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 : Bush Administration's Media Manipulation--MediaGate? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (3007)	5/19/2005 4:07:48 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9838

I'm of two minds on this whole fiasco. 1. Exxon has some $32 billion in cash it can't seem to find a home for. They're minting money on the backs of the middle class American worker who, apparently, doesn't seem to care that much. I heard that the energy companies have overtaken drug companies in the last year or so as the most profitable. Chaos in Iraq helps them boost their prices and rake in war profits. Too much chaos in Iraq and loss of a friendly puppet government could make them lose to other companies from other countries. China and Russia come to mind. They seem to be happy with Libya which is 'peaceful.' 2. Halliburton has some 1/4 of its work force working on Iraq. Buying Cheney has been an amazing ROI for them. Not surprisingly, AmericanFascism actually works. If, however, Iraq's government squashed (as they keep saying they're going to) the insurgency and their citizenry under their version of Saddam's iron fist, Halliburton and Bechtel could reap in ever more war profits by actually being able to rebuild the entire country at US taxpayer's expense. ====== Frankly, Iraq is so dangerous, who knows what the real situation is. The Shrub admin, HAL, Bechtel et al aren't coughing up any information anyway.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (3007)	5/19/2005 4:29:36 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 9838

What Happened to Watergate? commondreams.org <<...Not so long ago, two investigative reporters, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, did a bit of investigating and brought down a president. Watergate had a profound effect on journalism. J-schools were flooded. Investigative reporters became stars and competed with each other for stories. Quite a bit of government corruption and deception was exposed. Many officials straightened up and flew right (for a while), afraid of being exposed. It's different today. George Bush and Dick Cheney are scary individuals. With one eye firmly on Watergate, they want to discredit the press before their own dirty tricks are exposed. To that end, they have bribed columnists to create propaganda, lied their way to war, strong-armed media owners with threats and bluster, and buried as much real news as they could - for example, the public is still not allowed to see photographs of coffins coming back from Iraq. Their corruption is pleading to be exposed. But at a time when "follow the money" means reporting on the wholesale looting of the American treasury, journalism has lost its way. Take Dan Rather, who just received a Peabody Award for journalistic excellence for his reporting on the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. He got in trouble with a story about Bush's Vietnam-era National Guard duty. Everyone knows that Bush received special privileges and was often MIA. Everyone knows that he is, like most of his Administration, a chickenhawk - someone who dodged the actual fighting in Vietnam yet freely sends other people's children to their deaths in Iraq. Even if Rather's report contained a faulty document, the meat of the story has been public knowledge for years. Yet CBS did not defend its reporters and tell the Bush Administration to go to hell. Instead, Rather resigned and his producers were fired...>>