Sunday, January 31, 2010

Paul Krugman to Fox News CEO: ‘Deliberate misinformation’ | Raw Story

Paul Krugman to Fox News CEO: ‘Deliberate misinformation’ | Raw Story

In an interview Sunday, New York Times economist Paul Krugman hammered conservative talk show host Glenn Beck for spreading blatantly false information about the Democrats' health care bill -- and put the blame squarely on Fox News CEO Roger Ailes.

"Glenn Beck doesn't, you know," Krugman began, "what bothers me is the fact that people are not getting informed, that we are going through major debates on crucial policy issues; the public is not learning about them. And you know, you can say, well, they can read the New York Times, which will tell them what they need to know, but you know, most people don't. They don't read it thoroughly.... People did not know what was in the plan, and some of that was just poor reporting, some of it was deliberate misinformation. I have here in front of me when President Obama said, you know, why -- he said rhetorically, why aren't we going to do a health care plan like the Europeans have, with a government-run program, and then proceeds to explain whey he's different. On Fox News, what appeared was a clipped quote, "why don't we have a European-style health care plan?" Right, deliberate misinformation."

Fox News CEO Roger Ailes interjects: "Wait a minute, wait a minute..."

And Krugman replies, "I can show you the clip, and you can..."

"The American people are not stupid," Ailes says.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

ManCrunch SuperBowl Ad REJECTED: Gay Dating Site Ad Denied By CBS (VIDEO)

ManCrunch SuperBowl Ad REJECTED: Gay Dating Site Ad Denied By CBS (VIDEO)

Update: CBS has rejected an ad from gay dating site ManCrunch, telling the site that the ad "is not within the Network's Broadcast Standards for Super Bowl Sunday.", James Hibberd reports at The Live Feed

CBS released the following statement:

"After reviewing the ad - which is entirely commercial in nature - our Standards and Practices department decided not to accept this particular spot. As always, we are open to working with the client on alternative submissions."

Hibberd reports that CBS believed ManCrunch was trying to generate free publicity by submitting an ad that was likely to be rejected.

"We're 100% serious," ManCrunch spokesperson Elissa Buchter said. "We have the money to pay for it. If the ad showed a man and woman kissing it would have been accepted. You see ads for erectile dysfunction morning, noon and night. It's discriminatory that they wont show this....They should call our bluff. If the ad doesn't air on the Super Bowl, it will air on another network. It's not like it plays like Adam Lambert [kissing another man on the AMAs]."

Original Post: CBS is considering airing an ad for gay dating site ManCrunch, Fox News reports.

On the heels of the network's decision that advocacy ads are acceptable, ManCrunch says CBS has not rejected its ad — which includes two male football fans making out.

A rep for ManCrunch told Fox News that CBS said "the spot hadn't been officially approved yet" as of last week, but "all the Super Bowl spots were sold out."

"ManCrunch requested the spot get reviewed anyway just in case another advertiser drops out and a spot becomes available, as often happens, and CBS agreed," the rep said.

A CBS rep told Fox News that "the ad is still under review, the process takes a little while....We still have a lot of ads we have yet to review." ...

Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad May Be Based On Falsehood

Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad May Be Based On Falsehood

A commercial featuring Tim Tebow and his mother Pam that is likely to air during Super Bowl XLIV may be rife with inaccuracies,according to power lawyer Gloria Allred.

The ad, which is expected to promote an anti-choice message, will be based on the theme "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." The Christian conservative group Focus on the Family has paid for the spot. James Dobson, the group's founder, has a history of inflammatory statements and once said that gay marriage will "destroy the earth."

Despite resistance from women's groups, the ad is expected to air during the Super Bowl. It is believed that the commercial will focus on Pam Tebow's 1987 pregnancy, during which time she fell ill in the Philippines. According to reports, doctors recommended that she abort the pregnancy, but she chose to go through with the birth of her son Tim.

Tebow grew up to be one of the most accomplished and celebrated stars in college football history, capturing two national championships and becoming the first sophomore to win the Heisman trophy.

Because abortion under any circumstance has been illegal in the Philippines since 1930 and is punishable by a six-year prison term, Allred says she finds it hard to believe that doctors would have recommended the procedure. ...

Obama spars with GOP in no-holds-barred debate | Raw Story

Obama spars with GOP in no-holds-barred debate | Raw Story

UPDATE AT BOTTOM: Fox News cut live feed of Obama debate half-way through; GOP aides say allowing cameras was a 'mistake'
...

Even some conservative commentators conceded that Obama won the day.

"Obama did well, got the better of GOP today," the Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb tweeted. "Fortunately, we got the better of him the last six months or so. And health care is dead."

Daniel Foster at the National Review argued it made both sides look good.

"It would be hard to argue the exchange is anything but a plus-plus for Obama and the GOP," he wrote. "Both sides emerged from it looking as if, contra the public's greatest fears, they are serious about the deficit and health-care reform. ... [T]he Republicans went a long way toward showing that they are hardly a party of obstructionists with no solutions to offer Americans."

