‘Occupy’ news that’s not fit to print in NYT

If you haven’t seen Naomi’s Wolf’s analysis of the nationwide, federally supported crackdown against Occupy encampments, that’s because you don’t read Reader Supported News or foreign newspapers such as The Guardian. More here.

7 thoughts on “‘Occupy’ news that’s not fit to print in NYT

  1. Just because Naomi Klein Wolf didn’t get her facts straight doesn’t mean there isn’t DHS coordination. Just sayin’!

  2. More than a few credible journalists, including Joshua Holland, have noted that Wolf’s piece is a lot stronger on suppositions than on facts, and that it reeks of conspiracy theorizing, and might therefore alienate skeptics still weighing the evidence of federal collusion with municipal police departments.

    Holland’s piece is a sobering reminder to stick to the facts — i.e., don’t use phrases such as “it is likely” if you don’t have hard evidence — but I hope his article doesn’t discourage anyone from aggressively asking questions about the suspiciously synchronous attacks on Occupy, or Obama’s silence on police violence, or the corrupt relationship between Congresspeople and lobbyists.

    Bottom line: Don’t jump to conclusions, but don’t forget the corporate media has repeatedly shown that it must be embarrassed into reporting stories that reflect badly on the wealthy and powerful — the people who own the media and/or fund congressional campaigns.

  3. See, here’s the thing: Just because Naomi Wolf is wrong on the facts doesn’t mean her conclusion isn’t true. Anyone who thinks there’s no coordination is dangerously naive.

  4. “Anyone who thinks there’s no coordination is dangerously naive.”

    Yep.
    I believe it was the mayor of Oakland, the embattled Jean Quan, who publicly revealed a couple of weeks ago that she was part of a conference call on the topic of handling OWS that involved the Feds and 18 mayors.

  5. “Just because Naomi Wolf is wrong on the facts doesn’t mean her conclusion isn’t true. Anyone who thinks there’s no coordination is dangerously naive.”
    By that logic Bush was right – Hussein did play a role in 9/11. The President may have been wrong on the facts but that doesn’t mean his conclusion isn’t true. Some Deputy to some Deputy of Iraq did meet with some Al Qaeda functionaries. Therefore, ipso facto, cause and effect!

Comments are closed.