Friday, October 2, 2015

Tony Cartalucci Explains Ways That The Media Lie To Us

Tony Cartalucci Explains Ways That The Media Lie To Us



Tony Cartalucci Explains Ways That The Media Lie To Us



28.09.2015 Author: Tony Cartalucci

The Western Media Is Dying and Here’s Why

Column: Politics

fft163222Seymour Hersh has risked much over his decades of journalism. He is a true journalist who has been attacked, slandered, and shunned by all sides simply because he seems to resist taking any side. 

When he reported on US atrocities in Vietnam, he was first attacked and denounced as a traitor or worse. In time, both the truth and Hersh were vindicated and the importance of what he did as a journalist to both inform the public and serve as a check and balance against the special interests of ruling power were recognized with a Pultizer Prize.

In 2007, when he exposed the then Bush-administration’s plans to use the Muslim Brotherhood and militant groups linked to Al Qaeda to overthrow the government of Syria – the result of which is unfolding today – the New Yorker gladly welcomed his work as a message they perceived would resonate well with liberal audiences.

But then in 2013, when Hersh brought forward information contradicting the West’s official narrative regarding a chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus, the New Yorker decided not to publish it. His report, “Whose Sarin?” instead found itself published in the London Review of Books.

The story of Hersh bringing this information forward to the public and how the Western media attempted to first discourage it, then bury it, before attempting to discredit both the report and Hersh himself is a microcosm of the dying Western media.

The Final Nail 

Hersh’s  report went on in detail covering the manner in which Western leaders intentionally manipulated or even outright fabricated intelligence to justify military intervention in Syria – eerily similar to the lies told to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the escalation of the war in Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin incident.


And not only did the report punch holes through the official narrative, it helped hobble what little momentum was left for Western military aggression against Syria based on the lies told by the US and its allies regarding the chemical attack.

In Hersh’s follow up report, “The Red Line and the Rat Line,” also published by the London Review of Books, he revealed information not only further exposing the lies told by the US and its allies, but suggested NATO member Turkey and close US-ally Saudi Arabia may have played a role in supplying those responsible for the attack with the chemical weapons.

Should Hersh’s reports reach wider audiences and the idea of a West capable of conceiving, carrying out, then trying to exploit a crime against humanity to justify expanded, unjust war, Western foreign policy would irrevocably be disfigured and perhaps begin to unravel.

Outsourcing Trust

The methods of augmenting an increasingly discredited and distrusted Western media have become very creative. With the advent of the Internet and social media, attempts to produce viral content and seemingly outside sources to help guide the public back who are turning away from the mainstream media in droves was actually the subject of an entire policy paper by former Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein. The paper was covered in a Salon article titled, “Obama confidant’s spine-chilling proposal,” which stated (emphasis added):

Sunstein advocates that the Government’s stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups.” He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called “independent” credible voices to bolster the Government’s messaging (on the ground that those who don’t believe government sources will be more inclined to listen to those who appear independent while secretly acting on behalf of the Government).

It would be these – what are essentially government-paid liars – who the West would turn to in an attempt to bury Hersh and the remnants of real Western journalism with him.

The “Independent Credible Voices” 

UK-based unemployed government worker Eliot Higgins began and maintained a popular blog amalgamating online photos and videos from the Syrian conflict. Journalists and analysts from all sides used his resource as a sort of “wartime encyclopedia.” While Higgins possessed no qualifications or background in warfare, geopolitics, or weapons specifically, what he did possess was a great amount of time. In this time he was able to accurately look up and catalog the media on his blog.

However, it wasn’t long before the Western media approached him to fulfill the role of “independent credible voice.” Whether Eliot Higgins was the recipient of “secret payments” at that time or not, it is clear now that he was both approached by and sought those willing to pay him for his services and that his work from then on was decidedly both biased and dishonest.

Higgins was furnished with his own “weapons expert,” Dan Kaszeta, who either owns or is an associate of multiple dubious “consulting” firms. Together from the beginning Higgins and Kaszeta bolstered the West’s narrative that the Syrian government was responsible for using munitions filled with nerve agents right in front of UN inspectors in Damascus.

