Better in their words…

Supporter bonus roundup! How the media cooks up its fake news cancer narrative; how Russia responds to US-claimed ISIS conspiracy; how the NYT tries to help Biden overcome pandemic malaise; and more.

Source: THE GREAT MEDIA BAKING SHOW ☙ Sunday, March 24, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS

WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY

💉 The UK Telegraph took the opportunity of yesterday’s Royal Cluster story to cook up a narrative cover for rising cancer rates, by running this astonishing headline:

Don’t lost track of that sub-headline: more and more, fit, young people are getting cancer. Setting aside the ethical and civilizations aims of protecting our young folks, this trend could become a demographic atom bomb if it continues. You’d think the young cancer crisis would constitute the CDC’s biggest concern, but CDC researchers remain committed to diving into promiscuous gay mens’ nether orifices looking for monkeypox.

This Telegraph story is part of a recent series of similar ‘surging cancer’ stories that have been trickling out of corporate media, tantalizing us with the headline, but then packing the articles with useless tidbits to distract readers from ever thinking the magic vaccines could be involved or wondering, what changed that’s causing all this cancer?

I’m sick of playing pretend, and we’re shutting it down today.

Like Coca-Cola, corporate media keeps a secret recipe for baking all these narrative-framing cancer articles, a recipe for grudgingly recognizing the recent drastic increase in turbo cancers in young people . But today I’m going to give away their secret recipe. My hope is no one will ever again be tricked into consuming any more of these empty mental calories, not least because they’re packed with unhealthy high-fructose corn syrup and six different kinds of GMO seed oils.

Once baked, the media’s final journalistic product is a hallucinogenic compound causing people to forget that for their entire lives — until 2021 — all these weird turbo cancers were strictly diseases of old age. Whenever a young person used to get cancer it was practically a national tragedy, and lawyers would eagerly call the victims to find out if they’d been climbing through asbestos at their jobs or something. (Nowadays I suspect the reason only old people used to get those cancers is because of prolonged exposure to something in their environment.)

If you eat off the media’s narrative-formula cancer cake, you’ll get amnesia and forget all about cancer in the old days. The name of the media’s narrative formula is “strategic ambiguity.” (Actually, the real name includes a crass reference to male bovine excrement: ‘strategic b——.’ But that name was cleaned up since this is a family blog, and since cow farts cause climate change. Allegedly.)

Ready? Here it is; here is the media’s secret journalistic formula for manufacturing misleading strategic ambiguity to fog the skyrocketing numbers of young cancer diagnoses:

First, whip ten egg whites into empty fluff and carefully fold in a brief, drive-by citation to some barely relevant, antique study showing a long-term increase in cancer over an extended period of time except — and this is the important part — the study must end no later than 2019:

For added zest, don’t link the study, don’t give its name, don’t say what journal it appeared in, and don’t otherwise identify it so people can check for themselves. For best effect, generically call it “one study.”

Second, prepare your first bowl by adding two cups of CURRENT quotes from doctors who are NOW reporting alarming increases in cancer — but be very careful not to reveal exactly when cases started spiking. Let the reader interpret it any way they want:

Third, grease a second bowl of drivel with bafflement. Make readers more confused about the cause of the cancer than were the poor, bewildered Babylonians after God confused their languages and they were all trying to ask each other what exactly happened last night after the Tower party. To enjoy a spicier version, sprinkle into the mixture some sideways references to good-old Darwin and point the finger at rapid-onset genetics:

Then mix the two bowls together, combining the amorphous admission of ballooning cancer rates bowl with the bowl of bafflement, to reinforce the almost-baked narrative that it’s just a mystery and it always will be:

Finally, bake the result at 350 degrees for six seconds to create a hot mess. After you remove your strategically ambiguous narrative cake from the oven and allow it to cool, apply some vanilla icing of useless advice:

Now the strategically ambiguous narrative cancer cake can be served to unsuspecting news consumers. They’ll eat up the mystifying, amnesia-inducing pastry and ask for a cup of malarkey to wash it down.

But now, you won’t eat it, because now you know how the lying media’s cock-and-bull cancer cake was baked.

