Thread by @AlanRMacLeod

(Thread) The @nytimes has supported virtually every US backed coup attempt in history. I wrote about it here:

mintpressnews.com/long-history-n…

@nytimes The Times immediately backed the coup in #Bolivia, refusing to use that word, insisting that the "increasingly autocratic" Morales "resigned" after a "highly fishy vote". Forcing him out, it explained was "the only remaining option"

@nytimes This goes back decades. In 1953 the Times supported the overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran, expressing a "deep sense of relief" that the President who had "gone berserk with radical nationalism" (i.e. nationalized the oil industry) was gone.

@nytimes In 1964 @nytimes applauded the arrival of a fascist military dictatorship in what it called a "peaceful revolution" that deposed "a leader who had proved so incompetent and so irresponsible"

mintpressnews.com/long-history-n…

@nytimes 1973: Chile. "a heavy share must be assigned to the unfortunate Dr. Allende himself. Even when the dangers of polarization had become unmistakably evident, he persisted in pushing a program of pervasive socialism for which he had no popular mandate"

mintpressnews.com/long-history-n…

@nytimes The Times described the 2002 Venezuela coup as the "resignation" of a "ruinous demagogue" and his replacement with a "respected business leader". Like the other coups, it insisted the US was not involved.

@nytimes What comes out in analyzing the reporting is that there is a checklist of NYT talking points that always come out.

1. Blame all economic problems on the government. Ignore US sanctions.
2. Always claim the targeted ruler is a dictator, regardless of facts

....

@nytimes 3. Insist the leader is a Kremlin plant
4. Don't use the word coup. Uprising, revolt or revolution are better
5. Express ridicule at the idea the US is involved.
6. Depict the coup government as democrats
7. Blame the deposed leaders for their own demise
mintpressnews.com/long-history-n…