Richard Falk Continues His Truther Nuttiness
We have discussed this anti-Israeli UN representative before, but he continues his nuttiness:
The arguments swirling around the 9/11 attacks are emblematic of these issues [around the rush to judgment in Tucson]. What fuels suspicions of conspiracy is the reluctance to address the sort of awkward gaps and contradictions in the official explanations that David Ray Griffin (and other devoted scholars of high integrity) have been documenting in book after book ever since his authoritative The New Pearl Harbor in 2004 (updated in 2008). What may be more distressing than the apparent cover up is the eerie silence of the mainstream media, unwilling to acknowledge the well-evidenced doubts about the official version of the events: an al Qaeda operation with no foreknowledge by government officials. Is this silence a manifestation of fear or cooperation, or part of an equally disturbing filter of self-censorship? Whatever it is, the result is the withering away of a participatory citizenry and the erosion of legitimate constitutional government. The forms persist, but the content is missing.
UN Ambassador Susan Rice responds:
Mr. Falk’s comments are despicable and deeply offensive, and I condemn them in the strongest terms. I have registered a strong protest with the UN on behalf of the United States. The United States has in the past been critical of Mr. Falk’s one-sided and politicized approach to his work for the UN, including his failure to condemn deliberate human rights abuses by Hamas, but these blog comments are in another category altogether.
posted by James B. @ 8:01 PM
93 comments
93 Comments:
What may be more distressing than the apparent cover up is the eerie silence of the mainstream media, unwilling to acknowledge the well-evidenced doubts about the official version of the events
Yes, Richard, the mainstream media has been silent about this for the most part, just as they've been unwilling to report on my findings that Kim Kardashian controls the CIA through a mind-scrambling device transmitting from the top of Mt. Everest.
It's a cover-up!
What fuels suspicions of conspiracy is the reluctance to address the sort of awkward gaps and contradictions in the official explanations that David Ray Griffin
David Ray Griffin's explainations are "official"?
Yeah right, & it's official that Brian Good is a sex stalking egomanic!
Umm, that would be "US Ambassador the UN", not "UN Ambassador".
I abbreviated it. I figured most readers would figure it out.
The arguments swirling around the 9/11 attacks are emblematic of these issues [around the rush to judgement in Tucson].
He wishes.
All he's trying to do is inject 9-11 Truth into the big debate about the Tucson shooting. Jim Fetzer tries much the same thing here: http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/01/911-truth-is-no-parlor-game.html
9-11 Truth has been surprisingly absent from the discussion about Jared Loughner. It wasn't a major part of his worldview, and it didn't come up in the nationwide search for scapegoats that followed the shooting.
You get the feeling Falk and Fetzer WANT 9-11 Truth to be associated with Loughner, just so the world will know 9-11 Truth still exists.
Let's talk about that "eerie silence" of the mainstream media for a second because it is another fallacy of all conspircy kooks and specifically the troofers.
If 9/11 was an inside job with all of the bells and whistles that tyhe troofers have thrown in then it would be the story of the century. The reporter and news entity that broke it in a provable way could write their own ticket and name their own price for the rest of their lives.
Look at Woodward and Bernstien. Their work on exposing the Watergate Break-in and Cover-Up is a landmark in investgative journalism. Bob Woodward especially has been able to waltz thrpugh doors that regular journalists need to beg to be allowed a peek behind. Everything he has written has shot to the top ten of the NYTimes best sellar list since 1976.
What reporter wouldn't wish to have Woodward's perks?
The media has many problems these days but the news is still populated with professionals who would dig into the 9/11 conspiracy were there actually a 9/11 conspiracy. They're not remaining silent, there's just no big story there. They looked. Why wouldn't they look?
They found nothing.
M. Greg, the problem is that enterprising journalists have to go through their editors. And since the primary purpose of mainstream news seems to be facilitating consumer confidence, the editors know better than to publish disturbing stuff.
ROTFLMAO Yeah, that is why you never read anything in the newspapers about drugs, crime, poverty, war or anything disturbing.
Oh wait, you are serious.
Ah look! The failed janitor and deranged pud huffer is an expert on "the primary purpose of mainstream news."
You couldn't find your ass with a hunting dog and a compass, goat molester.
M. Greg, the problem is that enterprising journalists have to go through their editors.
Replace every instance "reporter" with "editor" in M. Gregory's post, and it still rings true.
ROTFLMAO Yeah, that is why you never read anything in the newspapers about drugs, crime, poverty, war or anything disturbing.
Not to mention shark attacks and kidnappings and other ridiculously over-blown scare stories the media cooks up every so often.
Crime has plummeted pretty much everywhere across the US over the last 20 years. Cities like New York and Los Angeles are seeing murder rates drop to historic lows....and yet people still think crime is worse than ever. That wouldn't happen to have anything to do with the local news leading every broadcast with a shooting, would it?
But Brian, our resident expert in everything, obviously knows what he's talking about.
Yes James B, I am serious. Drugs, crime, poverty, and war are not disturbing. They are only business as usual, and they happen to other people--not to those in the high-end consumer demographic the media wish to influence. Shark attacks and kidnappings are business as usual too, no threat to anyone's world view.
If you're not aware of what Dan Rather said about the fear of being "necklaced" and what Amanpour said about self-censorship, then you don't know beans about the media.
The myth of the attack-dog liberal media is easily demolished. It's lap-dog corporate media, so intent on cutting costs that when the government offered them pre-produced stories complete with footage, they ran them as if they were actual journalism.
That is just idiotic. Even by your standards.
Drugs, crime, poverty, and war are not disturbing.
Hey, if our resident liar and failed janitor says it's true, it must be.
I'll grant you that poverty doesn't get the attention it deserves, but drugs, war, crime? People in this country wet their pants over each of these far more than we should, and we've got overwrought "wars" on each that aren't working and are costing us billions because no politician is willing to say that Americans should stop being such cowards.
They are only business as usual, and they happen to other people--not to those in the high-end consumer demographic the media wish to influence.
What the hell are you talking about? It's precisely this demographic that is overly worked up over these overblown "threats" that the media feeds them.
The myth of the attack-dog liberal media is easily demolished. It's lap-dog corporate media, so intent on cutting costs that when the government offered them pre-produced stories complete with footage, they ran them as if they were actual journalism.
Again, what the hell are you talking about? In the day and age of the internet, twitter, wikileaks, etc. you're telling me that everything is covered up? Yeah, I'm sure the Bush administration was thrilled that the world found out there were no WMDs in Iraq. I'm sure the government of Egypt isn't trying to suppress images and stories from the protests there. I'm sure the US government just loves wikileaks.
As James B. says, this is idiotic even by your abysmal standards.
No Brian you're wrong. Your statement illustrates that line when beliefs are no longer based on facts and instead are fueled by mental illness.
Just because the news doesn't report things the way that you think that they should doesn't mean that they don't report the news. I have a huge problem with the way that NBC, CBS, ABC, NPR, CNN, Reuters, AP, the BBC, and the rest have blurred the line between entertainment and the news. That doesn't mean that the news is not reported, it just means that I need to read three or four different sources to get a clear picture of the event. The best recent example was the Moscow Airport bombing and the way that it was under reported by the big three. I felt that it should have been a bigger story - BUT THAT IS JUST ME. In the end the story made it on air so my ultimate complaint is with the substance and emphasis.
News editors at every level share a sense of duty. So if a story came along that tied a President, the government, and other Americans to the attacks of 9/11 they would run with it. Just as long as there were facts to support the story.
And that's your problem, ain't it?
You have ZERO facts. Inuendo, allegations,and coincidence are not the same thing as solid evidence.
For your twisted world-view to be true then all of those journalists and reporters in NYC don't know eachother, never attended awards ceremonies together, never worked with mutual friends, never bump into eachother while covering the same story, worked their entire career at the same news company with never jumping to a rival, and just live out their entire professional career in a vaccuum.
Guess what?
The reality is that most NYC-based journalists, reporters, and editors know eachother socially. Some are even great friends. 9/11 was the biggest story in NYC since the end of the American Revolution. So the idea that they wouldn't jump on "the Real Story of 9/11" is Jared Laughner-insane. Even if the NY Times editor was ordered by some dark cabal not to run a 9/11 conspiracy story he could give it to the NY Post, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS , or any of the other NYC-based news agencies. It has been done before. Even if it was killed then the fact that the story was killed becomes it's own story. Example: The 60 Minutes Phillip Morris story. Another example: The Discovery Channel dropping the Kennedy mini series at the behest of the Kennedy family.
Are you beginning to see a pattern here ( a real pattern)?
Seek help, Brian, before you end up hurting someone.
Not to mention is you don't like the news from US media you can get it from the BBC, CBC, or Al Jazeera etc. Note all of them see truthers as the nuts they’re.
Your problem Brian is you don't have the mental sharpness the rest of us have. So you are the sucker type.
MGF, thank you for a most revealing essay.
So in your mind, editors "share a sense of duty" and if there was anything there, somebody would have reported it--and anyone who disputes this is insane.
Never mind what Dan Rather said about the fear of being necklaced, never mind about Amanpour's statement about self-censorship. Never mind Dana Priest saying that you can't just write a story out of the blue, without some action by Congress, there's nothing to tie it to and you can't run it. Never mind that the media can not afford to pay for investigative journalism any more.
Before the election of 2004, both Popular Science and Popular Mechanics ran cover stories about the dangers of electronic voting machines. After the election, the only stories about them were hit pieces on voting integrity activists.
A judge in Spain began an investigation of six Bush Administration figures for war crimes. No coverage in the US media. Wikileaks revealed that the Obama administration acted to quash that investigation. No coverage in the US media.
Scott Horton writes in Harpers that three Gitmo inmates were murdered. No coverage in the US.
Condi Rice lies under oath to the 9/11 Commission. No coverage.
Project Censored has for decades been cataloging the legitimate stories the US media refuse to touch.
And you think the editors have a sense of duty? You live in a dream world like Ian, where there are no widows.
If anyone has any doubts that Brian drinks his own cleaning solvents, read this thread.
The above post may be Brian's finest hour: all the bitterness, paranoia, insanity, and ignorance of a burned-out far left relic from the 1960s are out in full force. It's hard to know which item is the most hilarious, but I'll mention this one:
Scott Horton writes in Harpers that three Gitmo inmates were murdered. No coverage in the US.
Apparently, Harpers doesn't count as media, just as Dr. Harris doesn't count as an independent engineer.
Replace Brian obsession with 9/11 Truth with the equally loony We Didn't Land on the Moon. and it all sounds the same.
You will note the REAL new ignores the ravings of fake moon kooks and chemtrail morons same as the inside job pin heads. Why? because it is not news.... As much as the particular loony might think it is, it is not.
You live in a dream world like Ian, where there are no widows.
When did I ever say there are no widows? My grandmother is a widow, for one.
Brian's probably wondering why the Media won't cover the Truth Movement's allegations of a "cover-up & conspiracy".
Because, the Media doesn't care, however it seems that Comedy Central & John Stewart does. Since Truthers make themselves out to be idiots.
Brian... please stop talking.
You obviously know nothing about the subject except your own prejudices, and what you can dig up in ten seconds of Googling.
Drop the subject.
NOW.
Ian, you have said there are no widows. There was no coverage of the Gitmo murders outside of Harper's (circulation 220,000)--even though Horton published the article on the internet two months before Harper's did, to give other media an opportunity to scoop Harper's.
When Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's chief of staff, told a Senate committee that 100 detainees had died in US custody and it appeared that 30 of these were homicides, the US media ignored the story. There were stories about the events of the day in that very hearing, but Wilkerson's testimony was ignored.
What does that say about the notion of a "sense of duty" that would lead the media to "run with" a big story?
TR, it's obvious that I do know quite a bit on the subject. I have attended many conferences and panel discussions on the problems in the US media, most recently a two-day conference last spring at the Stanford Law School called "The Future of Journalism".
I have attended many conferences and panel discussions on the problems in the US media, most recently a two-day conference
And I have a four year degree and several years working in the profession, asshole. And it's obvious to me that even if you did attend any seminars, you didn't pay any fucking attention.
TR, if you were any kind of journalist at all you would understand that the claimed credentials of an anonymous internet poster are meaningless.
What were you, a fashion reporter?
you would understand that the claimed credentials of an anonymous internet poster are meaningless.
Yeah, we get it, it's you Brian!
TR, if you were any kind of journalist at all you would understand that the claimed credentials of an anonymous internet poster are meaningless.
If this were a front-page article in the New York Times, yes. But since this is just another pissing match on an Internet blog, no. If you had so much as a high school diploma, you'd understand the difference.
Ian, you have said there are no widows.
False.
There was no coverage of the Gitmo murders outside of Harper's (circulation 220,000)
And an Associated Press article, but hey, you're Brian Good! You know everything!
When Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's chief of staff, told a Senate committee that 100 detainees had died in US custody and it appeared that 30 of these were homicides, the US media ignored the story. There were stories about the events of the day in that very hearing, but Wilkerson's testimony was ignored.
How did you find out about it, Brian?
TR, it's obvious that I do know quite a bit on the subject. I have attended many conferences and panel discussions on the problems in the US media, most recently a two-day conference last spring at the Stanford Law School called "The Future of Journalism".
You know nothing of the subject, Brian, which is no different than any other subject you babble about. The sooner you admit to yourself that you're nothing but a liar and failed janitor, the sooner you can get help for your problems.
Ian, frequently stories are out out by the wire services that the news media declines to publish. or maybe only a couple of small papers in Utah publish them. If you knew about the chill in Big Media, you would know this.
How did I find out about Wilkerson? From FireDogLake. I checked for confirmation in MSM and found they hadn't covered it. Later I found the transcript of the hearing and confirmed that he had said what FDL reported.
Ian, frequently stories are out out by the wire services that the news media declines to publish. or maybe only a couple of small papers in Utah publish them. If you knew about the chill in Big Media, you would know this.
Who gives a fuck about "big media"?
How did I find out about Wilkerson? From FireDogLake.
So through a media channel, huh? You mean you were able to find out about it even though FOX News didn't talk about it? How about that!
Boy, isn't it good to live in an era where we don't have to rely on big media to get our news? I'm sure glad there are so many different channels through which one can get the news.
BTW, I read the Harpers story because it was noted by a blogger I read, Andrew Sullivan.
I checked for confirmation in MSM and found they hadn't covered it.
So if they're not covering the issues that are important to you, don't read/watch/listen. I don't watch FOX News or any cable news for that matter. It's all rubbish.
Later I found the transcript of the hearing and confirmed that he had said what FDL reported.
Great.
You know what else is a good blog? Screw Loose Change. The MSM just doesn't report on how much the 9/11 Truth movement is a bunch of liars, frauds, and lunatics, so it's good to know 2 guys are out there making sure we stay informed about this crackpot conspiracy cult.
You're only supporting my point. Big media aren't covering the news.
FireDogLake is a left-wing blog, not mainstream media.
Ian, frequently stories are out out by the wire services that the news media declines to publish.
Brian, frequently items are stocked by grocery stores that the customers decline to buy. Must be a global conspiracy of consumers! Now we know why Crystal Pepsi failed!
The point, since I'm sure you missed it, is that wire services put out far more stories than any news outfit could ever run. So "declining to publish" a story says nothing.
If you knew about the chill in Big Media, you would know this.
You just made that phrase up.
You're only supporting my point. Big media aren't covering the news.
Who. Gives. A. Fuck. Nobody is making you watch CNN or FOX. You have plenty of alternative outlets in which you can find the news, such as blogs. I mean, you found out what you wanted to find on FireDogLake, right?
I get my news from the New York Times website and a subscription to BusinessWeek, but I also read blogs: Andrew Sullivan, Daily Kos, Calculated Risk (an excellent economics blog).
Hell, even my sports fandom is better served by the internet. The SB Nation family of blogs is a lot better than ESPN.
Also, Brian, how many articles about magic spray-on thermite have appeared at FireDogLake? Perhaps the reason 9/11 Truth isn't being covered has less to do with the media suppressing it and more to do with the fact that it's nonsense?
"Ian, frequently stories are out out by the wire services that the news media declines to publish. or maybe only a couple of small papers in Utah publish them. If you knew about the chill in Big Media, you would know this."
The fact that the news is even on a wire service means that you're for of shit.
Wire services feature NEWS from reporters and journalists. It is available to anyone on the internet, and news papers and network news agencies feature the stories that they feel rank highest. Most news agencies have an editorial staff, a bunch of editors from each department sit around a table and make their case for their story. Keep in mind that it has always been about space. In a newspaper it's page-space, and on TV/Radio it's air-time.
It isn't one person it's a group of people in most cases.
Just because you think that a story should have had more exposure is your problem, the fact that you read about it in Harper's means that you FUCKING READ IT IN THE MANISTREAM MEDIA.
Look, after the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989 I learned that the News can fuck up a simple story for a variety of reasons. Most of them stem from what the editors in New York want to see. So the news made the earthquake look worse than it was while at the same time ingnoring the suffering of thousands of people in the community of Pajaro, CA.
That takes talent.
Yet they did tell the Pajaro story, it just wasn't above the fold, and you had to hunt for it in the back pages. This was even true for the SF papers.
Stories aren't suppressed, it's just that most people don't care. In the case of the 9/11 troof it's a case of bullshit lacking wings.
TR, your analogy proves my point. If the editors universally refuse to buy the story, it shows that they are universally afraid of it.
Ian, "nobody cares" is your answer to everything. There's nothing magic about thermite. It's a very practical and useful chemical reaction.
MGF, I don't know anyone who goes direct to the wire services for news.
So first you argue that editors "share a sense of duty" so no major story goes unreported, and then you argue that major stories go unreported because there isn't space for them.
You clowns really sound like people trying to explain how the moon was made of green cheese.
The Harpers story is a big one--three witnesses to murder at Gitmo (war crimes) are ignored by the Obama administration, which has a fourth suspicious death to cover up. But none of the other news media pick it up. So much for your "sense of duty", schmuck.
Stories are suppressed. Project Censored has been documenting this for decades. Take a look, they have a website.
TR, your analogy proves my point. If the editors universally refuse to buy the story, it shows that they are universally afraid of it.
Brian, that's not even wrong.
Stories are suppressed. Project Censored has been documenting this for decades. Take a look, they have a website.
Project Censored is a stupid joke, and I explained why the last time you brought it up. Their stories are either poorly sourced, or thinly veiled editorials, or shit nobody cares about, or all three.
Nobody cares about East Timor or about PNAC's agenda to rule the world. Thanks for proving my point. You're no journalist.
You didn't answer my question. Did you cover the fashion beat?
TR, your analogy proves my point. If the editors universally refuse to buy the story, it shows that they are universally afraid of it.
Uh, no. They may just think the story is uninteresting or unimportant. Have you ever considered that possibility, petgoat?
There's nothing magic about thermite. It's a very practical and useful chemical reaction.
Right, it's not magic. That's why it obviously wasn't used to bring down the WTC. Maybe you should stop babbling about it as if it were magic?
So first you argue that editors "share a sense of duty" so no major story goes unreported, and then you argue that major stories go unreported because there isn't space for them.
Define "major story", petgoat.
You clowns really sound like people trying to explain how the moon was made of green cheese.
You're squealing again, petgoat.
So basically, Brian wants the major news media to report on what HE thinks is important. Sorry, Brian, but nobody thinks 9/11 truth nonsense is important...except maybe Jesse Ventura.
Nobody cares about East Timor or about PNAC's agenda to rule the world.
Um, pretty much. I'm sure most people have never even heard of East Timor. Also, what about East Timor is newsworthy right now? Is there a volcano erupting we should know about?
Also, if PNAC's agenda to rule the world is not newsworthy, that's because the "agenda to rule the world" is a figment of the imagination of a deranged liar failed janitor sex stalker named Brian "petgoat" Good.
Thanks for proving my point. You're no journalist.
You have no point. Also, failed janitors who are glue-sniffing liars and sex stalkers aren't qualified to judge who is or isn't a journalist. Try to leave that stuff to normal people, OK?
Nobody cares about East Timor or about PNAC's agenda to rule the world.
That's right, Brian, they don't. I know you were trying to be sarcastic, but you suck at that just like you suck at everything else in life.
Until the situation in East Timor involves al-Qaeda cells, or nuclear weapons, or a missing American white girl, or some wicked film footage, or becomes thus year's trendy atrocity, or your newspaper services an East Timorese community, it's not going to get media attention in the United States. Most people understand why.
As for PNAC, I can hardly think of a better example of "poorly sourced thinly veiled editorial". So thanks for that.
BTW, I how this thread is Brian finally letting loose with all his paranoid far-left delusions. It's not just 9/11 truth (it never is) but a whole array of issues befitting a loser burnout who still hasn't figured out that it isn't 1968 anymore.
And just to mention something that is newsworthy (unlike East Timor), I'm getting pretty much all my news about the mass protests in Egypt from al-Jazeera and blogs like "Little Green Footballs".
TR: Poorly sourced? How can the PNAC's own "Statement of Principles" be considered a poor source? More proof you're no journalist.
How can the PNAC's own "Statement of Principles" be considered a poor source?
When you're making up shit it doesn't say.
Brian want's to be like his friend Willie Rodriguez.
TR: Poorly sourced? How can the PNAC's own "Statement of Principles" be considered a poor source? More proof you're no journalist.
Their statement of principles says they want to rule the world? Gee, Brian, that's even dumber than your claim that the NIST report says the towers collapsed essentially in free-fall.
TR, nobody's making up stuff it doesn't say. It says that the USA is the sole remaining superpower, and that we should seize the opportunity to beef up our military and increase our influence and cause more trouble for our enemies. That is clearly a blueprint for global domination.
TR, nobody's making up stuff it doesn't say. It says that the USA is the sole remaining superpower, and that we should seize the opportunity to beef up our military and increase our influence and cause more trouble for our enemies. That is clearly a blueprint for global domination.
False.
Anyway, we don't seem to be doing so hot in the global domination department. We've fucked up 2 wars in the last 10 years, and China, Brazil, India, and others are becoming more and more influential globally.
But I'm sure you still hide under your bed, scared of the PNAC monster in the closet, and hoping Willie Rodriguez will come rescue you in his strong arms.
It says that the USA is the sole remaining superpower, and that we should seize the opportunity to beef up our military and increase our influence and cause more trouble for our enemies. That is clearly a blueprint for global domination.
No, Brian, it does not "say" those things. You're trying to pass off your opinions as paraphrasing. When you decide what a document is "clearly a blueprint" of, you are no longer reporting news, and are instead editorializing.
That's if any of this shit was newsworthy in the first place. Which it's not. The document was written in 1997. The organization folded in 2006. It was only a think tank, one of hundreds in Washington D.C. The list of signatories reads like a VH-1 retrospective on the Bush Administration.
As I said earlier... poorly sourced thinly veiled editorial.
Ian, our fucking up of 2 wars in the last 10 years does not in any way refute the point that 13 years ago PNAC had an agenda of global domination.
If I wanted strong arms to rescue me, I certainly would not choose Willie's flabby, fraudulent, and otherwise obviously-tainted arms (arse?) for the job.
TR, the organization did not "fold". It went quiescent because its agenda and the fact that half of the Bush cabinet was PNAC- associated had become common knowledge among the cognoscenti and there was nothing to be gained from continuing. The organization still exists.
Some journalist you are.
Brian, I appreciate your effort to provide examples of "poorly sourced thinly veiled editorial," but I think we have enough now. Please try finding a new way to be wrong.
you never answered the question. As a journalist, did you cover the fashion beat? Since you were so quick to brag about your college degree and your experience, your reluctance to provide more details is... well, not confusing so much as predictable.
Ian, our fucking up of 2 wars in the last 10 years does not in any way refute the point that 13 years ago PNAC had an agenda of global domination.
Wait, I thought we were talking about news? Something 13 years old is newsworthy? Hey Brian, how many Oscars do you think "Titanic" will win? Also, it's amazing how big the Spice Girls are right now, huh?
If I wanted strong arms to rescue me, I certainly would not choose Willie's flabby, fraudulent, and otherwise obviously-tainted arms (arse?) for the job.
Nobody cares about your obsession with that man, Brian.
The organization still exists.
It holds regular meetings in Brian's closet, which is why he cries to his mother about the monster in his closet every night.
Anyway, Brian, I love how you're obsessed with Triterope's profession. It's more evidence of the bitterness you have towards a world that won't recognize your genius and has consigned you to a life of failure. You couldn't hold a job mopping floors! You were kicked out of a religious cult!
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bwian, you are the last person to talk about 'sources'.
You couldn't even back up those you peddled to me.
You couldn't provide one fucking link. Not one.
Is it because there isn't any? Is it because you are lying again?
The best you could do was tell me to go look myself. What a joke.
As for the standards of journalism, is this another of your many expert skills?
We've added concrete cutting to the list, now we'll add journalism.
Go fuck yourself.
Once again an allegation is not proof, Brian.
On guard alleged that suicides at Gitmo were actually murders staged as suicides. That story broke a year ago this month. DoD is investigating the charges. What else do you want?
Oh that's right, you want a fucking lynch mob. You whip out the constitution when it suits you but when other people might get due process of law you goose-step over to your computer and bitch about it.
You read the story in Harpers, so it was not supressed. Either you don't know what that word means (possible) or you are a huge dipshit (likely).
