New York Times’ Disgraceful and Deceitful Attack on Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Calling Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. an anti-vaxxer, conspiracy theorist and names far worse, is part of a concerted smear campaign to turn the public away from his message, which is multi-faceted and supported by deep research and impeccable logic.
Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.
The New York Times, floundering in the deep waters of truth and desperately trying to stay afloat in the shallows by continuing its history of lying for its CIA masters, published Saturday a front page of propaganda worthy of the finest house organs of totalitarian regimes.
Right below its Feb. 26 headline denouncing Russia and Putin as evil dogs pursuant to the American empire’s dictates concerning Ukraine, it posted an unflattering photo of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. sandwiched between American flags with the title of its hit piece — “A Kennedy’s Crusade Against COVID Vaccines Anguishes Family and Friends.”
It’s an exquisite juxtaposition: Putin as Hitler and Kennedy as a junior demon, suggestive of the relationship between C. S. Lewis’s Screwtape and his nephew Wormwood in The Screwtape Letters. Evil personified.
The Times is big into anguish these days, not only for Nazis in Ukraine and upper-class apartment hunters who can’t find a place for less than a few million, but for Kennedy’s family and friends. It’s very touching his sister, Kerry Kennedy, would harshly criticize him once again is genuinely pathetic, but of course she has to add how much she loves him, ostensibly to take the sting out of her inability to remain sisterly silent.
If he is so wrong about his work with Children’s Health Defense and his book, “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,” rather than ripping him to the press, why doesn’t she or her siblings, who agree with her, write a comprehensive article or book refuting his facts?
They don’t because they can’t; so the next best thing is to criticize their brother to media — glad for any way to disparage the Kennedys. One senses a very weird masochistic family dynamic at work.
Kennedy’s siblings do not seem to understand why the media have been attacking him for years. His stance on vaccines and Anthony Fauci are the cover story they use to criticize him, and his siblings don’t get it. That their brother has become a major thorn in the side of the CIA escapes them, the CIA that has caused so much devastation to their family and the world. The CIA has been deeply involved in the global vaccine push, working with medical technocrats like Anthony Fauci, billionaires such as Bill Gates, the military, media, Big Pharma, World Economic Forum, etc. Calling your brother brilliant while ignoring his book’s searing, evidence-based indictment of the intelligence-run COVID-19 operation is more than sad, especially when doing so to The New York Times, the CIA’s paper of record together with The Washington Post.
Character assassination of Kennedy is what the CIA and its media mouthpieces have been doing for years. This has become more and more necessary as they have realized the great growing danger he poses to their agenda. Calling him an anti-vaxxer, conspiracy theorist and names far worse, is part of a concerted smear campaign to turn the public away from his message, which is multi-faceted and supported by deep research and impeccable logic. Like his father and uncle, he has become an irrepressibly eloquent opponent of the demonic forces intent on destroying the democratic dream.
Take a deep dive into the history of the CIA’s central role in orchestrating news and editorial coverage in America’s most influential liberal national media outlets — and its continued hold todayhttps://t.co/o5BpxVQdJy
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) December 10, 2021
The Times article by Adam Nagourney is a blatant hatchet job filled with sly jabs, innuendos and ignorant lies. As is par for the course, his hack piece completely avoids Kennedy’s arguments but relies on a form of social gossip that substitutes for logic and evidence. He seems to have learned much from The National Enquirer and The New York Post’s “Page Six” whose styles the The Times has emulated.
Nagourney tells the reader that RFK, Jr.’s work as the face of the vaccine resistance movement has “tested,” “rattled,” “anguished” and “mystified” family, friends and his Hollywood crowd; that this man “of the often troubled life” …. “has effectively used his talent and one of the most prominent names in American political history as a platform for fueling resistance to vaccines that could save countless lives.”
Translation: Kennedy, a Hollywood hobnobber and former drug addict, is so mentally unbalanced that he will betray his family and friends and kill people with medical advice that runs counter to the truth.
No evidence is required to establish this “truth,” just Nagourney’s word and those he can get to say the same thing, in other words. Such as:
“His conduct ‘undercuts 50 years of public health vaccine practice, and he’s done it in a way I’ve never seen anyone else do it,’ said Michael T. Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. ‘He is among the most dangerous because of the credibility of who he is and what his family name has brought to this issue.’”
Notice the implication: that these experimental mRNA so-called vaccines have been around 50 years and Kennedy is against all vaccines, both of which are false.
Furthermore, Nagourney says RFK, Jr. not only “inveighs” against vaccines, especially COVID vaccinations, but has adopted other weird “unorthodox” views (implication: orthodox views are good) over the years.
One is his claim that Sirhan Sirhan did not kill his father Sen. Robert F. Kennedy. Nagourney might do a smidgen of research and discover that Kennedy is correct; but doing so would disrupt the flow of his ad hominem attack. All serious writers on the case know that the senator was not shot by Sirhan; they know there are deep CIA connections to the assassination. The evidence conclusively proves, as the autopsy has shown, that Sirhan was in front of the senator when he fired his pistol but RFK was shot from the rear at very close range with all bullets entering his body from the rear. Nagourney either knows nothing about the assassination or is dissembling the facts, which must be “unorthodox.”
Sounding like a U.S. government spokesmen telling the press something is true without an iota of evidence, he writes the following sentence as if it were true simply because he wrote it, while making sure not to mention the book’s title — “The Real Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy” — a brilliant, deeply researched and sourced book The Times will not review:
“In a best-selling new book, he claimed that Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, who is President Biden’s top medical adviser for the coronavirus pandemic, and Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft, were in cahoots with the pharmaceutical industry to profiteer off dangerous vaccines.”
Notice Nagourney’s insidious method. State Kennedy’s claim as if it’s false because Nagourney stated it, when in fact it is so abundantly true and backed up by massive evidence that if Nagourney dared to engage in actual journalism by checking Kennedy’s book he would discover it. But his job is not to search for truth but to defile a man’s reputation. He accuses Kennedy of circulating false information on the coronavirus and the vaccines but of course doesn’t say what that is or why it is false.
His entire article is an ad hominem attack by statement with the author cunningly hidden behind deceitful objectivity.
He writes:
To the public distress of his wife, the actress Cheryl Hines, Mr. Kennedy invoked Anne Frank, the young German-Dutch diarist who died in a Nazi prison camp, as he compared government measures for containing the pandemic with the Holocaust at that rally in Washington.
However, that is not what he said. He said that during the Holocaust Anne Frank could hide for a while and others could flee out of Germany, but with the new “turnkey totalitarianism” being introduced today, which is technological, it will be harder to escape, for every aspect of life will be monitored by the authorities in a digital dystopia. Such a perspective is in no way unusual, for it is shared by many scholars of technology and only the most naïve would consider it eccentric. His point and words were twisted to serve others’ purposes and to paint him as an insensitive Holocaust denier. Here’s what he said:
“What we’re seeing today is what I call turnkey totalitarianism. They are putting in place all of these technological mechanisms for control we’ve never seen before. It’s been the ambition of every totalitarian state since the beginning of mankind to control every aspect of behavior, of conduct, of thought and to obliterate dissent. None of them have been able to do it. They didn’t have the technological capacity.
“Even in Hitler’s Germany, you could cross the Alps into Switzerland. You could hide in an attic like Anne Frank did. I visited in 1962, East Germany, with my father and met people who had climbed the wall and escaped, so it was possible. Many died … but it was possible.”
Yet his sister Kerry also ripped him for making a statement that was clearly true if you accept his argument about the technological lockdowns in progress. You can disagree (I don’t) but to impugn his intentions and his words is really despicable, but Nagourney adds it to his ad hominem attacks, making sure to include his sister Kerry’s Tweet:
“Bobby’s lies and fear-mongering yesterday were both sickening and repulsive. I strongly condemn him for his hateful rhetoric.”
