RT | June 30, 2020 The New York Times is doubling down on claims that Russia offered bounties for the killing of US troops in Afghanistan, but now …‘Russian bounty’ story shifts: NYT now claims Afghan CRIMINALS & not Taliban were paid, cites anonymous sources again
Richard Yuan is not alone as a Chinese-Australian businessman slandered by the mainstream media. Because it is in the nature of Chinese people not to engage in public arguments, and not to fight back when attacked, the media will continue to target them.
There is an assumption in the media that Chinese-Australians can easily be linked to impropriety, wrongdoing and allegations of improperly attempting to exert influence. That attitude is far too prevalent in major newsrooms, it’s not only biased it is racist.
Taking on a major media outlet for defamation can be a bruising, emotionally and financially draining experience. The one clear truth that’s emerged from the Yuan case is when sloppy journalists make false assumptions that are put to a legal test they can, and do, fail.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison held a somber press conference on Friday to announce that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) had conducted a raid on a sitting member of the New South Wales parliament all because, so far, he’d said favorable things about China and had traveled to the country.
He became the first Muslim MP in the NSW Parliament when he joined the Upper House in 2009 to fill a vacancy.
Shawki Moselmane said his brother was “a very respectable man” who was the subject of racism, and that the AFP would not find any evidence.
When most people think of the term “fake news,” they think of the headlines in supermarket tabloids about alien invasions and two-headed grandmothers giving birth to quintuplets. But when the New York Times and the leading US intelligence agencies use the term, they mean something entirely different: reporting that cuts across the efforts of the state to promote war and political viewpoints that challenge the establishment.