UPDATE: Some commentators are pointing to the fact that Fox News cut off the live feed of Obama's debate half-way through as proof that the president got the better of the GOP on Friday.

"Perhaps the most telling aspect of the speech reactions," writes David Weigel at the Washington Independent, is that "Fox News, alone among cable networks, cut away mid-broadcast and went to a newsless interview with Rep. Peter King (R-NY)."

NBC's Luke Russert offered more evidence that at least the GOP views it as a loss for their side.

"GOP aides telling me it was a mistake to allow cameras into Obama's QA with GOP members,"Russert tweeted Friday. "Allowed BO to refute GOP for 1.5 hours on TV."

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Poll finds Americans trust Fox News more than any other network | Raw Story

Poll finds Americans trust Fox News more than any other network | Raw Story

"The only one getting a positive review is Fox News."

An essay from a conservative media critic? A GOP blogger trumpeting the ratings of the allegedly "Fair and Balanced" news network?

Nope. A poll of 1,151 registered American voters, who were asked whether they trust each of the major television news networks. Ranking number one: Fox News Channel.

"49% of Americans say they trust Fox News to 37% who disagree," the poll's authors wrote. "Predictably there is a large party split on this with 74% of Republicans but only 30% of Democrats saying they trust the right leaning network."

"CNN does next best because it is the second most trusted of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. 39% say they trust it compared to 41% who do not, with 59% of Democrats, 33% of independents and 23% of Republicans saying it carries credibility with them."

CIA Man Retracts Claim on Waterboarding | Foreign Policy

CIA Man Retracts Claim on Waterboarding | Foreign Policy

Well, it's official now: John Kiriakou, the former CIA operative who affirmed claims that waterboarding quickly unloosed the tongues of hard-core terrorists, says he didn't know what he was talking about.

Kiriakou, a 15-year veteran of the agency's intelligence analysis and operations directorates, electrified the hand-wringing national debate over torture in December 2007 when he told ABC's Brian Ross and Richard Esposito in a much ballyhooed,exclusive interview that senior al Qaeda commando Abu Zubaydah cracked after only one application of the face cloth and water.

"From that day on, he answered every question," Kiriakou said. "The threat information he provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks."

No matter that Kiriakou wearily said he shared the anguish of millions of Americans, not to mention the rest of the world, over the CIA's application of the medieval confession technique.

...

Now comes John Kiriakou, again, with a wholly different story. On the next-to-last page of a new memoir, The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA's War on Terror (written with Michael Ruby), Kiriakou now rather off handedly admits that he basically made it all up.

"What I told Brian Ross in late 2007 was wrong on a couple counts," he writes. "I suggested that Abu Zubaydah had lasted only thirty or thirty-five seconds during his waterboarding before he begged his interrogators to stop; after that, I said he opened up and gave the agency actionable intelligence."

But never mind, he says now.

"I wasn't there when the interrogation took place; instead, I relied on what I'd heard and read inside the agency at the time."

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Exclusive: Obama stimulus reduced our pain, experts say - USATODAY.com

Exclusive: Obama stimulus reduced our pain, experts say - USATODAY.com
President Obama's stimulus package saved jobs — but the government still needs to do more to breathe life into the economy, according to USA TODAY's quarterly survey of 50 economists.

Unemployment would have hit 10.8% — higher than December's 10% rate — without Obama's $787 billion stimulus program, according to the economists' median estimate. The difference would translate into another 1.2 million lost jobs.

BUSINESS SURVEY: Slow recovery continues

But almost two-thirds of the economists said the government should do more to spur job growth. Suggestions included suspending payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare, increasing spending on infrastructure, enacting a flat tax on income and extending jobless benefits. ...

How will SCOTUS decision affect corporate media? | Media Matters for America

How will SCOTUS decision affect corporate media? | Media Matters for America

In 2004, the United Church of Christ produced a television commercial promoting its inclusive approach to organized faith. The ad showed two nightclub-style bouncers guarding the rope line of a church as they denied entry to a gay male couple, several people of color, and a man in a wheelchair. By contrast, a white family of four had no problems getting through.

"Jesus didn't turn people away" was the ad's tagline, but CBS did, turning down the commercial which was intended for broadcast during that year's Super Bowl. The 30-second spot apparently violated the network's policy of "prohibiting advocacy ads, even ones that carry an 'implicit' endorsement for a side in a public debate."

Now, six years later, CBS has agreed to run an ad by the notoriously anti-reproductive rights, anti-gay organization Focus on the Family, featuring college football star and anti-choice crusader Tim Tebow.

The network's blatantly hypocritical decision has sparked intense controversy and brought new light to the shadowy world of corporate media policy governing political or issue-advocacy commercials.

These cable and broadcast outlets seem to make the argument that only certain entities can make certain political arguments against certain figures on certain issues during certain programs. It's difficult to follow -- and perhaps that is the point. Lack of specificity provides ample wiggle room.

...


Monday, January 25, 2010

ei: New York Times fails to disclose Jerusalem bureau chief's conflict of interest

ei: New York Times fails to disclose Jerusalem bureau chief's conflict of interest
Report, The Electronic Intifada, 25 January 2010

The New York Times has all but confirmed to The Electronic Intifada (EI) that the son of its Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner was recently inducted into the Israeli army.

Over the weekend, EI received a tip suggesting this had been the case and wrote to Bronner to ask him to confirm or deny the information and to seek his opinion on whether, if true, he thought it would be a conflict of interest.

Susan Chira, the foreign editor of The New York Times wrote in an email to The Electronic Intifada this morning:

"Ethan Bronner referred your query to me, the foreign editor. Here is my comment: Mr. Bronner's son is a young adult who makes his own decisions. At The Times, we have found Mr. Bronner's coverage to be scrupulously fair and we are confident that will continue to be the case."

The Electronic Intifada also wrote to Clark Hoyt, the public editor of The New York Times, to confirm the information and ask for an opinion on whether this constituted a conflict of interest, but had yet to receive a response.

Bronner, as bureau chief, has primary responsibility for his paper's reporting on all aspects of the Palestine/Israel conflict, and on the Israeli army, whose official name is the "Israel Defense Forces."

On 23 January, Bronner published a lengthy article on Israel's efforts to refute allegations contained in the UN-commissioned Goldstone report of war crimes and crimes against humanity during its attack on Gaza last winter ("Israel Poised to Challenge a UN Report on Gaza").

As'ad AbuKhalil, a frequent critic of Bronner's coverage, blogged in response that "The New York Times devoted more space to Israeli and Zionist criticisms of the Goldstone report than to the [content of the] report itself" (The Angry Arab News Service, "Ethan Bronner's propaganda services, 25 January 2010)

Bronner's pro-Israeli bias reporting on Israel's attack on Gaza last year was also criticized by the media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) (See "NYT and the Perils of Mideast 'Balance'," 4 February 2009).

The New York Times' own "Company policy on Ethics in Journalism" acknowledges that the activities of a journalist's family member may constitute a conflict of interest. It includes as an example, "A brother or a daughter in a high-profile job on Wall Street might produce the appearance of conflict for a business reporter or editor." Such conflicts may on occasion require the staff member "to withdraw from certain coverage." ...

Fox News leaves false report on Haiti uncorrected | Raw Story

Fox News leaves false report on Haiti uncorrected | Raw Story

Fox News is staying silent after bloggers and commentators criticized the news network for a January 13 report on its Web site that stated Cuba was "absent" from global aid efforts in Haiti.

Observers note that the communist country was, in fact, one of the first to arrive after the earthquake that is now estimated to have taken the lives of 200,000 people. That has led some bloggers to accuse Fox of using the devastation in Haiti to propagandize against Cuba. ...

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Haiti: FoxNews lies about Cuba’s role - Democratic Underground

Haiti: FoxNews lies about Cuba’s role - Democratic Underground
Haiti: FoxNews lies about Cuba’s role
Tony Iltis
24 January 2010

A January 13, Rupert Murdoch's US network FoxNews claimed that while the US “was leading international relief effort in Haiti“, Cuba was “conspicuously absent from the roster of helping hands”.

The opposite is the case. At the time the earthquake struck, Cuba already had 344 of them doctors and paramedics working in Haiti. Also, in the past 12 years 450 young Haitians have graduated as doctors from Cuban colleges, free of charge.

From January 13 further teams of Cuban health workers, accompanied by Haitian medical students studying in Cuba, began arriving, with medical supplies.

A January 12 Granma article said that, within a week of the earthquake, “Cuban doctors in the Haitian capital 13,418 consultancies, with 1,078 operations, more than 550 of them considered major surgery. The Cuban doctors have also assisted 38 births.”

Read more: http://www.greenleft.org.au/2010/823/42360

Friday, January 15, 2010

Newsflash: Right is Not Center | CommonDreams.org

Newsflash: Right is Not Center | CommonDreams.org

"War is peace, freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength"-more than a quarter century after those oxymorons were supposed to pervade an Orwellian 1984, today's media make such newspeak even more preposterous: On economic issues, we are often told that right is center, center is left, and left is fringe.

For a year, national reporters (with help from conservative talk-radio goons) have depicted the center-right Obama administration and its corporatist policies as quasi-Marxist. We've heard that a government-run public health care option is a "liberal" cause, even as polls confirm that most Americans-not just liberals-support the idea. We're told that legislators backing no-strings-attached bank bailouts are mainstream "centrists," while bailout opponents are extremists-even as public opinion surveys say the opposite.

This is Washington's "fair and balanced" journalism (or "journalism," as it were) and as two of the most respected metro newspapers show this week, its distortions can bleed into local coverage.

Reporting on independent Bernie Sanders, the Boston Globe headlined its recent profile: "Sanders a growing force on the far, far left-Vermont senator is gathering clout as he takes on the Fed's Ben Bernanke."

Polls, mind you, prove that disdain for the Fed chairman transcends "the left." As a failed regulator and architect of unpopular bailouts, Bernanke is despised by the public at large. Even within the Senate, his renomination faces transpartisan opposition from Republicans like Jim Bunning (KY) and red-state Democrats like Byron Dorgan (ND).

So depicting Sanders' fight against Bernanke as a "far, far left" crusade tilts the definition of the economic "center"-the premium label in politics-to the far, far right. ...

The right-wing media react to Haiti | Media Matters for America

The right-wing media react to Haiti | Media Matters for America
...

But much of the conservative media elite has reacted quite differently.

Fox News Channel's highest-rated shows, for example, all but ignored the disaster, according to a new Media Matters study:

On January 13, Fox News' three top-rated programs for 2009 -- The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity, and Glenn Beck -- devoted a combined total of less than 7 minutes of coverage to the earthquake in Haiti, instead choosing to air such things as Beck's hour-long interview with Sarah Palin, Bill O'Reilly's discussion of Comedy Central host Jon Stewart, and Sean Hannity's advocacy for Massachusetts candidate Scott Brown's Senate campaign.

Fox News never hesitates to boast that its prime-time lineup draws more viewers than its competitors. But that success comes with a responsibility -- a responsibility to bring people important information in times of crisis. Fox fell far short of meeting that responsibility, instead inflicting upon viewers Sarah Palin's fumbling, bumbling attempt to answer a question about which of America's founders she most admires and continuing its attempts to elect Republicans to the Senate.

Not that O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck were alone in dropping the ball. Christian Coalition founder and former Republican presidential candidate Pat Robertson, host of the Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club, had a rather unusual response to the devastation in Haiti:

ROBERTSON: [S]omething happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, "We will serve you if you will get us free from the French." True story. And so, the devil said, "OK, it's a deal."

And they kicked the French out. You know, the Haitians revolted and got themselves free. But ever since, they have been cursed by one thing after the other. ... They need to have and we need to pray for them a great turning to God.

Got that? Haiti was hit by a crushing earthquake because it made a deal with the devil to escape the French.

...

Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh did his best to convince us that he isn't.

First, Limbaugh said President Obama would use the Haitian tragedy to enhance his standing with the "light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country." Then he seemed to dissuade people from contributing to relief efforts, complaining: "[W]e've already donated to Haiti. It's called the U.S. income tax."

As with Robertson, this really isn't anything new for Limbaugh. He has long been contemptuous of U.S. efforts to help Haiti -- particularly when there is a Democrat in the White House.

In 1994, when Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide was expelled by a military coup, Limbaugh opposed and ridiculed U.S. intervention, and claimed the only reason for restoring Aristide was to please the Congressional Black Caucus:

...

If Limbaugh and Robertson are any indication of the way the conservative media think about Haiti, maybe it's for the best that Fox's top-rated shows are ignoring the tragedy. I don't even want to think about the bizarre claims Glenn Beck would come up with. Probably something about the Obama administration faking the earthquake so they could funnel billions of dollars in funds to ACORN, just like Hitler would do.

Fox News inflates Obama bank fee by factor of 100 | Raw Story

Fox News inflates Obama bank fee by factor of 100 | Raw Story

Fox News seems to have trouble with numbers, at least when they have to do with global warming or President Barack Obama.

Today, Fox & Friends falsely claimed that Obama proposed a 15 percent tax on banks in an effort to recoup taxpayer funds shelled out to prop up consumer lending giants Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG.

Trouble is, the actual Obama-backed fee would be assessed at .15 percent -- or 15 basis points -- for covered liabilities. It also wouldn't kick in until bank assets exceeded $50 billion.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Health Insurers Funded Chamber Attack Ads | CommonDreams.org

Health Insurers Funded Chamber Attack Ads | CommonDreams.org
Published on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 by The National Journal Health Insurers Funded Chamber Attack Ads | by Peter H. Stone

Just as dealings with the Obama administration and congressional Democrats soured last summer, six of the nation's biggest health insurers began quietly pumping big money into third-party television ads aimed at killing or significantly modifying the major health reform bills moving through Congress.

That money, between $10 million and $20 million, came from Aetna, Cigna, Humana, Kaiser Foundation Health Plans, UnitedHealth Group and Wellpoint, according to two health care lobbyists familiar with the transactions. The companies are all members of the powerful trade group America's Health Insurance Plans.

The funds were solicited by AHIP and funneled to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to help underwrite tens of millions of dollars of television ads by two business coalitions set up and subsidized by the chamber. Each insurer kicked in at least $1 million and some gave multimillion-dollar donations.

"There's no question that AHIP has quietly solicited monies from their members which were funneled over to the chamber for their ads," said a source. The total donated by the health insurers, according to one estimate, was as much as one-quarter of the chamber's total health care advertising budget.

A spokesman for Kaiser said it contributed funds to AHIP last year for positive ads on health care reform, and that AHIP has told the insurer that none of its monies were sent to the chamber. ...

