Start A Petition


US Politics & Gov't  (tags: propaganda, americans, cheney, clinton, corruption, democrats, dishonesty, ethics, lies, media, republicans, politics, terrorism, usa, Govtfearmongering )

- 3269 days ago -
One day you read about a break-in at a Senator's office, the next day, you learn the Acorn "scandal" was a ruse. None of these things get any follow-up in the MSM/Corporate news. Then you find the only magazine that will report on massive spy operations


We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 11:04 am
Thank you Maria, Simone and Bev for nothing the article.


Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 11:22 am
Excuse me guys I meant "noting" the article to include Cher, Sue, elderberry, and Bev... ;-)

Eleanor B (909)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:11 pm
Thanks, Luisa. I don't know if I have understood the article - all I can really get from it is that the American people are not told the truth about anything - and it is government that wishes no one to understand. There is no reason for the UK to be involved in foreign wars and we get propaganda about how great the troops are doing. Never mind that they are being killed every day. They should not be there. The government does not want the truth to be known here. The so-called War on Terror is a ridiculous concept. If you can explain this article to me, I would be grateful. I don't think the American people have ever been able to understand what their government does because everything is propaganda. Is this what the article means?

Carole Sarcinello (338)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:13 pm

Good goin', Luisa!

Found my way here.

Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:17 pm
Thank you Carole. I can't believe this happened.

Now we have to dismantle the story and put it back together again to see what rings close to the truth and what does not.


David S (55)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:18 pm
The problem with such psychological manipulating is that it eventually destroys society as a whole. Eventually people come to understand, and then disbelieve every single thing they are told, distrust everyone they meet, both on a mass and even personal level, even the true things, as well as the lies. Such dead societies and lost generations are spread across parts of Eastern Europe today. To fully understand where this road leads you need to visit a nation like Romania. That is America's future down this path.


Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:19 pm
Eleanor, as mentioned to Carole, let's see how close how this article story may ring close in terms of where we are politically today.

Kit B (276)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:28 pm
I think Duff makes an excellent point and brings face to face the glaring truth that since "deregulation" of the fourth estate we have no fourth estate. Who or what is now the watch dog of DC and other elements of the government and business that need vigilant custodians of truth, monitors for the deceptive practices that are daily business de jour in Congress.

Am I very wrong or do others note that any main stream media will have at most one story that is the attention of the day and most of the time it is not a matter of someone digging out a story or an expose' so much as another discussion on some issue of little or no real relevance that is made "celebrity-like" in it's momentary (un)importance. As for our thoughts - not to worry paid, experts. or actually currently unemployed political advisers. will tell us exactly what to think. One more reason I avoid main stream media. it may in fact sell toilet paper, but it does not inform, educate or ask the tough questions of the day. Perhaps one more reason we have a dull, and apathetic populace. That a doorway to intellectual terrorism? Interesting.

Eleanor B (909)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:30 pm
Thanks, Luisa. Perhaps not being a US citizen, I can't understand it completely. I can understand what David S. is saying having been in Eastern Europe, the Czech Republic. People there have not yet recovered from Soviet domination but hopefully they are on their way. I do understand psychological manipulation but I think in the UK the government is unable to succeed with that except perhaps with readers of Rupert Murdoch's Sun. If he succeeds in brainwashing the majority it will be an even sadder country than it is today.

Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:31 pm
David, so you would agree with the article that we are being psychologically manipulated by our own government? I can't help but ask why? What motivates the psychological manipulation?

This is awful, we may as well live in a nightmare and never wake up. Awful.

Nancy M (147)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:39 pm
Thanks Luisa and Kit for sending me the link!

Nancy M (147)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:49 pm
Kit, I agree with you about the news having only one story a day. And I do thank Luisa for posting this. But I also wonder if it is really our government or the corporations they are running the government behind the scenes.

It has been happening slowly. Our major news shows- the 6:30 news on ABC, CBS, or NBC have slowly turned to personal interest stories (or whatever that term is). You know when they are advertising a day ahead of time what the stories will be, it really isn't news.

It is true that you don't know what to believe any more. There is so much conflicting stories and some people don't even have enough common sense to look at their own paychecks and realize they got a tax cut about a year ago. They actually believe that taxes have gone up. They'll believe anything.

I try to read from different sources just to at least get some balance. But for stories that aren't even told, that is difficult.

Eleanor B (909)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:50 pm
People in power are always manipuliative and are also manipulated by those with more power. Look how Obama has been manipulated by the power elite. Look how he has become like Bush with his 'surge' in Afghanistan instead of getting the hell out of there. Who makes the most money out of wars? It doesn't matter that this is a lost war. There is still money to be made. And do they care about the casualties on both sides? Unequal as it is, the US will never win. They know it but they carry on regardless because all they see are the dollar signs. People's lives mean nothing to them.

Kit B (276)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:50 pm
Are we actually manilpulated by the government or just own desire to allow others to think for us? Why do we not behave like the French and take to the streets and demand change?

"Well, Jonny has soccer, and Suzie has dance, then we have dinner party tonight and church in the moriniing," I 'm sure it's all just very important, but these things have a way of working themselves out and this is America." That could be why!

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:57 pm
I certainly agree that what we read and see on television is, at times, manipulated. However, I don't believe it is quite as dire as the news item suggests. Or as melodramatic (the security scandal involving Sibel Edmonds' testimony is "the biggest scandal in America's history"? I don't think so.)

While the article makes some excellent points it also is somewhat over-the-top. But the genuine points do need to be made - that the populace in general can be, and is, easily manipulated by those who know what they're doing. And it is, without question, being done. But, then, the masses have always been easy to lead around by the nose - religions have had it down pat for millenia (wasn't it Karl Marx who commented that 'religion is the opiate of the people'?)

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:59 pm
And, Kit - you make a good point. I think that so many people, perhaps the majority, DO choose quite willingly to allow others to think for them. It's so much easier than actually thinking for yourself.

