Matt Taibbi’s Slip Shows Beneath Praise for Ed Herman:

RIP Edward Herman, Who Co-Wrote a Book That’s Now More Important Than Ever

We need a new ‘Manufacturing Consent’

By Matt Taibbi, November 14, 2017


In his eulogy for Herman who, with Noam Chomsky, wrote the classic Manufacturing Consent, Taibbi makes the point that Ed’s work “has never been more relevant” – oops, except for Herman’s skepticism regarding Russia-gate.  The following two paragraphs reflect the painful contortions journalists like Taibbi go through, having drunk too much of the Kool-Aid served by the New York Times and the rest of the Establishment.



In his last piece, from this past summer, Herman made a list of some of the whoppers the media has foisted on the public over the years: the depiction of the U.S. not as an invader but as a defender of South Vietnam against “aggression,” the notion that the Soviets were behind a papal assassination attempt, the “missile gap” and others.

Herman was a skeptic about the current Russia news, but that isn’t why his work is relevant today. You can believe he’s dead wrong on Russia and Trump, and Manufacturing Consent would still be far more relevant now than it was when he and Chomsky first wrote it. [bold added]



See what I mean?  Am I the only one to see supreme irony in the fact that Taibbi would credit Herman with unmasking key historical WHOPPERS, but the fact that he was a “skeptic” about Russia-gate … well, “you can believe he’s dead wrong” on that one.  One can still admire Herman for providing the framework and conceptual tools needed to unmask whoppers – except please don’t apply them to Russia-gate. Would the NY Times manufacture consent on Russia-gate?  Does anyone remember the Times’scheerleading for the war on Iraq?


Oh, I think I get it.  I went and found the last piece Ed Herman wrote:


Fake News on Russia in the New York Times, 1917-2017

by Edward S. Herman / July 8th, 2017


Herman nails it.  He knows how it all works, and can spot REALLY FAKE NEWS, because, well, he wrote the book.  In my mind’s eye I can see him smiling with satisfaction while putting the finishing touches to his parting shot – at the same time realizing that his parting shot was likely to be missed by those in most need of his observations.


It is just short of amazing that Kool-Aid-drinking journalists can perform the mental gymnastics necessary to honor Herman, on the one hand, and remain a card-carrying member of Establishment groupthink, on the other.  And spread “consent” of the kind “manufactured” by the New York Times on Russia


This is the first I heard of Herman’s farewell address, so to speak.  Had any of you seen it already?  Is it totally unknown to “progressives?”  Would they read it if you asked them?


Hat tip to Matt Taibbi for referring us to it.  It is a must-read, in my view. As for the Herman/Chomsky book Manufacturing Consent?  Taibbi is correct — “it has never been more relevant.”  But there is no need for a new Manufacturing Consent.  It would suffice to re-read the old one.



McGovern to Binney on RT America: Do Americans deserve to hear us, with our combined 50 or more years of intelligence experience?

November 13, 2017 (11 minutes)

President Donald Trump said Saturday that Russian President Vladimir Putin again denied that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election, and that Putin seemed sincere.  This, of course, is a direct challenge to the paper-thin January “assessment” assessed by handpicked assessors from three agencies led by former bureaucratic “hacks” – labeled as such by the President himself.

That “assessment” has been debunked by a group of former senior intelligence analysts, who cite forensic evidence that the so-called “Russian hack” of the Democratic National Committee was actually an inside job – not a hack, by Russia or anyone else. RT America spoke Monday to Bill Binney, a former Technical Director at NSA, and Ray McGovern whose CIA-analyst career included briefing three Presidents. Both were involved in the “Russian hack” analysis, which was published last July by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and briefed by Bill Binney to CIA Director Mike Pompeo exactly three months later.

Mocking Trump Does Not Prove “Russia Did It”

By Ray McGovern

Mocking Trump Doesn’t Prove Russia’s Guilt

The group-think Establishment feigns shock as Trump takes on U.S. intelligence “hacks” full bore.  The Fawning Corporate Media cannot, by itself, get rid of Trump.  But the rest of the Deep State can.  They will now try big time.  As Chuck Schumer told Rachel Maddow in early January, the “intelligence community has six ways from Sunday” to put a President in his place.  Today is only Monday.

Intel community ‘not being honest’ with president about Russia

Bill Binney interviewed by Ed Schultz on President Trump’s interest in getting the facts on Russia-gate from Bill

November 8, 2017, 7 minutes

While Trump has told CIA Director Mike Pompeo to listen to Binney, the political establishment and mainstream media are pushing back with their customary smearing tactics.  They’ve got their work cut out for them; widely respected Bill Binney is a very difficult person to smear with any credibility.

Are CIA cyber-warriors impersonating companies like Kaspersky Lab – or, gosh, maybe even “Russian hackers?” Ray suggests it is really not difficult to connect dots; it’s just that you will be banned from what passes for the mainstream media. He was interviewed on this today:

Nov. 9, 2017 – five minutes


WikiLeaks has just published the source code for the CIA hacking tool named ‘Hive,’ which shows that CIA-operated malware can impersonate public companies – like, say, the cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Lab.  Ray was asked to comment on the story linked below:


Ray chose to focus on “Hive’s” cousin cyber-tool, “Marble Framework,” because immediately after Julian Assange outed “Marble” on March 31, the New York Timesdecided that any mention of “Marble” was not fit to print.  Apparently under special guidance – The NYT has avoided this particularly relevant cyber-tool like the plague.  On April 13, CIA Director Mike Pompeo told a friendly think tank audience that RT collaborates with WikiLeaks, and announced:


“It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service, often abetted by state actors like Russia.”


And you were maybe wondering why the U.S. “organs of state security” do not like Julian Assange?

Bill Binney was interviewed today about his October 24 meeting with CIA Director Mike Pompeo at President Trump’s request to discuss Russian hacking – if any.

November 8, 2017 – 15 minutes

Binney and Pompeo focused on the 3-month-old conclusion of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity that technical evidence disproves what “handpicked” intelligence analysts “assessed” was a Russian hack of DNC emails on July 5, 2016.  Binney and other former senior technical experts from NSA who co-authored the VIPS Memorandum of July 24 based their conclusions on the kind of forensic evidence that – so far as is known – neither FBI technicians nor “handpicked” analysts from CIA/NSA/FBI have paid adequate attention to.

Plainspoken Bill showed some impatience with the endless array of what-about-this-theory folks, who engage in speculation but do not produce any “factual evidence that we could take a look at.”  He makes the main point – transfer speed – a couple of times, and includes mention of the results of trans-Atlantic experiments he ordered in late summer to test what Internet transfer speeds could be achieved.  The results of those tests confirmed VIPS’s earlier conclusions that, during the July 5, 2017 cyber-intrusion at the DNC, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers.  Those more recent findings were discussed here:

Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

Truth in Labeling


It comes as no surprise that VIPS’s findings do not go down well with the guardians of ‘Russia-gate’ orthodoxy.  This morning, NBC and CNN were calling him a “conspiracy theorist” – a label customarily applied to those who dare dispute the prevailing wisdom on key issues like this one.  This ploy, of course, was not hard to see coming.  Actually, for the first time in its almost 15-year existence, VIPS felt it necessary to append the following advisory to the bottom of its Memorandum of July 24.

Full Disclosure: Over recent decades the ethos of our intelligence profession has eroded in the public mind to the point that agenda-free analysis is deemed well nigh impossible. Thus, we add this disclaimer, which applies to everything we in VIPS say and do: We have no political agenda; our sole purpose is to spread truth around and, when necessary, hold to account our former intelligence colleagues.


We speak and write without fear or favor. Consequently, any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental. The fact we find it is necessary to include that reminder speaks volumes about these highly politicized times. This is our 50th VIPS Memorandum since the afternoon of Powell’s speech at the UN. Live links to the 49 past memos can be found at


Sorting It All Out


Early this week a university professor asked Ray for help in plowing through this story.  He prepared a short list of relevant documents; they are pasted in below:


-A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack

By Patrick Lawrence, The Nation

August 9, 2017

“Former NSA experts, now members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.”







-A Demand for Russian ‘Hacking’ Proof

A Key Issue That Still Needs to be Resolved

January 17, 2017



-Allegations of Hacking Are Baseless

VIPS, December 12, 2016


Intelligence Analysts Say Russia Didn’t Hack U.S. Election; It Was an Inside Job

Watch Lee Camp use humor and some precious video clips to drive home the points that VIPS has been making.

August 26, 2017, (16 minutes: a biting spoof)