I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
I think Scot Simon drove us to war.
When you consider just how much GWB wanted that war, I'd say that Chalabi merely played to the prejudices of the neocons. How fortunate for him that this administration is weak and venial!
Scorpio
Eccentricity
Yum, what tasty tripe!
NPR screw with truth!
George W. Bush-boy drove us to war. See, that mean old Saddam tried to kill his daddy. Cain't ya'll see that? God dammit.
It was also Chalabi who told Condi not to worry, the hijackings would be merely "traditional" ones!
I knew there was pure evil hiding behind those chubby chipmunk cheeks.
But seriously, W's gotta lay the blame somewhere.
I think that this is a positive development. It was only a few weeks ago that the media was pretending to only just now discover this strange little man. From pretend obscurity to omniptotence ma just be the first swing of the pendulum.
Sure Chalabi "drove us to war." In a tank built by BushCo and serviced by Judy Miller, Chris Hitchens and the late and unlamented Michael Kelly.
Chalabai said it's all Tenet's fault
ball back in the Bush court.
I wonder what the Freepers think about this.
Only Iraqis Get Cheap Gas Despite Forecast
By JIM KRANE, Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD, Iraq - One of the prewar forecasts was that by invading Iraq (news - web sites), the world would profit from stable exports of Iraq's oil. And that would translate into cheap gas for American drivers.
Instead, Iraqis seem to be the only people getting cheap gas as a result of the invasion. They pay just five cents for a gallon — thanks to hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer subsidies.
"We thank the Americans. They risked their lives to liberate us and now they are improving our lives," said Hashim, 26, topping up the tank on his beat-up 1983 Volkswagen.
This excites me....anyway we can get the blogsphere behind this!?
This does my heart good, and it might yours too:
America's Most Wanted
"The Detroit Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild is calling upon U.S. Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat from Detroit, to help in getting a special counsel appointed to 'investigate President George Bush and top members of his administration for conducting an illegal and catastrophic U.S. war of aggression against Iraq.'
"In a letter mailed to Conyers on May 18, the lefty lawyers laid out their case that the prez and his top minions committed numerous war crimes.
"'First,' states the letter, 'these officials conspired to start an unlawful war of aggression, justified by lies. Then they carried out their illegal conspiracy. It included unlawful killing of thousands of Iraqi civilians, destruction of civilian infrastructure, and use of weapons of mass destruction like cluster bombs and depleted uranium against the civilian population of Iraq. Throughout this conspiracy, they have implemented policies and practices for unlawful arrests, detention, interrogation, beatings, abuse, humiliation and torture, in violation of fundamental human rights protected by law.
"'As a result of their misconduct, the dangers of international terrorism have been severely inflamed, international friends and allies turned away, and the security of our people imperiled.'"
Being Republican means never having to say you're sorry...or you're wrong.
Have A Nice, Hot Cup O' Joe!
The whores have one thing in mind:
Not to let Chimpy unwind.
They cover his tracks
Like lickspittle hacks,
And line up to kiss his behind.
no, FUCK you, NPR
Chalabi came over to my house last night, I was tired and didn't want to go out, but he talked me into it. Then he wanted to go to this one skanky dirty bar downtown and I was like "no way, man" and he was all bein' persuasive and shit, so we went there too. Then, after he got me drunk, he bought a round of shots and I said "no way, I'm out," but he insisted. I took the shot. I woke up with a raging headache sitting on my patio.
Damn you, Chalabi!!!!
what above said. all chalabi did was give georgie an EXCUSE he could us to invade, which georgie had been looking for.
when is the press gonna see the oedipal reason?
Assigning blame for the Iraq fiasco has become quite the game of *Hot Potato* for these children.
Chalabi got into the White House by caliming he could cure the Bush girls of hemophilia. From then on he had a strange hold over the family. It's really not George's fault.
I remember before the war started, there was a pollster on Weekend Edition talking about people attitudes about the war. The guy said that most people wanted more time for the inspectors, and U.N. backing etc.. The pollster then said Kerry's Position was that he wanted more time the inspectors, U.N. backing etc.. The host said that Kerry's position was awfully complicated, and that he would have a hard time explaining it to most people.....
WTF!!!
Thousands of innocent people are dead because of this war and these fucks are still alive.
No fair.
99% of mainstream reporters wanted desperately to go to war with Iraq. Even NPR. They wanted more blood after 9/11! Now they have second thoughts and are feeling guilty and want to blame it on Chalabi.
Is Daniel Schorr that guy with the gravelly old man voice? I think he's more of a commentator than a reporter.
Impeach Bush for being the dupe of homeless Iraqis.
"Thousands of innocent people are dead because of this war and these fucks are still alive.
No fair."
Agreed. Does anyone, ANYONE in the mainstream media EVER seem to care about the thousands of Iraqis who have in this war? I think not.
Also hundreds of thousands are dying in the Sudan-- and do they care? I think not.
They're pampered and selfish fucks.
Scott Simon sucks. Schorr doesn't suck as much, so I'll give him some leeway on this.
OT: I went over to CSPAN to see what viddies were being watched the most and I noticed today's edition of WJ was the second most watched (which is odd for something only a couple of hours old to be ranked so high). Today's ed. is with Greg Palast. Watching it now. He's a lot more convincing on TV than he is in writing.
By the way, Daniel Schorr has been a fairly harsh critic of the Bush Administration all along. I would be very careful to rely on second hand word of what he said. Schorr may have been using hyperbole. I haven't heard Schorr's piece so I can't characterize it, and it may very well be that our biases against SCLM are making us overly receptive to anti-NPR propaganda.
I wonder what the Freepers think about this.
Freepers ... think ... wait, it's too easy.
A.
We neeed a new meaning for the NPR acronym -- NeoCon Propaganda Radio?
Any other suggestions?
semi-on-topic. As usual there is so
much going on, that something as big as Tenet just falls off the radar.
I THINK he was chosen as the fall
guy for Abu Ghriab(?), 911 and the
bad Iraq intelligence. That seems to
nicely wrap up a binch of govt fuckups in one, Clinton-connected
package.
A non-contradiction is that the
neocons hate him for making sure they
pay for Plame.
I don't understand whether there is
also some context from the Chalabi
outing, as well as the IGCs sudden
"self organisation" ability as soon
as Brahimi showed up.
In other words, I SENSE that he
is both a fall guy and indication
of a neocon victory in the govt,
but I can't put the meat between the
pieces of the puzzle (to use a mixed
metaphor I'm quite proud of).
from today's pentapost:
Free for All
Saturday, June 5, 2004; Page A19
Count the Iraqi Casualties
Adding to the frustration about the Iraq war is the near-absence of information in the U.S. media about Iraqi casualties. I would expect such treatment from Fox News but not from quality and (mostly) balanced media organizations such as your paper.
Please tell us how many Iraqis are dying.
-- Michael Vaa
Little Silver, N.J.
Chalabi's just a content-provider. His customers were fat, happy, and stupid. Just tell 'em what they want to hear (remember Toles?).
Is Daniel Schorr that guy with the gravelly old man voice? I think he's more of a commentator than a reporter.
Frebnedzo: (I love your name) I have sneaking suspicion the bad guys have won -- at least temporarily. And I don't buy the "Powell is =.+d at Tenet" argument either. I think they outted Chalabi together and Tenet gave Powell cover. So who is this Stephan Cambone guy anyway? He's certainly kept a low profile until lately. The first time I ever heard of him is when he strong armed Taguba in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
I smell evil.
A high-ranking source in the administration said:
"Look, we inherited Tenet from Clinton, and obviously he didn't do that good a job. The President supported him as long as possible but Chalabi was the last straw. So the President decided that we had to deal with Chalabi and seek new leadership at the CIA. These things happen. The important thing is the President has taken action and we can move on.
/parody
Daniel Schorr was sticking it to freeper-types when many on this board, including the moderator, were still in diapers. Who the hell are you, Atrios, the comment police?
Sorry, Schorr defenders: he absolutely sucked this morning. On most days, it's clear that he's just read the headlines and listened to the slightly left-of-center opinions of his friends, then goes on the radio to spout conventional wisdom. On some days, like today, he's just nuts.
He went on and on about how the Iraqi Governing Council's hijacking of the process for selecting a new government was a shining example of democracy in action. Excuse me?!!?? These kleptocrats who have absolutely no legitimacy in the eyes of the Iraqi population give themselves some new titles, and this is democracy? Huh?
I know Schorr is a legend, but he really needs to retire. Unfortunately, the way NPR is going, he'd probably be replaced by an ultra-conservative. Or Kookie would get more air time. Pleccch.