Using what they collectively called “open source intelligence” – watching YouTube videos and looking at Google Earth – they claimed the type of rocket and nerve agent used could only have been deployed by the Syrian government.

Hersh contested these claims in both of his reports and in additional interviews pointing out that the rockets were crude and could just as easily be homemade, while the production of nerve agents – certainly the work of a state actor – could have been done in either Turkey or Saudi Arabia or with either nations’ assistance, then deployed by militants in Syria.

To this day, the UN’s official conclusion is that there was “clear and convincing evidence” that rockets containing nerve agents were launched at Damascus suburbs – assigning no blame, nor indicating from where either the rockets or the nerve agents originated.

Higgins and Kaszeta, featured in the London Guardian and Foreign Policy Magazine, would directly attack Hersh’s claims citing YouTube videos and UN reports as evidence that the Syrian government possessed the type of rockets used in the attack and the type of nerve agent contained in the rockets – omitting one very important question – what if the attack was meant to look like the work of the Syrian government?

In reality, all Higgins and Kaszeta proved was that whoever carried out the attack – designed solely to grant the US and its allies justification for direct military intervention – spent a lot of time and effort to make the attack appear as if the Syrian government carried it out. They predicate their entire argument upon claiming the West would not – for some reason – fabricate an attack to justify a war they sought to wage but lacked any justification to do so.

Along side Higgins and Kaszeta’s rebuttal was a scathing indictment of not only Hersh, but traditional journalism in general. The London Gaurdian’s Brian Whitaker would pen a piece titled, “Investigating chemical weapons in Syria – Seymour Hersh and Brown Moses go head to head,”claiming (emphasis added):

While seeking to re-ignite the “whodunnit” debate about chemical weapons, Hersh’s article unwittingly revealed a lot about the changing nature of investigative journalism. Hersh is old-school. He operates in a world of hush-hush contacts – often-anonymous well-placed sources passing snippets of information around which he constructs an article that challenges received wisdom. 

The Hersh style of journalism certainly has a place, but in the age of the internet it’s a diminishing one – as the web-based work of Higgins and others continually shows.

It is a talking point that Higgins himself would again make in the space afforded to him by Foreign Policy magazine – that traditional journalism with real sources is out, and Cass Sunstein’s army of paid “independent credible voices” are in.

Vindication
229173943


A Russian-brokered deal that saw the entirety of Syria’s chemical weapon stockpiles removed from the country under the supervision of the United Nations means that there are neither chemical weapons for the Syrian government to use (or be blamed for using), nor chemical weapons left for terrorists fighting the Syrian government to pilfer and use.

Yet now along Turkey’s border – the nation Hersh has suggested was behind the 2013 gas attack – terrorists from the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) are allegedly deploying chemical weapons.

Initial reports indicate the use of mustard gas – a blistering agent. Like nerve agents, the production and deployment of these weapons requires state resources.

The Western media, in a bid to explain how ISIS has acquired these weapons, has begun spinning theories that Syria’s weapons on their way out of Syria somehow ended up in ISIS’ hands. The presence of chemical weapons in northern Syria and Iraq indicates that just as Hersh suggested, chemical weapons are being passed on to terrorists operating in Syria from either Turkey or Saudi Arabia, or both.

With this recent development, literally years of Higgins and Kaszeta’s lies have been exposed, vindicating award-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh and the traditional methods of journalism he employed to draw his conclusions. It also exposes Sunstein’s army of “independent credible voices” as just another facet in the echo chamber of discredited, now widely distrusted lies of the Western media.

In an attempt to get Higgin’s and Kaszeta’s opinion on who they believed were supplying ISIS with chemical weapons, Kaszeta replied by saying, “lizard men.” Higgins refused to comment. When asked if either would like to extend an apology to Hersh, Kasezta would inexplicably reply, “Hersh owes me an apology, now get lost you useless sack of sh*t.“

One might expect a higher degree of professionalism and civilized debate from “experts” regularly deferred to by the Western media not only in regards to the Syrian conflict but also in Ukraine, where Eliot Higgins is now offering his “independent credible voice” to the MH17 disaster. However, admittedly employed by Western think tanks and consultancy agencies, Higgins no longer possess an “independent” voice, and considering his intentional and unrepentant deceit regarding Syria, he no longer possess a “credible’ voice either.

