Facebook Slider
Get News Alerts!
Tuesday, 12 September 2006 05:44

BuzzFlash Mailbag for September 12, 2006

  • font size decrease font size decrease font size increase font size increase font size
  • Print
  • Email

BUZZFLASH MAILBAG

Subject: Re: Vice President Dick Cheney Interview on Meet the Press

I will address only one issue regarding Tim Russert's interview of Vice President Cheney today. Mr. Cheney, again, said (paraphrasing) that "We have not been attacked again since 9/11, so that means we must be doing something right" in protecting the country against terrorism.

First of all, this is meaningless. The US was not attacked during the 5 years BEFORE 9/11 either (the Clinton administration thwarted Project Bojinko in 1995, and the Millennium Bombers in 2000). The passage of time proves nothing. It only takes one committed individual who slips under the radar - like Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing. Second, and far more importantly, the US WAS IN FACT ATTACKED AGAIN with the anthrax attacks in September and October of 2001.

2001 anthrax attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unbelievably, Tim Russert failed to correct the Vice President, and allowed his false statement to go unchallenged. That is simply poor journalism.

The anthrax attacks appear to have disappeared down the memory hole for the media, despite the fact that the media was also a target of the anthrax attacks - ABC, NBC, CBS, New York Post, National Enquirer and American Media (AMI) all received letters. Anthrax was also mailed to Senate Majority Leader Sen. Tom Daschle and Judiciary Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy -- at the very time that the USA Patriot Act was being considered by the Senate. Congress acted out of fear and panic and passed the USA Patriot Act without reading it and with little actual debate over its consequences. The anthrax attacks were a critical factor.

22 people, mostly mail handlers, contracted anthrax symptoms, and FIVE DIED of inhalation anthrax. Have you entirely forgotten this?

Perhaps Tim Russert could have asked the Vice President why members of his staff took Cipro on the night of the 9/11 attacks as a precaution, a week before the first post marked letter containing anthrax? Investigative reporters who have covered the anthrax attacks report that the anthrax was of high-grade military quality and closely resembles the aerosol anthrax produced at the US bio-defense lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland. To date, there have been no arrests made in the anthrax attacks, and the investigation appears to be a "cold case" -- not being actively pursued by the FBI and other law enforcement.

This is yet another failure of the Bush administration to bring terrorists to justice. We are coming up on the fifth anniversary of the anthrax attacks as well. Does the media intend to honor the five Americans who lost their lives as a result of the anthrax attacks with the same amount of fanfare as it is doing for 9/11? Or will the victims of the anthrax attacks be forgotten, lost to the memory hole of history?

Roger A. White
Tucson, AZ


Subject: Oh, the Irony!

From the WaPo story about the Saddam-al-Qaeda non-relationship linked in the 9/9 Buzz email:

Vice President Cheney, in an interview yesterday with CNBC's "Capital Report," said "the press has been irresponsible" in reporting on the commission's findings, sometimes for "malicious" reasons. Referring to a New York Times front-page headline, "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq Tie," he said: "What the New York Times did today was outrageous." Cheney added: "The fact of the matter is, the evidence is overwhelming. The press is, with all due respect, and there are exceptions, oftentimes lazy, oftentimes simply reports what somebody else in the press said without doing their homework."

Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship (Dana Milbank/Washington Post)

Wow. Wow! Cheney busting the press for doing their job in the exact way he's needed them to do it for six years just to survive. He is just AMAZING!

Allen Voivod


Subject: 9/11 Docudrama

Hi Buzz,

I am so proud that the fighting democrats have a cause they can really, really rally on. A movie.

Fake elections, fake evidence for war, and a fake attack on American soil. These topics are somehow just taboo for good democrats. Try bringing them up on most liberal websites. Don't hold your breath waiting for the fake stuff to come up on Sunday morning. But a movie...now that's a cause we can all call, write, email and boycott on. That's approved.

I'm glad we're finally fighting, it's just the timing and the cause. I truly believe ABC and Disney will regret they listened to KKKarl on this one. But then again, the NY Times could possibly go under and they're still catapulting the propaganda. I didn't like TV or Disney before this latest blatant "state media" thingy. I believe there are lots and lots of good newsmen and journalists who would like nothing better than to report the news. Fascism is too boring for words. And that is one thing WE will not stand much longer.