🚀 Speaking of media strategic ambiguity, the Moscow concert hall terrorist attack is rapidly becoming a high-stakes whodunit. Practically the only thing the warbloggers are debating is: who was behind the well-planned, well-funded, well-armed attacks? Russian warbloggers seem to be leaning toward Ukraine and the CIA. But yesterday, the U.S. State Department insisted the culprit was definitely ISIS-K, a Syrian branch of the CIA-linked muslim terror group, and not Ukraine, as Asia One reported in its article headlined, “ISIS solely responsible for Moscow attack, no Ukraine involvement: White House.”

Yesterday, the Russian Foreign Ministry sarcastically responded through its spokesman, Maria Zakharova.

Zakharova’s response might be best described as somewhat snarky. Or, you could say the chickens of the United States’ previous prevarications are coming home to roost, or are being thrown back in our faces, or words to that effect. Anyway, here’s what Zakharova said:

“The official representative of US National Security Council Adrienne Watson said Ukraine was not involved in the Moscow terrorist attack. Rather, the banned ISIS is to blame.

If only they could solve the assassination of their own President Kennedy so quickly. But no, for more than 60 years they have not been able to figure out who killed him. Or maybe that was ISIS too? Or, will they delay providing specifics for another 60 years, playing with any “constructive uncertainty”?

Or how about the terrorist attack on Nord Stream? According to the United States, Ukrainians were involved with that one. True, in that case the American authorities got to the bottom of things. So they are still rummaging around down there, searching for Kiev or some ISIS divers. Washington did not utter a single word calling on Denmark and Sweden not to give up searching for those responsible. And the U.S. and Britain blocked Russia’s formal request for a U.N. Security Council investigation into the bombing.

All this says is that U.S. political elites have become adept over the decades in artfully diverting attention from high-profile crimes and all other sorts of skillful staging.

Therefore, until Russia’s investigation into the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall is complete, any words from Washington exonerating Kiev should be considered as more evidence (implicating Kiev). After all, the Kiev mobsters’ terrorist activities were financed by American liberal democrats, and Kiev’s involvement in the Biden family’s corrupt schemes have been going on for years.”

I wonder how they really feel about the U.S.’s conclusions?

This morning, the Moscow attacks were the top stories on all three major U.S. corporate news websites: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.

But despite the attack being top-headline news in nearly all major Western media, and despite the fact that Ukraine’s very survival depends on Moscow being convinced of its innocence, as of this morning Ukraine’s state-run Kyiv Post still hasn’t reported on the Moscow attacks at all.

Ukraine seems not to have noticed the attack. Scrolling down the page, Kyiv Post readers find a single ambiguous headline, “World Briefing: March 24, 2024,” which links to a Canadian story that briefly mentions the Moscow attacks as part of an international news roundup. Ukraine’s other state-controlled paper, the Kyiv Independent, also failed to report the story. Down the page, readers find a two-sentence blurb reporting penis-pianist Zelensky’s denial of involvement in what it ambiguously called the “Moscow shooting.”

Why are Ukrainians under a news blackout about the terrorist attack on Moscow? The event is ineluctably linked to their fates. What do you think?

🔥 Yesterday, the New York Times ran a tremendously intriguing (paywalled) pandemic article headlined, “How a Pandemic Malaise Is Shaping American Politics.” I must give the Times credit for coining that terrific term, pandemic malaise. In essence, the article decried the fact that most Americans have neither forgotten nor forgiven what happened to them during the pandemic.

The article starts off by admitting the obvious: people’s trust in big institutions is down, far down, down at the bottom of the ocean somewhere near the blackened bits of the blown up Nordstream pipeline. Here’s how the Times more or less accurately described the nation’s pandemic malaise:

Public confidence in institutions — the presidency, public schools, the criminal justice system, the news media, Congress — slumped in surveys after the pandemic and has yet to recover. The pandemic hardened voter distrust in government, a sentiment Mr. Trump and his allies are using to their advantage. Fears of political violence, even civil war, are at record highs, and rankings of the nation’s happiness are at record lows. Voters’ views of the nation’s economy and their confidence in the future remain bleak.

“The pandemic pulled the rug out from under people — showing you were never quite as secure as you thought you were,” Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York, a Democrat, said in an interview. “We’re starting to get our grounding back. But I think it’s just hard for people to feel good again.”

High office vacancy rates have crippled downtowns, emphasizing the country has not yet fully recovered. Depression and anxiety rates remain stubbornly high, particularly among young adults. Students remain behind in math and reading, part of the continued fallout from school closures. And even positive news has been met with skepticism.

That was as accurate a description of current events as I’ve ever seen in the Times. Which just goes to show that all along, they knew. They knew, and they know. As far back as late 2020, I warned this would happen, especially as related to local governments whose unqualified commissioners embarked on an unprecedented destructive rampage wielding their newfound emergency executive authorities.

I’d add to the Times’ list of Americans’ post-pandemic gag reflex the fact that most red states drastically pruned local emergency authority, and significantly broadened individual rights.

The Times published its article because it is fretting about Americans blaming Joe Biden — in its view, unfairly — for the unmitigated disaster that the Biden Administration unleashed through its 100% pro-pharma, pro-union, completely political pandemic response.

The Times wanted to help Biden. But it seemed at a loss as to what to do about it. Still, and this is the reason I reported on this story at all, the Times’ article did come tantalizingly close to revealing the actual answer, which is that we need a bipartisan Truth Commission, we need serious reforms limiting emergency powers — including medical integrity, and we need accountability for somebody.

Short of those things, everybody remains in favor of a political wrecking ball. We want to tear down the Times’ darling, the Deep State.

And whatever else he might be, President Trump is a wrecking ball.

Not that the Biden Administration would listen, but the article quietly laid out a real solution. The Times described an effective answer in the voice of the best, most unassailable expert it could find. In other words, it’s not the Times saying this; it’s the experts. Here’s how the Times packaged its politically unappetizing menu, aimed squarely at Team Biden:

Philip D. Zelikow, the lawyer who served as the executive director of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11 terror attacks, who led a nonpartisan team of more than 30 experts called the Covid Crisis Group that investigated the pandemic response and published a book of its findings, and who says he opposes Mr. Trump, said the Biden administration moved too quickly to put the pandemic behind it.

“Since the Biden administration never conducted an investigation of the crisis,” Mr. Zelikow said, “and also the Biden administration never developed a serious package of reforms to react to the crisis, the administration basically left the impression that it accepted that the government had failed, but just didn’t want to talk about it anymore.”

“If someone like Donald Trump is elected this fall,” Mr. Zelikow said, “the government performance in the Covid crisis will be a significant cause.”

That is so important. There’s a lot packed into those few words. The whole answer is right there. Here, more plainly, is what the three short paragraphs explained. The major premise, if you will:

1. The Biden Administration put the pandemic behind it too fast (he refuses to admit people are still hurting).
2. The Biden Administration never investigated the crisis (he refuses to admit the government made mistakes).
3. The Biden administration never developed a serious package of reforms after the crisis (he refuses to make sure the same mistakes can’t happen again).

That ‘major premise’ established in people’s minds that Biden, as apparent chief executive, was the problem. Then Mr. Zelikow described what you might call the minor premise, that:

1. The Biden Administration just accepts that the government failed (oh well, mistakes were made).
2. The Biden Administration refuses to talk about it anymore (nah, nah, nah we can’t hear you).

The ‘minor premise’ established that Biden can’t or won’t fix the problem (which is him). Therefore, Americans have logically concluded that the government’s poor performance during the covid crisis supports Donald Trump’s election.

The Times intended to warn Team Biden. Think about what this implies: for Biden to rescue his campaign from pandemic malaise — a deep distrust of all the major institutions leading to democrat losses — Biden must rebuild that lost trust, through the classic three part formula: admitting the government hurt people, admitting that it screwed up, and then doing something to ensure it can’t happen again.

It won’t matter how clearly and how often the Times tries to explain it to the Biden campaign; they won’t listen.

This is huge progress. They’ve concluded that the strategy of pretending the whole mess is now behind us and it’s time to move on won’t work. Maybe, just maybe, we can start having some adult conversations about where to go from here. And it ain’t a new WHO pandemic treaty, that’s for certain.

Have a blessed Sunday! Thank you so much for your loyal support. I can’t believe it’s almost been four years. With your help, I promise to keep going, to keep working to save the country from our own C&C corner of the world. See you tomorrow!

Share

We can’t do it without you. Consider joining with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds.  I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can:  ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

How to Donate to Coffee & Covid
Twitter: jchilders98.
Truth Social: jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com