connecting*the*dots

From Media Matters:

Melanie Morgan, Lee Rodgers, Rush Limbaugh, and John Gibson all forwarded the accusation made by a website controlled by Rev. Sun Myung Moon that Sen. Hillary Clinton was responsible for spreading information linking Sen. Barack Obama to a madrassa, or Muslim school. None of the four cited any evidence, other than the article, that Clinton was responsible for promoting the madrassa story, and the article cited no one by name.

Below is a clip from The Big Story with John “War on Christmas” Gibson, where Gibson reports on Hillary Clinton “playing the Muslim-phobia card” and holds a conversation with the “level-headed” Republican strategist, Terry Holt.

These guys couldn’t hide a fart in a Trojan Horse.

Here’s my play-by-play breakdown of the clip:

• Charge Hillary Clinton with dirty tactics (from a non-sourced article, published on a right-wing nut job’s website)
• “Expose” Obama being a “Muslim” and being educated at a “madrasa” (after he talked about going to a Muslim school as a child and being a Christian in his book, The Audacity of Hope, which was released earlier this year)
• “Innocently” provide context that a madrasa wasn’t radical 40 years ago (while the rest of Fox News runs with the story as if it were exposing something relevant for American voters to chew on)
• Completely forget to include the fact that Obama was barely out of diapers at the time of his schooling
• Repeat that Clinton is playing political hardball because the American public “knows what a madrasa means” (again, while the rest of Fox hard-sells the ties to terrorists)
• Refuse to explain that The Washington Times is not the same as the “left-leaning” Washington Post (classifications in this culture war that most Americans might confuse rather easily)
• Cry innocent by stating that exposing a cigarette smoker is nothing like this form of political dirty work (while the rest of the network piles on the significance of this insignificant fact)

What’s the result?

An uniformed American public swallowing this story hook, line and sinker, creating doubt with Barak Obama and more venom directed at Hillary Clinton, adding to her baggage — perceived or otherwise.

Until sources are named outside of Insight.com’s word, I’ll file this under Republican Noise Machine.

Fox News isn’t biased; they’re a major part of the spin cycle.

UPDATE: CNN completely debunks the charges — both that Hillary Clinton outed Obama and that Barak Obama attended a “radical madrasa.” They even sent a reporter to Jakarta to show the normalcy of the school on tape. The best line out of Wolf Blitzer’s mouth following the ridiculous clips from Fox News?:

CNN did what any serious news organization is supposed to do in this kind of a situation. We actually conducted an exclusive, first-hand investigation, inside Indonesia, to check out the kind of school Barack Obama attended as a little six year-old boy.

Guess what happened next? Fox News swallowed their story. Lying bastards.

From an email sent to me by a friend:

As an active duty Marine I can not really voice my opinions about some of the events of the world. As you know we recently lost our 3000th service member and a song popped in my head. “Counting Bodies Like Sheep to the Rhythm of the War Drums” by A Perfect Circle.

If you post anything all I ask is that you not mention my name.

You got it, man.

Related posts:

• The Most Elegant, Rhetorical, Wartime Question… Ever
• 50,000 Dead Iraqi Citizens: Define “Victoryâ€? For Me
• I’ll Take King George, Center Square
• Lego My Country

the show with zefrank: 10-04-06

Fox News knows exactly what they’re doing.

the show with zefrank

Vernon’s made a new buddy-in-hate, good ol’ boy Rush Limbaugh… and he’s bubbling over with joy. Hmm.. let me try to recreate the vibe of Vern’s email newsletter for you:

RUSH: You’ve gotta hear this campaign commercial. There’s a man running for office as a Republican, running for Congress in … North Carolina. His name is Vernon Robinson. The audio is what we have here, obviously. The video to his commercial is … on his website. (Laughing.) I don’t even want to characterize it. Just listen to this commercial.

RUSH: Goes out with Leave It To Beaver music. I should point out Vernon Robinson is black, and when he mentions Sharpton and Jackson — have you seen the spot? When he gets to Jackson, he found a mug shot of Jesse Jackson and that’s what he runs and he found a picture of Sharpton with an Afro from years and years ago. (Laughing.) This is a national campaign. I mean, he’s talking about national issues. They all have impact locally, but I thought it was the Democrats that were going to nationalize the election this year! I thought Democrats were going to do that. That is Vernon Robinson who is running for Congress … He’s getting grief like you can’t believe. This is one of the best political ads in a long, long time, and can I ask you: When you heard that, folks, when you heard that, weren’t you going, “Yeah! Okay, yeah, yeah,” and, “Why don’t more Republicans talk like this? Why don’t more of them say these are the problems that we face?” And here’s Vernon Robinson in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, saying: I’m a pioneer, and I will take the arrows.
…

RUSH: Myrtle Beach, South Carolina - this is Jean. Welcome to the program.

JEAN: Well hello, mega dittos. … I wanted to say Vernon is a man.

RUSH: Do you know Vernon Robinson?

JEAN: No. I don’t know him personally. I just love his ah what can you say. He stands for something, regardless.

RUSH: Yes he does.

JEAN: I love a man. That’s my man.

RUSH: He stands for a lot of things.

JEAN: Yes. Besides yourself, that’s one I wouldn’t mind marrying.

RUSH: (Laughing) … I’ll tell you what’s do. She’s calling about an ad. Vernon Robinson is running for Congress as a Republican in … North Carolina. He has one of the best television ads out there in a long time. We have the audio to it. We are going to link to this at rushlimbaugh.com, link to his website because the video of this ad will start playing automatically once you log on to his website. … We mention Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in this ad. And the picture of the Reverend Jackson in this ad is his mugshot. … The picture of the Reverend Sharpton is back in the big jewelry, big hair, heavier days. I think he’s got a medallion on. He’s wearing a cleric’s collar …

RUSH: And of course it concludes with Leave it to Beaver type music. That is just a great, great ad. And by the way, again we were told the Democrats are going to be running a national campaign in their House races this year. Sounds to me like Vernon Robinson, who is black by the way, and he is a target now, they are targeting this guy like - he’s going to be targeted not to the extent Clarence Thomas was — but maybe Michael Steele, Ken Blackwell, Lynn Swann. This is, I mean pardon the French here, this is off the plantation. He has escaped and wandered off the liberal Democrat plantation. This is not allowed. This is not permitted. If they could, they’d grab this guy and send him to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and let Hillary as Nurse Ratchet try to get his mind right. Either that or send him to the warden in Cool Hand Luke and put him in the box. I can’t tell you folks. This wouldn’t have happened 20 years ago. You wouldn’t have had a black … congressional candidate in North Carolina running a spot like this. And mocking the Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton. But it’s a new day out there. Vernon Robinson, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
…

RUSH: Folks, don’t panic out there. Vernon Robinson’s website is not broken. The link is not broken. We’ve just shut down their server. We’ve overloaded the server at the Vernon Robinson campaign site where we’ve got the link posted to see his great TV ad. Just be patient. And as people get in and get out of there, the traffic will subside and you will be able to get in. But the site’s working fine. We’ve sent more people than their server can handle and this happens, we shut down servers routinely on this program.

Without your immediate financial support, Vernon cannot create new ads and put them on TV and radio! Please help Vernon make more ads that Rush Limbaugh says every Republican should be using.

Limbaugh played the Robinson ad twice. It was almost as if he was thinking, “Yeehaw! Someone else can hate more than me!” Remember kids, free speech is a beautiful thing, as it can help us find the bigots amongst us!

With the massacre of Haditha already drawing comparisons to the My Lai massacre — where up to 500 unarmed Vietnamese men, women and children were killed in cold blood by American forces — proponents of this war are holding fast against this incident becoming the tipping point of complete anti-war sentiment.

