Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

tenderfoot

tenderfoot's Journal
tenderfoot's Journal
October 31, 2021

When will leaders in the white community do something about the lawlessness among white gangs?

Look at these Michigan State students standing up to injustice!

https://twitter.com/DrewGoretzka/status/1454545930963890181

This violence and destruction undermines their cause.

October 31, 2021

The New York Times' 'Nazi Correspondent'

This is from this past June. It seems that the NY Times has a long history of being bad at reporting and kowtowing to fascists, racists and anti-semites...

At the outbreak of the Second World War, The New York Times bureau chief in Berlin, Guido Enderis, was known to sit in the bar of the city’s famous Adlon Hotel spouting “a loudmouthed defense of Nazism,” eventually provoking another reporter to complain to the Times’ publisher: “Isn’t it about time that The New York Times did something about its Nazi correspondent?”

But the Times had no intention of doing anything about Enderis. In fact, it valued his close connections to the Nazi government, as it had throughout the 1930s. All American newspapers found reporting in Nazi Germany difficult. The government tightly controlled information and harangued and threatened reporters who managed to publish what it didn’t like. The Nazi regime also didn’t hesitate to use its strongest weapons—banning a newspaper from distribution in Germany, kicking a reporter out of the country, or denying a reporter’s reentry. As a putatively “Jewish-owned” newspaper, The New York Times considered itself a special target. Bureau chief Enderis’ job therefore was “administering reasonably soothing syrup” to Nazi officials, as another Times reporter put it.

Yet, Enderis’ actions weren’t purely strategic and their consequences were grave. Throughout the 1930s, Enderis helped steer Times coverage to play down Jewish persecution and play up Germany’s peaceful intentions. He kowtowed to Nazi officials, wrote stories presenting solely the Nazi point of view, and reined in Times reporters whose criticism he thought went too far, shaping the news in favor of a genocidal regime bent on establishing a “Thousand Year Reich.”

Other New York Times reporters, most conspicuously Walter Duranty—who deliberately minimized the Soviet famine that took millions of Ukrainian lives in the 1920s—have become notorious for misreporting the news, once time had passed and archives had opened. Enderis, however, has remained largely under the radar. I wrote about him in my 2005 book, Buried by The Times: The Holocaust and America’s Most Important Newspaper, but Enderis’ personal perfidy likely got lost in the transgressions of his employer.

To be clear, the Times had no agenda to bolster Nazism. In fact, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, the Times publisher during most of the Nazi era, detested Hitler and advocated U.S. intervention to stop German aggression. Nor was Enderis a Nazi collaborator—a charge that should be leveled carefully, given that Nazi propaganda services actually enlisted American correspondents.

Instead, what crippled the Times coverage of Hitler and the Nazis was a timidity and deference to authority born of being an institution controlled by Jews who desperately wanted to fit into WASP society. Rather than run the slightest risk of being tossed out of Nazi Germany and causing a ruckus over its Jewish ownership, the Times let a figure like Enderis—a pitiful ally of some of history’s greatest villains—lead its Berlin bureau during its most consequential decade.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/history/articles/new-york-times-nazi-correspondent

October 30, 2021

Anti-Mask Man Shitcanned After Harassing School Kids

The Daily Mail reports:

A New York realtor was fired a day after he posted video of himself chasing young children down the street as they left school and telling them they had been abused because they were being forced to wear masks by teachers and parents.

Curtis Goldstein, who also goes by the name Curtis Orwell, worked for R New York Real Estate and posted the footage in which he yelled at the youngsters through a bullhorn on Thursday. On Friday, R New York CEO Stefani Berkin confirmed that Goldstein had been fired from the real estate firm in an Instagram post.

‘You need to be breathing fresh oxygen. This is diabolical. This is a psychological operation. Children should be breathing fresh oxygen!’ Goldstein yells. ‘Your children are abusing you because they can’t let go of CNN. They can’t let go!’


https://twitter.com/RzstProgramming/status/1454548745681526784

https://twitter.com/RzstProgramming/status/1454128487980314627

October 30, 2021

Alabama College Disinvites Historian Jon Meacham After Anti-Abortion Protest

Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Jon Meacham was invited to speak at Samford University in Alabama on the importance of civil discourse to celebrate the inauguration of the school’s new president. But Meacham has now been disinvited after students at the Southern Baptist institution, incensed that he had appeared at a Planned Parenthood event in Texas, kicked up a fuss.