Alex: Agreed. Does anyone, ANYONE in the mainstream media EVER seem to care about the thousands of Iraqis who have (died) in this war? I think not.
No they get the barest mention, hardly even. And since all media is worldwide, this sends a very clear message to the rest of the planet: US casulties bad, anyone else, who gives a fuck.
Basically, there's no problem in invading another country and killing 10,000 or so civilians -- as long as 'freedom is on the march'.
Assigning blame for the Iraq fiasco has become quite the game of *Hot Potato* for these children.
The circular finger pointing squad. Uggabugga should diagram it.
Too bad the Bushies are too stupid to hire someone like anon as their spokesperson. That's good for us, though. I've had a hard time listening to NPR since the build-up to war. Instead, I've been listening to the local station that carries 'Democracy Now' and other subversive programs when they aren't playing ecclectic music sets. I'm in Utah, so it's great that we even have such a station among the mostly stepford population.
Yesterday they had an excellent local program where they played clips from a lawyer's speech. He laid out an excellent case for the Bush administration's impeachment. Damn! I wish this stuff would make the mainstream media!
It's not just the war here though about foreign deaths.
Any time a plane crashes, we hear something like Air India flight 530 fell today, with 285 dead, none of them american.
Heck, when Turkey has an earthquake that kills 10,000 we don't care.
If 15 american tourists were killed in a tourist bus accident the day before the quake though, that would have been huge news. If they were murdered, even bigger. 10,000 foreigners killed, isn't important.
I have yet to figure out why it should be more important to me that some person who lives on the east coast, while I am on the west coast, in a country of 300 million is supposed to matter to me personally more than anybody else on the planet. Now if somebody in my city, my neighborhood, or more specifically my family is killed, then it hits home. I am sorry that Bob from Hoboken, NJ died in that plane crash, but the other 300 victims count as well.
NPR has been a mainstay of the Vovlo-driving, tea and croissant crowd for quite some time.
It still has a certain credibility w/ the bumper-sticker social activism crowd, who hasn't apparently noticed the drift towards the championing of corporate interests. Look at who underwrites the programming if you need any indication of where their sentiments are.
Daniel Schorr is a tired old fart who is pretty much irrelevant to anyone younger than 35.
Yeah, I remember now. Chalabi went to the us congressand had a war resolution passed. Then Chalabi went to the UN. Then Chalabi ordered our troops to deploy. Then Chalabi declared war.
Yep, its Chalabis fault.
I wouldn't be so hard on Schorr.
Once you get people used to the idea that Chalabi was the single source for most of the "intelligence" that was used to justify the war, it's a short step for voters to conclude that the administration that relied on him was a bunch of morons. People hold conclusions more firmly if they come to them on their own. The realization that Chalabi played these fools for, well, FOOLS is inescapably dawning on a lot of voters. When they look to hold someone responsible in November, Bush will be holding all the tickets in that lottery.
Oh I forgot to remember. The Supreme Court appointed Chalabi as President of the US too.
Emphyrio here.
Hey, lighten up on dear old Dan Schor. I think that Chalabi genuinely did fool a lot of his supporters.
Their lack of good will, due diligence, competence or any reasonable hesitation before a war they were hell-bent on starting won't be obscured by that.
Iraq is a disaster, and those voters inclined to hold the Bushies responsible for anything will blame them, whether or not a "Chalabi fooled me" excuse is offered.
VMA- but its not w's mistake or responsibility. Iraq is Chalabis baby period.
Nothing is w's mistake, or responsibility. He makes no mistakes, and certainly God doesn't either.
Hang Chalabi for taking the US to war.
anon 11:26- yeah but the CIA did NOT trust Chalabi- the neocons did.
Overreacting a little? It's Schorr's commentary. He has as much a right to it as anyone ... Political correctness comes to opinion now?
Hell, they don't mention the 10,000+ Iraqi civilian casualties because many Americans don't have a hard time with that, especially those 'compassionate' born-again Christians I've talked to.
Perhaps if there were a reality TV show about the daily lives of the Iraqi people, they might care. Maybe if Americans got to see their heroine's wedding party blown to bits, for instance, the horrendousness of what we're doing over there might sink in.
Daniel Schorr has been spouting RNC spin for a while now. i remember him saying that the election results in Spain were a win for terrorists and a loss for Bush.
Heyyyy Kool-aid!!!
It was also Chalabi who told Condi not to worry, the hijackings would be merely "traditional" ones!
Sharkbabe
That's a joke, right?
political correctness?
Trifecta, if they're from one of those bible belt states, I care even less.
The "Iraqi Casualties" talk here reminds me of the headline of the 80's parody Not the New York Times:
Earthquake Sinks Japan: 94 American Tourists Killed
OT- Last night four armed officers came to my neighbors home. They announced that they were there to search his house for bomb making materials. He asked for the search warrant. They told him that they did not need one under the Patriot Act. They searched and found nothing, apologized and left.
I have written to the ACLU- this can not be legal can it?
Can we PLEASE differentiate between one commentator and an entire network, even if it is a veteran voice on that network? Would you say "screw you CBS" based on an Andy Rooney commentary? Schorr is voicing opinion pieces, not issuing blanket NPR policy. He also hasn't said much interesting for decades but that's beside the point.
The point is this:
Screw/Fuck you oversimplification.
I'll do you one better, Atrios:
Fuck NPR!!!
I'll say it again: Fuck NPR!!!
And one more time, 'cause I LOVE saying or writing it: Fuck NPR!!!
Keep attacking these sons of bitches, Atrios!!
Bring these bastards down!! Do it by continuing to enlighten people as to how routinely and pathetically misleading NPR's news coverage is.
I will be glad to do my part here in my own personal sphere of influence.
My hope is that slowly and gradually, but nonetheless steadily, we will erode their subscriber base across the country, and then get it so that a lot of that money starts going to truly independent voices and news sources on the Internet.
By the way, everyone. This morning I just came across an interesting website that appearst to be still under construction. It is called:
"www.nprsucks.com"
Go pay the guy a visit. Maybe you can help figure out a way to help him out by sending him your ideas at:
mail@nprsucks.com
One last thing: www.FAIR.org recently released a study of NPR's reliance upon various sources. It shows that it overwhelmingly skews toward white, Republican and establishment voices and sources for opinion and "news."
Check it out at: www.FAIR.org.
I too have been gravely disappointed in Schorr's commentaries recently. He seems to be pulling his punches or phoning it in. Maybe he's just not motivated any longer.
The "Iraqi Casualties" talk here reminds me of the headline of the 80's parody Not the New York Times:
Earthquake Sinks Japan: 94 American Tourists Killed
"march ta war, march ta war"
"i pray for peace, april...i pray for peace"
I think NPR is on the list of what's called "Left Gate Keepers". Only tinfoil hat wearers might know about this. It's patently foolish to think that Chalabi is the sole instigator. The notion is rejectable on its face.
AKA
"One last thing: www.FAIR.org recently released a study of NPR's reliance upon various sources. It shows that it overwhelmingly skews toward white, Republican and establishment voices and sources for opinion and "news."
Check it out at: www.FAIR.org.
Jeremiah Elias | Email | Homepage | 06.05.04 - 11:52 am | #"
No shit. I don't need FAIR to tell me that they use biased think-tank sources.
We neeed a new meaning for the NPR acronym -- NeoCon Propaganda Radio?
I prefer "News Painted Republican"
"OT- Last night four armed officers came to my neighbors home. They announced that they were there to search his house for bomb making materials. He asked for the search warrant. They told him that they did not need one under the Patriot Act. They searched and found nothing, apologized and left."
--Damned right you should contact the ACLU. Last I checked, the protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution regarding search warrants and search and seizure protections trumped any act of Congress . . . including the Patriot Act.
BTW, I am unfamiliar with any provision in the Patriot Act other than the "sneak and peak" provisions that apply when someone is not at home that allow people to search property without a warrant.
What town do you live in, by the way? I ask because many cities have passed resolutions instructing their law enforcement officers not to cooperate with federal agents acting pursuant to the Patriot Act.
veritas--Under The Patriot Act, it is not only legal to search a house without a warrant, they could have hauled your neighbor off and detained him indefinitely without access to legal counsel. Welcome to Bush's Amerikka.
veritas-if W wasn't concerned about Chalabi being hung around his neck, why is he now saying he barely met the guy?
