SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: twmoore who wrote (9915)2/13/2005 12:32:00 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 20039
 
twmoore, the Cartoon Channel



To: twmoore who wrote (9915)2/14/2005 4:20:30 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Respond to of 20039
 
The media-military complex kicks out CNN whistleblower:

Controversy claims senior CNN executive

By Jacques Steinberg and Katharine Q. Seelye The New York Times

Monday, February 14, 2005


Eason Jordan, a senior executive at CNN who was responsible for coordinating the cable network's Iraq war coverage, has resigned abruptly, citing a tempest he touched off last month during a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, when he appeared to suggest that U.S. troops had targeted and killed journalists.

Though no transcript of Jordan's remarks at Davos on Jan. 27 has been released, the panel's moderator, David Gergen, editor at large of U.S. News & World Report, said in an interview on Friday night that Jordan initially spoke of soldiers "on both sides" who he believed had been "targeting" some of the more than five dozen journalists who had been killed in Iraq.

But almost immediately after making that assertion, Jordan, whose title at CNN had been executive vice president and chief news executive, "quickly walked that back to make it clear that there was no policy on the part of the U.S. government to target or injure journalists," Gergen said. Jordan was then challenged by U.S. Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, who was in the audience, and Jordan said he had intended to say only that some journalists had been killed by U.S. troops who did not know they were aiming at journalists.

Nonetheless, accounts of Jordan's remarks - and the apparently favorable response they received from some Arab representatives at the conference - were soon being reported on Internet Web logs, as well as in an article on Feb. 3 on the Web site of the conservative U.S. magazine National Review.

Ann Cooper, executive director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, said 54 journalists had been killed in 2003 and 2004. At least nine of those died as a result of U.S. fire, she said.

In a memorandum released to his colleagues on Friday night, Jordan, 44, who had worked at the network for more than two decades, said he had "decided to resign in an effort to prevent CNN from being unfairly tarnished by the controversy over conflicting accounts of my most recent remarks regarding the alarming number of journalists killed in Iraq."

In a separate e-mail message to the staff, Jim Walton, president of CNN News Group, a division of Time Warner, announced Jordan's resignation, which took effect immediately, before praising his 23 years of service at the network. "CNN's global news-gathering infrastructure is largely his vision and achievement," Walton said.

In accepting Jordan's resignation, CNN appeared intent on putting the episode behind it as quickly as possible, perhaps in an effort to avoid repeating the drawn-out tensions between CBS News and the Bush administration last autumn. After broadcasting a report critical of President George W. Bush's Vietnam-era National Guard service in early September, CBS defended the report, in the face of criticism on Web logs, for more than a week before announcing that it could not substantiate it.

Asked Friday night whether CNN had had any contact with the Bush administration over Jordan's remarks, a network spokeswoman, Christa Robinson, said, "Not that I'm aware of." Asked whether Jordan had been under any pressure from the network to resign, Robinson said he had not. She said that Walton, the CNN president, was unavailable for further comment. Jordan did not return a message left on his cellphone seeking comment.

Jordan - who once had day-to-day responsibility for CNN's international coverage but whose role had been more a logistical one in recent years - is no stranger to controversy.

In April 2003, he touched off a similar firestorm when he wrote an opinion article for The New York Times saying that CNN had essentially suppressed news of brutalities in Iraq under Saddam Hussein's presidency for fear of jeopardizing lives of Iraqis, particularly those on CNN's Baghdad staff.

"I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me," Jordan wrote. "Now that Saddam Hussein's regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely."

The online reports of Jordan's remarks at Davos - as well as the only interview Jordan has given on the subject, for an article that appeared in The Washington Post - have come at a challenging time for CNN. In November, the network appointed Jonathan Klein, a former CBS news executive, as president of its domestic network. (His predecessor had been appointed only a little more than a year earlier.) It also gave Klein an ambitious assignment: to somehow reclaim the U.S. ratings lead that CNN had long held but yielded some years ago to Fox News.

iht.com



To: twmoore who wrote (9915)2/14/2005 4:26:52 AM
From: Raymond Duray  Respond to of 20039
 
Re: Which mainstream media source would you suggest to get more information about 9/11 out to the public?

Surely you jest. No mainstream media source is adequately covering the 9/11 fraud. And we can expect that none ever will, since the mainstream media is an active party to the cover-up.

Now what I can recommend very highly is a new book by Paul Thompson, "The Terror Timeline : Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11--and America's Response" tinyurl.com

Paul is one of the very best 9/11 researchers, and this book, and his online "Complete 9/11 Timeline" tinyurl.com rely on a painstaking compilation of hundreds of citations from various mainstream media sources to piece together a compelling argument for official complicity in the perpetration and the cover-up of 9/11.

It is Paul Thompson's synthesis of hundreds of threads of evidence that is so valuable, and so lacking in the American corporate media.



To: twmoore who wrote (9915)2/14/2005 7:08:54 AM
From: Don Earl  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20039
 
RE: "Which mainstream media source would you suggest to get more information about 9/11 out to the public?"

If the mainstream media had any intention of getting the truth out about 9/11, it already would have done so. In a way, it's almost miraculous that as much information got out as it did.

There was an article I saw yesterday describing tactics being used by white supremacist groups to get their messages out. While their messages are pretty disgusting, 9/11 activists could stand to take lessons from their tactics. They're using the only methods available to those without access to the media, and they are using those methods with tangible results.

One of the greatest short comings among 9/11 researchers is a lack of consensus on what actually happened, and who actually had their finger on the trigger on 9/11. It's pretty hard to get a message out when no one can agree on what exactly the message is.

Your typical local classified outfits will happily print up anything you hand them, for a fee. Coming up with a stack of newsprint is hardly rocket science, and distributing that newsprint is something any third grader can figure out how to do. A million 9/11 researchers could easily blanket the country with the information, simply by distributing 100 such papers each. Properly organized, the information would be common knowledge in a week's time.

It isn't hard to imagine 30 of the top 9/11 researchers putting together 1 article each, and seeing those articles arranged into a cohesive picture of what happened on 9/11. The evidence is available and is easily documented from mainstream sources.

As the saying goes, "Many hands make light work.".