Identifying a limited hangout

[Ryan Carboni]

Muckrock has long been publishing the writings of Michael Best, now Emma
Best. I have previously pointed out that Muckrock is unwilling to
contradict the powerful, who as I pointed out, includes John Young of
Cryptome.

Now Best has been writing quite a bit about spicy topics regarding the CIA.
But how does a limited hangout work, and when you see it in action, why is
it so effective? It is quite a mystery why no one has espoused this in
plain English. A limited hangout serves to satisfy people's curiosity in
predominant narratives or explanations in what is going on. It is only by
merely being curious that you can succeed against limited hangouts.

Sometimes a limited hangout serves multiple ends, it may even operate as
framing ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)#Media ),
and how something is framed can also display different points with the same
message to different audiences.

But to go into detail ( see attachment for PDF of article "One of the CIA’s
private press contacts was a suspected Soviet spy" ), this article presents
the best example of limited hangouts. It frames Tad Szulc's possible
communist ties as a surprise. Automatically one thinks that this was an
unfortunate situation, that the agency would have to disclose classified
information to make a case, or to at least tell the New York Times that he
shouldn't be allowed to deal with certain matters.

Now I guess Best can't help that some people form those sorts of initial
conclusions. You know how people treat responsibility, how the law treats
responsibility. It's just an unfortunate thing.

But the New York Times is clearly and obvious a pro-communist publication.
To digress, every liberal publication was repeating the same story from
Pyongyang on Otto Warmbier. But the New York Times has done worse than
defend trumped up charges on a poor kid. The matter of Walter Duranty is
available to anyone over the internet. Defended what is now known as the
Holodomor, which ranks around the Holocaust in deaths. He defended Stalin's
show trials.

His name was maintained on a list by George Orwell (!) as a person
unsuitable as a possible writer for the Foreign Office's Information
Research Department. And here's Sculc's real scoop :
https://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2014/12/26/1961-the-c-i-a-readies-a-cuban-invasion-and-the-times-blinks/
 He wrote an article about "Anti-Castro units trained to fight at Florida
bases". Best mumbles about Sculc writing about AMTRUNK, but he leaked the
Bay of Pigs! Who is responsible for the Bay of Pigs disaster? Well, I
googled for what the CIA officially says, and they don't say anything about
Szulc (
https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2016-featured-story-archive/the-bay-of-pigs-invasion.html
).


In fact, I googled "new york times communist" I get this article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/29/opinion/sunday/when-communism-inspired-americans.html
Still, more examples can be found here:
http://www.conservapedia.com/The_New_York_Times#Newspaper_of_Record

Similar cases re-occur by numerous dishonest individuals, even those not
closely associated with the New York Times, Chomsky defends Pol Pot as not
that bad and the news reports on Pol Pot as exaggerated.


Although the concept of modifying the limitation of a hangout is some piece
of linguistics.

I leave this for your to chew on, why is this Best person so protective of
the New York Times' reputation?
There is no easier way to tweak the nose of a commie by defending
conservatives (not fascists) they condemn so harshly, particularly since
conservatives make it so easy to be defended.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 4542 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20170704/03d66e8a/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: One of the CIA's private press contacts was a suspected Soviet spy.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1130706 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20170704/03d66e8a/attachment-0001.pdf>