Martha Thacker
Prentiss Twp, ME


Subject: Right-wing takeover

Listening to AAR and they were talking about how the republicans have fought the labor unions because they contribute to democratic candidates. Add to that the fact that they systematically send out propaganda and take over every news organization that they can buy, join or infiltrate. Add to that the fact they have been filling the ranks of school boards and every church they can. Add to that they have been infiltrating the Green Party and funding them to siphon off progressive votes in every election possible. Add to that that many republicans seem to be either running as Democrats or switching from the Democratic Party the day after an election. They have also been working very hard to take over the judicial branch of government, not just by being appointed by their president but by setting up their own universities and taking over the leadership of law schools.

How much more do we have to see to convince people that we are facing a group that intends to RULE the U.S. in the future and for a long time? I used to hear Rush Limbaugh say that "a Democrat should not be elected to any position, not even dogcatcher," and now I think he was telegraphing their plans for our future.

A Buzz Reader


Mail: The BBC Has Claimed "Path to 9/11" Is "Accurate"

Through "Democrats Abroad" London chapter members, I learned that BBC2 will be broadcasting "Path to 9/11" tonight and tomorrow, too. I was totally appalled and wrote BBC only to receive the following reply.

That the BBC could possibly say that "The programme has been reviewed by the Editorial Policy team and we are confident it lives up to high standards of fairness and accuracy" IS BEYOND BELIEF! They wrote that their email shouldn't be copied so please don't use my name anywhere and just check it out on your own. THE BBC CLAIMS THE PATH TO 9/11 IS ACCURATE! YEEGAWDS!

A BuzzFlash Reader


Subject: It's All So Mickey Mouse

Our Prevaricating President George W. Bush is back on the campaign trail, claiming to make a number of non-political political speeches. Stepping up to the microphone and suddenly denying statements he had made many times in the past about staying the course (I never said that). Then of course as liars often do acknowledging the existence of things he denied in the past, such as secret CIA prisons (I think it makes them feel clean). The President for the New American Century then denounces the use of torture, but he doesn't tell you that he and the other members of the cabal have redefined torture to mean that if your major organs aren't in danger of immediate failure you have not been tortured.

And the PNAC has a new plan, because the old one worked so well. He misled us into war, drained our treasury, nearly 2,700 of our soldiers have died in pursuit of his personal political ideology, over 100,000 innocent Iraqis have died, the middle east has been destabilized, and he has forgotten about the man who murdered 3,000 innocent civilians on September 11th, 2001. It is just an endless stream of lies.

I can only speak for myself, but the last thing I want from George W. Bush is another plan. The man just can't be truthful. His cabinet members can't be truthful. Think about the charge of Donald Rumsfeld in calling the majority of Americans who think the Iraq War is wrong, "Nazi Appeasers." What evidence do these men bring to the table to justify such arrogance and disrespect for America and American ideals? There is nothing that they have pursued strategically or ideologically that has been a success. The WMDs were never there. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. We were not greeted as Liberators, the war lasted longer than 6 months, our soldiers deserve body armor and armored vehicles, 2,400 more soldiers have died since the publicity stunt of "Mission Accomplished" and the end of major combat operations, we did not use enough troops to win the peace, Iraq is in a civil war, and they have completely forgotten about Osama Bin Laden.

These guys are just so Mickey Mouse in everything they do. But those 30 some odd percent of you that still support this dangerous group of men and ideals, do not despair. Walt Disney and Mickey Mouse are coming to the rescue with a completely revised version of history. A merry little tale that disgraces the tragedy of 9/11 and the events of that day. They have decided to lie. And why not, the greatest liar of all time sits in The White House. When the truth distorts the perception then the only recourse is to lie. A Fabricated Fable of History presented by Disney.

I would suggest that the next Disney character be a funny cute little "Fascist Pig," who travels the world exploiting the poor and the natural resources, all while imposing a narrow political philosophy. It's a small world after all. The Fantasy Series "Pathway to 9/11" is just one more example of how immoral the right wing is they will even lie about a tragedy all to manipulate people into participating in their deceptive vision of the world. Mickey seemed so nice when we were growing up. Who knew that he would turn bad?

But why simply concentrate on the lies, let's look at some domestic data about the economic policies of George Bush and the Republican Party. After all, they are the spewers of the Great Trickle Down Economic Philosophy. I would suggest that we all put on raincoats or grab an umbrella cause what is trickling down may be harmful to your health. And then of course if you don't have health care you may be forced to choose between medicine and shelter or fuel or food. In which case you will then join the ranks of the homeless and before long you are forgotten. Thus goes their American dream. "Screw You, I've Got Mine".

Republicans are shouting out that real median household income rose 1.1% in 2005 (see what all those tax cuts for the wealthy have done). The bad news is that it is about 3% below the median family income when George Bush was appointed to office in 2000. During 2005 over 1 million more people joined the ranks of the uninsured. Poverty levels which had risen every year since the (dis) appointment of 2000 have now stabilized at 12%. Unfortunately in a recent study of the 16 wealthiest nations on the planet, the United States ranked dead last in the number of our citizens living in poverty.

But gas prices have dropped in recent weeks and now are only up 25% from a year ago, but alas the summer driving season is over. The Consumer Price Index for all items rose 4.1% from July 2005 to July 2006, while the average hourly wage also rose 4.1% over that same time frame (good news, you aren't getting ahead and the struggles will continue). The wealthy have gotten wealthier, corporate profits are growing, and the middle class and the poor struggle. We can't offer healthcare to our children or the elderly, but we can drain our treasury to pursue a war we were lied into and whom our President for the New American Century continues to lie about.

Our President and his cabinet are left only to continue the endless stream of lies and the Mickey Mouse behavior, they are in too deep. Pakistan has offered safe haven to those who attacked us (how much of our money did we give them?), and Tony Blair is being booted. We need some real leadership, this Mickey Mouse behavior has got to stop.

Let's All Sing it out, M-I-C (see you real soon, Democrats back in control)-K-E-Y (Why? because we must save our nation) M-O-uuuU-S-eeeE... dump the bums la la la, dump the bums lalala. FOREVER LET US HOLD OUR BANNER HIGH!!!! Come along and join the club that's meant for you and me...USA, USA, the USA....

Jim Ridout
Albuquerque, New Mexico


Subject: NeoCons retain control, swearing in before vote certified, Bilray example

Did you see a way that sElection 2006 will allow one party to maintain control of both houses of Congress? The congressional race in San Diego with the replacement of Congressman Cunningham, who was sent to jail for taking bribes, Hastert, head of the Republican contingent in the House of Rep, swore in Bilray before the vote was certified and challenged by the Democratic candidate. The US District Judge said that federal law took precedence over local certification.

So the way it could work in November is that, say the Democrats win two races that would place them in a majority in the House of Representatives. Hastert could swear the losing Republicans in as members of Congress even though they received less votes and prior to the election being certified by the voting official in the district where the race took place. What do you think?

Karen
Platteville, WI


Subject: “Elvis” Is Off the Net (The Truth About the Hunt for bin Laden)

Now here’s a juxtaposition for you. Five years ago this week, September 11, to be exact, a group of Saudi terrorists belonging to an organization called al Qaida hijacked airplanes and flew them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and at least 3,000 of our citizens died.

I think we all remember that.

And also this week ABC is launching what it has described as the “Truth” about 9/11 in a staged television debut titled “The Path to 9/11” that will be shown worldwide. At this moment, they are promoting this movie with a shocking trailer that shows an almost subliminal image of President CLINTON, photoshopped on another image of smoke and fire and running firemen. The image, and the message, is intended to subliminally and psychologically accuse Clinton of responsibility for the 2001 terrorist attack that brought down the buildings in the heart of New York City.

And then there is this news article on MSNBC.com announcing Bin Laden trail goes “stone cold.” We learn that they haven’t had a “credible lead” in more than two years - TWO YEARS! On March 13, 2002, George W. Bush was quoted as saying, “I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. IT’S NOT THAT IMPORTANT. IT’S NOT OUR PRIORITY.”

Now, during the past three months, the “clandestine U. S. commandos” who have been hunting this unimportant man have “flood[ed] the zone” at the request of George W. Bush. But we seem to have a problem in locating this “not a priority” target. It seems that in the last five years he has so completely disappeared from “the zone” that they don’t have a clue where to look.

In fact, some “operatives” find him so illusive that they have dubbed bin Laden “Elvis” because of all the “wishful thinking sightings that turned out to not be real.”

Now, let me get this straight. This news article states and backs up with quotes that in February, 2002 George W. Bush decided to “pull out most of the special operations troops and their CIA counterparts in the paramilitary division that were leading the hunt for bin Laden.” And now, 5 YEARS later, he just as impulsively decides to “flood the zone”?

Most of what is being said about the Clinton administration dismisses what he DID do to prevent terrorist attacks. Most of what the “docudrama” says about the Bush administration isn’t in their trailer but those with advance copies (like Limbaugh) seem to agree with the way Bush is portrayed.

However, since Bush was “at the helm” when the attack occurred, and Bush is the one who didn’t pursue bin Laden, isn’t it more HIS responsibility than a president who had been out of office almost a year?

Especially when Clinton had set up a cabinet position whose only responsibility was to process terrorists threats, created a terrorist task force and assisted the world in preventing the 2000 millennium attack! What more did they expect from Clinton? If he had the ability to foretell the future he probably wouldn’t have missed bin Laden at Tora-Bora, would he?

