Robert Parry: A still valuable investigative journalist or a liar & conspiracy theorist?

[Karmadillo]

I had always thought Robert Parry was a rather admirable figure. There's the October Surprise, the Iran-Contra work, the willingness to back Gary Webb when so many of the best journalists kept their silence and cashed their paychecks, and the nonstop reporting on the spectacularly criminal George W. Bush administration. Is that admiration misplaced? No longer seen as the award-winning investigative journalist of the past by some who visit the internet, Parry is now openly called a liar and a conspiracy theorist by those disenchanted with his reporting.

First, a review of what Parry has done:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Parry_%28journalist%29

Robert Parry (born June 24, 1949) is an American investigative journalist best known for his role in covering the Iran-Contra affair for the Associated Press (AP) and Newsweek, including breaking the Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare (CIA manual provided to the Nicaraguan contras) and the CIA and Contras cocaine trafficking in the US scandal in 1985. He was awarded the George Polk Award for National Reporting in 1984. He has been the editor of Consortium News since 1995.

<edit>

In August 1990 PBS' Frontline asked Parry to work on the October Surprise conspiracy theory, leading to Parry making several documentaries for the program, 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, and in 1994 he unearthed "a treasure-trove of government documents" supporting the theory, "showing that the task force suppressed incriminating CIA testimony and excluded evidence of big-money links between wealthy Republicans and Carter's Iranian intermediary, Cyrus Hashemi". 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."

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.

If DU postings are any indicator, Parry was seen as someone with a pretty reliable insight into reality during the not too distant Bush II years. His work was posted on a regular basis.

All in all, Parry has built a resume that screams a willingness to speak the truth regardless of the cost in dollars or popular acclaim. What's happened? Why are those so opposed to Parry so opposed? Has his reporting on Ukraine and the threats of a new Cold War been so off base as to reveal a once praiseworthy journalist as nothing more than a propaganda spewing puppet? Is the US Empire now such a good actor that investigative journalists like Parry are left with no real crimes and controversies to report and must resort to simply making things up? I don't see it, but that's just me. Maybe those opposed to his work could enlighten those of us who still embrace it. Is it Money? Sex? Power? What is it that would make a champion of progressive reporting abandon his principles?

[Faryn Balyncd]

1. Parry is the real thing, in an age of disappearing journalism.

[polly7]

2. He tells the uncomfortable truth.

His principles are intact.

[NuclearDem]

3. Because this went so well last time.

[Agschmid]

4. There is an alert on it already...

I guess I should Google who this fellow is, seems to be kind of a big deal?

[grasswire]

12. oh FFS

I guess all this hiding of posts related to Robert Parry just underscores his brilliant coverage of the lies and lying liars.

[Duckhunter935]

11. nice callout of a DU host

[Oilwellian]

14. When Freepers become DU Hosts

That could be a thread of its own.

[NuclearDem]

15. Are you proud of yourself?

[Duckhunter935]

17. I sure think so

well 5-2 hide

[leveymg]

18. Not a good first day on the job for that host

Perhaps some additional training might be a good idea. Locking a post that had survived a jury wasn't.

[Duckhunter935]

19. It was not a good lock

perry has been wrong on MH17 but his craziness should be posted to show how wrong he can be. He may very well have done some great work in the past.

[leveymg]

24. Agreed. Censorship shouldn't be tolerated here.

The truth usually wins out. It is usually most instructive when it's embarrassing.

[Electric Monk]

6. I notice his biggest detractors also happen to be some of the loudest Greenwald & Snowden haters too

Anyone else noticing this pattern?

/things that make me go "hmmmm...."

[woo me with science]

16. +1000000 Always watch the patterns.

Always watch what policies are defended, and by whom.

Patterns always reveal motives.

[JEB]

32. Yep, same bunch of name callers.

[MannyGoldstein]

42. That's a known bug

in our software, sorry about that. It's slated to be fixed in our next major release, code named "Finally Ready for Hillary" due out in a few months. The new rule is that any single persona cannot attack two targets. The coolest thing is that we'll be able to manage fights between personas, which will totally throw you people off track.

Regards,

HBGary Manny

[Scuba]

45. Yeah, but they just love Hillary.

[Karmadillo]

50. If only every reporter could have the integrity of Judith Miller...

[Octafish]

7. Robert Parry has integrity.

He is a top investigative journalist with a track record for telling nothing but the truth and reporting the story as he sees it.

He does not inject himself into what he covers, reports or analyzes. Unlike many of today's mass media stars, he does not make himself part of the story.

Robert Parry writes the truth, the mark of an honest reporter. And that, for some, is a problem.

[woo me with science]

20. [phone]

A free, investigative press is a grave threat to those who wish to implement a corporate authoritarian state.

The assault on journalism in this country reveals the depth of corruption and overt hostility to democracy we face from corporate politicians pretending to be democratic representatives.

It is DANGEROUS to be a real journalist - or a whistleblower who talks to a journalist - today.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026197388

(Thank you for adding links...)

[Scuba]

46. + another

[grasswire]

8. support truth tellers and whistle blowers

consortiumnews

[woo me with science]

21. grasswire?