I think we are seeing a war being played out within the administration. The CIA, the uniformed military, and State are leaking info like sieves, all of which shows Bush and his judgement in a disastrous light. Even stalwart Republicans like Gen. Zinni and Tom Clancy are embarrassing him. If he doesn't clean house,especially at defense, he will own the blame. If he does purge them, he will be admitting failure. A Hobson's choice.
In short, I don't think he is escaping blame or benefitting by the outing of Chalabi. Every time we see another story about Chalabi selling us out to Iran we will see the picture of him smiling unctuously over Laura Bush's shoulder at the SOTU.
"i'd wake up with blood on my ass & then we'd get high!
goooooood tiiiiiimes!"
-jerri blank, STRANGERS WITH CANDY
why change "fuck" to "screw?"
I call NPR "National Propaganda Radio."
'Cause it truly is.
Apologies for the duplicate post. Never hit "refresh" to get new comments if you've posted. Click the link on the blog and let javascript do its work.
OT- Last night four armed officers came to my neighbors home. They announced that they were there to search his house for bomb making materials. He asked for the search warrant. They told him that they did not need one under the Patriot Act. They searched and found nothing, apologized and left.
Veritas, CALL the ACLU!
No more clear-cut unresonable-search case could exist. That could go to the Supremes.
Get some digital pictures before they clean up! Important!
Regarding what can be done under The USA Patriot Act--the bottom paragraphs of this article are particularly disturbing:
http://tinyurl.com/2qflo
Daniel Schorr was sticking it to freeper-types when many on this board, including the moderator, were still in diapers.
Speaking as a Daniel Schorr fan from the Watergate era, I can confidently say, without fear of contradiction, that that worm turned quite some time ago.
Reagan was once a Democrat. Senility does strange things...
Oops! Here's a link for the copy and paste impaired:
Patriot Act
BTW, I see there's another "dave" posting... accept no subsitutes!
On a related topic, has anyone read Ken Auletta's article in the June 7th 'New Yorker'?
It's a revealing look at how the CPB and PBS are explicitly pushing public broadcasting to the right.
Google "Left Gatekeepers". The results show something different than what the label explicitly implies.
Donna, AKA
I heard the segment this morning, and really didn't see the pro-Bush spin that others have attributed to it. To be sure, the notion was implicit that the Bushies hadn't already decided on 9/12 to make war against Iraq. But I don't know if "Chalabi played us" is a talking point Ed Gillespie and Marc Racicot can make much use of.
NPR is definitely biased against cynicism, no doubt about it. And in this case, cynicism is the most accurate take. But I strongly disagree that this is a reason not to support NPR in general. If everyone got their news from NPR instead of commercial or right-wing media, this country would literally be a much better place to live.
I didn't know Chalabi was a Jedi. Too bad the government and the media are weak-minded fools...
veritas,
I would suggest - that if your neighbors are willing - that they speak loudly to local media, community groups, etc. about this. It is important that average people know that average people can be swept up by the Patriot Act.
BTW, NYT has a frightening article up about Brandon Mayfield, and about how the Spanish authorities had to fight for his rights as the FBI wanted to close their eyes to the lack of evidence.
John Ashcroft's America is frightening. (Word on the street is that even the rest of the administration hate this rat bastard. Worst AG ever.)
NPR is so sad and infuriating these days.
OT, since hearing last week's tapes of Enron brokers gleefully discussing raping Granny's pension, and seeing the sleazy banality of the Abu Ghraib interrogators, and reading how Americans actually rode an old Iraqi woman like a donkey--
I've come to see that these are the moments that give us the true picture of the utter comtempt with which the Enron business types hold average citizens, and which is Bush's government-as-business model.
I tuned in my local public radio affiliate at two different times during the day yesterday, and both times the discussion was about Christian rock music (?????)
At least they didn't have a guy from the Washington Times to comment on it, he would have had to tell them about the REAL Messiah and true parent....
What are we gonna do, invade Iraq again?
Wow, a lot of NPR hatred from people who seem to listen to it obsessively. Offering different perspectives is not the same thing as spewing right wing lies. If you really think NPR has a rightwing slant or is Neocon Radio, well, you're just being foolish. NPR has people from Heritage and AEI on pretty frequently but they also offer tons of leftie experts. If you want advocacy radio go listen to Pacifica or Rush Limabaugh, both of which would love to have you. Yeah, you might hear something you violently disagree with on NPR. Are your beliefs so shaky that they can't withstand that?
Check these out! BTW, so many of Raimondo's predictions concerning Iraq, that he made pre-invasion, have come true that the new age types are probably going to start claiming that he's clairvoyant.
Chalabi-gate: None Dare Call It Treason
Neocons behind bars? Sounds good to me…. by Justin Raimondo:
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?a...?
articleid=2683
The Chalabi Follies
The neocons' man in Iraq goes down – what does it all mean?
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?a...?
articleid=2647
When my daughter was four, she called it "National Puppet Radio". Seems precient.
Yeah, you might hear something you violently disagree with on NPR. Are your beliefs so shaky that they can't withstand that?
Their downhill slide might have started with the ADM scandal. It's not that they report things that I disagree with, but it seems that the balance slipped from reporting news to having commentators. I used to hear things on NPR before they hit the mainstream. This is no longer true, and I don't think that it is because the mainstream has gotten better.
@PeterB,
I heard about the politization of the CPB/PBS thanks to a Common Cause email alert this week. Part of the plan is to cut Now with Bill Moyers to a half hour and add shows hosted by Tucker Carlson and Paul Gigot to the PBS line-up. All in response to pressure from political partisans.
Common Cause has info on their website (commoncause.org) and a "take action now" link that helps you send a fax to the CPB or write a letter to the editor.
We need to invade NPR and hood the wingnut moles who have infiltrated and taken over what was once a national treasure. Now it is national garbage straight from the WH and the natl. gop.
Would some people in D.C. please start picketing NPR! Just a handful of people out there for an hour each morning for a week would bring some needed national attention to FOX's sister station.
Perhaps it's also worth identifying all of the decision makers at NPR and tracing their roots to the GOP. I bet $100 it they will be right there, plain as day. And I suspect it would not be that difficult to uncover the fact that there was a plan to turn NPR conservative and GOP friendly (now that they control everything).
Open letter to Atrios.
No Atrios--fuck you.
Did you even listen to what he said--the audio file is on the NPR web site. You have taken this completely out of context and compounded the mistake with your profanities. Look a-hole, Dan Schorr provides reasoned analysis of the news and has progressively gotten more and more harsh in his criticisms of the Bush administration over the weeks. This knee-jerk idiotic reaction to rumors is what the right does--lets not fall into that trap as well. Look there is a lot of big news going on right now most of it pretty damning of the administration, why don't you use your immensely popular pulpit to bring that out rather than just playing meaningless gotcha games with the media.
Daniel Schorr:
"...and now all of a sudden, people are getting wise to Chalabi, almost single-handedly getting the United States into war, because all these naive people believed him, or wanted to believe him. So all of a sudden Chalabi becomes a great big issue." [emph. added]
Scott Simon:
"Mr. Chalabi, who has been interviewed on this program, denies misrepresenting anything and says it was up to U.S. intelligence sources to verify and certify the information that was provided by defectors with whom he put them in contact with..."
But go ahead, I guess. They're all whores, etc. Blah blah blah.
Yanno, I heard Nina Totenberg, NPR's legal "expert" the other morning going on and on about how silly the whole issue is about Bush seeking outside counsel. She said, quote, "Of course they're (they being the grand jury) not going to find anything on Bush!"
She basically repeated this a couple of times. Now, given that grand jury testimony is secret, and that no one can possibly know what has been disclosed in testimony thus far, it makes me wonder how she *knows* this...Or if she just figured she'd base her report on what her tea leaves said that morning.
So the FBI is questioning which drunk in the administration gave Chalabi the secrets. Why does it seem like such a safe bet that no one in management at USofA Corp. will take responsibility in any real way.
NPR does a creditable job much of the time, but they too often seemed determined to join the race to the bottom going on at network news corps.
Yes, NPR is a brothel, has been for decades. And I saw last night that PBS is putting out a program featuring Tucker Carlson soon. I imagine it's supposed to be an ideological balance to NOW. You wonder how you balance real news program featuring real journalists with a soft-faced, soft-handed, soft-brained, bow-tied young fogey who is barely thought with his cable training.
HoloScan seems to be particularly funky today. Anyone else getting weird effects?
Okay, this has touched a nerve. I posted longer comments on it over at my place.
"...to go nuclear on NPR, which despite its fear of the Right, and its hundred little capitualations, does provide much less ideologically colored information than corporate media, seems self-defeating to me..."
