that determines the quality of people's lives. By treating policy debate like a sports match we're allowing people to be reduced to footballs.

[rhett o rick]

142. I see it as part of authoritarianism. The USofA is strong in the bully culture.

We have bullies everywhere. How many articles do we see where a child is bullied at school and the school punishes the victim. Bullies often get to be the bosses at work because we have a "kick ass and take names" culture. As a nation we have bullied other nations since we were founded. In DU there are those here that think it's their duty to keep DU clean of bad elements and they justify their bully actions by claiming "he/she deserved it". That's always the justification for bullying. The ends justify the means.

[nashville_brook]

144. omg, that's it -- Bullying Culture.

i was casting about, making it way more difficult than it is. You are spot-on.

[woo me with science]

67. Good jury.

[nashville_brook]

74. totally bad faith alert.

[rhett o rick]

105. IMO alerts are being used more and more to promote a POV. I think alerters and jurors

shouldn't be anonymous.

[SidDithers]

2. ...

Sid

[rhett o rick]

84. Since you don't say much, I assume you are siding with the neocons and declaring Russia as the new

enemy numbero uno.

[SidDithers]

85. Assume any fucking thing you want...

Sid

[rhett o rick]

92. No please tell us how you feel on this issue. I hate to guess from your emoticons. nm

[SidDithers]

94. I don't think Robert Parry should be exempt from criticism, which is what the OP apparently wants.nt

Sid

[zappaman]

96. A real Democrat knows that everyone can be criticized.

Why would a Democrat say some people are above criticism?
Makes no sense.


But the good news is GD hosting is just about to get a little better...

[SidDithers]

103. I think I'd say that GD Hosting is about to get exponentially better...

Bill is a fantastic, no nonsense DUer who can be counted on to fairly and equitably enforce the GD SOP.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

108. Are you relishing the thought of more alerts and locks? Seems that's what you like most.

Trying to push your POV by locking opposing discussions. Well, best of luck to you and the reality group's quest to lock and hide.

[SidDithers]

109. I'm relishing the thought of GD Hosts who aren't opposed to the idea of locks on principle...

I'm relishing the thought of GD Hosts who do what they've volunteered to do.

I'm relishing the thought that we might have GD Hosts who won't be an automatic leave on everything that gets alerted, because they think posters can just ignore threads that they think are off-topic.

I'm relishing the thought that we might have GD Hosts who think all alerts should be fairly considered, and not dismissed, ignored or ridiculed based on the identity of the alerter or the poster whose thread is being alerted.

That's the thought I'm relishing. And GD Hosting will move significantly in that direction when Bill769 comes on board.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

121. Of course your alert, lock and hide quest is for the good of DU if only DU would appreciate it.

I trust that William769 will do a good job and not bow to your attempts to lock discussions that don't agree with your world view.

Some here relish the power to lock and hide while the Admins make it clear that the job of a host is to leave as much as possible.

I think that using criticism of hosts to push a POV is low.

[G_j]

124. I've seen it

said person, posted numerious snarky replies on one my threads. Then 'someone' found that one of the links I posted in a reply to theirs, had some anti-vax articles somewhere, and I was locked out of my own thread. pretty low...

[SidDithers]

127. Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly what happened...

One of your posts was hidden or locked because your link "had some anti-vax articles somewhere".



Sid

[G_j]

130. the first link was from Mother Jones

pointing out that the author of an article posted in the thread, wrote hit pieces for big-ag. The second link had similar information.
I had no idea there was anti-vax stuff at that link. You might have brought that to my attention and I would have deleted it, but better to try get me locked out eh??

[SidDithers]

131. Here's the post...

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5227055

You linked to "The Refusers" blog. I would have voted to hide it too, had I been on the jury. You link to dumbass CT sites like that one, you take your chances, as far as I'm concerned.

Sid

[G_j]

132. ever hear of asking a person to remove a link?

[zappaman]

122. Refreshing!

[Bobbie Jo]

128. Hear, hear

Especially this:

I'm relishing the thought that we might have GD Hosts who think all alerts should be fairly considered, and not dismissed, ignored or ridiculed based on the identity of the alerter or the poster whose thread is being alerted.

The constant editorializing was completely inappropriate. Talk about pushing a POV.....

[MrMickeysMom]

110. Jesus H Christ...

Un-fucking-believable…

[SidDithers]

111. Wah...nt

Sid

[MrMickeysMom]

112. Would that be your only word on the subject?

You have made that sound a great number of times in the past, Sid.

Un-fucking-real.

[SidDithers]

113. FFS. Wah...

Is that better?

You think your reply deserves more?

Sid

[MrMickeysMom]

116. I didn't think my reply deserved anything from you...

History dictates never to expect any real response from you, anyway.

[rhett o rick]

107. It's sad that you and your "Reality Group" have to stoop to such childish attempts at insults.

I guess it's what you do when you have no opinions but snark here in DU.

[zappaman]

115. The "reality" group?

The people that know RT is a propaganda tool of Putin?
Proud to be in that group, Rick.
Although, as a host, you put me in a different group, right?
The group whose alerts hosts should ignore because...because why again?

[rhett o rick]

126. You said you were the spokesperson for the "Reality Group" or "Reality Community" whatever the name

is. "The people that know..." As yes the people that know what's the best for the rest of us. If you hate RT that's cool, but please don't try to censor what the rest of us see. Does your "Reality Group" think they will save us from the bad information?

[zappaman]

129. Never claimed to be a spokesperson for anybody, Rick.

I think you have me confused with hosts who ignore people by claiming they are in groups.

[rhett o rick]

99. I agree and would love to see you provide criticism beyond emoticons. I think it's healthy

to hear both sides, without ridicule of course. I don't don't think it's healthy when one side wants to shut down discussion via ridicule, hides and locks.

[conservaphobe]

4. He could learn a thing or two about journalistic integrity from:

Liz Wahl and Sara Firth...

Two brave women who couldn't bear being mouthpieces for the Russian government, ripped up their Kremlin-produced scripts and told Putin where to stick it.

If only more were that brave.

[Mass]

5. Many people could learn from him.

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

Except if we are talking about two different pieces, he was reporting about what he heard. Actually, the idea the intelligence community may question the CW even for a moment makes me feel better. Remember the Maine.

[conservaphobe]

8. "What he heard"

Maybe he should listen less to the voices in his head and more to the corroborated facts.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

9. Did you believe Colin Powell's --

presentation at the UN? Those were "corroborated facts" at the time, too.

[whatchamacallit]

10. The authoritarian mind is impervious to points like this

Good try tho.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

12. Gotta school the noobs.

10+ years of being challenged on DU has done wonders for me.

[jeff47]

42. When your argument is "he's more truthful than Colin Powell"

then you are making a shitty argument.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

50. Uh, the only agurment I am making is -

"Facts" are tricky things that can be made out of whole cloth. BushCo's "factual" claims about WMD were pure, unadulterated bullshit. The current "factual" claims we are seeing re: Russia's involvement of the shoot-down may also be. I have no idea of the Truth at this point.

[jeff47]

54. Which is exactly the argument I said you were making

Last edited Mon Jul 21, 2014, 05:11 PM - Edit history (1)

You're claiming "These other people lied, so we have to believe this story".

I have no idea of the Truth at this point.

Largely because the goal appears to be contrarian.

So far, we have this information:
Separatists shot it down Pros:
-Separatists claimed responsibility until they found out it was an airliner.
-Missile was launched from separatist territory. It doesn't have the range to be fired from outside their territory.
-Separatists are preventing investigators from getting to the crash site, and taking bodies at gunpoint. Why protect the Ukrainian government if the government shot it down?

Separatists shot it down Cons:
-It's not easy to operate a Buk SAM launcher. Would likely require some training. However, there could be separatists that used to be in the USSR's military and got training long ago.

Ukraine shot it down Pros:
-Ukrainians are in the general area.
-Ukrainians officially own Buk SAM launchers.

Ukraine shot it down Cons:
-No reported deployments of Ukrainian SAMs, since the separatists don't have aircraft
-Getting to the right location to fire would have required a large military operation to push deep into rebel territory, and then retreat. No reports of such an offensive.

Russia shot it down Pros:
-Russia is in the general area
-Russia is giving aid to the separatists.
-Russia owns lots and lots and lots of Buk launchers.

Russia shot it down Cons:
-They aren't that stupid - this incident would put Russian troops officially on Ukrainian soil, creating a massive international incident in addition to the incident caused by the shoot-down.