Tierney G (381)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 1:05 pm
I believe overpopulation is the biggest culprit here. It may seem crazy but when you put a large group of mice in a very small space they will eventually and quickly kill each other off until there is enough room for them to survive. It happens all the time. Too many people who want want want and more and bigger and enough money to reach the sky! It is out of control. Civil war? Thanks Luiza and thanks Kit for the forward

Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 1:26 pm
If I haven't thanked you publically Kit.

Thank you for saving the day.

All the comments are excellent and inspire more food for thought.

I plan to soak them in for a bit.

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 1:33 pm
A list in itself does not make a conspiracy. A section of society all thinking the same sort of thing and with the same values does not make a conspiracy. That is simply an elite, or in old political-speak, a class. What is needed is clear evidence of collusion. A movement is not a conspiracy. I would say every revolution of right or left has required a party to organize it. I think the Republican Party could become that party, but it will need what is called a “strong man”, a Mussolini, a Lenin, or a military junta led by a General, some sort of organization. Even for an isolated and heavily-propagandized society like the USA, the condition of the people is not desperate enough that they will accept it or not resist in some way as to frustrate the revolution. The conditions have to be right.

I do not say that it will never happen in the USA. It can happen anywhere if the conditions are right. Nor do I say that the conditions cannot be right, nor that the US is not descending into the kind of barbarism and despair that gives birth to a fascist revolution. At present what I do say is that there is no evidence of conspiracy to completely overthrow democracy,Patriot Act notwithstanding, nor is there an identifiable organization capable of facilitating such a takeover,nor is there evidence of a program to usurp democratic power. As Chomsky has said, the Us is the most open and free society on earth. You can find out things about government, you can say things, that you can’t in the UK, for example. You can publish books that you can’t in the UK because of the crushing libel laws.

There must also be a significant proportion of the population that is willing to accept and support a fascist revolution, to fill it’s government posts, carry out it’s dirty work, turn up at propaganda rallies. The military, who have already had their minds rebuilt through a mixture of bullying and contempt during boot camp, can normally be counted on to obey orders. The police, who identify with power and share the same basically negative view of human nature (the ‘bad guys’ syndrome) can also be counted on. Do the Tea-baggers, John Birchers, NRA, etc want a fascist state? I don’t know. Many saw Nazi Germany coming. Others thought it is what the country needed. While most, including, sadly, the Jews, either wouldn’t believe it or looked the other way.

The final pitfall is Cry Wolf. If you keep asserting it exists when it doesn’t, then when it comes nobody will believe you. Evidence of collusion first please!

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 2:42 pm
What saddens me about the US is that there is so much alternative media out there doing the digging, writing great investigative journalism, that can often be bought for peanuts, and yet they struggle to survive. Do the American people want to know or don't they? My ex- could not give up her daily newspaper and ration of infotainment' with the evening news, even though I proved to her that most of it was either 'police blotter', fires, accidents and trivia like that, and the rest recycled press releases from corporations. It's as though that's all she wanted to know. She didn't want to lift up the rock of the Official Lie and see what slithers out from underneath. Is that what the American people are doing? Burying their heads in the sand, looking the other way, and hoping it will go away and everything will be all right? Perhaps "In God We Trust" should be "In Skepticism We Trust". At the risk of offending Luisa could I start a list of alternative print magazines here that people can check out and (please!) subscribe to. Then you can dump your "bought and sold" corporate daily propaganda sheet, owned by the great corporations, most of which lose money, but serve a political function(e.g. why is there no criticism of Israel in the MSM?.) Most of these I have subscribed to, some allat once, in the past. Here we go.

Z Magazine. Excellent long essays, but needs time and quiet to read.
Mother Jones
Utne Reader?
Harpers (elite owned by Lewis Lapham, but good essays)
Against the Current
Global Outlook
The Nation
The Progressive

An alternative mainstream newspaper daily can never happen. The advertizers will boycott it. The last two, The News Chronicle" and the "Daily Herald" died in the UK in the late 50's due to this reason. Can anyone recommend any local or national print magazines?


Kit B (276)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 3:06 pm
I think a walk down history lane will put this into perspective and address Nancy's point:

1941--- Local Radio Ownership Rule, National TV Ownership Rule enacted. A broadcaster cannot own television stations that reach more than 35% of the nation's homes.

1946 ---Dual Television Network Rule enacted, prohibiting a major network from buying another major network.

1964 --- Local TV Multiple Ownership Rule enacted, prohibiting a broadcaster from owning more than one television station in the same market, unless there are at least eight stations in the market.
1970 Radio/TV Cross-Ownership Restriction enacted, prohibiting a broadcaster from owning a radio station and a television station in the same market.

1975 --- Newspaper/Broadcast Cross-Ownership Prohibition enacted. Bans ownership of both a newspaper and a television station in the same market.

1981 --- Reagan Administration deregulation under the leadership of FCC Chairman Mark Fowler. Deregulatory moves, some made by Congress, others by the FCC included extending television licenses to five years from three in 1981. The number of television stations any single entity could own grew from seven in 1981 to 12 in

1985.--- (Museum of Television and Radio)

1985--- Guidelines for minimal amounts of non-entertainment programming are abolished. FCC guidelines on how much advertising can be carried per hour are eliminated.