Sunstein’s Failed Experiment 

Using chemical weapons has never been an effective means of fighting war. Beyond their psychological effects, conventional weapons have proven a vastly superior means of waging and winning war.

During the deadly 8 year war between Iraq and Iran, chemical weapons were used including nerve agents. Yet a document produced by the US Marine Corps, titled, “Lessons Learned: The Iran-Iraq War” under “Appendix B: Chemical Weapons,” revealed less than 2-3% of all casualties were the result of chemical warfare.The report concluded that even large scale use of chemical weapons offered little advantage to either side and suggests that attacks carried out with such weapons required almost perfect weather and geographical conditions to be of even limited benefit. On a smaller scale, the use of chemical weapons would be tactically and strategically useless – unless of course used as a means of implicating your enemy and justifying wider war.

Likewise, shooting down a civilian airliner over Ukraine offers no benefit to a warring party unless of course they did it to implicate their enemies and justify wider war.Discerning this is a product of critical thinking – which is what drove people away from the Western media in the first place. Sunstein’s mistaken belief that somehow those drifting away from the Western media were as easily fooled as those still watching it is why people like Higgins have ended up chased out of the independent media and back, deeply within the system that co-opted and used him in the first place.

For Hersh, he proves that dedication to the truth when it is unpopular is a small price to pay to keep one’s dignity. The ridicule and accusations of those without dignity fades, but the truth is everlasting. When the truth Hersh has pointed out beneath the lies finally surfaced for all to see, vindication exposed people like Higgins and Kaszeta for all to see.

With the veils of legitimacy and professionalism yanked from them, they are reduced to vulgar, miniature versions of the rotting system that created them. Without realizing their very creation as “consultants” lies in the decline of those who sought them out, not because of their talent, but because of their willingness to do what those with dignity refuse to do, they will likely go on with their ignoble work. But like the media houses that desperately needed their “independent credible voices” to begin with, fewer will be listening and reading.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazineNew Eastern Outlook”.


Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books areThe Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West

Russian (Vestnik Kavkaza) Interview With PCR on US/Russia Syria Cooperation

Russian (Vestnik Kavkaza) Interview With PCR on US/Russia Syria Cooperation



Russian (Vestnik Kavkaza) Interview With PCR on US/Russia Syria Cooperation


Paul Craig Roberts: “Russia has independent foreign policy, this is unacceptable to Washington”
 Sep 27 - 11:17 pm By Vestnik Kavkaza



A long-awaited meeting between Presidents of Russia and the U.S. will take place tomorrow in New York, apparently, in the room of the Russian delegation in the UN SC. Paul Craig Roberts, professor, Chairman of The Institute for Political Economy, the former Aid of the Financial Minister in the administration of Ronald Reagon, told Vestnik Kavkaza (VK) about his view on the Russian-American relations.

Vestnik Kavkaza (VK) -    Do you believe that the fact that presidents Barak Obama and Vladimir Putin agreed to meet is the sign of thaw in bilateral relations?

Paul Craig Roberts  (PCR)-    No. Of course, not.

VK -    What does it mean then?

PCR -    I think, it means that Putin is too hopeful. It can also mean that he went every possible length to calm down the hostility flowing towards Russia from Washington; but it does not really mean anything, because Putin wants to talk about Syria and ISIS, and Obama wants to talk about the breakaway republics and Ukraine and wants Putin to turn it all back to Kiev. 

Therefore, they have no common purpose in the talks. Obama intends to overthrow Assad, one of the reasons, of course is to get rid of the Russian naval base at Tartus, which was the reason Washington overthrew the Ukrainian government, he wanted to get rid of the Russian Black Sea naval base. So, the two countries have different intentions. The neo-conservative strategy is that the United States must prevent the rise of Russia, because Russia could be a constraint on unilateral US actions. So, if you intend to prevent the rise of a country and you have demonized it, Russia is demonized: it is a threat worse than Ebola, the threat worse than Islamic State. American politician and top government officials even compared the president of Russia to Hitler. So, you cannot create a threat in the minds of the American people and the minds of the Europeans, and then turn around and work with that threat, because it undermines the success of the propaganda in demonizing Russia. So, there is nothing to be expected.

