The New York Times is still The ‘Old Duranty Times’


Walter Duranty: On March 31, 1933, Walter Duranty denounced the famine stories and Gareth Jones in the New York Times. In the piece, he described the situation under the title “Russians Hungry, But Not Starving”Contradicting what he had written in the New York Times, on September 26, 1933 in a private conversation with British Diplomat William Strang, Duranty said, “it is quite possible that as many as 10 million people may have died directly or indirectly from lack of food in the Soviet Union during the past year.”

At the NYT nothing has changed:

* Shamelessly propagating enemy propaganda, lies and distortions and a self-hatred that is almost schizophrenic, New York’s Duranty Times (google Walter Duranty) once again defecates on the troops for 7 dead Afghan children, totally ignoring the fact that hiding behind women and children is traditional Muhammedan warfare:

7 Children Killed in Airstrike in Afghanistan

KABUL, Afghanistan, June 18 — Seven children were killed during an airstrike by the United States-led coalition against a religious compound thought to be a Qaeda sanctuary in remote eastern Afghanistan, the coalition said Monday.

The death of the children on Sunday may well add to the crescendoing anger many Afghans feel about civilian casualties from American and NATO military operations. More than 130 civilians have been killed in airstrikes and shootings in the past six months, according to Afghan authorities.

That toll may soon inflate dismally. Afghan officials said late Monday that more than 50 civilians may have died during fierce fighting over the past three days between NATO forces and the Taliban in the Chora district of the southern province of Uruzgan.

“I have seen with my own eyes that women and children were badly hit by bombing,” said Mullah Ahmidullah Khan, head of Uruzgan’s provincial council. “The fighting is inside the villages, so that’s why the civilians are suffering casualties. I have met some families who have lost almost everyone.”

If it wasn’t for this sentence you would never know what really went on:

But the American ambassador, William B. Wood, said the coalition went to extraordinary lengths to avoid civilian casualties. “Unfortunately, when the Taliban are using civilians in this tactical way, instances of civilian casualties, just like instances of casualties from friendly fire, cannot be completely avoided,” he said.

Read it all. Or better: Don’t bother, complain to the NYT


Looks like a ‘big fish’ was hiding among those children. Looks very much like we got him, too…


3 thoughts on “The New York Times is still The ‘Old Duranty Times’”

  1. I loathe the times. If nothing else, over the years they have shown that as a’news organisation’ that they are consistent in their inabilty to convey honest journalism.

    It has been 70 years and on behalf of my ancestors who were tortured, suffered and were murderd under Stalin, I am still filled with rage.

    On behalf of my ancestors, I would personally like to thank the Durante Times for colluding with one of the most evil men of the 20th century. You must be so proud.

  2. I disagree. The old Duranty Times was much more rigorously edited. It wasn’t easy filing from Moscow in those days and the mood in New York was still a little suspicious, despite the great progress Lenin and Stalin had made in such a short time. Today, getting misinformation into the paper is a breeze! Anyone can do it, obviously. And so they do, day after day. It kind of takes away from the specialness of Duranty-style journalism, if I do say so myself.

Comments are closed.