1987 --- "Fairness Doctrine" eliminated. At its founding the FCC viewed the stations to which it granted licenses as "public trustee" — and required that they made every reasonable attempt to cover contrasting points of views. The Commission also required that stations perform public service in reporting on crucial issues in their communities. Soon after he became FCC Chairman under President Reagan, Michael Fowler stated his desire to do away with the Fairness Doctrine. His position was backed by a 1987 D.C. Circuit Court decision, Meredith Corp. v. FCC, which ruled that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and the FCC no longer had to enforce it. (Full history of the Fairness Doctrine)

February 8, 1996 --- President Clinton signs the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It is generally regarded as the most important legislation regulating media ownership in over a decade. The radio industry experiences unprecedented consolidation after the 40-station ownership cap is lifted. Clear Channel Communications owns 1200 stations, in all 50 states, reaching, according to their Web site, more than 110 million listeners every week. Viacom's Infinity radio network holds more than 180 radio stations in 41 markets. Its holdings are concentrated in the 50 largest radio markets in the United States. In 1999 Infinity owned and operated six of the nation’s Top 10 radio stations.

July 17, 2001 --- Senate Commerce Committee hears panelists speak about media ownership. Senator Fritz Hollings (D-SC) expresses concerns about media consolidation. Mel Karmazin (President and COO, Viacom), Alan Frank (CEO, Post-Newsweek Stations, Inc.), Jack Fuller (President, Tribune Publishing Company), William Baker (President, WNET, New York City), Gene Kimmelman (Co-Director, Consumer's Union), and Professor Eli M. Noam (Columbia Business School) in attendance.

October 29, 2001 --- FCC conducts a roundtable on media ownership policies. Government officials, business analysts, academics, and media advocates in attendance.

January 18, 2002 --- A train carrying hazardous materials derails at 1:30 a.m. in Minot, North Dakota, spilling 210,000 gallons of anhydrous ammonia in an incident federal regulators call "catastrophic". Clear Channel Communications owns six out the seven commercial stations in Minot. Minot authorities say when they called with the warning about the toxic cloud, there was no one on the air who could've made the announcement. Clear Channel says someone was there who could have activated an emergency broadcast. But Minot police say nobody answered the phones. (The Associated Press, January 14, 2003 - "A year after derailment, the land has healed, mostly, but what of the people who live in Minot?" by Blake Nicholson). (At the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on January 14, 2003, Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) cites Minot as an example of how consolidated media can negatively affect a local community. THE NEW YORK TIMES reported on the Minot radio station market again on

March 29, 2003 --- in "On Minot, N.D., Radio, a Single Corporate Voice")
September 7, 2002 --- THE NEW YORK TIMES reports that the FCC will conduct a review of media ownership rules, as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The FCC commissions several studies of the media marketplace to review the rules on an empirical basis. They start the review in September, 2002.

September 9, 2002 --- According to our survey, ABC's WORLD NEWS THIS MORNING is the only network show to acknowledge the FCC's announcement - at 4:40 in the morning. The report, in its entirety: Liz Cho, ABC News: "Government regulators reportedly are likely to allow the country's media giants to get even bigger. THE NEW YORK TIMES says the Federal Communications Commission is reviewing media ownership rules this week. Among other things, current rules prevent a newspaper from owning a TV station in the same city or a network from owning stations that serve more than 35 percent of the national market."
October 1, 2002 --- FCC releases 12 studies on the media marketplace. The studies comment on how Americans get their news, the state of television, newspaper, and radio industries, and a variety of other media issues.

January 2, 2003 --- Comments on media ownership due to the FCC. Viacom (owner of CBS and UPN), General Electric (owner of NBC), and News Corporation's Fox Entertainment Group, among others, file a request with the FCC that all media ownership rules be eliminated. They argue that the rules are outdated in the internet age, when average Americans have access to media through countless forms and outlets.

(WALL STREET JOURNAL, January 3, 2003 --- "Media Companies Seek End to All Ownership Rules," by Yochi J. Dreazen) (Read the comments filed.)

January 14, 2003 --- Senate Commerce Committee hearing - Chairman Powell and Commissioners Abernathy, Adelstein, Copps, and Martin in attendance. Senators Ernest Hollings (D-SC), John McCain (R-AZ), Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) are among the participants. Powell declares there won't be radical changes to the current media ownership rules in response to Senators' concerns. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) cites Minot as an example of how consolidated media can negatively affect a local community.
January 16, 2003 --- Columbia Law School holds forum on media ownership. Chairman Powell and the four other FCC Commissioners attend. Discussions on news and civic discourse, entertainment, localism, and the business of media. Panelists include television executives (including Martin Franks from CBS Television), journalists, academics, union representatives, advertisers, media advocacy groups, and business analysts. Listen to the forum.
January 21, 2003 --- Chairman Powell writes an op-ed in USA TODAY "The time has come to honestly and fairly examine the facts of the modern marketplace and build rules that reflect the digital world we live in today, not the bygone era of black-and-white television."
"Joe Friday knew that only the facts would help him unravel a case. It is the same with this critically important FCC policy review. Only the facts will enable us to craft broadcast-ownership restrictions that ensure a diverse and vibrant media marketplace for the 21st century."

January 30, 2003 --- Senate Commerce Committee hearing on media ownership - L. Lowry Mays (Clear Channel), Edward Fritts (National Association of Broadcasters), Don Henley (Recording Artists Coalition), Robert Short (Short Broadcasting), and Jenny Toomey (Future of Music Coalition) testify.
February 3, 2003 Thirty Congressmen sign a letter to Chairman Powell criticizing the FCC for not adequately publicizing the media ownership debate and rushing the rules-changing process to favor major media outlets.

