A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Export Import Bank GUILTY as charged [Rush Limbaugh, even he agrees?]



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 7th 06, 09:13 PM posted to alt.fan.howard-stern,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.democrats.d,rec.aviation.piloting,alt.politics.economics
FFB-Exim axis of evil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Export Import Bank GUILTY as charged [Rush Limbaugh, even he agrees?]

HOW THE TREASURY OF USA went bankrupt via GLOBAL WEAPONS merchants --
http://www.geocities.com/exim_bank_w.../TREASURY.html

WHAT HAPPENED to the PROMIS SOFTWARE of BCCI notoriety and currently
embedded in our HHS, Health & Human Services Dept [Medicare] today, via

defense subcontractors?
http://www.angelfire.com/blog/zog/ZOG_PROMIS.html


Amanda Williams wrote:
"lab~rat :-)" allegedly said in
:

Now don't you people feel dumb making a big deal out of some stupid
pecker pills?


Not really rat-boy... we found out a few things...

He can't get it up and he's seeing a shrink, so not only is he a fat felon
junkie but he's an impotent whack-job as well...

rotfl...

--
AW

small but dangerous


  #2  
Old July 8th 06, 07:38 PM posted to alt.fan.howard-stern,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.democrats.d,rec.aviation.piloting,alt.politics.economics
KAL007 Coldwar Mystery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Export Import Bank GUILTY as charged [Rush Limbaugh, even he agrees?]


HOW THE TREASURY OF USA went bankrupt via GLOBAL WEAPONS merchants --
http://www.geocities.com/exim_bank_w.../TREASURY.html

WHAT HAPPENED to the PROMIS SOFTWARE of BCCI notoriety and currently
embedded in our HHS, Health & Human Services Dept [Medicare] today, via
defense subcontractors?
http://www.angelfire.com/blog/zog/ZOG_PROMIS.html

The Neocon Battle for Media
By Robert Parry
June 29, 2006


Since the 1980s, when the neoconservatives burst onto the Washington
scene, they have always understood the power that comes from
controlling the flow of information that passes from the U.S.
government to the news media and then to the American people.

This transmission of information through Washington was to these savvy
neoconservatives what a key railroad junction was to Civil War
generals, a strategic switching point to be captured and exploited.

Just as the rapid movement of troops and supplies by rail was crucial
to those old-time generals, the dissemination of favored facts and
sometimes disinformation via the media was vital to these neocon
"information warriors" who saw their conflict as a "war of
ideas" with fronts, both foreign and domestic.

This imperative to dominate information also underscores the recent
spate of over-the-top attacks against the New York Times for publishing
stories about the Bush administration's secret monitoring of phone
calls and financial transactions. That spying - done without court
orders and with minimal oversight - was ostensibly aimed at terror
suspects but mostly produced thousands of false leads against innocent
Americans.

The Right's denunciations of the Times - rising to demands that the
newspaper's editors be prosecuted for espionage and even treason -
represent a fierce counterattack that seeks to reclaim what the neocons
in the Bush administration had come to view as a valued part of their
propaganda infrastructure, the major U.S. news organizations.

For years, the Times' news pages had been the neocons' preferred
conduit for fictitious stories about Iraq's nuclear weapons program
as well as for criticism of Al Gore and other political challengers.
During the war fever of 2002, Vice President Dick Cheney and national
security adviser Condoleezza Rice loved to cite supportive stories in
the Times, made even more convincing because the Times editorial page
opposed the Iraq invasion.

Resistance

However, following the humiliating discovery in 2003-2004 of how the
nation's "newspaper of record" had been deceived about Iraq's
WMD, Times news editors began to resist the administration's
propaganda themes and even rebuff some White House demands for silence
on terrorism-related stories.

Though the Times editors in fall 2004 did bend to White House pressure
and withheld the story about the administration's warrantless
wiretapping of some American phone calls, the newspaper finally
published the article more than a year later, in December 2005.

On June 23, 2006, the Times again defied the administration in
publishing a story about the administration's secret monitoring of
nearly $6 trillion in bank transactions handled by a Belgian-based
clearinghouse known as Swift for the Society for Worldwide Interbank
Financial Telecommunications.

After the story ran, President George W. Bush and other administration
officials denounced the Times for allegedly hindering the "war on
terror" by alerting al-Qaeda to U.S. capabilities (even though the
administration itself had often boasted of its success in tracking
international money transfers). Meanwhile, civil libertarians cited the
story in raising alarms over what appeared to be the administration's
expansion of long-term Big Brother surveillance programs.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana, asked Treasury Secretary-designate Henry
Paulson whether the financial monitoring might violate the Fourth
Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches.

"I think you'll agree that we could fight terrorism properly and
adequately without having a police state in America," Baucus said.
[NYT, June 28, 2006]

But some Republican members of Congress and right-wing pundits demanded
investigations with the goal of bringing criminal charges against the
Times or throwing some Times journalists into prison if they refuse to
identify the newspaper's sources. Some cable news shows suggested
that the Times had committed "treason."

"Even by modern standards of media-bashing, the volume of vitriol
being heaped upon the editors on Manhattan's West 43rd Street is
remarkable," observed Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz.
"New York Rep. Peter King continues to call for the Times - which,
he told Fox News, has an 'arrogant, elitist, left-wing agenda' -
to be prosecuted for violating the 1917 Espionage Act." [Washington
Post, June 28, 2006]

After using the New York Times for years as a favorite propaganda
vehicle, the administration may now be making the newspaper and its
editors an example of what happens to journalists who stop toeing the
line.

'Perception Management'

This battle over the U.S. news media - and similar assaults on the
objectivity of CIA analysts - have been crucial fronts for years in
the Right's struggle to shape the American people's view of the
world, a concept known as "perception management." [For more on
this topic, see Robert Parry's Lost History or Secrecy & Privilege.]

This fight over controlling perceptions also has intensified in recent
weeks as the Republican Party has sharpened its plans for winning the
congressional elections in November, victories that would advance
political strategist Karl Rove's goal of creating a de facto
one-party state in America.

But central to that ambition of consolidating Republican power is
controlling the public's perception of Bush's "war on terror,"
both his positive image as America's defender and the negative vision
of Democrats and journalists as weaklings who would endanger the
nation.

Selective release of information has been crucial in burnishing
Bush's hero image.

In the new book, The One Percent Doctrine, author Ron Suskind describes
some previously unreported deceptions that boosted Bush's standing
with the public.

For instance, the capture of al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah was hyped
into a major victory over terrorism though U.S. intelligence knew that
Zubaydah was really a mentally disturbed gofer whose main job was to
arrange travel for al-Qaeda family members.

"In the wide, diffuse 'war on terror,' so much of it occurring in
the shadows - with no transparency and only perfunctory oversight -
the administration could say anything it wanted to say," Suskind
wrote. "That was a blazing insight of this period. The administration
could create whatever reality was convenient."

So, on April 9, 2002, when Bush wanted to tout some successes in a
speech to Republican contributors, the President elevated Zubaydah from
a minor fixer into a key al-Qaeda mastermind.

"The other day we hauled in a guy named Abu Zubaydah," Bush said.
"He's one of the top operatives plotting and planning death and
destruction on the United States. He's not plotting and planning
anymore. He's where he belongs."

Bush later instructed CIA director George Tenet not to contradict that
version of reality, Suskind reported. "I said he was important,"
Bush told Tenet at one of their daily meetings. "You're not going
to let me lose face on this, are you?"

Media Tolerance

Not that the major U.S. news media was doing much to penetrate the
cloak of heroism that had been draped around Bush's shoulders.

Though Bush's claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
collapsed after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, the U.S. press corps
still gave Bush wide latitude in his handling and depiction of the
"war on terror" - until fall 2005.

The New York Times had that article on the warrantless wiretapping
ready before Election 2004 but bowed to Bush's demands that the story
be spiked. In November 2005, however, the Washington Post defied the
White House and published a detailed article about the CIA's secret
prisons where terrorism suspects reportedly were tortured.