More at Emphyrio.
It was a Daniel Schorr piece about the Spanish electorate's "appeasement" of terrorists that caused me to withdraw funding from my local NPR affiliate. Good to see he's still on the case.
.
I think NPR is on the list of what's called "Left Gate Keepers". Only tinfoil hat wearers might know about this. AKA
Kate_Storm
They do mark the boundary point past which the discussion can go no farther left. But that mark is well onto the conservative side. Our major print organs mostly respect the line followed by NPR.
Suppression of free thought in the United States by means of ignoring it has proven more effective than outright oppression. Bread and circus, or as today, corn sweetner and trash TV.
Thunk, they are perpetuating the GOP meme that GWB is accountable for nothing. Anything that happens is someone else's fault. No WMD, no reason to invade, well that's the CIA and Chalabi's fault. 9-11, that was Clinton's fault. The shitty economy? Clinton's fault. Torture at AG, just a few bad apples at fault. Leaking names of CIA agents? We'll never know, where's my lawyer.
NPR is so blatantly biased (see study that they use conservative sources over so called liberal ones at a 7 - 1 ratio) that they should be help up for ridicule every day.
"I'm the commander. See, I don't need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."
-GW
NPR has long been sliding into the irrelevancy of what I call an "official" media, sort of what one finds in soft authoritarian regimes like Mexico or Egypt. The official version of any story is what gets the most play & is deemed legitimate; other alternative narratives (the illegitimacy of the Governing Council, for instance) simply don't make it onto the air.
Scott Simon has long been particularly odious -- with his bogus piety, his little sermons. I recall his outrage during the Clinton follies, and his ire commenting of how the Clintonistas trashed the White House upon thier departure. Now that story as we all know was untrue, a clear dirty-tricks operation (boy they got off to a good start), but Simon never revisited it, nor took to task those that would engage in such smears. The last comment was his outrage at the sleazy Clintonistas.
Fast forward to the week the torture photos broke on CBS and in the New Yorker. That Saturday, it merited 1 mention, when Schorr noted the President has problems with some pictures...At a moment when the ugly face of the New Imperial USA! surfaced, when the foundation of who we are & what we stand for suddenly cracked, in the 2 hours of Simon's show, there was silence. When it seemed safe and/or unavoidable, he did make it the subject of his little pietistic sermon the NEXT week, in which he intoned how regretable it was that these bad soldiers had sullied the reputation of the noble US Army, citing how wonderfully we'd treated captured Iraqis after Gulf War I, when he was embedded with an outfit responsible for rounding up the remnants of Saddam's army (he seems to have missed the slaughter on the Highway of Death, but no matter).
I no longer listen to weekend Edition Saturday.
In another report, that had me firing off an unacknowledged email to NPR, during the seige of Fallujah, Ann Garrels did a human interest story on the US snipers -- how they were good country boys, and not one had shot anyone, according to them & their officer, other than Iraqi fighters. While a number of human rights groups & Arab correspondents who were in Fallujah would beg to differ, the story had the nice, reassuring NPR touch that we're really nice people. Official media, indeed.
Boy talk about synchronicity--I was reeling in disgust yesterday when I stumbled across some Ray Suarez hosted "news commentary" show (caught it toward the end, don't know/care what the actual titleof the show was, should be "We're Buying The Lie" or some such) and was astounded at just how pro Bush/anti Kerry all the "diverse voices" were. Lots of talk about how Kerry doesn't "resonate" and other Rovian constructions.
Chalabi and Tenet are, IMO, about to be named the "Axis of Bad Intelligence". Chalabi, of course, is the Evil Foreign Spy who supplied all of the bad info about WMD etc., and Tenet is the Bumbling CIA Head who failed to see through it (and of course, also failed to prevent 9/11!). Therefore, none of it is the fault of GW and the Neocon Mob, right? The sad thing is, I think this construction could get some serious traction within the body politic--it's so nice and simplistic, not too many characters to keep track of, ties many loose ends up into a neat little bundle, and all in time for us to hop into the SUV and head to the mall before it closes.
Can I go back to my home planet now? I'm pretty sure I'm not from this one....
Uncle $cam -
I posted this on another thread, but you might be interested. From this morning's Washington Post...
"The Acting U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report yesterday that said the mistreatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison could amount to war crimes.
The report by Bertrand Ramcharan noted that "willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment" of detainees constitutes a grave breach of international law, adding that such acts "might be designated as war crimes by a competent tribunal."
The report called for "full accountability" regarding the mistreatment of prisoners at detention facilities throughout Iraq. It recommended a "high-level international ombudsman" be designated to monitor U.S. and other coalition troops while they remain in the country."
How long is it going to take to get an independent investigation of the whole sorry mess? It's excruciating to watch this thing unfold without a serious effort to expose the real criminals. So sickening...
Scott Simon has long been particularly odious -- with his bogus piety, his little sermons.
A whore dressed up as a nun. What's really irritating is when he does his really, really earnest voice that gets quieter and quieter during an interview. Ever notice that it seem to coincide with the point at which his crib notes seem to run out?
Wow! I feel like I just strolled thru Freeperville! The vitriol is astounding! NPR and Dan Schorr (for all their faults) have been champions of many good liberal causes when there were few left leaning media outlets . Calm down people, I did't hear the report, but did he sound like Ed Gillespie or Tom Delay? How bad could it have been? Have Dan and NPR been taken over by the wingers?
Jeez!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Yesterday: 5 U.S. Troops Killed in Baghdad Attack
And Today: Explosion Kills One U.S. Soldier, Wounds Three
But... but...We thought torturing, er,
abusing those prisoners would stop these horrors? Surely when Commander AWOL turns over complete sovereignty this nightmare will end?
(BTW, for a fine series of photos of
the CIC not "out of control" check the Post online this afternoon)
Here's what irks me about NPR: it overwhelmingly consists of voices that register as white and middle- to upper-middle class. A problem with this homogeneity is that its speakers’ ability to “articulate so smoothly” is actually THAT form of articulateness—a manner of “polite” speech that is appropriate in white middle to upper-middle-class settings, but not necessarily in other American settings. Working class, inner city, regional, or rural forms of American articulateness are not given enough airtime on NPR (“Car Talk”’s faux working class chatter notwithstanding), and therefore not enough credit for being DIFFERENT KINDS of articulateness. NPR has an unstated bias in terms of class and race that passes for smooth articulateness, when it's really college-educated, upper-middle-class white talk (of course people of color can and do talk this way, but when they do so on NPR, listeners usually assume that they are white).
NPR does have token reporters and, rarely, anchors with ethnic or other-raced names, but their accents have usually been erased, and most just parrot the same polished sound (after being edited into it, as John tells us). On the other hand, Pacifica’s programs often sound more like real people to me, not just because they say “um” and “uh” sometimes, but also because their raced and classed heterogeneity sounds more like the true diversity of America than NPR’s cloistered, jovial insularity does.
So they have a "target demographic"? Then they should be more upfront about just who that demographic consists of, since they bill themselves as some sort of public property--"National" "Public" Radio.
Jenny from the Blog thanks, yeah, I read that too. I'm quite surprized that no one has commented on something as powerful as the Detroit Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild
calling for a war crimes investigation.
I guess I thought the good folks here would be overjoyed at such a hearing.
hummm, funny now the link is missing... searches for tinfoil*
"Screw you NPR."
Yeah, screw them for allowing a news analyst to state an opinion that might be wrong or overstated.
Sheeesh, it's gettin' hard to tell the left from the right these days.
[And as thunk pointed out, the quote was taken a bit out of context as well. Did anybody bother to listen to it before posting?]
Crunchy:
I heard Nina Totenberg too. I wanted to write a letter to NPR complaining, but couldn't find an email address.
All of the media keeps treating Bush and Cheney with kid gloves regarding the Plame affair. They report that Bush has lawyered up, and that Cheney was interviewed by federal agents, but, of course, neither could possibly be the target of investigation.
WTF -- imagine if this were Clinton and Gore.
.
"Have Dan and NPR been taken over by the wingers?"
Dan is usually OK. They are just waiting for him to die, then they will replace him with Rush L.
NPR is no longer "left-leaning." Not even close. It is demonstrably righ-leaning. Didn't youy read/hear about the study that veriufies this....as though one was even needed. All you have to do is listen and it is obvious they have made very conbcerted efforts to swing their coverage from left center to right center. It's actually more accurate to say they support the gov. no matter what it does and undermine opponents and critics.
