The Prophet tried to post this article to his blog earlier today and it appears not to have posted. Sorry if this is repititious -- but -- ignore the earlier post in which The Prophet threatened to leave the Democratic Party.
In fact, The Prophet voted for President Obama and worked for his election -- door-to-door canvassing, phone canvassing, drove people to the polls, and the like.
Friday, August 07, 2009
The Prophet is back
The Prophet is back after an extended absence.
First, let's cancel the previous post about not supporting the Democratic Party because they won't impeach George Bush. The Prophet drinks a bit.
The Prophet not only voted for OBAMA-BIDEN, but also worked in his local area to get out the vote for now President Obama.
So -- let's move on.
It's now August 2009 and the nation is under attack from the most vile, destructive enemy we have ever encountered: The Republican rightwing and their allies -- the "religious right," Fox, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, the "birthers," and the "Tea Baggers."
The Prophet will be back later today to comment on several matters. Meanwhile, the garden needs tending.
First, let's cancel the previous post about not supporting the Democratic Party because they won't impeach George Bush. The Prophet drinks a bit.
The Prophet not only voted for OBAMA-BIDEN, but also worked in his local area to get out the vote for now President Obama.
So -- let's move on.
It's now August 2009 and the nation is under attack from the most vile, destructive enemy we have ever encountered: The Republican rightwing and their allies -- the "religious right," Fox, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, the "birthers," and the "Tea Baggers."
The Prophet will be back later today to comment on several matters. Meanwhile, the garden needs tending.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Why the silence about the White House-Pentagon propaganda barrage?
I clipped the following item from the "Daily Kos" on 14 May 2008. This item raises continuing disturbing questions about the validity and independence of the national press.
--- quote from Daily Kos ---
Twenty-four days of silence and still counting.
On Sunday, April 20, The New York Times published David Barstow's article on the propaganda conduit the Pentagon had built for itself to television, radio and cable channels, turning retired military-cum-media-analysts "into a kind of media Trojan horse - an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks."
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air."
Since then, as a number of bloggers have repeatedly noted, almost zero coverage about Barstow's story has appeared on the television and radio networks and cable stations where these analysts have appeared. Not even 30 seconds in most cases.
That's high contrast with how many times the analysts themselves have appeared.
Media Matters, which has been doing an excellent job of hammering on this story, has conducted a review which found that since January 1, 2002:
...the analysts named in Barstow's article collectively appeared or were quoted as experts more than 4,500 times on ABC, ABC News Now, CBS, CBS Radio Network, NBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, Fox News, MSNBC, CNBC, and NPR in segments covering the Iraq war both before and after the invasion, as well as numerous other national security or government policy issues. ...
Media Matters used the Nexis database to tabulate appearances by [20] analysts on networks with which they were affiliated that included discussions of issues related to national security or U.S. government policy. Instances in which analysts appeared on networks other than those with which they were affiliated were not counted. (My emphasis - MB)
For instance, Thomas G. McInerney, a terrorist-promoting retired lieutenant general, appeared on Fox News 144 times. Retired Brigadier Gen. David L. Grange analyzed for CNN and CNN Headline News 921 times. Retired Major Gen. Wayne A. Downing analyzed 270 times for NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC.
A spreadsheet listing each of the analysts' appearances is available at the Media Matters' link above.
Someone else who has been doing a fine job of dogging the military analyst story since it broke is Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com. He is one of those rummaging around in the document dump of 8000 pages and audiotapes that the Pentagon was forced to provide The New York Times.
Greenwald's latest piece, on Tuesday, asked, Was Karl Rove involved in the military analyst program?:
I have no idea whether the "Karl" with whom they had weekly briefings and were planning to brief on the military analyst Iraq trip is Karl Rove. I asked Larry Di Rita by email about this exchange and specifically whether Rove was ever briefed on the program, and he has not replied.
In the documents I reviewed, I haven't seen any other "Karl" referenced who works at the DoD. These are fairly high-ranking DoD officials and there aren't many people they're worried about having to explain themselves to (Smith's position as Assistant Defense Secretary was one requiring Senate confirmation and he reported to Rumsfeld). Given the significant possibility that this program was illegal, and given Perino's denial of the White House's knowledge of it, this question -- whether the "karl" being briefed on the program was Karl Rove -- certainly seems to be one that should be asked.
UPDATE: I think it's fair to call this "confirmation" that Rove was involved in the military analysts program. First, a March 16, 2006 email from Dallas Lawrence (6548), referencing a briefing of military analysts -- which, he wrote, was "a closed call opened only to our retired military analysts" in order "to get them on message heading into the weekend on Iraqi troop strength, advances, etc."
Some bloggers have wondered why anybody should make such a big deal of this story. After all, we've known for years that government propagandists exaggerated, distorted and lied about the Iraq war before it started and have continued to do so as the occupation has dragged on and on. So nobody should be shocked that this Pentagon project occurred. Moreover, it is said, this is nothing new in U.S. history.
That misses the point. Yes, our government did not begin engaging in this kind of media-mediated propaganda on September 12, 2001. Starting in the 1950s, for instance, the CIA eventually put together a cohort of 400 American journalists at highly respected newspapers that it could count on to provide information about countries they visited and leaders they talked to as well as to get story angles the agency wanted published into print.
This latest domestic propaganda project is no surprise, and only a shock to the naive. But just because it's not surprising doesn't make it any less outrageous. And those who are digging out the details of what went on, how the project came about, who thought it up and carried it out, deserve our kudos for their efforts just as the media who operated as conduits for this propaganda deserve our jeers for failing to vet these experts in the first place and for keeping silent about them now.
--- end quote from "Daily Kos"
I plan to write letters to the editor to my local and regional newspapers in hopes of calling attention to this issue -- perhaps you can do the same??
--- quote from Daily Kos ---
Twenty-four days of silence and still counting.
On Sunday, April 20, The New York Times published David Barstow's article on the propaganda conduit the Pentagon had built for itself to television, radio and cable channels, turning retired military-cum-media-analysts "into a kind of media Trojan horse - an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks."
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air."
Since then, as a number of bloggers have repeatedly noted, almost zero coverage about Barstow's story has appeared on the television and radio networks and cable stations where these analysts have appeared. Not even 30 seconds in most cases.
That's high contrast with how many times the analysts themselves have appeared.
Media Matters, which has been doing an excellent job of hammering on this story, has conducted a review which found that since January 1, 2002:
...the analysts named in Barstow's article collectively appeared or were quoted as experts more than 4,500 times on ABC, ABC News Now, CBS, CBS Radio Network, NBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, Fox News, MSNBC, CNBC, and NPR in segments covering the Iraq war both before and after the invasion, as well as numerous other national security or government policy issues. ...
Media Matters used the Nexis database to tabulate appearances by [20] analysts on networks with which they were affiliated that included discussions of issues related to national security or U.S. government policy. Instances in which analysts appeared on networks other than those with which they were affiliated were not counted. (My emphasis - MB)
For instance, Thomas G. McInerney, a terrorist-promoting retired lieutenant general, appeared on Fox News 144 times. Retired Brigadier Gen. David L. Grange analyzed for CNN and CNN Headline News 921 times. Retired Major Gen. Wayne A. Downing analyzed 270 times for NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC.
A spreadsheet listing each of the analysts' appearances is available at the Media Matters' link above.
Someone else who has been doing a fine job of dogging the military analyst story since it broke is Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com. He is one of those rummaging around in the document dump of 8000 pages and audiotapes that the Pentagon was forced to provide The New York Times.
Greenwald's latest piece, on Tuesday, asked, Was Karl Rove involved in the military analyst program?:
I have no idea whether the "Karl" with whom they had weekly briefings and were planning to brief on the military analyst Iraq trip is Karl Rove. I asked Larry Di Rita by email about this exchange and specifically whether Rove was ever briefed on the program, and he has not replied.
In the documents I reviewed, I haven't seen any other "Karl" referenced who works at the DoD. These are fairly high-ranking DoD officials and there aren't many people they're worried about having to explain themselves to (Smith's position as Assistant Defense Secretary was one requiring Senate confirmation and he reported to Rumsfeld). Given the significant possibility that this program was illegal, and given Perino's denial of the White House's knowledge of it, this question -- whether the "karl" being briefed on the program was Karl Rove -- certainly seems to be one that should be asked.
UPDATE: I think it's fair to call this "confirmation" that Rove was involved in the military analysts program. First, a March 16, 2006 email from Dallas Lawrence (6548), referencing a briefing of military analysts -- which, he wrote, was "a closed call opened only to our retired military analysts" in order "to get them on message heading into the weekend on Iraqi troop strength, advances, etc."
Some bloggers have wondered why anybody should make such a big deal of this story. After all, we've known for years that government propagandists exaggerated, distorted and lied about the Iraq war before it started and have continued to do so as the occupation has dragged on and on. So nobody should be shocked that this Pentagon project occurred. Moreover, it is said, this is nothing new in U.S. history.
That misses the point. Yes, our government did not begin engaging in this kind of media-mediated propaganda on September 12, 2001. Starting in the 1950s, for instance, the CIA eventually put together a cohort of 400 American journalists at highly respected newspapers that it could count on to provide information about countries they visited and leaders they talked to as well as to get story angles the agency wanted published into print.
This latest domestic propaganda project is no surprise, and only a shock to the naive. But just because it's not surprising doesn't make it any less outrageous. And those who are digging out the details of what went on, how the project came about, who thought it up and carried it out, deserve our kudos for their efforts just as the media who operated as conduits for this propaganda deserve our jeers for failing to vet these experts in the first place and for keeping silent about them now.
--- end quote from "Daily Kos"
I plan to write letters to the editor to my local and regional newspapers in hopes of calling attention to this issue -- perhaps you can do the same??
Friday, January 11, 2008
Father of Virginia Tech victim speaks -- is anyone listening?
I found this commentary on the website of "The Gun Guys." Now, before you gunnuts out there attack me as wanting to confiscate your guns, stop. Don't even think about it. The Prophet owns guns and hunts. The Prophet served almost 30 years in the Army, including a tour as a grunt in Vietnam. I know guns. And I want them controlled.
Now, here's the article I copied from "The Gun Guys:"
-- quote --
http://www.gunguys.com/#post-2763
We came across this extraordinary op-ed in the Atlanta Journal Constitution by Michael Bishop, whose son Jamie was murdered during the VA Tech massacre.
It's worth quoting at length.
At 9:40 a.m. on Monday, April 16, 2007, my wife's cousin, Lee Ellis, telephoned. Check the news, he advised. Something was happening at Virginia Tech, where our adult son, Jamie, taught. There were two dormitory murders and bloodshed in an engineering building.
"Jamie has his own house," I said. "He teaches German, not engineering." I could not imagine that at an institution as big as Virginia Tech, our son could fall victim to such peril. I dismissed Lee's warning as alarmist.
Later, though, I knelt in our kitchen to pray. Later, I called my wife, Jeri, at work to say that things looked bad. She drove home screaming. Together, we failed to reach our daughter-in-law, a tenure-track German teacher, by telephone.
Near 6 p.m., cruising up I-85, we learned that, in the gunman's assault, Jamie had died. His wife, kept in the dark all day, spoke by phone, crying, "I'm so sorry you've lost your son." My breath left me, and I let Jeri drive to our daughter's home in Bogart.
Although the majority of gun violence victims are not killed in rampage murders such as Virginia Tech, the horrific tragedy of losing a loved one is all too common in America. Mr. Bishop continues:
Ten days later, back in Pine Mountain, I stopped behind a pickup bearing the sticker "Gun Control: Simple Solutions for Simple Minds."
I served in the military, and my father hunted. I do not wish to confiscate any decent citizen's gun. But soon Georgia lawmakers will debate two bills that, if passed, would steeply undermine public safety.
House Bill 89 would let workers tote guns to corporate parking lots in their vehicles. HB 915, the "Second Amendment Protection Act," would authorize guns at volatile venues like ballgames, political rallies, bars, and postsecondary schools. (I would not teach at such a school.)
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, dubiously misinterpreted and idolized, does not prohibit states from restricting firearms subject to criminal misuse or from denying guns to persons unfit to possess them.........
Georgia takes no real action to protect us and places us at risk for events as calamitous as Seung-Hui Cho's Virginia Tech rampage. Like Virginia, Georgia has no statute for background checks at gun shows, no assault-weapon limitations, no waiting period, no requirement for child safety locks, no call for a license/permit to buy guns, and seemingly little patience for any rule that would truly enforce accountability............
But in Georgia, gun-lobby groups back the Second Amendment Protection Act that denies the latent murderousness of any firearm by implying that everyone should carry, even workers and students. (A pro-gun student group proposed wearing holsters to class to signal their desire to carry on campus.)
Such thinking presages an obligation, not just a right, to bear arms.
Yes, Virginia Tech involves other issues: mental illness, privacy, campus security. But it centers around lax gun laws. As Lu Ann McNabb, friend of slain student Reema Samaha, said last week in Virginia, "Without a Glock, a Walther, and high-capacity magazines," Cho could never have done such damage.
Some say, "More guns make us safer. An armed society is a polite society." Yeah, right. Think Deadwood. Think Iraq. Ask why no one believes nuclear proliferation makes us safer.
Georgia needs no "Second Amendment Protection Act." Georgia needs laws that sensibly protect us. So does every state in this nation.
In the mortuary, I kissed our son's forehead. Even through his clothes, I felt his strange iciness.
"His hands are so cold," I said.
"Yes," his widow said. "But if you rub them, they warm up."
I've warmed up. Have the people of Georgia? It's past time to voice our disgust with wrongheaded extremists.
We honor Michael Bishop's courage in standing up for the memory of his son by opposing the gun lobby's ridiculous and extremist agenda in Georgia. His pain and loss is simply unfathomable, to lose his son in such a sudden and horrific manner.
If only the pro-gunners who send hateful emails to us at GunGuys.com read Mr. Bishop's column, they might at least think twice before ridiculing the families who've lost loved ones to gun violence. But since gun zealots demonstrate zero empathy beyond their own selfish and radical ideology, it's doubtful the words of a father who buried his son would register to gun proponents at all.
Survivors such as Michael Bishop, and the millions of Americans who have been affected by gun violence, deserve a better, safer, and just response to their loss and suffering. And instead of correcting and strengthening our efforts to reduce gun violence, Georgia and several other states are moving in a wrong, and deadly, direction.
As we said days after the massacre at Virginia Tech, "It's time to re-think guns in America."
-- end quote --
Now, here's the article I copied from "The Gun Guys:"
-- quote --
http://www.gunguys.com/#post-2763
We came across this extraordinary op-ed in the Atlanta Journal Constitution by Michael Bishop, whose son Jamie was murdered during the VA Tech massacre.
It's worth quoting at length.
At 9:40 a.m. on Monday, April 16, 2007, my wife's cousin, Lee Ellis, telephoned. Check the news, he advised. Something was happening at Virginia Tech, where our adult son, Jamie, taught. There were two dormitory murders and bloodshed in an engineering building.
"Jamie has his own house," I said. "He teaches German, not engineering." I could not imagine that at an institution as big as Virginia Tech, our son could fall victim to such peril. I dismissed Lee's warning as alarmist.
Later, though, I knelt in our kitchen to pray. Later, I called my wife, Jeri, at work to say that things looked bad. She drove home screaming. Together, we failed to reach our daughter-in-law, a tenure-track German teacher, by telephone.
Near 6 p.m., cruising up I-85, we learned that, in the gunman's assault, Jamie had died. His wife, kept in the dark all day, spoke by phone, crying, "I'm so sorry you've lost your son." My breath left me, and I let Jeri drive to our daughter's home in Bogart.
Although the majority of gun violence victims are not killed in rampage murders such as Virginia Tech, the horrific tragedy of losing a loved one is all too common in America. Mr. Bishop continues:
Ten days later, back in Pine Mountain, I stopped behind a pickup bearing the sticker "Gun Control: Simple Solutions for Simple Minds."
I served in the military, and my father hunted. I do not wish to confiscate any decent citizen's gun. But soon Georgia lawmakers will debate two bills that, if passed, would steeply undermine public safety.
House Bill 89 would let workers tote guns to corporate parking lots in their vehicles. HB 915, the "Second Amendment Protection Act," would authorize guns at volatile venues like ballgames, political rallies, bars, and postsecondary schools. (I would not teach at such a school.)
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, dubiously misinterpreted and idolized, does not prohibit states from restricting firearms subject to criminal misuse or from denying guns to persons unfit to possess them.........
Georgia takes no real action to protect us and places us at risk for events as calamitous as Seung-Hui Cho's Virginia Tech rampage. Like Virginia, Georgia has no statute for background checks at gun shows, no assault-weapon limitations, no waiting period, no requirement for child safety locks, no call for a license/permit to buy guns, and seemingly little patience for any rule that would truly enforce accountability............
But in Georgia, gun-lobby groups back the Second Amendment Protection Act that denies the latent murderousness of any firearm by implying that everyone should carry, even workers and students. (A pro-gun student group proposed wearing holsters to class to signal their desire to carry on campus.)
Such thinking presages an obligation, not just a right, to bear arms.
Yes, Virginia Tech involves other issues: mental illness, privacy, campus security. But it centers around lax gun laws. As Lu Ann McNabb, friend of slain student Reema Samaha, said last week in Virginia, "Without a Glock, a Walther, and high-capacity magazines," Cho could never have done such damage.
Some say, "More guns make us safer. An armed society is a polite society." Yeah, right. Think Deadwood. Think Iraq. Ask why no one believes nuclear proliferation makes us safer.
Georgia needs no "Second Amendment Protection Act." Georgia needs laws that sensibly protect us. So does every state in this nation.
In the mortuary, I kissed our son's forehead. Even through his clothes, I felt his strange iciness.
"His hands are so cold," I said.
"Yes," his widow said. "But if you rub them, they warm up."
I've warmed up. Have the people of Georgia? It's past time to voice our disgust with wrongheaded extremists.
We honor Michael Bishop's courage in standing up for the memory of his son by opposing the gun lobby's ridiculous and extremist agenda in Georgia. His pain and loss is simply unfathomable, to lose his son in such a sudden and horrific manner.
If only the pro-gunners who send hateful emails to us at GunGuys.com read Mr. Bishop's column, they might at least think twice before ridiculing the families who've lost loved ones to gun violence. But since gun zealots demonstrate zero empathy beyond their own selfish and radical ideology, it's doubtful the words of a father who buried his son would register to gun proponents at all.
Survivors such as Michael Bishop, and the millions of Americans who have been affected by gun violence, deserve a better, safer, and just response to their loss and suffering. And instead of correcting and strengthening our efforts to reduce gun violence, Georgia and several other states are moving in a wrong, and deadly, direction.
As we said days after the massacre at Virginia Tech, "It's time to re-think guns in America."
-- end quote --
Monday, January 07, 2008
Thoughts at the start of 2008
The Prophet has been busy and has not posted for over six months. In early 2005 The Prophet and Sweet Thing moved to the Mississippi Gulf Coast where we were building our dream retirement home -- all of which ended when Hurricane Katrina destroyed everything we owned. We fled back to The Prophet's home and soon afterward his father died, his mother was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, she died, and now The Prophet and Sweet Thing have moved to Eastern Virgina where we plan to start building a house in March 2008 or so.
At the beginning of 2008 The Prophet has a lot to say but it will have to wait for another day because now The Prophet is off to watch LSU stomp Ohio State -- again.
At the beginning of 2008 The Prophet has a lot to say but it will have to wait for another day because now The Prophet is off to watch LSU stomp Ohio State -- again.
Friday, May 25, 2007
Democrats sell out
Well, well. The Prophet is disgusted with the Democratic Party. I have been a life-long Democrat -- and still am.
However -- yesterday a majority of Democrats in both the House and Senate voted to give George Bush what he wants: More money to continue the war in Iraq.
The leading Democratic candidates for president, Senators Clinton and Obama, both waited until the bill had passed before they voted against it. Cowards, both of them.
The Prophet will sit out the 2008 election unless Bill Richardson or Al Gore is the Democratic candidate.
However -- yesterday a majority of Democrats in both the House and Senate voted to give George Bush what he wants: More money to continue the war in Iraq.
The leading Democratic candidates for president, Senators Clinton and Obama, both waited until the bill had passed before they voted against it. Cowards, both of them.
The Prophet will sit out the 2008 election unless Bill Richardson or Al Gore is the Democratic candidate.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