Was there supposed to be a link in your post? The body of it just says "consortiumnews" on my screen.


[phone] for supporting truth tellers and whistleblowers.

[grasswire]

23. try this

www.consortiumnews.com

[woo me with science]

29. LOL.

Okay, I'm stupid.

[whereisjustice]

44. thanks for that, I need to check that site more often...

Check this out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026200309

[arcane1]

9. If someone alerts on this again, I hope they at least explain themselves this time n/t

[dissentient]

10. How dare you! Parry is an enemy of the state!

Anyone who says otherwise will be investigated by Homeland security.

[UTUSN]

13. I'm missing the liar/conspiracy parts. nt

[woo me with science]

22. K&R Excellent OP.

Very well said.

[SidDithers]

25. He's a stenographer, parroting the Kremlin line...

His coverage of the shoot-down of MH-17 was fucking hilarious.

Sid

[NuclearDem]

26. If the NYT used unnamed sources the same way Parry did

the same people defending him here would be screaming PNAC.

[SidDithers]

30. Putin boot-lickers abound...nt

Sid

[grasswire]

27. no ROFL?

something amiss?

[RobertEarl]

33. sid, nukie dem and the duck? ROFLMAO

They have squat so all they do is....?

Go Parry!! Keep us informed!!

[NuclearDem]

34. Damn starfish shot down MH-17.

[RobertEarl]

35. Sea stars are still dieing

So is a lot of other Pacific sea life. And you sit there and make jokes about and belittle the deaths?

I doubt even sid is proud of you. But I could be wrong.

As for flight 17, looks more and more like one of the crazies in the Ukraine military shot it down.

[NuclearDem]

36. Glad to see you have about as good a grasp on aerodynamics and physics

as you do radiation.

[RobertEarl]

37. If i have a one finger grasp

That would be two more than you.

I thought you were going to quit eating?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6181711

[NuclearDem]

39. You can Be Free to believe whatever you want, Billy.

[RobertEarl]

41. Making a name for yourself, are you?

See my last PM to you. Heck, post it here.

In the meantime, Go Parry! It is evident not everyone has been reading your words like they should.

[grasswire]

28. see post #6 nt

[Duckhunter935]

31. yes it really was

[Tace]

38. Argumentum ad hominem – the evasion of the actual topic by directing an attack at your opponent.

I don't see what's funny in Parry's reporting. He's a pro.

https://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/03/flight-17-shoot-down-scenario-shifts/

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/19/the-danger-of-an-mh-17-cold-case/

[NuclearDem]

40. He's a fucking Kremlin stooge.

He parroted the RT spin on the shootdown as an attempt on Putin and bought the bullshit that it was a Ukrainian shootdown, using an anonymous source and in complete defiance of the laws of physics.

[zappaman]

56. Well said. n/t

[rhett o rick]

43. Well said. nm

[SidDithers]

49. LOL...

The topic is Robert Parry. The OP created a thread to solicit comments about Parry's credibility.

Commenting on Parry is not an ad hom, when Parry is the fucking topic.



Sid

[Scuba]

47. How predictable.

[treestar]

48. Is that the one where the someone quoted the pilot

and his plane could not go at an altitude high enough to shoot down the type of airliner involved?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

51. Sid is the media decider. Iteration 3.

[SidDithers]

52. Ooooh, like a little puppy dog, following me around from thread to thread...

Sid

[DisgustipatedinCA]

54. I already feel regret For what I posted, Sid.

It's become clear to me that I should have started the numbering with 001, 002, etc. alphabetization is going to be a real mess after we roll into triple digits.

[SidDithers]

55. You're OK with using conservative sources to attack Democrats at DU?...

Really?

Sid

[DisgustipatedinCA]

57. You keep asking that question absent any reason to ask it.

It's not going to work for you, Mr Sid. I'm not quite naive enough to endorse your entire, fatally-flawed statement.

Aside from that, I am a registered Democrat. You are not. I will on occasion criticize my party from the inside, when I feel the need. I don't seek permission from outside my party to level criticism at MY party.

[SidDithers]

58. Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge...

We're not talking about he Democratic Party, we're talking about DU.

Sid

[DisgustipatedinCA]

59. Tell you what, Sid-O, you ask a question based in truth, and I'll try to answer it.

If you keep asking questions half-predicated on lies, I'm not going to play your little game. Just gonna keep counting 'em as I see them roll across my screen.

[elias49]

60. ..

Sic.

of the same old poo.

[treestar]

53. Why do we talk about the journalist?

Is this the next Glenn Greenwald? If a journalist has us talking about them and not what they reported, they are a failure.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

61. "Has his reporting on Ukraine and the threats of a new Cold War been so off base as to reveal...."

"....a once praiseworthy journalist as nothing more than a propaganda spewing puppet?"

I know this was intended as a rhetorical question, but it shouldn't be, because the answer is pretty clearly yes.

[Blue_Tires]

62. Sometimes even good reporters let their narrative biases get the better of them

so it's easy for a clever person to take advantage by feeding him an "explosive" story, (in exchange for anonymity, of course)...And some end up trying to stretch the boundaries in an effort to remain relevant (i.e., Seymour Hersh's bullshit Syria chemical weapons story)...