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

The Fundamental Unreliablity of America's Media | CommonDreams.org

The Fundamental Unreliablity of America's Media | CommonDreams.org

The Fundamental Unreliablity of America's Media

by Glenn Greenwald

Consider the record of the American media over the last two weeks alone. Justin Elliott of TPM documents how an absolute falsehood about the attempted Christmas Day airline bombing -- that Abdulmuttab purchased a "one-way ticket" to the U.S., when it was actually a round-trip ticket -- has been repeated far and wide by U.S. media outlets as fact. Two weeks ago, Elliott similarly documented how an equally false claim from ABC News -- that two of the Al Qaeda leaders behind that airliner attack had been released from Guantanamo -- became entrenched as fact in media reports (at most, it is one of them, not two). This week, Dan Froomkin chronicles how completely discredited claims about Guantanamo recidivism rates continue to be uncritically "reported" by The New York Times and then inserted into our debates as fact.

As I documented two weeks ago, government claims about which "top Al Qeada fighters" were killed by our airstrikes turn out to be untrue far more often then true, yet are always mindlessly featured by our media, ensuring little questioning of those actions; at least two of the three Top Terrorists claimed to have been killed by our airstrikes in Yemen -- and possibly all three -- are quite likely alive. As Greg Sargent writes, one of the most provocative and inflammatory claims of the trashy Halperin/Heilmann gossip book -- that Bill Clinton told Ted Kennedy that Obama would have been "getting us coffee" just a couple years earlier -- is not only completely unsourced (like virtually every one of their sleazy claims), but also "paraphrased."

Aside from falsity, what do all of these deceitful reports have in common? They're all the by-product of granting anonymity to people and then repeating what they claim as fact, protected by their journalist-guaranteed anonymity from any and all accountability for their falsehoods. ...
...

Two other media points:

(1) I've been writing frequently of late about the perception disparities between Americans and the Muslim world due not to their propaganda-based ignorance but to ours. Here's a somewhat old but highly illustrative example: in 1996, then-Secretary-of-State Madeline Albright was asked by 60 Minutes about the fact that American sanctions on Iraq resulted in the deaths of "half million children," to which Albright dismissively replied: "We think the price is worth it." At the time, FAIR documented that while the number of dead Iraqi children -- as well as Albright's quote -- was known far and wide in predominantly Muslim countries, it was almost completely blacked-out in the American press.

(2) Last night, Brian Williams began his NBC News broadcast by expressing extreme and righteous anger over a truly momentous scandal: Mark McGwire's steriod use, telling his audience: "Because this is a family broadcast, we probably can't say what we'd like to about the news today." If Williams has expressed even a small inkling of an objection -- let alone righteous outrage -- over things like torture, lies that led to the Iraq War, chronic surveillance lawbreaking and the like, I'd be quite surprised. ...

Monday, January 11, 2010

Is Israel Controlling Phony Terror News? � Aletho News

Is Israel Controlling Phony Terror News? � Aletho News

By Gordon Duff | Veterans Today | January 5, 2010

Who says Al Qaeda takes credit for a bombing? Rita Katz. Who gets us bin Laden tapes? Rita Katz. Who gets us prettymuch all information telling us Muslims are bad? Rita Katz? Rita Katz is the Director of Site Intelligence, primary source for intelligence used by news services, Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA. What is her qualification? She served in the Israeli Defense Force. She has a college degree and most investigative journalists believe the Mossad “helps” her with her information. We find no evidence of any qualification whatsoever of any kind. A bartender has more intelligence gathering experience.

Nobody verifies her claims. SITE says Al Qaeda did it, it hits the papers. SITE says Israel didn’t do it, that hits the papers too. What does SITE really do? They check the internet for “information,” almost invariably information that Israel wants reported and it is sold as news, seen on American TV, reported in our papers and passed around the internet almost as though it were actually true. Amazing.

Do we know if the information reported comes from a teenager in Seattle or a terror cell in Jakarta? No, of course not, we don’t have a clue. Can you imagine buying information on Islamic terrorism from an Israeli whose father was executed as a spy by Arabs?

...

Can we prove that SITE Intelligence is the Mossad? No. Would a reasonable person assume it is? Yes.

Would a reasonable person believe anything from this source involving Islam or the Middle East? No, they would not.

SITE’s primary claim to fame other than bin Laden videos with odd technical faults is their close relationship with Blackwater. Blackwater has found SITE useful. Blackwater no longer exists as they had to change their name because of utter lack of credibility.

What can be learned by examining where our news comes from? Perhaps we could start being realistic and begin seeing much of our own news as the childish propaganda it really is.

Propaganda does two things:

1. It makes up phony reasons to justify acts of barbaric cruelty or insane greed.

2. It blames people for things they didn’t do because the people doing the blaming really did it themselves. We call these things “false flag/USS Liberty” incidents.

...

Yet these two individuals manage to do what the ENTIRE combined assets of the world’s Western intelligence can’t:

Be the first to obtain fresh video and audio tapes from aL-Qaeda with Bin Laden making threats and issuing various other comments. If OBL appears a bit “stiff” in the latest release, that’s because he is real stiff, as in dead.

