Interviewed by Jeff Blankfort
Blankfort revisits previous commentary, noting how US orchestrated coup in Ukraine and DNC sabotaging of Sanders’ campaign have been erased by liberals who have adopted anti-Russian line of the PNAC neocons that illustrates their intellectual dishonesty.
As example he quotes from New Yorker article, “Trump, Putin, and the New Cold War,” in which Victoria Nuland’s “Fuck the EU” comment to US Ukraine ambassador Geoff Pyatt in tapped conversation is cited as example of Russia’s playing dirty, ignoring part of conversation in which Nuland tells Pyatt who should be the next Ukraine prime minister and that’s who it turned out to be. Even the BBC’s Jonathan Marcus, who he quotes, thought that more important.
He then quotes from article by neocon guru and PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan on Republicans being soft on Russia and calling, like the liberals, for a special investigation of Russia’s election meddling. He then recounts history of PNAC’s role in fabricating false intelligence on Iraq WMD’s to justify the war.
Next Blankfort examines world’s longest running farce, the Israel-Palestine “peace process” beginning with the background of David Friedman, Trump’s bankruptcy lawyer and uber Zionist as ambassadorial appointment to Israel and the money he has given and raised for right wing Jewish settlement, Beit El, and does the same for Trump son-in-law Jared Kershner.
He then cites a NPR report on another Trump lawyer, Jason Greenblatt’s meeting with Mahmoud Abbas and exposes Abbas’s history as a traitor, beginning with the Oslo Agreement and the role of the Palestinian Authority in suppressing Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation, claiming that his and Arafat’s betrayal at Oslo and agreeing to allow Israel to occupy 60% of the West Bank is unmatched in the history of people’s struggles.
Jeff Blankfort speaks with Parry about his most recent articles, “The Politics Behind Russia-gate” and “When Disinformation is Truth,” in which he lays into the liberal media for abandoning journalistic professionalism and ethics to hop upon the neocon bandwagon in going after Russia for interfering in the US election without waiting for or presenting evidence that it actually occurred.
Using MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow as an example, he points out that her McCarthy-style Russia bashing has been terrific for the network’s ratings, while warning that using this as a device to get Trump impeached could lead not just to an escalation of the new Cold War but the launching of a hot one which would be the war that would end all wars and the world as we know it.
Parry recounts how before he and his colleague Brian Barger broke the stories about Iran-Contra and the drug trafficking associated with it back in the 1980s, they assembled the evidence to back up what they wrote. By contrast, liberals in the media like Maddow or the New Yorker editor David Remnick, accept the intelligence agencies general conclusions about Russian interference in the presidential election without presenting or demanding facts despite the DNI’s James Clapper’s admission that there was no evidence showing collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians.
Kagan also points out that while none of the experts in the US gave Trump a chance to win the White House, it was unlikely that Putin and the Russians would be any more knowledgeable on the subject and that while Putin may have quietly preferred a Trump victory, the last thing he needed was to be seen as pushing for it.
He concludes that it is preferable for those who supported Clinton to blame Putin and the Russians for Trump’s victory than examine what the Democrats did wrong by the nature of her campaign as well as making her the candidate in the first place.