IMO the only story that makes sense is the separatists got a hold of a Buk launcher, and people who were poorly trained or trained many years ago accidentally shot down the plane. None of the doubts raised by people such as Parry solve the problem of the separatists blocking investigators from the site.

[GeorgeGist]

58. As I am sure you are aware ...

Colin knew they were bullshit.

[rhett o rick]

81. Only the idiots believed Powell. nm

[Iggo]

101. Anybody with a brain knew that was bullshit.

[Billy Budd]

17. we know were they are

The WMD are in Tikrit North and west ...somewhere around LOL

[sabrina 1]

91. Parry has sources within the government. You would know that if you knew anything at all about this

most excellent journalist. Like Sy Hersch, good journalists like Parry are often contacted by sources inside the government who themselves cannot openly express their concerns.

Parry is one of the best and the proof is the attempts to smear him. They only go after the best.

[KittyWampus]

120. He HAD some sources in the Govt. And for all you know he's being feed misinformation intentionally.

The stupid crap he posted during the Syrian crisis a few months ago proves this.

[sabrina 1]

123. No, he has as does Hersch and other well respected journalists. There are people

in our government, as we have learned, who are deeply concerned about what is going on and some reach out to trusted reporters, like Parry and Hersch because they themselves cannot speak openly without dire consequences, see our treatment of Whistle Blowers.

[treestar]

135. Sources in the government?

Now they are to be trusted?

[sabrina 1]

137. Yes, not all of them are on board with our disastrous foreign policies.

Those are the people who contact journalists they trust, like Sy Hersch.

[Billy Budd]

13. they might be CIA assets

who were placed in a Russian Media center...or is that out of the question ? I take Robert Parry over those two....
The Mighty Wurlitzer

Hey I wish Judith Miller had some integrity but she has none...helped facilitate propaganda for war...

[randome]

14. They might be giants.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Billy Budd]

16. This is what is causing the Robert Parry thing

What I’ve been told by one source, who has provided accurate information on similar matters in the past, is that U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms.

The source said CIA analysts were still not ruling out the possibility that the troops were actually eastern Ukrainian rebels in similar uniforms but the initial assessment was that the troops were Ukrainian soldiers. There also was the suggestion that the soldiers involved were undisciplined and possibly drunk, since the imagery showed what looked like beer bottles scattered around the site, the source said.

http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/20/what-did-us-spy-satellites-see-in-ukraine/

[jeff47]

45. And a half-second thought would have demonstrated

that this source has a problem.

The separatists are protecting the crash site from investigators. They are refusing to turn over the bodies. Why on earth would they do that to protect the Ukrainian government? If the government had shot the plane down, they'd want to discredit the government and assist in the investigation.

That's the giant red flag on this story. Add the technical problems and it becomes abundantly clear this story isn't true.

[Billy Budd]

133. and the Dutch have the Black boxes

Crash victims' remains reach Ukraine-held city
10:29 AM - By SERGEI CHUZAVKOV and JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG KHARKIV, Ukraine (AP) — The remains of the victims of the Malaysia Airlines crash arrived in territory held by the Ukrainian government on Tuesday on their way to the Netherlands, after delays and haphazard ... (AP-Excite)

[FrodosPet]

86. What brand were they drinking?

Was it Chernihivske or Zhigulevskoye?

That should nail it down.

[Billy Budd]

25. This is journalistic Integrity right here

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rula-jebreal-msnbc-israel-coverage

MSNBC Contributor Slams Network For Pro-Israel Coverage: 'We Are Ridiculous!'

[sabrina 1]

75. Are you serious? The right wing plant, urged on by her right wing buddies? You've got to be

kidding to even try to compare her, a lightweight if ever there was one. There are a few more of them we'll be hearing from soon. She was totally exposed which is probably why we haven't heard much from her since. Thankfully.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

6. This is the NEW DU --

I was watching several news casts over the weekend and I saw several former spooks/military intel guys say that they were not immediately buying what was being sold. They found the amazing plethora of very specific and timely "evidence" being supplied about the shoot-down to be something that raised suspicions. Parry is simply reporting what is being said.

I think Putin's a shitbag -- but I am deeply suspicious about the "evidence" as it currently stands, and am waiting on further reporting from sources I trust. Like Parry.

