The Mounting Powers of Secrecy - New York Times: "The Mounting Powers of Secrecy | Published: December 29, 2005
The open government law that guaranteed greater freedom of information to the public will soon be 40 years old and desperately in need of legislative overhaul, thanks to the Bush administration. The White House's sweeping enlargement of agency powers has already nearly doubled the rate of newly classified documents to 15 million a year. At the same time, the administration has choked back the annual volume of documents declassified for public access, from 200 million in 1998 to 44 million lately.
At the heart of this thickening veil are direct presidential orders and former Attorney General John Ashcroft's blanket assurance of legal defense to any agency erring on the side of secrecy in sealing off documents. This reversed the Clinton administration's 'presumption of disclosure' when it came to public requests. The 9/11 commission has already pointed out that this general retreat from the intent of the law hardly discourages terrorists; in fact, it was the government's internal failure to share information that contributed to that tragedy." ...
Thursday, December 29, 2005
Sunday, December 18, 2005
NY Times held off publishing for a year at request of White House ...
At the Times, a Scoop Deferred: "By Paul Farhi |`Washington Post Staff Writer | Saturday, December 17, 2005; Page A07
The New York Times' revelation yesterday that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to conduct domestic eavesdropping raised eyebrows in political and media circles, for both its stunning disclosures and the circumstances of its publication.
In an unusual note, the Times said in its story that it held off publishing the 3,600-word article for a year after the newspaper's representatives met with White House officials. It said the White House had asked the paper not to publish the story at all, 'arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.' ...
The New York Times' revelation yesterday that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to conduct domestic eavesdropping raised eyebrows in political and media circles, for both its stunning disclosures and the circumstances of its publication.
In an unusual note, the Times said in its story that it held off publishing the 3,600-word article for a year after the newspaper's representatives met with White House officials. It said the White House had asked the paper not to publish the story at all, 'arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.' ...
Columnist resigned after ...he took payments from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for writing columns favorable to his clients
Columnist Admits Being Paid, Resigns From Cato Institute… | The Huffington Post: "New York Times | ANNE E. KORNBLUT | Posted December 17, 2005 12:05 AM | READ MORE: Jack Abramoff
WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 - A senior scholar at the Cato Institute, the respected libertarian research organization, has resigned after revelations that he took payments from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for writing columns favorable to his clients.
The scholar, Doug Bandow, who wrote a column for the Copley News Service in addition to serving as a Cato fellow, acknowledged to executives at the organization that he had taken money from Mr. Abramoff after he was confronted about the payments by a reporter from BusinessWeek Online. ...
WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 - A senior scholar at the Cato Institute, the respected libertarian research organization, has resigned after revelations that he took payments from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for writing columns favorable to his clients.
The scholar, Doug Bandow, who wrote a column for the Copley News Service in addition to serving as a Cato fellow, acknowledged to executives at the organization that he had taken money from Mr. Abramoff after he was confronted about the payments by a reporter from BusinessWeek Online. ...
Thursday, December 15, 2005
New York Times admits it held [warantless] domestic spying story for a full year
The Raw Story | New York Times admits it held domestic spying story for a full year:RAW STORY | Print This | Email This
On the second page of a report which reveals the White House engaged in warantless domestic spying, the New York Times reveals that it held the story for a full year at the request of the Bush Administration, RAW STORY can reveal.
The Times also reveals that senior members of Congress from both parties knew about Bush's decision to spy on Americans who were making international calls or emails without warrants.
Further, the Times notes that they have omitted information in the article they did write, agreeing with the Bush Administration that the information could be useful for terrorists. Excerpts from the Times' article follow. ...
On the second page of a report which reveals the White House engaged in warantless domestic spying, the New York Times reveals that it held the story for a full year at the request of the Bush Administration, RAW STORY can reveal.
The Times also reveals that senior members of Congress from both parties knew about Bush's decision to spy on Americans who were making international calls or emails without warrants.
Further, the Times notes that they have omitted information in the article they did write, agreeing with the Bush Administration that the information could be useful for terrorists. Excerpts from the Times' article follow. ...
Saturday, December 03, 2005
Congress Researchers say Environmental Protection Agency skewed its analysis of air pollution legislation to favor President Bush's plan
Print Story: Congress Researchers Fault EPA Studies on Yahoo! News: "By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press WriterFri Dec 2, 5:08 PM ET
Researchers who work for Congress say the Environmental Protection Agency skewed its analysis of air pollution legislation to favor President Bush's plan.
EPA's analysis 'works in favor of' Bush's plan by overstating some costs of competing bills, said a report Friday by the Congressional Research Service. The 2002 Bush plan, dubbed 'Clear Skies,' remains stalled in Congress."
...
But the agency overestimated costs of installing the high-tech controls for mercury and assumes natural gas will more plentiful and available at cheaper prices than the Energy Department estimates, according to congressional researchers James McCarthy and Larry Parker. ...
Researchers who work for Congress say the Environmental Protection Agency skewed its analysis of air pollution legislation to favor President Bush's plan.
EPA's analysis 'works in favor of' Bush's plan by overstating some costs of competing bills, said a report Friday by the Congressional Research Service. The 2002 Bush plan, dubbed 'Clear Skies,' remains stalled in Congress."
...
But the agency overestimated costs of installing the high-tech controls for mercury and assumes natural gas will more plentiful and available at cheaper prices than the Energy Department estimates, according to congressional researchers James McCarthy and Larry Parker. ...
95 per cent US dailies ignored Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death
NEWSWATCH INDIA: � 95 per cent US dailies ignored report on torture of Iraqi prisoners: "
Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the corporate media of the United States (US) is covering it with the seriousness of a garage sale for the local Baptist Church, media research organisation Project Censored has said.
According to Prof Peter Phillips, director, Project Censored, a press release on these deaths by torture was issued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on October 25, 2005 and was immediately picked up by Associated Press (AP) and United Press International (UPI) wire services, making the story available to the US corporate media. A thorough check of Nexus-Lexus and Proquest electronic data bases, using the keywords ACLU and autopsy, showed that at least 95 per cent of the daily papers in the US didn't bother to pick up the story.
The Los Angeles Times covered the story on page A-4 with a 635-word report headlined 'Autopsies Support Abuse Allegations.' Fewer than a dozen other daily newspapers including: Bangor Daily News, Maine; Telegraph-Herald, Dubuque Iowa; Charleston Gazette; Advocate, Baton Rouge; and a half dozen others actually covered the story.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Seattle Times buried the story inside general Iraq news articles. USA Today posted the story on its website. MSNBC posted the story to its website, but apparently did not consider it newsworthy enough to air on television.
'The Randi Rhodes Show,' on Air America Radio, covered the story. AP/UPI news releases and direct quotes from the ACLU website appeared widely on Internet sites and on various news-based listservs around the world, including Common Dreams, Truthout, New Standard, Science Daily, and numerous others, Phillips said.
What little attention the news of the US torturing prisoners to death did get has completely disappeared as context for the torture stories now appearing in corporate media. A Nexus-Lexus search November 30, 2005 of the major papers in the US using the word torture turned up over 1,000 stories in the last 30 days. None of these included the ACLU report as supporting documentation on the issue.
The Project Censored director wondered, 'How can the American public understand the gravity of the torture that is currently being committed in our name when the issue is being reported with no reference to the extent to which these crimes against humanity have gone? Has the Internet become the only source of real news for mainstream Americans while the corporate media only tells us what they want us to know?'" ...
Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the corporate media of the United States (US) is covering it with the seriousness of a garage sale for the local Baptist Church, media research organisation Project Censored has said.
According to Prof Peter Phillips, director, Project Censored, a press release on these deaths by torture was issued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on October 25, 2005 and was immediately picked up by Associated Press (AP) and United Press International (UPI) wire services, making the story available to the US corporate media. A thorough check of Nexus-Lexus and Proquest electronic data bases, using the keywords ACLU and autopsy, showed that at least 95 per cent of the daily papers in the US didn't bother to pick up the story.
The Los Angeles Times covered the story on page A-4 with a 635-word report headlined 'Autopsies Support Abuse Allegations.' Fewer than a dozen other daily newspapers including: Bangor Daily News, Maine; Telegraph-Herald, Dubuque Iowa; Charleston Gazette; Advocate, Baton Rouge; and a half dozen others actually covered the story.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Seattle Times buried the story inside general Iraq news articles. USA Today posted the story on its website. MSNBC posted the story to its website, but apparently did not consider it newsworthy enough to air on television.
'The Randi Rhodes Show,' on Air America Radio, covered the story. AP/UPI news releases and direct quotes from the ACLU website appeared widely on Internet sites and on various news-based listservs around the world, including Common Dreams, Truthout, New Standard, Science Daily, and numerous others, Phillips said.
What little attention the news of the US torturing prisoners to death did get has completely disappeared as context for the torture stories now appearing in corporate media. A Nexus-Lexus search November 30, 2005 of the major papers in the US using the word torture turned up over 1,000 stories in the last 30 days. None of these included the ACLU report as supporting documentation on the issue.
The Project Censored director wondered, 'How can the American public understand the gravity of the torture that is currently being committed in our name when the issue is being reported with no reference to the extent to which these crimes against humanity have gone? Has the Internet become the only source of real news for mainstream Americans while the corporate media only tells us what they want us to know?'" ...
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Pentagon is paying millions more ...for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism....
U.S. Is Said to Pay to Plant Articles in Iraq Papers - New York Times: "By JEFF GERTH and SCOTT SHANE
Published: December 1, 2005
WASHINGTON, Nov. 30 - Titled "The Sands Are Blowing Toward a Democratic Iraq," an article written this week for publication in the Iraqi press was scornful of outsiders' pessimism about the country's future.
"Western press and frequently those self-styled 'objective' observers of Iraq are often critics of how we, the people of Iraq, are proceeding down the path in determining what is best for our nation," the article began. Quoting the Prophet Muhammad, it pleaded for unity and nonviolence.
But far from being the heartfelt opinion of an Iraqi writer, as its language implied, the article was prepared by the United States military as part of a multimillion-dollar covert campaign to plant paid propaganda in the Iraqi news media and pay friendly Iraqi journalists monthly stipends, military contractors and officials said.
...
Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism. ...
Published: December 1, 2005
WASHINGTON, Nov. 30 - Titled "The Sands Are Blowing Toward a Democratic Iraq," an article written this week for publication in the Iraqi press was scornful of outsiders' pessimism about the country's future.
"Western press and frequently those self-styled 'objective' observers of Iraq are often critics of how we, the people of Iraq, are proceeding down the path in determining what is best for our nation," the article began. Quoting the Prophet Muhammad, it pleaded for unity and nonviolence.
But far from being the heartfelt opinion of an Iraqi writer, as its language implied, the article was prepared by the United States military as part of a multimillion-dollar covert campaign to plant paid propaganda in the Iraqi news media and pay friendly Iraqi journalists monthly stipends, military contractors and officials said.
...
Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism. ...
Morley Safer, one of the real old timers of CBS, once again bemoaning the almost total loss of freedom in reporting on these invasions and occupations
None Dare Call It Censorship by Jack D. Douglas: "
All serious and intelligent journalists today know that the U.S. government has massive media management brigades to carefully control what Americans see in the media and, thus, what they are very likely to believe about things of which they have no direct experience, such as high-level politics, finance and foreign affairs. They also know that the government is extremely effective in secretly censoring the news by using devices such as 'embedded reporting' in nations like Afghanistan and Iraq which the U.S. government invades, occupies, and governs.
Yesterday I saw Morley Safer, one of the real old timers of CBS, once again bemoaning the almost total loss of freedom in reporting on these invasions and occupations. As he said, in Vietnam, U.S. and other national reporters could hop a ride on U.S. or other vehicles to cover anything they wanted to cover, which led directly to their exposing the Big Lies of the U.S. military and politicians about what was going on there. In Iraq and Afghanistan the reporters are 'in-bedded' (as I call it) with the military to prevent such free lancing and the soaring dangers of guerilla attacks almost totally prevents their even trying to circumvent the official censorship. Of course, none dare call it censorship for fear of being fired and ostracized to Alaska, so he did not use that forbidden word." ...
All serious and intelligent journalists today know that the U.S. government has massive media management brigades to carefully control what Americans see in the media and, thus, what they are very likely to believe about things of which they have no direct experience, such as high-level politics, finance and foreign affairs. They also know that the government is extremely effective in secretly censoring the news by using devices such as 'embedded reporting' in nations like Afghanistan and Iraq which the U.S. government invades, occupies, and governs.
Yesterday I saw Morley Safer, one of the real old timers of CBS, once again bemoaning the almost total loss of freedom in reporting on these invasions and occupations. As he said, in Vietnam, U.S. and other national reporters could hop a ride on U.S. or other vehicles to cover anything they wanted to cover, which led directly to their exposing the Big Lies of the U.S. military and politicians about what was going on there. In Iraq and Afghanistan the reporters are 'in-bedded' (as I call it) with the military to prevent such free lancing and the soaring dangers of guerilla attacks almost totally prevents their even trying to circumvent the official censorship. Of course, none dare call it censorship for fear of being fired and ostracized to Alaska, so he did not use that forbidden word." ...
Friday, November 25, 2005
Ain't no free speech allowed in Dubya's America
Capitol Hill Blue: Ain't no free speech allowed in Dubya's America: "By DOUG THOMPSON | Nov 24, 2005, 07:10
In George W. Bush’s America, protest and free speech are illegal acts. Just ask those arrested Wednesday for staging a peaceful protest against the Iraq war near the President’s ranch in Crawford, Texas.
Camping on the same land that antiwar mom Cindy Sheehan used to stage her highly-publicized protest in August, the activists quickly ran afoul of a new county law, hastily passed at the White House's orging, prohibiting public gatherings.
That’s right. The public no longer has a right to protest the President’s policies on public land near the President’s home in Crawford.
“The ordinance was very plainly meant to prevent people from protesting in front of Bush's ranch,” Dave Jensen, a 54-year-old former Marine told reporters. “We feel that's a First Amendment issue. It's intentionally designed to curtail freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.”
But the First Amendment doesn’t mean much to cops in Texas or the Bush administration as a dozen protestors, including Daniel Ellsberg of Pentagon papers fame along with the sister of Cindy Sheehan.
Such arrests, says Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, is just another example of how the Bush administration seeks to stifle debate on the Iraq war." ...
In George W. Bush’s America, protest and free speech are illegal acts. Just ask those arrested Wednesday for staging a peaceful protest against the Iraq war near the President’s ranch in Crawford, Texas.
Camping on the same land that antiwar mom Cindy Sheehan used to stage her highly-publicized protest in August, the activists quickly ran afoul of a new county law, hastily passed at the White House's orging, prohibiting public gatherings.
That’s right. The public no longer has a right to protest the President’s policies on public land near the President’s home in Crawford.
“The ordinance was very plainly meant to prevent people from protesting in front of Bush's ranch,” Dave Jensen, a 54-year-old former Marine told reporters. “We feel that's a First Amendment issue. It's intentionally designed to curtail freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.”
But the First Amendment doesn’t mean much to cops in Texas or the Bush administration as a dozen protestors, including Daniel Ellsberg of Pentagon papers fame along with the sister of Cindy Sheehan.
Such arrests, says Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, is just another example of how the Bush administration seeks to stifle debate on the Iraq war." ...
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Majority Believe White House Misleads Public, Poll Shows
WSJ.com - Majority Believe White House Misleads Public, Poll Shows: "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE | November 23, 2005
A majority of U.S. adults believe the Bush administration generally misleads the public on current issues, while fewer than a third of Americans believe the information provided by the administration is generally accurate, the latest Harris Interactive poll finds.
While the telephone survey of 1,011 U.S. adults indicates about 64% of Americans believe the Bush administration 'generally misleads the American public on current issues to achieve its own ends,' opinion on the topic is clearly divided along party lines. A large majority (68% to 28%) of Republicans say the Bush administration generally provides accurate information. However, even larger majorities of Democrats (91% to 7%) and Independents (73% to 25%) think the information is generally misleading. ...
A majority of U.S. adults believe the Bush administration generally misleads the public on current issues, while fewer than a third of Americans believe the information provided by the administration is generally accurate, the latest Harris Interactive poll finds.
While the telephone survey of 1,011 U.S. adults indicates about 64% of Americans believe the Bush administration 'generally misleads the American public on current issues to achieve its own ends,' opinion on the topic is clearly divided along party lines. A large majority (68% to 28%) of Republicans say the Bush administration generally provides accurate information. However, even larger majorities of Democrats (91% to 7%) and Independents (73% to 25%) think the information is generally misleading. ...
Top 3 papaer make Just 36 requests Freedom of Information requests of the Pentagon between 2000 and February 2005
The Raw Story | Freedom of Information logs shed light on media's military curiosity: "John Byrne
A listing of all requests made of the Pentagon under the Freedom of Information Act since 2000, acquired by RAW STORY, provides new insight into the aggressiveness of American news agencies.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, the public can request records of government agencies. Records seen as jeopardizing national security or individual rights are typically exempted. All requests are public.
The request for a list of all who made inquiries of the Pentagon was filed by Michael Petrelis (http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/, a San Francisco-based activist and blogger. He provided a copy to RAW STORY, which will be released in full next week.
The Pentagon’s records reveal that the law is broadly used—more than 10,000 requests have been made since 2000. But they also illuminate a seeming dearth of curiosity by news organizations about the internal files of the U.S. military establishment.
This lack of curiosity appears particularly evident among the nation’s three largest newspapers.
In total, the three papers with daily circulations greater than one million--USA Today, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times -- made just 36 requests of the Pentagon between 2000 and February 2005. USA Today made nine; the Journal, six; and the Times, 21. ...
A listing of all requests made of the Pentagon under the Freedom of Information Act since 2000, acquired by RAW STORY, provides new insight into the aggressiveness of American news agencies.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, the public can request records of government agencies. Records seen as jeopardizing national security or individual rights are typically exempted. All requests are public.
The request for a list of all who made inquiries of the Pentagon was filed by Michael Petrelis (http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/, a San Francisco-based activist and blogger. He provided a copy to RAW STORY, which will be released in full next week.
The Pentagon’s records reveal that the law is broadly used—more than 10,000 requests have been made since 2000. But they also illuminate a seeming dearth of curiosity by news organizations about the internal files of the U.S. military establishment.
This lack of curiosity appears particularly evident among the nation’s three largest newspapers.
In total, the three papers with daily circulations greater than one million--USA Today, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times -- made just 36 requests of the Pentagon between 2000 and February 2005. USA Today made nine; the Journal, six; and the Times, 21. ...
Five page memo, stamped Top Secret, alleging that President Bush had threatened to undertake military action against al-Jazeera
The Raw Story | UK press gags news outlets over minutes of meeting discussing al Jazeera bombing: "Larisa Alexandrovna
The Mirror, a UK publication which reported Tuesday on an alleged US plan to bomb an Arab TV station seen as anti-US, has been gagged from reporting any further on the memo and its contents by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, RAW STORY has learned.
The publication reported on the contents of a five page memo, stamped Top Secret, alleging that President Bush had threatened to undertake military action against al-Jazeera, a TV station located in the country of Qatar. While al-Jazeera is seen by some in the Bush administration to be largely anti-West, Qatar is an American ally.
According to sources familiar with the case, it was the recent attack on Fallujah that had Bush concerned about what al-Jazeera might report." ...
The Mirror, a UK publication which reported Tuesday on an alleged US plan to bomb an Arab TV station seen as anti-US, has been gagged from reporting any further on the memo and its contents by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, RAW STORY has learned.
The publication reported on the contents of a five page memo, stamped Top Secret, alleging that President Bush had threatened to undertake military action against al-Jazeera, a TV station located in the country of Qatar. While al-Jazeera is seen by some in the Bush administration to be largely anti-West, Qatar is an American ally.
According to sources familiar with the case, it was the recent attack on Fallujah that had Bush concerned about what al-Jazeera might report." ...
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Ex-Chief of Public TV Violated Federal Law - to combat what he saw as liberal bias! ... scathing report ... violated the Public Broadcasting Act
Report Says Ex-Chief of Public TV Violated Federal Law - New York Times: "By STEPHEN LABATON | Published: November 15, 2005
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15 - Investigators at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting concluded today that its former chairman repeatedly broke federal law and its own regulations in a campaign to combat what he saw as liberal bias.
A scathing report by the corporation's inspector general described a dysfunctional organization that violated the Public Broadcasting Act, which created the corporation and was written to insulate programming decisions from politics. ...
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15 - Investigators at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting concluded today that its former chairman repeatedly broke federal law and its own regulations in a campaign to combat what he saw as liberal bias.
A scathing report by the corporation's inspector general described a dysfunctional organization that violated the Public Broadcasting Act, which created the corporation and was written to insulate programming decisions from politics. ...
Monday, October 31, 2005
US Ranks 44th in Worldwide Press Freedom Index
OhmyNews International: "Nation's openness sinking after Sept. 11, northern Europe tops the list
The annual worldwide press freedom index from Reporters Without Borders shows the United States, which is supposedly spreading freedom and liberty throughout the world, is in a fast decline regarding the freedom of its own press.
The report ranked the United States in 44th place, an atomic drop from a favorable position of 22nd held last year, and from a handsome 17th place in 2002.
The organization mentioned that several journalists were expelled from the country since the terrorist attacks of 2001.
...
Repeated evidence of the media printing government propaganda and misleading information leading up to the U.S.-led Iraq invasion have surely made the decline of mainstream readers accelerate. ...
The annual worldwide press freedom index from Reporters Without Borders shows the United States, which is supposedly spreading freedom and liberty throughout the world, is in a fast decline regarding the freedom of its own press.
The report ranked the United States in 44th place, an atomic drop from a favorable position of 22nd held last year, and from a handsome 17th place in 2002.
The organization mentioned that several journalists were expelled from the country since the terrorist attacks of 2001.
...
Repeated evidence of the media printing government propaganda and misleading information leading up to the U.S.-led Iraq invasion have surely made the decline of mainstream readers accelerate. ...
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Maureen Dowd on Judith Miller [CIA leak, WMD promotion, Chalabi defender ...] ... Judy's stories about W.M.D. fit too perfectly with the White House
THE NEWS BLOG: "Let me put it this way, if anyone liked me like MoDo says she likes Miller, well, I'd have to check to see if I owed them child support.
" I've always liked Judy Miller. I have often wondered what Waugh or Thackeray would have made of the Fourth Estate's Becky Sharp.
The traits she has that drive many reporters at The Times crazy - her tropism [involuntary orientation by an organism or one of its parts that involves turning or curving by movement ... broadly : a natural inclination] toward powerful men, her frantic intensity and her peculiar mixture of hard work and hauteur - have never bothered me. I enjoy operatic types.
She never knew when to quit. That was her talent and her flaw. Sorely in need of a tight editorial leash, she was kept on no leash at all, and that has hurt this paper and its trust with readers. She more than earned her sobriquet "Miss Run Amok."
Judy's stories about W.M.D. fit too perfectly with the White House's case for war. She was close to Ahmad Chalabi, the con man who was conning the neocons to knock out Saddam so he could get his hands on Iraq, ..................
Even last April, when I wrote a column critical of Mr. Chalabi, she fired off e-mail to me defending him.
................... This cagey confusion is what makes people wonder whether her stint in the Alexandria jail was in part a career rehabilitation project.
................... But before turning Judy's case into a First Amendment battle, they should have nailed her to a chair and extracted the entire story of her escapade.
Judy told The Times that she plans to write a book and intends to return to the newsroom, hoping to cover "the same thing I've always covered - threats to our country." If that were to happen, the institution most in danger would be the newspaper in your hands. "
Ok, after calling her a drama queen and a whore, tropism being a fancy word for women who likes powerful men and fucks them, she then goes after her bosses for not supervising her and letting her hurt the paper.
Then she suggests that Miller's jail stint had other motives.
Then, finally, calls for her to be fired.
And Gail Collins might as well have cosigned it.
Why? It ran on the op-ed page, she's her nominal boss.
This is call putting your business in the street. This is the consensus opinion of the Times staff, except for the open hatred some folks had for Miller. ...
" I've always liked Judy Miller. I have often wondered what Waugh or Thackeray would have made of the Fourth Estate's Becky Sharp.
The traits she has that drive many reporters at The Times crazy - her tropism [involuntary orientation by an organism or one of its parts that involves turning or curving by movement ... broadly : a natural inclination] toward powerful men, her frantic intensity and her peculiar mixture of hard work and hauteur - have never bothered me. I enjoy operatic types.
She never knew when to quit. That was her talent and her flaw. Sorely in need of a tight editorial leash, she was kept on no leash at all, and that has hurt this paper and its trust with readers. She more than earned her sobriquet "Miss Run Amok."
Judy's stories about W.M.D. fit too perfectly with the White House's case for war. She was close to Ahmad Chalabi, the con man who was conning the neocons to knock out Saddam so he could get his hands on Iraq, ..................
Even last April, when I wrote a column critical of Mr. Chalabi, she fired off e-mail to me defending him.
................... This cagey confusion is what makes people wonder whether her stint in the Alexandria jail was in part a career rehabilitation project.
................... But before turning Judy's case into a First Amendment battle, they should have nailed her to a chair and extracted the entire story of her escapade.
Judy told The Times that she plans to write a book and intends to return to the newsroom, hoping to cover "the same thing I've always covered - threats to our country." If that were to happen, the institution most in danger would be the newspaper in your hands. "
Ok, after calling her a drama queen and a whore, tropism being a fancy word for women who likes powerful men and fucks them, she then goes after her bosses for not supervising her and letting her hurt the paper.
Then she suggests that Miller's jail stint had other motives.
Then, finally, calls for her to be fired.
And Gail Collins might as well have cosigned it.
Why? It ran on the op-ed page, she's her nominal boss.
This is call putting your business in the street. This is the consensus opinion of the Times staff, except for the open hatred some folks had for Miller. ...
Friday, October 21, 2005
Hardball's pattern of misinformation and imbala ... [Media Matters]
Hardball's pattern of misinformation and imbala ... [Media Matters]: "Hardball panels skew right
A review of Hardball programming since July 2 revealed nine separate discussions of the Plame investigation with panels solely composed of Republicans, prominent conservatives, and journalists or political figures with no public partisan or ideological affiliation. By contrast, Media Matters found only one instance of a panel that was arguably skewed left: In a July 5 discussion on whether journalists should have federal protections against revealing their sources to prosecutors, Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant was paired with Barbara Cochran, president of the nonpartisan professional organization the Radio-Television News Directors Association. (Oliphant is occasionally paired with a conservative commentator on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer -- here, for example.) The nine panels that skewed right are:
* July 15 (with NBC News chief White House correspondent David Gregory guest-hosting): Andrea Mitchell and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX);
* July 15: Washington Post correspondent Dana Milbank and National Review White House correspondent Byron York;
* July 21: Washington Post staff writer Jim VandeHei and Washington Times editorial page editor Tony Blankley;
* July 22: Hotline editor Chuck Todd and Weekly Standard staff writer Stephen F. Hayes;
* September 30: Todd and Hayes;
* October 6: Newsweek investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff, Washington Post national political editor John Harris, and Hayes;
* October 12: Republican attorney Victoria Toensing and former Kenneth Starr deputy independent counsel Sol Wisenberg;
* October 18: MSNBC contributor and former Republican presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan and former presidential adviser David Gergen;
* October 18: Newsweek political analyst Howard Fineman and Hayes."
A review of Hardball programming since July 2 revealed nine separate discussions of the Plame investigation with panels solely composed of Republicans, prominent conservatives, and journalists or political figures with no public partisan or ideological affiliation. By contrast, Media Matters found only one instance of a panel that was arguably skewed left: In a July 5 discussion on whether journalists should have federal protections against revealing their sources to prosecutors, Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant was paired with Barbara Cochran, president of the nonpartisan professional organization the Radio-Television News Directors Association. (Oliphant is occasionally paired with a conservative commentator on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer -- here, for example.) The nine panels that skewed right are:
* July 15 (with NBC News chief White House correspondent David Gregory guest-hosting): Andrea Mitchell and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX);
* July 15: Washington Post correspondent Dana Milbank and National Review White House correspondent Byron York;
* July 21: Washington Post staff writer Jim VandeHei and Washington Times editorial page editor Tony Blankley;
* July 22: Hotline editor Chuck Todd and Weekly Standard staff writer Stephen F. Hayes;
* September 30: Todd and Hayes;
* October 6: Newsweek investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff, Washington Post national political editor John Harris, and Hayes;
* October 12: Republican attorney Victoria Toensing and former Kenneth Starr deputy independent counsel Sol Wisenberg;
* October 18: MSNBC contributor and former Republican presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan and former presidential adviser David Gergen;
* October 18: Newsweek political analyst Howard Fineman and Hayes."
Editor Says He Missed Miller 'Alarm Bells' - might have been more willing to compromise with Special Counsel given "details of Judy's entanglement"
Editor Says He Missed Miller 'Alarm Bells' - Yahoo! News: "By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The New York Times' Judith Miller belatedly gave prosecutors her notes of a key meeting in the
CIA leak probe only after being shown White House records of it, and her boss declared Friday she appeared to have misled the newspaper about her role.
In a dramatic e-mail, Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote Times' employees he wished he'd more carefully interviewed Miller and had "missed what should have been significant alarm bells" that she had been the recipient of leaked information about the CIA officer at the heart of the case.
"Judy seems to have misled (Times Washington bureau chief) Phil Taubman about the extent of her involvement," Keller wrote in what he described as a lessons-learned e-mail. "This alone should have been enough to make me probe deeper."
Keller said he might have been more willing to compromise with Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald "if I had known the details of Judy's entanglement" with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. ...
WASHINGTON - The New York Times' Judith Miller belatedly gave prosecutors her notes of a key meeting in the
CIA leak probe only after being shown White House records of it, and her boss declared Friday she appeared to have misled the newspaper about her role.
In a dramatic e-mail, Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote Times' employees he wished he'd more carefully interviewed Miller and had "missed what should have been significant alarm bells" that she had been the recipient of leaked information about the CIA officer at the heart of the case.
"Judy seems to have misled (Times Washington bureau chief) Phil Taubman about the extent of her involvement," Keller wrote in what he described as a lessons-learned e-mail. "This alone should have been enough to make me probe deeper."
Keller said he might have been more willing to compromise with Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald "if I had known the details of Judy's entanglement" with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. ...
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Curiously, America’s Greatest Newspaper (not!) has never mentioned the White House Iraq Group. Not once ...
The Grey Lady that did not bark in the night | CorrenteWire: "Submitted by lambert on Fri, 2005-10-14 23:18.
Curiously, America’s Greatest Newspaper (not!) has never mentioned the White House Iraq Group. Not once.
Why is this curious? Because to make the case for Bush’s war of choice in Iraq, the W.H.I.G. was tasked with fixing the facts and the intelligence around the policy through a disinformation campaign that involved more than 50 planted stories in the press. The W.H.I.G. membership? Karen Hughes, Andrew Card, Mary Matalin, James Wilkinson, Karl Rove—and “Scooter” Libby, the source Judy “Kneepads” Miller was, erm, “protecting.”
Why would the Times not cover this story? Why wouldn’t anyone else? Here are some theories, in increasing order of institutional corruption. ....
Curiously, America’s Greatest Newspaper (not!) has never mentioned the White House Iraq Group. Not once.
Why is this curious? Because to make the case for Bush’s war of choice in Iraq, the W.H.I.G. was tasked with fixing the facts and the intelligence around the policy through a disinformation campaign that involved more than 50 planted stories in the press. The W.H.I.G. membership? Karen Hughes, Andrew Card, Mary Matalin, James Wilkinson, Karl Rove—and “Scooter” Libby, the source Judy “Kneepads” Miller was, erm, “protecting.”
Why would the Times not cover this story? Why wouldn’t anyone else? Here are some theories, in increasing order of institutional corruption. ....
Monday, October 17, 2005
During the propaganda buildup for the invasion of Iraq, Judith Miller and the New York Times served as a key asset of the warfare state
AlterNet: Judith Miller, the Fourth Estate and the Warfare State: "By Norman Solomon, AlterNet. Posted October 17, 2005.
During the propaganda buildup for the invasion of Iraq, Judith Miller and the New York Times served as a key asset of the warfare state.
More than any other New York Times reporter, Judith Miller took the lead with stories claiming that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Now, a few years later, she's facing heightened scrutiny in the aftermath of a pair of articles that appeared in the Times on Sunday -- a lengthy investigative piece about Miller plus her own first-person account of how she got entangled in the case of the Bush administration's "outing" of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent.
It now seems that Miller functioned with more accountability to U.S. military intelligence officials than to New York Times editors. Most of the way through her article, Miller slipped in this sentence: "During the Iraq war, the Pentagon had given me clearance to see secret information as part of my assignment 'embedded' with a special military unit hunting for unconventional weapons." And, according to the same article, she ultimately told the grand jury that during a July 8, 2003, meeting with the vice president's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, "I might have expressed frustration to Mr. Libby that I was not permitted to discuss with editors some of the more sensitive information about Iraq." ...
During the propaganda buildup for the invasion of Iraq, Judith Miller and the New York Times served as a key asset of the warfare state.
More than any other New York Times reporter, Judith Miller took the lead with stories claiming that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Now, a few years later, she's facing heightened scrutiny in the aftermath of a pair of articles that appeared in the Times on Sunday -- a lengthy investigative piece about Miller plus her own first-person account of how she got entangled in the case of the Bush administration's "outing" of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent.
It now seems that Miller functioned with more accountability to U.S. military intelligence officials than to New York Times editors. Most of the way through her article, Miller slipped in this sentence: "During the Iraq war, the Pentagon had given me clearance to see secret information as part of my assignment 'embedded' with a special military unit hunting for unconventional weapons." And, according to the same article, she ultimately told the grand jury that during a July 8, 2003, meeting with the vice president's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, "I might have expressed frustration to Mr. Libby that I was not permitted to discuss with editors some of the more sensitive information about Iraq." ...
50 False News Stories By Bush Propaganda Machine
50 False News Stories By Bush Propaganda Machine: "50 False News Stories By Bush Propaganda Machine | A Strategy of Lies: How the White House Fed the Public a Steady Diet of Falsehoods | Earth Island.net | 11-10-3
Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Ret.) has identified 50 false news stories created and leaked by a secretive White House propaganda apparatus.
Bush administration officials are probably having second thoughts about their decision to play hardball with former US Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Joe Wilson is a contender. When you play hardball with Joe, you better be prepared to deal with some serious rebound. ...
...
Gardiner's dogged research identified a long list of stories that passed through Rumsfeld's propaganda mill. According to Gardiner, "there were over 50 stories manufactured or at least engineered that distorted the picture of Gulf II for the American and British people." Those stories include:
The link between terrorism, Iraq and 9/11
Iraqi agents meeting with 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta
Iraq's possession of chemical and biological weapons.
Iraq's purchase of nuclear materials from Niger.
Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons.
Aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons
The existence of Iraqi drones, WMD cluster bombs and Scud missiles.
Iraq's threat to target the US with cyber warfare attacks.
The rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch.
The surrender of a 5,000-man Iraqi brigade.
Iraq executing Coalition POWs.
Iraqi soldiers dressing in US and UK uniforms to commit atrocities.
The exact location of WMD facilities
WMDs moved to Syria.
Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Ret.) has identified 50 false news stories created and leaked by a secretive White House propaganda apparatus.
Bush administration officials are probably having second thoughts about their decision to play hardball with former US Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Joe Wilson is a contender. When you play hardball with Joe, you better be prepared to deal with some serious rebound. ...
...
Gardiner's dogged research identified a long list of stories that passed through Rumsfeld's propaganda mill. According to Gardiner, "there were over 50 stories manufactured or at least engineered that distorted the picture of Gulf II for the American and British people." Those stories include:
The link between terrorism, Iraq and 9/11
Iraqi agents meeting with 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta
Iraq's possession of chemical and biological weapons.
Iraq's purchase of nuclear materials from Niger.
Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons.
Aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons
The existence of Iraqi drones, WMD cluster bombs and Scud missiles.
Iraq's threat to target the US with cyber warfare attacks.
The rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch.
The surrender of a 5,000-man Iraqi brigade.
Iraq executing Coalition POWs.
Iraqi soldiers dressing in US and UK uniforms to commit atrocities.
The exact location of WMD facilities
WMDs moved to Syria.
Friday, October 14, 2005
Political Appointees Re-Write Commerce Department Report On Offshore Outsourcing; Original Analysis Is Missing From Final Version
Political Appointees Re-Write Commerce Department Report On Offshore Outsourcing; Original Analysis Is Missing From Final Version: "BY RICHARD McCORMACK richard@manufacturingnews.com | October 12, 2005 Volume 12, No. 18
The Commerce Department has responded to a half-year-old request by Manufacturing and Technology News for the release a long-awaited study on the issue of 'offshore outsourcing' of IT service-sector jobs and high-tech industries. But the 12-page document represented by the agency as its final report is not what was written by its analysts. Rather, it was crafted by political appointees at Commerce and at the White House, according to those familiar with it.
...
According to those who have tracked the report's whereabouts, it was completed well before the November 2004 presidential election but was delayed for clearance by the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress due to the controversial nature of the subject. Outsourcing had become a contentious campaign issue, particularly in the swing states.
...
The 12-page version that was released focuses on the allegedly positive impacts for the U.S. economy of the offshore outsourcing -- and "insourcing" -- of jobs in the IT, semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries, argue those who have read it. The report quotes research conducted by organizations and individuals that have been funded by multinationals that benefit from shifting jobs overseas. No mention is made of the conflict of interest inherent in the studies cited by the Commerce report.
The Commerce Department has responded to a half-year-old request by Manufacturing and Technology News for the release a long-awaited study on the issue of 'offshore outsourcing' of IT service-sector jobs and high-tech industries. But the 12-page document represented by the agency as its final report is not what was written by its analysts. Rather, it was crafted by political appointees at Commerce and at the White House, according to those familiar with it.
...
According to those who have tracked the report's whereabouts, it was completed well before the November 2004 presidential election but was delayed for clearance by the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress due to the controversial nature of the subject. Outsourcing had become a contentious campaign issue, particularly in the swing states.
...
The 12-page version that was released focuses on the allegedly positive impacts for the U.S. economy of the offshore outsourcing -- and "insourcing" -- of jobs in the IT, semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries, argue those who have read it. The report quotes research conducted by organizations and individuals that have been funded by multinationals that benefit from shifting jobs overseas. No mention is made of the conflict of interest inherent in the studies cited by the Commerce report.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
FOXNews.com - Politics - Bush Teleconference With Soldiers Staged .... "carefully scripted publicity stunt."
FOXNews.com - Politics - Bush Teleconference With Soldiers Staged: "Thursday, October 13, 2005
WASHINGTON — It was billed as a conversation with U.S. troops, but the questions President Bush asked on a teleconference call Thursday were choreographed to match his goals for the war in Iraq and Saturday's vote on a new Iraqi constitution.
"This is an important time," Allison Barber, deputy assistant defense secretary, said, coaching the soldiers before Bush arrived. "The president is looking forward to having just a conversation with you." ...
...
A brief rehearsal ensued.
"OK, so let's just walk through this," Barber said. "Captain Kennedy, you answer the first question and you hand the mike to whom?" ...
...
Paul Rieckhoff, director of the New York-based Operation Truth (search), an advocacy group for U.S. veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, denounced the event as a "carefully scripted publicity stunt." Five of the 10 U.S. troops involved were officers, he said. ....
WASHINGTON — It was billed as a conversation with U.S. troops, but the questions President Bush asked on a teleconference call Thursday were choreographed to match his goals for the war in Iraq and Saturday's vote on a new Iraqi constitution.
"This is an important time," Allison Barber, deputy assistant defense secretary, said, coaching the soldiers before Bush arrived. "The president is looking forward to having just a conversation with you." ...
...
A brief rehearsal ensued.
"OK, so let's just walk through this," Barber said. "Captain Kennedy, you answer the first question and you hand the mike to whom?" ...
...
Paul Rieckhoff, director of the New York-based Operation Truth (search), an advocacy group for U.S. veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, denounced the event as a "carefully scripted publicity stunt." Five of the 10 U.S. troops involved were officers, he said. ....
Thursday, October 06, 2005
viability of Representative Democracy rests on well-informed citizenry ... White house ad runs on TV, MoveOn.org is blocked
TomPaine.com - Our Democracy Has Been Hollowed Out: "Al Gore, Jr. | October 06, 2005
I came here today because I believe that American democracy is in grave danger. It is no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse. I know that I am not the only one who feels that something has gone basically and badly wrong in the way America's fabled "marketplace of ideas" now functions.
...
Are we still routinely torturing helpless prisoners, and if so, does it feel right that we as American citizens are not outraged by the practice? And does it feel right to have no ongoing discussion of whether or not this abhorrent, medieval behavior is being carried out in the name of the American people? If the gap between rich and poor is widening steadily and economic stress is mounting for low-income families, why do we seem increasingly apathetic and lethargic in our role as citizens?
...
Their faith [founding fathers] in the viability of Representative Democracy rested on their trust in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry. But they placed particular emphasis on insuring that the public could be well-informed. And they took great care to protect the openness of the marketplace of ideas in order to ensure the free-flow of knowledge.
...
Our founders knew all about the Roman Forum and the Agora in ancient Athens. They also understood quite well that in America, our public forum would be an ongoing conversation about democracy in which individual citizens would participate not only by speaking directly in the presence of others -- but more commonly by communicating with their fellow citizens over great distances by means of the printed word. Thus they not only protected Freedom of Assembly as a basic right, they made a special point - in the First Amendment - of protecting the freedom of the printing press.
...
And what if an individual citizen, or a group of citizens wants to enter the public debate by expressing their views on television? Since they cannot simply join the conversation, some of them have resorted to raising money in order to buy 30 seconds in which to express their opinion. But they are not even allowed to do that.
Moveon.org tried to buy ads last year to express opposition to Bush's Medicare proposal which was then being debated by Congress. They were told "issue advocacy" was not permissible. Then, one of the networks that had refused the Moveon ad began running advertisements by the White House in favor of the President's Medicare proposal. So Moveon complained and the White House ad was temporarily removed. By temporary, I mean it was removed until the White House complained and the network immediately put the ad back on, yet still refused to present the Moveon ad.
I came here today because I believe that American democracy is in grave danger. It is no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse. I know that I am not the only one who feels that something has gone basically and badly wrong in the way America's fabled "marketplace of ideas" now functions.
...
Are we still routinely torturing helpless prisoners, and if so, does it feel right that we as American citizens are not outraged by the practice? And does it feel right to have no ongoing discussion of whether or not this abhorrent, medieval behavior is being carried out in the name of the American people? If the gap between rich and poor is widening steadily and economic stress is mounting for low-income families, why do we seem increasingly apathetic and lethargic in our role as citizens?
...
Their faith [founding fathers] in the viability of Representative Democracy rested on their trust in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry. But they placed particular emphasis on insuring that the public could be well-informed. And they took great care to protect the openness of the marketplace of ideas in order to ensure the free-flow of knowledge.
...
Our founders knew all about the Roman Forum and the Agora in ancient Athens. They also understood quite well that in America, our public forum would be an ongoing conversation about democracy in which individual citizens would participate not only by speaking directly in the presence of others -- but more commonly by communicating with their fellow citizens over great distances by means of the printed word. Thus they not only protected Freedom of Assembly as a basic right, they made a special point - in the First Amendment - of protecting the freedom of the printing press.
...
And what if an individual citizen, or a group of citizens wants to enter the public debate by expressing their views on television? Since they cannot simply join the conversation, some of them have resorted to raising money in order to buy 30 seconds in which to express their opinion. But they are not even allowed to do that.
Moveon.org tried to buy ads last year to express opposition to Bush's Medicare proposal which was then being debated by Congress. They were told "issue advocacy" was not permissible. Then, one of the networks that had refused the Moveon ad began running advertisements by the White House in favor of the President's Medicare proposal. So Moveon complained and the White House ad was temporarily removed. By temporary, I mean it was removed until the White House complained and the network immediately put the ad back on, yet still refused to present the Moveon ad.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Buying of News by Bush's Aides Is Ruled Illegal - "Engaging in a purely political activity such as this is not a proper use of appropriated funds."
Buying of News by Bush's Aides Is Ruled Illegal - New York Times: "By ROBERT PEAR | Published: October 1, 2005
WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 - Federal auditors said on Friday that the Bush administration violated the law by buying favorable news coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party.
In a blistering report, the investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, said the administration had disseminated "covert propaganda" in the United States, in violation of a statutory ban.
The contract with Mr. Williams and the general contours of the public relations campaign had been known for months. The report Friday provided the first definitive ruling on the legality of the activities.
Lawyers from the accountability office, an independent nonpartisan arm of Congress, found that the administration systematically analyzed news articles to see if they carried the message, "The Bush administration/the G.O.P. is committed to education."
The auditors declared: "We see no use for such information except for partisan political purposes. Engaging in a purely political activity such as this is not a proper use of appropriated funds." ....
WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 - Federal auditors said on Friday that the Bush administration violated the law by buying favorable news coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party.
In a blistering report, the investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, said the administration had disseminated "covert propaganda" in the United States, in violation of a statutory ban.
The contract with Mr. Williams and the general contours of the public relations campaign had been known for months. The report Friday provided the first definitive ruling on the legality of the activities.
Lawyers from the accountability office, an independent nonpartisan arm of Congress, found that the administration systematically analyzed news articles to see if they carried the message, "The Bush administration/the G.O.P. is committed to education."
The auditors declared: "We see no use for such information except for partisan political purposes. Engaging in a purely political activity such as this is not a proper use of appropriated funds." ....
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
F.A.A. Alerted on Qaeda in '98, 9/11 Panel Said - [update to] heavily redacted [blacked out]version was released by the Bush administration in January
F.A.A. Alerted on Qaeda in '98, 9/11 Panel Said - New York Times: "By ERIC LICHTBLAU | Published: September 14, 2005
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 - American aviation officials were warned as early as 1998 that Al Qaeda could 'seek to hijack a commercial jet and slam it into a U.S. landmark,' according to previously secret portions of a report prepared last year by the Sept. 11 commission. The officials also realized months before the Sept. 11 attacks that two of the three airports used in the hijackings had suffered repeated security lapses.
...
A heavily redacted version was released by the Bush administration in January, but commission members complained that the deleted material contained information critical to the public's understanding of what went wrong on Sept. 11. In response, the administration prepared a new public version of the report, which was posted Tuesday on the National Archives Web site.
While the new version still blacks out numerous references to particular shortcomings in aviation security, it restores dozens of other portions of the report that the administration had considered too sensitive for public release.
The newly disclosed material follows the basic outline of what was already known about aviation failings, namely that the F.A.A. had ample reason to suspect that Al Qaeda might try to hijack a plane yet did little to deter it. But it also adds significant details about the nature and specificity of aviation warnings over the years, security lapses by the government and the airlines, and turf battles between federal agencies. ...
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 - American aviation officials were warned as early as 1998 that Al Qaeda could 'seek to hijack a commercial jet and slam it into a U.S. landmark,' according to previously secret portions of a report prepared last year by the Sept. 11 commission. The officials also realized months before the Sept. 11 attacks that two of the three airports used in the hijackings had suffered repeated security lapses.
...
A heavily redacted version was released by the Bush administration in January, but commission members complained that the deleted material contained information critical to the public's understanding of what went wrong on Sept. 11. In response, the administration prepared a new public version of the report, which was posted Tuesday on the National Archives Web site.
While the new version still blacks out numerous references to particular shortcomings in aviation security, it restores dozens of other portions of the report that the administration had considered too sensitive for public release.
The newly disclosed material follows the basic outline of what was already known about aviation failings, namely that the F.A.A. had ample reason to suspect that Al Qaeda might try to hijack a plane yet did little to deter it. But it also adds significant details about the nature and specificity of aviation warnings over the years, security lapses by the government and the airlines, and turf battles between federal agencies. ...
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
As bodies recovered, reporters are told 'no photos, no stories' ... [ vs. Bush: "they [terrorist] hate our freedom" !?]
As bodies recovered, reporters are told 'no photos, no stories': "Cecilia M. Vega, Chronicle Staff Writer | Tuesday, September 13, 2005
...
Outside one house on Kentucky Street, a member of the Army 82nd Airborne Division summoned a reporter and photographer standing nearby and told them that if they took pictures or wrote a story about the body recovery process, he would take away their press credentials and kick them out of the state.
"No photos. No stories," said the man, wearing camouflage fatigues and a red beret.
On Saturday, after being challenged in court by CNN, the Bush administration agreed not to prevent the news media from following the effort to recover the bodies of Hurricane Katrina victims.
But on Monday, in the Bywater district, that assurance wasn't being followed. The 82nd Airborne soldier told reporters the Army had a policy that requires media to be 300 meters -- more than three football fields in length -- away from the scene of body recoveries in New Orleans. If reporters wrote stories or took pictures of body recoveries, they would be reported and face consequences, he said, including a loss of access for up-close coverage of certain military operations.
...
Dean Nugent, of the Louisiana State Coroner's Department, who accompanied the soldier, added that it wasn't safe to be in Bywater. "They'll kill you out here," he said, referring to the few residents who have continued to defy mandatory evacuation orders and remain in their homes."
"The cockroaches come out at night," he said of the residents. "This is one of the worst places in the country. You should not be here. Especially you," he told a female reporter.
Nugent, who is white, acknowledged he wasn't personally familiar with the poor, black neighborhood, saying he only knew of it by reputation.
...
Outside one house on Kentucky Street, a member of the Army 82nd Airborne Division summoned a reporter and photographer standing nearby and told them that if they took pictures or wrote a story about the body recovery process, he would take away their press credentials and kick them out of the state.
"No photos. No stories," said the man, wearing camouflage fatigues and a red beret.
On Saturday, after being challenged in court by CNN, the Bush administration agreed not to prevent the news media from following the effort to recover the bodies of Hurricane Katrina victims.
But on Monday, in the Bywater district, that assurance wasn't being followed. The 82nd Airborne soldier told reporters the Army had a policy that requires media to be 300 meters -- more than three football fields in length -- away from the scene of body recoveries in New Orleans. If reporters wrote stories or took pictures of body recoveries, they would be reported and face consequences, he said, including a loss of access for up-close coverage of certain military operations.
...
Dean Nugent, of the Louisiana State Coroner's Department, who accompanied the soldier, added that it wasn't safe to be in Bywater. "They'll kill you out here," he said, referring to the few residents who have continued to defy mandatory evacuation orders and remain in their homes."
"The cockroaches come out at night," he said of the residents. "This is one of the worst places in the country. You should not be here. Especially you," he told a female reporter.
Nugent, who is white, acknowledged he wasn't personally familiar with the poor, black neighborhood, saying he only knew of it by reputation.
Saturday, September 10, 2005
Republican indignation over Marble’s “inappropriate remarks to Cheney -- "Go F**k yourself" ... same words Cheney used last year to a Senator
Capitol Hill Blue: A Very, Very Good Idea: "By DOUG THOMPSON | Sep 9, 2005, 06:37
Ben Marble, a Gulfport resident who says he’s a doctor, had the guts to wade into Vice President Dick Cheney’s carefully-staged photo op Thursday and say what many residents of the Gulf Coast wanted to say to the politicians who sat on their butts while the people of Mississippi and Louisiana lay dead and dying.
“Go fuck yourself Mr. Cheney,” Marble screamed just off camera as the event played out live on CNN. “Go fuck yourself you asshole!”
Secret Service agents subdued Marble and CNN yanked the video off its web site but copies of it float around the Internet and Marble, who’s homeless after Katrina destroyed his Gulfport home, is offering a copy for sale on EBay.
Republicans, of course, jumped in with carefully-crafted indignation over Marble’s “inappropriate remarks” to Cheney, forgetting the Vice President used the same words to tell off a Senator just last year.
Cheney offered his outburst of obscenity because that Senator had the gall to question his relationship with scandal-scarred Halliburton, the company he used to run and that’s now ripping off taxpayers in Iraq. All Marble had to be upset about was loss of his home, death of close friends and family and destruction of the city he loved."
Ben Marble, a Gulfport resident who says he’s a doctor, had the guts to wade into Vice President Dick Cheney’s carefully-staged photo op Thursday and say what many residents of the Gulf Coast wanted to say to the politicians who sat on their butts while the people of Mississippi and Louisiana lay dead and dying.
“Go fuck yourself Mr. Cheney,” Marble screamed just off camera as the event played out live on CNN. “Go fuck yourself you asshole!”
Secret Service agents subdued Marble and CNN yanked the video off its web site but copies of it float around the Internet and Marble, who’s homeless after Katrina destroyed his Gulfport home, is offering a copy for sale on EBay.
Republicans, of course, jumped in with carefully-crafted indignation over Marble’s “inappropriate remarks” to Cheney, forgetting the Vice President used the same words to tell off a Senator just last year.
Cheney offered his outburst of obscenity because that Senator had the gall to question his relationship with scandal-scarred Halliburton, the company he used to run and that’s now ripping off taxpayers in Iraq. All Marble had to be upset about was loss of his home, death of close friends and family and destruction of the city he loved."
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Frustrated: Fire crews to hand out fliers for FEMA ... assigned as community-relations officers for FEMA
Salt Lake Tribune - Utah: "09/06/2005 02:04:54 AM |
Frustrated: Fire crews to hand out fliers for FEMA | By Lisa Rosetta | The Salt Lake Tribune
... Many of the firefighters, assembled from Utah and throughout the United States by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, thought they were going to be deployed as emergency workers.
