What the MSM won't report

[moreluck]

Where's the coverage?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011...cial-order-media-wheres-reporting/?test=faces

 

[bbsam]

Where's the coverage?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011...cial-order-media-wheres-reporting/?test=faces

Wow! Rupert Murdoch pointing the finger at George Soros?! Rupert's people calling Soros a "meglomaniac"? I guess if one signs your check, you know 'em when you see 'em.

 

[trplnkl]

Wow! Rupert Murdoch pointing the finger at George Soros?! Rupert's people calling Soros a "meglomaniac"? I guess if one signs your check, you know 'em when you see 'em.

And that's all you have to say say about the article? Nothing about what it says? Is the piece true or is it made up? No thoughts on rearranging the entire financial order and changing the world & media ? No questions regarding the conferences? I'm willing to bet if it was Murdoch doing this you would have plenty to say and ask.

 

[wkmac]

"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State." - Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels

 

[Lue C Fur]

Great vid WK!!! I did not know that MSNBC was that hardcore. It is strange how this war is OK and some are calling for the arming of the rebels in Libya. Really?

 

[Lue C Fur]

Wow! Rupert Murdoch pointing the finger at George Soros?! Rupert's people calling Soros a "meglomaniac"? I guess if one signs your check, you know 'em when you see 'em.

So you think that Soros does not mean any harm to America? You think he is a great guy? WTF?

 

[bbsam]

So you think that Soros does not mean any harm to America? You think he is a great guy? WTF?

No. I find both Murdoch and Soros to be horrible bastards and the "news" that they put out to be worthless, self-serving crap. And when one points to the other and says, "Oh the horror!" I simply can't get past the irony.

 

[wkmac]

Washington Post Dependent on the Gov't It Covers

The Washington Post this morning published a lengthy article detailing the fortune -- and now the trouble -- generated for its parent company, The Washington Post Co., as a result of its acquisition of Kaplan Higher Ed. While The Post continues to lose money, Kaplan -- particularly its sprawling network of for-profit "universities" which the company began building in 2000 -- generates huge profits for the company, profits on which the Post Co. depends almost completely for its sustainability.

The article is largely devoted to recounting the corruption and abuses which pervade the for-profit education industry in general and Kaplan in particular (saddling poor people with debt in exchange for nothing of real value). But what I found most notable is how dependent is this industry -- including The Washington Post Co. -- on staying in the good graces of the Federal Government. Because these schools target low-income students, the vast majority of their income is derived from federal loans. Because there have been so many deceptive practices and defaults, the Federal Government has become much more aggressive about regulating these schools and now play a vital role in determining which ones can thrive and which ones fail.

Put another way, the company that owns The Washington Post is almost entirely at the mercy of the Federal Government and the Obama administration -- the entities which its newspaper ostensibly checks and holds accountable.

The Post is hardly alone among major media outlets in being owned by an entity which relies on the Federal Government for its continued profitability. NBC News and MSNBC were long owned by GE, and now by Comcast, both of which desperately need good relations with government officials for their profits. The same is true of CBS (owned by Viacom), ABC (owned by Disney), and CNN (owned by TimeWarner). For each of these large corporations, alienating federal government officials is about the worst possible move it could make -- something of which all of its employees, including its media division employees, are well aware. But the Post Co.'s dependence is even more overwhelming than most.

 

[Lue C Fur]

The Washington post leans really hard left...hmmm.

 

[wkmac]

40 years later, this is an interesting revisit of the Gulf of Tonkin incident from which became the Vietnam war. Give Cronkite credit for revisiting this story as more details have now emerged with classified maintenance dates having begun to expire. Ashame the MSM didn't grant Cronkite access to bring this story a bit more full circle in 2004' and while he was still with us.

In 2003' Robert McNamara covered many of the Gulf of Tonkin events in the documentary "The Fog of War."

In this case, it may not be what they won't report as much as it was what they didn't know to report but once it did come to light, why did the MSM not bring this to public attention?