VK -    So, what are the chances for the US-Russia cooperation against ISIS? Actually, Ashton Carte recently said that such cooperation might be possible.

PCR -    I do not understand why the Russians are so unrealistic. For at least two years, the highest echelons of the United States government, of NATO, of European governments had been demonizing Russia and making military preparations against them. We have now sent nuclear bombs to Germany. Why do the Russians think that the Americans want to cooperate with them?

VK -    Maybe it is just politics. How serious are Americans in their hostile moves towards Russia?

PCR -    Very serious. Extremely serious. What every Russian journalist and every Russian politician needs to do is to go read the Wolfowitz doctrine. The Wolfowitz doctrine says: the collapse of the Soviet Union means history chose the United States to rule the world and the United States will not permit any country to get in its way, it is entitled to world hegemony. That is the basis of American foreign policy. What the neoconservative doctrine means (and I do not understand why Russians do not understand this) that the country that has an independent foreign policy is a threat to the United States. Who had an independent foreign policy? Ghaddafi in Libya, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Assad in Syria, the Iranians, the Chinese and the Russians. Then who are the threats as defined by Washington? Precisely those countries. The two of them have been completely destroyed and one is in the process of being destroyed. Russia has an independent foreign policy, this is unacceptable to Washington. 



Dr. Paul Craig Roberts 
was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books areThe Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.

Thursday, October 1, 2015

GUEST CONTRIBUITIONS: The Revolutionary Act Of Telling The Truth -- by John Pilger

John Pilger on the Revolutionary Act of Telling the Truth



John Pilger on the Revolutionary Act of Telling the Truth


Pilger announces the publication of The WikiLeaks Files: the World According to the US Empire




The Revolutionary Act Of Telling The Truth



By John Pilger


John Pilger, speaking at the launch in London of The WikiLeaks Files, with an introduction by Julian Assange.

September 30, 2015 "Information Clearing House" -  George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

These are dark times, in which the propaganda of deceit touches all our lives. It is as if political reality has been privatised and illusion legitimised. The information age is a media age. We have politics by media; censorship by media; war by media; retribution by media; diversion by media - a surreal assembly line of clichés and false assumptions.

Wondrous technology has become both our friend and our enemy. Every time we turn on a computer or pick up a digital device – our secular rosary beads -- we are subjected to control: to surveillance of our habits and routines, and to lies and manipulation.

Edward Bernays, who invented the term, “public relations” as a euphemism for “propaganda”, predicted this more than 80 years ago. He called it, “the invisible government”.

He wrote, “Those who manipulate this unseen element of [modern democracy] constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of ...”

The aim of this invisible government is the conquest of us: of our political consciousness, our sense of the world, our ability to think independently, to separate truth from lies.


 This is a form of fascism, a word we are rightly cautious about using, preferring to leave it in the flickering past.  But an insidious modern fascism is now an accelerating danger. As in the 1930s, big lies are delivered with the regularity of a metronome. Muslims are bad. Saudi bigots are good. ISIS bigots are bad. Russia is always bad. China is getting bad. Bombing Syria is good. Corrupt banks are good. Corrupt debt is good. Poverty is good. War is normal.
Those who question these official truths, this extremism, are deemed in need of a lobotomy – until they are diagnosed on-message.  The BBC provides this service free of charge. Failure to submit is to be tagged a “radical” – whatever that means.

Real dissent has become exotic; yet those who dissent have never been more important. The book I am launching tonight, The WikiLeaks Files, is an antidote to a fascism that never speaks its name.

It’s a revolutionary book, just as WikiLeaks itself is revolutionary – exactly as Orwell meant in the quote I used at the beginning.  For it says that we need not accept these the daily lies. We need not remain silent. Or as Bob Marley once sang: “Emancipate yourself from mental slavery.”

In the introduction, Julian Assange explains that it is never enough to publish the secret messages of great power: that making sense of them is crucial, as well as placing them in the context of today and historical memory.

That is the remarkable achievement of this anthology, which reclaims our memory. It connects the reasons and the crimes that have caused so much human turmoil, from Vietnam and Central America, to the Middle East and Eastern Europe, with the matrix of rapacious power, the United States.