And should they be able to blame Clinton when George W. Bush was the one who eliminated the cabinet position, disbanded the task force and DIDN’T pay enough attention to the intelligence briefings that were given to him? When his appointees ran such inefficient offices that reports warning of suspicious occurrences were left to lie on desks or filed away. Bush wasn’t exactly tuned in to the future either, was he?

This ABC fictional movie is not just that proverbial red herring; it is a perverted attempt to clear George W. Bush’s name without a public trial. There will be no evidence presented and he will not face his accusers. And neither will William Jefferson Clinton. And it has taken our nation’s deep grief and turned it into a personal vendetta to once again try to “get” Clinton.

The truth of 9/11 IS out there; if ABC cared enough to seek it. And if they did, George W. Bush’s picture would be superimposed upon that scene of fire and devastation. Check it out!

Carol Hagner
Richland, MO


Subject: Rumsfeld Forbade Plans for Post War Iraq

Complete original news report at the Daily Press, Newport News, Virginia.

Paraphrased, General Scheid said that preparing a Phase 4 Plan as to handling the aftermath of defeating Saddam was not allowed, not even to be discussed on punishment of being "fired." A Phase 4 Plan would have tipped Congress and the public that Iraq would be or could be a very murderous multi-year extended engagement. Rummy et al. apparently considered that they could only tell the voters more palatable news that we would be warmly welcomed and that it would be a short engagement if no one planned for or was even allowed to outline the obvious and known probable downside contingencies. The message, again paraphrased, was "Shinseki's honest estimate of troop needs and all normal post occupation planning are (to use a good fascist word) verboten. The lie that the Iraq mission will be easy, complete with flowers from the liberated, will be sold to the public and we do not want any negative scenario planning documents to see the light of day."

The book "Assassin's Gate" tells the same story, i.e. that the State Department could not get a direct charge for preparing a post invasion plan and what was prepared by way of Phase 4 by the Army, de facto, never saw the light of day.

To summarize: the leadership of the United States prevented our entire Military and each and every one of our now dead or disabled troops the benefit of a normal, complete and required invasion plan in order that their hyped story for the public would not be subject to "smoking gun" evidence that they fully knew of the issues embodied in the maelstrom of post invasion Iraq. Thousands of our troops and tens of thousand Iraqis are now dead in the service of deliberate and malicious lies. I can not remotely imagine the searing anger and bitterness a parent might feel if their child was now dead due to this act of calculated incompetence.

Cognitorex
Cape Cod


Subject: Clear choice

Protection or deception?

Vote Democrat for protection, vote Republican for deception.

It really is that simple for once.

D.L. Miller
Lawrence, KS


Subject: Katie Couric's Interview with George Bush

I watched the interview (?) that Katie Couric held with President Bush and have been able to withhold my comments until now. I'm sure CBS wanted to hurry and get Ms. Couric into the spotlight of being the new CBS Evening Anchor as soon as possible and they certainly did.

Promoting her to evening anchor is one thing. Thinking that she should start off her career as a 'hard-hitting journalist' by interviewing the President was a complete error in judgement on their part. This wasn't so much an interview as it was a 'coffee table discussion' and a promotional stunt.

I'm quite sure President Bush's handlers were licking their chops when they heard it would be Katie Couric who would be doing the interview. Ms Couric was 'fed to the wolves' and it showed. There were no incisive follow up questions to serious topics. I've never seen George Bush more 'comfortable' in an interview, something he usually isn't when he's questioned by real journalists. I swear I thought her head was going to start bobbing in response to some of his answers.

Face it, CBS was had. They could have sent a real journalist to interview the president but they chose to send Katie Couric, and doesn't the entire country just love 'Katie'? Was Mike Wallace unavailable? Ed Bradley on vacation? Bob Schieffer would have done a much better job, too. Starting Ms. Couric 'at the top' was a bad decision if CBS was actually interested in a serious interview.

CBS had their chance and they blew it, unless it was their decision all along to send a softball pitcher in to face a big-leaguer.

I'll get my 'news' from other sources from now on.

Sincerely,

Mike Donelson
Las Vegas, NV


Subject: New Word for "The Path to 9/11"

It's a docutisement!

Fabricated facts put together to sell a product (or party, as the case may be).

My question is, will there be some product placement as well? Halliburton comes to mind. How about the Ken Lay legal fund while we're at it?

Lee Pulliam
Anchorage, Alaska


Subject: “Republi-cons”

We’ve sought a term or catch-phrase that would characterize the many distortions the GOP has employed to attempt to explain its many failures. Such a term or catch-phrase could be employed in a manner similar to the GOP use of “cut and run.” While the latter is totally inaccurate and inflammatory, the former would be entirely accurate.