How is it that a Jewish owned group like S.I.T.E. can outperform the world’s best and brightest in the intelligence field and be the first to know that a group like al-Qaeda is getting ready to release another tape?

How is it possible that Rita Katz and S.I.T.E. can work this magic? Maybe looking at Katz’s background will help:

Rita Katz is Director and co-founder of the SITE Institute. Born in Iraq, her father was tried and executed as an Israeli spy, whereupon her family moved to Israel [the move has been described as both an escape and an emigration in different sources]. She received a degree from the Middle Eastern Studies program at Tel Aviv University, and is fluent in Hebrew and Arabic. She emigrated to the US in 1997.

Katz was called as a witness in the trial, but the government didn’t claim she was a terrorism expert. During the trial it was discovered that Katz herself had worked in violation of her visa agreement when she first arrived in America in 1997.

She also admitted to receiving more than $130,000 for her work as an FBI consultant on the case.

seafan's Journal - Just a profound sense of loss and betrayal.

seafan's Journal - Just a profound sense of loss and betrayal.

Since the turn of the new year, I've reached some kind of threshold in the way I view what is happening to us. I really cannot adequately articulate it yet, because it is a change so overwhelming in scope.

In the insufferable day-to-day rancor over Tiger Woods, Rush's satisfaction with his health care or the absolute standstill of Congress and the deliberate, cynical failure of our elected officials to mind the business of the people, we are finding ourselves careening toward a concrete wall with no control over the wheel.

With headlines bringing news like this over the weekend:
There has been zero net job creation since December 1999. No previous decade going back to the 1940s had job growth of less than 20 percent. Economic output rose at its slowest rate of any decade since the 1930s as well. ----Washington Post, January 2, 2010

.....

About six million Americans receiving food stamps report they have no other income...

One in eight Americans now receives food stamps, including one in four children.

Here in Florida, the number of people with no income beyond food stamps has doubled in two years and has more than tripled along once-thriving parts of the southwest coast. ----
NY Times, January 2, 2010

It is profoundly difficult to pick yet another battle to fight.

Then I read Bob Herbert's column in the NY Times today, and it perfectly describes what I am feeling-- a penetrating forlorn and a deep sense of loss.

Bob Herbert in the NYT:
January 5, 2010

I’m starting the new year with the sinking feeling that important opportunities are slipping from the nation’s grasp. Our collective consciousness tends to obsess indiscriminately over one or two issues — the would-be bomber on the flight into Detroit, the Tiger Woods saga — while enormous problems that should be engaged get short shrift.
Staggering numbers of Americans are still unemployed and nearly a quarter of all homeowners owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. Forget the false hope of modestly improving monthly job numbers. The real story right now is the entrenched suffering (with no end in sight) that has been inflicted on scores of millions of working Americans by the Great Recession and the misguided economic policies that preceded it.

.....

This is a society in deep, deep trouble and the fixes currently in the works are in no way adequate to the enormous challenges we’re facing. For example, an end to the mantra of monthly job losses would undoubtedly be welcomed. But even if the economy manages to create a few hundred thousand new jobs a month, it would do little to haul us from the unemployment pit dug for us by the Great Recession. We need to create more than 10 million new jobs just to get us back to where we were when the recession began in December 2007.

.....

The fault lies everywhere. The president, the Congress, the news media and the public are all to blame. Shared sacrifice is not part of anyone’s program. Politicians can’t seem to tell the difference between wasteful spending and investments in a more sustainable future. Any talk of raising taxes is considered blasphemous, but there is a constant din of empty yapping about controlling budget deficits.

Oh, yes, and we’re fighting two wars.

If America can’t change, then the current state of decline is bound to continue. You can’t have a healthy economy with so many millions of people out of work, and there is no plan now that would result in the creation of millions of new jobs any time soon.

Voters were primed at the beginning of the Obama administration for fundamental changes that would have altered the trajectory of American life for the better. Politicians of all stripes, many of them catering to the nation’s moneyed interests, fouled that up to a fare-thee-well.
Now we’re escalating in Afghanistan, falling back into panic mode over an attempted act of terror and squandering a golden opportunity to build a better society.

Just a profound and crippling sense of loss.

And besieged with leaders who lack moral courage, we are on a collision course with tragic social upheaval. ...

Geithner's New York Fed Pushed AIG To Keep Sweetheart Deals Secret (READ THE AIG EMAILS)

Geithner's New York Fed Pushed AIG To Keep Sweetheart Deals Secret (READ THE AIG EMAILS): "

UPDATE: This post was updated at 2:15 p.m. to reflect new information obtained by the Huffington Post regarding an ongoing investigation into these matters.


An arm of the Federal Reserve, then led by now-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, told bailed-out insurance giant AIG to withhold key details from the public about overpayments that put billions of extra tax dollars in the coffers of major Wall Street firms, most notably Goldman Sachs.