“Although I am disappointed by the narrative that has combined important conversations about pro-life issues and Mr. Meacham’s planned appearance at Samford, it is vitally important to me that next week’s events unify and draw our community together to celebrate the history and future of Samford University, a place we love and for which we all care deeply,” President Beck Taylor said, according to AL.com. “Unexpectedly, Mr. Meacham’s planned lecture has become a divisive issue, one that takes attention away from our opportunity to celebrate Samford.”

https://www.al.com/education/2021/10/samford-disinvites-historian-after-student-anti-abortion-protest.html

October 24, 2021

Conspiracy beliefs prospectively predict health behavior and well-being during a pandemic

Individuals who believe in COVID conspiracy theories are more likely to test positive for Covid and violate public health regulations, as well as experience job loss, reduced income, social rejection, and decreased overall well-being.

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 October 2021

Abstract
Background

Conspiracy beliefs are associated with detrimental health attitudes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. Most prior research on these issues was cross-sectional, however, and restricted to attitudes or behavioral intentions. The current research was designed to examine to what extent conspiracy beliefs predict health behavior and well-being over a longer period of time.

Methods
In this preregistered multi-wave study on a large Dutch research panel (weighted to provide nationally representative population estimates), we examined if conspiracy beliefs early in the pandemic (April 2020) would predict a range of concrete health and well-being outcomes eight months later (December 2020; N = 5745).

Results
The results revealed that Covid-19 conspiracy beliefs prospectively predicted a decreased likelihood of getting tested for corona; if tested, an increased likelihood of the test coming out positive; and, an increased likelihood of having violated corona regulations, deteriorated economic outcomes (job loss; reduced income), experiences of social rejection, and decreased overall well-being. Most of these effects generalized to a broader susceptibility to conspiracy theories (i.e. conspiracy mentality).

Conclusions
These findings suggest that conspiracy beliefs are associated with a myriad of negative life outcomes in the long run. Conspiracy beliefs predict how well people have coped with the pandemic over a period of eight months, as reflected in their health behavior, and their economic and social well-being.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychological-medicine/article/conspiracy-beliefs-prospectively-predict-health-behavior-and-wellbeing-during-a-pandemic/9739301679DEF2B81958CBB03C5D5AC1

October 17, 2021

😂Rioter Sobbed To FBI: "I'm A Fucking Piece Of Shit"😂

The Huffington Post reports:

Daniel “D.J.” Rodriguez, the Donald Trump fanatic who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and was arrested for electroshocking D.C. Metropolitan Police Officer Mike Fanone a month after he was identified in a HuffPost story, spilled his guts to the FBI after his arrest, repeatedly crying as he told special agents he was a “fucking piece of shit” and worried that his “mom’s going to find out” what he did.

Rodriguez, according to a transcript of his FBI interview filed in court by his defense attorney on Friday, said that he became radicalized watching videos on InfoWars and from conservative commentators like Steven Crowder, Mark Dice, and the Hodgetwins that convinced him of the conspiracy theory that Trump actually won the election. Rodriguez, like millions of Trump supporters, was suckered by ludicrous conspiracy theories about a stolen election, he told the FBI.


https://twitter.com/HuffPost/status/1449706854662168578

https://twitter.com/ericlevai/status/1449460112104595458
October 14, 2021

Does our "news" media have the public's best interest at heart or are they just in it for the money?

Or is their current role to insure nothing threatens the status quo?

We're talking television networks like NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, MSNBC...

I'm not including PBS because they seem to take reporting seriously but that's not how I feel about the others. Personally, I do not care for networks that cater to one side or the other. How is it that we went from 3 major networks (pre-cable) covering news - more or less the same stories etc. and everyone had different opinions despite getting the same information?

Their aggressive approach in covering Biden/Obama/Clinton in comparison of their soft-pedalling covering TFG or W should be alarming. Their penchants for bringing on unqualified commentators (Chris Christie, Santorum, McCaskill) rather than experts in topics/issues at hand. Or spending endless hours covering something stupid that someone said rather than stories of pertinence.

I've seen a few clips of people that lost loved ones to covid due to misinformation but they never discuss what misinformation or who's producing it. It's always just "due to misinformation on the internet" or "they saw it on facebook!" and that's it. It's never a particular source - they just cut to blaming it on the platform.

Just thought I'd ask.

Please no flaming.

Thank you.

Profile Information

Gender: Female
Hometown: East Coast
Home country: USA
Current location: West Coast
Member since: Tue Sep 3, 2013, 01:59 PM
Number of posts: 8,426
Latest Discussions»tenderfoot's Journal