Let's see, what else of major significance was taking place in 2003' when McNamara admitted the Gulf of Tonkin didn't occur? Was there something else going on at the time that had we learned that what started Vietnam never happened might have played an impact on? And whatever this event in 2003' might have been, would it have decreased the viewership if it did not happen because there were no other stories to drive that level of viewership to tune in and thus boost ratings and advertising revs?

Gee, can anyone think of anything as I'm just drawing a blank as to what that event could be?

 

[MrFedEx]

The Washington post leans really hard left...hmmm.

Who is worse, Murdoch or Soros? (This is a quiz).

 

[Babagounj]

Who is worse, Murdoch or Soros? (This is a quiz).

which ever one dies second.

 

[MrFedEx]

which ever one dies second.

They're both equally bad.

 

[wkmac]

They're both equally bad.

You got that right!

 

[moreluck]

 

[moreluck]

 

[wkmac]

CBS New York ran this story on their website yesterday and like most would do, you read it and the dire warnings of the security and counter-terrorism experts by many are just accepted as our new way of life without much further thought. But just who is counter-terrorism expert Juval Aviv and Security expert David Boehm?

First let's consider Aviv. A few years back an email circulated that a so-called terrorism expert predicted the London Subway bombing on FoxNews a week before it happened and then issued all kinds of dire warnings as a result. Good ole Snopes checked out this email and a bit more about Mr. Aviv was uncovered as was the falsehood of the email itself.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/soapbox/juvalaviv.asp

Mr. Boehm has not been as bold (that I can find) but his prediction of checkpoints into malls are a bit dire. However, the CBS piece linked above failed to disclose that Mr. David Boehm is COO of the security firm Security USA and that among it's services are security guards (a must for checkpoints right?) and closed security camera systems. http://www.securityandbodyguards.com/profile.htm

In such a security situation, most likely so big as it would be a quasi gov't/private venture, I wonder how much a company like SecurityUSA would stand to make if they were in on this piece of pie? Was Boehm performing a moral duty and warning us of impending peril or was he just greasing the company skids for some good ole corp. welfare? Hmmm! Nice move too when so many need jobs.

And in the case of CBS, so much for truth in advertising glossed over as news IMO! When I read a piece like the one from CBS, I so often think of the film maker John Pilger and his "Flying the Flag and Faking the News" piece.

 

[wkmac]

This has been around a while but is another glaring example of why what you see on the one eyed cyclops should always be questioned.

At the 7 minute mark is one of the most slapstick comedy moments I've ever seen on a news program and it would be even funnier had not the American public in it's state of fear swallowed it hook, line and sinker!

Thanks to my kids and their friends for finding it and spreading it like wildfire as a warning to not believe the news on TV. They are fast understanding that Goldstein is a media creation for the benefit of the state!

 

[Babagounj]

"The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Public Sector Jobs Saved, Private Sector Jobs Forestalled."
The paper is dense and rather lengthy, and requires considerable study. Here, however, is the bottom line:

Our benchmark results suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs. State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment. The majority of destroyed/forestalled jobs were in growth industries including health, education, professional and business services.
So the American people borrowed and spent close to a trillion dollars to destroy a net of more than one-half million jobs.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/05/029042.php

​

 

[wkmac]

Why Mainstream Media Refuses to Report the West's Shocking New Colonialism

Hardly a whisper regarding what is evidently and obviously a deliberate policy of "neo-colonialism" has been heard from the West's mainstream media. Thus it was with interest that I read an article in yesterday's online version of The Hindu, India's "national newspaper" entitled The Manufacture of Consensus and Legitimacy. Author M.S. Prabhakara deals with many of the issues raised in these electronic pages in the past few weeks.

Prabhakara has pretty much figured it out – as we have over the past few months. He believes the recent conflicts in the Middle East and Africa raise important questions about the limits of national sovereignty, asUnited Nations resolutions were used to justify invasions into both Libya and the Ivory Coast.