February 17, 2003 --- The Project for Excellence in Journalism releases a five-year study of local television news, "Does Ownership Matter in Local Television News?" They found that TV stations owned by smaller media firms generally produce better newscasts; are better at local reporting; produce longer stories ; and do fewer softball celebrity features. The study concludes that ... "Changes that encourage heavy concentration of ownership ... In local television ... By a few large corporations ... Will erode the quality of news Americans receive."LA Times, February 17, 2003 - "Smaller Stations Fare Better in Local TV News," by Edmund Sanders, )
February 27, 2003 --- FCC holds its only official public hearing on media ownership rules in Richmond, VA. Chairman Powell and the other four commissioners make statements, panels discuss diversity, competition, and localism. Panelists include television and radio executives, journalists, academics, union representatives, media advocacy groups, and economists. (Press release, program, and presentations)

March 19, 2003 ---- Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO), Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), and Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) write a letter to Chairman Powell calling for a broader public debate in the FCC's media ownership review. ("Senators Want Input on Media Rules,"
April 1, 2003 --- A group of lawmakers write to FCC Chairman Powell urging him to keep to his proposed schedule to present the ownership rules decision by June 2, 2003. (Read the full letter, signed by Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., Sen. John Breaux, Reps. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., John Shimkus, R-Ill., Vito Fossella, R-N.Y., Mary Bono, R-Calif., George Radanovich, D-Calif., and Pete Sessions, R-Texas, and Sens. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., John Ensign, R-Nev., and George Allen, R-Va.)

June 2, 2003 --- The FCC revised its limits for broadcast ownership (read Media Ownership Rule Changes) but multiple parties appealed this decision. The cases were consolidated and assigned to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which stayed the effective date of the new rules.
July 23, 2003 --- The House voted 400-21 to approve a spending bill that included a provision to block the FCC decision to allow major television networks to own up to 45% of the country's viewers. The Bush administration has voiced opposition to the attempt to rescind the FCC ruling.
September 3, 2003 A federal appeals court in Philadelphia issued an order blocking the rule changes from taking effect. (Read the ruling.)
September 4, 2003 The Senate Appropriations Committee passed a spending bill that contained a provision that would effectively block the ownership rule changes.

September 16, 2003 --- Congress introduced a "resolution of disapproval" to nullify the new FCC rules which passed in the Senate 55-40 (with overwhelming bipartisan support); however, Republicans in the House have vowed not to pass the legislation. Read the resolution.
October 8, 2003 --- NBC said it would purchase the entertainment arm of Vivendi Universal for $3.8 billion. See what the "Big Six" own now.

November 5, 2003 --- A letter signed by 208 members of Congress is sent to House Speaker Dennis Hastert requesting the full House be allowed to consider the resolution of disapproval passed in the Senate on September 16, 2003. --- Read the letter.
November 24, 2003 --- In a last minute deal Senate Republican leaders and the White House compromised on the TV station ownership cap. It was increased just enough to allow Viacom and News Corporation to keep all their stations (39% limit).

December 8, 2003 --- January 22, 2004 Omnibus spending bill incorporating the ownership cap adjustment passed first by the House on December 8, 2003, and by the Senate on January 22, 2004.

January 6, 2004 --- At the Smith Barney Citigroup Global Entertainment, Media and Telecommunications Conference, Sumner Redstone, Chairman and CEO of Viacom remarks that "2004 will be a breakout year for Viacom." Media reporters speculate that 2004 will be a year of mergers.

January 28, 2004 --- The Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") released its tenth annual report on competition in the market for the delivery of video programming. The report examines the status of competition, discusses changes that have occurred in the competitive environment over the last year, and describes barriers to competition that continue to exist. The FCC released the report at an open meeting in San Antonio, Texas.
January 29, 2004 --- The Consumer's Union released its new national survey of where people turn for local news. The survey found "newspapers are more than twice as important a source than the Federal Communications Commission determined when it relaxed its media ownership rules."
February 11, 2004 ---The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled a hearing for this date to decide if and when the FCC's decision will take effect. (Read the brief.)



September 21, 2009

The Internet was born and thrived on openness. Keeping it open as some players amass the power for gatekeeper control is essential. The FCC's Statement of Four Internet Principles that we won in 2005 was the initial down-payment toward that objective. Chairman Genachowski’s bold announcement today is a significant further investment in safeguarding Internet Freedom. I salute him for it.

Broadband users should be able to use any device or application they want, to reach any legal content they wish, using any broadband technology, so long as they don’t cause harm to the network. Some rules of the road and a venue for enforcing them are required to make this vision reality. This is why I have long advocated an enforceable principle of non-discrimination, ensuring that product and service providers understand the difference between advancing and short-circuiting Internet Freedom. And the venue with the expertise to adjudicate claims of alleged discrimination, and with the authority to enforce the principle, is the FCC.

The Chairman’s statement also rightly accords high priority to transparency for consumers. Users have a right to know how the network is being managed and what practices providers are employing. A sixth principle of transparency is therefore not just good--but essential--policy.

And more - so read the report it does affect your life,

Kit B (276)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 3:12 pm
The medis - our fourth estate was to have one primary function with government - a watchdog. The final system of checks and balances, and unfortunately that is gone. So without the fairness doctrine, which may have outlived it's uselessness, what do we want crafted to still keep the news as a vigilant keeper of the flame and yet, still maintain a reasonable expectation to make a profit. I contend there is a middle ground, only to be found with those willing to express opinions and ideas.

Simon Wood (207)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 4:08 pm
It is time for the people of the USA to stop supporting the capitalist parties (the "Democrats" and "Republicans"), and start supporting the Greens Party and socialist parties instead.

This is the only way to ensure an end to domination of politics by the megarich.

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 4:17 pm
Excellent perspective, Kit. It is interesting that under Bush Jnr the Director of the FCC was Micheal Powell, son of Colin Powell. I think it was A.J.Leibling who said "it's a free press for anyone who owns one". My own rule of thumb is that if advertising covers more than a quarter of the page I won't read it. Americans have to accept that the MSM is dead. Then they can go to the internet and alternative media to get their information. I don't read anything that is dependent on advertising or owned by a large corporation. It is only by subscriptions from ordinary Americans that a magazine or media outlet can be both. Apparently the corporate media is incensed that Russia Today , which doesn't carry advertising (or not many) and interviews alternative writers like Chris Hedges, Michael Parenti, Norman Solomon, and all the other names we read, but never see on in the MSM, is allowed into the USA. THE BBC has been discredited since Margaret Thatcher brought it to heel during the Falklands/Malvinas conflict. It now has joined with the Canadian and US MSM in never criticizing Israel. I watch Russia Today, which, like the BBC and CBC, is state sponsored by a very capitalist society, and rarely anything else. It is a breath of fresh air.