Instead, they have learned they are going to be community-relations officers for FEMA, shuffled throughout the Gulf Coast region to disseminate fliers and a phone number: 1-800-621-FEMA.
On Monday, some firefighters stuck in the staging area at the Sheraton peeled off their FEMA-issued shirts and stuffed them in backpacks, saying they refuse to represent the federal agency.
Federal officials are unapologetic.
Frustrated: Fire crews to hand out fliers for FEMA | By Lisa Rosetta | The Salt Lake Tribune
... Many of the firefighters, assembled from Utah and throughout the United States by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, thought they were going to be deployed as emergency workers.
Instead, they have learned they are going to be community-relations officers for FEMA, shuffled throughout the Gulf Coast region to disseminate fliers and a phone number: 1-800-621-FEMA.
On Monday, some firefighters stuck in the staging area at the Sheraton peeled off their FEMA-issued shirts and stuffed them in backpacks, saying they refuse to represent the federal agency.
Federal officials are unapologetic.
It's Not a 'Blame Game' - No administration could credibly investigate such an immense failure on its own watch ... a whitewash
It's Not a 'Blame Game' - New York Times: "It's Not a 'Blame Game' | Published: September 7, 2005
With the size and difficulty of the task of rescuing and rebuilding New Orleans and other Gulf Coast areas still unfolding, it seemed early to talk about investigating how this predicted cataclysm had been allowed to occur and why the government's response was so slow and inept. Until yesterday, that is, when President Bush blithely announced at a photo-op cabinet meeting that he, personally, was going to 'find out what went right and what went wrong.' We can't imagine a worse idea.
No administration could credibly investigate such an immense failure on its own watch. And we have learned through bitter experience - the Abu Ghraib nightmare is just one example - that when this administration begins an internal investigation, it means a whitewash in which no one important is held accountable and no real change occurs." ...
With the size and difficulty of the task of rescuing and rebuilding New Orleans and other Gulf Coast areas still unfolding, it seemed early to talk about investigating how this predicted cataclysm had been allowed to occur and why the government's response was so slow and inept. Until yesterday, that is, when President Bush blithely announced at a photo-op cabinet meeting that he, personally, was going to 'find out what went right and what went wrong.' We can't imagine a worse idea.
No administration could credibly investigate such an immense failure on its own watch. And we have learned through bitter experience - the Abu Ghraib nightmare is just one example - that when this administration begins an internal investigation, it means a whitewash in which no one important is held accountable and no real change occurs." ...
FEMA Top Heavy with Inexperienced Friends of Bush
FEMA Top Heavy with Inexperienced Friends of Bush - Independent Media TV: "September 07, 2005 | By: Kenneth Bazinet | New York Daily News
WASHINGTON - The three top jobs at the Federal Emergency Management Agency under President Bush went to political cronies with no apparent experience coping with catastrophes, the Daily News has learned. Even if Bush were to fire embattled and suddenly invisible FEMA Director Michael Brown over his handling of Hurricane Katrina, the bureaucrat immediately below him is no disaster professional, either.
While Brown ran horse shows in his last private-sector job, FEMA's No. 2 man, deputy director and chief of staff Patrick Rhode, was an advance man for the Bush-Cheney campaign and White House. He also did short stints at the Commerce Department and Small Business Administration.
Rhode's biography posted on FEMA's Web site doesn't indicate he has any real experience in emergency response.
In addition, the agency's former third-ranking official, deputy chief of staff Scott Morris, was a PR expert who worked for Maverick Media, the Texas outfit that produced TV and radio spots for the Bush-Cheney campaign. In June, Morris moved to Florida to become FEMA's long-term recovery director.
WASHINGTON - The three top jobs at the Federal Emergency Management Agency under President Bush went to political cronies with no apparent experience coping with catastrophes, the Daily News has learned. Even if Bush were to fire embattled and suddenly invisible FEMA Director Michael Brown over his handling of Hurricane Katrina, the bureaucrat immediately below him is no disaster professional, either.
While Brown ran horse shows in his last private-sector job, FEMA's No. 2 man, deputy director and chief of staff Patrick Rhode, was an advance man for the Bush-Cheney campaign and White House. He also did short stints at the Commerce Department and Small Business Administration.
Rhode's biography posted on FEMA's Web site doesn't indicate he has any real experience in emergency response.
In addition, the agency's former third-ranking official, deputy chief of staff Scott Morris, was a PR expert who worked for Maverick Media, the Texas outfit that produced TV and radio spots for the Bush-Cheney campaign. In June, Morris moved to Florida to become FEMA's long-term recovery director.
Democrats will oppose Katrina committees; 'Sham and a charade'
The Raw Story | Democrats will oppose Katrina committees; 'Sham and a charade': "RAW STORY
The top Congressional Democrats announced their opposition Thursday to the creation of a GOP-led bicameral committee to examine federal, state and local relief efforts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, ROLL CALL reported Thursday morning. Excerpts follow (full paid article.
#
Calling it a sham and a charade, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she will not appoint anyone from her Caucus to the joint committee. And Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will urge his Democratic colleagues not to serve on the panel, a senior aide said Thursday morning.
...
Pelosi said she is 'very disappointed' and 'very offended' by the Republican leaders' actions. She added that in order to be truly bipartisan, Democrats had to have been brought to the table at the outset, the committee membership must be evenly divided between the two parties, and the new panel must have 'true subpoena power' and the authority to act.
The top Congressional Democrats announced their opposition Thursday to the creation of a GOP-led bicameral committee to examine federal, state and local relief efforts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, ROLL CALL reported Thursday morning. Excerpts follow (full paid article.
#
Calling it a sham and a charade, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she will not appoint anyone from her Caucus to the joint committee. And Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will urge his Democratic colleagues not to serve on the panel, a senior aide said Thursday morning.
...
Pelosi said she is 'very disappointed' and 'very offended' by the Republican leaders' actions. She added that in order to be truly bipartisan, Democrats had to have been brought to the table at the outset, the committee membership must be evenly divided between the two parties, and the new panel must have 'true subpoena power' and the authority to act.
U.S. Censoring Katrina Coverage, Groups Say
U.S. Censoring Katrina Coverage, Groups Say: "By Deborah Zabarenko | Reuters | Thursday, September 8, 2005; Page C08
When U.S. officials asked the news media not to take pictures of those killed by Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, they were censoring a key part of the disaster story, free- speech watchdogs said yesterday.
The move by the Federal Emergency Management Agency is in line with the Bush administration's ban on images of flag-draped U.S. military coffins returning from the Iraq war, media monitors charged in separate telephone interviews.
...
"The notion that, when there's very little information from FEMA, that they would even spend the time to be concerned about whether the reporting effort is up to its standards of taste is simply mind-boggling," Daugherty said. "You cannot report on the disaster and give the public a realistic idea of how horrible it is if you don't see that there are bodies as well."
....
Rosenstiel also noted that generally, the American media, especially television outlets, are reluctant to show corpses.
"By and large, American television is the most sanitized television in the world," he said. "They are less likely to show bodies, they are less likely to show graphic images of the dead than any television in the world."
When U.S. officials asked the news media not to take pictures of those killed by Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, they were censoring a key part of the disaster story, free- speech watchdogs said yesterday.
The move by the Federal Emergency Management Agency is in line with the Bush administration's ban on images of flag-draped U.S. military coffins returning from the Iraq war, media monitors charged in separate telephone interviews.
...
"The notion that, when there's very little information from FEMA, that they would even spend the time to be concerned about whether the reporting effort is up to its standards of taste is simply mind-boggling," Daugherty said. "You cannot report on the disaster and give the public a realistic idea of how horrible it is if you don't see that there are bodies as well."
....
Rosenstiel also noted that generally, the American media, especially television outlets, are reluctant to show corpses.
"By and large, American television is the most sanitized television in the world," he said. "They are less likely to show bodies, they are less likely to show graphic images of the dead than any television in the world."
FEMA Wants No Photos of Dead - but NEW ORLEANS' DEAD SHOW UP IN FOREIGN NEWSPAPERS
FEMA Wants No Photos of Dead - Forums powered by Reason and Principle: "Category: News & Opinion (General) Topic: News & Current Events | From Reuters | September 7, 2005
KATRINA'S AFTERMATH
NEW ORLEANS — The U.S. agency leading Hurricane Katrina rescue efforts said Tuesday that it does not want the news media to photograph the dead as they are recovered.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, heavily criticized for its slow response to the devastation caused by the hurricane, rejected journalists' requests to accompany rescue boats searching for storm victims.
An agency spokeswoman said space was needed on the rescue boats.
'We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media,' the spokeswoman said in an e-mail.
djarum writes: 'This maybe explains why the local media is staying away from pictures of the dead in NO.
There was an earlier thread on this topic. --
NEW ORLEANS' DEAD SHOW UP IN FOREIGN NEWSPAPERS'"
KATRINA'S AFTERMATH
NEW ORLEANS — The U.S. agency leading Hurricane Katrina rescue efforts said Tuesday that it does not want the news media to photograph the dead as they are recovered.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, heavily criticized for its slow response to the devastation caused by the hurricane, rejected journalists' requests to accompany rescue boats searching for storm victims.
An agency spokeswoman said space was needed on the rescue boats.
'We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media,' the spokeswoman said in an e-mail.
djarum writes: 'This maybe explains why the local media is staying away from pictures of the dead in NO.
There was an earlier thread on this topic. --
NEW ORLEANS' DEAD SHOW UP IN FOREIGN NEWSPAPERS'"
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Murder and rape - fact or fiction? ... no rape at Superdome? Guardian found no corpses ... "no riots in Baton Rouge. There were no armed hordes"
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Murder and rape - fact or fiction?: "Gary Younge in Baton Rouge | Tuesday September 6, 2005 | The Guardian
There were two babies who had their throats slit. The seven-year-old girl who was raped and murdered in the Superdome. And the corpses laid out amid the excrement in the convention centre.
In a week filled with dreadful scenes of desperation and anger from New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina some stories stood out.
But as time goes on many remain unsubstantiated and may yet prove to be apocryphal.
New Orleans police have been unable to confirm the tale of the raped child, or indeed any of the reports of rapes, in the Superdome and convention centre. ...
..
... And while the floor of the convention centre toilets were indeed covered in excrement, the Guardian found no corpses.
...
By the end of last week the media in Baton Rouge reported that evacuees from New Orleans were carjacking and that guns and knives were being seized in local shelters where riots were erupting.
The local mayor responded accordingly.
"We do not want to inherit the looting and all the other foolishness that went on in New Orleans," Kip Holden was told the Baton Rouge Advocate.
"We do not want to inherit that breed that seeks to prey on other people."
The trouble, wrote Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune is that "scarcely any of it was true - the police confiscated a single knife from a refugee in one Baton Rouge shelter".
"There were no riots in Baton Rouge. There were no armed hordes."
Similarly when the first convoy of national guardsmen went into New Orleans approached the convention centre they were ordered to "lock and load".
But when they arrived they were confronted not by armed mobs but a nurse wearing a T-shirt that read "I love New Orleans".
"She ran down a broken escalator, then held her hands in the air when she saw the guns," wrote the LA Times.
"We have sick kids up here!" she shouted.
"We have dehydrated kids! One kid with sickle cell!"
There were two babies who had their throats slit. The seven-year-old girl who was raped and murdered in the Superdome. And the corpses laid out amid the excrement in the convention centre.
In a week filled with dreadful scenes of desperation and anger from New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina some stories stood out.
But as time goes on many remain unsubstantiated and may yet prove to be apocryphal.
New Orleans police have been unable to confirm the tale of the raped child, or indeed any of the reports of rapes, in the Superdome and convention centre. ...
..
... And while the floor of the convention centre toilets were indeed covered in excrement, the Guardian found no corpses.
...
By the end of last week the media in Baton Rouge reported that evacuees from New Orleans were carjacking and that guns and knives were being seized in local shelters where riots were erupting.
The local mayor responded accordingly.
"We do not want to inherit the looting and all the other foolishness that went on in New Orleans," Kip Holden was told the Baton Rouge Advocate.
"We do not want to inherit that breed that seeks to prey on other people."
The trouble, wrote Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune is that "scarcely any of it was true - the police confiscated a single knife from a refugee in one Baton Rouge shelter".
"There were no riots in Baton Rouge. There were no armed hordes."
Similarly when the first convoy of national guardsmen went into New Orleans approached the convention centre they were ordered to "lock and load".
But when they arrived they were confronted not by armed mobs but a nurse wearing a T-shirt that read "I love New Orleans".
"She ran down a broken escalator, then held her hands in the air when she saw the guns," wrote the LA Times.
"We have sick kids up here!" she shouted.
"We have dehydrated kids! One kid with sickle cell!"
Proof: Louisiana Governor Had Asked Bush To Declare Disaster On Aug, 28th. [... Spet 4 Bush official claims NO DECLARATION !!!]
Proof: Louisiana Governor Had Asked Bush To Declare Disaster On Aug, 28th.: "Exposed: Louisiana Governor Had Asked Bush To Declare Disaster On Aug, 28th."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/DisasterReliefRequest.pdf
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/DisasterReliefRequest.pdf
WaPo: Sun 9-4 per Bushofficial: [Louisiana Governor] Blanco not declared a state of emergency --- WRONG -- she declared one Aug. 26 - B4 HURRICANE
'Wash Post' Runs A Key Katrina Correction: "By E&P Staff | Published: September 04, 2005 11:30 PM ET
NEW YORK In its Sunday edition, the Washington Post quoted a 'senior Bush official' who said that 'as of Saturday [Louisiana Governor] Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency.' This, of course, was meant to make the governor look foolish and spread the blame around for the disastrous response to the disaster, though it was hard to imagine on what grounds the newspaper would quote an unnamed source in this case.
Several hours of blogosphere howling ensued. Later in the day, the Post ran this correction, or rather, 180-degree turn:
'A Sept. 4 article on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina incorrectly said that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) had not declared a state of emergency. She declared an emergency on Aug. 26.' "
NEW YORK In its Sunday edition, the Washington Post quoted a 'senior Bush official' who said that 'as of Saturday [Louisiana Governor] Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency.' This, of course, was meant to make the governor look foolish and spread the blame around for the disastrous response to the disaster, though it was hard to imagine on what grounds the newspaper would quote an unnamed source in this case.
Several hours of blogosphere howling ensued. Later in the day, the Post ran this correction, or rather, 180-degree turn:
'A Sept. 4 article on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina incorrectly said that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) had not declared a state of emergency. She declared an emergency on Aug. 26.' "
Monday, September 05, 2005
NY Times reprinted without contradiction Bush's false claim that nobody 'anticipated the breach of the levees'
NY Times reprinted without contradiction Bush's ... [Media Matters]: "NY Times reprinted without contradiction Bush's false claim that nobody 'anticipated the breach of the levees'
In a September 2 article headlined 'Government Saw Flood Risk but Not Levee Failure,' The New York Times printed without challenge President Bush's false claim, originally made on ABC's Good Morning America, that 'I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees' surrounding New Orleans as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In fact, dozens of news organizations had reported on the possibility of a breach well in advance of the hurricane, and even the Times' lead editorial in the same day's newspaper flatly stated that '[d]isaster planners were well aware that New Orleans could be flooded by the combined effects of a hurricane and broken levees.'
...
Though the Times kept it a secret from its readers, Bush simply wasn't telling the truth. Many people "anticipated the breach of the levees," as Media Matters for America has detailed. A September 2 Washington Post editorial similarly noted:
It is simply not true, as Mr. Bush said yesterday, that nobody "anticipated the breach of the levees." In fact, experts inside and outside of government have issued repeated warnings for years about the city's unique topography and vulnerability, and those warnings were loudly and prominently echoed by the media both nationally and in Louisiana.
Not only is it not true, as Bush claimed, that nobody "anticipated the breach of the levees," it seems that nearly everybody anticipated the breach. The problem wasn't lack of anticipation, it was lack of preparation.
A June 8, 2004, New Orleans Times-Picayune article noted: "For the first time in 37 years, federal budget cuts have all but stopped major work on the New Orleans area's east bank hurricane levees." ...
In a September 2 article headlined 'Government Saw Flood Risk but Not Levee Failure,' The New York Times printed without challenge President Bush's false claim, originally made on ABC's Good Morning America, that 'I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees' surrounding New Orleans as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In fact, dozens of news organizations had reported on the possibility of a breach well in advance of the hurricane, and even the Times' lead editorial in the same day's newspaper flatly stated that '[d]isaster planners were well aware that New Orleans could be flooded by the combined effects of a hurricane and broken levees.'
...
Though the Times kept it a secret from its readers, Bush simply wasn't telling the truth. Many people "anticipated the breach of the levees," as Media Matters for America has detailed. A September 2 Washington Post editorial similarly noted:
It is simply not true, as Mr. Bush said yesterday, that nobody "anticipated the breach of the levees." In fact, experts inside and outside of government have issued repeated warnings for years about the city's unique topography and vulnerability, and those warnings were loudly and prominently echoed by the media both nationally and in Louisiana.
Not only is it not true, as Bush claimed, that nobody "anticipated the breach of the levees," it seems that nearly everybody anticipated the breach. The problem wasn't lack of anticipation, it was lack of preparation.
A June 8, 2004, New Orleans Times-Picayune article noted: "For the first time in 37 years, federal budget cuts have all but stopped major work on the New Orleans area's east bank hurricane levees." ...
The Show Didn't Benefit by Censors - Excuse me, but whose tragedy is this: NBC's or America's
The Show Didn't Benefit by Censors - Los Angeles Times: "By Robert Hilburn, Times Staff Writer
...
By censoring Grammy-winning rapper Kanye West's remarks critical of President Bush during its West Coast feed of the program Friday night, the network violated the most moving and essential moment in an otherwise sterile, self-serving corporate broadcast.
