Monthly Round Up: May 10-June 10, 2009

123 Real Change- Progress Report & Notes

Hard to believe it’s already been a month since I finally got down to it, joined the blogosphere, and started this blog. Originally I thought the blog would be limited to a few posts per month, mainly short commentaries on issues and topics of interest to me, and maybe an op-ed piece or two. Well, that changed, and did so quickly!

The lengthy series on ‘Dissecting the MSM’ ended up becoming a project of its own. I have 3 parts done, and one last post, part 4, Corporate Ownership & Public Demand, to go. I think I should be able to wrap that one up before the end of this month. I already have an idea and notes on my next series, and I think you will find it interesting and controversial; at least I hope you will. I won’t give out more but please stay tuned.

I have two reports on Project Expose MSM and am reviewing two other cases to see whether they are ‘solid’ and supported sufficiently to be published. It is quite difficult, but interesting and fun nonetheless. Exposing these cases is only step one. What we need to do is decide how to translate the knowledge of these cases into action. More on this later…

We have also had a few fun TGIF posts. For these I am running out of ‘fun’ but relevant ideas, and welcome your suggestions on our future TGIF topics. The criteria: Fun, humorous, and relevant to our general discussion areas. Please bring in your ideas. You can post them under the ‘comments’ section of our
last TGIF on June 5.

We have had over 25,000 visitors here in one month. This really exceeded my expectations for the first month. Most importantly I have been truly amazed by the depth of the comments you’ve posted: articulate, thought provoking, independent, and all that expressed and communicated respectfully and civilly. I have to admit, my biggest fear was to end up with lots of ‘one-liner’ shallow, ultra partisan, and or propagandist comments; the ultimate turn off and at times nauseating trend I’ve observed on many sites/blogs throughout the years. I am delighted to have you and your voice. I am learning a lot from you. Please don’t stop. For those of you among the 25,000 who have not added your voice yet: please join us. Let us hear and learn from you. Whether you are conservative, liberal, libertarian, realist, neocon…doesn’t matter, join the discussion and add your voice; enrich the discussion we are having here.

I have a few ideas and projects for the future of this blog. Some of them may be considered ambitious, but so what? I’ll do my best to implement them. One of these ideas will involve participation of a few solid investigative journalists I know and consider friends. Another one has to do with weekly Podcast interviews…However, before I start pitching and implementing them I need to get this blog, the number of visitors, and the number of posted comments to the next benchmark. I am hoping to establish a monthly average of 50,000 unique ID visitors by this fall. Ambitious? Yes. Doable? Surely. This also will largely depend on you and your support to get us there. Again please bring your ideas and suggestions. Those of you who happen to be savvy (I am certainly not savvy) in blogging and website promotion (cross-posting, RSS Feed, Digg, Reddit, etc.): I appreciate any help you can provide in this area…E-mail me if you are interested and can spare a little time to pitch in and help implement these ideas.

This is it for my brief monthly round up on this blog’s monthiversary. Now, it is your turn. Let me know what you think.


Peter Lance’s ‘Triple Cross’ & Patrick Fitzgerald

This coming week the paperback edition of Peter Lance’s latest HarperCollins investigative book TRIPLE CROSS is being released. The book is highly critical of Fitzgerald, particularly with respect to his interaction with al Qaeda master spy Ali Mohamed, and is already creating lots of controversy. I just received my signed copy from Peter, but I haven’t had a chance to read it yet.

So far Patrick Fitzgerald has sent four threat letters to HarperCollins, Lance’s publisher, threatening to sue if the book is published. He claims the book has defamed him and put him in a "false light."

Here is an article covering the latest on Lance’s book and Fitzgerald:

Ann Sparanese, the New Jersey Librarian who has waged anti-censorship campaigns in the past, sent an email to thousands of librarians nationwide chastising Fitzgerald for his attempt to pulp the book and calling it "A Book to Watch." Here is the link:

Lance’s Press Conference will be held this Tuesday, June 16, at 9:30 a.m., in the John Zenger Room of the National Press Club, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC 20045. I am invited to attend, and hopefully will make it there and report on it further here.

Okay, this was supposed to be a brief monthly round up! I’ll wrap it up here before it turns into a novella, and leave you with the latest from

Paul Jamiol:

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

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


  1. Kathleen M. Dickson says:

    AP to entertain non-profit journalism; I think we're getting to them.


  2. greatdogs says:

    I noticed this and thought it might be of interest to the audience here.

    How The Spooks Took Over the News

    In his controversial new book, Nick Davies argues that shadowy intelligence agencies are pumping out black propaganda to manipulate public opinion – and that the media simply swallow it wholesale

    The entire article can be reached at

    The Corporate Media, in their attempt to keep viewers and sell papers, have prostitued themselves in the pursuit of profit.

    A question for the readers here. Does anyone use the history commons. org site for information on subjects such as the US decision to invade Iraq or US policy towards Iran? I have followed the commons timelines since the Paul Thompson ivestigation into 9/11. Just wonder what your thoughts are on the commons site.


  3. Metemneurosis says:

    I've used history commons. As far as I can tell it's an unmatched resource in terms of getting a feel for the overall flow of events and starting your research on whatever it covers, at least as far as main stream sources. I haven't looked at it enough to know how much he uses non-mainstream sources, it's a place I've always intended on looking into more. It's great for putting things in context.

    Sibel, I'm sure this first month has involved a lot of work on your end. I updated Time's Sourcewatch page with stuff from the Gonzalez article. Plan to maybe do Wikipedia as well. Great job so far.

  4. Sibel Edmonds says:

    greatdogs: I think this is your first comment here; thank you and welcome. I think you may already know about the following article, if not, you'll find it relevant and interesting: 'The Man Who Sold the War' by James Bamford: Excellent piece.

    Metemneurosis & greatdog: I know Paul Thompson, and I have his signed book. It is almost like encyclopedia; well-documented, wealth of info. I go to the site very often to find references…

    Metemneurosis: Thank you! Adding the info there, both sites (wiki & Sourcewatch) goes a long way.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Congratulations on your 1st monthiversary – great job. I've been following all your posts and look forward with anticipation to the next one. The PodCast idea excites me – I've listened to numerous radio interviews you have given over the years and think you will make a great host/interviewer. Will you be doing all the interviews yourself? Will it be subscription based? I have a dozen questions, but I'll try to wait for your update. Keep up the great work & you'll have no trouble meeting and exceeding your goals.


  6. Metemneurosis says:

    Apparently Sourcewatch didn't like my addition to the Time page. They took it down. In retrospect I could perhaps have phrased it a little more judiciously (constant use of the word 'alleged'). I'll have to see if I can work out a compromise with the site admin over there. Editors again!! This is part of what he wrote on the discussion page explaining why he took it down. "As it stands it is asking readers to take a lot of assertions at face value.
    I was also left wondering whether the story has been reported anywhere in the five years since Gonzales and others approached Time. If not, I was wondering why that is the case" The term Kafkaesque catch-22 came to mind.

  7. mcthorogood says:

    I've been following your blog for several weeks via RSS. I just viewed "Kill the Messenger", the Triangle didn't surprise me.

    I just read this article "Seeing Red" at the following link.

    The analogy is made where the bull is the populace and the matador is the government. Through education, the media, and entertainment the matador keeps waving the red flag to detract the people from seeing the truth.

    Keep up the good work!

  8. Konstantin says:

    I've been catching up on your blog post. Great work. You've written quite a bit, hard to catch up. i'm still reading and digesting the early posts and comments.

  9. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Metemneurisis: Sourcewatch- Since the reported case has been witnesses by several (including me, Professor Weaver), since Time and the involved reporters were given plenty of chances to respond/comment, it should be as safe and solid as any 'MSM' reports they publish! Please keep me posted. As for the reason for continued black out on this story (and similar story): stay tuned for my next MSM analyses which will include several cited cases…

    Mcthorogood: I see this is your first comment here. Thank you & welcome. I hope we'll get your comments here regularly. I'll check the link; thanks.

    Konstantin: Same as above-welcome and thank you. I know; the posts and analyses are painfully long! On the other hand just look at the topic: it is a decease we've been inflicted with for a long time, complicated…Also in order to show the pattern, the context, I end up citing many sources and cases. That's good, because it goes deep and illustrates the larger picture. That's also a bit painful, because it takes time to read, digest, and come back with counter views/comments/etc. Finally, I am notorious when it comes to writing long long op-ed pieces/articles:-) Looking firward to reading your take, feedback…

  10. Eric Pottenger says:

    I'm going to address greatdogs' comment above, about the intelligence agencies pumping out black propaganda in the media.

    There was an article in NY Times, published a little over a year ago, about this very topic that should interest you:

    it's truly disgusting. every time I see some retired military general on CNN, MSNBC, whatever…reading his talking points on the war…well, you know…I get pretty 'bothered' and not in a good way. what I've actually started doing now is (when watching MSM news) imagining even the so-called civilian anchors as wearing military uniforms. makes it easier to connect the human with the message.