The burden of proof is on you and your ilk, Brian, You are the assholes making the charges against the government so lay out your evidence. Oh wait, you have and it turns out your best witnessed are crack-pots. Your egnineers for truth are pool cleaners and guys with an HO railroad in the garage. You have nothing. Worse you won't accept reality, you just keep moving the goal post back so that you can pretend you are being victimized by "The Man".
PNAC? Really? They weren't talking about a military build up they were talking about modernizin the military. That is where the Pearl Harbor refference came from, they were warning against the Navy's reliance on aircraft carriers just as it once relied on battleships.
Learn to read, toe head.
Paul, I can back up everything I claim. After a long long time here having my links ignored and covered over with Ianspam, I no longer take the time. This is not a research blog.
I have put in some study of the ethics of journalism.
MGF, allegation is not proof. This entire blog is built on the proposition that the fact that allegation is not proof is sufficient to foreclose investigation of important allegations.
DoD investigations tend to be whitewashes. I want investigations in the news media and in Congress. Where do you get the idea that I want a lynch mob? Who cares about punishing some DoD schlubs? The point is the restoration of accountability in government.
The story was obviously suppressed outside of Harper's. Nobody covered it. There wasn't room. They needed to do the waterskiing squirrels instead.
PNAC calls for increased defense spending not just for modernization but "to carry out our global responsibilities", specifically "America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles."
That's global domination.
Paul, I can back up everything I claim. After a long long time here having my links ignored and covered over with Ianspam, I no longer take the time. This is not a research blog.
Why do you think anyone cares what you post, Brian? You're the one who wants the new investigation (that will never happen), remember?
I have put in some study of the ethics of journalism.
And like everything else you've studies, you learned nothing about it.
DoD investigations tend to be whitewashes. I want investigations in the news media and in Congress.
Nobody cares what you want, Brian. Normal procedure for this kind of thing is to have the DoD investigate. The government isn't going to change this because some babbling liar and sex stalker demands it.
The story was obviously suppressed outside of Harper's. Nobody covered it. There wasn't room. They needed to do the waterskiing squirrels instead.
Brian, learn what words like "suppressed" mean. What's "obvious" to you has no basis in reality since it's "obvious" to you that 9/11 was an inside job.
That's global domination.
Nobody cares, petgoat. Squeal all you want about it, but at the end of the day, you'll still be a failed janitor who nobody pays any attention except to laugh at.
Ian, when did I ever say 9/11 was an inside job?
Why would I say such a stupid thing?
Jesus Christ, the goat molester is beyond surreal.
Do ever bother to read the nonsense you write--you goat fucking Al Qaeda apologist?
GutterBall, I am not now and have never been a goat. Nor am I aware that I have ever fucked an al Qaeda apologist.
Ian, when did I ever say 9/11 was an inside job?
About every 10 minutes or so.
Why would I say such a stupid thing?
Because you're stupid. Jesus.
GutterBall, I am not now and have never been a goat. Nor am I aware that I have ever fucked an al Qaeda apologist.
punxsutawney petgoat good!
punxsutawney petgoat good!
punxsutawney petgoat good!
punxsutawney petgoat good!
punxsutawney petgoat good!
I have put in some study of the ethics of journalism.
And if this was a discussion of journalistic ethics, that would mean something.
Since you were so quick to brag about your college degree and your experience
Are you fucking kidding me? Nobody spends more time congratulating himself for his intellect than you. At least I stick to one subject.
It was a discussion of journalistic ethics. You claimed that "News editors at every level share a sense of duty" and therefore they would report any important story.
Then you backed off and allowed as how they only reported what they had room for. So waterskiiing squirrels come first.
If that's not a matter of journalistic ethics, what is it?
You never answered about your journalistic career. Were you a sports writer or a fashion writer?
It was a discussion of journalistic ethics. You claimed that "News editors at every level share a sense of duty" and therefore they would report any important story.
Yes, and nobody considers East Timor and the PNAC "important news" because it's old stuff. Only babbling paranoid liars like you think it's important.
Then you backed off and allowed as how they only reported what they had room for. So waterskiiing squirrels come first.
They do have a limited amount of space to report thing, but only you babble about waterskiing squirrels, which doesn't surprise me, given your apparent belief in things like magic thermite elves and attack baboons.
Ian, the fact that it's old news does not change the fact that it was not reported when it was new news and thus gives the lie to TR's claim that editors "share a sense of duty".
The sense of duty they share is a duty to their corporate masters and to their own careers.
And if you never heard of East Timor or of PNAC's blueprint for global domination it's new news to you, and important news. Your failure to recognize that "water-skiing squirrels" is something of a term of art among media analysts only shows your ignorance on these matters.
Ian, the fact that it's old news does not change the fact that it was not reported when it was new news and thus gives the lie to TR's claim that editors "share a sense of duty".
Who says it wasn't reported as news, petgoat?
The sense of duty they share is a duty to their corporate masters and to their own careers.
More bitterness from a failed janitor who thinks he's a genius.
And if you never heard of East Timor or of PNAC's blueprint for global domination it's new news to you, and important news.
Um, it's not new news to me, petgoat. I'm perfectly familiar with PNAC and East Timor. I'm just not a paranoid lunatic who finds anything about these two topics to be relevant to things in the US in the year 2011.