The GOP approach to winning elections has been focused on conning the public; not on the issues that matter to most Americans. This obfuscation is obvious with their use of terms like the “Death Tax” or “Save the Forest” and “Pension Protection”: the purpose of these labels is to mislead and actually pertain to the opposite of the label.

Accordingly, “Republi-cons” captures a fundamental essence of the GOP approach.

1. It identifies their mode of communication with people in the United States and the world generally by reference to the verb “con,” meaning “to swindle or manipulate.” “Con” is also short for “convict,” a person sentenced to prison for committing a felony.

2. It refers to “neocon” which has fallen from frequent or favorable public reference but is tied to those close to the administration’s failed policies.

3. It is short, easily understood, and can be applied in a wide variety of communications contexts:

a. GOP positions can be identified as “Republi-con” positions.

b. “The Republi-cons” want to ‘stay the course’…”

c. “The President, the GOP’s top “Republi-con” has proposed…”

d. FOX News, the Republi-con news organization

e. “Senator Santorum, the trailing Republi-con from Pennsylvania…”

f. “The Republi-cons want your vote…”

g. “Karl Rove, architect of Republi-conism…”

h. The American Middle Class, a victim of Republi-con policies

i. Keith Olbermann could tell us who or what is the biggest Republi-con of the day in his Countdown

j. “Let’s examine the “Republi-con” position on this….”

k. …the list is endless

4. When the term is well-established, it could be shortened to simply “con” or “conned”:

a. The President “conned” the American people into a war that should never have started…”

b. Reference to particularly flagrant campaigners could be made by use of the label “con artists” or “Republi-con artists.”

c. Haven’t you been “conned” enough?

d. Have you been conned today? Fox News is waiting….

A BuzzFlash Reader


Subject: The War on Terror

"The War on Terror" is an oxymoron. Why have Americans bought into this meaningless phrase? Our "war" has actually terrorized the world!

BuzzFlash News Network George Lakoff & Evan Frisch -- Five Years After 9/11, Drop the War Metaphor.

A BuzzFlash Reader


Subject: 9/11, 5 Years, and the Death Of A Dream

Buzz,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueoBp1ktcBE David Letterman- first show after 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSCoF7yEC9E Jon Stewart- first show after 9/11.

"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse,
Out of the corner of my eye.
I turned to look but it was gone.
I cannot put my finger on it now.
The child is grown, the dream is gone.
I have become comfortably numb."

Pink Floyd Comfortably Numb

On the 5'th year anniversary, I think it about sums it for me.

Akhil Bhardwaj
Manhattan, KS


Subject: Dr. Rice Speaks

"... has taken root in the Middle East , and that you have to go to the source and do something about the politics of that region."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060910/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/sept_11_washington

When Dr. Rice speaks, I find it hard to contain my knee-jerk urge just to slap her and say “shut-up you dangerously ignorant beyotch”... but this time I will engage:

Could a person of Dr. Rice's alleged intellect really believe that any of our actions in the last five years, once we have “gone to the source,” have “done something” other than to inflame hatred toward the west and basically make them NEED TO KILL US MORE?!? What the hell is she thinking when she utters sh!t like this?

Yes, we should have “gone to the source”... but after that we’ve just FUBAR’d this so badly I can’t believe any of these people still have their jobs. Not only have their actions served to make the matter worse, they WENT TO THE WRONG FRIGGIN SOURCE!

Sorry. Guess I should have just stuck with, “shut-up you dangerously ignorant beyotch”...

John L. Johnson
Laingsburg, Michigan


Subject: The Devil and Lindsey Graham

Regarding legislation to authorize Bush’s military commissions, let me make a prediction:

The “compromise” legislation that emerges from the Senate Armed Services Committee and is sent to the Senate floor will be the one Lindsey Graham champions. It will seem to add more to the “just make my tribunals legal” legislation Bush sent to Congress, but in reality it will give the administration everything it wants and has always wanted.

Indeed, I believe the sole purpose of the proposal Bush sent to Congress is to make the legislation that finally gives him exactly what he wants seem like a compromise on his part. Bush will appear less inflexible, and Congressional republicans up for re-election can vote for a law the President wants, while giving the appearance of resisting him. The new legislation’s empty ‘compromises’ on detainee rights will also deflect attention from the redefinition of “war crimes” the legislation will contain, which will retroactively make legal Bush’s now criminal violations of Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

Lindsey Graham has masterfully bamboozled the media into thinking he is someone with an allegiance to the rule of law that rises above mere political gain. The reprehensible Graham Amendment to the Detainee Treatment Act, and his shameful attempts to manufacture a false legislative history for the Graham-Levin Amendment, should be enough to disabuse anyone of that notion.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060705.html

Whenever Lindsey Graham is at work in the name of upholding justice and the rule of law there is a hint of sulfur in the air, and I detect it here.

