Select Page

Month: June 2008

Number 14

The Hostilities, And The People Who Have Investments In Them The situation in Iraq remains both (a) promising, and (b) under-reported, as this quote proves (do read the entire post, it’s brief): Iraq is much better. For weeks and months other outlets including some of the (NY) Times’s major competitors, the Times’s own editorial writers, government officials, and independent observers have been saying much the same thing, indeed saying it without much of the self-conscious double-talk we read in the Times. Yet the Times neither reported itself on the developments which other outlets did or acknowledged others’ reports. Then this article appeared in the NY Times. It’s surprising enough to rate a close look…considering the source. Or is this just the dead tree media sticking the knife in the electronic media? Whatever; as long as reports like this appear, in the long run all propaganda-mongers lose. For news and facts you almost certainly did not get from the major media, you can call up this on Basra, or an interesting discussion of Iraq, Iran and more. It’s all grist for the mill. Of some historical interest, as well — perhaps that should read, “hysterical interest” — is this this meditation on weapons of mass destruction, lies, and Bush. One can’t talk about US policy toward Iraq and Al Qaeda without eventually getting into the McCain-Obama issues, or the role...

Read More

Number 13

The War And Beyond So how are things going in Iraq? As pointed out in the last issue of the PenPo, news is down in the major media, with little information reaching the public — some of whom probably assume that means the USA is sinking into the quagmire. Not so, as PenPo subscribers realize. The Washington Post, long a purveyor of misleading and carefully selected news (which is the definition of the term “propaganda”) has finally capitulated in a fascinating way: in the recent past, the paper neither believed nor reported the facts, but is now saying that given those discredited and unreported facts, its original proposal (that the USA pull out of Iraq) has been proved correct and should be implemented. “We are losing, therefore we need to pull out.” Later: “We are winning, so it’s time to pull out.” The crafty editors manage to deduce the identical conclusion from whatever facts they deign to acknowledge, even when the facts change 180 degrees. That’s proof that genuine logic was never involved. In any event, the politicians’ investment in defeat is not paying dividends, as even Al-Reuters has been forced to admit. Here are some links that will take you to ignored, tardy, improperly-reported, trivialized and narrowly-publicized events that provide a decent overview of how Iraq (oh, yes, let’s not forget Afghanistan!) is coming along: First we note...

Read More