MSM-Notes on the Margin

Maybe...

Seymour Hersh was recently interviewed by Gulf News, during which he talked about Cheney’s Secret Assassination Unit under JSOC. The topic of the interview is important and warrants its own post, especially now that President Obama is considering Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal as a replacement for Gen. McKiernan, the top US and NATO Commander in Afghanistan. McChrystal happens to be the man who commanded Cheney’s JSOC. As I said, this is an important topic on its own, but here is what I got from the interview:


How closely is the new US administration looking at your revelations?


“Publicly they don't say anything at all. It's obvious I have credibility because I've written things that have turned out right. My colleagues at the press corps often don't follow up, not because they don't want to but because they don't know who to call. If I'm writing something on the Joint Special Operations Command, which is an ostensibly classified unit, how do they find it out? The government will tell them everything I write is wrong or that they can't comment. It's easy for those stories to be dismissed.”

I take this as a loaded comment on the MSM. It is almost like the ‘Clintonian’ definition of ‘is.’ The ‘can’t’ doesn’t seem to be based on a ‘pledge to secrecy no matter how wrong or criminal the deed.’ Because these sources obviously ‘can’ comment when it is Seymour Hersh, but they ‘can’t’ comment when it comes to other MSM reporters. It seems to me they are using ‘can’t’ as in I can’t trust you to comment.

Another point I got from this is that the large and prestigious news agencies’ reporters who are specialized in Pentagon and DOD areas ‘don’t know who to call.’ Can you hear me whistling here, whistling not as in ‘whistleblowing,’ but as in ‘wow’ whistling 😉 Maybe Hersh is trying to convey a coded message to these veteran expert but pitiful reporters: ‘Guys, you won’t get the real story, the truth, if you keep calling the press offices of these agencies, and, print what they are faxing you.’ Maybe he means ‘dear colleagues, you can’t get the truth when you only deal with government designated sources.’ Just Maybe.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    -ian
    What i wonder is how much does it even matter anymore that the public gets the news? by that I mean the decisions are controlled by the compromised members of congress no matter what the public wants. for example, this bailout bill…amazingly, the american public DID get off their collective ass and call in to their congresscritters..and by a large margin, something like 300 to 1, the demanded that the bailout bill be voted against. but what happened? it was passed and there were even some congress people who got up afterwards and said they just had to vote for it even though their constituents did not want it because it was the right thing to do. the demands of the people they represent were thrown in the garbage. this is the current state of our government. so while hiding the facts from the people can be helpful in keeping down the noise, it is not even required anymore that the public be unaware..because they are plain ignored even when they ARE informed!!
    This McChrystal character is a great example. we also know he was involved in the cover up of the Pat Tillman murder. Who knows, he’s probably involved in helping the american black ops military arm smuggle all the heroin from afghanistan too (as we did for ages in south east asia during vietnam). in the end, no matter the public outcry, it won’t matter. the politicians will be told whom to vote for and will have no say in the matter. I hate feeling this cynical and powerless but when i look around i see no solution unless all the whistleblowers come forward at once…now…with information that will cause the people to rise up and really protest (like naomi wolf says) in a way that does not respect the ‘free speech zone’ BS that we have accepted as constraints on our protests. we need real action that will shut down the corridors of power..even if that means a few thousands or more people sitting in the doorways to congress.

  2. Kathleen M. Dickson says:

    Can you hear me whistling here, whistling not as in ‘whistleblowing,’ but as in ‘wow’ whistling 😉 Maybe Hersh is trying to convey a coded message to these veteran expert but pitiful reporters: ‘Guys, you won’t get the real story, the truth, if you keep calling the press offices of these agencies, and, print what they are faxing you.’ Maybe he means ‘dear colleagues, you can’t get the truth when you only deal with government designated sources.’ Just Maybe.
    ===============

    “Hear me whistling,”
    Gotchya, girlfriend.

    Kathleen

  3. Anonymous says:

    I hear that whistle too. loud & clear!!!!!