The sordid tale unfolds in a series of e-mails between the company and the New York Fed obtained by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and first publicly disclosed by Bloomberg News.

The matter is the subject of an "ongoing review" by the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), communications director Kristine Belisle said in an e-mail to the Huffington Post. SIGTARP is headed by Neil M. Barofsky, a former federal prosecutor.

...

A brutal report issued in November by a government watchdog disclosed that AIG had actually been trying to negotiate better terms with the banks until - guess what? -- the New York Fed stepped in. The report held Geithner personally responsible, and led to renewed questions about his fitness for the job."

Sunday, January 10, 2010

NYT's David Leonhardt Keeps Clinging to Disproved Ideas | OurFuture.org

NYT's David Leonhardt Keeps Clinging to Disproved Ideas | OurFuture.org

The beat goes on: David Leonhardt, the Times economics blogger and tax supporter, had this exchange regarding the Senate's health excise tax on NPR's "Marketplace" program:

Leonhardt: (It's) a tax on the costliest health-insurance plan. It's an idea health economists really like.

Host: These are the Cadillac plans, right?

Leonhardt: Yeah, these are the so-called Cadillac plans. And these are plans that tend to have very low co-payments, and as a result people often get a lot of care that it seems doesn't actually improve health.

What's wrong here? First, Leonhardt says that this is "an idea health economists really like," despite the objections of the nation's leading health economist, Uwe Reinhardt (who called an underlying assumption behind the plan "nonsense.") Reinhardt's objections were echoed in a press conference yesterday by Robert Reich, and by Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute.

He could say that it's an idea some economists like. That would be accurate. It would not, however, have the same impact on NPR's listeners.

"These are plans that tend to have very low co-payments," Leonhardt added. That comment ignores contradictory findings published in the prestigious journal Health Affairs (and summarized here), which showed that benefit features like co-payments had very little effect on whether a plan would be hit by the tax.

"(A)s a result," Leonhardt goes on, "people often get a lot of care that it seems doesn't actually improve health." That last remark is based on research that has been severly questioned by other health economists (a topic I've discussed elsewhere.)

Some ideas refuse to die, even when confronted with the facts.

Monday, January 04, 2010

Washington's Blog

Washington's Blog

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 22, 2009

The Real Reason Newspapers Are Losing Money, And Why Bailing Out Failing Newspapers Would Create Moral Hazard in the Media

Conventional wisdom is that the Internet is responsible for destroying the profits of traditional print media like newspapers.

But Michael Moore and Sean Paul Kelley are blaming the demise of newspapers on simple greed.

...

You can provide a public service with small profits for a long, long time, but if you demand large ones you will destroy it. Just ask the big banks.

Moral Hazard for Newspapers

There has been talk of bailing out newspapers for months.

But the newspapers have largely driven themselves into the ground with their never-ending drive for higher profits, which led to a reduction in news bureaus, investigation and real reporting, and an increase in reliance on government and corporate press releases.

The newspapers made a speculative gamble that reducing real reporting and replacing it with puff pieces would increase its profits, just as the giant banks made speculative gambles on subprime mortgages, derivatives, and other junk, and largely abandoned the boring, traditional business of depository banking.

Bailing out these newspapers would be a form of moral hazard equivalent to bailing out the giant banks. Instead, we should let the bad gamblers lose, and make room for companies that will actually serve a public need.

The banking industry has become more and more consolidated, which hasdecreased financial stability.

Likewise, Dan Rather points out that “roughly 80 percent” of the media is controlled by no more than six, and possibly as few as four, corporations. As I wrote in July:

This fact has been documented for years, as shown by the following must-see charts prepared by:

***

This image gives a sense of the decline in diversity in media ownership over the last couple of decades:

If traditional newspaper companies are bailed out, they will be encouraged to continue their business-as-usual, and new, fresh media voices will face a handicap to competition (just as the small banks are now unable to compete fairly against the too big to fails).

We need more real reporting in this country, not less. Bailing out the traditional media will create more consolidation, just as it has in the banking industry.

...

The popularity of some reliable internet news sources are growing by leaps and bounds. For example, web news sources which run hard-hitting investigative news stories on the economy - and do not simply defer to Bernanke, Geithner, Summers and other people "of the establishment persuasion" - are gaining more and more readers.


It is not because it is some new, flashy media. It's because people want to know what is going on ... and some of the best reporting can now be found on the web. ...

Progressive Breakfast: W. Post Scraps Objectivity, Backs Austerity Agenda | OurFuture.org

Progressive Breakfast: W. Post Scraps Objectivity, Backs Austerity Agenda | OurFuture.org

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day.