[woo me with science]

7. +1 Propaganda Central.

[840high]

41. Oh yes.

[m-lekktor]

27. yep, one can be skeptical of the official story AND not like Putin at the same time.

the simplistic binary thinkers believe if you don't believe the official story you are a Putin lover.

[HooptieWagon]

39. Yep. Some DUers are unable to grasp the notion that there's lying from both sides.

[Adrahil]

89. What is so suspicious?

I mean, we have a very politically charged conflict in Southeast Ukraine. You;re surprised that we have a ton of intelligence assets focused in on the area?

Heck, I'd be very surprised if we didn't. In fact, if I were Obama, and they couldn't answer some basic questions like "where did that missile come from?" Someone would be getting fired. We pour billions into intelligence. They better be able to do something besides spy on my freakin' internet traffic.

[Capt. Obvious]

11. Is he posting here?

Is there some thread(s) bashing him?

[dipsydoodle]

15. Largely carried out by those who default to the use of childish names.

.

[FBaggins]

18. He may have been a journalist at one point... but that's not the current reality.

He has become a mouthpiece for russian propaganda.

Nothing in his prior work excuses the almost daily defense he's shilling. That's not "journalism" by any reasonable definition.

[zeemike]

31. Daily defense?...where do you get that?

Most of what I see is "evidence" that Putin did it and Putin is a poopy head...Kiev is good, Russia bad.
And when I see it done like that I remember Iraq war one and two...babies taken from incubators, drawings of chemical weapon plants and threats of mushroom clouds...

How many times can they fool us?...apperently there is no limit...because a sizable number of us just accept things without ever questioning it...in other words suckers.

[CJCRANE]

35. I agree. We've seen this (neocon) movie before.

It doesn't end well.

Let's not repeat it.

[zeemike]

43. But the corporate neocons get the money

And that is a good ending in their view.

[FBaggins]

36. Three days since the event... three direct mouthpiece for Putin articles.

That works out to daily by my count.

[zeemike]

40. And how may saying Putin did it?

Dozens maybe?...and I don't watch TV but my guess is they are all over it with Russia hate.
But three stories that question the official story is just too much for those that want to believe...they must be censored, and all media that is not our MSM must be discredited.

Now where have I seen this before?...oh I know Gulf war 1 and 2, and all the stories that came out of it...right down to not showing the returning caskets.

Yep they want cold war 2...and maybe some hot proxy wars to suck up as many tax dollars as they can.

[FBaggins]

44. I'd imagine most of them

"Journalism" doesn't consist in making sure that every reality is challenged. The evidence pretty clearly points to who shot the plane down (they were even taking credit for it up until they realized that it was a civilian plane).

But three stories that question the official story

They aren't just questioning the official story... they're inventing a new finctional one.

they must be censored

Apparently you don't know what that word means.

It's the folks in Russia who are getting the censored version.

[zeemike]

49. So you have declared it a reality then?

Or did someone else declare it a reality and you just repeat it?

Funny to me that we can declare it a reality 3 days after the incident and declare all information to the contrary off limits for discussion...If you want to see Pravda just look at us.

And a reporter reporting what he learned is not creating a fictional one...unless you have already passed judgment with little evidence.
And again this is deja voe all over again...the rush to judgment with intimidation on anyone who says wait a miniute...and this time they got liberals doing it.

Yep, we will have our cold war, and our proxy wars and if the truth ever comes out they will just say my bad, and do it all over again, because we are suckers.

[rhett o rick]

83. You are making this way too hard. Start with the premise that "Russia is Bad" and go from there.

Then you believe the media that supports that and declare it's REALITY. Funny how much trouble philosophers have with figuring out reality. They should just ask the neocons.

Empires must have their wars. Problem is that our empire is almost dead. Too bad we can't sell our 10 or 11 nuclear carriers and feed our children.

[zeemike]

97. Well of course you are right.

Start with the conclusion and make the facts fit it...all philosophers know that is the best way to do it.
But sell our precious nuclear carriers?...what a tragedy that would be...we need more because we still have a neocon president that does not have one named after him...W...and if Obama plays ball he might have one too.

[navarth]

19. I support Consortium News

And I can't imagine why someone would be bashing Robert Parry. He's one of them that walk the walk, like Chris Hedges or Jeremy Schahill.

