afellowkid

joined 2 years ago
[–] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Listened to ep. 1.

tl;dr: Thank you for your service o7o7o7o7 9/11 never forget Soldier Protecting Sleeping Child Meme

Their first guest was the current CIA director. Basically they all just talked about how the CIA has made countless hidden sacrifices for the American people and that while their failures are widely publicized, the dedicated sacrifices they make and the danger they face is hardly known, they talked about the ~~CIA gender neutral bathroom~~ CIA Memorial Wall of their fallen comrades and got excited about how its the CIA's 75th birthday and how Biden came to their birthday party, then congratulated themselves for saying "Russia bad" before this year and for doing the Ayman al-Zawahiri drone strike and how it brings justice for 9/11 victims etc. and said how "generations" of CIA personnel have been keeping Americans safe, thanked the CIA director for his service, oohed and aahed at his life story, etc. Talked about how they are now recruiting Mandarin speakers for their new China department. They also praised the CIA for its dedication to protecting America and stressed in particular that the CIA is "apolitical".

[–] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I'm impressed you remained so calm.

Discussions like this are extremely frustrating. Atrocity propaganda can be created with virtually no effort, and it proliferates easily once set in to motion. Countering it with facts requires you to have seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of history and politics on hand at all times.

A (slightly edited) quote on war-time lies: "Man's habit of lying is not nearly so extraordinary as his amazing readiness to believe. It is, indeed, because of human credulity that lies flourish."

Anyway, here's a quote from a guy who worked for the CIA for 25 years. I hope it can help you if you get into another conversation like this.

I want to reveal to those who still believe in the myths of the CIA what it is and what it actually does. My explanation will not include the usual pap fed to us by Agency spokesmen. My view backed by 25 years of experience is, quite simply, that the CIA is the covert action arm of the Presidency. [...] The CIA is not an intelligence agency. In fact, it acts largely as an anti-intelligence agency, producing only that information wanted by policymakers to support their plans and suppressing information that does not support those plans. As the covert action arm of the President, the CIA uses disinformation, much of it aimed at the U.S. public, to mold opinion. It employs the gamut of disinformation techniques from forging documents to planting and discovering "communist” weapons caches. But the major weapon in its arsenal of disinformation is the "intelligence" it feeds to policymakers. Instead of gathering genuine intelligence that could serve as the basis for reasonable policies, the CIA often ends up distorting reality, creating out of whole cloth "intelligence" to justify policies that have already been decided upon. Policymakers then leak this "intelligence" to the media to deceive us all and gain our support. (Ralph W. McGehee, "Deadly Deceits: My 25 Years in the CIA", p. 15)

Aa shorter quote of his with the same essence: "The CIA is not now nor has it ever been a central intelligence agency. [...] Disinformation is a large part of its covert action responsibility, and the American people are the primary target audience of its lies." (Deadly Deceits, p. 192).

You may also find this useful: Former CIA Agent John Stockwell Talks about How the CIA Worked in Vietnam and Elsewhere - he talks about how the CIA gives false stories to reporters, some reporters know this and purposely publish false stories planted by the CIA and some don't know that they are planting CIA stories.

In my war, the Angola war, that I helped to manage, 1/3 of my staff was propaganda. [...] I had propagandists all over the world, principally in London, Kinshasa, and Zambia. We would take stories which we would write and put them in the Zambia Times, and then pulled them out and sent them to journalists on our payroll in Europe. But his cover story, you see, would be what he would've gotten from his stringer in Lusaka, who had gotten them from the Zambia Times. We had the complicity of the government of Zambia, Kenneth Kaunda if you will, to put these false stories into his newspapers. But after that point, the journalists, Reuters and AFP, the management was not witting of it. Now, our contact man in Europe was. And we pumped just dozens of stories about Cuban atrocities [...] We didn't know of one single atrocity committed by the Cubans, it was pure raw false propaganda to to create a an illusion of communists, you know, eating babies for breakfast and so forth, totally false propaganda.

