This notice is a call out for All Nasty Women and Men Who Are Anti-hate to join forces to march on Washington on January 21, 2017, the day after our President-elect Donald Trump’s Inauguration ceremony. The following information can be found on Facebook.
WOMEN’S MARCH ON WASHINGTON- JANUARY 21st, 2017
OFFICIAL STATEMENT, National Organizers”On January 21, 2017 we will unite in Washington, DC for the Women’s March on Washington. We stand together in solidarity with our partners and children for the protection of our rights, our safety, our health, and our families — recognizing that our vibrant and diverse communities are the strength of our country.”“The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us–women, immigrants of all statuses, those with diverse religious faiths particularly Muslim, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native and Indigenous people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, the economical…ly…
Just as Donald Trump and Russian president Vladimir Putin’s friendship was really starting to bloom, some trouble back home may complicate Trump’s vision of a new era in U.S.-Russia relations. On Tuesday, Republican senator Lindsey Graham called on the Senate to open an investigation into Russia’s reported interference into the presidential election.
“Assuming for a moment that we do believe that the Russian government was controlling outside organizations that hacked into our election, they should be punished,” Graham said. “Putin should be punished.”
During the election, American intelligence officials repeatedly voiced concerns that Russia was using cyberattacks — hacking the DNC and leaking emails damaging to Hillary Clinton, for example — to influence the outcome of the election.
Graham is no friend of Donald Trump and has often opposed him publicly, though he has said that he would support him fully as commander-in-chief. The senator’s call represents an attack on Trump’s policy positions, especially because the investigation that Graham has described would not be limited to the election, but would also include what he calls “Russia’s misadventures throughout the world,” even in places like Syria.
A Powerful Russian Weapon: The Spread of False Stories
The planting of false stories is nothing new; the Soviet Union devoted considerable resources to that during the ideological battles of the Cold War. Now, though, disinformation is regarded as an important aspect of Russian military doctrine, and it is being directed at political debates in target countries with far greater sophistication and volume than in the past.
The flow of misleading and inaccurate stories is so strong that bothNATOand the European Union have established special offices to identify and refute disinformation, particularly claims emanating from Russia.
The Kremlin uses both conventional media — Sputnik, a news agency, and RT, a television outlet — and covert channels, as in Sweden, that are almost always untraceable.
Russia exploits both approaches in a comprehensive assault, Wilhelm Unge, a spokesman for the Swedish Security Service, said this year when presenting the agency’s annual report. “We mean everything from internet trolls to propaganda and misinformation spread by media companies like RT and Sputnik,” he said.
The fundamental purpose of dezinformatsiya, or Russian disinformation, experts said, is to undermine the official version of events — even the very idea that there is a true version of events — and foster a kind of policy paralysis.
Disinformation most famously succeeded in early 2014 with the initial obfuscation about deploying Russian forces to seize Crimea. That summer, Russia pumped out a dizzying array of theories about the destruction of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine, blaming the C.I.A. and, most outlandishly, Ukrainian fighter pilots who had mistaken the airliner for the Russian presidential aircraft.
The right of the press to circulate information and opinion without censorship by the government.
While watching coverage of this week’s Republican National Convention, I switched between CNN, ABC, FOX-News, CBS and others. I read news articles online and in print, and watched live streaming from different sources online.
And I was struck by how one event could be seen so differently by so many news organizations — nearly all of which had a clear slant, whether for or against.
Our founding fathers made Freedom of the Press part of the Constitution’s First Amendment because, in the words of its principle author James Madison:
“We have no Facebook yet.”
And because I’m a journalist, you can trust me on that.