"It would be most unfortunate," the network said in a statement defending its action, "if the efforts of the artists who participated tonight and the generosity of millions of Americans who are helping those in need are overshadowed by one person's opinion."
Excuse me, but whose tragedy is this: NBC's or America's? ...
...
By censoring Grammy-winning rapper Kanye West's remarks critical of President Bush during its West Coast feed of the program Friday night, the network violated the most moving and essential moment in an otherwise sterile, self-serving corporate broadcast.
"It would be most unfortunate," the network said in a statement defending its action, "if the efforts of the artists who participated tonight and the generosity of millions of Americans who are helping those in need are overshadowed by one person's opinion."
Excuse me, but whose tragedy is this: NBC's or America's? ...
FEMA knew storm's potential, Mayfield says .. “We were briefing them way before landfall,” ... We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped
NOLA.com: Times-Picayune Breaking News WeblogFEMA knew storm's potential, Mayfield says | Sunday, 4:44 p.m. ... By Mark Schleifstein ... Staff writer
Dr. Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center, said Sunday that officials with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security, including FEMA Director Mike Brown and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, listened in on electronic briefings given by his staff in advance of Hurricane Katrina slamming Louisiana and Mississippi and were advised of the storm’s potential deadly effects.
“We were briefing them way before landfall,” Mayfield said. “It’s not like this was a surprise. We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped.
“I keep looking back to see if there was anything else we could have done, and I just don’t know what it would be,” he said.
Chertoff told reporters Saturday that government officials had not expected the damaging combination of a powerful hurricane levee breaches that flooded New Orleans.
... In the days before Katrina hit, Mayfield said, his staff also briefed FEMA, which under the Department of Homeland Security, at FEMA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., its Region 6 office in Dallas and the Region 4 office in Atlanta about the potential effects of the storm.
He said all of those briefings were logged in the hurricane center’s records.
... FEMA’s own July 23, 2004, news release announcing the end of that exercise summed up the assumptions they used, which were eerily close to what Katrina delivered:
“Hurricane Pam brought sustained winds of 120 mph, up to 20 inches of rain in parts of southeast Louisiana and storm surge that topped levees in the New Orleans area. More than one million residents evacuated and Hurricane Pam destroyed 500,000-600,000 buildings. Emergency officials from 50 parish, state, federal and volunteer organizations faced this scenario during a five-day exercise held this week at the State Emergency Operations Center in Baton Rouge.
“The exercise used realistic weather and damage information developed by the National Weather Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the LSU Hurricane Center and other state and federal agencies to help officials develop joint response plans for a catastrophic hurricane in Louisiana.”
Dr. Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center, said Sunday that officials with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security, including FEMA Director Mike Brown and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, listened in on electronic briefings given by his staff in advance of Hurricane Katrina slamming Louisiana and Mississippi and were advised of the storm’s potential deadly effects.
“We were briefing them way before landfall,” Mayfield said. “It’s not like this was a surprise. We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped.
“I keep looking back to see if there was anything else we could have done, and I just don’t know what it would be,” he said.
Chertoff told reporters Saturday that government officials had not expected the damaging combination of a powerful hurricane levee breaches that flooded New Orleans.
... In the days before Katrina hit, Mayfield said, his staff also briefed FEMA, which under the Department of Homeland Security, at FEMA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., its Region 6 office in Dallas and the Region 4 office in Atlanta about the potential effects of the storm.
He said all of those briefings were logged in the hurricane center’s records.
... FEMA’s own July 23, 2004, news release announcing the end of that exercise summed up the assumptions they used, which were eerily close to what Katrina delivered:
“Hurricane Pam brought sustained winds of 120 mph, up to 20 inches of rain in parts of southeast Louisiana and storm surge that topped levees in the New Orleans area. More than one million residents evacuated and Hurricane Pam destroyed 500,000-600,000 buildings. Emergency officials from 50 parish, state, federal and volunteer organizations faced this scenario during a five-day exercise held this week at the State Emergency Operations Center in Baton Rouge.
“The exercise used realistic weather and damage information developed by the National Weather Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the LSU Hurricane Center and other state and federal agencies to help officials develop joint response plans for a catastrophic hurricane in Louisiana.”
Hurricane Center Director Tells Paper He Briefed Brown and Chertoff on Danger of Severe Flooding [... vs. "nobody expected such a devastating ...]
Hurricane Center Director Tells Paper He Briefed Brown and Chertoff on Danger of Severe Flooding: "By E&P Staff | Published: September 04, 2005 6:55 PM ET
NEW YORK Dr. Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center, told the Times-Picayune Sunday afternoon that officials with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security, including FEMA Director Mike Brown and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, listened in on electronic briefings given by his staff in advance of Hurricane Katrina slamming Louisiana and Mississippi--and were advised of the storm’s potential deadly effects."
...
"We were briefing them way before landfall," Mayfield said. "It’s not like this was a surprise. We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped."
Chertoff told reporters Saturday that government officials had not expected the damaging combination of a powerful hurricane levee breaches that flooded New Orleans.
Brown, Mayfield said, is a dedicated public servant. “The question is why he couldn’t shake loose the resources that were needed,’’ he said.
Brown and Chertoff could not be reached for comment on Sunday afternoon.
In the days before Katrina hit, Mayfield said, his staff also briefed FEMA, which under the Department of Homeland Security, at FEMA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., its Region 6 office in Dallas and the Region 4 office in Atlanta about the potential effects of the storm. He said all of those briefings were logged in the hurricane center’s records.
NEW YORK Dr. Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center, told the Times-Picayune Sunday afternoon that officials with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security, including FEMA Director Mike Brown and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, listened in on electronic briefings given by his staff in advance of Hurricane Katrina slamming Louisiana and Mississippi--and were advised of the storm’s potential deadly effects."
...
"We were briefing them way before landfall," Mayfield said. "It’s not like this was a surprise. We had in the advisories that the levee could be topped."
Chertoff told reporters Saturday that government officials had not expected the damaging combination of a powerful hurricane levee breaches that flooded New Orleans.
Brown, Mayfield said, is a dedicated public servant. “The question is why he couldn’t shake loose the resources that were needed,’’ he said.
Brown and Chertoff could not be reached for comment on Sunday afternoon.
In the days before Katrina hit, Mayfield said, his staff also briefed FEMA, which under the Department of Homeland Security, at FEMA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., its Region 6 office in Dallas and the Region 4 office in Atlanta about the potential effects of the storm. He said all of those briefings were logged in the hurricane center’s records.
Sunday, September 04, 2005
"it became apparent that yesterday we witnessed a hastily prepared stage set for a Presidential photo opportunity"
From The Roots :: Pulling the Bush Out: "Landrieu Blasts Bush on Katrina Response | by Mike Liddell | Sat Sep 3rd, 2005 at 07:05:42 PM EST
U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu, D-La., issued the following statement this afternoon regarding her call yesterday for President Bush to appoint a cabinet-level official to oversee Hurricane Katrina relief and recovery efforts within 24 hours.
Sen. Landrieu said:
...
... Meanwhile, FEMA, now a shell of what it once was, continues to be overwhelmed by the task at hand.
“I understand that the U.S. Forest Service had water-tanker aircraft available to help douse the fires raging on our riverfront, but FEMA has yet to accept the aid. When Amtrak offered trains to evacuate significant numbers of victims – far more efficiently than buses – FEMA again dragged its feet. Offers of medicine, communications equipment and other desperately needed items continue to flow in, only to be ignored by the agency.
“But perhaps the greatest disappointment stands at the breached 17th Street levee. Touring this critical site yesterday with the President, I saw what I believed to be a real and significant effort to get a handle on a major cause of this catastrophe. Flying over this critical spot again this morning, less than 24 hours later, it became apparent that yesterday we witnessed a hastily prepared stage set for a Presidential photo opportunity; and the desperately needed resources we saw were this morning reduced to a single, lonely piece of equipment.
...
U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu, D-La., issued the following statement this afternoon regarding her call yesterday for President Bush to appoint a cabinet-level official to oversee Hurricane Katrina relief and recovery efforts within 24 hours.
Sen. Landrieu said:
...
... Meanwhile, FEMA, now a shell of what it once was, continues to be overwhelmed by the task at hand.
“I understand that the U.S. Forest Service had water-tanker aircraft available to help douse the fires raging on our riverfront, but FEMA has yet to accept the aid. When Amtrak offered trains to evacuate significant numbers of victims – far more efficiently than buses – FEMA again dragged its feet. Offers of medicine, communications equipment and other desperately needed items continue to flow in, only to be ignored by the agency.
“But perhaps the greatest disappointment stands at the breached 17th Street levee. Touring this critical site yesterday with the President, I saw what I believed to be a real and significant effort to get a handle on a major cause of this catastrophe. Flying over this critical spot again this morning, less than 24 hours later, it became apparent that yesterday we witnessed a hastily prepared stage set for a Presidential photo opportunity; and the desperately needed resources we saw were this morning reduced to a single, lonely piece of equipment.
...
striking dicrepancy between the CNN International and German TV: ZDF News reported that the president's visit was a completely staged event
War and Piece:: "September 03, 2005
If he could go to Baghdad, why didn't Bush go to the New Orleans Superdome or the Convention Center? It was bizarre for all of the country and much of the world to be watching those scenes for days on our TVs and news reports, and for Bush's photo ops to be in areas that were far less critical. I know there are security considerations but his visit seemed extraordinarily hollow even by this administration's standard of ultra-stage managed events.
Dutch viewer Frank Tiggelaar writes:
There was a striking dicrepancy between the CNN International report on the Bush visit to the New Orleans disaster zone, yesterday, and reports of the same event by German TV.
ZDF News reported that the president's visit was a completely staged event. Their crew witnessed how the open air food distribution point Bush visited in front of the cameras was torn down immediately after the president and the herd of 'news people' had left and that others which were allegedly being set up were abandoned at the same time.
The people in the area were once again left to fend for themselves, said ZDF."
If he could go to Baghdad, why didn't Bush go to the New Orleans Superdome or the Convention Center? It was bizarre for all of the country and much of the world to be watching those scenes for days on our TVs and news reports, and for Bush's photo ops to be in areas that were far less critical. I know there are security considerations but his visit seemed extraordinarily hollow even by this administration's standard of ultra-stage managed events.
Dutch viewer Frank Tiggelaar writes:
There was a striking dicrepancy between the CNN International report on the Bush visit to the New Orleans disaster zone, yesterday, and reports of the same event by German TV.
ZDF News reported that the president's visit was a completely staged event. Their crew witnessed how the open air food distribution point Bush visited in front of the cameras was torn down immediately after the president and the herd of 'news people' had left and that others which were allegedly being set up were abandoned at the same time.
The people in the area were once again left to fend for themselves, said ZDF."
New Orleans: :OMB director blistered Army Corps chief before firing ... "president's budget is unacceptable and probably just a cynical ploy ..."
www.GovExec.com - OMB director blistered Army Corps chief in memo before firing (3/8/02): "March 8, 2002" | By Lisa Caruso, CongressDaily
Despite an Office of Management and Budget official's denial that OMB Director Mitch Daniels was involved in the forced resignation of former Army Corps of Engineers head Mike Parker, a frank and sharply worded memo from Daniels indicates he was at least in the loop.
A former House member from Mississippi and a onetime member of the Appropriations Committee, Parker was asked to resign his post as assistant secretary of the Army for Civil Works less than a week after bluntly telling the Senate Budget Committee he believed OMB deliberately had shortchanged his agency's fiscal 2003 budget.
...
Daniels observed that Parker, Flowers and Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., "reached convivial agreement that the president's budget is unacceptable and probably just a cynical ploy on our part."
...
But Daniels minced few words in describing the exchanges in his memo. He labeled as "totally bogus" Flowers' testimony that the president's budget, which would cut $600 million from the Corps' current spending level, would force the Corps to terminate existing contracts and could lead to the loss of 45,000 jobs....
Despite an Office of Management and Budget official's denial that OMB Director Mitch Daniels was involved in the forced resignation of former Army Corps of Engineers head Mike Parker, a frank and sharply worded memo from Daniels indicates he was at least in the loop.
A former House member from Mississippi and a onetime member of the Appropriations Committee, Parker was asked to resign his post as assistant secretary of the Army for Civil Works less than a week after bluntly telling the Senate Budget Committee he believed OMB deliberately had shortchanged his agency's fiscal 2003 budget.
...
Daniels observed that Parker, Flowers and Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., "reached convivial agreement that the president's budget is unacceptable and probably just a cynical ploy on our part."
...
But Daniels minced few words in describing the exchanges in his memo. He labeled as "totally bogus" Flowers' testimony that the president's budget, which would cut $600 million from the Corps' current spending level, would force the Corps to terminate existing contracts and could lead to the loss of 45,000 jobs....
Saturday, September 03, 2005
FEMA Director Offers New Spin On Broken Levees: all taken aback by the fact that the levees did break in so many places and caused such devastation
Think Progress � FEMA Director Offers New Spin On Broken Levees: "September 2, 2005
Yesterday, Bush said “I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees.” Today, FEMA director Mike Brown was asked about that comment on ABC’s Good Morning America:
GIBSON: Mike, with all due respect to you and with all due respect to the president, I was amazed to hear him say to Diane yesterday, We didn’t know the levees were going to break. We didn’t know the dams wouldn’t hold.
We all were talking about that on Monday morning, that the levees were only built to withstand a category 3 hurricane. There’s batches of reports that say that. And you knew a 4 or 5 was coming all weekend long.
BROWN: I think we were all taken aback by the fact that the levees did break in so many places and caused such widespread devastation. And so we’re responding the best we can to help those people that are stuck in this ongoing disaster.
So the new story is: that administration knew the levees would break but didn’t think it was going to cause so much devastation. How could the administration not know that the flooding of a major city would cause massive devastation?
(The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette headline on 10/17/04: New Orleans In Danger of Drowning; Hurricane Ivan Passed It By, But a Direct Hit By Another Storm Would Swamp Its Levees and Leave Thousands Dead.)"
Yesterday, Bush said “I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees.” Today, FEMA director Mike Brown was asked about that comment on ABC’s Good Morning America:
GIBSON: Mike, with all due respect to you and with all due respect to the president, I was amazed to hear him say to Diane yesterday, We didn’t know the levees were going to break. We didn’t know the dams wouldn’t hold.
We all were talking about that on Monday morning, that the levees were only built to withstand a category 3 hurricane. There’s batches of reports that say that. And you knew a 4 or 5 was coming all weekend long.
BROWN: I think we were all taken aback by the fact that the levees did break in so many places and caused such widespread devastation. And so we’re responding the best we can to help those people that are stuck in this ongoing disaster.
So the new story is: that administration knew the levees would break but didn’t think it was going to cause so much devastation. How could the administration not know that the flooding of a major city would cause massive devastation?
(The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette headline on 10/17/04: New Orleans In Danger of Drowning; Hurricane Ivan Passed It By, But a Direct Hit By Another Storm Would Swamp Its Levees and Leave Thousands Dead.)"
Kanye West: George Bush doesn't care about black people' during Telethon: NBC censors ... edited his remarks on the West Coast feed.
Crooks and Liars: "Breaking News: Kanye West: George Bush doesn't care about black people'
During the Concert for Hurricane Relief, Kanye West and Mike Meyers were celebrity narrators during the segment, West said: (rush transcript)
'I hate the way they portray us in the media. 'If you see a black family it says they are looting if you see a white family it says they are looking for food.
'We already realize a lot of the people that could help are at war now fighting another way and they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us.'
'George Bush doesn't care about black people.'
Mike Meyers was floored..."
Friday, September 02, 2005
NBC censors Kanye West
The corporate big wigs didn't take too kindly to West's tirade against President Bush earlier today on the Concert for Hurricane Relief, so they edited his remarks on the West Coast feed. (hat tip Digby)
During the Concert for Hurricane Relief, Kanye West and Mike Meyers were celebrity narrators during the segment, West said: (rush transcript)
'I hate the way they portray us in the media. 'If you see a black family it says they are looting if you see a white family it says they are looking for food.
'We already realize a lot of the people that could help are at war now fighting another way and they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us.'
'George Bush doesn't care about black people.'
Mike Meyers was floored..."
Friday, September 02, 2005
NBC censors Kanye West
The corporate big wigs didn't take too kindly to West's tirade against President Bush earlier today on the Concert for Hurricane Relief, so they edited his remarks on the West Coast feed. (hat tip Digby)
Bush administration determination to punish whistle-blowers: blatant retaliation includes the Army general, Medicare expert, climate change, contracts
Banished Whistle-Blowers - New York Times: "September 1, 2005
The Bush administration is making no secret of its determination to punish whistle-blowers and other federal workers who object to the doctoring of facts that clash with policy and spin. The blatant retaliation includes the Army general sidelined for questioning the administration's projections about needed troop strength in Iraq, the Medicare expert muted when he tried to inform Congress about the true cost of the new prescription subsidies and the White House specialist on climate change who was booted after complaining that global warming statistics were being massaged by political tacticians.
We agree with critics like Congressman Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois Democrat, who has tracked a long list of abused federal workers who should be applauded, not penalized, for their dedication. The latest victims include Bunnatine Greenhouse, a career civilian manager at the Pentagon. She was demoted from her job as the top contract overseer of the Army Corps of Engineers after she complained of irregularities in the awarding of a multibillion-dollar no-bid Iraq contract to a subsidiary of Halliburton, the Texas-based oil services company run by Dick Cheney before he became vice president.
Ms. Greenhouse made complaints internally, then publicly, describing the contract as "the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed." Recently, Ms. Greenhouse was ordered removed for "poor performance," just as unfairly as the administration forced out Lawrence Greenfeld as director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Mr. Greenfeld's sin was to stand fast against senior political appointees intent on watering down a study's finding that blacks and Hispanics were subject to more searches and force in police traffic stops.
The Bush administration is making no secret of its determination to punish whistle-blowers and other federal workers who object to the doctoring of facts that clash with policy and spin. The blatant retaliation includes the Army general sidelined for questioning the administration's projections about needed troop strength in Iraq, the Medicare expert muted when he tried to inform Congress about the true cost of the new prescription subsidies and the White House specialist on climate change who was booted after complaining that global warming statistics were being massaged by political tacticians.
We agree with critics like Congressman Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois Democrat, who has tracked a long list of abused federal workers who should be applauded, not penalized, for their dedication. The latest victims include Bunnatine Greenhouse, a career civilian manager at the Pentagon. She was demoted from her job as the top contract overseer of the Army Corps of Engineers after she complained of irregularities in the awarding of a multibillion-dollar no-bid Iraq contract to a subsidiary of Halliburton, the Texas-based oil services company run by Dick Cheney before he became vice president.
Ms. Greenhouse made complaints internally, then publicly, describing the contract as "the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed." Recently, Ms. Greenhouse was ordered removed for "poor performance," just as unfairly as the administration forced out Lawrence Greenfeld as director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Mr. Greenfeld's sin was to stand fast against senior political appointees intent on watering down a study's finding that blacks and Hispanics were subject to more searches and force in police traffic stops.
Who is jamming communications in New Orleans?
Wayne Madsen Report: "September 2, 2005 -- Who is jamming communications in New Orleans?
Ham radio operators are reporting that communications in and around New Orleans are being jammed. In addition, perplexed ham radio operators who were enlisted by the Federal government in 911 are not being used for hurricane Katrina Federal relief efforts. There is some misinformation circulating on the web that the jamming is the result of solar flares. Ham radio operators report that the flares are not the source of the communications jamming. If anyone at the National Security Agency is aware of the source of the jamming, from direction finding or satellite intelligence, please discretely contact me at waynemadsendc@hotmail.com (from a private or temporary email account). In this case, the Bush administration cannot hide behind national security and it is the duty of every patriotic American to report such criminal activity to the press. Even though the information on the jamming may be considered classified -- it is in the public interest to disclose it. Also, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is reporting that no aircraft over New Orleans have been fired on over New Orleans or anywhere else in the area. Are the reports of shots being fired at aircraft an attempt by the Bush administration to purposely delay the arrival of relief to the city's homeless and dying poor? The neocons have turned New Orleans into Baghdad on the Mississippi.
New Orleans: Who is jamming communications and why?
UPDATE: We can now report that the jamming of New Orleans' communications is emanating from a pirate radio station in the Caribbean. The noise is continuous and it is jamming frequencies, including emergency high frequency (HF) radios, in the New Orleans area. The radio frequency jammers were heard last night, stopped for a while, and are active again today. The Pentagon must locate the positions of these transmitters and order the Air Force to bomb them immediately.
However, we now have a new unconfirmed report that the culprit may be the Pentagon itself. The emitter is an IF (Intermediate Frequency) jammer that is operating south southwest of New Orleans on board a U.S. Navy ship, according to an anonymous source. The jamming is cross-spectrum and interfering with superheterodyne receiver components, including the emergency radios being used in New Orleans relief efforts. The jamming frequencies are:
72.0MHZ 45.0MHZ 10.245MHZ 10.240 Mhz 11.340 Mhz 455 IF 233 MHZ
A former DoD source says the U.S. Army uses a portable jammer, known as WORLOCK, in Iraq and this jammer may be similar to the one that is jamming the emergency frequencies.
If a U.S. Navy ship is, in fact, jamming New Orleans communications, the crew must immediately shut down the jammer and take action against the Commanding Officer..
***
We have just learned from a journalist in Mobile that yesterday, Sprint blocked all cell phone calls from the Gulf Coast region to points north and west. Calls were permitted between Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida but no calls could be made to Washington, New York, or Los Angeles
Ham radio operators are reporting that communications in and around New Orleans are being jammed. In addition, perplexed ham radio operators who were enlisted by the Federal government in 911 are not being used for hurricane Katrina Federal relief efforts. There is some misinformation circulating on the web that the jamming is the result of solar flares. Ham radio operators report that the flares are not the source of the communications jamming. If anyone at the National Security Agency is aware of the source of the jamming, from direction finding or satellite intelligence, please discretely contact me at waynemadsendc@hotmail.com (from a private or temporary email account). In this case, the Bush administration cannot hide behind national security and it is the duty of every patriotic American to report such criminal activity to the press. Even though the information on the jamming may be considered classified -- it is in the public interest to disclose it. Also, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is reporting that no aircraft over New Orleans have been fired on over New Orleans or anywhere else in the area. Are the reports of shots being fired at aircraft an attempt by the Bush administration to purposely delay the arrival of relief to the city's homeless and dying poor? The neocons have turned New Orleans into Baghdad on the Mississippi.
New Orleans: Who is jamming communications and why?
UPDATE: We can now report that the jamming of New Orleans' communications is emanating from a pirate radio station in the Caribbean. The noise is continuous and it is jamming frequencies, including emergency high frequency (HF) radios, in the New Orleans area. The radio frequency jammers were heard last night, stopped for a while, and are active again today. The Pentagon must locate the positions of these transmitters and order the Air Force to bomb them immediately.
However, we now have a new unconfirmed report that the culprit may be the Pentagon itself. The emitter is an IF (Intermediate Frequency) jammer that is operating south southwest of New Orleans on board a U.S. Navy ship, according to an anonymous source. The jamming is cross-spectrum and interfering with superheterodyne receiver components, including the emergency radios being used in New Orleans relief efforts. The jamming frequencies are:
72.0MHZ 45.0MHZ 10.245MHZ 10.240 Mhz 11.340 Mhz 455 IF 233 MHZ
A former DoD source says the U.S. Army uses a portable jammer, known as WORLOCK, in Iraq and this jammer may be similar to the one that is jamming the emergency frequencies.
If a U.S. Navy ship is, in fact, jamming New Orleans communications, the crew must immediately shut down the jammer and take action against the Commanding Officer..
***
We have just learned from a journalist in Mobile that yesterday, Sprint blocked all cell phone calls from the Gulf Coast region to points north and west. Calls were permitted between Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida but no calls could be made to Washington, New York, or Los Angeles
The official version; then there's the in-the-trenches version
CNN.com - The�big disconnect on New Orleans - Sep 2, 2005: "The official version; then there's the in-the-trenches version | Friday, September 2, 2005; Posted: 5:17 p.m. EDT (21:17 GMT)
NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) -- Diverging views of a crumbling New Orleans emerged Thursday, with statements by some federal officials in contradiction with grittier, more desperate views from the streets. By late Friday response to those stranded in the city was more visible.
...
Conditions in the Convention Center
# FEMA chief Brown: We learned about that (Thursday), so I have directed that we have all available resources to get that convention center to make sure that they have the food and water and medical care that they need. (See video of Brown explaining how news reports alerted FEMA to convention center chaos. -- 2:11)
# Mayor Nagin: The convention center is unsanitary and unsafe, and we are running out of supplies for the 15,000 to 20,000 people. (Hear Nagin's angry demand for soldiers. 1:04)
# CNN Producer Kim Segal: It was chaos. There was nobody there, nobody in charge. And there was nobody giving even water. The children, you should see them, they're all just in tears. There are sick people. We saw... people who are dying in front of you.
...
Uncollected corpses
# Brown: That's not been reported to me, so I'm not going to comment. Until I actually get a report from my teams that say, "We have bodies located here or there," I'm just not going to speculate.
# Segal: We saw one body. A person is in a wheelchair and someone had pushed (her) off to the side and draped just like a blanket over this person in the wheelchair. And then there is another body next to that. There were others they were willing to show us. ( See CNN report, 'People are dying in front of us' -- 4:36 )
...
Hospital evacuations
# Brown: I've just learned today that we ... are in the process of completing the evacuations of the hospitals, that those are going very well.
# CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta: It's gruesome. I guess that is the best word for it. If you think about a hospital, for example, the morgue is in the basement, and the basement is completely flooded. So you can just imagine the scene down there. But when patients die in the hospital, there is no place to put them, so they're in the stairwells. It is one of the most unbelievable situations I've seen as a doctor, certainly as a journalist as well. There is no electricity. There is no water. There's over 200 patients still here remaining. ...We found our way in through a chopper and had to land at a landing strip and then take a boat. And it is exactly ... where the boat was traveling where the snipers opened fire yesterday, halting all the evacuations. ( Watch the video report of corpses stacked in stairwells -- 4:45 )
...
The federal response:
# Brown: Considering the dire circumstances that we have in New Orleans, virtually a city that has been destroyed, things are going relatively well.
# Homeland Security Director Chertoff: Now, of course, a critical element of what we're doing is the process of evacuation and securing New Orleans and other areas that are afflicted. And here the Department of Defense has performed magnificently, as has the National Guard, in bringing enormous resources and capabilities to bear in the areas that are suffering.
# Crowd chanting outside the Convention Center: We want help.
# Nagin: They don't have a clue what's going on down there.
...
Security
# Brown: I actually think the security is pretty darn good. There's some really bad people out there that are causing some problems, and it seems to me that every time a bad person wants to scream of cause a problem, there's somebody there with a camera to stick it in their face. ( See Jack Cafferty's rant on the government's 'bungled' response -- 0:57)
# Chertoff: In addition to local law enforcement, we have 2,800 National Guard in New Orleans as we speak today. One thousand four hundred additional National Guard military police trained soldiers will be arriving every day: 1,400 today, 1,400 tomorrow and 1,400 the next day.
# Nagin: I continue to hear that troops are on the way, but we are still protecting the city with only 1,500 New Orleans police officers, an additional 300 law enforcement personnel, 250 National Guard troops, and other military personnel who are primarily focused on evacuation.
NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) -- Diverging views of a crumbling New Orleans emerged Thursday, with statements by some federal officials in contradiction with grittier, more desperate views from the streets. By late Friday response to those stranded in the city was more visible.
...
Conditions in the Convention Center
# FEMA chief Brown: We learned about that (Thursday), so I have directed that we have all available resources to get that convention center to make sure that they have the food and water and medical care that they need. (See video of Brown explaining how news reports alerted FEMA to convention center chaos. -- 2:11)
# Mayor Nagin: The convention center is unsanitary and unsafe, and we are running out of supplies for the 15,000 to 20,000 people. (Hear Nagin's angry demand for soldiers. 1:04)
# CNN Producer Kim Segal: It was chaos. There was nobody there, nobody in charge. And there was nobody giving even water. The children, you should see them, they're all just in tears. There are sick people. We saw... people who are dying in front of you.
...
Uncollected corpses
# Brown: That's not been reported to me, so I'm not going to comment. Until I actually get a report from my teams that say, "We have bodies located here or there," I'm just not going to speculate.
# Segal: We saw one body. A person is in a wheelchair and someone had pushed (her) off to the side and draped just like a blanket over this person in the wheelchair. And then there is another body next to that. There were others they were willing to show us. ( See CNN report, 'People are dying in front of us' -- 4:36 )
...
Hospital evacuations
# Brown: I've just learned today that we ... are in the process of completing the evacuations of the hospitals, that those are going very well.
# CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta: It's gruesome. I guess that is the best word for it. If you think about a hospital, for example, the morgue is in the basement, and the basement is completely flooded. So you can just imagine the scene down there. But when patients die in the hospital, there is no place to put them, so they're in the stairwells. It is one of the most unbelievable situations I've seen as a doctor, certainly as a journalist as well. There is no electricity. There is no water. There's over 200 patients still here remaining. ...We found our way in through a chopper and had to land at a landing strip and then take a boat. And it is exactly ... where the boat was traveling where the snipers opened fire yesterday, halting all the evacuations. ( Watch the video report of corpses stacked in stairwells -- 4:45 )
...
The federal response:
# Brown: Considering the dire circumstances that we have in New Orleans, virtually a city that has been destroyed, things are going relatively well.
# Homeland Security Director Chertoff: Now, of course, a critical element of what we're doing is the process of evacuation and securing New Orleans and other areas that are afflicted. And here the Department of Defense has performed magnificently, as has the National Guard, in bringing enormous resources and capabilities to bear in the areas that are suffering.
# Crowd chanting outside the Convention Center: We want help.
# Nagin: They don't have a clue what's going on down there.
...
Security
# Brown: I actually think the security is pretty darn good. There's some really bad people out there that are causing some problems, and it seems to me that every time a bad person wants to scream of cause a problem, there's somebody there with a camera to stick it in their face. ( See Jack Cafferty's rant on the government's 'bungled' response -- 0:57)
# Chertoff: In addition to local law enforcement, we have 2,800 National Guard in New Orleans as we speak today. One thousand four hundred additional National Guard military police trained soldiers will be arriving every day: 1,400 today, 1,400 tomorrow and 1,400 the next day.
# Nagin: I continue to hear that troops are on the way, but we are still protecting the city with only 1,500 New Orleans police officers, an additional 300 law enforcement personnel, 250 National Guard troops, and other military personnel who are primarily focused on evacuation.
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Was the White House psychic ... Not exactly ... [they] referred to Tropical Storm Cindy, which struck the state a full seven weeks earlier
Hurricane PoliticsWEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY | By Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey | Newsweek | Updated: 10:54 p.m. ET Aug. 31, 2005
As Katrina forced President Bush to cut short his vacation, the White House is facing a perfect storm of trouble at home and abroad.
...
Beyond the poll numbers, the Bush administration faces some immediate, urgent challenges—and serious questions about its response to the disaster. For all the president’s statements ahead of the hurricane, the region seemed woefully unprepared for the flooding of New Orleans—a catastrophe that has long been predicted by experts and politicians alike. There seems to have been no contingency planning for a total evacuation of the city, including the final refuges of the city’s Superdome and its hospitals. There were no supplies of food and water ready offshore—on Navy ships for instance—in the event of such flooding, even though government officials knew there were thousands of people stranded inside the sweltering and powerless city.
Then there’s the speed of the Bush administration’s response to such disasters. Just one week ago the White House declared that a major disaster existed in Louisiana, specifically most of the areas (such as Jefferson Parish) that are now under water. Was the White House psychic about the disaster ahead? Not exactly. In fact the major disaster referred to Tropical Storm Cindy, which struck the state a full seven weeks earlier. That announcement triggered federal aid for the stricken areas, where the clean-up had been on hold for almost two months while the White House chewed things over.
Now, faced with a far bigger and deadlier disaster, the Bush administration faces at least two difficult questions: Was it ready to deal with the long-predicted flooding of New Orleans? And is it ready to deal with the long-predicted terrorist attack that might some day strike another of our big cities?
As Katrina forced President Bush to cut short his vacation, the White House is facing a perfect storm of trouble at home and abroad.
...
Beyond the poll numbers, the Bush administration faces some immediate, urgent challenges—and serious questions about its response to the disaster. For all the president’s statements ahead of the hurricane, the region seemed woefully unprepared for the flooding of New Orleans—a catastrophe that has long been predicted by experts and politicians alike. There seems to have been no contingency planning for a total evacuation of the city, including the final refuges of the city’s Superdome and its hospitals. There were no supplies of food and water ready offshore—on Navy ships for instance—in the event of such flooding, even though government officials knew there were thousands of people stranded inside the sweltering and powerless city.
Then there’s the speed of the Bush administration’s response to such disasters. Just one week ago the White House declared that a major disaster existed in Louisiana, specifically most of the areas (such as Jefferson Parish) that are now under water. Was the White House psychic about the disaster ahead? Not exactly. In fact the major disaster referred to Tropical Storm Cindy, which struck the state a full seven weeks earlier. That announcement triggered federal aid for the stricken areas, where the clean-up had been on hold for almost two months while the White House chewed things over.
Now, faced with a far bigger and deadlier disaster, the Bush administration faces at least two difficult questions: Was it ready to deal with the long-predicted flooding of New Orleans? And is it ready to deal with the long-predicted terrorist attack that might some day strike another of our big cities?
Reuters news agency said Wednesday it was shocked and appalled by the sentencing of one of its cameraman to Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Excite Money & Investing: "Reuters:'Appalled' By Cameraman's Imprisonment In Baghdad | Wednesday August 31, 6:46 PM EDT
LONDON (AP)--The Reuters news agency said Wednesday it was shocked and appalled by the sentencing of one of its cameraman to Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Reuters Group PLC (RTR.LN) said 36-year-old cameraman Ali al-Mashhadani, who was detained by U.S. forces in Iraq three weeks ago, had been ordered by a secret tribunal to be held without charge in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison until his case was reviewed - a process which could take up to six months.
'I am shocked and appalled that such a decision could be taken without his having access to legal counsel of his choosing, his family or his employers,' said David Schlesinger, Reuters Global Managing Editor.
Schlesinger said the U.S. military had refused the news organization's requests to disclose why the cameraman was being detained.
"I call on the authorities to release him immediately or publicly air the case against him and give him the opportunity to defend himself," Schlesinger said.
Reuters claim al-Mashhadani was detained after U.S. marines examined images on his and a colleague's cameras.
Another Reuters cameraman in Iraq, Haider Kadhem, 24, was released Wednesday after being held and questioned by the U.S. military since Sunday. Kadhem was traveling with his brother Waleed, 35, a Reuters sound technician, when the pair's vehicle was fired upon, injuring Haider and killing Waleed.
LONDON (AP)--The Reuters news agency said Wednesday it was shocked and appalled by the sentencing of one of its cameraman to Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Reuters Group PLC (RTR.LN) said 36-year-old cameraman Ali al-Mashhadani, who was detained by U.S. forces in Iraq three weeks ago, had been ordered by a secret tribunal to be held without charge in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison until his case was reviewed - a process which could take up to six months.
'I am shocked and appalled that such a decision could be taken without his having access to legal counsel of his choosing, his family or his employers,' said David Schlesinger, Reuters Global Managing Editor.
Schlesinger said the U.S. military had refused the news organization's requests to disclose why the cameraman was being detained.
"I call on the authorities to release him immediately or publicly air the case against him and give him the opportunity to defend himself," Schlesinger said.
Reuters claim al-Mashhadani was detained after U.S. marines examined images on his and a colleague's cameras.
Another Reuters cameraman in Iraq, Haider Kadhem, 24, was released Wednesday after being held and questioned by the U.S. military since Sunday. Kadhem was traveling with his brother Waleed, 35, a Reuters sound technician, when the pair's vehicle was fired upon, injuring Haider and killing Waleed.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
NY TImes Skews the News… pro-war/pro-Bush: 1,301 words, seven quotes, two photos + opening and close VS antiwar/anti-Bush: only 327 words, 4 quotes
NY Times Skews the News… Again - by Dr. Teresa Whitehurst: "August 30, 2005
The New York Times, sheltered by its legendary but mythical "liberal" reputation, has become increasingly bold and transparent in its defense of President Bush and his policies, both foreign and domestic. This support is not found, of course, on the labeled editorial pages (which can be discounted as mere opinion), but on the attention-grabbing front page and in other news sections.
Artfully skewed "news" pieces pay lip service to balance, fairness, and objectivity by mentioning or even quoting the opposition, but the writers' loyalty is clear: These "factual" pieces unabashedly devote far more direct quotes, positive editorial descriptions, and emotionally appealing photos to Bush supporters than to those who oppose him or his policies.
...
In a shameless repeat performance of the piece I analyzed earlier this year, the New York Times has gone for the jugular of the antiwar movement by portraying its strongest spokespersons – military family members who oppose Bush and are calling for troops to be withdrawn from Iraq – as weak, misguided, confused, mentally unbalanced, and unpatriotic.
...
The title of the copycat article, eerily reminiscent of the previous article's title ("GI Families United in Grief, but Split by the War," Jan. 2, 2005) is "In War Debate, Parents of Fallen Are United Only in Grief." Clearly, the Times has an agenda to pursue: To overshadow the shared sorrow and rage experienced by parents of slain soldiers across America with simplistic pro-Bush vs. anti-Bush opinions – opinions that divide onlookers, thereby undercutting public support for people like Cindy Sheehan, and for all parents who don't support the war that killed their children.
For anyone who doubts that the Times has devolved into a house organ of the Bush administration and the Pentagon, the following facts and figures about this new "aren't those antiwar parents just awful?" article will be eye-opening.
WORD COUNT: The article is composed of 1,628 words. Of these, only 327 words were devoted to the antiwar/anti-Bush side (primarily in direct quotes, many of which portray the speaker as seeking therapy, confused, or looking for answers), while 1,301 words were devoted to the pro-war/pro-Bush side (in both direct quotes and positively worded descriptions of Bush/war supporters).
PHOTOS: Two photos accompanied the supposedly "balanced" article, both of which were Bush/war supporters. Notably, in one of the photos, a woman who uncannily resembles Cindy Sheehan is kneeling in front of a white cross, mirroring the photo of Sheehan at Camp Casey that millions of Americans have already seen. Thus the pro-war camp, the reader is to assume, has its own Cindy Sheehans – a sure sign that somebody at the New Bush Times is getting terribly nervous about her persuasive appeal.
DIRECT QUOTES: The article quoted seven pro-Bush/pro-war family members (some of them repeatedly), but only four who oppose Bush and the war.
OPENING AND CLOSING PARAGRAPHS:
The New York Times, sheltered by its legendary but mythical "liberal" reputation, has become increasingly bold and transparent in its defense of President Bush and his policies, both foreign and domestic. This support is not found, of course, on the labeled editorial pages (which can be discounted as mere opinion), but on the attention-grabbing front page and in other news sections.
Artfully skewed "news" pieces pay lip service to balance, fairness, and objectivity by mentioning or even quoting the opposition, but the writers' loyalty is clear: These "factual" pieces unabashedly devote far more direct quotes, positive editorial descriptions, and emotionally appealing photos to Bush supporters than to those who oppose him or his policies.
...
In a shameless repeat performance of the piece I analyzed earlier this year, the New York Times has gone for the jugular of the antiwar movement by portraying its strongest spokespersons – military family members who oppose Bush and are calling for troops to be withdrawn from Iraq – as weak, misguided, confused, mentally unbalanced, and unpatriotic.
...
The title of the copycat article, eerily reminiscent of the previous article's title ("GI Families United in Grief, but Split by the War," Jan. 2, 2005) is "In War Debate, Parents of Fallen Are United Only in Grief." Clearly, the Times has an agenda to pursue: To overshadow the shared sorrow and rage experienced by parents of slain soldiers across America with simplistic pro-Bush vs. anti-Bush opinions – opinions that divide onlookers, thereby undercutting public support for people like Cindy Sheehan, and for all parents who don't support the war that killed their children.
For anyone who doubts that the Times has devolved into a house organ of the Bush administration and the Pentagon, the following facts and figures about this new "aren't those antiwar parents just awful?" article will be eye-opening.
WORD COUNT: The article is composed of 1,628 words. Of these, only 327 words were devoted to the antiwar/anti-Bush side (primarily in direct quotes, many of which portray the speaker as seeking therapy, confused, or looking for answers), while 1,301 words were devoted to the pro-war/pro-Bush side (in both direct quotes and positively worded descriptions of Bush/war supporters).
PHOTOS: Two photos accompanied the supposedly "balanced" article, both of which were Bush/war supporters. Notably, in one of the photos, a woman who uncannily resembles Cindy Sheehan is kneeling in front of a white cross, mirroring the photo of Sheehan at Camp Casey that millions of Americans have already seen. Thus the pro-war camp, the reader is to assume, has its own Cindy Sheehans – a sure sign that somebody at the New Bush Times is getting terribly nervous about her persuasive appeal.
DIRECT QUOTES: The article quoted seven pro-Bush/pro-war family members (some of them repeatedly), but only four who oppose Bush and the war.
OPENING AND CLOSING PARAGRAPHS:
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Move America Forward ( the Hate crowd ) was outed today by Keith Olbermann as launched by a Sacramento P.R. firm which has strong ties to Republicans
Crooks and Liars: "MAF: Republican Shills
Move America Forward ( the Hate crowd ) was outed today by Keith Olbermann as having been launched by a Sacramento P.R. firm which has strong ties to the Republican party. Later in the segment Dana Milbank said that they were part of the Orin Hatch for President campaign. lol That's grassroots for you. This diary at Kos was the first one that I found which uncovered the scam."
Move America Forward ( the Hate crowd ) was outed today by Keith Olbermann as having been launched by a Sacramento P.R. firm which has strong ties to the Republican party. Later in the segment Dana Milbank said that they were part of the Orin Hatch for President campaign. lol That's grassroots for you. This diary at Kos was the first one that I found which uncovered the scam."
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Darfur genocide: NBC News featured 5 minutes, and CBS only had three ... in ALL of 2004 -- , “about a minute of coverage for every 100,000 deaths.”
Think Progress � BREAKING: NBC, CBS, ABC Reject Ad Criticizing Their News Coverage: "Apparently you can’t even pay TV networks to cover genocide.
American Progress created a television advertisement for BeAWitness.org, our netroots campaign that calls out the television news media for their deplorable coverage of the genocide in Darfur. Over the last few days, three Washington DC television affiliates, NBC-4, CBS-9, and ABC-7, informed us that they refuse to air the ad.
Since the major networks seem to have their hands full covering stories like Natalee Holloway and the Runaway Bride, the ad does what the media won’t — puts the spotlight on Darfur, and suggests that genocide warrants increased coverage.
ABC News broadcast just 18 minutes of Darfur coverage in its nightly newscasts in all of 2004 — “and that turns out to be a credit to Peter Jennings,” as Nicholas Kristof pointed out. NBC News featured 5 minutes, and CBS only had three, “about a minute of coverage for every 100,000 deaths.” Now they won’t allow us to pay for 30 seconds to urge better coverage of the genocide."
American Progress created a television advertisement for BeAWitness.org, our netroots campaign that calls out the television news media for their deplorable coverage of the genocide in Darfur. Over the last few days, three Washington DC television affiliates, NBC-4, CBS-9, and ABC-7, informed us that they refuse to air the ad.
Since the major networks seem to have their hands full covering stories like Natalee Holloway and the Runaway Bride, the ad does what the media won’t — puts the spotlight on Darfur, and suggests that genocide warrants increased coverage.
ABC News broadcast just 18 minutes of Darfur coverage in its nightly newscasts in all of 2004 — “and that turns out to be a credit to Peter Jennings,” as Nicholas Kristof pointed out. NBC News featured 5 minutes, and CBS only had three, “about a minute of coverage for every 100,000 deaths.” Now they won’t allow us to pay for 30 seconds to urge better coverage of the genocide."
Sunday, August 21, 2005
The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan - especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside
The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan - New York Times: "By FRANK RICH | Published: August 21, 2005
CINDY SHEEHAN couldn't have picked a more apt date to begin the vigil that ambushed a president: Aug. 6 was the fourth anniversary of that fateful 2001 Crawford vacation day when George W. Bush responded to an intelligence briefing titled 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States' by going fishing. On this Aug. 6 the president was no less determined to shrug off bad news. Though 14 marine reservists had been killed days earlier by a roadside bomb in Haditha, his national radio address that morning made no mention of Iraq. Once again Mr. Bush was in his bubble, ensuring that he wouldn't see Ms. Sheehan coming. So it goes with a president who hasn't foreseen any of the setbacks in the war he fabricated against an enemy who did not attack inside the United States in 2001.
When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam. ...
CINDY SHEEHAN couldn't have picked a more apt date to begin the vigil that ambushed a president: Aug. 6 was the fourth anniversary of that fateful 2001 Crawford vacation day when George W. Bush responded to an intelligence briefing titled 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States' by going fishing. On this Aug. 6 the president was no less determined to shrug off bad news. Though 14 marine reservists had been killed days earlier by a roadside bomb in Haditha, his national radio address that morning made no mention of Iraq. Once again Mr. Bush was in his bubble, ensuring that he wouldn't see Ms. Sheehan coming. So it goes with a president who hasn't foreseen any of the setbacks in the war he fabricated against an enemy who did not attack inside the United States in 2001.
When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam. ...
McCarthyism Watch | Santorum’s People Toss Young Women out of Barnes & Noble, Trooper Threatens Them with Prison
The Progressive Magazine: "McCarthyism Watch | Santorum’s People Toss Young Women out of Barnes & Noble, Trooper Threatens Them with Prison | Matthew Rothschild | August 19, 2005
On the evening of August 10, Hannah Shaffer of Glen Mills, Pennsylvania, decided to go to the nearby Barnes & Noble outside of Wilmington. She wanted to see Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, who was promoting his book, “It Takes a Family.”
The event was billed as a “book signing and discussion,” Shaffer says.
But discussion was the last thing that the Senator’s people wanted.
Shaffer, her friends, and two other young women were booted out of the store and threatened with imprisonment even before they had a chance to say a word to Santorum, as Al Mascitti first noted in the Delaware News Journal.
...
A state trooper in full uniform, including hat and gun, was in the store, and, according to Shaffer and Galperin, he met with the person who didn’t care for the Dan Savage joke, along with a few others, including members of the store and Santorum’s people.
Galperin says she heard the trooper ask, “Do you want me to get rid of them?”
And then the trooper, Delaware State Police Sgt. Mark DiJiacomo, who was on detail as a private security guard, came over to the group of women.
Here is the conversation, as Galperin remembers it: “You guys have to leave.”
“Why?”
“Your business is not wanted here. They don’t want you here anymore. If you don’t leave, you’re going to be arrested. If you can’t post bail, you’ll go to prison. Those of you who are under 18 will go to Ferris [the juvenile detention center]. And those of you over 18 will go either to Gander Hill Prison or the woman’s correctional facility. Any questions?”
...
He told Rocek to put her hands on the squad car, and then told both of them to call their parents and tell them to bring “at least $1,000 in bail money,” Galperin says.
Galperin reached her father, an attorney.
“I told my dad, ‘I’m under arrest for expressing dissenting opinions.’ ”
Her father asked to speak to the sergeant.
“Your dad says get out of here,” the sergeant told her. “He’ll meet you at home.”
And so they both left. ...
On the evening of August 10, Hannah Shaffer of Glen Mills, Pennsylvania, decided to go to the nearby Barnes & Noble outside of Wilmington. She wanted to see Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, who was promoting his book, “It Takes a Family.”
The event was billed as a “book signing and discussion,” Shaffer says.
But discussion was the last thing that the Senator’s people wanted.
Shaffer, her friends, and two other young women were booted out of the store and threatened with imprisonment even before they had a chance to say a word to Santorum, as Al Mascitti first noted in the Delaware News Journal.
...
A state trooper in full uniform, including hat and gun, was in the store, and, according to Shaffer and Galperin, he met with the person who didn’t care for the Dan Savage joke, along with a few others, including members of the store and Santorum’s people.
Galperin says she heard the trooper ask, “Do you want me to get rid of them?”
And then the trooper, Delaware State Police Sgt. Mark DiJiacomo, who was on detail as a private security guard, came over to the group of women.
Here is the conversation, as Galperin remembers it: “You guys have to leave.”
“Why?”
“Your business is not wanted here. They don’t want you here anymore. If you don’t leave, you’re going to be arrested. If you can’t post bail, you’ll go to prison. Those of you who are under 18 will go to Ferris [the juvenile detention center]. And those of you over 18 will go either to Gander Hill Prison or the woman’s correctional facility. Any questions?”
...
He told Rocek to put her hands on the squad car, and then told both of them to call their parents and tell them to bring “at least $1,000 in bail money,” Galperin says.
Galperin reached her father, an attorney.
“I told my dad, ‘I’m under arrest for expressing dissenting opinions.’ ”
Her father asked to speak to the sergeant.
“Your dad says get out of here,” the sergeant told her. “He’ll meet you at home.”
And so they both left. ...
TV Station Refuses to Air Anti-War Ad featuring Cindy Sheehan, whose son's death in Iraq prompted a vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch
TV Station Refuses to Air Anti-War Ad - Yahoo! News: "By JENNIFER DOBNER, Associated Press Writer Sun Aug 21, 2:13 AM ET
SALT LAKE CITY - A Utah television station is refusing to air an anti-war ad featuring Cindy Sheehan, whose son's death in Iraq prompted a vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch.
SALT LAKE CITY - A Utah television station is refusing to air an anti-war ad featuring Cindy Sheehan, whose son's death in Iraq prompted a vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
THE BRAD BLOG: "CENSORING AGAIN: Comcast Blocks Emails Linking to Cindy Sheehan Website! Cox Cable Joins Nation's Largest Net Provider in Keeping Citi
THE BRAD BLOG: "CENSORING AGAIN: Comcast Blocks Emails Linking to Cindy Sheehan Website! Cox Cable Joins Nation's Largest Net Provider in Keeping Citizens in the Dark!": "8/17/2005 @ 11:14pm PT... Guest blogged by Winter Patriot
CENSORING AGAIN: Comcast Blocks Emails Linking to Cindy Sheehan Website! Cox Cable Joins Nation's Largest Net Provider in Keeping Citizens in the Dark!
Other ISPs doing the same thing -- here we go again! only bigger!!
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot UPDATE: Since the following item was posted, we have had confirmed reports of emails being blocked by other ISPs as well as Comcast. We'll post...
UPDATE: Since the following item was posted, we have had confirmed reports of emails being blocked by other ISPs as well as Comcast. We'll post more when we know more. In the meantime, please try the tests described below, regardless of your e-mail provider, so we can get some sense of the scope of the problem. Thank you very much, as always.
Five weeks ago The BRAD BLOG ran a report indicating that Comcast, the nation's most popular email provider, was automatically deleting emails containing the web address 'www.afterdowningstreet.org'. Shortly after the report was published, 6 or 7 people made such a commotion that the problem was suddenly fixed. Various explanations were given, none of which cut any ice in the opinion of this lowly and nearly frozen blogger, but at least the problem went away.
Why am I telling you this? Background info. Today we have received a report indicating that something similar is happening again, but this time the address that triggers Comcast's automatic deletion is 'www.meetwithcindy.org'."
CENSORING AGAIN: Comcast Blocks Emails Linking to Cindy Sheehan Website! Cox Cable Joins Nation's Largest Net Provider in Keeping Citizens in the Dark!
Other ISPs doing the same thing -- here we go again! only bigger!!
Guest blogged by Winter Patriot UPDATE: Since the following item was posted, we have had confirmed reports of emails being blocked by other ISPs as well as Comcast. We'll post...
UPDATE: Since the following item was posted, we have had confirmed reports of emails being blocked by other ISPs as well as Comcast. We'll post more when we know more. In the meantime, please try the tests described below, regardless of your e-mail provider, so we can get some sense of the scope of the problem. Thank you very much, as always.
Five weeks ago The BRAD BLOG ran a report indicating that Comcast, the nation's most popular email provider, was automatically deleting emails containing the web address 'www.afterdowningstreet.org'. Shortly after the report was published, 6 or 7 people made such a commotion that the problem was suddenly fixed. Various explanations were given, none of which cut any ice in the opinion of this lowly and nearly frozen blogger, but at least the problem went away.
Why am I telling you this? Background info. Today we have received a report indicating that something similar is happening again, but this time the address that triggers Comcast's automatic deletion is 'www.meetwithcindy.org'."
Thursday, August 04, 2005
"We need to get our own U.S. government colleagues to be leaking like a sieve,”
The Lone Star Iconoclast Online: "Former Ambassador Urges U.S. Officials To Leak More Memos | By Nathan Diebenow | Associate Editor
AUSTIN — The former ambassador to Afghanistan, Ann Wright, called on U.S. federal employees to leak more secret memos on the lead-up to the war in Iraq like Downing Street memos uncovered by the British press this last May.
“It seems like the British government is leaking like a sieve. We need to get our own U.S. government colleagues to be leaking like a sieve,” said Wright, who gave up her career in the foreign service because she disagreed with the U.S. invasion of Iraq. “We need more documents — certainly not documents that are really going to jeopardize the security of the United States — but documents that show the sequence of events within our own government.”