Then, in December 2005, the Times revived and published its wiretapping
story, which was followed by other disclosures, including a USA Today
article about the administration's monitoring of American phone
records.

On June 23, 2006, the Times then broke the story of the secret
financial monitoring, followed by similar stories in the Wall Street
Journal and the Los Angeles Times.

The moment was ripe for Bush and his right-wing allies to hit back,
both to rally their base for the fall elections and to nip any
journalistic independence in the bud.

(Even administration officials could offer only lame explanations about
the supposed damage caused to the "war on terror" from the
surveillance disclosures. The officials said the articles may have
filled in some details for al-Qaeda though the group was already well
aware of U.S. capabilities to spy on its phone calls and financial
transactions.)

The absence of any clear damage from the Times article, however,
didn't lessen the intensity of the counterattack against the Times
editors. Bush's advisers saw an opening for portraying Bush as the
common-sense battler against terrorism hampered by pointy-headed
intellectuals who put privacy rights over the safety of Americans.

Bush's supporters made the strong emotional argument that the primary
responsibility of the government was to protect its citizens, while
Bush's critics had to present a more nuanced case about the
constitutional rights of Americans and the responsibilities of
journalists to keep the public informed.

The Times tried to make that case in an editorial that concluded:

"The United States will soon be marking the fifth anniversary of the
war on terror. The country is in this for the long haul, and the fight
has to be coupled with a commitment to individual liberties that define
America's side in the battle. ...

"The free press has a central place in the Constitution because it
can provide information the public needs to make things right again.
Even if it runs the risk of being labeled unpatriotic." [NYT, June
28, 2006]

Cheers & Silence

Not surprisingly, the administration's assault on the New York Times
drew hearty cheers from the conservative punditry but - somewhat
surprisingly - the attacks elicited little comment or objection from
the liberal blogosphere. That's probably because many Bush critics
blame the Times and other leading newspapers for their long failure to
stand up to the White House.

But the larger significance of the Times bashing is that it marks the
opening of a decisive phase in the Bush administration's long
campaign to lock in a revised version of the American constitutional
system, in effect putting Bush's national security judgments beyond
question and outside any meaningful oversight.

The Republicans are now looking toward November with increasing hope
that the elections will consolidate GOP control of Congress and thus
put Bush in position to stack the U.S. Supreme Court with right-wing
jurists before the end of his second term. The court would then almost
certainly endorse Bush's claims to broad authoritarian powers.

In essence, Bush has asserted that for the duration of the indefinite
"war on terror," he or another President can assert the
"plenary" - or unlimited - powers of commander in chief and
thus negate all other powers granted to Congress, the courts or the
people. [See Consortiumnews.com's "End of Unalienable Rights."]

The fate of the American Republic could not be more clearly at stake.
But the forces that share a common cause in trying to protect the
traditional concepts of constitutional checks and balances and the
inalienable rights of citizens are scattered and disorganized.

Meanwhile, Bush's neoconservative administration is tightening its
grip on what information the American people get to see and hear.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the
Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege:
Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at
secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his
1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'
FFB-Exim axis of evil wrote:
HOW THE TREASURY OF USA went bankrupt via GLOBAL WEAPONS merchants --
http://www.geocities.com/exim_bank_w.../TREASURY.html

WHAT HAPPENED to the PROMIS SOFTWARE of BCCI notoriety and currently
embedded in our HHS, Health & Human Services Dept [Medicare] today, via

defense subcontractors?
http://www.angelfire.com/blog/zog/ZOG_PROMIS.html


Amanda Williams wrote:
"lab~rat :-)" allegedly said in
:

Now don't you people feel dumb making a big deal out of some stupid
pecker pills?


Not really rat-boy... we found out a few things...

He can't get it up and he's seeing a shrink, so not only is he a fat felon
junkie but he's an impotent whack-job as well...

rotfl...

--
AW

small but dangerous


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.