Albert Clark
NY


Subject: Victory laps around Ground Zero

How has it come to pass that the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001 -- which happened on President Bush's watch and should be a source of great shame to him -- is now an occasion for Mr. Bush to do victory laps and claim that he will keep us safe?

He did not keep us safe. He had eight months after he first took office to go after Osama bin Laden, but he didn't.

Right after the 9/11 attack, Mr. Bush promised to get Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." Bush said Osama could run but he could not hide and that we would track him down and eliminate him.

But Bush did none of those things. When our military had Osama bin Laden penned in, in the mountains of Afghanistan, Bush withdrew our forces and dispatched them to Iraq, leaving the capture of bin Laden to the local warlords who -- as any fool could have predicted -- allowed bin Laden to escape.

Bush's good friend in the region, the Pakistani president, just concluded a "peace" pact with the warlords in the region where Osama bin Laden is assumed to be living. President Musharraf will not only NOT try to capture bin Laden, he will also prevent any foreigners from going into the region to attempt to capture him.

Musharraf surrenders before Taliban (asiantribune)

Osama bin Laden -- five years after masterminding 9/11 -- is living safe and serene under the protection of Bush's political ally in the region.

Sadly, instead of using Sept. 11 as an opportunity to reclaim the national unity we felt on that sad day five years ago, Bush sees it as an occasion for another photo op -- and another victory lap around Ground Zero.

A BuzzFlash Reader


Subject: FBI Propagandist co-wrote "Path to 9/11"

I just saw "Path to 9/11" and wondered who this John Miller was. He wrote a wonderful part in the show for himself. It's a terrific free commercial for the republicans. Brilliant Rovian coup. Good-bye democracy,

John Miller, assistant director of public affairs for the FBI, [propaganda?] co-wrote the script to "Path to 911".

http://mediamatters.org/items/200609070004

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_09_01_

digbysblog_archive.html#115749281468208474

Liz


Subject: Tragedy, a Registered Trademark of the Republican Party

I attend the University of Minnesota. This morning as I walked to the student union, Coffman Union, I noticed freshly planted flags in the ground. There must have been a thousand of them, placed in a neat square in front of Coffman Union. I suppose it's one way of mourning what happened five years ago. Maybe a selfless individual awoke before dawn to plant the flags and leave them in silent tribute to the dead.

But the people who planted the flags would not mourn in silence. Those who planted the flags have never mourned the dead in silence. Those who planted the flags were the U of M College Republicans.

In front of the flags was a long table, draped with a sign saying "COLLEGE REPUBLICANS" with a complementary American flag logo. Two large flags sat on either side of the table, one the Stars and Stripes, the other the State flag. And just beyond that were two small yard signs saying "Never forget 9/11."

I can't forget 9/11. It's been five years and what happened that day is seared into my memory, as it is for everyone else. Why do the College Republicans think I have forgotten 9/11? Or 'the lessons' of 9/11? The lesson of 9/11 is that extremism, especially in the name of god is to be condemned in the strongest terms, for it is that same extremism that motivated nineteen men to pilot airplanes into buildings, ending thousands of lives and ruining thousands more.

What are the Republican 'lessons' of 9/11? From all I can tell, it's "Islamic extremists must be stamped out, that we must bomb countries to exact revenge on those who killed us. Republicans are patriots and anyone else is an immoral terrorist appeaser who would rather talk to men than blow them up."

How do you condemn killing by killing? Do you spread democracy by dropping bombs? How do you condemn 'evildoers' by sending people to a gulag and subjecting others to torture?

Let me remind my Republican friends that patriotism is not a democratic/republican value, and the flag doesn't belong to anyone, or any one party. The flag belongs to all of us. We all mourn what happened that day.

Do republicans have no shame? Is there a compassionate conservative anywhere who will stand up and say that we must drop our partisan bickering and come together to mourn without condemning liberals as unpatriotic?

I'd like to find one.

A BuzzFlash Reader


Subject: Bribe from Canada to WH

My son is in the lumber business, so I am interested in it. Mills all over US have closed because of NAFTA. I read on the internet PM Harper gave 50 million to the WH, specified no congressional oversight) for more concessions to close the lumber business here. Just read from a comment on RAW STORY, a Canadian mentioned it as well. Remember when Al Gore made phone calls for the Dem. party out of the Blair house and so much was made of it..the crooked dems. Well, this latest Bush crime seems like an out right bribe to me. Wonder if dems. in big lumber states will mention it? Up here in Maine, mills are shutting down right and left..hurting the employees, woodsmen and communities. Olympia Snowe is running for reelection and doesn't mention on her TV spot that she is republican. Independent.