Wright said that many federal employees disagree with the policies of the current administration but stay involved for a host of reasons, one of which more often than not is that they have mouths to feed. A closer look of the major U.S. newspapers, however, shows that those discouraged officials inside the government are sending signals of hope to the American people, she said.
“It’s important that we encourage our colleagues in the U.S. federal government to think really seriously about the future of our country and to inform their conscience and look to see if they can find the equivalent memos that we have in our United States government,” said Wright. “So if you have any colleagues, cousins, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, sons or daughters that are working in whatever level of government, talk to them. Just casually mention it. You never can tell.”"
AUSTIN — The former ambassador to Afghanistan, Ann Wright, called on U.S. federal employees to leak more secret memos on the lead-up to the war in Iraq like Downing Street memos uncovered by the British press this last May.
“It seems like the British government is leaking like a sieve. We need to get our own U.S. government colleagues to be leaking like a sieve,” said Wright, who gave up her career in the foreign service because she disagreed with the U.S. invasion of Iraq. “We need more documents — certainly not documents that are really going to jeopardize the security of the United States — but documents that show the sequence of events within our own government.”
Wright said that many federal employees disagree with the policies of the current administration but stay involved for a host of reasons, one of which more often than not is that they have mouths to feed. A closer look of the major U.S. newspapers, however, shows that those discouraged officials inside the government are sending signals of hope to the American people, she said.
“It’s important that we encourage our colleagues in the U.S. federal government to think really seriously about the future of our country and to inform their conscience and look to see if they can find the equivalent memos that we have in our United States government,” said Wright. “So if you have any colleagues, cousins, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, sons or daughters that are working in whatever level of government, talk to them. Just casually mention it. You never can tell.”"
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
What has become of media watchdogs: hounded Nixon, Reagan, impeached Clinton ... now co-opted as a propaganda organ for the Bush administration
Armageddon Gets No Press - by Paul Craig Roberts: "August 2, 2005 | by Paul Craig Roberts
What has become of the print and TV media watchdogs who hounded President Nixon from office because he lied about when he learned of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself?
What became of the watchdog media that bayed after President Reagan because some low-level neoconservative officials sold arms to Iran and diverted the money to anti-communist insurgents in Latin America?
President Clinton was impeached by the House, though not convicted by the Senate, for lying about a sexcapade with a White House intern.
Now that we really need them, the watchdog media has hired out as public relations and propaganda shills for the Bush administration and the neocon network.
The entire Bush administration – not merely the president – is involved in the most extraordinary lies and fabrication of false intelligence claims in order to lead America into an unwarranted and illegal invasion of Iraq, an invasion that has cost the U.S. taxpayers $300 billion and resulted in the deaths and maiming of tens of thousands of people.
...
The mainstream media has been co-opted as a propaganda organ for the Bush administration. How did this come about?
It came about through media concentration. There are no longer independent voices in the mainstream media. American news reporting is a corporate operation run with a view to advertising profits and the accommodation of government in order to protect holdings of valuable federal licenses. For reporters and editors, knowing what to say and not to say is the main qualification for job security.
What has become of the print and TV media watchdogs who hounded President Nixon from office because he lied about when he learned of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself?
What became of the watchdog media that bayed after President Reagan because some low-level neoconservative officials sold arms to Iran and diverted the money to anti-communist insurgents in Latin America?
President Clinton was impeached by the House, though not convicted by the Senate, for lying about a sexcapade with a White House intern.
Now that we really need them, the watchdog media has hired out as public relations and propaganda shills for the Bush administration and the neocon network.
The entire Bush administration – not merely the president – is involved in the most extraordinary lies and fabrication of false intelligence claims in order to lead America into an unwarranted and illegal invasion of Iraq, an invasion that has cost the U.S. taxpayers $300 billion and resulted in the deaths and maiming of tens of thousands of people.
...
The mainstream media has been co-opted as a propaganda organ for the Bush administration. How did this come about?
It came about through media concentration. There are no longer independent voices in the mainstream media. American news reporting is a corporate operation run with a view to advertising profits and the accommodation of government in order to protect holdings of valuable federal licenses. For reporters and editors, knowing what to say and not to say is the main qualification for job security.
Sunday, July 31, 2005
Bush administration obsession with controlling the flow of information: Officials Routinely Rewarded for Lying and Punished for Telling the Truth
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility: News Releases: "July 20, 2005
Contact: Chas Offutt (202) 265-7337
“DISINFORMATION SYNDROME” AFFLICTS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT — Officials Routinely Rewarded for Lying and Punished for Telling the Truth
Washington, DC — The federal government suffers from a “severe disinformation syndrome” in which agency specialists are pressured to alter reports by managers who are promoted for breaking the law, according to congressional testimony delivered today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). As a consequence, scientific and technical papers, particularly within environmental agencies, are routinely censored, altered or manipulated for political purposes.
“The Bush administration obsession with controlling the flow of information means that factual information that does not serve its political agenda rarely sees the light of day,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch who testified today. “Public servants who wish to speak honestly about matters outside officially approved agency talking points are required to cast a profile in courage because their honesty could cost them their jobs.”
...
The PEER testimony outlines a pervasive effort to edit out vital but discordant information across the range of environmental activities:
* Science. PEER and the Union of Concerned Scientists have conducted surveys among federal scientists showing a high degree of political intervention to amend scientific findings;
* Land Management. Federal agencies are routinely issuing documents that do not withstand judicial scrutiny because the documents are at variance with the agency’s own internal data; and
* Public Health. Whistleblowers lack meaningful protections so that professionals who raise concerns are banished or terminated as a result.
A major problem cited by PEER is that Congress extends no meaningful legal protections for executive branch employees who communicate information to oversight committees or individual members. As a consequence, official reports to Congress are often inaccurate, incomplete or untimely.
“If agencies can lie with impunity to Congress, why should they be expected to tell anyone else the truth?” Ruch asked, calling for Congress to put teeth into laws forbidding interference with or retaliation for transmitting information to elected representatives. “Right now, the federal civil service is scared to death.”
Contact: Chas Offutt (202) 265-7337
“DISINFORMATION SYNDROME” AFFLICTS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT — Officials Routinely Rewarded for Lying and Punished for Telling the Truth
Washington, DC — The federal government suffers from a “severe disinformation syndrome” in which agency specialists are pressured to alter reports by managers who are promoted for breaking the law, according to congressional testimony delivered today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). As a consequence, scientific and technical papers, particularly within environmental agencies, are routinely censored, altered or manipulated for political purposes.
“The Bush administration obsession with controlling the flow of information means that factual information that does not serve its political agenda rarely sees the light of day,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch who testified today. “Public servants who wish to speak honestly about matters outside officially approved agency talking points are required to cast a profile in courage because their honesty could cost them their jobs.”
...
The PEER testimony outlines a pervasive effort to edit out vital but discordant information across the range of environmental activities:
* Science. PEER and the Union of Concerned Scientists have conducted surveys among federal scientists showing a high degree of political intervention to amend scientific findings;
* Land Management. Federal agencies are routinely issuing documents that do not withstand judicial scrutiny because the documents are at variance with the agency’s own internal data; and
* Public Health. Whistleblowers lack meaningful protections so that professionals who raise concerns are banished or terminated as a result.
A major problem cited by PEER is that Congress extends no meaningful legal protections for executive branch employees who communicate information to oversight committees or individual members. As a consequence, official reports to Congress are often inaccurate, incomplete or untimely.
“If agencies can lie with impunity to Congress, why should they be expected to tell anyone else the truth?” Ruch asked, calling for Congress to put teeth into laws forbidding interference with or retaliation for transmitting information to elected representatives. “Right now, the federal civil service is scared to death.”
Friday, July 29, 2005
Fedrs decline to press charges of impersonating a Secret Service agent against White House volunteer who forcibly ousted three progressives
Rocky Mountain News: News: "No charges in Denver 3 ouster | By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News | July 29, 2005
Federal prosecutors have declined to press charges of impersonating a Secret Service agent against a White House volunteer who forcibly ousted three people from a speech by President George W. Bush in Denver on March 21.
The announcement was made without explanation today in a letter from the Secret Service to Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar and Reps. Mark Udall and Diana DeGette, all Democrats who had asked for the agency to investigate the incident.
...
Although the three are involved in a political group called the Denver Progressives, they did nothing to interfere with the event and were bounced before the president arrived. They admitted to wearing t-shirts under their clothing that said, "No more lies." They said they considered revealing the t-shirts, but decided not to do so. Later, though they had done nothing disruptive, the unidentified man forced them to leave.
Federal prosecutors have declined to press charges of impersonating a Secret Service agent against a White House volunteer who forcibly ousted three people from a speech by President George W. Bush in Denver on March 21.
The announcement was made without explanation today in a letter from the Secret Service to Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar and Reps. Mark Udall and Diana DeGette, all Democrats who had asked for the agency to investigate the incident.
...
Although the three are involved in a political group called the Denver Progressives, they did nothing to interfere with the event and were bounced before the president arrived. They admitted to wearing t-shirts under their clothing that said, "No more lies." They said they considered revealing the t-shirts, but decided not to do so. Later, though they had done nothing disruptive, the unidentified man forced them to leave.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Pentagon probes use of apparent fake quotes in Iraq news releases
Pentagon probes use of apparent fake quotes in Iraq news releases - Yahoo! News: "Tue Jul 26, 7:17 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon said it was investigating the use of near-identical quotations from unidentified Iraqis in official news releases that criticized insurgent bombings.
...
Journalists in Iraq first complained Sunday to US authorities in Baghdad about the questionable quotes in the releases.
"If a journalist were to make up a quote or copy a quote or misuse a quote like that, he could lose his job," a reporter told DiRita Tuesday.
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon said it was investigating the use of near-identical quotations from unidentified Iraqis in official news releases that criticized insurgent bombings.
...
Journalists in Iraq first complained Sunday to US authorities in Baghdad about the questionable quotes in the releases.
"If a journalist were to make up a quote or copy a quote or misuse a quote like that, he could lose his job," a reporter told DiRita Tuesday.
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Estate Tax Myths: numbers [of farmers and owners of small businesses] that owed estate tax were paltry
Estate Tax Myths: "Sunday, July 24, 2005; Page B06
ONE OF THE chief arguments of those seeking permanent repeal of the estate tax is that it cruelly penalizes farmers and owners of small businesses whose heirs are forced to sell off their holdings to pay the tax. 'In order to make sure our farms stay within our farming families, we need to get rid of the death tax once and for all,' President Bush proclaimed in a speech last month to the Future Farmers of America."
...
A new study by the Congressional Budget Office examined estate tax returns filed by farmers and owners of small businesses in 1999 and 2000. The numbers that owed estate tax, the CBO found, were paltry, and the number without enough cash on hand to pay the bill even punier: In 2000, for example, just 1,659 farm estates had taxes due, of which 138 didn't report enough liquid assets to cover their tax liability. ... But members of Congress debating the issue now ought to look at the facts assembled by the CBO -- not the misinformation peddled by those maneuvering to make repeal permanent.
ONE OF THE chief arguments of those seeking permanent repeal of the estate tax is that it cruelly penalizes farmers and owners of small businesses whose heirs are forced to sell off their holdings to pay the tax. 'In order to make sure our farms stay within our farming families, we need to get rid of the death tax once and for all,' President Bush proclaimed in a speech last month to the Future Farmers of America."
...
A new study by the Congressional Budget Office examined estate tax returns filed by farmers and owners of small businesses in 1999 and 2000. The numbers that owed estate tax, the CBO found, were paltry, and the number without enough cash on hand to pay the bill even punier: In 2000, for example, just 1,659 farm estates had taxes due, of which 138 didn't report enough liquid assets to cover their tax liability. ... But members of Congress debating the issue now ought to look at the facts assembled by the CBO -- not the misinformation peddled by those maneuvering to make repeal permanent.
Friday, July 22, 2005
56% say "[news] stories and reports are often inaccurate,"
David Domke: There's No Shield Against Public Anger: "July 22, 2005 | The American Press and Credibility | By DAVID DOMKE
...
A recent Pew Research Center poll shows U.S. press credibility at historic lows. In early June, 56% of randomly sampled U.S. adults said that "[news] stories and reports are often inaccurate," an increase from 34% of the public who held this view in 1985. Similarly, 72% of Americans today say news organizations "tend to favor one side" when covering political and social issues, up from 53% two decades ago. And 75% of Americans said news organizations' reporting is most concerned about "attracting the biggest audience," while only 19% said it was "keeping the public informed."
...
The desire for pro-American news produces this outcome: when news content is critical of U.S. actions, many Americans become angry with the press, rather than the government. In other words, the public becomes likely to shoot the messenger. It would help if the news media stopped providing ammunition.
...
A recent Pew Research Center poll shows U.S. press credibility at historic lows. In early June, 56% of randomly sampled U.S. adults said that "[news] stories and reports are often inaccurate," an increase from 34% of the public who held this view in 1985. Similarly, 72% of Americans today say news organizations "tend to favor one side" when covering political and social issues, up from 53% two decades ago. And 75% of Americans said news organizations' reporting is most concerned about "attracting the biggest audience," while only 19% said it was "keeping the public informed."
...
The desire for pro-American news produces this outcome: when news content is critical of U.S. actions, many Americans become angry with the press, rather than the government. In other words, the public becomes likely to shoot the messenger. It would help if the news media stopped providing ammunition.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Iraq: The War We Are Not Being Shown: It’s like a pair of blinders has been removed
Iraq: The War We Are Not Being Shown Huffington Post | 07.20.2005 Arianna Huffington
My vacation has been remarkably eye-opening. Now, when travelers say things like that, they usually are talking about being introduced to new cultures, different foods, singular settings… but in my case, I’m talking about war. Specifically, how shockingly different the coverage of the war in Iraq is here in Europe compared to what we get back home.
It’s like a pair of blinders has been removed and I’m suddenly seeing for myself what I’ve long known to be the case: just how sanitized a version of the war the American mainstream media are delivering, and how little of even this cleaned-up coverage we get.
Take Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari’s lovefest visit to Tehran on Sunday, where he laid a wreath on the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeini and hailed what he called “a new chapter in brotherly ties” between Iran and Iraq. Now, by all rights, this should have been a major story in the U.S. Here you have the leader of the new government we’re spending hundreds of billions of dollars creating in Iraq making very nice with the terror-funding and nuke-building mullahs in Iran. So this is what our soldiers are putting their lives on the line for -- 1,770 killed so far -- a budding alliance between fundamentalist theocracies? (And yesterday’s news about the Iraqi constitution being based on fundamentalist Islamic principles, including curtailing women’s rights only confirms these fears) Surely that’s front page news, right? Not in America.
In fact, the historic visit was barely covered in the mainstream American press. The only major U.S. newspaper to report it was the Washington Post -- and its story was on page A-21. A-21?! The consequences of this lack of coverage are enormous. As the blogger Billmon at Whiskey Bar nailed it:
“How would the folks back home feel if they knew their sons and daughters were getting limbs blown off so that Iraqi politicians could jaunt off to Tehran and say warm and fuzzy things about the crazy old man who gave us the Iranian hostage crisis? And what kind of surrealist cover story would the GOP propaganda machine come up with to convince the Fox News audience that fighting and dying to keep Khomeini lovers in power is really a good thing?”
Another example of this lack of proper coverage -- and of the media’s bizarre priorities -- came when the Iraq Body Count dossier on civilian casualties in Iraq that HuffPost’s Jane Wells blogged about was released. Despite the vitally important information it contained, the Washington Post story on it ran on page A-18, the LA Times’ on page A-12, and the New York Times’ on A-8 . Thirty-seven percent of all non-combatant deaths were caused by US led coalition forces -- compared to 9% caused by insurgents -- and in the nation’s capital it runs on A-18.
My vacation has been remarkably eye-opening. Now, when travelers say things like that, they usually are talking about being introduced to new cultures, different foods, singular settings… but in my case, I’m talking about war. Specifically, how shockingly different the coverage of the war in Iraq is here in Europe compared to what we get back home.
It’s like a pair of blinders has been removed and I’m suddenly seeing for myself what I’ve long known to be the case: just how sanitized a version of the war the American mainstream media are delivering, and how little of even this cleaned-up coverage we get.
Take Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari’s lovefest visit to Tehran on Sunday, where he laid a wreath on the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeini and hailed what he called “a new chapter in brotherly ties” between Iran and Iraq. Now, by all rights, this should have been a major story in the U.S. Here you have the leader of the new government we’re spending hundreds of billions of dollars creating in Iraq making very nice with the terror-funding and nuke-building mullahs in Iran. So this is what our soldiers are putting their lives on the line for -- 1,770 killed so far -- a budding alliance between fundamentalist theocracies? (And yesterday’s news about the Iraqi constitution being based on fundamentalist Islamic principles, including curtailing women’s rights only confirms these fears) Surely that’s front page news, right? Not in America.
In fact, the historic visit was barely covered in the mainstream American press. The only major U.S. newspaper to report it was the Washington Post -- and its story was on page A-21. A-21?! The consequences of this lack of coverage are enormous. As the blogger Billmon at Whiskey Bar nailed it:
“How would the folks back home feel if they knew their sons and daughters were getting limbs blown off so that Iraqi politicians could jaunt off to Tehran and say warm and fuzzy things about the crazy old man who gave us the Iranian hostage crisis? And what kind of surrealist cover story would the GOP propaganda machine come up with to convince the Fox News audience that fighting and dying to keep Khomeini lovers in power is really a good thing?”
Another example of this lack of proper coverage -- and of the media’s bizarre priorities -- came when the Iraq Body Count dossier on civilian casualties in Iraq that HuffPost’s Jane Wells blogged about was released. Despite the vitally important information it contained, the Washington Post story on it ran on page A-18, the LA Times’ on page A-12, and the New York Times’ on A-8 . Thirty-seven percent of all non-combatant deaths were caused by US led coalition forces -- compared to 9% caused by insurgents -- and in the nation’s capital it runs on A-18.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)