Mainstream media “mob violence” over Helsinki summit

Professor Cohen is always good value and we should take these comments of his seriously. After all, there is nothing more serious today than the threat of war between the US and the Russian Federation. Yet we have politicians and the mainstream media preferring to promote this threat. They seem to want to prevent any step towards relaxing international tension and divert attention by waving their dirty domestic laundry on the international scene.

Yes I know, I will probably be attacked (again) for using a clip from Tucker Carlson and Fox. There seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to ignore or reject serious arguments because they appear on a “non-approved,” “non-official,” or alternative media. But be honest – that reaction, and the fact it is a knee-jerk one, simply demonstrates the self-censorship which people have had imposed on them.

Particularly in this case where Professor Cohen is not given any space on the “liberal-approved” mainstream media to present his highly sensible views.

The worst aspect of all this is the diversion of public opinion from what should be the substance of such summits.

What is this media hysteria and bullying, and self-censorship, doing? It is preventing consideration of the real content of this important international summit.

No discussion of real issues

Where is the media discussion on questions (and possible moves towards agreement on these questions) like a return to the Start Nuclear Treaty, the danger presented by stationing anti-ballistic missile systems in Europe, problems created by US withdrawal from the Iran Treaty and the Paris climate change agreements, provision of security for Israel, settlement of the war in Syria, humanitarian aid to the victims of that war, the fight against terrorism, a treaty on cyberwar, etc., etc? Things that really matter and affect the future of this planet and its people.

Why is it that US journalists at the Summit press conference showed absolutely no interest in these substantive issues? They were simply there to fight out their non-acceptance of the 2016 election result.

I think this is disgusting. Instead of attempting to prevent war and to do something substantial to reduce international tension the US establishment is carrying out their dirty domestic partisan warfare in public. We have a media-intelligence agency coalition fighting with a President who (maybe wisely) refuses to take the fight head on. A strong president might be expected to take on an intelligence establishment which has become partisan and is actively constricting his actions. Instead, he appears to mumble and backtrack like a coward.

No sensible person would ever claim to have full confidence in the US intelligence establishment – come on, look at their record.

A media created smokescreen

But meanwhile the real interests of people in the US, and indeed the world, get ignored by a compliant media.

And groups and commenters on social media get sucked in by this circus like easy fools.

Come on, there are real problems in the world – the Trump circus is a diversion imposed on you by the US media-political-intelligence establishment. An establishment which still works, behind the smokescreen they have created, to impose their diktat on the world.

Similar articles

19 responses to “Mainstream media “mob violence” over Helsinki summit

  1. Bill Osmunson DDS, MPH

    Oh my Ken,
    You (and I) sure enjoy the controversial issues.
    Your point that we need to calm the waters between the two major nuke countries is certainly valid.

    However, the USA was attacked with an act of war and becoming a Russian state is not my desire. OK, cyber war, but an act of war as big or bigger than 9/11 and some would argue Pearl Harbor.

    Trump hit NATO countries hard and then claimed credit for success, but there was no change, just threats. He created a problem then he claimed to solve the problem. He hit our friends and in effect said, “that will feel better when it quits hurting.”

    Trump hit NATO and said maybe we should not go to the aid of other NATO countries if they are attacked (Article 5). . . in other words, “Putin, you can take over more NATO countries and we won’t interfere.” To NATO countries, “you are on your own. . . maybe.”

    Trump has hit all our long time friends. But he almost only speaks kind words about Putin/Russia. Why? What does Putin have over Trump? My guess is the Russians have put in hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars into Trump towers and Trump golf courses. Many are not making money and after he went bankrupt twice he paid cash for the courses. Where did he get the money? Trump is Putin’s Pet.

    Trump has not released his tax returns so we can see where he got the money, but we will find out.

    Trump likes to spend money (don’t we all?). The USA economy is running strong, not on earnings but on barrowings. Trump is barrowing a trillion to push the economy. How long will living on debt last? Bankruptcy for individual and corporations, but what about the USA?

    Trump has cut taxes and keeps spending. Of course that will punch up the economy, but we will have to pay it back. And the problem is that most of the trillion dollars is going to a few wealthy people who are gaining more control of our country.