There is currently an American and European attempt to destroy the government of Syria. Prime Minister David Cameron is especially keen. This is the same David Cameron I remember as an unctuous PR man employed by an asset stripper of Britain’s independent commercial television.

Cameron, Obama and the ever obsequious Francois Hollande want to destroy the last remaining multi-cultural authority in Syria, an action that will surely make way for the fanatics of ISIS.

This is insane, of course, and the big lie justifying this insanity is that it is in support of Syrians who rose against Bashar al-Assad in the Arab Spring. As The WikiLeaks Files reveals, the destruction of Syria has long been a cynical imperial project that pre-dates the Arab Spring uprising against Assad. 

To the rulers of the world in Washington and Europe, Syria’s true crime is not the oppressive nature of its government but its independence from American and Israeli power – just as Iran’s true crime is its independence, and Russia’s true crime is its independence, and China’s true crime is its independence.  In an American-owned world, independence is intolerable.

This book reveals these truths, one after the other.  The truth about a war on terror that was always a war of terror; the truth about Guantanamo, the truth about Iraq, Afghanistan, Latin America.

Never has such truth-telling been so urgently needed. With honourable exceptions, those in the media paid ostensibly to keep the record straight are now absorbed into a system of propaganda that is no longer journalism, but anti-journalism. This is true of the liberal and respectable as it is of Murdoch. Unless you are prepared to monitor and deconstruct every specious assertion, so-called news has become unwatchable and unreadable.

Reading The WikiLeaks Files, I remembered the words of the late Howard Zinn, who often referred to “a power that governments can’t suppress”.  That describes WikiLeaks, and it describes true whistleblowers who share their courage. 

On a personal note, I have known the people of WikiLeaks for some time now. That they have achieved what they have in circumstances not of their choosing is a source of constant admiration. Their rescue of Edward Snowden comes to mind. Like him, they are heroic: nothing less.

Sarah Harrison’s chapter, ‘Indexing the Empire’, describes how she and her comrades set up an entire Public Library of US Diplomacy. There are more than two million documents, now available to all.  “Our work,” she writes, “is dedicated to making sure history belongs to everyone.”  How thrilling it is to read those words, which also stand as a tribute to her own courage.

 From the confinement of a room in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, the courage of Julian Assange is an eloquent response to the cowards who have smeared him and the rogue power seeking revenge on him and waging a war on democracy.

None of this has deterred Julian and his comrades at WikiLeaks: not one bit.   Isn’t that something?

The WikiLeaks Files: the World According to the US Empire is published by Verso



Friday, September 18, 2015

Charity isn't an Alternate for Animal Sacrifice/Qurbani:

Charity isn't an Alternate for Qurbani:

Some people think that instead of offering a Qurbani they should give its amount to some poor people as charity. This attitude is totally wrong. Actually, there are different forms of worship obligatory on Muslims. Each one of them has its own importance and none of them can stand for the other. It is not permissible for a Muslim to perform salah instead of fasting in Ramadan, nor is it permissible for him to give some charity instead of observing the obligatory Salah. Similarly, Qurbani is an independent form of worship and this obligation cannot be discharged by spending money in charity.

However, if somebody, out of his ignorance or negligence, could not offer Qurbani on the three prescribed days (10th, 1lth and 12th Zulhijjah) then, in that case only, he can give the price of a Qurbani as sadaqah to those entitled to receive Zakah. But during the days of Qurbani no Sadaqah can discharge the obligation.

Question: During the days of Eidul-Adha is it better to offer Udhiyah/Qurbani (sacrifice) or give Charity (in general)?

Scholars of Islam have stated that its better to offer Udhiyah/Qurbani (sacrifice). Ibn al-Qayyim (RA) said in Tuhfat al-Mawdood:

الذبح في موضعه أفضل من الصدقة بثمنه ولو زاد ، كالهدايا والأضاحي ، فإن نفس الذبح وإراقة الدم مقصود ، فإنه عبادة مقرونة بالصلاة

Sacrifice at the appropriate time, such as during Hajj and on Eid al-Adha, is better than giving its price in charity even if one gives more, because offering a sacrifice and shedding blood is what is required, and it is an act of worship that is mentioned alongside prayer...