Jaclin S (230)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 4:31 pm
TY Luisa for the post which bought many interesting comments. TY Kit for the forward. Love & Light

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 4:35 pm
I prefer reading the editorialists, such as Thomas Sowell, Leonard Pitts, and Cal Thomas. I don't always agree with their outlooks in the entirety (especially Thomas), but I enjoy getting a variety of viewpoints. And I miss Bill Buckley dreadfully.

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 5:09 pm
When Charlie Company’s Lt. William Calley ordered and encouraged his men to rape, maim and slaughter over 400 men, women and children in My Lai in Vietnam back in 1968, there were at least four heroes who tried to stop him or bring him and higher officers to justice.

One was helicopter pilot Hugh Thompson Jr., who evacuated some of the wounded victims, and who set his chopper down between a group of Vietnamese and Calley’s men, ordering his door gunner to open fire on the US soldiers if they shot any more people. One was Ron Ridenhour, a soldier who learned of the massacre, and began a private investigation, ultimately reporting the crime to the Pentagon and Congress. One was Michael Bernhardt, a soldier in Charlie Company who witnessed the whole thing, and reported it all to Ridenhour. And one was journalist Seymour Hersh, who broke the story in the US media.

Today’s war in Afghanistan also has its My Lai massacres. It has them almost weekly, as US warplanes bomb wedding parties, or homes “suspected” of housing terrorists that turn out to house nothing but civilians. But these My Lais are all conveniently labeled accidents. They get filed away and forgotten as the inevitable “collateral damage” of war. There was, however, a massacre recently that was not a mistake–a massacre which, while it only involved fewer than a dozen innocent people, bears the same stench as My Lai. It was the execution-style slaying of eight handcuffed students, aged 11-18, and a 12-year-old neighboring shepherd boy who had been visiting the others, in Kunar Province, on Dec. 26.

Sadly, no principled soldier with a conscience like pilot Hugh Thompson tried to save these children. No observer had the guts of a Michael Brernhardt to report what he had seen. No Ron Ridenhour among the other serving US troops in Afghanistan has investigated this atrocity or reported it to Congress. And no American reporter has investigated this war crime the way Seymour Hersh investigated My Lai.

And while a few news outlets in the US like the New York Times did mention that there were some claims that the dead were children, not bomb-makers, none, including CNN, which had bought and run the Pentagon’s lies unquestioningly, bothered to print the news update when, on Feb. 24, the US military admitted that in fact the dead were innocent students. Nor has any US corporate news organization mentioned that the dead had been handcuffed when they were shot.

Yvonne White (229)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 5:43 pm
I love what you said Kit: "..currently unemployed political advisers will tell us exactly what to think"! I always thought it was hilarious that they trot out these "experts" (usually the same ones from program to program) to Translate Poltical English to pathetic english..;)
I think MSM now means Manipulate to Sustain Mansions!;) The Corporations are better at manipulations than even the Politicians, they control the Horizontal & the Vertical, Along with the Sound Bytes! Don't Adjust your set.. So it makes sense that the Politicians and the Pentagon should buy the access they need to sustain their status quo from the Media Moguls..:(

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 7:24 pm
"One day you read about a break-in at a Senator’s office, the next day, you learn the Acorn “scandal” was a ruse. None of these things get any follow-up in the MSM/Corporate news. Then you find the only magazine that will report on massive spy operations against America is Hustler, and their coverage of the national security scandal involving Sibel Edmonds testimony.

This is the biggest spy scandal, biggest scandal in America’s history, best documented and most damaging and has been covered up for years. When a huge story like this breaks, we hear nothing, read nothing.

Keep thinking, “If it isn’t in the newspapers or on TV, it can’t hurt me.” You couldn’t be more wrong.

Your spam box fills with accusations, polished lies, propaganda, dozens a day sometimes and you never know who or where. It is never anything exposing the truth, always something coordinated with the MSM. They report only what they are allowed and leave the cover-up and lies that point fingers the wrong way to their friends on the internet.

Its called “psy-ops,” a form of warfare and we are the victims. The military spends billions protecting us from “cyber-warfare” but fails to note that the spam we get daily is cyber warfare, in fact it is terrorism. Every criminal organization, every terrorist group, uses psy-ops, and cyber warfare. Much of your email is part of it and it is so successful that you don’t even know who your real enemies are anymore.

An enemy calls this “winning.”....WHO IS THE "ENEMY"?

War is simply "terrorism" with a bigger budget.

The USA is the best armed, best heavily media censored, best funded "terrorist" on the planet today!

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 8:11 pm
Hey Kit, you seem to have good research skills where the US scene is concerned, is it possible to get a list of all the registered federal political parties in the USA. Obviously we have the Republicans, Democrats, maybe Greens, I read somebody mentioning a Socialist Party. Is there a Labour Party? It would be good to see what's available. Then we could see what party best represents the interests of working people, the unemployed, middle class, etc. Can you find such a list?

Luisa Fox (144)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 9:40 pm
Hey Vinidiboy, while this question is not specifically directed at me, YES there is a list of registered parties in the US. I recall finding one and posting the list on another forum during the presidential race.

You would be surprised at the many registered parties in the US. However, only the Democratic and Republican party are counted as major parties based on voting results. The Libertarian party is edging in as a viable third party although my research also found that this is a bit of a hype.

Just do a Google search for your inquiry Vindiboy - it's at your fingertips...

Tomorrow I hope to comment on the article by Gordon Duff "Is America subject to a reign of terror". I've been reading the article very careful to pull out what I read the author is saying.