More from him:

Another thing [the CIA does] is to disseminate propaganda to influence people's minds, and this is a major function of the CIA. And unfortunately, of course, it overlaps into the gathering of information. You have contact with a journalist, you will give him true stories, you'll get information from him, you'll also give him false stories. [...] You buy his confidence and set him up. We've seen this happen recently with Jack Anderson, for example, who has his intelligence sources, and he has also admitted that he's been set up by them, every fifth story just simply being false. You also work on their human vulnerabilities to recruit them, in a classic sense, to make them your agent, so that you can control what they do so you don't have to set them up. Sort of, you know, by putting one over on them so you can say, "Here, plant this one next Tuesday." [...] The Church Committee brought it out in 1975, and then Woodward and Bernstein put an article in Rolling Stone a couple of years later. Four hundred journalists cooperating with the CIA, including some of the biggest names in the business, to consciously introduce the stories into the press.

Good luck talking with people in the future about things like this. Often, there is not much hope in a conversation like this with a person who is not poised to listen. But on the off chance you have some favorable conversation conditions sometime, I hope these quotes can help.

 

China's autumn grain growth has entered the critical summer field management period. Some intelligent technologies have been used in northeast China, the country's most significant autumn grain-producing region.

 

3 minute video explains the process of how articles are published in scholarly journals and what peer review is.

Transcript:

Scholarly articles. Academic articles. Peer reviewed articles. You may have heard these terms used by your professor, but what do they mean? Essentially,these are all different ways of describing the same thing: research articles that have been published in scholarly journals. But what is a research article, and how does it get published in a scholarly journal?

First of all, the article reports a scholar's research practice and findings. And, it's written with an audience of other researchers in mind. Finally, in order to be published and accepted by the scholarly community, the article must pass several quality tests. The most important of these tests is called peer review. We can get a better understanding of the role of peer review if we look at the academic publishing process as a whole.

Let's imagine a researcher who wants to share a discovery with the academic community. To do this, he writes a draft article describing his research and findings and submits it for publication in a scholarly journal. Here's where the article has to pass its first test: The journal's editor reads over the article to decide whether it's a good fit for her journal. If it is, she sends copies of the article to a group of experts to evaluate the article's quality, in a process called "peer review". This is the article's second, and most important, test. These experts are the author's "peers", since they are working in the same research area. And since they are making a judgment about the article, they're sometimes called referees -- so peer reviewed articles are sometimes called "refereed articles".

Each reviewer evaluates the article by asking questions to judge the quality and significance of the research. Questions like, "What is this research about?" "Is it interesting?" "Is it important?" "Is the methodology sound?" "Are the conclusions logical?" and "Are the findings original?" Based on the answers to these questions, the reviewers decide whether the article is worthy of publication in the journal. They then make a recommendation to the editor -- either approve the article for publication, or reject it. Even if they recommend publishing the article, they usually expect the author to make revisions. The editor, however, makes the final determination whether the article should be approved, rejected, or revised.

Rejection is common, though. The most prestigious journals are very selective about the articles they publish, so they tend to have high rejection rates: some journals reject more than 90% of the submissions they receive. From the time the researcher first submits his draft article to the time it is finally published, several months - or years - may have elapsed. Once the journal is published, it is made available to subscribers, which are usually university libraries, because individual subscriptions are very expensive, often hundreds or thousands of dollars a year.

By the way, like all established systems, the peer review system has its critics, and scholars continue to think about how the peer review process might be improved. The library has tools to help you find peer reviewed research. If you want to know more about the peer review process or need help finding peer reviewed articles, ask a librarian for help!

I also saw another video about this that contains much of the same information but also talks about "single-blind review", "double-blind review", and "open review". In single-blind review, the researcher doesn't know who has reviewed their paper. In double-blind review, both the researchers and reviewers don't know who each other are. And in an open review, all parties may know who each other are.

 

Furniture Today is a weekly American magazine about the furniture industry.

Pretty interesting video, watch an editor from "Furniture Today" prompted by Trump's tariffs/trade barriers on China, exploring options for moving manufacturing to Vietnam by talking to Western manufacturers in VN and see some footage of furniture factories in Vietnam. Get the perspective of some factory owners/managers etc. while seeing inside their factories.

view more: ‹ prev next ›