Once Upon A Time Long Ago Truth Was Important

Paul Craig Roberts

I wonder how many people, not just Americans but those in other countries, have come to the conclusion that the United States today is a less free and less aware society than the societies in the dystopian novels of the 20th century or in movies such as The Matrix and V for Vendetta. Just as people in the dystopian novels had no idea of their real situation, few Americans do either.  

What are we to make of the extraordinary war crimes committed by the United States in the 21st century that have destroyed in whole or part seven countries, resulting in millions of dead, maimed, orphaned, and displaced peoples? Consider, for example, the latest Washington war crime, the illegal attack on Syria. Instead of protesting this illegality, the American media egged it on, cheering impending death and destruction.

During the entirety of the 21st century, Israel, Washington’s only ally—as contrasted with the European, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese vassal states of Washington’s empire—has continued with Washington’s support, protection, and encouragement the genocide of the Palestinian people. Essentially, all that is left of Palestine is a ghetto concentration camp known as Gaza which is routinely bombed by Israel using weapons and money supplied by Washington. When a bombing of Gaza is announced, God’s Chosen People take their lawn chairs and picnics up on a hill overlooking Gaza and applaud as the Israeli military murders women and children. This is America’s only ally.

The crimes committed by the US and Israel are horrific, but meet with little opposition. In contrast, an alleged attack in which 70 Syrians are alleged to have died sets in motion the wheels of war. It makes no sense whatsoever. Israel routinely bombs Syrian targets, killing Syrians, and the US arms and supports the “rebels” that the Obama regime sent to overthrow Assad, resulting in large numbers of dead Syrians. Why all of a sudden do 70 Syrians matter to Washington?

According to the Washington authorities, or to the presstitutes’ reports of their statements, two or three alleged Syrian chemical weapons facilities were destroyed by Washington’s missile attack. Think about this for a minute. If Washington bombed or sent missiles into chemical weapons facilities, a vast cloud of lethal gas would have been released. The civilian casualties would be many times higher than the claimed 70 victims of Assad’s alleged and unsubstantiated chemical attack used as the pretext for the Trump regime’s war crime against Syria. There is no evidence whatsoever of these casualties.

Had there been casualties, Washington’s attack would obviously be a far greater crime than the chemical attack that Washington used as cover for its own crime. Yet the American presstitutes are crowing over the lesson that America has taught Syria and Russia. Apparently, the American media consists of such immoral or moronic hirelings that the presstitutes are unable to comprehend that an attack by Washington on Syrian chemical weapons plants, if such actually existed, is the equivalent of an attack on Syria with chemical weapons.

As I wrote yesterday, when I was a Wall Street Journal editor, if Washington had just announced that it had bombed the chemical weapons facilities of another country in punishment for that country’s alleged use of a chemical weapon, the Journal’s reporters were sufficiently intelligent to ask where are the victims of Washington’s chemical attack on that country? Are there thousands of dead people from the chemical gas released by Washington’s attack? Are the hospitals of the country over-filed with the injured and dying?

If a reporter had brought to us a story that was nothing but a Washington press release claiming obviously impossible happenings, we would have told him to go look again and ask the obvious questions. Today the NY Times and Washington Post put the unsubstantiated report on the front page.

Today reporters no longer have to check sources, because there is no longer journalism in America. When the Clinton regime in compliance with the Deep State that made the Clintons super-rich permitted 90% of the independent and diverse US media to be concentrated in the hands of six political companies, that was the end of journalism in America. All we have now is a propaganda ministry that lies for a living. Anyone in American journalism who tells the truth is either immediately fired or in the case of Tucker Carlson at Fox News is set upon by outside presstitutes in an effort to force Fox to replace him. I wonder how long before some woman pops up and claims Tucker Carlson sexually harassed her.

As far as I can tell, the United States is now a police state in which all information is controlled and the population is trained to believe the propaganda or be accused of lack of patriotism and consorting with terrorists and Russians.


6 thoughts on “Once Upon A Time Long Ago Truth Was Important

  1. I’ve called Paul Craig Roberts a “shill” in the past, and promised to elucidate that accusation after a future article of his, so let’s have a look at this one. First of all, please remember that if his purpose is to influence the “alternative news” audience for the enemy, he’s first going to have to gain some credibility with that audience, and that’s going to require a lot of truth-telling on his part, so the first thing to look at his how much truth is he willing to tell?

    As a former editor of the Wall Street Journal, he’s well aware of who owns the media, and what their political agenda is, because his bosses told him exactly what was and wasn’t to be printed, but we never hear a word from him about his ex-bosses, or their directives. He mentions “presstitutes” in this article, but expects us to believe that the media was honest when he was an editor. We already know that’s untrue because we have quotes from media executives which reveal their dishonesty that predate Paul Craig Roberts’ tenure as editor of the Wall Street Journal. Why does he never reveal the truth about the media, who owns it, and what their political agenda is when he MUST know? He could undoubtedly tell us a lot about propaganda techniques used to influence millions of people, but he never touches the subject. Is that what someone who was devoted to our cause would do, or would they be teaching us new things, and giving us new information?

    Paul Craig Roberts only gives an opinion on what’s already been widely circulated, which does no damage to the enemy, but buys him some credibility with our side, which can later be used to deceive or misdirect people interested in the truth.

    To wit:
    “….Just as people in the dystopian novels had no idea of their real situation, few Americans do either…..”

    Why does he claim that “few Americans” have any idea of their real situation when all empirical data* tells us otherwise? Is he trying to convince us that there are very few of us, and that resistance is futile?

    “…If Washington bombed or sent missiles into chemical weapons facilities, a vast cloud of lethal gas would have been released…..”

    This statement is patently false, and he uses it to build further assumptions. A chemical weapons facility would not store very much of their product on site, but instead would have the raw materials of their product on hand, which are likely harmless until combined with other chemicals. The finished product (the chemical weapon) would be shipped out of there almost immediately after it’s produced to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands.

    *all empirical data: Nielsen ratings, circulation numbers, web hits, gun & ammunition sales, honest polls, poor election turnout.

    1. Look at what he refuses to discuss, rather than appreciate the fast that he’s telling the “truth”, and remember that subtlety is effectiveness in the propaganda business.

      Half of the truth is just another lie, and these lies of omission are what the “news” business constantly uses to deceive us. I think Paul Craig Roberts still has the same Zionist boss he did as editor of the WSJ, but he’s now working to deceive the alternative news audience rather than the majority of the American public, which he’s already made a career out of. (and we may soon be the new majority, if we’re not already there)

      1. “The crimes committed by the US and Israel are horrific…”

        Yes, Jolly, statements like this that are not even an ice crystal on the tip of the iceberg of atrocities that the occupying zog joo govt commit against US, downplay our struggle with how the kosher devils run amok in the united snakes of amerika. It’s not just over there. It resides HERE among US and anyone with an iota of understanding of the j? knows who is destroying US.

  2. In 1970 I wanted to be a journalist (because I love to write) and it was either go to journalism school or art school. Chose art school (but only went for a year, then went into the world of work). So why not journalism school? Because after attending an anti-war demo in NYC and read about it in the NY Times and it was an untrue story, I realized I did not want to be a journalist. PCR doesn’t have to tell me the MSM is BS. But, with his Putin worship and other nonsense he only tells part of the truth over, there is no reason to take what he says seriously. And it doesn’t matter how awake Americans become–he will ALWAYS claim Americans are all a bunch of brainwashed idiots who need “elite” journalists like him to tell us what to think. The guy was Assist. SecTreas under Reagan–why the heck should I believe him?

    And, uh, PCR…TRUTH IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT! Maybe you should try it sometime. Don’t worry, your savior Putin won’t care..

  3. PCR banned me from commenting at his site many years ago (I may have been the catalyst for disallowing all comments).

    I called him out on the jew. Never call PCR out on his real masters. You’ll understand his “truth” soon enough, if you do.

Join the Conversation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *