There is little point in reading the papers. Twitter is a much better source, now that the CIA no longer controls it

The silly idea that Ukraine can push Russia out of Crimea, as opined by a Chinese 'expert' is relayed uncritically in the Economist, where it is read by people who matter. 

Reuters tells us that 

US intelligence believes Putin probably didn't order Navalny to be killed, Wall Street Journal reports

I had the gravest doubts at the time. It was not in Putin's interests just after the successful (from his point of view) interview with Tucker Carlson.

An incident set up by a trouble maker who wants the public to believe people who march for Palestine are anti-Semites got widespread coverage in England and his story was taken at face value. 

Lots of female columnists waxed volubly indignant, though the man was obviously not the passer-by caught up by chance in a demonstration that he claimed to be. 

At the same time, the discovery of 300 bodies in a mass grave in Gaza, some of them with their hands tied, went unremarked.

The media account of the student protests in the US and elsewhere is a tissue of distortions and half-truths. The struggle that is going on for the minds of people under 30 is very interesting. It is taking place on Twitter (X) and TikTok, though TikTok is in trouble in the USA where politicians want to suppress it. 

I think that generation is lost to the Zionists.

Why? Because, as Richard Pipes said about the Soviet Union, each new generation sees the truth before it is taught not to do so. 

Biden and Trump denounced Chinese genocide of the Uigurs, with very little evidence.

Many more Arabs have been killed in Gaza than Uigurs in China.

There was no reason to suppose that George Floyd was killed because of the colour of his skin, but this incident started off a worldwide movement which, curiously, the media and people in authority supported. 

A generation that was carefully reared on stories of the German murder of the Jews, and taught that it must never happen again, think what they see on social media in Gaz is genocide.

Whether it is or not is for the World Court to tell us, but that is how it looks to young, inexperienced idealists. 

No amount of thugs paid for by billionaires breaking up protests will change this. In fact they may be counter-productive. 

But the media want us to think the demonstrations in favour of the Arabs are a threat to democracy and freedom.

It reminds me of the Economist and Financial Times treating the fall of East Aleppo (Al Qaeda's affiliate Al Nusra were part of the rebel coalition that had held it) as a disaster for Western civilisation, while photographs emerged of happy Christians siting in the open air in East Aleppo drinking wine.

I wonder how many Arabs have died in Gaza, by the way. The official Hamas figure of 32,000 seems low and the Israeli figure of one third being Hamas fighters seems to me very likely to be a big exaggeration, but the media do not help here.

How long will the mainstream media continue to wield the power they have? 

I don't know but I wouldn't give it ten years.

The sooner it goes the better, I'd say.