Your failure to recognize that "water-skiing squirrels" is something of a term of art among media analysts only shows your ignorance on these matters.
And nobody cares. Babbling about water-skiing squirrels is as pointless as your babbling about modified attack baboons.
Project Censored says they weren't reported, Ian.
What's relevant in 2011 is that TR claimed that "News editors at every level share a sense of duty" and I was pointing out their sense of duty apparently did not include reporting these vital news stories.
Given further consolidation and stress on the news media since then it's likely that the situation has only deteriorated further.
Project Censored says they weren't reported, Ian.
Nobody cares.
What's relevant in 2011 is that TR claimed that "News editors at every level share a sense of duty" and I was pointing out their sense of duty apparently did not include reporting these vital news stories.
There's nothing vital about these stories, petgoat.
Given further consolidation and stress on the news media since then it's likely that the situation has only deteriorated further.
And nobody cares. If you haven't noticed, the mainstream media is a dying industry.
Ian, the fact that about half of the Bush cabinet were signatories to a statement that amounted to a blueprint for global domination was certainly a vital story.
How bout them Steelers?
Oh, and in Ian-land nobody cares that the mainstream news media are dying.
So you don't consider the health of free press essential to the health of democracy? Oh I know, nobody cares about democracy.
Is there anything you do care about Ian, besides childish games?
Ian, the fact that about half of the Bush cabinet were signatories to a statement that amounted to a blueprint for global domination was certainly a vital story.
You're aware that Bush is no longer president, right?
Hey Brian, is it a vital story that 11 states seceded from the union? Is the mainstream media "suppressing" stories about the Confederacy?
Oh, and in Ian-land nobody cares that the mainstream news media are dying.
I sure don't care. If people wanted to get their news from the mainstream media, it wouldn't be dying. Supply and demand, petgoat.
So you don't consider the health of free press essential to the health of democracy? Oh I know, nobody cares about democracy.
What the fuck are you talking about? How is, say, "NBC Nightly News" going the way of the dinosaur going to hurt the free press? Is it going to stop, say, FireDogLake from reporting the stories that you think are being "suppressed"?
You really aren't that stupid, are you petgoat?
Is there anything you do care about Ian, besides childish games?
You mean besides taunting you? Yes, I care about the New York Mets starting rotation, for one.
How bout them Steelers?
Fuck 'em. Go Packers.
You claimed that "News editors at every level share a sense of duty
No, M Gregory Ferris said that.
Ian, you're playing dumb to obscure the fact that the PNAC plan for global domination was an important news story at the time the Bush administration was pushing for two wars, and that the story was suppressed by editors acting contrary to TR's ignorant and silly claim that editors "share a sense of duty".
Yeah, how's that global domination working out?
Are we getting our gasoline cheaper than everyone else?
Is the world beating a path to by our domestic products like they used to?
Hows our influence working out in Egypt right now? Does it look like the new guys will be America-friendly?
The Chinese government doesn't even pick up the phone on an incoming White House call on the first ring these days. In fact they played a pro-communist revolution song at the White House reception a few weeks back.
The USA has become the global version of the Oakland Raiders.
As far as DoD investigations being white-washes go, you're full of shit. Just because an investigation doesn't go the way that you want it to go (translation: It's not a witch hunt) doesn't mean that it's a white-wash. In fact more DoD investigations (OSI, NCIS,CID) often turn into railroad jobs that you'd approve of.
Most people can't find East Timor on a map (that would include many Australians), so the interest meter just won't peg very high.
Project Censored is pretty much what you'd expect, a bunch of delusional jack-apes. First off their definition of the word "Censored" is questionable because their #1 censored story is about global plans to replace the dollar. Guess what? Drudge throws those stories up on his page whenever they appear, Washington Post and the NY Times have run stories about this topic too.
Here's the problem: There's nothing to censor because the dollar hasn't been replaced...yet, and even if this was front page news the sad fact that there is nothing that we can do about it (see the part where I question the US's lack of global domination these days).
Their #3 story is laugh-out-loud hillarious: Internet Privacy and Personal Access at Risk. This is news? News to whom? Seriously? There's no such thing as privacy on the net, never has been and never will be.
Then there's #7 - External Capitalist Forces Wreak Havoc in Africa. No shit, Sherlock. Man that should be headline news right there...assuming that you've never read "Hearts of Darkness" or picked up a newspaper, National Geographic, Soldier of Fortune, Nature, or a dozen other print sources (I left out the zillions of stories PBS Frontline has done over the YEARS).
Jesus Brian, get it together. I don't know maybe you should go back to college and develope some critical thinking skills and take a science class or two.
TR's ignorant and silly claim that editors "share a sense of duty".
Ahem... "No, M Gregory Ferris said that."
M Greg, where do you get the idea that PNAC wants to dominate the world just so they can give cheap gasoline to peons like you and me? Why should they care about the price of gas?
The global domination game sucks, just like always. It's a game for madmen, and it brings down empires.
East Timor was an important story not because it is a big or significant country, but because it was a case of war crimes tolerated by the USA.
Ian, you're playing dumb to obscure the fact that the PNAC plan for global domination was an important news story at the time the Bush administration was pushing for two wars, and that the story was suppressed by editors acting contrary to TR's ignorant and silly claim that editors "share a sense of duty".