Torture? Snipers killing kids and women? Lies to get your war on? Lies all over the place? They will give a nice cozy warm exculpating spin to it so we can maintain faith in the infallibility of our leaders and blame everything EVERYTHING on the critics and opponents of the admin.
Well, let's see:
1. Is Chalabi "tied to Bush", keeping in mind that Bush can jettison Laura if he has to?
2. Is Chalabi really white [and/or white-Jewish]?
If the answers are no, then, well, why the hell not? Would Bush accept responsability himself? Is Colin going to...
hmmm, Colinnn....
Uncle $cam -
I know, I know -- the Detroit Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild is not on the tip of everyone's tongue (never heard of them myself) but it's in the Washington Post and so I took heart. I'm just happy when someone reports anything on the issue and puts "war crimes" on the page in the same sentence with our dear administration.
I don't want this issue to go by the wayside. If there is no continual public outcry -- senators like Warner, who are crucial to setting up an investigation may capitulate to the pressure to just let it drop.
I think, of all the scandals, Plame, Chalabi, whatever, this is the most deadly -- if we don't do something about it and hold the right people accountable (and we know who they are -- and so does Congress!) then our country will be forever changed.
Anyway, your post was funny -- I know that bigger names have to come forward and make the demands -- but don't you think it's a start?
I'd like to know what many good liberal causes Scot Simon and Dan Schorr have promoted lately? Not very damn many, I'd say. In fact, they've become tools / participants in the SCLM. And NPR has gotten to be that way in general.
I switched over to listening to Amy Goodman's Democracy Now earlier this spring after listening to NPR since 1981. I know that Goodman has her own biases, because I recognize them, and she doesn't hide them. This behavior is rather unlike the Nice Polite Republicans at National Propaganda Radio who cloak their biases in "commentary."
NPR could make a big start in redirecting its programming towards truth if it got rid of its commentators and got some journalists instead. But then they'd have to practice journalism, rather than the stenography that is rampant right now in mainstream American journalism.
If you don't think NPR hasn't gone over to the dark side, you're deluding yourselves.
I think Daniel Schorr’s description of the neocons... Wolfowitz, Feith, Miller, Kristol, Podhoretz...you know, the invade-Iraq-now, ask-questions-later brigade, as naive people who believed him, or wanted to believe him is right on.
A brilliant example of analysis and telling it like it is. Naive, willing dupes are so much more palatable to the American public than venal, mendacious, warmongering psychos, don’t you think?
Carry on.
Hey - I like Dan Schorr. I don't believe that Schorr was absolving the Bush administration of guilt. If you think about Schorr's statement for 2 seconds you can see that it is actually a huge insult to the Bush admin. I read it as:
The Bush administration is so woefully incompetent that they essentially allowed one man with a huge conflict of interest to con them into a war.
The fact that the neo-cons were inclined in this direction anyway (the invasion) does not change the fact that they leaned heavily on Chalabi for all public justification for the war.
Other criticisms of NPR I agree with. They have not been worth a damn since Ray Suarez left Talk of the Nation. When calling in to get on the air in the old days you just had to get through. Now a call screener argues with you and seems reluctant to let you on the air if you are echoing the opinion of one of the guests. Even if this guest is being trounced by another guest. Maybe I am hypersensitive but I see it as NPR fighting its "lefty" image.
Uncle $cam -
Hey, maybe the Detroit Chapter IS a big deal and you were saying it straight. Actually, the more I think about it - this may be the first time in this country's history that an organization of this type makes such a strong call. Will embolden other cities to also speak up. Well, this is encouraging! Honestly, if we don't do something about this we are lost as a nation......
And another thing before I forget. It's obvious, and will become obvious to everyone by and by, that Chalabi is not the only one to blame for Iraq. No, fair is fair.
There's also the other arch duper in this fiasco, George Tenet.
What I don't get are the liberals who think this is a convenient way for the administration to escape responsibility.
The problem hanging stuff on these jokers is the world is complex and most of these stories can be told several ways especially to a public that mostly couldn't find Canada on map let alone Iraq.
The argument that the Bushies have screwed things up by destabilizing the middle east and drawing resources from the real war on terra (not to mention alienating allies whose help we need) is a pretty complex one that requires a certain understanding of the past present and future of Iraq and the region that most Americans (especially the ones listening to Fox news) just don't have.
Understanding that the Bushies got taken by a con man who was already on the lam for stealing half of Jordan and has now taken millions from us and turned our secrets over to the "evil" Iranians and "single-handedly" got us into this disastrous and costly war is about as devastating a story as I can imagine hanging on Bush and Co. Sure the cynical view is they wanted to get conned, but isn't that always the way with good marks?
Calling Rove a Fascist and Bush a brainless puppet may be accurate, but isn't really good politics. Painting them as naive fools is close enough to the truth and a much better story.
Ariel, it's not naivete when they know that they're lying and keep going to satisfy their bloodlust. Had there been no Chalabi, we would've been hearing from some pseudochalabi (what, the Middle East is short on messiahs now?). Chalabi without Kristol and his gang is like that guy, the son of Shah Reza Pahlavi (of Iran).
Perhaps Schorr's words were ill-chosen. He definitely says Chalabi "single-handedly" got us into the war. He modifies that by saying it's because naive people believed or wanted to believe him. That still puts the blame on Chalabi and makes victims of BushCo. The Bush admin were not victims of Chalabi. The Bush admin engineered the war and found any liar who would shore (Schorr?) up their claim. They chose to ignore better intelligence from more reliable sources. At best, Schorr's analysis was unintentionally misleading.
BTW, Schorr is not a commentator. He's NPR's "News Analyst." His analysis was insipid during Contragate.
I'm an almost constant listener to NPR because I don't have much choice: I've worked at a public radio station that carries NPR's progamming, for nigh on three decades. NPR has swung far, far to the right. I was forced to listen to hours and hours of call-in shows after 9/11. To a person, the program hosts invited callers with questions such as: "In the wake of this terrible attack on our country, how do YOU cope with the fear that all of us feel?" Always manipulative, and no guests who were against going to war. One listener called in and said he had been in Baghdad when Bush41 bombed it. He said he saw a woman run out into the street with bombs falling around her to rescue the body of her dead child. Then he said (get your Bibles out) that he believed that Bush43, "like a dog returning to its vomit," would use 9/11 as an excuse to attack Iraq. The host cut him off quickly and moved on to the next caller.
So from a longtime public radio employee: FUCK you, NPR.
The press has always gone out of its way to ignore dumb shit the right does. Its a hangover from the charge that the press brought Nixon down against the will of the people.
They hammer Carter, ignore Reagan and Bush I. They hammer Clinton and Gore and give Bush II a pass. Don't worry, when Kerry wins they will go back to hammering him like the others. Its not a liberal media in any sense of the word.
Well, Schorr is right if he meant to point up that Chalabi, his lies and the inseparable lies of his flunkies ultimately was the whole "case" for aggression.
Schorr is a slimeball if he's trying to excuse the Kongregation of the Kristol Kathedral.
And Schorr is wrong either way, because as a journalist his prose and his point should never be so fucking vague.
Bing-that is exactly the point we raised in another thread. Next time a Naderite complains that Kerry will not call a spade a spade and get out of Iraq, point out that mass murder, committed by a Democrat, is actually mass murder, whereas we all know what Rethugs can get away with. So the moral thing is to transfer Iraq to Kerry so the Establishment will, by its hillariphobic bylaws, be allowed to attack it.
They hammer Carter, ignore Reagan and Bush I. They hammer Clinton and Gore and give Bush II a pass. Don't worry, when Kerry wins they will go back to hammering him like the others. Its not a liberal media in any sense of the word.
One reason outlets like Atrios and Air America have to hang around for awhile, especially if Kerry wins.
As for NPR. Note the seamless transition for Juan Williams from Talk of the Nation to Fox News. That tells you all you need to know about NPR.
Duped by Chalabi my ass. More like "You just tell us whatever lies we want to hear so we can go to war, and then you can be the new president over there. And if you ever get found out for lying, don't worry, we'll come to your defense. Well, OK, we lied about that last part..."
Mostly lost in all the comments about Schorr's comments is whether there's any sense in which Chalabi DID "singlehandedly" bring about the Iraq war.
Here's one way to understand that claim. What I think is true is that Chalabi and the INC did singlehandedly engineer a necessary condition for the war, namely the disinformation campaign that provided intelligence agencies, politicians, and the media with the raw "intelligence" that made war with Iraq seem justifiable. Putting this another way, had Chalabi and the INC not existed, it's pretty unlikely we would have gone to war with Iraq -- there would be no apparent justification that could wash politically.
On the other hand, Bush and company, our intelligence agencies, and our press are each "single handedly" responsible too for their end in bringing about the war. Had ANY ONE of them done their job with competence and integrity, the war would NOT have come about. None of them consitituted sufficient conditions of the war, but each was a necessary condition, and in that sense could have singlehandedly stopped the war from happening.
Of course, using the word "singlehandedly" suggests to most people that Chalabi was a sufficient condition of the war, and that's dead wrong -- which even Schorr seems to imply when he qualifies his statement by saying that Chalabi required eager believers in the administration. What's fair to say is that Schorr's "singlehandedly" remark was misleading and politically obtuse.
Gosh, maybe this is an oversimplification, but isn't NPR biased towards the people/entities that give them money?
And that would be the corporations (which are given credit on the shows) and their aging, middle of the road, liberals who've been mugged, white audience. Hell, here in Settle our local public TV station has hours of Laurence Welk on Saturday nights!
The overall schema of NPR, as it seems to me: We got Nixon, the Viet Nam war is over, and alls well with the world. Now get in your Volvo station wagon (so much more eco-friendly than a SUV) and go on down to the mall. Funny, how it always ends up at the mall.
Bing-that is exactly the point we raised in another thread. Next time a Naderite complains that Kerry will not call a spade a spade and get out of Iraq, point out that mass murder, committed by a Democrat, is actually mass murder, whereas we all know what Rethugs can get away with. So the moral thing is to transfer Iraq to Kerry so the Establishment will, by its hillariphobic bylaws, be allowed to attack it.
That's exactly it. Of course, there will be fewer people buying the "stories" we got during the 90s from the mainstream press. The irritating thing about NPR is that for most folks it represents what they would consider a "leftist" viewpoint, so when they hear Simon or one of the AEI/Heritage/Moonie nutjobs on his show banter away unchallenged, FOX news looks downright middle of the road.
Mooser, (in Tucker Carlson bowties and nothing else), are you saying that the only motive anyone has for anything at all is sheer greed? Is that what you're saying? Because if it is, "I" (as Tacky, remember) would ask who's paying you to breathe.
er, as "Tucky". Someone paid us to misspell a nickname...
ok--I'll just say it---how many of you complaining actually listened to the "offending" piece? Folks--Schorr is on our side--this comment is taken out of context--especially if you listen to what he has saying for weeks now.
I'm tired of this place, it is degenerating into the left wing freeperville.
OT - This is powerful -- An article posted on Axis of Logic entitled " Why Are They Doing This to Us? www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/
article_8595.shtml.
It's hard to read -- another Iraqi family tortured and destroyed -- but a very eloquently written piece.
I'm tired of this place, it is degenerating into the left wing freeperville.
anonymous | Email | Homepage | 06.05.04 - 3:06 pm | #
Dude, get a handle to be known as and get a grip on yourself. I'm sick of this anonymous shit.
I've noticed that with all the shots being taken at the C.I.A. nobody is talking about the Office of Special Plans over at the Pentagon. Weren't they the most biased group of "intel" folks?
I'm tired of this place, it is degenerating into the left wing freeperville.
Actually, if you read all the comments, you'll find a very good number of posters who defend Schorr.
THAT is what makes us different from freeperville.
I can't remember a weekend in years that I haven't looked forward to listening to Daniel Schorr. I am so far left that I still have tear gas in my lungs and lumps on top of my skull from the 60's. Schorr was on the very top of Nixon's enemies list. Let's give the old dude a break. Believe me, he is THE lone voice over at Corporation Radio. I know were are all getting fucking impatient in this time of war, but Dan Schorr is not the enemy.
I didn't hear the offending commentary, personally, as I was too busy workin' my serivce industry job that Thomas Sowell recently said wasn't "really working". However, NPR aside - and NPR sucks in Georgia, anyway - I ain't surprised a'tall if the current spin is it's all Chilabi's fault we went into that dang ol' Iraq War. After all, a man who's such a powerful leader as George W. Bush can't be expected to take responsibility when shit blows up in his munchkin face, now can he? Remember, the Republican Party is the "Party Of Responsibility...For Everyone But Us."
As for showing the proper "respect" for ol' Ronnie Reagan, well...my pappaw had Alzheimer's for five years before he finally kicked, and I personally wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Since his ailment, every single member of my family has put it in their wills to not have us "survive" like that. If euthinasia is outlawed, we're expected to "take matters in our own hands", so to speak. I will not watch my mother or grandmother or uncles or aunts suffer that. Never again.
Nevertheless, fuck Ronald Reagan. I spent my formative years convinced the world would end in a nuclear holocaust thanks to his big-dick diplomacy, and that's more than enough to put him off my Christmas card list forever. I respect the family for not allowing the old boy to be a tool for the nu-metal Republicans and my heart goes out to them for the disease that's more'n likely rendered him dead to the world already...but that's it.
Now...I'm gonna go back to listening to Doug Sahm and try not to think about kei & yuri wearing nothing but gaudy bowties. Y'all ought not to do that to a poor boy.
Schorr is on our side
Well, jesus, don't you remember the story Schorr broke (in America anyway, overseas it was Palast's) about Florida?
'Cuz if you don't, it's because there was no story, not when there was any danger of it doing any good.
Or the debunking any child could've done of Bush's laughable case for war, released by Schorr just in time to avert the...oh, yeah.
Yeah, he's on "our side", insofar as "our side" is set wide enough to include "their side".
Admit it, none of the cowardly pieces of shit defending the bloodthirsty bomb-happy warmongering "liberal" (as in "liberal with the ammo") media are facing the danger, death or imprisonment of our servicemen, "inactive reserves" and those in the path of the draft!
We are fucking sick of "libruls" turning out to be some bastard who is not going to be dead or legless or mental next year insisting that ANYONE as gleeful as NPR or CNN or NYT over the jigsawwed bodies of Iraqi children (does he know why? Does he understand that he's liberated now?) counts as "one of us" because they're pretending to be "objective".
So that's the media in your sick world? Faux and Limbaugh and York tell outright mythology, and meanwhile, on the "other side", you have "respectable" slime telling offical lies dressed up as "truth" and they're "on our side"?
At least the Faux side is honest about its lying.
After reading Kei & Yuri I've decided I have been asleep for about 10 years. Time to wake up. Anybody for a good old fashion march/riot? Fuck Daniel Schorr!
Let's face it, a big part of the problem is that a lot of folks on this board are tired of NPR and PBS being the only "big media" that is allowed by corporate interests to define what is and is not "liberal". Its a dangerous situation that liberals themselves contributed to by doing a 40 year Rip Van Winkle while the right built its strength after the 1964 Goldwater massacre.
I think that the "gatekeeper" definition that some folks have ascribed to PBS and NPR is exactly correct. And these gatekeepers are methodically moving the gate to the right. The Iraqi war, which is looking more profoundly tragic with each passing day, is a huge consequence of this shift.
Please listen to the Daniel Schorr commentary again. I really think that his intent was to describe how the administration was attributing how "Chalabi single-handedly brought us into war".. not that he thought that himself.
He has a been a pretty good critic in the past and will continue to be. I for one am glad for his voice.
Scott Simon if another matter...
According to John Leo's 6/7/04 column in U.S. News & World Report, it's obvious that NPR is liberal:
"Even 60 percent of the Homer Simpson family could probably figure out that the New York Times or National Public Radio qualify as liberal."
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/iss...inion/
7john.htm
What I think is true is that Chalabi and the INC did singlehandedly engineer a necessary condition for the war, namely the disinformation campaign that provided intelligence agencies, politicians, and the media with the raw "intelligence" that made war with Iraq seem justifiable.
Oh, I don’t know. We at the OSP had other sources, you know (hint, hint). But maybe they were duped by Chalabi, too, just as we were (cough).
Its a dangerous situation that liberals themselves contributed to by doing a 40 year Rip Van Winkle while the right built its strength after the 1964 Goldwater massacre.
We did a lot of heavy lifting and fighting for 20 years during the 60's and 70's and maybe some of us thought that the generation coming along would understand the value of the gains and try to at least preserve what we fought for,went to jail for, and died for. We were obviously wrong. Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition.
It's a subtle distinction that he should have made more clear if he had the time.
But I'm sure they had to go to break to have time to feature an underwater Peruvian opera singer.
"It's not that they report things that I disagree with, but it seems that the balance slipped from reporting news to having commentators."
That is exactly the same argument that a right leaning Joe Six-pack makes when he complains about the SCLM. The idea that it is unethical or not proper for news outlets use commentary or analysis in their reporting of news is to ignore the history of the press in the United States.
FOX News is no different from the Hurst papers of the early 1900’s. These were vile daily rags that helped stir up the Spanish / American War, but they were perfect examples of the truly free American Press. The key difference now is instead of lots of different news outlets owned by different companies, we have a consolidated press with no real competition.
For all its faults NPR is the only place someone in Bumfuck, Pennslytucky can hear news that isn’t all jingoistic propaganda.
I had another listen. Here's a direct link to the Schorr commentary.
He was actually asking the question from another point of view not his own I guess.
And now all of a sudden people are getting wise to... ahh.. Did Chalabi almost single-handedly get the United States into a war because all these naive people believed him or wanted to believe him?
It was ambiguous for sure.. but not the propaganda being described here.
oh what the hell... Fuck NPR anyway. I feel better now saying it for their past crapentary.
Add my voice to those praising Dan Schorr. Anyone journalist on Nixon's enemies list is fine with me. Schorr worked with Murrow at CBS back in the day, for gosh sakes. Now maybe some of the Trotskyites in the crowd would say that proves he, like NPR, is a capitalist tool. To that I say, get some damn perspective.
As for NPR listing rightward, funny -- I was just listening to my local public radio station's airing of NPR's "On the Media". The first thing discussed was this:
If You Can't Destroy Them, Join Them
When the Public Broadcasting Service was set up 37 years ago, its founders made various bylaws to insure that it could operate entirely free of political pressure. So for many years, the American right, which saw the network as a mouthpiece for the left, tried to divert public support away from the network. But now, according to New Yorker Ken Auletta, Republicans are changing course. He tells Brooke about how conservatives are changing PBS from the inside-out.
The RIPPED into AFR for airing an hour a day of Rush, and openly mocked the government's assertion that NPR (also aired on AFR) was a counterbalance.
anyone else enjoying all of the anonymous posts calling this a lefty freeperville?
methinks we have attracted a new troll.
Well you all know *my* feelings about NPR, so all I will say is go take a look at their annual report. You want to understand an operation, you gotta look at its funding. Lots of money from your friend and mine: Howard Ahmanson...
As a bumpkin, I grew up listening to NPR. It was the only place a hilljack kid could hear about what was happening in places like Angola and Indonesia.
Them days are long gone. During the 90s, NPR began to move away from anything that resembles news. 25 minute pieces on refuge crisises were displaced by risible profiles of safe, mezzobrow entertainers.
Fuck NPR, PBS and the whole CPB. They've become "Headline News" for easily-offended seniors.
Give me bomb-throwing Pacifica any day; at least they have the courage of their convictions.
Excuse me, but you've apparently forgotten -- there's a Scott Peterson trial going on!!!!!!! And it's been 10 years since OJ didn't murder Nicole!!!!!!!! And, this summer, we'll have sharks, and hurricanes, and a Michael Jackson trial!!!
Geeze, some people just don't appreciate nice bread and circuses, even when they get it for free.
I would like to add one more, "FUCK NPR" in the ear! Fuck that. FUCK NPR in both ears.
I started donating to NPR during the Ray Suarez era. Ray was amazing in the way he handled the guests. It was clear they didn't screen the calls very thoroughly, as Ray would often just plain call BS when someone--one either side--was bloviating partisan crap.
They then moved to that hack Juan Williams. As someone already pointed out, the smooth transition from TOTN host to Faux News token Liberal from NPR demonstrates where NPR has been heading.
Now they have that soporific Neil Conan who is so boring that perhaps he should do two hours on all the traffic fatalities he has caused due to drivers falling asleep at the wheel while he discusses something that lacks any substance. Has Neil ever discussed anything controversial with respect to the Bushies on his show?
And then we have Nina Totenberg, so-called "legal expert', Mara Liasson, Faux Hack Extraordinaire, that crazy religion correspondent who equates Republicans with morality and Liberals with sin, David Brown, Neil Cavuto wannabe, Scott "I'd fellate Karl Rove if I could" Simon and poor old Daniel Schorr. I can at least listen to Dan, but after the "Spaniards appease Terrorists" BS and the firing of Bob Edwards, I decided enough is enough.
I called NPR and cancelled my monthly donation of $10.00, then promptly turned around and gave the remainder to Atrios during his "Beg-a-thon."
I still listen to NPR on my drive to work, however, I now listen to Democracy Now. I don't agree with everything she says, but at least she has the temerity to investigate the BS flowing like a river from the WH. I'd prefer a biased investigative show, than a WH stenography outfit, complete with white, high-brow, Volvo-driving, latte-drinking "commentary" any day.
Buck | Bush >> dev/null
Err... Pacifica radio
"Hell, here in Settle our local public TV station has hours of Laurence Welk on Saturday nights! "
This actually IS a public service--I made my kids watch LW so they'd know the kind of scary stuff that happens if white people are left to their own devices. (Of course, now we watch it on a semi-regular basis because it's pretty damn funny.....and it's also the only channel we get. [Kill your cable--you won't regret it!])
I have often thought Amy Goodman was out of her mind.
Then, six months later, as the situation developed, I've had to admit she was right.
If I had Soros' cake, I'd buy CNN and put her on primetime 5 nights a week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5137382/
Anthony Zinni, Tom Clancy interview. Read it and weep. Some juicy bits. A lot left out. Read it.
Zinni was in charge of all US troops in the ME from 1997 to 2000, then Bush admin special envoy to the ME. Short lived there. Ha ha ha. No kidding.
“When in 1998 Desert Fox, President Clinton directed us to attack the weapons of mass destruction program, we ended up having to attack the missile program that he was allowed to have, the al-Samoud system, the Special Republican Guard who had traditionally been sort of the keepers of the documents.”
.......
“...we had no hard evidence, no hard targets of weapons of mass destruction, of sites, storage areas, missle systems, planes. This was all speculation, much of which, even at that time, was coming from exiles that didn’t prove out to be credible.”
.......
Those that do the analysis, those that interpret the intelligence--the intelligence is facts or possible facts, and they’re put together in some sort of story line. Those that do that are responsible for either gross negligence in the way they gathered, handled the intelligence...Or they’re guilty of diliberately misleading the president.
.......
...when the Congress was, in 1998, about to pass the Iraqi Liberation Act, I suddenly discovered these exiles, and my intelligence officers said they were not credible. Much of the intelligence they gave us was misleading, either possible deliberately or not based on fact.
Wow, in 1998 you say? Not duped, I guess.
.......
NORVILLE: And Paul Wolfowitz.
CLANCY: Is he really on our side?
NORVILLE: You genuinely ask that question? Is he on our side?
CLANCY: I sat in on--I was in the Pentagon in ’01 for a red team operation and he came in and briefed us. And after the brief, I just thought, is he really on our side? Sorry.
I would never accuse NPR of greed. I'm just saying they are trying to reflect the views of their listeners. And as far as I know, they judge that by who contributes.
I used to listen to Scott Simon every Saturday morning - and immediately after Election 2000, he changed completely - He immediately started trashing the Clintons, repeating all the bull--- about how they had trashed the White House computers. etc., etc., (lies that were disproved),and I have not listened to NPR since. (I never did listen to Moira L. on NPR, and I never watch Fox.)
Life is too short for bull----.)
I didn't know Chalabi was a Jedi. Too bad the government and the media are weak-minded fools...
NTodd
Actually, the weak minded are those of us and those "lefties" in the SCLM that fixate on Chalabi.
Chalabi is clearly a Hut. Evil, dangerous, but not very mobile, and helpless without the countenance of the real Sith Lords. Throw him to his own banthas and be done with him.
The real Sith Lords? Why, the ones who didn't resign this week. Rumsfeld. Cheney. Rove. And other shadow Undead: Poppy and his Fixer. Scaife. And other great and lesser minions.
But really, Schorr has always resisted the tide of evil, to a varying extent. The problem is the media itself, and to a greater extent corporate society.
Is it just in my career, or does it seem to you all that corporate society is becoming exclusively control by NeoCons or overt NeoCon sympathizers?
It's getting hard to find a decent paying job where you don't have to give lip service to the Evil Ones.
So I ask you, what's a middle aged professional to do? Many of us are in no shape to walk away from the financial heroin. We're right to damn NPR- but give Schorr a break if he tries to introduce an ironic note in his narrative that belittles the criminal efforts of the Bu$hCo crime $yndicate to blame Iraq on Chalabi and Tenet alone.
