Tuesday, July 26, 2005

the "mainstream press" has a long and illustrious history of not investigating stories until it's sure that readership will not fall off. now, after two years of photographic and anecdotal evidence, the numbers are beginning to add up in such a manner that publications like the washington post and new yahk times and time magazine and newsweek cannot afford to remain silent on the alleged mistreatment and/or torture of those people detained incommunicado by our government.
i wonder why it takes so long for the so-called bastions of freedom to take an interest in actual reporting if it's not because of the money. below are some of my other concerns about our current state of the union and the silence of the press up until recently:
  • the karl rove/valerie plame leak hit the press over two years ago.
  • the government's "faulty" WMD info happened in 2002.
  • john kerry's vietnam war record was under attack (fraudulently) in 2000.
  • john ashcroft recused himself from the rove investigation over a year ago when bloggers began reporting he might have been given inside info on the affair. no one has questioned him on his sudden departure from the investigation or asked about the so-called "conflict of interest".
  • abu ghraib pictures surfaced two or so years ago and not one mainstream reporter went after it. or, if one did, the indepth story was quashed for a year.
  • george bush said two years ago that anyone in his administration caught leaking sensitive info to the public would be fired. now he says anyone "convicted of the crime of leaking sensitive info to the public" will be fired.
  • judith miller has chosen to go to jail rather than give up her sources for a story she never even wrote. matt cooper somehow was given a waiver by his sources. bob novak, who wrote the actual story that outed valerie plame/wilson, seems to have been given a free pass by the independent prosecutor.
  • if cooper spoke with rove and scooter libby and somehow was given permission to speak their names to a grand jury, then who spoke with judith miller? it couldn't have been those two, could it? someone higher up, maybe? dick cheney (which is the punchline for the piercing joke they say bush likes to tell)?
  • why are we now prosecuting sergeants in the prisoner abuse cases after two years? shouldn't we up to colonels by now?
  • when is halliburton going to pay back the hundreds of millions of $$$ it overcharged the government (which is our tax money) instead of continuing to be given new contracts?
  • are the women of Iraq and Afghanistan destined to remain chattel under their new U.S. backed governments? not that i could realistically argue against it if this is what these cultures have practiced for aeons. our government only seems to desire a semblance of democracy. it doesn't seem concerned with true democracy. true democracy might get in the way of oil, money and power. besides, if true democracy exists in Iraq, then it includes powersharing with Iran (which is perhaps the most ironic thing to happen so far).
  • senate republicans are calling for an investigation into the rove/plame leak affair and (at the same time) an investigation into the special prosecutor's job of handling it. so far, the prosecutor has been given high marks by almost all involved. why, then, would he need investigating? no republican wanted kenneth starr "investigated" while he took a gander at monica's dress and claimed that clinton was satan.

these are just some of the things that don't really keep me up at night. but that's only because i promised in my first blog never to do this sober (and i've only broken that vow a number of times). the one thing that lets me sleep at night is the fact that i write this and then take 5 minutes to laugh like a hyena, throw my poop at passing cars like a chimpanzee, and pee all over my neighbor's bushes (because it confuses the hell out their dog the next morning). stress relief baby.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/26/AR2005072601792.html?sub=AR

and just so you know a bit more about karl rove, read this.

and today's white house briefing (parsed i must add).

so, tell me if you will and are worthy what you think of any of this. i shudder to think that i am almost alone in looking further into this morass than others. i would specifically enjoy input by soldiers or those who have been soldiers...and by "input" i don't mean the 'hey sailor' sort of thing, mustang.

1 comment:

spcoon said...

call me ignorant, but if a cop can throw a kid in lockup for dealing an ounce of weed, why can't that same cop walk up to karl rove and arrest his smug, fat ass with treason?

this shit is so frustrating.

-sean

http://www.seancoon.org