Local blogger, Joe Guarino:

[…] We cannot take these unfortunate events, and then somehow generalize and amplify the Big Message they convey to suggest that the overall war effort is unworthy. We cannot make general assessments of the war in Iraq (or in Vietnam, for that matter) on the basis of tragic events that do not reflect the overall pattern.

The media would be wrong to muster a drumbeat on these stories, but if they do in stereotypical fashion, the public should ignore it.

Unfortunately for Joe and his agenda, the American public will discuss the role this atrocity plays in the overall war effort.

Whether Haditha represents an accurate assessment of the US military’s tactical MO or not, it has marked a clear shift in our collective perception of modern warfare. No longer do we live in a fantasy world of surgically precise operations; we’ve all awoken to the reality that combat-stressed groups of men and women in a war zone are capable of murdering civilians on their own accord.

That 21st century, smart-bomb warfare meme is kaput; we’re now all aware that the US is knee-deep in a grudge match.

But in the end, it truly doesn’t matter if this one incident is indicative of the pattern to the entire war effort or not, because to the Iraqi people — the people on the other end of the gun barrel in any circumstance — it signifies a terrifying escalation of chaos, murder and occupation that cannot be erased with clarifying words.

Not that our words would do any good anyways.

The Overall Pattern In Iraq

From pg. 39 of the September 2004 Strategic Communication report, by the Defense Science Board — a federal advisory committee established to provide independent advice to the secretary of defense:

2.3 What is the Problem? Who Are We Dealing With?

The information campaign — or as some still would have it, “the war of ideas,� or the struggle for “hearts and minds� — is important to every war effort. In this war it is an essential objective, because the larger goals of U.S. strategy depend on separating the vast majority of non-violent Muslims from the radical-militant Islamist-Jihadists. But American efforts have not only failed in this respect: they may also have achieved the opposite of what they intended.

American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.

• Muslims do not “hate our freedom,â€? but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states.
• Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy. Moreover, saying that “freedom is the future of the Middle Eastâ€? is seen as patronizing, suggesting that Arabs are like the enslaved peoples of the old Communist World — but Muslims do not feel this way: they feel oppressed, but not enslaved.
• Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self-determination.
• Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an Ummah (the entire Muslim community) invaded and under attack — to broad public support.
• What was a marginal network is now an Ummah-wide movement of fighting groups. Not only has there been a proliferation of “terroristâ€? groups: the unifying context of a shared cause creates a sense of affiliation across the many cultural and sectarian boundaries that divide Islam.
• Finally, Muslims see Americans as strangely narcissistic — namely, that the war is all about us. As the Muslims see it, everything about the war is — for Americans — really no more than an extension of American domestic politics and its great game. This perception is of course necessarily heightened by election-year atmospherics, but nonetheless sustains their impression that when Americans talk to Muslims they are really just talking to themselves.

Thus the critical problem in American public diplomacy directed toward the Muslim World is not one of “dissemination of information,� or even one of crafting and delivering the “right� message. Rather, it is a fundamental problem of credibility. Simply, there is none — the United States today is without a working channel of communication to the world of Muslims and of Islam. Inevitably therefore, whatever Americans do and say only serves the party that has both the message and the “loud and clear� channel: the enemy.

That last sentence (with my emphasis) represents the overall pattern that I see in the Iraq war.

We’re a 100,000 strong force of monolinguistic, armed men and women on a foreign soil.

Our soldiers have little to no training in the local customs of the Iraqi people, and practically no one can verbally communicate with either civilians or the enemy.

Essential building blocks of communication with Iraqi’s — humane, personal connections via idle chat during a convoy exercise, supportive conversation in local establishments, calming direction provided during a house raid — all become lost opportunities to gain a semblance of trust or credibility.

This simple inability to communicate waters the fields of insurgent seeds.

So when an atrocity such as Haditha occurs, the Iraqi people’s understanding of the act can’t be contextualized or messaged into obscurity by our military.

Worse even, the sheer brutality of such an incident doesn’t need to be framed or spun by operatives of al Qaeda or the leaders of local insurgents to build a greater resistance to American forces.

The atrocity speaks for itself, with a clarity of message delivered via a deafening tone of dead relatives, neighbors and friends, all never to be seen again.

Iraqi citizens have lived with the fear of a potential Haditha massacre for years now. Their daily lives are filled with various degrees of similar experiences with American forces as we consistently sweep through house after house in the middle of the night, searching for insurgents. A Haditha massacre does only one thing: it confirms their worst fears, leading to more fear and more aggression towards our troops.

No matter what we want to tell ourselves, perception is reality.

The DoD knows we’ll never be able to control the perception of Iraqi’s, so this cry of the right to look at the big picture of the war is a nothing more than panicked attempt to control the perception and reactions of Americans that might question this war effort.

To suggest that the American public should “ignore” the “media mustering a drumbeat on these stories” — these atrocities — in order to protect the overall pattern of the war in Iraq is a failed intellectual position. This incident might only be one data point in the overall pattern of war, but it’s a glaring one — one that exposes more elements going wrong over there than going right.

The Role Of The Media

Iraqi war planners aren’t overly concerned with critical journalism, such as the March 2006 Time magazine exclusive on Haditha, affecting the average American’s take on the state of the war.

Sure, it’s a concern, but it’s only the tip of the iceberg.

If not managed, the mainstream media can become a major threat to war efforts because it is exists via the same capitalistic infrastructure as the government it supposes to watchdog.

In other words, when media institutions begin climbing onto editorial limbs, foregoing their inherent responsibility to the interests of corporate advertising, it clearly signals a shift in times to American corporations who become placed in a position to make certain decisions they’d rather not have to make:

• They can remove themselves from media buys that are beginning to serve the reflected will of the consumer (poor PR) or
• They can keep their advertising in place as a public relations strategy, while implicitly distancing themselves from our government’s effort to wage war

See, the real concern isn’t with the common people in as much as it is with the flow of money, for once the majority of corporations are off the bandwagon of a war effort, its future becomes rather short-lived.

An Example Of The Power Of Media

Lieutenant William Calley — the American officer in charge at the My Lai massacre — faced the scrutiny of the much more centralized, mainstream media of 1970. Advertising legend George Lois provides context to the media exposure of the atrocity at the time by describing the decision and experience of placing Calley on the November, 1970 cover of Esquire magazine :

“Lieutenant, this picture will show that you’re not afraid as far as your guilt is concerned. The picture will say: ‘Here I am with these kids you’re accusing me of killing. Whether you believe I’m guilty or innocent, at least read about my background and motivations.’” Calley grinned on cue, and we completed the session.

When I sent the finished cover to (Esquire editor, Harold) Hayes he called to let me know that his office staff and Esquire’s masthead bureaucrats were plenty shook up.

“Some detest it and some love it,” he said. “You going to chicken out?” I asked. “Nope,” he said. “We’ll lose advertisers and we’ll lose subscribers. But I have no choice. I’ll never sleep again if I don’t muster the courage to run it.”

The notion that some editors might feel a sense of duty to a global community — and not just to a sovereign position or a bottom line — marks the potential for transforming the media into the greatest, political equalizer on the face of the earth.

In 1970, the attack on the “liberal” media — outlets that didn’t explicitly recognize corporate interests over human interests at every turn — was eerily similar to the conservative banter of today. From Into The Dark: The My Lai Massacre:

[…]

On April 1, 1971, just two days after the verdict, Nixon ordered Calley to be placed under house arrest while his appeal worked its way through the courts. “The whole tragic episode was used by the media and the antiwar forces to chip away at our efforts to build public support for our Vietnam objectives,� he wrote.

Across the nation, there were many demonstrations of support for Lt. Calley. The American Legion announced plans that it would try to raise $100,000 for his appeal. Draft board personnel in several cities resigned in groups. Several politicians spoke out in public criticizing the government’s prosecution of the soldiers at My Lai. “I’ve had veterans tell me that if they were in Vietnam now, they would lay down their arms and come home,� Congressman John Rarick told the New York Times.

But prosecutor Aubrey Daniel also did not remain silent. He wrote a highly publicized letter to President Nixon criticizing him for releasing Calley to house arrest: “How shocking it is if so many people across this nation have failed to see the moral issue… that it is unlawful for an American soldier to summarily execute unarmed and unresisting men, women and babies.�

[…]

In the end, we have to recognize that an atrocity such as Haditha is a symptom of the behavioral patterns of all warfare.

To brush it aside as a random act of violence would be to remove the complicit nature of war planners from the equation and lay it squarely on the shoulder of the brave souls that serve our country, no matter the call to duty.

Check out more Tom Tomorrow brilliance at his blog: This Modern World

(via workingforchange)

globeandmail
Extremists threaten peace, Clinton warns
by Bill Curry

[…]

Accusing violent fundamentalists of “religious heresy,” Mr. Clinton listed the major world faiths and said they all agree that human beings are flawed individuals in search of a divine truth.

“That’s okay. We can all live with each other believing there is truth. The trouble is whether you believe any flawed human being can be in absolute possession of that truth,” he said. “When you see this fellow [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi who runs the al-Qaeda operation out of the Sunni section of Iraq hoping to dominate Jordan, saying his first priority is not to kill Jews, it’s not to kill Americans, it’s not to kill Westerners — his first priority is to kill Shiite Muslims and moderate Sunnis who don’t agree with him, what he calls the near enemy, you see this carried to its absurd link.”

Mr. Clinton then addressed such fundamentalists directly.

“If you believe anybody can actually completely know the truth and turn it into a political program that is completely true, then what do you need God for?” he asked. “The hope and idea of any religion is that all living human beings have imperfect knowledge and are imperfect by definition and that life is a journey toward the truth. When people short-circuit that and claim they have the truth and have a political program that’s absolutely true and if you don’t agree with me you’re less than human and I can kill you, which is what’s going on halfway around the world, that is the problem.

“If we don’t walk away from that, we’re going to tear the world apart. If we do, I believe the 21st century will be the most exciting, prosperous, interesting time the world has ever known and you don’t have the luxury of leaving that to the politicians,” he said.

[…]

Man, I miss Clinton.

Can you imagine the difference he’d make in office — with this type of a perspective — in a post-9/11 world? His quote on fundamentalist’s targeting the “near enemy” is spot on (Reza Aslan speaks of this in his book that I’m currently reading), though it would seem that neither the Bush administration nor the American press has any clue along these lines, as the only meme pumped into the media bullhorns is via the filters of the “War on Terror.”

Kent Bye and I touched upon the notion of truth in our conversation earlier in the week. If we can build social systems that aren’t organized around absolutes, and the participation levels reach a global, critical mass, we’ll go far in taming absolutist notions simply through the process of immersion and osmosis.

(via islamicate)

This “Boycott MSNBC” meme being promoted by the “Open Letter To Chris Matthews” blog and pushed by big-time, left bloggers is disingenuous at best, and a horrible strategy… period. Forget for a moment that Chris Matthews compared Osama bin Laden’s recent choice of language to Michael Moore’s, the facts regarding Moore are just not being represented correctly. The “Open Letter…” blog states:

What’s this all about? Chris Matthews has repeatedly compared Osama bin Laden to Democrats…

Wrong.

1. Michael Moore is not a registered Democrat
2. Michael Moore does not hold office
3. Michael Moore is an independent documentary filmmaker, one who goes after both corrupt corporations and government administrations

1992 was the last time Moore was registered as a Democrat. In the past, I’ve had my own problems wrestling with how he has been positioned by both the media and the RNM as a “Liberal Democrat” due to his hardcore stance against the Bush administration. And then I experienced F9/11 on opening night and my eyes opened even wider regarding the actions of this administration, realizing that Moore wasn’t being partisan, he was being as direct and honest as humanly possible.

I’m sure Democrats feel a rush when an independent, creative voice rips apart the opposition party — especially one as corrupt as the Bush administration — but these actions don’t exclusively subscribe a voice such as Moore to the Democratic Party’s brand of progress or politics, nor should the Democrats want such to be the case.

As an independent (or non-affiliated here in North Carolina), I respect Moore’s perspective because he doesn’t belong to a political party. Michael Moore will reach more people to act and/or vote against corruption as an independent filmmaker, than a labeled “Liberal Democratic” filmmaker. The sheer amount of bloggers that are blindly supporting this meme is poor strategy.

Stop feeding the machine their propaganda. This is a short-term tactical reaction, one that will negatively affect Moore’s long-term output of truth if he’s pigeon holed as a Democrat.

UPDATE: The blog has changed its intro to now read:

What’s this all about? Chris Matthews has repeatedly compared Americans who are concerned about the war in Iraq to Osama bin Liden…

Well, at least they got the Democratic issue corrected, but Matthews only compared Moore’s language. This boycott is retarded. Shit, I’m watching Keith Olberman no matter what Chris Matthews says.

After a ton of hard work by many people, the redesigned Media Matters for America site has launched.

OLD:

NEW:

Behavior Design knocked out the visual design, we shared the information design, I handled the tagging schema/information architecture and we all tag-teamed with the Media Matters crew.

Now that the site is live, I’ve a bunch of tagging and findability methods I’d like to discuss here, but not tonight. Tonight I digest my sushi dinner with friends in San Fran.

Media Matters clearly describes how Fox News is a major part of the Republican Noise Machine.

If you’re a Republican, please read this article in depth. Everything is based on facts and a timeline. You tell me: Who’s spinning here? The President and his cronies talk about not playing the "blame game," so how would you classify the glare on local government?

Here’s my take on the federal governments response:

Pre-hurricane preparation: Failure by the federal government by:
a) Hiring Michael Brown (bi-partisan failure in approving the hire)
b) Moving FEMA under the Homeland Security bucket (stealing funding to support the War in Iraq)
c) Cutting said funding to the development of the levee infrastructure (80% complete is completely incomplete)

Hurricane response: Failure by the federal government by:

1. Not being proactive based on weather forecasters reports describing the size of the impending hurricane as definitely greater than a category 3 (levees only hold back a level 2 based on years of studies)
2. Not immediately responding to local government cries for evacuation assistance
3. Not using all means at their disposal (i.e. Aircraft Carriers) to assist with the evacuation/rescue efforts in a timely manner
4. Not allowing private business to assist (WalMart, Amtrak, UPS, airlines, Greyhounds, etc.)
5. Not allowing volunteers to do anything aside from posing in photo ops or forcing them to endure with the red tape or go home
6. Not knowing what was happening in NO until TV reports informed them.
7. Considering evacuees as threats ("looters/thieves") before considering them people in a desperate situation
8. Locking evacuees into the city of NO and specific staging areas, causing more death and violence
9. Not allowing the media to report what is happening in the streets (i.e. photos of dead bodies)

(originally uploaded by Antifluff Superstar)

While I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment from the left blogosphere, nothing that the Bush administration has done (or not done) surprises me.

Why?

Because a large percentage of the American public will continue to allow themselves to fall into the trappings of the Bush administration’s lies, no matter the dark alley we are led to.

It’s called fear.

And even though Bush’s overall approval ratings are unbelievably low, his hardcore support continues to be there in force for one simple, but powerful, reason:

The wealthy and powerful stick with the wealthy and powerful to keep and create more wealth and power.

Only when it is not in their best interests will they act otherwise.

These strategic relationships — private industry to public service and back — provide vast resources and networks in keeping the masses in consume and desire mode, while providing each other the cover of a shared vocabulary to continuously spin themselves clear of criticism.

And when I say consume, I don’t necessarily mean eating drug-laced poultry or purchasing unnecessary material products.

This administration has perfected the consumption of propaganda regarding what it means to be an American — or more precisely — they’ve generated clear symptoms of an anti-American as any person who dissents from the party line.

Back To The Future State

Towards the end of the Athenian Empire, Socrates was sentenced to death because he had the bad habit of questioning his surroundings. He was viewed as dangerous, particularly because of his ability to influence the youth of his time.

So he was offed with a swig of hemlock.

Thankfully, we’ve evolved as a society to where outspoken voices such as Noam Chomsky can debate the origin and potential results of foreign policy, while question the motives of all parties involved without the possibility of being put to death by the rulers of our times.

Dissent forms priceless threads of discourse that are necessary to continuously evolve a moral Republic.

But there are other ways to silence a person in this modern age.

Chomsky is a rock star overseas for his political essays and speeches, but he can barely get an interview from the mainstream American media. So without sentencing good ol’ Noam to death, the collective will of the US media — with editors focused on advertising dollars and corporate sponsorship — has created a passive method of forcing hemlock upon our independent minds.

So, how does this tie back to our government?

The very freedoms and rights that our soldiers are fighting to protect have already begun deteriorating through conglomerate ownership of conglomerate media empires.

Unless voices with challenging perspectives are able to creep into the media conversation and the periphery of the average American, middle-America will continue to be ripe for rallying support by the serial spinners of big business and government.

Unless this administration is held accountable to the illegal war and domestic messes they’ve birthed, I can’t envision where this degradation of our moral fiber will end.

It’s almost as if each move the Bush administration makes that concludes without legal or mass public recourse, they consciously create an even greater climate of fear and mistrust within our own society to further propagate their unimpeded actions.

Moving Forward

So, how can we each work towards breaking this unnatural ecosystem of immorality as a nation — breaking through the spin climate of Karl Rove and President Bush’s managementof “global extremism?”

• Either turn off your TV or remain an active participant with critical, deconstruction of the media
• Use the web to find and connect with real people that share your perspectives
• Meet and share ideas off-line, in the real (leave the web for connections and community discourse)
• Influence non-political citizens to become involved in making a difference
• Most importantly: Walk your talk in the daily choices you make in your own life

/soapbox

the world has changed.
no shit, glad you’ve woken up.
we don’t all drink from the same fountain
or even from the same cup
but if the music’s right
and the air is clear
why confuse the good times
with political matters
we fear
nothing.
at all…
because "no fear" is a fucking brand
manufactured for morons
living in a testosterone dreamland
yeah, we’re all now awake
we now have an enemy to curse and blame
but do we really understand why
"they" burn our flag and name?
no.
but who cares?
we’ll bomb ‘em till they quit.
yeah that’s a solid tactic
a top five rotation hit
now all the brands are buzzing
pulling at our patriotic strings
the marketing is subtle
yet sick and deafening
"united" is just that
ready to serve you across the land
and since they’re so "united"
they want us to go lend a helping hand
because, you see, they’re "with us"
and not just a part of our verbal psyche
but what if their name was continental?
or fuddruckers?
or nike?
brand opportunity
awareness at an all time high
higher than they used to go
when consumers weren’t afraid to fly
so come on out and support ‘em
get the business back on track
while you’re at it buy a rolex
shit, get a new cadillac
because money is all that matters
to a society built on exploitation
i wonder what "those people" would say
if we opened up actual lines of communication?
yeah right…
too late…
it’s all about annihilation.