thenewobserver.co.uk Report : Visit Site

Technical data of the thenewobserver.co.uk

Geo IP provides you such as latitude, longitude and ISP (Internet Service Provider) etc. informations. Our GeoIP service found where is host thenewobserver.co.uk. Currently, hosted in United Kingdom and its service provider is Webfusion Internet Solutions .

the related websites

iucnredlist.org walmart.com maplin.co.uk hse.gov.uk ticketmaster.co.uk visitlondon.com ebrd.com nice.org.uk hermes.com 888.com 

HTTP Header Analysis

HTTP Header information is a part of HTTP protocol that a user's browser sends to called nginx containing the details of what the browser wants and will accept back from the web server.

DNS

HtmlToText

skip to content the new observer voices from the margin menu home features surveillance de-constructing the adhd narrative in the uk psychotherapy foucault russian federation reviews arts reviews book reviews contact featured relocation of site the new observer is in the process of moving from a hosted wordpress site to a site on wordpress.com. please bear with us during this transition period – some links may not work. we are working to fix everything, but it may take some time, as the editor only has a limited amount of time available for this work. thank you for your patience. advertisements justinwyllie all categrories september 1, 2018 september 1, 2018 0 minutes why does the guardian lie so much on russia? quite possibly a russian intelligence agency was behind the alleged attempted poisoning of sergei skripal and his daughter. if this was the case then maybe the kremlin knew about it in advance; or maybe they didn’t. there is quite a lot of material in the public domain which makes the former quite a strong possibility. all this makes it all the more surprising that the guardian incessantly lies when they write about russia. if they want to criticise russia there is surely plenty to write about without lying? this is guardian ‘journalist’ andrew roth writing from moscow on putin’s comments that skripal is/was a traitor and scumbag . these are the lies in mr roth’s piece: i. the piece is headlined “vladimir putin calls sergei skripal a scumbag and a traitor”. however; in his actual remarks putin called skripal a traitor and then went on to say that surely seeing a traitor as a ‘scumbag’ is the natural reaction. (the russian word he used is подонок for which wiktionary offers the following translations “rogue, bastard, rat, scum, scoundrel” ). that is – for putin skripal is a traitor and it follows from this that he is a rogue/rat/scum/scoundrel. to report this as “scumbag and traitor” i.e. to change the word order obfuscates putin’s principled position – he doesn’t like traitors, and for putin it follows from this that skripal is a подонок. furthermore; the word “scumbag” appears to be the worst possible translation of the russian word putin used. these errors are likely not unintentional. mr roth wants to tell a story about how terrible putin is and he will distort the facts to prop up his story. ii. “the novichok used was one of a number of nerve agents developed in the soviet union”. this is tendentious. indeed this lie has already been called out . the substance allegedly used has been identified as being of a type which was developed by the soviet union. however, the specific material that was used in salisbury could have come from a wide number of countries (including britain) with the knowledge and capacity to produce this kind of agent. iii. “investigative journalists claim they have identified one of the two men as col anatoliy chepiga, a military intelligence officer who strongly resembles one of the two suspects.” this refers to claims by a blogger called “bellingcat”. bellingcat specialises in scouring social media to find material to bolster nato narratives on various matters. his analytical abilities do not reach the standard required of an investigative journalist – as this website has shown . citing the weak ‘analyses’ by this propagandist as the work of an “investigative journalist” is one way that western propagandists/journalists produce their narratives. iv. “the kremlin has said it will not help secure an interview with the suspects or discuss speculation as to their identities, despite the fact that putin had originally called on them to come forward and protest their innocence on television” in fact the two suspects were produced and gave an interview to rt . v. “russian television presented the two suspects, naming them as boshirov and petrov, as tourists who travelled twice to salisbury because they were determined to see the city’s cathedral” if mr roth is referring to the rt interview this is incorrect. rt simply interviewed the two men. it didn’t “present” them as anything. the interviewer (the editor of the channel) declined to state her personal opinion as to whether the men were telling the truth or not. embellishing a story or outright lying – a matter of semantics perhaps. but in either case – not journalism. update it really is incessant. here is today’s article which links skripal and alleged russian cyberattacks . it is by ‘diplomatic editor’ patrick wintour. he writes: official russian explanations for the two men’s visit to salisbury have been widely ridiculed, prompting tensions inside the russian government over the inept handling of the episode. however; there haven’t been any official explanations. see point iv. above: “the kremlin has said it will not help secure an interview with the suspects or discuss speculation as to their identities”. you can check they are lying because they can’t even get their story straight. then we have: the cyber-attack on the dnc headquarters, critical to the outcome of the 2016 elections, has often been attributed to the russians, but it is the first time the uk intelligence services have made the claim. maybe ‘critical’. but that is a judgement not an objective fact as mr wintour presents here. (and a simplistic hack as this was reported to be is not a ‘cyber-attack’. a cyber-attack is when you set out to actively damage or cripple infrastructure – such as the us/israel cyber-attack on iran’s nuclear facilities. in this case it was a hack to obtain data. calling this event a cyberattack is just another lie). actually this story about alleged russian hacking (perhaps provided to the guardian by the security services?) should be understood completely in the context a) of britain having recently set up its own dedicated cyber warfare unit and b) britain trying to create a post-brexit security role for itself in europe. justinwyllie media comment october 3, 2018 october 4, 2018 3 minutes we “bolster” – they meddle you have to do a double-take to check that the author of this guardian article on the recent referendum in macedonia is not having a laugh. but no – this is how they think. the referendum asked people if they wanted to change the name of the country so as to be able to resolve a dispute with greece and move towards eu and nato membership. the vote was high – about 90% in favour – but the low turnout (36%) meant that the result was not binding. there are the usual unsubstantiated claims about “russian meddling”. there is the usual reliance on claims by us officials. as usual “allegations” are treated as facts. and a smattering of facebook posts (which could, as far as the article evidences, be by anyone at all) are cited as evidence of russian interference. but what is really surprising is how they manage to keep a straight face when after all these (vague and unsubstantiated claims) of russian “interference” they calmly discuss how the us spent usd 8 million trying to “bolster” the yes vote. the vote – to move towards nato and eu membership – was not binding on the government because the turnout was only 36%. but in a nice show of western progressives true attitude towards democracy – they report that “the paradox is that, whatever their country is called, a large majority of macedonians support eu and nato membership, according to a recent survey”. the source of the survey is not mentioned. so; the referendum abjectly failed to achieve the desired result despite a massive us/eu attempt to “bolster” the result . this was blamed on russia – simply based on a series of allegations and claims by western officials. but – not to worry – a survey said that macedonians want nato and eu membership so, hey ho, lets press on anyway. russian meddling does seem to have a purpose. the story (true or not – in this world of media narratives it makes no difference) of russian meddling allows progressives to blame russia for any failure of their “democratic” political projects –