 The true philosophy of Qurbani:

The present-day Qurbani is offered in memory of the great model of submission set before us by the great father Ibrahim عليه سلم  and the great son Ismael عليه سلم . So Qurbani must be offered in our time emulating the same ideal and attitude of submission.

This, then, is the true philosophy of Qurbani. With this in mind, one can easily unveil the fallacy of those who raise objections against Qurbani on the basis of economic calculations and depict it to be a wastage of money, resources and livestock. Unable to see beyond mundane benefits, they cannot understand the spirit Islam wants to plant and nourish among its followers, the spirit of total submission to Allah's will which equips man with most superior qualities so necessary to keep humanity in a state of lasting peace and welfare.

Qurbani is nothing but a powerful symbol of the required human conduct vis-a-vis the divine commands, however "irrational" or "uneconomic" they may seem to be in their appearance. Thus, the distrustful quest for mundane economic benefits behind Qurbani is, in fact, the negation of its real philosophy and the very spirit underlying it.

Extracted from http://www.central-mosque.com/index.php/Soul/ten-blessed-days-of-dhul-hijjah.html

Thursday, September 3, 2015

Finding Your Right Bra Size

The majority of women wear ill-fitting bras – this fact cannot be overemphasized. Wearing a bra with the right size of both band and cup seems to be a moving target. So many parameters are required for a bra to fit properly. But what is the issue if a bra does not fit?

Finding Your Right Bra Size

Consequences of an ill Fitting Bra

  • Breasts overflow at the top
  • Straps are bound to fall off
  • An ill-fitting bra is not aesthetically appealing
  • The band rests on the breasts and not on the ribs
  • Feeling suffocated if band is too tight
  • Breasts may slip under the band if it is loose
  • The required support may not be achieved
  • Straps dig in – this may lead to headaches, neck-ache and back pain

A bra that does not fit properly may also result in poor blood circulation, an issue that causes a pricking sensation in the fingers.

So, how do you find your right bra size? The easiest way to do it is to find an experienced bra fitting assistant. They will not only inform you about your ideal size but also show you different styles to try and see which ones have a better look. Not all types of bras will suit you.

How to Measure Your Bra Size

If you can’t find a professional bra shop near you, you can still measure yourself by following these steps:

Step 1
Remove your clothing and stand upright

Step 2
Take a flexible tape measure (like a tailor’s measure) and lay it just below your bust where the band is supposed to be. This measure will give you your correct band size. Be sure that you are standing straight and that the tape is horizontal. Make the measurement a little tighter than is done when measuring for other clothing.

The result you get in inches is your band size. If you get an odd number, like 37, you can try bras with a band size 36 and 38. It’s normally better to start with the lower number.

Step 3
To determine your cup size, place the tape measure on the widest part of your bust. This will usually be on the nipples. Once again, take the measure in inches, with the tape parallel to the floor. Should you get an odd number, opt for the lower even number.

If your bust is saggy, you will get a more accurate figure if you already have a good fitting bra on. If you do not have one, pick one which seems to fit. Adjust it for the fit and not looks.

Step 4
Subtract cup size (step 3) from the band size (step 2). Check in the table below to see your cup size.

Bra Size Chart


Bra size chart


Common Bra Issues and Troubleshooting

Problem: Breasts spill over at the top
Solution: The bra cups are too small, or the style does not correspond with your bust shape

Problem: Soreness or redness under the bust
Solution: The cups are irritating the skin because they are most likely small

Problem: Breasts are spilling on the sides
Solution: The bra you are wearing has insufficient breast coverage

Problem: Breasts are falling underneath the band
Solution: The band is too long, or the cups are too small, or both

Problem: Your bust has a saggy appearance
Solution: Your bra has insufficient support

Problem: Band is hiked up by the straps at the back
Solution: You are wearing a larger band size

Problem: The straps are digging into the shoulders

Solution: The band size is too big, the straps are too narrow, or both

Where to Buy Good Quality Bras

Although there are many outlets that sell bras both online and offline, Amazon stands out from them all. There is a wide range of styles and brands to choose from. The customer feedback feature enables you to figure out which bras are the best even before you buy. Make the right decision. Find a bra that fits your size.