W. Post Hammered For Partnership With Austerity Ideologue Pete Peterson

OurFuture.org's Roger Hickey sounds alarm at Fiscal Times-W. Post arrangement to advance austerity agenda: "...The Washington Post published an article, presented as a news story, which could be a signal of the death of the Post as an independent and objective news source. The piece, entitled 'Support grows for tackling nation's debt,' appeared to be one of those background news pieces common in newspapers like the Post. But article was written not by the newspaper’s reporters – and not by an objective wire service, like the Associated Press – but by a new organization called The Fiscal Times, whose founder and major backer [is] Peter G. Peterson ... Nowhere in the 'story' would the reader find reference to the fact that it is now official government policy to increase the federal deficit in order to stimulate growth and economic recovery from the worst recession since the great depression. The whole piece seems designed to give prominence to the legislation, advanced by Sens. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and Judd Gregg, R-N.H., that would create a commission to come up with a plan for slashing deficits which would be voted on – without amendments and with limited debate – by both houses of Congress. No mention is made of the fact that Pete Peterson recently testified in favor of such a commission before Conrad’s Senate Budget Committee."

Politico flags the controversy: "Critics are calling on The Washington Post to stop printing news articles from The Fiscal Times ... In a letter to The Post’s ombudsman, 14 academic and public-policy experts on Social Security said the newspaper should 'rescind the partnership, reserve opinion pieces for the op-ed page, and not allow itself to be a propaganda arm for ideologues who use fiscal distress as a stalking horse to destroy social insurance.'"

Huffington Post's Susie Madrak shreds the Post: "... if the healthcare battle hasn't opened your eyes to the fact that immensely wealthy and powerful corporate interests are perverting our democracy, you're not paying attention. Why else do you suppose the Washington Post turned over a chunk of their news section the other day to a Peterson propaganda supplement - as news content?"

FireDogLake's David Dayen notes the larger battle against the Peterson agenda: "The letter is part of a larger effort to rebut the Peterson Foundation’s money and influence with pushback from multiple angles. As the letter notes, over 40 organizations, including the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Common Cause, NAACP, National Organization for Women and SEIU, have objected to the deficit commission which the Fiscal Times article and Peterson’s organizations in general have promoted."

Media Matters offers a backgrounder on Peterson

Saturday, January 02, 2010

Prostitution "journalism": Yup, mainstream media is intentional propaganda. Accept the evidence

Prostitution "journalism": Yup, mainstream media is intentional propaganda. Accept the evidence

Please click and read the outstanding work of Stephen Lendman in Paid lying – what passes for major media journalism. Stephen documents major areas of propaganda. I also recommend the work of PuppetGov to artistically represent the fact of Americans being played by political “leadership” and their media whores. An example of their video work is below in powerful beauty (warning: some strong language).

In my work, to just consider one area of easily-demonstrated intentional lies of omission and commission, propaganda: I’ve previously documented the two principle fears some Americans espouse with Iran and threaten war to prove beyond doubt they are without basis in fact:
* Iran’s nuclear energy program is in compliance with international treaty, fully inspected with all evidence showing energy-use only, and all US intelligence agencies in agreement of zero evident threat of nuclear weapon production. The US is out of compliance by refusing to help Iran achieve nuclear energy and accept inspections to ensure safety.
* Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s statements toward Israel have been contrived by US political “leaders” from both parties and the corporate media as a threat when the text and context of the speech clearly and verifiably show only interest in an Israeli government that respects the rights of Palestinians. This means Americans are being lied to from their political leadership and media, just as we were lied to about Iraq. Please let that sink in.
Please verify these two facts to your satisfaction. I’ve also documented that the US overthrew Iran’s democracy from 1953 until 1979; denied by the US government until 2000, but now conservative and unchallenged history. The US aided Iraq’s invasion of Iran from 1980 to 1988, supplying chemical and biological weapons to kill Iranians defending their nation, and US military attacked and destroyed Iranian oil platforms and a commercial airliner. I've also written the facts in a story as if the US were in Iran's position.
This is in addition that we now know from US Senate and House disclosed evidence that all claims to invade Iraq were known to be false at the time they were told. Another gem to consider is the Department of Defense acknowledges they routinely "lose" 25% of their budget. No, you say? Watch this CBS 3-minute report to verify.
Because “mainstream media” doesn’t scream these facts and reveal the US illegal Wars of Aggression, they are criminally complicit in covering-up crimes. They are propagandists of an oligarchic dictatorship; literally dictating what they want us to believe. This evidence verifies for all with intellectual integrity and moral courage that the US has been subject to Orwellian lies from a controlled corporate media.
...
You're being played. Let that sink in. You are being treated as a dumb animal by both political party leaderships and the corporate media. You are being used for something, some agenda other than what they say.
Your political leaders and the corporate media are lying sacks of spin.
And this will continue to your children and on into the future unless we have a breakthrough in public recognition of propaganda and demand for truth. I advocate Truth and Reconciliation or prosecution.
As I previously wrote with documented manipulation of information:
Information Operations Roadmap is a program approved by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld in 2003, and surprisingly released to George Washington University’s National Security Archive in a Freedom of Information Act request.[13] Wikipedia acknowledges its existence, but fails to inform of its content for government influence of American public opinion for support of US military operations. The existence of this document confirms governmental planning to replace fact with spin for the American public’s consumption.[14] ...