Journalists, Learning They Spread a CIA Fraud About Russia, Instantly Embrace a New One

greenwald.substack.com ^ | Glenn Greenwald

[RoosterRedux]

That Russia placed "bounties” on the heads of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan was one of the most-discussed and consequential news stories of 2020. It was also, as it turns out, one of the most baseless — as the intelligence agencies who spread it through their media spokespeople now admit, largely because the tale has fulfilled and outlived its purpose.

The saga began on June 26, 2020, when The New York Times announced that unnamed “American intelligence officials” have concluded that “a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan — including targeting American troops.” The paper called it “a significant and provocative escalation” by Russia. Though no evidence was ever presented to support the CIA's claims — neither in that original story nor in any reporting since — most U.S. media outlets blindly believed it and spent weeks if not longer treating it as proven, highly significant truth. Leading politicians from both parties similarly used this emotional storyline to advance multiple agendas.

The story appeared — coincidentally or otherwise — just weeks after President Trump announced his plan to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2020. Pro-war members of Congress from both parties and liberal hawks in corporate media spent weeks weaponizing this story to accuse Trump of appeasing Putin...

*snip*

What was missing from this media orgy of indignation and militaristic demands for retaliation was an iota of questioning of whether the story was, in fact, true. All they had was an anonymous leak from “intelligence officials” — which The New York Times on Thursday admitted came from the CIA — but that was all they needed. That is because the vast majority of the corporate sector of the press lives under one overarching rule:

[ReaganGeneration2]

One commenter at this article probably had the most truth: Journos and the CIA are one

[Eddie01]

Journalist = CIA mouthpiece

[PGR88]

Journos and the CIA are one

the next obvious question is - what else do they control?

[Pearfect]

NYT

NEVER

YEILD

TRUTH

Liars and democrat left wing hacks !!

[AnotherUnixGeek]

I’m grateful to Substack for giving actual journalists like Greenwald a place to still practice his profession. I subscribed - I don’t always agree with Greenwald on everything, but he’s principled and honest.

[Truth29]

For any “journalist” who had a soul or morals, this is a scathing indictment so sweeping that they should just commit hari-kari to end their shame. Alas, the have to soul, morals or shame. They are worse than what should be scrapped off the bottom of your shoes.

[NWFree]

They should be in jail. Enemies of America.

[Luke21]

Greenwald is pretty good. You know his biases, but he tries to be objective.

[DUMBGRUNT]

Let's express this as clearly as it can be expressed. Any journalist who treats unverified stories from the CIA or other government agencies as true, without needing any evidence or applying any skepticism, is worthless. Actually, they are worse than worthless: they are toxic influences who deserve pure contempt. Every journalist knows that governments lie constantly and that it is a betrayal of their profession to serve as mindless mouthpieces for these security agencies: that is why they will vehemently deny they do this if you confront them with this accusation. They know it is a shameful thing to do.

[JayAr36]

Journalists, Learning They Spread a CIA Fraud About Russia, Instantly Embrace a New One

More propaganda from the spokesmodels of the publicity arm of the democrook party.

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

RoosterRedux :" Pro-war members of Congress from both parties and liberal hawks
in corporate media spent weeks weaponizing this story to accuse Trump of appeasing Putin..."

Other earlier FReeper posts claim that Liz Cheney was the source of the "Russia bounty " for killing American troops.

[Bernard Marx]

Agree.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Perhaps IO missed it - nut I did not see any Martha Raddatz clips in the videos. I recall the moment I heard the claim that there were Russian bounties on US troops, because the hairs on the back of my neck stood up the way they did when I read the Steele Dossier in October 2016. It had a certain ring of untruth to it, just as the concoction about Russian prostitutes peeing on the bed in a Moscow Presidential suite did. My first reaction to each story - how perfect! It was so perfect it could have been made up by the President's political opposition, and almost had to be!

The reason I ask about Raddatz is that on election night 2016 she broke down in tears while explaining that she was concerned for all the servicemen who would have to respond to orders from Trump. It was too much for her to bear that evening (or early the next morning.)

If as a crusading journalist you aligned your self with what you saw as the cause of the US service men and women, and you hated the president and wanted to damage his support from the services, what would be the most devastating accusation you could create? That the president knew there were bounties and did nothing about it.

I recommend that someone trace Raddatz and her connections to this story to see if this fits - if my supposition that she could have been at the center of this concoction holds any water.

[Nextrush]

The government has their plants everywhere maybe the meetings you go to no kidding.