Do You Wear a Normal Bra Under a Sports Bra?

Do You Wear a Normal Bra under a Sports Bra?

Wearing a Sports Bra Over a Regular Bra


Whether or not you should wear a regular bra under a sports bra is a controversial issue. In ideal circumstances, you should not wear anything underneath your workout bra. If you buy a properly fitting and good quality bra, you are not supposed to bother wearing it over a normal one.

An athletic Bra is meant to be comfortable as workout underwear. Wearing another bra underneath it makes it uncomfortable. If you feel comfier when you wear a bra with a sports bra, then you’re wearing poor quality or wrong size or style.

Disadvantages of Wearing Clothing Under a Sports Bra

Because a sports bra is supposed to be a workout innerwear, wearing clothing inside results in some difficulties. Below are some of the nuisances that come with the practice:

  1. Athletic bras are made to wick away moisture – wearing them over things disables this feature. You therefore become hotter and soggy
  2. Some regular bras push the bust closer thereby hindering ventilation
  3. When the breasts are held closer, minimizing the figure-8 movement is obstructed
  4. Normal bras are made with tough materials which can dig and/pinch under the pressure of compression garments
  5. When taking part in exercises involving lifting your hands above the head, the thin straps of normal bras will dig into your shoulders
Should you wear a bra with a sports bra
Athletes in sports bras. As you can see, these bras do not offer sufficient coverage

Can You Wear 2 Sports Bras?

Some ladies argue that two are better than one. The bottom line is that wearing two is better than wearing a regular one inside. But this is bound to make you hotter especially when exercising. The better option is to look for a double layer sports bra.

If your bra fits but is too thin to wear alone, consider layering over rather than under. For instance, you can wear a feminine sports tank or T-shirt over your workout bra. Something else you can try is detachable bra pads. You can even use breast petals or nipple covers.

Why Girls Wear a Sports Bra Over a Normal Bra

There are many reasons why some girls and women are adamant about using a regular bra underneath. Some of them are highlighted below:

  • To hide the nipples
  • Make breasts appear bigger – most athletic bras tend to have a minimizing effect
  • Out of habit – women are used to layering clothes and wearing just one item on the top does not feel okay
  • To enhance support – this mostly happens to busty women
  • Fashion designers are nowadays making athletic style bras for everyday wear. Some consumers confuse these with workout bras and wear them for exercise, necessitating layering
  • The influx of imitation workout bras. Only buy top-rated sports bras
  • Some ladies are either unwilling or unable to invest in good quality sports gear
  • Some sports bras are somewhat translucent
  • Avoid embarrassment in public changing rooms

Normal Bra under a Sports Bra

Though wearing a sports bra alone is the ideal thing, it is by no means the easiest undertaking. The answer to this issue lies in buying a good quality bra in your correct size. Top rated manufacturers of sports bras include;

  • Champion
  • Under Armour
  • Adidas
  • Nike
  • Victoria’s Secret
  • Calvin Klein
  • Fruit of the loom
  • Fittin
  • Glamorise
  • Hanes
  • Syrokan

You can find all these brands at Amazon.
If you must wear your athletic bra over other bras, here are some points to ponder upon:

  1. Choose a bra with no underwire
  2. Opt for bras with wider straps
  3. Make the bra underneath discreet to avoid embarrassment
  4. If you must show any part of a regular bra underneath your sports gear, do it intentionally and be sure you are comfortable with it – avoid scenarios of wardrobe mishaps
  5. Avoid pushup bras
  6. Consider layering over the bra rather than underneath

Comfort is the key in any outfit. Experimenting with different brands may give you a simple answer. But whether you wear other clothing under your sports bra or not is a decision that you should make with your personal comfort as the first priority.

Shop the best back closure sports bras whether for workouts, daily use or post-operation. Also learn why you may need to wear a back clasp sports bra even for everyday wear

20 Best Front Hook Sports Bras

Buy the best front hook, high impact sports bras and get a new experience. Shop bras for athletics, leisure, sleep, every day and post-operation wear.