Softwood Deal Ends in Sawoff (Ottawa Sun)

Martha Thacker
Prentiss TWP, Maine


I can't imagine how proud terrorists around the world must have felt today as they watched how we are reacting to nine eleven. They won. They must also be very proud of the fact that they have succeeded with keeping everyone very scared, even our president seems to take delight in helping them scare the American people. But best of all for the terrorists, it doesn't cost much to scare us anymore, just the threat is all it takes now. Those terrorists must be so proud of the sniveling cowards they have turned us into. Yes Mr. Bin Laden, you have outwitted the American president, but don't be so proud, it's not hard to outwit the mind of a child. He won't always be our president. One day you will face an intelligent president.

Sharon Swift
Memphis, TN


Subject: Mailbag 9/11/06

KJ Lovell...I have noticed for a long time the way Bush starts waving as soon as he deplanes or gets on it...his walk to the plane. This has been a hilarious thought in my mind for some time. I think he waves at NOTHING!...I think that someone out there, yells to him, "Mr. President, why do you hate out soldiers?" and he waves ... and grins. "Mr. President...you are a sack of sh*t! and he smiles...and waves...his little shaking back and forth hand. "Mr. President....why does the V. President go on Meet the Press and lie?" he waves...and is always distracted by something else...but he waves. "Mr. President...you are a real ass**le"...and he grins and waves... "Mr. President...why did you tell us "mission accomplished" when it was not?"...he waves. "Mr. President...did you know that New Orleans washed away yesterday?"...he grins...waves.. "Mr. President. we are never going to be able to stay the course...right?" He smiles and nods and waves.

Bush, does not ever hear anyone when he is walking...and if you ever notice....you never, ever see the crowd...so, I think it is either voices in his head....or waving at nothing, which is likely what is in his head....nothing!

Well, no surprise....Keith did it again! Were we surprised that Dick Cheney...could not understand that Tim Russert did not understand him? What a jerk! "I don't know what about this you do not understand?" Does he actually think that Tim is the only one who knows? Then, the president came on tonight and just reiterated what he always says....if we do not stick with him...we are not patriotic...we are aiding and abetting the enemy, yada., yada!!!

Would you believe that I actually have a brother who feels that those of us who do not think like George Bush....are unpatriotic? Well, I do....and let me tell you...after this long and these lies....he ain't gonna change...and he makes me sadder and sadder. What do we do?? We make sure we do not miss Keith Olbermann's show...so we can get some intelligence in our diets.... We also read every single thing on BuzzFlash every single day....so we will be informed and add a little more intelligence...thank goodness, we have both!

Thanks..........Buzz.

Shirley ..... St. Louis


Subject: Lack of Journalistic Integrity at The New York Times

David Brooks: Spokesman for Economic Elitists

There are many reasons for the New York Times to be ashamed of what it publishes. A major one is giving space to columnist David Brooks. His values, opinions and worldview should be despised by most Americans. His latest attack on objective truth was the column "The Populist Myths on Income Inequality." It was a defense of the current American economic system and an attack on all those "populists" that see a morally bankrupt economy under the control of elitists and operated for their benefit. Brooks has a knack for turning reality upside down, inside out and getting away with it. Time for the Times to stop it.

The first point of Brooks-the-liar was that "workers are not getting a smaller slice of the pie." Here is some economic injustice truth: Since 1970, the share of gross domestic product going to wages and salaries has shrunk 8.3 percent. If the 2006 American economic pie were divided into 1970-sized slices, with workers today receiving the same share of gross domestic product workers received in 1970, each American household would receive about $9,600 more in paycheck income this year. Brooks rejects arguments about rising economic inequality. Here's the latest truth: Income inequality grew last year, as the richest fifth of households took home 50.4 percent of all income, their largest share since the government began tracking the data in 1967. Of course, Brooks sees the world through elitist eyes, as shown by this statement: "The rich don't exploit the poor. They just out-compete them."

The second point of Brooks-the-elitist was that "outsourcing is not decimating employment." This is such a remarkable lie that one wonders if there are any editors at the Times doing their job. Rather than look at how outsourcing has robbed Americans of good, high-paying jobs, Brooks, like other pro-business shills, uses an irrelevant statistic on all jobs lost. One wonders how Brooks has such chutzpah. And WHY does Brooks want to dismiss years of outsourcing manufacturing, engineering, computer, software design, legal, technical support, and various medical jobs. Not only have jobs been lost, but those jobs remaining in the U.S. pay lower salaries because of the competition from outsourcing. Has Brooks noticed that virtually no product he has purchased in recent years is made in the USA? Has he noticed the foreign accents of people he is talking to on the phone when he seeks technical support or has an issue with a credit card account? High-paying jobs have not kept pace with population growth, with GDP growth or with productivity growth. That is the depressing economic truth. The many trade agreements sought so aggressively by business interests keep harming working- and middle-class Americans. And a major underlying reason is that new jobs, not merely existing ones here, are being created overseas. Business shills like Brooks are correct when they say that there has been increased wealth creation in the U.S. The problem is simple -- that wealth creation is being dispersed to the Upper Class, the economic elites. The economy grows but wealth is NOT being distributed in any fair way to working- and middle-class Americans.

Brooks-the-deceiver is adept at finding statistics that seem to support his biased beliefs. He continues to assert that "the meritocracy is working." Apparently he has no contact with the army of well educated, experienced Americans who cannot find good jobs, take low-wage jobs just to survive, or remain unemployed and depressed. Brooks-the-elitist is so completely out of touch with economic reality that you have to wonder exactly why The New York Times wants to appeal to readers who happily accept the twisted facts and logic of Brooks or, worse yet, are totally fooled by them.

There have been a number of serious examinations of Brooks' journalistic integrity that have found him to have major deficiencies, especially an inquiry by Nicholas Confessore in the Washington Monthly. Brooks has said "People want reality that tells them how right they are all the time." That explains why Brooks creates his own reality. Here is another glimpse into the Brooks psyche: "We pretend to be a middle class, democratic nation, but in reality we love our blue bloods. ... We love the prep school manners, the aristocratic calm, the Skull and Bones mystery, the dappled lawns stretching before New England summer homes." Does Brooks speak for you or anyone you know?

Others also see the shameful notions of Brooks expressed in his recent column. Jared Bernstein, on MaxSpeak, pointed out:

Brooks argues that declining unionization is not a 'driving force' because it only explains 10-20 percent of the rise in inequality. But that's as big as any other force that economists have measured. ... Does Brooks or anyone else seriously believe that the increase in trade, investment flows and multinational corporate activity has had no impact on inequality? Does he believe that large and sustained trade deficits have nothing to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs and the fall in the relative wages of non-college educated workers?

At this point, I'm not aware of any serious analysis of inequality that is anywhere near this dismissive of these impacts. ... I think we all have to agree that this Brooks column is hugely effective: 600 short words that pack enough distortions, bad statistics, and headfakes to keep honest folks scrambling and needing 3 times as many words to expose as the flim-flammery they are. ... the most obnoxious aspect of Brooks' production is not the distortions which he advances, but that they are allowed to be published in a news journal which purports to offer veridical information in regards to news worthy subject matter.

Dean Baker wrote on The American Prospect online some strong criticism. He said Brooks "gets almost everything in his article wrong. ... David Brooks comes up with almost nothing in his column that would contradict the vast body of evidence showing that most workers have not been benefiting from the economy's growth over the last quarter century -- and that this is the result of deliberate policy decisions."

With his latest diatribe in favor of economic inequality and injustice the time has come for serious thinkers concerned about the sad state of our union to BOYCOTT THE NEW YORK TIMES in print and on the Internet. Often described as the Times' token conservative, David Brooks is an insult to truth, objective reality and all attempts to improve the quality of America's democracy and economy. He is an embarrassment to journalism and an insult to the vast majority of Americans who, unlike Brooks, are not economic elitists.

Joel S. Hirschhorn
Chevy Chase,

P.S. Joel S. Hirschhorn's new book is Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government -- www.delusionaldemocracy.com.


Subject: What the Democrats Should Say

The only thing we have to fear is two more years of Republican fear-mongering. Shut them up. Elect Democrats.

A BuzzFlash Reader


Subject: Rove's Syrian Embassy Attack

Hey Buzz,

Rove is getting sloppy, he probably wanted the four "terrorists" he hired to attack the US embassy in Syria during bush's speech. The government's fox news channel could then run the "terrorists attack US embassy" banners below bush's image on the screen. C'mon rove four lame terrorists after all the hezbollah sh*t has died down? What's the matter, is your PR budget getting stretched a little thin? We've had it with the coincidental bush speech/subsequent terrorist attack theme. I think even the hypnotised "swing voters" may recognize this flagrant fear factor promotion.Take a hike rove.

Tom Coombs
Kaslo, BC, Canada

BUZZFLASH MAILBAG