    Trump keeps telling lies, so often we think lies are normal. Truth du jour, based on his gut, not facts. He is a bully, abusive to women and minorities, a white male supremacist.

    If Helsinki were the only strike out, we would have no serious problems. Treason to the USA. Trump rejected evidence from our security agencies that we were attacked. Instead, Trump looked into the eyes of the best KGB agent and used his gut instinct to disagree.

    Facts vs Faith/trust.

    Trump rejects the fact that the earth is getting warmer.
    Trump rejects the fact that humans are polluting the earth and sky.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not in favor of entitlements for all. Makes lazy people. But kids out of college with $300,000 debt (no hope of paying it off), the number one reason for bankruptcy in the USA is medical debt and most of those have medical insurance, thousands and thousands homeless, and kids taken from their parents even though the parents are following the laws (and over 50 they may never find the parents), is simply unacceptable, not human. Oh, and big tax breaks for the wealthiest 1%. Don’t forget many Legislators gave themselves over $200,000 a year tax break.

    Helsinki summit is just the tip of Trump’s corruption and collusion.

    Forgot to mention more than 24 indictments and the convictions have started, in just over a year of investigations. Trump calls that “Fake News” because it is pointing at his collusion with Russia.


  2. Richard Christie

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with you that US media operates with a risible level of anti Russian bias I think you silly to presume that Trumps summit talks with the leaders of N Korea and Russia are anything other than charades designed to inflate Trump’s ego. The Korean summit was an extraordinary exercise in hot air generation.

    Since the content of Trumps talks with Putin are known only to themselves and a pair of translators I struggle to see how you justify your claim that their content even covered important matters. You rely only on the word of an unprepared and deranged serial liar of breathtaking ignorance in matters relating to the topics claimed to be discussed and that a master political manipulator.

    Trump is clearly beholden to Putin. I suspect inspection of Trump and his business’s’s tax returns will reveal why.


  3. Richard Christie

    @Bill Ormunson

    As can be seen in my comment above we agree over musvh of this topic but pplease….

    However, the USA was attacked with an act of war and becoming a Russian state is not my desire.

    Get over it.

    If hostile interference in another nations politic’s is the metric then USA has committed more acts of war against more nations than any other since Genghis Khan. USA is the champion amongst war mongers.

    Stop feeling so affronted and accept that such actions are part of a dance that your own country eagerly participates in, or, stop doing it yourselves and we might take your whinging more seriously.


  4. Richard Christie

    correction apostrophe meant for nation’s, not politics.


  5. Richard, I think you should read the transcript of the press conference, particularly President Putin’s initial comments where he lists things discussed and presented for future discussion.

    I disagree with you. I do not think President Putin is “unprepared and deranged serial liar of breathtaking ignorance in matters relating to the topics claimed to be discussed.”

    I see nothing unusual about the format of the discussions of the two presidents – this procedure is common – despite US media attempts to somehow raise fears about it. This summit was about laying the groundwork – not reaching final agreements. Necessary because of the deplorable state of US-Russian relations. But Russian media reports I have seen indicate that officials are continuing the work. For ewxmaople, the Russian MOD is preparing for their high command to meet with the US high command.


  6. Bill, really?

    You say “the USA was attacked with an act of war and becoming a Russian state is not my desire. OK, cyber war, but an act of war as big or bigger than 9/11 and some would argue Pearl Harbor.” I must have missed it. Russians sometimes jokingly refer to their loss of Alaska to the USA (after the return of Crimea some Russians were referring to Alaska as IceCrimea) – but I have never seen anything showing an intention to make the USA a “Russian State” (whatever that means).

    When did this act of war take place? Show me the evidence it occurred.

    But let me tell you about this bridge in Manhattan I can sell you for a very reasonable price. You seem to be the sort of person who would welcome such a bargain.


  7. Came across this comment on scoial meida:

    “”Just a reminder to everyone who insists that Russia “attacked” us… the entire premise is based on the assertion that Russia “interfered” with our elections by “hacking” into the DNC servers and releasing emails to Wikileaks that showed how corrupt the Democrats were and how they rigged the election.

    So if you choose to ignore the the fact that the Dems were ACTUALLY caught rigging the election and choose to adhere to the insane logic that “Russia rigged our elections by exposing how the Dems actually rigged the elections” then you’re already lost.