I emailed Gordon Duff to tell him we were reading his article on Care2 and he was gracious enough to respond to the effect that he is pleased we are spreading the word.

In the meantime, I am posting Gordon Duff's background.

Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, grunt and 100% disabled vet. He has been a UN Diplomat, defense contractor and is a widely published expert on military and defense issues. He is active in the financial industry and is a specialist on global trade. Gordon Duff acts as political and economic advisor to a number of governments in Africa and the Middle East. Gordon Duff is currently working on economic development projects in Pakistan and Afghanistan to counter the effects of poverty and global extremism.


Kit, thank you again for saving the day and thank each and everyone of you who have commented and noted. We still have lots to talk about folks...

Carry on...

Bill C (91)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 1:29 am
Noted without comment. Thanks for forwarding, Kit.

Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 5:11 am
Thank you Bill.

Bev Caro (48)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 6:38 am
Luisa, Thanks for pointing this article out. It sounds like truth to me and explains the feelings that I have about our government at the present time. There have been times that I have felt that there has been some unseen force influencing President Obama. At the least, there is too much not being made known to the American public. Why? Are they afraid that if we did know the truth, we would take to the streets in protest? Then by all means lets get to the truth because it is time we start to protest and don't quit until we see results!!

Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 7:06 am
Bev, Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

Yes, in my view, it's time to up the ante ...

Bev, I for one will not pretend everything is alright, because it is not.

To paraphrase the article, we are experiencing a systemic plan to misinform, decieve, and undermine our ability to make informed decisions for our own welfare. This by it's very nature, is an attack on the United States and under the law, a criminal act.

If as the author suggests, this done with the intent to inflict damage on our security, it is called Treason. The proof is before us, for example, rigged elections, managed news, public opinion twisted by phoney scares, invented and massive deception campaigns, and only God knows what. Crime, murder, theft, spying treason.

You name it, much more...

Koko, I for one do not pretend everything is alright, because it is not.

To paraphrase the article, we are experiencing a systemic plan to misinform, decieve, and undermine our ability to make informed decisions for our own welfare. This by it's very nature, is an attack on the United States and under the law, a criminal act. If done with the intent to inflict damage on our security, it is called Treason, "

The proof is before us, for example, rigged elections, managed news, public opinion twisted by phoney scares, invented and massive deception campaigns, and only God knows what. Crime, murder, theft, spying, Treason.

"FTA: With hundreds of trained spies, snipers, “black-bag” crews and “hit squads” from the CIA and other spy organizations, not only working for extremists but working inside the US for years, has anyone wondered why nothing is done to investigate anything?
Is there a secret domestic reign of terror, unreported, unseen by the public but there just the same?"

You name it, and much more...


Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 7:08 am

Bev - I referred to you as Koko sorry. I had just emailed with my bud Koko, and still had him on my mind. Mea culpa...

Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 7:54 am
Linsey wrote:
... However, I don't believe it is quite as dire as the news item suggests. Or as melodramatic (the security scandal involving Sibel Edmonds' testimony is "the biggest scandal in America's history"? I don't think so.)
Sibel, what do you know about the Sibel Edmonds'?

Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 8:20 am

CORRECTION: Linsey, what do you know about the Sibel Edmonds story? After acquainting yourself with the issue are you still of the mind this the security scandal involving Sibel Edmonds' testimony is not one of the biggest scandals in American history?
Please view the video for background information. ~Luisa
Another element of truth hits us: There is a movement behind Sibel. The Young Trukish American has real public backing. Most of her supporters are kept in the dark about what she knows. Yet, they all understand what is at stake" "In a country where every citizen has to report suspicious activity", one person is forbidden from coming forward ---a complete contradiction of America's most sacred First Ammendment Right: freedom of speech.

Out of love for her newly-adopted country, Sibel Edmonds agreed to join the FBI as a translator in the wake of 9/11. But her world gets turned upside-down when Sibel reports wrongdoings to her supervisors: one of her colleagues from the Translation Unit is
secretly working for the same Turkish officials who are “targetted” by the top-secret FBI investigations that Sibel is working on. As a “reward” for her whistle-blowing, Sibel is fired from the FBI.

Today, she is fighting for the very ideals that American democracy relieson, and is facing, against overwhelming odds, some of the most reckless and powerful officials in the U.S. government. Sibel has granted a film crew full and exclusive access to document
her story, and her struggle, as we zero in on her “secret”.

KILL THE MESSENGER (UNE FEMME A ABATTRE) is a true spy story about the only American citizen who dared stand up to the FBI in an attempt to expose the truth on some specific yet hidden aspects of today’s War on Terror and give the American people the protection and security the U.S. government has failed to provide.


Pamylle G (461)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 8:26 am
What a lively conversation, with many good points.

Our mainstream media presents issues with knee-jerk phrases, buzzwords, little or no historical context, and uses "experts" who are often on the dole with very interests they are supposedly making objective commentaries about, (with no revelation as to their viewpoint-for-pay). Follow-ups on stories or corrections of inaccuries are rare.

I don't know if we need to invent a term like "psy-ops". The word "propaganda" works for me; it includes the notion of manipulation for a desired effect.

One of Duff's points is that we become overwhelmed. "Conspiracy theories" often present new facts we may want to pay attention to, but we should pay attention to how they are framed. It is tempting to go along and "connect the dots" as others see, because it gives us some sense of finally "seeing things clearly". If we know our government to be corrupt, we will tend to not carefully examine so much as plug things into our sweeping, simplistic template. It makes us easy to manipulate & to act against our interests.

Those who are destabilizing our country are well-funded, organized & working together. They have a plan. Do we ?

. (0)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 8:34 am
Noted, thanks Louisa for posting and thanks Kit for the message to note it :-)

Jeff W (38)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 8:55 am
We can all guess or speculate who it is that's conning us or trying to convince us but, at the end of the day we are all united in the expectation of our own ideal...