URL analysis for thenewobserver.co.uk

https://newobs.wordpress.com/2018/09/11/guardian-propaganda-watch-fake-news-on-russia/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/category/reviews/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/2018/09/29/the-intolerance-of-the-new-progressives/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/foucault-page/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/category/media-commentary/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/2015/06/03/the-bellingcat-report/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/features-2/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/surveillance/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/category/russian-federation/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/2015/06/03/the-bellingcat-report/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/2018/10/03/why-does-the-guardian-lie-so-much-on-russia/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/2018/09/01/relocation-of-site/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/we-bolster-they-meddle/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/category/international_affairs/
https://newobs.wordpress.com/contact/
craigmurray.org.uk

Whois Information

Whois is a protocol that is access to registering information. You can reach when the website was registered, when it will be expire, what is contact details of the site with the following informations. In a nutshell, it includes these informations;

Error for "thenewobserver.co.uk".

the WHOIS query quota for 2600:3c03:0000:0000:f03c:91ff:feae:779d has been exceeded
and will be replenished in 262 seconds

WHOIS lookup made at 04:07:26 17-Oct-2017

--
This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central registry
for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:

Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2017.

You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as permitted
by the terms of use available in full at http://www.nominet.uk/whoisterms,
which includes restrictions on: (A) use of the data for advertising, or its
repackaging, recompilation, redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing
or hiding any or all of this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume
limits. The data is provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the
register. Access may be withdrawn or restricted at any time.

  REFERRER http://www.nominet.org.uk

  REGISTRAR Nominet UK

SERVERS

  SERVER co.uk.whois-servers.net

  ARGS thenewobserver.co.uk

  PORT 43

  TYPE domain

DISCLAIMER
This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central registry
for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:
Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2017.
You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as permitted
by the terms of use available in full at http://www.nominet.uk/whoisterms,
which includes restrictions on: (A) use of the data for advertising, or its
repackaging, recompilation, redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing
or hiding any or all of this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume
limits. The data is provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the
register. Access may be withdrawn or restricted at any time.

  REGISTERED no

DOMAIN

  NAME thenewobserver.co.uk

NSERVER

  NS1.CONTABO.NET 79.143.182.242

  NS3.CONTABO.NET 5.189.191.29

  NS2.CONTABO.NET 178.238.234.231

Mistakes

The following list shows you to spelling mistakes possible of the internet users for the website searched .