[grasswire]

20. I expect they will go after Bill Moyers next...

...on something or other. No shame. No shame.

[navarth]

22. I probably shouldn't wonder why

but I can't help it.

Anybody that reads a thread like this oughta check out Robert Parry IMO. He's always impressed me as a right guy.

[proReality]

21. K&R

Parry is one of the best out there trying to get the truth out.

[navarth]

23. So what did he to that pissed people off? I haven't seen anything.

maybe I shouldn't ask...

[JustAnotherGen]

26. No - go ahead and ask

I have no idea what the OP is referencing. . .

[SidDithers]

28. Robert Parry is going gaga for Putin here in this thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025268517

And the OP here felt it was necessary to rise to his defense with this "Leave Parry alone!!" effort.

Sid

[JustAnotherGen]

30. Thanks Sid

[SidDithers]

32. Happy to help...

Sid

[Octafish]

143. What did Parry write that was not true?

What a strange thing to write: If there's nothing wrong, there is nothing gaga, is there SidDithers of DU?

[FBaggins]

29. I don't think that anyone is "pissed off"

They're just noticing the energy he's putting in to defending the Russians.

Just read his last few articles (and then look back over the last couple months on Ukraine)... he might as well be taking the RT propaganda pieces and swapping paragraphs around.

[stupidicus]

33. point me in their direction

he has more intelligence and integity than the lot of them

He's as honest as any that ever used a typewriter or keyboard

[PoliticalPothead]

34. These are the same people who relentlessly attack Greenwald.

They seem to dislike anyone who reports facts which are unfavorable to the current administration. I've learned that if the usual suspects are attacking a source, that means it's most likely a good source.

[Spazito]

37. LOL! Hyperbole much?

"patriot/journalist extraordinaire"

When one has to use hyper hyperbole to try and make a point, the point becomes ludicrous on it's face.

As to criticism of journalists, media, bloggers, you name it, DU does it all the time, from all points of view and to be outraged about it is laughable, to say the least, imo.

[totodeinhere]

38. So because of his past body of work, and I have no doubt it's outstanding, we are not allowed to

disagree with him on anything? Come on now. Disagreeing is not attacking.

[countingbluecars]

46. Many good people have been

"under attack" on DU at one time or another. Some you agree with, some you don't.

[Caretha]

72. When this journalist

was compared in another thread to rw rags & ct and Alex Jones....I'd call that under attack. What would you call it?

Here. Here's a link...you decide if you think this is an attack or not. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025268517#post132

[The Magistrate]

47. Indeed, Sir: He Has Abandoned All Pretense Of Journalism, And Become A Third-Rate Op-Ed Woo Pedlar

It is uncomfortable to watch someone sink so low, like watching a relative succumb to crack or gambling, but it happens in life, and it is happening to Mr. Parry before our eyes over these past few months.

[jeff47]

48. And the NYT was once a respectable news organization.

Past is past. It doesn't guarantee the future.

Parry's current coverage is tainted by an apparent desire to be contrarian. So he publishes "questions" and "sources" while not literally claiming they are true.

The problem is Parry is ignoring a massive problem with his angle of attack: The separatists are keeping investigators away from the crash site, and taking the bodies at gunpoint.

If the Ukrainian government shot down the plane, why would the separatists protect the Ukrainian government like that? They'd want the international pressure on the government. Instead, they're taking the international pressure onto themselves. That makes no sense if Parry's story is true.

And that's just the biggest problem with his story. There's other problems such as the Ukrainian and Russian camo pattern being very similar, so you wouldn't be able to tell nationality from a satellite. Especially when the separatists are wearing whatever is handy. There's also the problem of we wouldn't be able to resolve beer bottles, especially when looking at a very broad area. And we had no reason to look at this SAM site before the launch. There's the problem where the separatists claimed responsibility up until they figured out it was a civilian plane. There's the problem of the Ukrainians have no reason to deploy SAMs, because the separatists don't have aircraft - and there are no reported deployments. There's the problem that launching from separatist territory would have required a large invasion, followed by a large retreat. Neither of which were mentioned by the separatists or civilians in the area.

Given what happened in Parry's Syria coverage, I expect he'll hide behind "I was just asking questions" when this story proves to be utterly false.

[Shivering Jemmy]

51. Make me care

No matter how good his sources have been the laws of physics don't change to make them credible in this instance.

[PeaceNikki]

52. Where is he being "viciously attacked"?

[jeff47]

55. This thread didn't go as well as the OP hoped

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025268517

[PeaceNikki]

59. Calling that "vicious attacks" is being a bit melodramatic.

[jeff47]

61. Well, when you call them "vicious attacks" you don't have to address the criticism. (nt)

[rhett o rick]

114. And I suppose this is what you call "criticism": "Even when propping up an evil fuck like

like Putin." or "He has become a mouthpiece for russian propaganda. " or " he's shilling."

The anti-Russian neocons dont like him because he isn't falling in line with the "build-up". Skepticism isn't allowed and we all must hate the Russians.

[jeff47]

119. Golly, it's too bad 95% of that thread doesn't have such comments.

Otherwise, you'd have a point.

[greatauntoftriplets]

56. Apparently, criticism now equals "vicious attacks"...

when it's against someone the OP likes, even when that someone is in the tank for Putin.

[PeaceNikki]

62. the words "attack", "abuse" and "harass" are overused here for melodrama.

[greatauntoftriplets]

64. Yep.

[archaic56]

57. wrong to attack Robert Parry

Those who do not want human rights for all have gone to great lengths to divde and conquer the left using .. dubious money from unknown nefarious sources. Those of us online who have sustained our own attacks.. condemn this. You want to be a pawn for the dirty money side of things, that is between you and your source.. To go after folks, who are after all, good folks is to prove which side you are on.

What someone thinks or says.. doesn't affect you live and let live.. that is the DEmocratic way.. all others ways are of another source
Besides, for exposing North, I think the man should be given a medal

[frazzled]

60. Isn't criticism allowed here?

It seems the very people who so often profess their god-given right to criticize, say, a president (which of course they are welcome to do; even as others are also free to criticize their criticisms) are the same ones who are crying foul about criticisms of Robert Parry.

Whazzup with that? Criticisms are fair game for discussion. Dispute the content of the criticisms, but not peoples' right to criticize.

Alternative moral: you can dish it out but you can't take it.

[Johonny]

68. +1

[Major Hogwash]

69. Nyet!!!

As all the Putinistas know already.

If Russia is good enough for Snowden, then the rest of us should just wake up to that reality, put down our e-cigarettes, and move to Mother Russia ourselves!

Can't you see, if Putin were king of the world, then the world would be alright by now, dammit!!

[OilemFirchen]

65. When "important" becomes "self-important", the results are usually toxic.

I miss Nat Hentoff:

Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute
... at Jewish World Review
... at WND
... at Reason:

Via the Cato Institute’s Tim Lynch, legendary civil libertarian Nat Hentoff gives Barack Obama's presidency a big fat F in a rollicking interview with John W. Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute. A snippet:

...

So in answer to your question, I am beginning to think that this guy is a phony. Obama seems to have no firm principles that I can discern that he will adhere to. His only principle is his own aggrandizement. This is a very dangerous mindset for a president to have.

JW: Do you consider Obama to be worse than George W. Bush?

NH: Oh, much worse. Bush essentially came in with very little qualifications for presidency, not only in terms of his background but he lacked a certain amount of curiosity, and he depended entirely too much on people like Rumsfeld, Cheney and others. Bush was led astray and we were led astray. However, I never thought that Bush himself was, in any sense, "evil." I am hesitant to say this about Obama. Obama is a bad man in terms of the Constitution. The irony is that Obama was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He would, most of all, know that what he is doing weakens the Constitution.

Nat Hentoff on Abortion

Tragic.

[2banon]

66. Hey grasswire, I'm Robert Perry fan, but missed all the brouhaha around this

do you have a link? tia..

[grasswire]

70. here

Plenty of insults against Parry, including the phrase "worthless hack" in that thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5268517

and here a new thread attacking him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025272048

[2banon]

76. When did DU turn into Freeperville?

wow.

[Doctor_J]

78. About the time Heritage Care became law

The Cult decided that this atrocity had to be defended at all cost. Then when the 2008 voters figured out they'd been had, and decided not to support DINOs in 2010, "the left" became to reason for all of the ills in the world.

[malaise]

71. Frightening indeed

They're on their own.

Bravo Robert Parry.
Truth will out.
Seems some folks are seriously desperate to push a particular agenda.

[Cha]

73. Oh boo Hoo.. People aren't bowing at everything CT Robert Perry comes up with .. Wah wah wah

[Doctor_J]

77. DU is about as friendly to liberals as Fox Nation is

It's turned into nothing but a hero worship site for the DINO in Chief. Then the Tiger Beat Club will blame liberals for the November ass-kicking.

[2banon]

87. They love to hate us even want to drum us out of the party with their RW BS,

then when their candidate loses, it's all our fault.

[Octafish]

79. It IS shameful, grasswire.

Denigrating Parry over his reportage of the events in Ukraine an the nation's response to them also serves to discredit one of the few journalists brave enough to write about the criminal nature of the national security state, no matter who is president or what "party" is in power in Congress.

Interesting to see how many of those working or acting to discredit Parry have done the same to Glenn Greenwald and Christopher Hedges, among others on DU. What a coincidence.

[BainsBane]

82. It really is amazing how everything on here is about an individual

rather than the issue. This person is above reproach, another is beneath contempt. In the meantime, the issues are completely lost.

[marmar]

88. One thing that's become abundantly clear since 2008 is that .......

....... there's no liberal stalwart who will not be tossed under the bus when they're going against a Democratic administration, regardless of how correct they are. Amy Goodman, Michael Moore, Bill Moyers, Rachel Maddow, Daniel Elsberg, Chris Hedges, Cornel West, Eugene Robinson, David Sirota and on and on -- they've all had bus tire tracks on their backs at some point in the last six years.

[NCTraveler]

93. When did this become a place where journalists credibility can't be questioned?

Amazing that you think he is beyond reproach. Hero worship sucks all the way around.

[zappaman]

98. When it's a journalist that has written some good stuff.

Then they are NEVER wrong.
Even when propping up an evil fuck like Putin.

[NCTraveler]

100. These same people yell from the rooftops that Warren learned from her days as a republican.

Something I agree with them on. Yet they don't think anyone else can ever change. x has always been a good journalist, so everything he reports in the future will be good. That is a thought process I can't grasp. It truly is blind hero worship.

[KittyWampus]

118. Blind hero worship is exactly right. And yet these same people accuse others of same for Obama.

Always same DU'ers who blindly support anything Greenwald, Snowden say or do or HAVE said or done.

Or Warren.

So sick of the constant hypocrisy.

We all, including myself, have our inconsistencies and blind spots, but some people are so totally lacking self awareness.

[grasswire]

102. there's a difference between "questioning a journalist"...

....and (in partisanship) calling a distinguished and honest journalist a "worthless hac".

The attacks on Parry a scurrilous, not intended to question, but to smear.

[NCTraveler]

104. Many of the questions raised doubts in a very fair manner. That is obvious to all.

Who cares if someone on a discussion board called him a worthless hack. There is everything her from right wingers trolling to the far left. Read over those posts and move on. Leave the thoughts of hero worship out of it and it will become easier. People can be really good and flawed at the same time. If more understood that these issues wouldn't carry the divisiveness they currently do.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

136. If he takes a reckless approach to the truth, then he deserves to be called a hack.

And that he most definitely has done when it comes to Ukraine. For some reason, he sees fit to simply repeat the fatally flawed Russian state media reports as if they are gospel truth.

[Uncle Joe]

106. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, grasswire.

[KittyWampus]

117. Funny how the DU'ers who throw the term "Authoritarian" around the most are the LEAST

absolutely the LEAST tolerant and most likely to insist on group think.

Robert Parry is not what he was. His reporting is not what it was.

Yet noting this fact causes one group of DU'ers to flip out.

And it's always the same instigators too.

[zappaman]

125. Ain't it though?

[Octafish]

138. Really?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025279532

[zappaman]

140. Really.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2261046

[treestar]

134. How does any of that prove the Ukrainian government is at fault?

People made some very good points in that other thread. This time, your hero went out on a limb. It's very unlikely that what he reported, which was what someone else told him about someone else, is true.

[Octafish]

139. How does any of that - or anything published - prove the Russian government is at fault?

Parry is heroic for standing up for the truth - not because he is on one side or another side.

[uhnope]

145. tide has turned since this OP. Parry is now accepted as a hack.

[grasswire]

146. by whom? nt