Um, no.
M Greg, where do you get the idea that PNAC wants to dominate the world just so they can give cheap gasoline to peons like you and me? Why should they care about the price of gas?
PNAC is defunct, petgoat. Just like the Confederacy.
The global domination game sucks, just like always. It's a game for madmen, and it brings down empires.
Yes. What point are you trying to make?
East Timor was an important story not because it is a big or significant country, but because it was a case of war crimes tolerated by the USA.
"War crimes tolerated by the USA"? What the hell does that even mean? The US didn't intervene in East Timor to prevent war crimes? The US also didn't intervene in Rwanda, where a half-million people were butchered. It doesn't mean the US "tolerated" it. Learn what words mean.
Ian, I get really tired of you playing dumb. What you're doing is only fooling the people who are dumber than you are pretending to be, and it's wasting the time of people who are smarter than you are pretending to be.
PNAC is not defunct, it's revived. And its current status has nothing to do with the fact that the failure of the US news media to cover the story when the Busgh Administrarion was stampeding us into stupid wars shows that the belief in the "sense of duty" of news editors is silly. It's also an essential story to understanding the predicament the USA is in now, so it's still an important part of recent history, and thus important for people to know.
Indonesia was a client state of the USA, so US tolerance for its crimes made them US crimes.
Ian, I get really tired of you playing dumb. What you're doing is only fooling the people who are dumber than you are pretending to be, and it's wasting the time of people who are smarter than you are pretending to be.
My, such squealing!
PNAC is not defunct, it's revived.
False. Also, who is the "Busgh Administration"?
Indonesia was a client state of the USA, so US tolerance for its crimes made them US crimes.
Uh, no. When US soldiers commit war crimes (like My Lai), then it's US crimes. See how that works?
Also, you keep babbling about how East Timor is "news". You do realize that things that happened almost 20 years ago (like the Dili Massacre) are not news, right? You're aware that the news media is also not reporting on Soviet attempts to crush the Lithuanian independence movement, right? Is that because this story is being "suppressed", or because it's not news?
You really need to see a psychiatrist, petgoat. You really don't have a grasp on what normal people call "reality".
Ian, the point that you are pretending to be too dumb to comprehend is that it was news when it was happening, and the news media didn't report it. In fact it's still news if people don't know it yet.
Soviet attempts to crush the Lithuanian independence movement were well reported on at the time they were happening, which makes the failure to report on East Timor all the more hypocritical.
No, petgoat, the reason is nobody cares about East Timor. It's really that simple. Sad but true.
How do you know if nobody cares when the news media don't report it?
Nobody would have cared about Iraq but for the propaganda campaign. If the news media half way tried, they could have stirred up a war against Indonesia.
My little brother went through a "I don't care" phase--when he was four.
M Gregory Ferris mentioning the Loma Prieta earthquake got me thinking...
Here are 3 natural disasters in the last 25 years: The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, and the 2005 Kashmir earthquake.
The order I listed them ranks them from most to least coverage in the US media, even though that order is from least destructive and deadly to most.
Now a sane person says, "of course, the first one struck a major US metro area, and the 2nd one affected two large US military installations, while the 3rd had no effect on the US. Thus, American media will report more on on what affects Americans."
To the paranoid lunatic, though, the story of the Kashmir earthquake was "suppressed" by the media.
How do you know if nobody cares when the news media don't report it?
Because nobody knows East Timor exists. If the media covered the Lithuanian independence struggle, it's because most Americans were familiar with the Soviet Union.
Jesus, how stupid and obtuse does one have to be to not grasp this? I guess as stupid and obtuse as Brian.
Now, getting back on topic, why is it that the media doesn't report (any longer) on 9/11 truth? Most Americans are familiar with 9/11. Thus, the media doesn't report on it because there's nothing to report: it's a tiny lunatic fringe movement whose ideas have no validity.
Nobody would have cared about Iraq but for the propaganda campaign. If the news media half way tried, they could have stirred up a war against Indonesia.
Wow, Brian thinks the rest of the people in the US are as dumb as he is.
My little brother went through a "I don't care" phase--when he was four.
And yet he probably has a job, a family, and doesn't stalk people and babble on the internet all day.
Ian, suggesting that the newsworthiness of far-away natural disasters is comparable to the newsworthiness of war crimes committed by US client states is dishonest.
You seem to think that having a job and a family is some kind of achievement. Any idiot can do it.
Brian, just shut the fuck up . You lack even a middle school newspaper-level understanding of newsworthiness, factuality, or sourcing.
Ian, suggesting that the newsworthiness of far-away natural disasters is comparable to the newsworthiness of war crimes committed by US client states is dishonest.
Uh, no. It's exactly the same. Nobody cared when an earthquake killed 80,000 in Pakistan, and nobody cared what Indonesia did in East Timor.
It's amusing to watch you continue to squeal about this, however.
You seem to think that having a job and a family is some kind of achievement. Any idiot can do it.
Well, for you it would be an achievement, since you're a failed janitor with no job and you have to live with your parents. Also, you have no friends and no romantic life, which is why you stalk Willie Rodriguez and Carol Brouillet.
Post a Comment
<< Home