Thanks for the thread, MattSh.

The Parry and Consortium News bashing here is beyond belief. Makes me wonder what site I'm on sometimes.

can Democrats be conservative, mainstream news consumers with nasty tendencies towards investigative journalists, complicit or supportive of assassinations, violents coups and economic oppression?

and if so, is that OK as long as they support the silencing of dissent or unwelcome speech?

of course, these outlooks would never countenance torture or illegal invasions.

other questions include- would disruptive elements stake out and take down liberal message board websites?

the answer to that question should be settled already.

.

recognized for his consistently good work.

So it is very revealing to see him bashed here, as he is regularly on Right Wing forums.

A lot has been revealed over the past several years.

But nothing can chage the fact that Robert Parry is one of our few real journalists.

Thanks for posting, MattSh!

Congratulations to Robert Parry!

Let the Parry haters go to hell.

Parry is a great journalist despite what some post here about him.

Never any substance to them, just pure throw-away one-liners.

you can't get water out of a dry well.

For some it's easier to post a laughing smilie with the hopes of inducing a negative emotional response, whereas using reason in a rebuttal or debate requires hard work and some measure of courage; lest your reasoned argument fail.

in which he virtually cut & pasted whatever RT and Putin were saying at the time, right down to using the same graphic as RT, in his 'The plane looked just like Putin's plane, that's why Ukraine shot it down' piece of fiction.

Parry, once, may have been a decent investigative reporter.

Sadly, he's nothing more than a Putin stenographer now.

Sid

Trying to silence liberal voices isn't the answer.

whether you realize it or not.

You want people to believe it does. That way, they'll swallow the thinly-veiled Putin apologia whole because of Parry's laudable work during Iran-Contra.

People capable of nuanced thought can acknowledge his previous body of work and still find the Ukraine coverage laughable.

achievements, only acknowledging or mentioning those achievements when called on it.

Frankly, this being posted here is less about honoring his past achievements as it is about shielding him from legitimate skepticism about his Ukraine coverage.

What I'm saying is this:

be posted here regardless of any perceived motivation of the OP.

And in reading the OP, I noticed the poster's name, and recognized them as one of the more persistent Putin apologists here.

Hence, an agenda.

One of the biggest pro-Putin posters at DU posts an article about a journalist who has specifically received criticism for his unquestioningly pro-Putin articles.

That's not simply someone sharing news about Parry. It's someone pushing a narrative.

Sid

that is a legitimate newsworthy story and it should be posted.

This thread is not about Putin, it's about Parry and the award for his substantial life time record of journalistic achievements which you nor any other poster here can deny.

Sid

Is Truthout in your sights next? And what site after that?

is just like the Holocaust, you guys.

in this country right now, great to see him be recognized for his work.

His reporting on Ukraine, on the other hand...

it's completely laughable.

Sid

Ukr. The truth is not always welcome, his reporting on Iraq wasn't popular either with those who had a vested interest in not wanting the truth to be told. But it was the truth, great to see him be recognized.

Whose reporting on Ukr btw, do you think was accurate?

Unlike the state media RT you've fallen in love with. NG has lost three of its journalists covering Putin's corruption and crimes in Chechnya--coincidence, no doubt--and is currently being threatened with closure.

It's probably no coincidence Parry's reporting seems to be dastardly similar to RT's viewpoints.

for their work.

So you have no problem with the neo-con exposures over there, their support for neo nazi thugs and their attempts to start yet another war for profit, like all the other ones they started in recent years?

What do you know about Virginia Nuland eg? She is trustworthy to you?

Did you support the same people, McCain, Nuland's husband et al, when they pushed for the Iraq War?

I remember having these discussions about Iraq, same arguments, same denials of provable facts etc.

Same 'you're a Saddam lover' devolvement when the facts could not be refuted.

I mean I could sink to that level and simply say 'the same Moscow commie news source you have fallen in love with' but that is just so below the bar, why would I bother when I have FACTS to argue against rather than YOU?

Parry is excellent on this subject and he's not alone. And he's getting the same pushback that he got on Iran Contra, so I doubt it bothers him.

Tell me, in the Russia/Ukraine situation, which country launched a preemptive invasion against a country that didn't attack them in the first place?

object to what you do yourself. However the reality is that the SAME PEOPLE who dragged this country into Iraq, are trying to start yet another war somewhere that is ALSO none of our business.

I care about THIS country, period. Europe can take care of its own problems, what are WE doing all over the world making things WORSE every time we interfere, though VERY profitable for the neocons and their Defense Contractors.

Let Europe handle its own affairs as they are trying to do and they do NOT want the neocon wars in their backyard.

your argument is complete nonsense.

You know absolutely nothing about Eastern Europe, and have absolutely zero standing to act as spokesperson for what they want.

What they want is protection from the country that's attempted to wipe out their cultures and peoples for the last several centuries, and given that Russia has invaded two of its former victims in the last decade, their fears seem entirely founded.

I'm getting really sick of this fucking imperialism out of the pro-Kremlin left that seems to think Eastern Europe doesn't actually know what it wants.

the plot to influence the outcome of the 1980 Carter/Reagen election and creating the first investigative news magazine on the Internet in 1995 aren't worthy of an award?

recognition for Platoon, even though Alexander was a train wreck.

Parry's body of work has helped educate us about our not so distant history.

Last edited Thu Jul 30, 2015, 10:52 AM - Edit history (2)

whose careers have been nothing but highlights or a straight line in progression unless they died young.

Parry's 80's and 90's works definitely entitles him to the award and I believe he wil produce more quality work in the future as well.

other times, they do their best work and then it's over (Francis Ford Coppola's best contributions over the past 25 years have been in luxury lodging and wine).

for his lifetime of achievements.

Peace to you.

a regular basis. Parry is one of those, there are others also. So it's not like he's the ONLY one reporting the inconvenient facts about our current situations all over the world.

But then again, he was slammed I'm sure for his coverage of Iran Contra too at the time. In the end as always happens with TRUTHFUL reporting, journalists like him are generally proven to be right.

So who do you trust to report the facts he is reporting on?

There is a definite difference in who he is and what he writes about.

said about him when he reported truthfully on Iran Contra, 'there's something wrong with him'..

I look forward to some proof of that statement. Otherwise it is nonsense.

The ONLY difference in his current reporting is he's covering RECENT events, honestly and truthfully as always.

Great journalist, never allowed the critics to stop him from telling the truth, and still doesn't.

Is that what happens when someone you are ignoring responds to a post? It jumps up to the most recently responded to posts in My Posts?

it was sabrina that replied, btw.



Sid

a time machine so they can go back and give it to the Robert Parry who actually *deserves* the award...

detract from his lifetime of substantial achievements in the field of journalism, Iran Contra, Oliver North, the election plot of 1980 Carter/Reagan, and creating the first investigative news magazine on the Internet in 1995.

believe this will be Parry's last award by any stretch.

foundation pause and they should have addressed why they gave him that award in the face of that activity.

so thankfully he has remained a journalist who can be trusted and is being awarded for his integrity and honesty and fearlessness, as always.

Btw, where do you get your info on these issues? What sources do you recommend we trust?

What a hoot...

Last edited Sat Aug 1, 2015, 03:12 AM - Edit history (2)

What's funny is people who automatically fall for everything the mainstream media reports without using the slightest bit of critical thinking. Whoosh!

If you think the reporting on Ukraine, Russia and Putin has had even the slightest bit of reality to it, you have no idea what's going on over here.

I know. I've read in whole or in part over 10000 articles since the Ukraine crisis began. And I live over here, almost 10 years now. And you? What's your authority? 1-2 articles a month, all from mainstream sources? Like you said. Hardy har har. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

This is exactly what Robert Parry haters look like:

Yes, they do.

If you wonder why Parry is an outstanding journalist, no amount of explaining will help you understand.

we all (US citizens, onlookers have no stake) have a stake in the justness and forward progress of social values. the truth should produce a result, or it is worthless. A just result will take more than words.