Kit B (276)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 9:25 am
Sorry Vindiboy I took some time out from the computer and missed that question about political parties. I hope this helps but keep in mind each state can add or subtract parties. Of course the life and death of any party is money and though the advent of the Internet could change the scene of "who's on top" the corporate money is the key to advancing the growth of any party.

Communist Party USA

International Socialist Organization

Socialist Equality Party

Workers' International League

World Socialists

Socialist Party USA

Green Party of the United States

The Democratic Party

The Libertarian National Committee

GOP Republican National Committee

Rebecca Forste (475)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 10:26 am
Thank you, Luisa! Important news!

Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 12:42 pm
Rebecca, thanks for reading...

This is important stuff, and we should be thinking about what and how we're going to fight against our loss of freedom and media manipulation.

Past Member (0)
Sunday March 7, 2010, 10:57 pm
I hope it’s not too late for our version of humanity But the really long view of “we’re all in this together” says that our “stuff” was here at the last big bang and it will be there at the next one.

linker r4

Luisa Fox (144)
Monday March 8, 2010, 4:59 am
FTR: Here is the list of viable registered political parties in the US:
Tell me what you think of them and if there is any of the them you would consider the next election, aside from Democrat or Republican... Note the Libertarian Party and the US (European) Green Party are neck and neck in third place as viable political parties.



Natural Law Party founded in April 1992 to “bring the light of science into politics.” Its founders, a group of a dozen educators, businessmen, and lawyers.

WORLD SOCIALIST PARTY OF THE USA - The WSP-USA are seemingly utopian Marxists.

WORKERS PARTY, USA - The WP-USA is a hardcore Marxist-Leninist political party founded in 1992

THE THIRD PARTY -alternative to the two major political parties by building a sound platform from scratch;

REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNIST COMMUNIST PARTY USA - The RCP is based upon the teachings of the late Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong (Tse-tung)

PROGRESSIVE LABOR PARTY - The PLP is a New York-based, militant, Stalinist-style communist party dedicated to bringing about a world-wide, armed, communist revolution.

PANSEXUAL PEACE PARTY - The PPP is a generally left-wing party that has yet to field any candidates


DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA - The DSA is the official US full member party of the Socialist International (which includes UK's Labour Party, the French Parti Socialiste and nearly 140 other political parties around the globe).

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY - The The APP, established in 2003, was "founded on the basic principals set forth by our founding fathers, that the federal government should only have the powers set forth in the framework of the Constitution and all other power to be delegated back to the states.

WORKING FAMILIES PARTY - The WFP, founded in 1998 by a coalition of labor unions, was for many years a one-state party which operated only in New York

WORKERS WORLD PARTY - The WWP was formed in 1959 by a pro-Chinese communist faction that split from the Socialist Workers Party.

VETERANS PARTY OF AMERICA - The Veterans Party was founded in 2003. The party vows to "give political voice for the first time since 1776, to the men and women who were willing to give the ultimate sacrifice for this country.

U.S. PACIFIST PARTY - This tiny political party fielded a write-in candidate for President in 1996, 2000 and 2004, and a US Senate candidate in Colorado in 1998.

U.S. MARIJUANA PARTY - Founded in 2002, the US Marijuana Party (USMJP) is -- as you would expect -- a marijuana legalization entity espousing generally libertarian views.

SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY - Originally a pro-Trotsky faction within the Communist Party USA, the SWP was formed in 1938 after the CPUSA -- acting on orders from Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin -- expelled the American Trotskyites.

SOCIALIST LABOR PARTY - Founded in 1877, the SLP is a militant democratic socialist party.

SOCIALIST EQUALITY PARTY - The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) was originally named the Workers League (WL). The WL was founded in 1966 as a Trotskyist communist group closely associated with the electoral campaigns of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP).

SOCIALIST ACTION - Socialist Action is a Trotskyist political party of "revolutionary socialists" originally founded by expelled members of the Socialist Workers Party.

SOCIALIST PARTY USA - The SPUSA are true democratic socialists -- advocating left-wing electoral change versus militant revolutionary change.

SOCIAL DEMOCRATS, USA ("SOCIALIST PARY, USA") - The SD-USA has only fielded candidates for local office, and has been only nominally active since the 1980s.

REFORM PARTY - Once a rapidly growing, populist third party, the Reform Party shifted far to the right in recent years -- but then experienced massive waves of conservative defections away into the Constitution Party and the America First Party in 2002.

PROHIBITION PARTY - "If you are a reform-minded conservative and a non-drinker, the Prohibition Party wants you," exclaimed an official party message in 2002.

PEACE AND FREEDOM PARTY - Founded in the 1960s as a left-wing party opposed to the Vietnam War, the party reached its peak of support in 1968 when it nominated Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver for President.

PARTY FOR SOCIALISM AND LIBERATION - The Party of Socialism & Liberation (PSL) is a revolutionary Marxist party created "to be a vehicle for the multinational working class in the struggle for socialism ... Only a multinational party can create the unity necessary to defeat the most powerful capitalist class the world has ever seen ... We aim for revolution in the United States."

OBJECTIVIST PARTY - Founded in 2008, the party "seeks to promote Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism in the political realm."

NATIONAL SOCIALIST MOVEMENT - The NSM is yet another of the many odious splinter parties seemingly created in recent years from the remnants of the old American Nazi Party of the early 1960s .

MODERN WHIG PARTY - Seizing the name of the defunct Whig Party (1833-1856) of Presidents Zachary Taylor, John Tyler and Millard Fillmore, this new Modern Whig Party was launched in 2008. Nearly all of the party founders and state chairs are Iraq/Afghan War veterans.

