Proof: Control of the Media

The media is being controlled. Here's proof...

RE: Iraq
Request for inquiry into a planned attack on Iraq before the WMD announcement gets back seat to "missing" bride. Major media does nothing.

"Unfortunately, the mainstream media in the United States was too busy with wall-to-wall coverage of a "runaway bride" to cover a bombshell report out of the British newspapers," Conyers [Congressman John Conyers (D-MI)] writes. "The London Times reports that the British government and the United States government had secretly agreed to attack Iraq in 2002, before authorization was sought for such an attack in Congress, and had discussed creating pretextual justifications for doing so."

"The Times reports, based on a newly discovered document, that in 2002 British Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a meeting in which he expressed his support for "regime change" through the use of force in Iraq and was warned by the nation's top lawyer that such an action would be illegal," he adds. "Blair also discussed the need for America to "create" conditions to justify the war."
(more ...)

RE: "War on Terror"
So why are comments like this not picked-up by the larger media outlets?
Brigadier shocks and awes: There is no war on terror

The so-called global war on terrorism does not exist, a high-ranking Australian Army officer has declared in a challenging speech.

Brigadier Justin Kelly dismissed several central tenets of the Iraq war and the war on terrorism, saying the "war" part was about politics and terrorism was merely a tactic.

Though such wars were fuelled by global issues, they were essentially counter-insurgent operations fought on a local level, he said.

RE: Media Choice of Words
Editor's Note from t r u t h o u t:

The Republican Party has directed journalists to drop the word "nuclear" in describing the GOP plan to revise long-standing Senate rules and eliminate any possibility of Democrats filibustering Mr. Bush's most right-wing judicial nominees. The GOP prefers to speak of "the Constitutional option," and now accuses anyone who uses "the nuclear option" of showing "liberal bias."

Molly Ivins: Christian Right Goes Nuclear and The nuclear option and judicial activists

I was all set to write a column about the nuclear option -- the proposal to change the rules of the Senate in order to get President Bush's most questionable judicial appointments through -- when, lo, word came that there is no nuclear option anymore. It is now called "the constitutional option."

Who changed it? Why, the Republican Party, of course. Having found that "nuclear option" does not poll well, the Republicans simply decreed the rules change can no longer be described by that name. Further, the Republican Party sent media operatives around to major news organizations to inform them that anyone who fails to obey the new diktat on usage will be demonstrating the dread "liberal bias."

RE: 9/11
Hijackers on the FBI list found to be alive and the media does not confront the FBI.
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

Why doesn't any of this make the main outlets? If it does make it out, why doesn't someone run with it? Why is its lifespan so short?

Because it is not being allowed!

Some small voices are trying to get the news out, although not without paying a price. The concern of "when" they will be shut down, shut up, or put down.

One example, Deer in the Headlights by John Kaminski.

Never have I heard so much talk as over the past few years about people wanting to escape from warmongering America. I get postcards from Costa Rica, cryptic e-mails from Thailand, letters about how nice it is in Denmark or Portugal or Brazil, all from people who have shucked that furtive sense of panic that still grips many people with actually functioning souls who remain uneasily in their decaying United States.

Once I wrote that we shouldn’t run off to foreign places, that the best of us should stay and fight for what is truly ours. But who can blame those of us who are intimidated by the widespread lack of support for values and actions that are truly humane. What’s the score now? About six people in the entire Congress who are apt to tell the unvarnished truth about anything? And not a single newspaper.

To not be afraid is to be stupid.

What keeps one going? What keeps one from giving up and throwing ones hands up in the air out of frustration?

People (them again) always ask me, "How can you read all those horrible stories day after day and not be affected by them; how can you keep from slitting your wrists?" or something along those lines. It's a question I don't usually answer.

But when I try to, I think of that series of photos taken at a checkpoint in Iraq in which triggerhappy U.S. troops shot first and asked questions later, later to find six terrified and bleeding children in the car that rolled to a stop. I think of that little bleeding girl screaming over her butchered parents, and U.S. soldiers wearing masks to hide their identities from the photographer. That little girl is my boss. And the rage I feel at the people who put her in that position, I'm telling you, is simply more than you want to hear. Why do I do what I do, and how can I stand what I have to look at? I work for that little girl, and if you don't too, then you have a problem with me.

Because if you don't work for her, that means you're an accomplice to mass murder...

Technorati Categories: Bush Administration, Censorship, Iraq, Media, Politics, War on Terror