  4. Maybe. Let’s hope these reporters can understand that by just getting what the press offices of these agencies send them and printing them, they themselves become those press offices of the agencies in question. And that is the job of a stenographer, not a journalist.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Good catch, gets right to the heart of the problem – reporters allowing government sources to dictate what they report & what we hear & see.

    Markum

  6. Kingfisher says:

    Sibel, you are a brave woman and someone who I admire very much. That said, I am concerned about this new blog endeavor of yours. I sense mission creep. If you wish to pursue the roll of a pundit, I wish you luck. My interest is in your case, not your media criticism.

    And I certainly am not interested in hearing you discuss JSOC, because frankly most people do not know what they are talking about when it comes to this. Hersh had already written about it and nobody gave a hoot until he used the sensational expression “executive assassination wing”, which he regrets using.

    Best

  7. Kathleen M. Dickson says:

    There is nothing else to do but slam the MSM, since they abandon whistleblowers to the persecutions of the perp.

    It’s about cowardice on their part, so there’s nothing left to do but call them on What Is An American.

    I called Holc Noble of the New York Times for taking the “quiet money” – knowing the Lyme crymes story but taking the gag money and not publish it elsewhere, when the Times refused to publish his LymeCryme.com story.

    Kathleen M. Dickson
    http://www.actionlyme.org

  8. To kingfisher:

    Why don’t more people in the United States know about her case? Why don’t they know about a lot of things some people know concerning the conduct of this country and its various agencies, branches of government, and politicians? In my world, media criticism is essential under present conditions.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Getting sick of this BS dem/repub false dichotomy….
    its time for a REAL party based on the founders’ vision…

    http://anti-federalist.org/platform.html

  10. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Ian:"i wonder is how much does it even matter anymore that the public gets the news?" You are not alone; I have the same question. The news did get out re: NSA, Torture, Rendition, lying to get us into war, Harmans & Hasterts of congress…and yet nothing. This is exactly why I am seeking 'action' versus sitting in front of these tubes and get 'outraged.'

    MMonk: " And that is the job of a stenographer, not a journalist." Exactly. In fact let's start referring to them under this correct title, because calling them 'journalists' is to demean a respect-worthy profession. Right on.

  11. Bill Bergman says:

    If you aren’t trying hard to find something, its pretty easy not to be able to find it.

  12. Sibel Edmonds says:

    King Fisher: First, thank you for your kind words and support. Next, This is a blog where I share my views, analysis, knowledge, and do so as Sibel Edmonds the citizen, the taxpayer, the mother, the activist, as a graduate of Public Policy Major, as the person who'd lived in different parts of the world and knows what the road to police state/dictatorship looks like…Not only as 'Sibel Edmonds the FBI Whistleblower'; thus, the title. Is it more clear now? Hope so.

    Next, what do you mean by 'your case'? Do you see a case out there? Last time I looked the court case was 'Finale' via State Secrets Privilege with no legal 'explanation or justification.' Same with Congress, last time I checked they were gagged by some DOJ retroactive classification and although deemed 'illegal' by many legal experts, they were determined to comply with it indefinitely. So, no case there either. As for the MSM, they'd buried, and killed that case long time ago (not one has questioned the reasons for SSP. The reason I'm bringing this up: I don't know what you've been following as 'my case.'

    Next, the post you are referring to has nothing to do with 'justifying' or 'attacking' Hersh, or his report, or …Who is discussing JSOC? This is why I wrote that it deserves its own post; not by me, but by many who can discuss it: whether in support or opposition. I believe it is important and I want to hear more about it; know more about it. I believe many do. The post with Hersh example has to do with MSM and what this blog has been focusing on.

    Finally, this blog is what it is. I am very interested in others' views and suggestions on the issues I am currently writing about. I want all views that are stripped from partisanship. I welcome disagreements & critiques, but as long as they are reasoned and respectful; constructive. I understand that you are NOT interested, and consider it a mission creeper pundit. So long and best to you.

  13. Kathleen M. Dickson says:

    It’s working.
    Lawrence Wilkerson called Congress “spineless” today and Helen Thomas is in the news, complaining about the failure of the MSM, too, today/
    See RawStory.com

    K

  14. Metemneurosis says:

    David – (cause it’s easier to write if you want to reply)

    Hi Sibel,

    I noticed the same thing when I read the Hersh story. Good catch. I guess when I read it though I just wasn’t surprised, I thought ‘yeah Hersh is one of the only ones out there.’ But I’m never quite sure about how bad it is eaxactly. I mean there’s Eric Lichtblau and James Risen who did do the wire tap story. But then they also sat on it for a year right? I definitely agree good reporters are very few and far between but it’s people like Lichtblau and Risen that I’m uncertain how to judge. I suppose their trying to do a balancing act and their just willing to push a little farther than others but not as far as Hersh maybe. And I guess the other important thing is that Thomas Tamm came to them and possibly Tice as well (you may know more than I here). Whereas Hersh has been more proactive perhaps. If Tamm hadn’t come to them would they have settled for a less explosive more restrained version of the story? I guess this is empty speculation now. By the way since you’re thinking of moving to New Zealand 🙁 I wonder if you’ve heard of the Australian journalist John Pilger. If not you have to look him up. Just go to google video and put in “Freedom Next Time”.

  15. Kingfisher says:

    I do not mean “your case” in the legal sense; I mean it in the issues your legal case is exposed to. That is: public corruption, narcotics trafficking, nuclear proliferation, etc.

  16. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Thank you for the clarification. Then the amazing MSM blackout on the real issues involved in my case (such as those you listed) should be considered very relevant. For example: The reliance on Press Offices & 'assigned sources', the case I 'illustrated in the quote from Hersh's interview, has been a common theme among those journalists I've dealt with. Why, do you think, David Rose or Joe Lauria, were able to meet with several FBI agents and get confirmation/evidence, but no one else in the MSM here could? Or, why the above journalists had corroboration from DOJ, when the rest couldn't?

    I know some of these reporters, and I have seen how they 'work' the story: Make a couple of phone calls to the press offices of DOJ/FBI, maybe a congressional office, and of course they are going to get zilch. Same with given names: Instead of approaching the 'given' sources/witnesses outside their work, these 'reporters' actually call them at work, let's say at the FBI, who in the world would give information on the FBI case while working inside there???!!

    Now, please go back and read my short comments on Hersh story. It's about 'why certain journalists can get comments/information from valuable sources, while most can't/don't.' Some may call it 'lazy' journalism on the cheap; some may call it 'intentional mouth piecing,' and some may call it…I have worked with way too many whistleblowers to see and know how certain things work, or actually don't work (!) regarding the MSM. So, this is what we are discussing/analyzing here.

    If you have any comments on this topic or those related, you are welcome to add your voice; regardless of where you stand, what party you belong to, or who you are. If you don't, then, there are 10000000000 of 'pundits,' cases, blogs, sites out there, and one or a few or many may fit what you are 'interested' in. Regards.

  17. Sibel Edmonds says:

    David: The Times, not the reporters made that call (to sit on the story for 1+ year). Based on my own direct experience and those I know of, both Lichtblau & Risen seem to be good reporters; ethical and professional. Again, this is based on my own experience and knowledge. Actually this is an important point: I have known many 'good' reporters who felt their hands were tied…Let me give you a general idea:

    A 'good' reporter does his job, gets the story, establishes credibility of his/her source,gets one or more sources to confirm/vouch.. etc., etc. Then, when he brings it back to his editor, his editor says: 'You need to get two more sources who corroborates this; in addition to those you have.' So the reporter goes and gets two more, then, the editor says, but the second source wants to remain anonymous, until you get him on the record the story won't run…

    This is an actual case. Suddenly the reporter is pressured to fulfill thisimpossible task; asked to go beyond what they actually ever go.

    Now, the same editor will publish a story (brought to him by a reporter) that has to do with 'high-level government official source' who wants to remain anonymous ('n the background), will not provide any documents, or any other witnesses/sources. Take: Hatfil Story with Anthrax as an example. Of course the reporters were not forced to go and do real homework when it came to Iraq either…

  18. Metemneurosis says:

    Wow, that’s a very revealing story. I had I guess imagined the pressures coming from editors in a more caricatured kind of battle-of-wills, direct confrontation way. But the story you’re telling seems eminently more plausible and more insidious. And I’m sure that kind of thing is also easier for both the editor and the reporter to justify to themselves. Even if the reporter thinks the story needs to get out they may realize it could bring a lot of ‘heat’. So they may think the extra work they’re being asked to do is at least understandable. Thanks for sharing the anecdote.

  19. Sibel – i’ve been following all your stuff since hassart and the turkish connection – keep up the great work, stay strong, and stay out of small planes – you know what these people are capable of. Truth seekers like myself support you 100%! If there is anything I can do other than post links to your stories on message boards, just let me know. They will NOT be able to censor you forever!

  20. seedyrum says:

    I think the public has been dumby down by both parties> the DEMOCRATS given them:stuff(entitlements) and the REPUBLICANS have made the public afraid of whatever> so both parties has essentially "blackmailed" the public into doing nothing> the public compesates by watching and listening to puff pieces> MSM is owned and operated by the big corporations so the media is reluctant to upset the powers that controll their paychecks> the corporations have stopped innovating and being creative in bring "real and new products to the market since they can get no bid contracts or get tax cuts to outsource to emerging markets who have no regulations or standards for cheap and vulnerable labor>

    its a viscious cycle

    the public want cheap products so they buy from walmart>

    the walmarts of the country wants more profits so they take advantage of gullible foreign markets>

    our elected offiiclais are addicted to power and wealth (not of their own making aka quid quo) by way of lobbyists who wants to write the legislation for their companies but do harm to the rest of the country>)

    the public at large want MORE but dont want to pay>so if they complain it may upset the status quo so they remain silent> sad but true>

    we need to clean out CONGRESS of all incumbents (except those who were elected in the last four years) the cancer is in CONGRESS>

    THEN WE NEED TO DIVEST OR REPEAL CORPORATION OWNING MEDIA COMPANIES>
    government controls what is told to media but then the companies controls what the media allow to tell the public at large>

    republicans need to stop telling folks you arent patriotic if you dont support the Iraq WAR since we were lied into that war> and DEMOCRATS need to grow a spine and pushback on these armchair chikenhawks ( funny those who never been in uniform or fought in a war (can we say CHENEY AND FIVE DEFERMENTS) always want to go to war sending other peole children)

    the public at large needs to wake up and get involved before there will be nothing to salvage when they do decide to wake up>

  21. seedyrum says:

    oh yes please dont forget that BUSH and CHENEY politicized DOJ>CIA>DOD>

    now you have to ask WHY??????

    my guess they still wanted to control government from the outside>know what is going on >stymie
    any progress that Obama may make also they want to know if they will be charge with breaking laws>

    we are living in very troubled times>

    moles in DOJ: how horrid

    moles in CIA: how scary

    moles in DOD: how distructive

    it is what it is

    and yeah BUSH AND CHENEY not above blackmailing folks in CONGRESS to undermine USA to make the past administration RIGHT ON EVERY LIE AND DECEIT AND CORRUPTION they did in the name of USA>

  22. Kathleen M. Dickson says:

    Halliburton Whistleblower Gagged by US Army Corps of
    Engineers after Testifying in Congress
    http://www.opednews.com/articles/HALLIBURTON-WHISTLEBLOWER-by-Bunnatine-H-Green-090520-536.html

  23. Sibel,
    I think this piece in OpEdNews about says it all:
    http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypage.php?did=13221

    I sure would like to hear your take on this article.
    thanks
    joe

  24. And just why was my comment deleted?

  25. Anonymous says:

    Sibel:
    Please comment on the current Obama position on Valerie Plame as covered by JustaCitizen….
    http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/39740

    My take is treasonous activity perpetrated by both Republicans and Democrats is being given cover.

    One point that I do not see mentioned too often is the tie between your case and hers.
    Valerie was outed by… I believe… US Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith… when he warned turkish elements to stay away from her as her meet was part of a government nuclear sting operation.
    That was treason and way before US Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitige, was said to have outed her to reporter, Bob Woodward, in mid-June of 2003.

    best,
    ArchAnon

  26. Kathleen M. Dickson says:

    “One point that I do not see mentioned too often is the tie between your case and hers.
    Valerie was outed by… I believe… US Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith… when he warned turkish elements to stay away from her as her meet was part of a government nuclear sting operation.
    That was treason and way before US Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitige, was said to have outed her to reporter, Bob Woodward, in mid-June of 2003.”
    ===========

    OMG if that’s true, that explains Cheney going off the deep end recently.

    Which, BTW, crackks me up.

    Kathleen

  27. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Joe: I’ve been working on my op-ed piece. It should be out later today. I won’t be able to read it until later-maybe this weekend. Thanks.

    Rob: You’ve been posting some good comments. That particular one was off topic and sounded a bit out of place. Please stay within a reasonable parameters of the posts as much as possible. And, please don’t take it personal.

    Arch Anon: My next op-ed piece will be on Obama. It should be out by later today. It is not specifically on this topic. When appropriate, let’s say for providing case examples or illustrating a certain issue, I cover relevant points from my case. Other than that, this blog will be about macro issues such as: The MSM, Congress, Accountability, Lobby, etc. Now, as you know the MSM and many bloggers have turned the Plame case into something that fits their small world and narrow view. This way they can keep it ‘partisan’ and not threatening:-) So, you are right with your observation.

    Slay: Welcome and thank you for the support. Hope to see your comments here regularly.

  28. eric zaetsch says:

    Readers, some help —

    I have not tried to research this on the web, but my recollection was that as one outcome of the Church committee CIA inquiry that agency's assassinating people was ended.

    Then, was it a Bush executive order, Patriot Act fine print, or secret decision making – a signing statement to the Patriot Act, that such a curtailment was lifted?

    Also, if CIA cannot do it; DIA is the alternative, especially in Cheney and Rumsfeld times – but the entire JSOC thing McChrystal spearheaded, isn't it very heavily into assassination plots and actual actions?

    Two links:

    http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/05/top_secretgst_mcchrystal_torture_and_sy_hershs_book.php

    http://www.nytimes.com/1998/09/20/weekinreview/world-passing-laugh-test-pentagon-planners-give-new-meaning-over-top.html?sec=&spon=

    That last link, flying SEAL forces in on ultralights, to "capture" bin Laden? That would just be extra baggage on the ultralights flying out. But if not to "capture" then for what other purpose – to neutralize not by capture, but how?

    I have seen JSOC reported as an outgrowth of the failed hostage rescue attempt during the Carter years. If that's so, it's been with us for some time. Any reader insights about that?

  29. eric zaetsch says:

    Sorry to have left this out of the last comment – it goes to what MSM chooses to cover, or not.

    DoD head Robert Gates bashing NATO committment in Afghanistan:

    " 'I've been disappointed with NATO's response to this ever since I got this job. NATO, as an alliance, if you exclude the United States, has almost two million men under arms,' Gates said, wondering why they can't get more than 32,000 to Afghanistan has always been puzzling."

    That is showing up everywhere:

    http://www.rttnews.com/ArticleView.aspx?Id=953079&SMap=1

    http://kansasprogress.com/wordpress/index.php/2009/05/20/robert-gates-on-nato-ignoring-obama-us-progress-in-afghanistan-two-to-four-more-years-before-afghan-military-can-take-lead/

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/29/gates-i-expect-nato-allie_n_180430.html

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303956,00.html

    Is it a question of eternal quest for a good soundbite?

    Normally, this kind of thing between ostensible allies would be handled via diplomatic channels, not the press.

    What's up? Any reader or Sibel insights??? About this detail as an example, but more about the general question of the place and use [via planting either stories or apt soundbites] of the press?

    The reader comments about Plame, that was planting a story to get even with, and to discredit, truthtelling about Saddam, Niger, and yellowcake intent/actions.

    Is openness to plantings a bigger problem with the press than self censorship, or just the other side of one coin?

  30. Anonymous says:

    eric…
    The Plame affair was more than getting even.

    I speculate that the reason Sibel was gagged is that Congress was told that there was a disinformation campaign aimed at Turkis, Pakistani and other elements interested in acquiring US nuclear secrets.
    Sibel uncovered a novel US method of earning (illegal) foreign campaign and personal vacation funding while passing on US intelligence community operationally ‘blessed’ nuclear secrets with ‘supposedly’ key bits of incorrect information within…. disinformation.

    Or perhaps it was a way of furthering the ‘MAD’ (mutually assured destruction) policy in helping Pakistan to match up to India.

    Either way US government employees and elected officials personally benefitted from foreign payments for nuclear secrets. None of whom were legally registered foreign lobbyists at the time. Although more than a few became so after they left public office.

    High crimes and misdemeanors indeed.
    Our government has been broken for some time.

    ArchAnon

  31. John Medeiros says:

    ArchAnon:

    You stated “Our government has been broken for some time.” I have been reading the message traffic on this Blog, especially your inputs and given your expertise and that you work for the Government in a covert capacity, what is your contribution to fixing what is wrong and broken with our Government? After all, correct me if I am wrong but you are being paid and subsidized by the taxpayers or are you responding on your own time? Thanks

  32. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Eric: NATO-Much happening behind the doors…Let me put it this way, you also aren't hearing about this strong push to have other former Soviet States ( Cauc.& C. Asia) join NATO…Check out Azerbaijan's status on this; almost there. Now, this is making the Russians very…hmmm….uncomfortable. Just look what happened with Uzbekistan. Not only they kicked out US Base, but following that two major agreements/business deals were signed with Russia & China on 'Energy.'With Afghanistan, behind the scenes, certain NATO members, justifiably, are not comfortable supporting a war that mainly serves US strategic interests & of course certain future energy-sources related objectives…I won't be surprised of an attitude change in the near future once 'certain crumbs' offered to a few members…Okay, that's my take.

    Plame Issue: I have to agree with the point made below by Anon the Neocon. Despite the circus created by the trial, the 'CORE' issue had nothing to do with Plame or Libby. Sure, Cheney may have used some 'footnotes' to get back at some people, but that's not what this case was about. You have to look at Armitage & Grossman roles played, Brewster Jennings, and year 2001 when BJ was dissolved. Unfortunately that core aspect did not fit well with the Partisan scenario, thus, got totally ignored and buried.

    John Medeiros: I have to agree with one of your points- Anon the Neocon is certainly very knowledgeable in certain areas. I won't speculate further, but itc ertainly keeps things interesting:-)

  33. Anonymous says:

    Do not confuse Anon the Neocon with Arch Anon.
    We are not one and the same.

    I am only a concerned citizen lurker who has waded through a lot of posts over the years to piece together some likely truths.

    I also own my own business and make my own billable time anytime of the day neh.

    ArchAnon

  34. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Arch Anon:Thanks for the clarification! You see, this is exactly why posting under ‘Anon’ makes things confusing. Can you grab Arch Anon as blogger name for comments? Just a suggestion, as you see you almost became known as ‘Neocon’;-)I also appreciate your humor. Hope to see you lurk around here regularly!

  35. Imhotep says:

    Hello Sibel….
    As requested I’ve registered a blogger name…. different but similar to arch….

    See you on the net.

  36. eric zaetsch says:

    More Hersh and MSM, same site:

    http://archive.gulfnews.com/nation/Media/10313197.html

    There is Angry Arab News Service, where it is clear what rooftop he is shouting from; but he finds things:

    You can follow the link, to that item’s links; it’s not a joke:

    http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2009/05/another-scheme-from-american-zionists.html

    But then, his next item would have to be viewed as speculative at best:

    http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2009/05/mubarak-dead.html

    In sum – he reads Arabic which I do not, and he seems a fast reader and posts a lot – filter it, but it is not mainstream uncritically rehashed, not press release based.

  37. John Medeiros says:

    ArchAnon: I apologize for any confusion that I caused. But, I did identify myself clearly as “John Medeiros” as that is my name and I don’t use pseudonyms. Now that you have clearly identified yourself as “Imhotep”, it will make it easier for everyone to follow and track your future inputs.

    Anon the Neocon: ArchAnon has clarified for everyone by choosing a blogger/display name of “Imhotep”. Could you also please choose a blogger/display name and let us know what it is for everyone’s benefit?

  38. Anonymous says:

    While some of you have already heard my opinion on somehow leveraging the FCC to change the law to force all broadcast stations to make their “public file” available online and accessible by American Citizens, so they may complain and get the stations frequency allocation and station renewal denied.

    But I also wish to share a document with you I learned about back around 1983, 1984 (somewhere in there.) It has been updated and revised since then, but it’s absolutely applicable to the problem with have currently with corporate media.

    A brief description: “This tool can be used by parents, reporters, law enforcement agents, social scientists and others interested in evaluating the actual dangers presented by a given group or movement.”

    The document is called

    “The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame
    (Version 2.7)”

    http://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html

    Anyway, going by this chart on can only come to the conclusion, corporate, or fascist media (also called the MSM or mainstream media) is a DANGEROUS CULT!

    Armed with such knowledge, is why every so often you’ll hear me nipping at their heels with the “public file” idea. For a small time either in 2007, or 2008, I stumbled on a group out there who I thought were interested in the same idea about getting the FCC to force stations to make their public file accessible. I analyzed their content for a couple weeks and decided to write them. Sadly it’s 2009 and I have never received a response. They could have visited my website to contact me or just emailed me, but nothing. I got nothing.

    From the FCC’s own website I seem to only find vague, poorly thought out and zero timetable idea of forcing stations to do such a thing, but stations complain they can’t afford to. Which is a lie if you think about it, they all have websites, they all have streaming video, your going to tell me they can’t run a small database and some text file scripts behind a firewall? Utter nonsense.

    The other thing that bugs me about the FCC, is I remember reading a mission statement long ago, something about allowing all voices equal access to our public spectrum, and using engineers to better resolve the solutions to expedite it

    vs.

    Today we now have profit and fascism to shove spectrum around, with regard to the physics as an after thought and filter dilemma.

    (No, no no, that ain’t it, but it would be better than any mission statement they have now – I can’t remember what “the FCC’s mission statement” really was “then” and I know it’s not the nonsense they have up now. –Do they have anything up now?
    Although I believe it was based on that concept..Roughly.)

    I hope you see my frustration here.

    Anyway, That mission statement disappeared somewhere over time. And from what I can tell over the last 10-12 years…

    I am sure some wise guy will go find it now and make me look stupid. It still doesn’t change what I said about the public file and the Cult evaluation frame.

    ~phil
    http://sacxtra.com

  39. Anonymous says:

    “It seems to me they are using ‘can’t’ as in I can’t trust you to comment.”A long time ago, a music teacher in elementary school told me, “Phil, can’t means won’t.”

    ~phil

  40. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Phil: Your music teacher was right on.

  41. Sibel,

    Besides Seymor Hersh, what other journalists do you feel are independent & are motivated & skilled enough to uncover the facts of a news story?

  42. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Paul: That's a tough one. Okay, at least I can give you my take with a few examples:

    Take Eric Lichtblau-He is professional, ethical, trust worthy, and has been doing a good job, that is within 'the limits.' Same can be said for James Risen. Both work for NY Times. Individually I'd recommend them; as journalists. However, they have to perform within the 'limits' set by higher ups: Editors, management, legal department, etc. With that NSA breaking story they did their job, so what happened? The decision from the higher up was: sit on it for 1+ year.

    Even within very known polarized publications you can find a few. Take UPI/Washington Times & Shaun Waterman. He is another very good journalist, BUT he has to function, operate, AND keep his job (livelihood) under some very 'limiting' conditions…

    It would be easy to expect all of them to blow the whistle and go 'independent.' But they have to live, support family…Very similar to many who don't blow the whistle in agencies…

    As I've said I do have a fairly short list of solid reporters. My upcoming project for this blog (very very soon) will try to cover some of this.

  43. Thanks Sibel. I was unfamiliar with Eric Lichtblau & just read a short piece he wrote for Salon concerning the year long delay in getting his story published on the NSA spying program.

    I'm glad I found you're blog. Keep up the good work.

  44. Anonymous says:

    NSA whistleblower's story
    http://cryptogon.com/?p=9971

Speak Your Mind