    But fine, your next hurdle that you have to clear is to explain why the FBI wasn’t allowed to inspect the server that the DNC claimed was hacked by the Russians. Cause you know that’s what happened right?

    The DNC refused to give their “hacked” server to the FBI to let them examine it. The entire Russian conspiracy was hatched based on the word from a private IT company who was hired by the DNC who then told the FBI that it was the Russians who hacked them but wouldn’t let the FBI examine the evidence.
    Meanwhile, the actual source of the emails has repeatedly offered to sit down and talk about who actually released the emails but the law enforcement wants nothing to do with him.

    Nope, they’d rather blindly trust a private company and completely break procedure by letting an outside company investigate for them. In short… it’s all bullshit. You’re clamoring to go to war with Russia based on bullshit.

    Rep Eric Swalwell compared this “hack” to Pearl Harbor. He literally said that. Despite the fact that the server was never investigated by the FBI, he accused Russia of attacking us on the same scale that brought us into WWII.

    This fucking idiot would rather get us all killed than just admit to what they did. THAT’S what I’m afraid of. Not Trump trying to make peace with Russia. (Who by the way Obama admitted are no longer our enemies during his run against Romney. Remember, “The cold war is over!”)

    What’s it going to take to get through to you people?””


  8. Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

    Before you dismiss the “act of war” opinion, the history of Russia attacks goes back to 2014.

    Russia understands that almost 90% of USA has greater faith and trust in “local” news. Russia capitalized on that parochial bias and developed news organizations online, developing followers online, developing local trust and then used their network to spread fear and further bias during the election.

    Remember when Trump asked Russia to hack the DNC? Just hours later they did.

    Has the USA done the same or worse to other countries? Yes. But that is a tangent worth following. This time the attack was against the USA and we are still being attacked by Russia. They did change our election, IMO.



  9. Bill, my offer on the Manhattan Bridge is still open.


  10. Ken says, “I will probably be attacked (again) for using a clip from Tucker Carlson and Fox. There seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to ignore or reject serious arguments because they appear on a “non-approved,” “non-official,” or alternative media. ”

    You’re funny, Ken. It’s interesting that anything supporting your pro-Russian bias is “alternative,” “non-approved,” or “non-official.” I always enjoy watching you play the radical.

    I’m going to let you in on a little secret: In the U.S., FOX State Propaganda TV is about as mainstream as it gets. It’s “approved” to the point of winning an election, and it certainly is “official,” in that it is not only supported by the White House, but we now know that the President consults with FOX Minister of Propaganda Hannity on a regular basis.


  11. Ken, you said, “Came across this comment on scoial meida:”

    You posted the comment which means you support it and you endorse it. I glanced at it and first spotted this comment: ” . . why the FBI wasn’t allowed to inspect the server that the DNC claimed was hacked by the Russians. Cause you know that’s what happened right?

    The DNC refused to give their “hacked” server to the FBI to let them examine it.” End quote.

    Hmm . . I never heard that before, so I thought I’d check it out. Did you check it out? Or did you just blindly accept it because it supports your bias & you got it from an “unofficial,” “unaccepted,” or “alternative” source? Therefore in your mind it must be true? Is that what happened?

    I came across this this comment from another source, Politifact:

    “We rate this statement False.”

    It turns out, the original lie came from a “Trump tweet,” and we all know how accurate those are . . . or do you?


  12. David, I think you still have the problem of avoiding issues by attacking the media in the sense that you refuse to engage with content becuase you hate the media that presents the content, or you think presents the content.

    1: Yes, in the past you have refused to consider an interview by Tucker Carlson because it was him and on Fox. You diversion into my labelling (in inverted commas) media sources is “funny” on your part because it is irrelevant.

    Yes, I do include Fox in the mainstream, as I also include RT. But of course, I never treat any media source as reliable in itself. I always consider the information critically and intelligently and look for evidence.

    It would have been far more interesting for you to have actually engaged with the content of Professor Cohen’s warning about the dangers of the current hysteria in the US. He is a highly respected and authoritative expert on Russia and Russia-US relations. What he says is important.

    But perhaps I expect too much.

    2: The comment I copied and pasted was of general interest. It is not my purpose here to get into debates on this whole interference/collaboration political myth yet again. My article is, after all, about something more important.

    As I pointed out to someone else, if the Russian journalists at the press conference had ignored the important geopolitical issues and concentrated only on their own dirty electoral laundry in the way the US journalist did we would have laughed at them. For example, one of the presidential candidates in this year’s election, Sobchak, chose to spend the election campaign period in the US interacting with anti-Russian think tanks and promoting an anti-Russian narrative. She was no doubt criticised for this (and for many other things) by the other candidates. Maybe she still is. But none of the journalists chose to obscure the work of this summit by concentrating solely, or at all, on that internal dirty electoral laundry, did they?

    In fact, the huge difference in the nature of the questions form each side in the room (journalists from the US on one side and from Russia on the other) was very clear and if I was a US citizen I would have been thoroughly ashamed at the blatant ignoring of the important content of that summit.

    So my comment on your rejection of the point about the FBI not investigating the DNC server will., only be minor.

    You attempt to attribute this to Trump as a source, rather than simply repeating – that is stupid. Are you going to deny the day of the week because Trump refers to it?

    No, I have seen the comment on the way the FBI did not have direct access to the server mentioned in many sources – I think one of these by a DNC official, others mentioned in Senate hearings, etc. Contrary to your desire I do not pay any attention to Trump’s tweets.

    It is my understanding that the FBI did not have direct access to that server – But of course, I am willing to accept they did if I am given credible evidence they did. Your cited article did not provide any such evidence – in fact, if anything it confirmed that the FBI did rely on the DCI’s own contracted IT firm – which is what I have always understood.

    Finally, David, let’s not get diverted back to the US dirty electoral laundry issue. We will probably never agree on any aspect of that.

    The important issue for you, the US and Russian people, and indeed the whole world, is the summit itself and the degree to which it will provide impetus to solving a long list of international problems identified by both presidents. That list was reported very clearly by President Putin in his introductions. And yes, aspects of it formed the content of some of the Russian journalist’s questions – to both Presidents.


  13. Ken,

    Glad to see you took the time to read the Politifact link I provided . . and you are right. Although the FBI didn’t have access to the server (I can look into why later), Comey seemed to be satisfied with the evidence he did have. We can argue about his credibility if you like . . or not.

    I haven’t had time to look at the video you provided, but I will this weekend. I hope he, Cohen, isn’t going off into tangents about a possible war between the U.S. & Russia. That’s the last thing Trump would resort to.

    Looking at the body language between the two when they spoke together, it painted a portrait of Master & Servant. It reminded me of a scene from the movie “Bugsy” (you probably didn’t see it) . . Bugsy Segal took a fat man by the ear, made him crawl across the floor, get on his knees, and bark like a dog. Putin seemed confident & comfortable . . smiling, while Trump seemed nervous & uncomfortable. No doubt he (Trump) was out of his league. Hell, he was out of his league when he went to Singapore to discuss North Korea.

    (I couldn’t find the scene from Bugsy I was describing . . but I did find something from the film. I can imagine Putin & Trump playing the parts in their private meeting )


  14. Strike that last comment. Trump’s hair wasn’t messed up when they spoke 🙂


  15. I have picked up contradictory views of Trump’s performance in Helsinki. Myself, I didn’t think his performance was bad, considering his limitations.

    It’s inevitable he will come across badly beside Putin. The Russian president has a huge amount of experience and is actively involved in extensive diplomatic activity at a very high and sophisticated level. No US politician can compete with that.

    One has only to compare the meetings Putin has with many world leaders and his role in the Normandy and Astana peace processes. The US seems only to be involved in crude pressure and the promotion of war and regime change. What a contrast.

    It is damning that public opinion in the USA and most of the media are so ideologically driven that they react badly to their president meeting another important world leader. It happens all the time in Europe and Asia. Yet media in the US just can’t handle it and promote all sorts of crude lies to prevent this normal international diplomatic activity.

    The US behaves like a spoilt child demanding things it thinks it is entitled to by right without any input.

    No wonder the USA has become so isolated.


  16. Cedric, you seem to have been, uncharacteristically, left (almost) speechless. 🙂


  17. Richard Christie

    Whatever Cedric says, it’s worth reading.


Leave a Reply: please be polite to other commenters & no ad hominems.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s