    I guess my only contention here with regard to greatdogs' comment is that greed and status, etc. may be the prime motivating factor for most of our participants in the corporate media, this is true, yet a bigger picture cannot be complete without observing the 'products' being sold. In other words, what is being substituted for truth? Take Sibel Edmonds' case. What were the details that MSM wanted us to come away with? FBI didn't have enough resources, enough translators, enough preparedness, etc. Exactly the argument also made by the 911 Commission Report. Not enough preparedness. Need more money, more resources, more legislation that provides more control. Feels like a script, doesn't it? And the media reports it word for word, usually without fail.

    And so I ask, is this just selling papers or increasing ratings?

  11. Anonymous says:

    What is the deal with Ali Mohamed? I read Lance's book and have a difficult time buying his theory that Mohamed duped the CIA, FBI, SDNY and US special forces. Lance even gives examples in his book that refute his own theory. The extent of time Mohamed is supposed to have fooled US agencies extends from '89 or '91 through '98. That is a rather long time for US agencies to have been fooled.

    Some have suggested that Lance is toeing the line in order to avoid the dreaded "anti-American conspiracy theorist" label. I've read his books, listened to interviews and watched speeches on the Internet and have never seen any indication that Lance doubts his theory that Mohamed was a successful al Qaeda mole.

    What gives?

  12. greatdogs says:

    Eric, the media had little choice in what news they covered or in how they covered it. Either they played the game or they were shut out. No embeds, no questions from their correspondents, no access ergo no news to report. A media that breaks the rules and will be consigned to reporting second hand stories, a not very profitable endeavor.

    Proof of this lies in the firing of Phil Donohue at MSNBC for his opposition to the war. Another example would be McClatchey news and the propaganda against Al Jazeerah.

    The Rolling Stone article that Sibel refered to provides part of the story as to the control of the storyline by the Administation and the Pentagon. Other sources are Denny Schecter's film "Weapons of Mass Deception" and LTC Karen Kwiatkowski.

    How many news directors in the mega media were willing to go out on a limb with a story that contradicts the "official line" with the outcome being exiled from the reporting pool, and being labeled as a traitor, and as being in bed with Saddam, or OBL (or the current enemy of the day)?

    I do not know what the solution is to the current scenario. The end of media consolidation is perhaps one option but I doubt very much that those who control the media are going to give up their power without a fight. Another possibility is that those like Sibel will with her postings get enough people interested in the corporate media's failure to perform it constitutional protected duty and to demand they and the people who fabricate the lies be held accountable.

    We'll see.

  13. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Anon: I haven't read the book yet, so I can't comment on Lance's angle/view. However I do agree with you- I have a more cynical but realistic theory on Ali Mohamed. Have you noticed the MSM coverage on him? Basically none, as in 'zero.'

  14. Eric Pottenger says:

    greatdogs, I agree with pretty much everything you have written.

    The fact that human motivation is involved with any human endeavor necessarily means that those participants in a powerfully controlled institution (like the media) must either do as the power instructs, or pay the consequences. Most are 'flexible' in this regard, hence the sorry state of all centrally-controlled institutional behavior.

    In the media this means printing, publishing, airing only the establishment positions, which may change its tune from day-to-day, year-to-year, but only to reflect new objectives, new realities on the ground. As the institutional logic prevails, it is the institutional objectives that remain the same.

    I guess the only thing that I wanted to emphasize (and I think you'll agree with me here) is that to understand the logic of their system of rewards, punishments, etc., is both to find out who controls this media and what it is they want. In other words, if these corporate/finance/military/governmental interests control what most people see/read etc., it helps to find out where they want us to go.

    This is where most people start getting confused, sidetracked, jumping to conclusions. This is also the only way to get answers.

    You concluded by mentioning breaking up the media monopoly. To my estimation, the media is perhaps the strongest pillar of their power, and the one under the greatest attack. Information control. Making a whore of perceived reality. Of course they won't abdicate this control without a fight. And so we must continue fighting.

    I applaud each of our efforts to combat this monopoly and I wonder, if people like Sibel and others wouldn't have been there to offer challenges to the government/media's fabricated realities, where would we be today?

    Either way, we are here and we have a job to do. I can feel that, together, we are changing the minds of the people that (right now, at least) matter most: the intellectuals, the brains that operate their machines. It's only a matter of time before the well-meaning intellectuals that jumped on to Obama's rhetoric of change get unfastened from the stupidity that illusion.

    Sorry to be long winded, but, hey, we're making an impact and so let's keep it up!

    and, thanks, greatdogs, for the discussion. I'll click on the link you provided.

  15. Metemneurosis says:

    Hi, greatdogs I agree with your posting for the most part except that I'd point out that there are in fact now reporters who report regularly from Iraq without being embeded with any military.

    "Then the American soldiers come over. A cursory check of your identity card. The usual quick interrogation. No, we aren’t embedded. No, we don’t live in the Green Zone. Yes, we go around Baghdad all the time on our own. Yes, really."

    Certainly it's more dangerous and not everyone is willing to do it. And it would have been even more dangerous during the earlier parts of the war. But not only did al Jazeera do it but also a young woman named Jo Wilding reported from inside Fallujah while the battle there was going on. If the major media had thought it was really worthwhile I think they could have found a way to report without embeding, at least after the initial invasion.

    On the discussion of disinfo in the media here's an interesting story involving the very current issue of preparing public opinion for attacking Iran.

  16. Anonymous says:

    It is being reported an east coast 911 truth activist[Greg Hoover] is preparing to file a defamation lawsuit against Glenn Beck and his producers in the Fox News Channel for specifically broadcasting statements characterizing those who question the governments official version of the 911 events as 'anarchists' 'terrorists' and as persons denying the Holocaust.[]

    The coercive nature of bullying or the psychology of bullying at this level as practiced by Beck and others like him, is part of the program of news control you are discussing. How to disenfranchise a movement or denigrate an opponent without actually addressing factual parts is the purpose of the exercise. or by changing its name, so that 'torture' becomes enhanced interrogation as already said, or 'war on terror' becomes 'overseas contingency operation'. Basic snow jobs that allow continuity while placating hostile opinion.

  17. Imhotep says:

    Your blog is so far unique in attracting serious thinkers expressing serious thoughts.

    You also treat the bloggers and their postings seriously and respectfully.

    Thank you !

    I have been toying with also posting at Daily KOS but I find that he has too many article postings, and much too many blathering nonsensical trivial comments. There also exists a team of hitbloggers that wait like sharks for the opportunity to tear a posting into pieces with distain, outright lies, and other heavy handed techniques.
    Every now and then there is a a gem comment there but it is such a waste of time to wade through and sift to find them.

    Happy Anniversary !

  18. Interesting little tiff between Fitz and Lance. I would say I don't know enough of what is said about Fitz in the book to comment. Anyway, I look forward to your ideas about your blog.


  19. Eric Pottenger says:

    remorris–thanks for including that Glenn Beck story…I thought about it after I last commented…it's a perfect illustration of both their tactics and ours. it's a wonderful sign that Greg Hoover responded so quickly to the challenge.

    f.y.i–I just found an Orwell essay that is highly-relevant to everything we're doing here. It's called "Politics and the English Language."

    I suggest it, not only because it offers a succinct presentation of the bastardization of language and thought (as a consequence of self-serving political reality), but also because it serves as a good guide to follow as we, individually, are trying to write clearly, thoughtfully, honestly, and changing people's minds.

  20. greatdogs says:

    Anon @6:08 am and Eric, with the reference to Glenn Beck, you are opening up another can of worms, talk radio and shock jock TV.

    It is amazing the number of people who rely on the national figures such as Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly et al for information and base their opinions on the words of these talkers. The hosts of these shows rarely have anything approaching debate and use projection, half truths and innuendo to make their points.

    I wish Greg Hoover the best of luck in his dealings with Beck. But remember, it was Fox News that did go to court to argue the news did not have be factual.

    Oh, Sibel, Thank You for the warm welcome and Happy Monthiversay!

  21. Eric, thanks for the link to the Orwell essay. It was not uninteresting 😉

  22. mmonk,

    I heard Lance interviewed on Amy Goodman a couple of years back, when Fitz was at the height of his popularity amongst the Left (remember, 'Fitzmas'?) and Lance really lit into Fitz (and Larry Johnson as well). Apparently, Fitzgerald really screwed up during his time in New York, in regards to the terror issue. However, I can't remember the details, so I'll have to read the book as well.

    Lance has proven to be right about Larry Johnson, I have to say with some sadness. Remember Johnson's pro-Hillary nonsense and B.S. he put out about Obama during the primary campaign last year?

  23. Ishmael says:

    Hi Ms. Edmonds,

    I saw another article in OpEdNews here that's a bit off topic but is relevant due to it's total non-coverage by the MSM. It's about a Chinese cubmarine colliding with a passive-towed-array cable streamed by USS John McCain in order to obtain a piece of the cable. This is similar to the incident mentioned of the forcing down of a US Navy P-3 anti-sub patrol plane in China a few years back:

    my comment from there:

    I spent 6 years as a destroyer sonarman working on anti-submarine warfare systems including passive towed arrays.

    The article author is correct about Chinese motives for obtaining a piece of a hydrophone cable. So here's my analysis of this piece.

    1. The Chinese already have advanced their submarine quieting regimen. How else would they have gotten so close to the array in the first place? The towed array is supposed to pick up and classify submarines at far greater distances than this incident. So why did the Navy allow this sub to get so close unless they hadn't picked up the sub on the array to begin with?

    2. Recent advances in diesel-electric sub technology have produced a new generation of ultraquiet boats virtually impossible to detect using passive technologies. Witness recent USN tests with a Swedish Goteborg-class boat showing passive systems ineffectiveness in finding the boat under ideal circumstances.

    3. China is using it's multi-trillion dollar holdings if US curency to upgrade it's Navy to blue-water status reminiscent of Adm. Sergei Gorshkov's upgrade of the Soviet Navy in the 1960's-70's. The difference is the Soviets had to pay for it themselves, the Chinese are using the money they got from us to accomplish the same thing.

    To me, the Chinese strategy is clear. Check US Military and economic power in Asia to allow China a free hand in reunification with Taiwan, control of resources in the South China Sea and obtain and hold critical resources in Asia for the continued growth of the Chinese economy.

  24. Eric Pottenger says:


    with regard to the Greg Hoover/Glenn Beck issue, a major victory here is not limited to a legal victory, although that would be nice. what Greg Hoover is doing is forcing a few more people that "don't get it" to pay attention to the ridiculousness of Glenn Beck and what Glenn Beck is usually saying. it shines just a little more light on to how corrupt the whole state-sponsored media enterprise really is. and that's a victory.

    I must say, if I thought that the extent of intelligent and passionate political discourse was limited to people like Glenn Beck, I would be sleep-walking through the issues,too. I mean, why bother? None of it makes any sense.

    Glenn Beck is just the kind of personality that reinforces stupidity with stupidity. we look at him and say, isn't political discourse stupid!? and then we stay ignorant because we're not aware that there actually are differences.

    we have all been woken up by something; some strange moment where we finally "got it" in a passionate way. but how many nameless moments preceded that strange moment; how many contributed to it? although we can't ever know the answer to this question, we intuitively know that these moments are there.

    realizing this, I say that justice is won in moments like these, in the moments that won't ever be remembered. to me it's like, THIS is the revolution that won't be televised.

  25. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Miguel: You are back! You are right:

    Larry Johnson: What a disgrace. I had to remove his name and membership (NSWBC). Not because I supported Obama's presidential bid, but because this was done so very disgracefully; a cheap shot done in even a cheaper way.

    I went to Lance's Press Conference today. He will post the conference on his blog (I have to find a link). You'll find his statements and several others' very interesting. I haven't read his book yet, but everything he has on Fitz: documented, confirmed, vetted several times to cover Harper Collin's a.. against any libel;-)

  26. YuvbinDuped says:

    Until you come full circle and realize that it is the Banksters that run America through the Federal Reserve and CFR you will get nowhere!

    The nexus of evil lies with those who are printing our money. They can buy everything. They have been running Americas government, our media and our military complex through corporations for decades.

    Please push Ron Paul's H.R. 1207 the Federal Reserve Transparency Act.

    The Federal Reserve as well as the CFR, Trilateral Commission, United Nations, Bilderbergs, etc. were all formed by David Rockefeller. They are all sovereign busting organizations which violate the U.S. Constitution. Mr. Rockefeller, whose family put up the WTC stated the following:

    "For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."


    "We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
    Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended
    our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost
    forty years."

    "It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world
    if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
    But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a
    world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite
    and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
    auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

    His family as well as J.P. Morgans and a handful of others took America over with the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. Please, I implore you, do the research. The "divide and conquer" partisan arguments are a waste of time.

    The Democrats and Republicans are merely a symptom.

  27. To YuvbinDuped:

    Please read more of the articles and comments here, then calm down and respect yourself and your ability to respect others, then comment some more.


  28. YuvbinDuped says:

    Not trying to be rude. We are way past urgency stage here. I love and respect Sibel for all her efforts and applaud them. The cancer starts with our financial network. The Creature From Jeckyll Island has been attacking us for 97 years. Now Obama gives them even more power. I actually see it in the reverse. Obama is merely their puppet.The Serpents head must be removed to affect any real change.

    There are two members of Congress that I wish Sibel would meet with. One is Ron Paul and the other is Dennis Kucinich. The only two that appear to care about the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    Could you just imagine the skeletons that would come from that Fed closet after 97 years?

Speak Your Mind