Nagourney:
“Even his most prominent critics say they do not doubt his sincerity, even as he has become one of the most prominent spreaders of misinformation on vaccines.”
Translation: RFK, Jr. means well but he’s deluded.
Big Daddy Fauci is introduced to tell the young whippersnapper the following after Kennedy delivered a briefing at the National Institutes of Health:
When it was over, Dr. Fauci walked Mr. Kennedy out of the conference room.
“I said, ‘Bobby, I’m sorry we didn’t come to any agreement here,’” he said. “‘Although I disagree factually with everything you are saying, I do understand and I respect that deep down you are really concerned about the safety of children.’ I said that in a very sincere way.”
Condescension and sincerity overflow as the “conspiracy theorist” patient is told by the good doctor that he means well but needs help.
Then, making sure to include The Times endlessly repeated CIA talking point, our no-nothing author writes:
“The assassination of President John F. Kennedy, his uncle, in 1963, when Robert was 9, helped foster a modern culture of conspiracy theories. Now, many of the arguments that Mr. Kennedy has embraced — including that Dr. Fauci is part of a ‘historic coup d’état against Western democracy’ — recall the theories of a secret assassin helping Lee Harvey Oswald from the grassy knoll in Dallas.”
That it was the CIA that weaponized the use of the term “conspiracy theory” in a 1967 dispatch — #1035-960 — in order to disparage those questioning The Warren Commission and its cover-up of the CIA’s role in JFK’s assassination is another fact that our fair-minded scribe conveniently omits while insidiously implying that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. Yes, there are magic bullets and magical tricks used to make sure RFK, Jr. is seen as a “sincere” nutcase.
RFK, Jr. has been and is an astute critic of the CIA and all its machinations, including its involvement in the assassinations of his uncle JFK, his father Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, its involvement in the COVID propaganda, and in its extensive deadly deeds and disinformation at home and abroad. His critical siblings praise him for his great intelligence and political acumen but seem clueless themselves. So they ally with the same media that have been stenographers for the CIA. The Kennedy family may be very well known, but in these ways they are very typical of American families that are divided by those who know and those who don’t know who the real devils are.
But let me make two final points about this sickening piece of character assassination.
RFK, Jr. has spent decades as an environmental lawyer fighting the pollution of our air, earth and water. In other words, the pollution also of human beings who live in nature while nature lives in us. Some people know the outside and the inside are connected. Yet Nagourney bemoans the tragic turn he took from such good work with the environment to such terrible work with Children’s Health Defense and vaccines. He writes:
“The swerve in Kennedy’s career, from the environment to vaccines, is particularly startling because for many family members and other Kennedy associates, Robert Kennedy Jr. is the sibling who most recalls the level of charisma and political appeal of his late father.”
Startling? No, very consistent for one who can think. There is an obvious link between the major corporate polluters of the outside environment and the major polluters of human bodies. Big pharmaceutical, oil, chemical, agribusiness, military, etc. are an interrelated lot of criminal enterprises despoiling all life on earth. Kennedy’s lifetime work has followed a natural trajectory and underlying it all is his critique of the CIA and its media accomplices, such as The Times.
Yes, those family and friends who say he’s brilliant are right, and he is following in his father’s footsteps in ways they do not grasp; for he is able to connect the dots, diagnose the patterns, and expose with facts the criminal syndicates that are destroying democracy and so many lives.
The reason The Times publishes hit pieces like this and does not review his recent book is because his critique of these nefarious forces has gained a large audience and as a result many people are awakening to the truths concealed by the likes of “the paper of record” with its propaganda.
Hit pieces like Nagourney’s should cause anyone reading it intense “anguish.” There is nothing “mystifying” about it.
It’s simply disgraceful and deceitful.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense.