Wednesday, September 1, 2004

The 10 big stories the national news media ignore

Interesting article from The San Francisco Bay Guardian

snippet (but you should really read the details in the article before commenting...):

  1. Wealth inequality in 21st century threatens economy and democracy
  2. Ashcroft versus human rights law that holds corporations accountable
  3. Bush administration manipulates science and censors scientists
  4. High uranium levels found in troops and civilians
  5. Wholesale giveaway of our natural resources
  6. Sale of electoral politics
  7. Conservative organization drives judicial appointments
  8. Secrets of Cheney's energy task force come to light
  9. Widow brings RICO case against U.S. government for 9/11
  10. New nuke plants: taxpayers support, industry profits


http://www.sfbg.com/38/49/cover_censored.html

14 comments:

  1. I'm shocked that this post has no comments.

    Really good stuff here, especially number two (Ashcroft) and three (really bad...it's almost like religion vs. science from what I've heard).

    As for my comment?! Well I've known that the media ignores important stories for reasons of greed and fear. It's pretty scary and now that I think about it, I'm not suprised that this post got any comments.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree, Walter. I thought a few people would comment. I thought it was a good article. Not sure about the bias factor though...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for sharing the article... pretty scary stuff, though.

    In one of my undergrad political theory classes, our prof handed out a diagram showing the major newspapers and TV and radio networks in the country, and it was shocking to me how few hands controlled all our major news sources. It takes a lot of effort to stay a well-informed citizen (even for something as relatively minor as the VA sales tax increase!) and hench a responsible voter. What disheartens me is that most people don't make that effort.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That's another difficulty of being well-informed, considering the spin on all the info you receive...

    ReplyDelete
  5. The things that are important to me are the economyand healthcare.

    I hope that Kerry can push these issues and focus on them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You hope that Kerry finds a way to push and focus on point number 9? The widow who is attempting to bring a RICO case against the US government?

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Wealth inequality in 21st century threatens economy and democracy"

    I believe that will only get worse with the Bush administration in power.

    And

    "Ashcroft versus human rights law that holds corporations accountable"
    What an opportunist. Yeah, companies that set camp up in countries where there are "human rights" are violated are supporting these governments.
    Go Kerry!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh my God! Wouldn't that be terrible if that were true? Nobody would ever believe that...

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm not sure why anyone's surprised that there are less responses to this. This article contains nothing more than unsubstantiated snippets of someone's negative, conspiracy-oriented, paranoid thoughts. Just look at the sources used by Peter Phillips, head of Sonoma State University's Project Censored. He is claiming censorship simply because he doesn't hear enough of what he feels is right. How can anyone seriously say that the media has a right wing agenda? Come on now.

    #4
    "among its top 10 underreported stories. Almost 10,000 U.S. troops died within 10 years of serving in the first Gulf War"
    What!? Wow. Strange that among my many friends that have served in the first gulf war none of them have died from suspicious maladies nor do they know of anyone who has. You would think it would be a hot topic for them. You might even believe that someone in the military for 20 years would at least at a minimum know someone, who knew someone who this applies to.
    Where did this number come from?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Here are the sources. I am not certain how much research that you want to be done on this topic.

    Sources: "UMRC's Preliminary Findings from Afghanistan and Operation Enduring Freedom" and "Afghan Field Trip #2 Report: Precision Destruction, Indiscriminate Effects," Tedd Weyman, UMRC Research Team, Uranium Medical Research Center, January 2003. "Scientists Uncover Radioactive Trail in Afghanistan," Stephanie Hiller, Awakened Woman, January 2004. "There Are No Words ... Radiation in Iraq Equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs," Bob Nichols, Dissident Voice, March 2004. "Poisoned?," Juan Gonzalez, New York Daily News, April 2004. "International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan at Tokyo: The People vs. George Bush," Niloufer Bhagwat J., Information Clearinghouse, March 2004.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I would also be interested to seeing a reputable source for the '10,000 dead veterans' claim. I highly doubt that there is one though as it sounds like a typical anti-government/war exaggeration or outright lie.

    I have several fiends who are now in Iraq or Afghanistan, who served in the the first Gulf war, and they are all still very much alive.

    Bob Nichol's claim that the 'Radiation in Iraq Equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs' is utter bullshit, and his inclusion in your list of sources throws the the rest into doubt. Unbiased scientific research and facts is what is needed here, not people doing research to try prove what they already think to be true.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yeah--that kind of logic goes both ways.
    I don't doubt that for every article that I pull up, I am certain you can pull another one up to counter it. Great!

    Even the "so called" facts can be altered to prove a point.
    Some people read the "New York Times" others "Fox News".

    ReplyDelete
  13. No doubt, but do you have a reputable source for the '10,000 dead' or not?

    Not trying to 'counter' anything, except that nothing is as clear cut as the far left and right will have you believe, especially in this case.

    When you start altering facts, they are then no longer facts in my opinion.
    I read, or watch, neither. I prefer my information as unbiased as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Not trying to 'counter' anything, except that nothing is as clear cut as the far left and right will have you believe, especially in this case."

    Right on! I've yet to see an article for either side that wasn't full of half truths. I'm so glad to see people questioning these articles. Nobody ever seems to ask, "what are you *not* telling me?" Put out a few "facts" that sound outrageous, and 90% of time you'll solicit an emotional "knee jerk" response that will overpower sensibility and logical thinking. With careful choices of words, THEY decide what you ponder and analyze. This is what all the media is good at, and it keeps this country divided pretty efficiently.

    Just my $.02 :)

    --mike

    ReplyDelete