"For all its faults NPR is the only place someone in Bumfuck, Pennslytucky can hear news that isn’t all jingoistic propaganda."
Bing Crosby
Sure, it's not jingoistic, but...
I'm just going to add my comments to those defending Schorr here. NPR has definitely moved rightward over the years--as with CPB/PBS--(if interested you should read the excellent article written in last week's New Yorker about the right wingers trying to take over), but Dan Schorr is on our side (at least my side--I can't speak for the rest of you). Anyway, I heard his commentary this morning and certainly wasn't offended, so after reading about it here I went to the NPR site and listened to it again--this quote is taken way out of context. As someone who listens to NPR nearly every weekend, I can tell you that Dan Schorr has been extremely critical of the administration and in recent weeks he has been obviously angry (less so today). Those of you that think you have a problem with it should at least listen to the actual audio.
Reagan is dead. The man who proved once and for all that Americans wanted a movie script, or at least a scenario, instead of politics. All the reports are saying "he reduced the size of government" Still sticking to the script.
Did NPR or did it not allow the completely dishonest selling of the war?
Did it or did it not in fact gleefully contribute to the chorus of media warmongerers seeking to bring it on?
Did it or did it not debunk the easily refuted lies, or did it in fact promote them as gospel?
Yep, I listened to Schorr's report. I agree that Schorr has been taken out of context on this thread. By his remarks, I think he is a bit snarky when he makes the remarks about Chalabi "single handedly" Leading us into war. If you listen to the entire summation regarding Chalabi. It's pretty clear that Schorr thinks that the whole thing has a bad smell. Comments like "They gave him 40 million dollars for....I don't know what." And "wonderful" kind of give his mood away. While the general criticisms of NPR are on the mark. This specific one on Schorr that this thread is based on sure isn't.
"For all its faults NPR is the only place someone in Bumfuck, Pennslytucky can hear news that isn’t all jingoistic propaganda."
Assuming that the person in the colorfully named town has a fairly new computer there are much better alternatives. Lacking that there is always the very low fi, but always interesting and challenging short wave radio but you'll need a good schedule, Passport to World Band Radio is useful but not as useful as the schedules you can find on the web.
Again, if you can, listen to CBC's The World At Six to see how much news can be fitted into a half hour by real professional journalists.
Reagan is dead. The man who proved once and for all that Americans wanted a movie script, or at least a scenario, instead of politics. All the reports are saying "he reduced the size of government" Still sticking to the script.
Very nicely said, our media can't function without a script. That's why the RNC is happy to provide them with one.
"Assuming that the person in the colorfully named town has a fairly new computer there are much better alternatives"
Less then 25% of America has Broadband. Trust me on this, they get their news in Bumfuck from Radio & TV. Not the internet.
Bing, there was an article we saw somewhere on how embarassingly behind the Civilized World we are in that. In the late nineties there were miles of fiber laid and thanks to mindless dereg, they'll never be used...of course there are informational and economic benefits to the Magnates That Be in that event...
Shit...believe or not we are miles behind Europe in cell phone technology, much less Broadband.
Bing, don't know if this is part of that but when we were in Kuwait/Iraq the embeds all had French phones. The phones themselves became a kind of controversial thing briefly (something about giving away positions) but they stayed, in part because there was no [American] alternative.
But never mind education, technology and an industrial base, what makes us great is MILITARY STRENGTH!!! More parades and giant concrete statues! We'll show North Korea who's who!
The embeds had French phones because all of Europe uses the same system. But does the US?............Nooooooooooooo, that would fuck up the market. Dumb asses....
Excuse me for a few minutes...I'm listening to Pig Pen sing "Good Lovi'n"
I'd expect this from Mary Louise Kelly, the NPR "Foreigh Affairs Reporter," but not from Schor.
den npr reporters are as lazy as fox news reporters < you_bastard > 2004-03-29 16:17:52
On "Talk of the Nation" 3/29/04 she and Neil Conan were talking about the Richard Clark interview, when a caller mentioned the fact that Bush had installed Dick Cheney as head of an anti-terror task force in the months prior to 9/11.
Both she and Neil Conan said they had never heard of such a thing, couldn't be or they would have read about it in the newspapers!
It's not like it's been a big deep, dark secret. I mean, Daschle brought it up on the Senate floor last week, so if she had been paying attention it would have been hard to miss.
These people make decent money. My thought is that they should at least cover their beats.
Wednesday, March 24, 2004 Statement of Democratic Leader Daschle on the War on Terrorism:
"During the nearly nine months it took the Administration to develop and sign off on its terrorism strategy, it does not appear the Bush Administration took any decisive or effective action to cripple Al Qaeda. Perhaps the most potentially significant action the Administration took prior to September 11 was in May 2001. At that time, reportedly in response to an increase in "chatter" about a potential Al Qaeda attack, President Bush appointed Vice President Cheney to head a task force "to combat terrorist attacks on the United States." But, according to The Washington Post and Newsweek, the Cheney Terrorism Task Force never met. The American people need to know whether this is true."
http://democrats.senate.gov/~dpc...2004324653.html
I listened to the NPR report, and tried to figure it out, and the only thing I could come up with is, they're afraid. There was a passage, I can't remember it, and then, the NPR reporter hesitated just a second, and changed the tone -- and I saw it. They are afraid. Fear, not greed is driving this. The journalists are afraid.
We saw this once before, more open and more virulent in the early 50s with the House UnAmerican Activities Committee and its Senate equivalent under McCarthy. In that day is was more open. Today, people with reasonable but not outstanding talent are afriad, because they know in their heart of hearts that someone can take their place and be as good at what they do as they are. Fear is driving this. It's sickening.
Yeah...
Fuck Nationalist Petroleum Radio.
I think fear is what drives the Republican party- aside from greed.
During the Clinton years we developed a worker- based economy.
Talented people, regardless of race or sexual orientation, were in demand. Talent fueled the economy. Ability enabled the best of us to shine, and anybody that tried could do well.
This is incredibly threatening to the aristocratic partyboys and that make up the core constituency of Bu$hCo. How could some airhead like Bush compare to a Rhodes Scholar born in a trailer park?
Fuck NPR. Worked in a college station during Desert Storm .
A marketing professor at my college was a retired Col from nam who coordinated SAC groundstrikes for troop support of spec ops.
He was a former geology /wildcat assessor in the Gulf of Mexico for oil. Mentioned Bush Sr's oil ties to Kuwait along with Baker and Tutwiler, and Jr's Guard skip-out with pro football players in Texas.He has a ton of contacts in every aspect of their doings, going back decades, wouldn't name names to protect his friends.
The station wouldn't let us put him on air for the war buildup. He gave a day by day of the Desert storm war, before things would happen , they would 12 hours later(by the book). Said before it started our biggest logistical problem would be rounding up the POW who would surrender in droves.
Had a lot of stuff about Saddam supplying them.
We were a small school by most standards (Ark. State) and the source would have given the school a lot of visiblity. No go.
NPR owned by the war/ag/oil industry. They do just enough to keep the smart folks from organizing to the point real change occurs. Eye candy for thinkers.
It's a shit turd of stories now, heard Cokewhore Roberts for a source on one story, and AEI people.
Fuck NPR times ten. Only listen to them when driving because clear channel has bought up most of this fucking market and every time they play Layla the solo gets cut in half and it ruins my Goodfellas flashback...
Only the music on NPR is worth hearing now. Bluegrass, Blues, Jazz. Red Rooster's Blues show... and then of course classics.
Just for the record, it's SCHOR w/o the second "R." Been listening to his commentary on NPR for years, including this one on Saturday. If they believe anyone is actually listening, the handlers of the current administration surely must find him a thorn in their side. I cannot recall having heard Schor say anything complimentary about Bush's leadership (except perhaps in the days immediately following 9//11}.
Sorry, but I find "Screw NPR" to be an overreaction in this case.
DANIEL SCHOR, who is so impressively liberal to monabona:
"You know, Hitler is really a very bad man, and while I have nothing to say about the legitmacy of his mandate to power, his conduct or his Just and Fair Counterattack against Polish Aggression, in which we are all wearing yellow ribbons as let me tell you we Support Our Troopers, you will find plenty of uncomplimentary things I have said about him."
Were there ever real witches? http://www.graphics.h12.ru/
it tells me i don't have http://www.thispot.com/stock-tra...ck-
trading.html
bridal bingo cards bridal bingo cards bridal bingo cards // betting line vegas betting line vegas betting line vegas
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
