Weeks after a British magazine published a long article by two American professors titled “The Israel Lobby,” the outrage continued to howl through mainstream U.S. media.

A Los Angeles Times op-ed article by Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow Max Boot helped to set a common tone. He condemned a working paper by professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt that was excerpted in the London Review of Books.

The working paper, Boot proclaimed, is “nutty.” And he strongly implied that the two professors -- Mearsheimer at the University of Chicago and Walt at Harvard -- are anti-Semitic.

Many who went on the media attack did more than imply. On April 3, for instance, the same day that the Philadelphia Inquirer reprinted Boot’s piece from the L.A. Times, a notably similar op-ed appeared in the Boston Herald under the headline “Anti-Semitic Paranoia at Harvard.”

And so it goes in the national media echo chamber. When a Johns Hopkins University professor weighed in on the op-ed page of the Washington Post, the headline was blunt: “Yes, It’s Anti-Semitic.” The
AUSTIN, Texas -- Personally, I think this is a really good time not to keep up. The more you try, the less sense it makes, although getting us used to having it all make no sense at all may be an extremely sneaky Karl Rove ploy to justify the war in Iraq. Hard to say.

The latest development to which the only appropriate response is, "Huh," is the news that the "mobile weapons labs" introduced to us by President Bush before the war as conclusive evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were not evidence -- conclusive or otherwise -- of WMD and were not, in fact, mobile weapons labs.

The only thing new here is the news that George W. Bush likely knew a couple of days before he talked about them in public that the Defense Intelligence Agency had found they were not mobile weapons labs.

HOLY COW!!!  Somebody emailed me the above captioned article and I have seldom been as entertained.  I have always wondered just how, in Christ's time, the Pharisees got things so twisted.  To heck with the Pharisees...we've got THE FREE PRESS.  You folks need to take a course in old fashioned logic.  I have never read such twisted diatribe in my life.

  Are you really serious???
AUSTIN, Texas -- We need to keep up with the daily drip, that endless succession of special favors for special interests performed by Congress, or we'll never figure out how we got so far behind the eight ball. While the top Bushies lunge about test-driving new wars (great idea -- the one we're having is a bummer, so let's start another!), Congress just keeps right on cranking out those corporate goodies.

Earlier this month, the House effectively repealed more than 200 state food safety and public health protections. Say, when was the last time you enjoyed a little touch of food poisoning? Coming soon to a stomach near you. What was really impressive about H.R. 4167, the "National Uniformity for Food Act," is that it was passed without a public hearing.

"The House is trampling crucial health safeguards in every state without so much as a single public hearing," said Erik Olson, attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "This just proves the old adage, 'Money talks.' The food industry spared no expense to ensure passage."

Tsotsi: Written and directed by Gavin Hood, based on the book by Athol Fugard. Running time: 94 minutes.

Tsotsi, the recent Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Film, is currently playing at the Drexel East Theater. The film centers on a young hoodlum (Presley Chweneyagae) from the Soweto township of Johannesburg, South Africa. He goes by the name of “Tsotsi,” which is the local street slang for “thug.”

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
---Oscar Wilde


“Why are we over there in Iraq?”
“To protect our freedoms.”
“How are the Iraqis threatening our freedoms?”
“They attacked us on 9/11.”
“If that is true, why are so many Americans against the war?”
“I don’t know, but I think Cindy Sheehan and all the other war protestors should be rounded up and shot.”

I was involved in this exchange with a co-worker about two months ago. I was utterly perplexed at how this individual managed the obvious cognitive dissonance created by thinking that we are fighting to protect our “freedoms” while simultaneously holding the notion that non-violent dissidents “should be rounded up and shot”.

Politicians, pundits, journalists and bloggers have been debating President Bush's ultimate motivation for authorizing the leak of classified information about the Iraq war to Scooter Libby. But the central issue in the case is not whether or not Bush broke the law per se, or whether he sought isolated revenge against Joe Wilson. What's important to understand and determine here is whether or not this leak is part of a much broader scandal; part of the Bush administration's cover-up of a pre-planned invasion of Iraq, and the cherry-picking of intelligence to fit that mission.

It's a crime. No kidding. But the media has it all wrong. As usual.

'Scooter' Libby finally outed 'Mr. Big,' the perpetrator of the heinous disclosure of the name of secret agent Valerie Plame. It was the President of United States himself -- in conspiracy with his Vice-President. Now the pundits are arguing over whether our war-a-holic President had the legal right to leak this national security information. But, that's a fake debate meant to distract you.

OK, let's accept the White House alibi that releasing Plame's identity was no crime. But if that's true, they've committed a BIGGER crime: Bush and Cheney knowingly withheld vital information from a grand jury investigation, a multimillion dollar inquiry the perps themselves authorized. That's akin to calling in a false fire alarm or calling the cops for a burglary that never happened -- but far, far worse. Let's not forget that in the hunt for the perpetrator of this non-crime, reporter Judith Miller went to jail.

The media has largely been ignoring the fact that the Feingold Resolution to censure George W. Bush has been gaining support among leading Democrats. The Corporate Mainstream Media made it a huge story that the Feingold Censure Resolution did not immediately gain massive public support from other Democratic Senators. Senate Democrats are starting to rally behind the resolution after exploring the issue and examining public opinion on the issue.

Senator Barbara Boxer of California and Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa are now co-sponsors of the Feingold Censure Resolution. Senator Harkin has written an excellent article on the subject titled “Why I Fully Support Bush Censure”.  This article can be read at Tom Harkin.com http://www.tomharkin.com . Former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina recently declared his support of the resolution.

Marcy Winograd has strong words for Democratic Congresswoman Jane Harman: "She is pro-war and has voted for the Patriot Act three times. Do we really need her in Congress?"

Winograd, 52, is a grassroots activist who has just won a stunning victory in her challenge for Harman's southern California Congressional seat. In a district pre-endorsement meeting, Winograd won 35% of the delegate vote, denying Harman the 70% she needed to enter the statewide Democratic convention with a clear home district endorsement.

"It's almost unheard of for a six-term Congressional incumbent to walk into the Democratic party convention without a pre-endorsement," says Winograd. "Harman can't possibly feel like she has the backing of the people of the district."

Pages

Subscribe to Freepress.org RSS