WSJ Editors Challenging Their NYT Counterparts for Worst of the Worst Fake News Proliferator

If what’s going on was a horse race, an announcer might report something like the following:

Times editors (and staff) are ahead by (blank) lengths, the WSJ trying to pull up on the outside for a stretch run to the wire.

It’s no contest.

Times editors, correspondents, commentators and contributors clearly stand out as worst of the worst proliferators of fake news mass deception in print.

They prove it in daily fake news editions, giving me plenty to critique, and I’d add:

If I visited New York and entered Times headquarters unprotected, I’d risk a Jamal Khashoggi fate, what I wrote a great deal about in 2018.

I’d rather stay alive to keep exposing MSM Big Lies and mass deception, especially the worst of it by the self-styled newspaper of record — and by the way.

In the 1930s leading up to WW II, the Times’ Berlin bureau chief, Guido Enderis, was a Nazi collaborator.

His bureau reporters won Pulitzer Prizes for their coverage of the regime in the 30s.

After Hitler invaded Poland in September 1939, Enderis falsely claimed that it was the other way around.

What goes around, comes around.

Once a Nazi supporter, always one.

Yesteryear it was Germany. Today it’s Ukraine — same scourge, different locations.

The Times today is far from alone in supporting it and its US/Western patrons.

So give the self-styled newspaper of record’s Journal counterparts credit for trying to close the gap between them for top fake news proliferator in print.

The WSJ’s editorial, titled “Putin’s Desperate Ukraine Escalation (sic)” is an example of giving it the old college try by making stuff up.

Truth-telling would be self-defeating. Fake news mass deception proliferation pays well.

It would be totally out of character for MSM editors, reporters and commentators to shift from fake news to the real thing.

It would also assure sacking and having to find another line of work.

According to Journal fake news — and ignorance about what Vladimir Putin’s mobilization is all about — activating 300,000 reservists for past military service “is an admission that Russia is losing” to Ukraine (sic)” — far from it.

It’s a sign of strength and intent to toughen it, not the reverse as Journal fake news falsely claimed.

And saying that it “won’t deter Ukraine from continuing its military offensive” fails to admit that no real one, clearly no effective one, exists.

And this Journal perversion of reality, sounding like Times fake news:

“(T)he call-up is an admission that the Kremlin’s campaign in Ukraine is failing (sic) and that its current forces are exhausted and inadequate (sic).”

Putin explicitly made clear that activated reservists will under go weeks of training, likely to continue until near yearend to bring them up to speed on new weapons and their use. 

As previous articles explained, if Nazified Kiev keeps attacking Russian territory — including Donbass and Kherson/Zaporozhye Regions when join Russia — its liberating SMO will likely be upgraded to a declaration of war, followed by strikes on key regime targets not attacked so far.

And this Journal trash:

“Putin (threatened) to use nuclear weapons (sic) if Ukraine continues to reclaim” regions joining Russia in the coming days (sic).

No such threat exists except under conditions explained clearly in a days earlier article — only if nukes are used against Russia or the state’s existence is greatly jeopardized.

More Journal trash:

An earlier poll by the US imperial-supporting International Republican Institute (IRI) showed that “only 21% of Kherson residents and 32% of Zaporozhye residents described their attitude toward Russia as warm (sic).”

The IRI operates in similar fashion to the so-called National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Their mandate is all about eliminating it wherever it exists — by election-rigging, color revolutions, state-sponsored violence and other dirty tricks.

The so-called IRI poll gives illegitimate surveying a bad name.

More Journal trash:

“Russian’s best option at this point would be to seek a negotiated settlement with Ukraine (sic), but Kiev understands (sic) that now is its best chance to drive Russia from its territory (sic).”

Publishing a steady stream of rubbish like the above is the Journal’s best chance to give the Times a run for its money as for top worst of the worst fake news proliferator.

2 thoughts on “WSJ Editors Challenging Their NYT Counterparts for Worst of the Worst Fake News Proliferator

Add yours

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: