Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (24871)	8/9/2003 12:45:55 PM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

It's going to all come down to the electronic ATM-like voting machines. Are they rigged? No paper trail for a recount. No more Exit Polls. This is the biggest threat to America and out Democracy. Rascal @WorkAtYouRLocalPolls.com

To: lurqer who wrote (24871)	8/9/2003 1:27:08 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Americans Pay Price for Speaking Out ________________________________________ Dissenters Face Job Loss, Arrest, Threats But Activists not Stopped by Backlash GW Bush's America by Kathleen Kenna Published on Saturday, August 9, 2003 by the Toronto Star commondreams.org He's a Vietnam War hero from a proud lineage of warriors who served the United States, so he never expected to be called a traitor. After 39 years in the Marines, including commands in Somalia and Iraq, Gen. Anthony Zinni never imagined he would be tagged "turncoat." The epithets are not from the uniforms but the suits — "senior officers at the Pentagon," the now-retired general says from his home in Williamsburg, Va. "They want to question my patriotism?" he demands testily. To question the Iraq war in the U.S. — and individuals from Main St. merchants to Hollywood stars do — is to be branded un-American. Dissent, once an ideal cherished in the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, now invites media attacks, hate Web sites, threats and job loss. After Zinni challenged the administration's rationale for the Iraq war last fall, he lost his job as President George W. Bush's Middle East peace envoy after 18 months. "I've been told I will never be used by the White House again." Across the United States, hundreds of Americans have been arrested for protesting the war. The American Civil Liberties Union has documented more than 300 allegations of wrongful arrest and police brutality from demonstrators at anti-war rallies in Washington and New York. Even the silent, peaceful vigils of Women in Black — held regularly in almost every state — have prompted threats of arrest by American police. Actors and spouses Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon have publicly denounced the backlash against them for their anti-war activism. Robbins said they were called "traitors" and "supporters of Saddam" and their public appearances at a United Way luncheon in Florida and the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, N.Y., this spring were cancelled in reaction to their anti-war stance. Actor/comedian Janeane Garofalo was stalked and received death threats for opposing the war in high-profile media appearances. MSNBC hosts asked viewers to urge MCI to fire actor and anti-war activist Danny Glover as a spokesperson — the long-distance telephone giant refused to fire him despite the ensuing hate-mail campaign — and one host, former politician Joe Scarborough, urged that anti-war protesters be arrested and charged with sedition. "There's no official blacklisting," says Kate McArdle, executive director of Artists United, a new group of 120 actors devoted to progressive causes. "This is Hollywood, so there are always rumours starting up. Mostly it was producers saying, `We know your position — do you have to be so vocal?'" Internet chat rooms have spouted "tons and tons of vitriol aimed at us," says McArdle, a former network TV executive. "Things like, `Tell me where Tim Robbins lives and I'll go bash out his brains,'" she says. "Or, `If you don't like America, why don't you move to Iraq? Why don't you move to Canada?' "The real backlash comes from the right wing, from America's talk radio guys — when their ratings are down — not from the industry," McArdle says. "We get the `You're either with us or agin' us.'" Comes with the territory, she adds. "We're a nation of dissenters." The Dixie Chicks country pop group won worldwide attention for their anti-Bush comments, which were met with widespread radio station bans against playing their music. Their fans have responded by circulating petitions on the Internet objecting to the "chill" that has tried to silence free speech in the U.S. And opposition to the war has spawned many new songs — some remixes of old Vietnam protest songs — and Web sites devoted to anti-war lyrics. Dozens of fans walked out of a Pearl Jam concert in Denver, Colo., last spring when lead singer Eddie Vedder hoisted a Bush mask on a microphone stand and sang, "He's not a leader, he's a Texas leaguer." But musician Carlos Santana was cheered in Australia — a key U.S. ally in the Iraq war and recent proponent of the "Bush doctrine" of intervention in smaller states' affairs — when he spoke against the war and American foreign policy. ### Copyright 1996-2003. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited

To: lurqer who wrote (24871)	8/9/2003 9:56:19 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 89467

MEDIA THAT MATTERS: lurqer, Re: There’s a reason why I’m increasingly using foreign media – when I can. There are many of us who are disgusted with the U.S. corporate media. It's the worst propaganda machine the world has ever endured. Here's a nice little news digest from the UK you might find useful: newsnow.co.uk And a useful set of links: guardian.co.uk sundayherald.com [Neil Mackay is particularly good on politics.] mondediplo.com Of course, when it comes to sorting out the U.S. press, these guys are the best: buzzflash.com commondreams.org mediawhoresonline.com truthout.org ********* Finally, you may have seen this, but it is so typical of the ridiculous race to the Right among the U.S. press that it is worth repeating: demagogue.blogspot.com What Makes the Front Page and What Gets Buried Okay. Suppose for just a moment that you're a news editor for The Washington Post. The deadline is approaching for the Friday edition of the newspaper. A news story has just been sent your way, and you've got to decide how important it is and where it should go. Here's the lead paragraph: "In one of the most brazen and well-organized attacks in recent months, 40 suspected Taliban fighters armed with assault rifles shot up a government office in southern Afghanistan yesterday, killing six Afghan soldiers and a driver for a U.S. aid organization." Do you run this story on one of the first few pages of the newspaper or do you bury it at the bottom of page A-12 under the heading "World in Brief"? The Post chose to bury this story on page A-12. This is strange given that newspapers generally play up a story that they feel broadcast media will ignore because they have no video or audio to support it. Given that virtually all major Western broadcast news outlets have essentially left Afghanistan, one would think The Post would seize an opportunity to let the public know what TV and radio won't report -- that Taliban forces have re-emerged in Afghanistan with surprising strength. The Post could rightly argue that Thursday was a busy news day and that they had to choose from a number of important stories. Yet one of the stories that The Post chose to put on its front page defies all logic -- intellectual or journalistic. This story concerned national security adviser Condoleezza Rice's speech to the National Association of Black Journalists and carried the edgy, earth-shattering headline: U.S. Promises Democracy in Middle East. This story is one, great big yawn. Reporter Peter Slevin's not a bad writer, but there's just nothing to say, no real news. The story begins: "The Bush administration made a broad pledge yesterday to spread democracy and free markets to the Middle East …" I can almost hear an editor shout from the far end of the newsroom, "Hey, Charlie, hold page 1! We just got a scoop … get this: America wants democracy in the Middle East!" Who would have guessed? The administration should have been charged advertising rates per column inch for this story. Having worked in the newspaper field, I can imagine what happened. The Post agrees to send staff reporter Peter Slevin to Dallas to cover Rice's speech. My guess is that the original thought by the editor who approved Slevin's trip was that Rice might say something new or surprising about Iraq, the administration's intelligence-gathering or some related issue. But what is new or surprising about a Bush administration spokesperson saying that the White House wants democracy to take root in Iraq? In his story, even Slevin seems to recognize that there was no real substance to this speech. He writes: "[Rice] offered few details of a project whose prospects have been greeted with widespread skepticism, particularly in the Middle East itself, where the depth of the administration's spoken commitment to Arab democracy remains unproved." It's a classic case of how decisions on deploying reporters can trump a judicious assessment of what is truly newsworthy. If your editor sends you out of town to cover a speech, the easiest thing to do is to write a story. But tell your editor there's no news, and you might be made to feel like the fisherman who came home without a fish. You'd normally expect more from The Post, but, every now and then, I find myself glancing back at the top of the front page just to make sure someone didn't deliver the Washington Times to my door by mistake. posted by Frederick Maryland at 1:24 PM Comment (1)