LIGHT PARTY - The Light Party is is a generally liberal party -- falling somewhere between the Greens and New Age feel of the now defunct Natural Law Party -- and seems strongly centered around of party founder "Da Vid, M.D., Wholistic Physician, Human Ecologist & Artist" (he was also a write-in candidate for President in 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 amd 2008 -- and seems to be the only visible leader of the party).

LABOR PARTY - The Labor Party is a liberal entity created in 1996 by a sizable group of labor unions including the United Mine Workers, the Longshoremen, American Federation of Government Employees, California Nurses Association and other labor union locals.

INDEPENDENT AMERICAN PARTY - The small Independent American Party has existed for years in several Western states -- a remnant from the late Alabama Governor George Wallace's once-powerful American Independent Party of the 1968-72 era.

INDEPENDENCE PARTY - After two years of openly feuding with Ross Perot's allies in the Reform Party, Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura and his supporters bolted from the party to launch the new Independence Party in 2000.

THE GREENS/GREEN PARTY USA (G/GPUSA) - When people talk about "the Green Party" in the US, they are likely NOT talking about this entity.

FREEDOM SOCIALIST PARTY / RADICAL WOMEN - The FSP was formed in 1966 by a splinter group of dissident feminist Trotskyites who broke away from the Socialist Workers Party to create a new party in the "tradition of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky." That's the reason they also refer to their entity as "Radical Women."

COMMUNIST PARTY USA - The CPUSA, once the slavish propaganda tool and spy network for the Soviet Central Committee, experienced a forced transformation in recent years. Highly classified Soviet Politburo records, made public after the fall of Soviet communism in the 1990s, revealed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) illegally funneled millions of dollars to the CPUSA to finance its activities from the 1920s to the 1980s.

.BOSTON TEA PARTY - The BTP was a splinter group that broke from the Libertarian Party in 2006, when the BTP founders believed the LP was straying from its libertarian roots.

AMERICAN REFORM PARTY - The ARP, formerly known as the National Reform Party Committee, splintered away from Ross Perot's Reform Party in 1997.

AMERICAN NAZI PARTY - Exactly what the name implies ... these are a bunch of uniformed, swastika-wearing Nazis! This party is a combination of fascists, Aryan Nations-type folks, "White Power" racist skinheads and others on the ultra-radical political fringe

AMERICA'S INDEPENDENT PARTY - Former Ambassador and frequent GOP Presidential candidate Alan Keyes created this party in 2008, after he quit the Republican race for President and failed to win the Constitution Party's nomination.

AMERICAN INDEPENDENT PARTY - Governor George C. Wallace (D-AL) founded the AIP and ran as the its first Presidential nominee in 1968. Running on a fiery populist, right-wing, anti-Washington, anti-racial integration, anti-communist platform,

AMERICAN PARTY - The AP is a very small, very conservative, Christian splinter party formed after a break from the American Independent Party in 1972.

AMERICA FIRST PARTY - The America First Party was founded in 2002 by a large group of arch-conservative "Buchanan Brigade" defectors who splintered away from the declining Reform Party to form this uncompromisingly social conservative and fair trade party (with a strong foundation in the Religious Right movement).

LIBERTARIAN PARTY - The LP, founded in 1971, bills itself as "America's largest third party" (and, along with the Greens, are definitely among the two largest third parties in the nation).

GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES - The Green Party -- the informal US-affiliate of the leftist, environmentalist European Greens movement -- is one of the two largest third parties in the nation. The party regularly fields candidates for local, state and federal offices in many states, and has established active state affiliate parties in nearly all 50 states.

CONSTITUTION PARTY - Former Nixon Administration official and one-time Conservative Coalition chair Howard Phillips founded the US Taxpayers Party (USTP) in 1992 as a potential vehicle for Pat Buchanan to use for a third party White House run -- had he agreed to bolt from the GOP in 1992 or 1996.

REPUBLICAN PARTY (RNC) - Republicans lost control of the big job in 2008: the Presidency.

DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DNC) - The Democrats regained control of the US House and US Senate in the 2006 elections, and of the White House in the 2008 elections (plus widened their congressional advantage).

Abdessalam Diab (145)
Monday March 8, 2010, 5:23 am
Noted . No comment for the moment. Thanks Luisa

Luisa Fox (144)
Monday March 8, 2010, 5:55 am
Thank you Abessalam...

. (0)
Tuesday March 9, 2010, 8:25 am
Should we get that charming old spy in 007 in for some comments... Bring Aston Martin with

Luisa Fox (144)
Tuesday March 9, 2010, 9:07 am

By all means Chaz, maybe 007 is amenable for a spot of tea?

Aston is definitely welcome. We can double!!!

I'll take 007. You can have Aston.

Nancy M (147)
Tuesday March 9, 2010, 9:22 am
Or a Martini- shaken not stirred!

Luisa Fox (144)
Tuesday March 9, 2010, 10:27 am

I guess we could go for the harder stuff... in that case I might want a Bloody Maria... Chaz should have what she wants.

You care to join us Nancy? Hmmm... Let's see, how about Jemaine Clement from The Flight of the Condor for you, think he might be available? I hear he loves Condor juice...

Whatta you think Chaz?

Locan Sleeping-Squirrel (209)
Sunday March 14, 2010, 9:45 pm
Lindsey O. (238)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 12:57 pm
"I certainly agree that what we read and see on television is, at times, manipulated. However, I don't believe it is quite as dire as the news item suggests. Or as melodramatic (the security scandal involving Sibel Edmonds' testimony is "the biggest scandal in America's history"? I don't think so.) "

For someone so well read with such obvious intelligence, your level of selectivity (willful denial?) absolutely takes my breath away.

. (0)
Saturday March 6, 2010, 2:42 pm
"Do the Tea-baggers, John Birchers, NRA, etc want a fascist state? I don’t know."

Your level of ignorance brings it back.
I attended a local "Tea-Party" the very first day they were held and met people from ALL ethnicities, income levels and political affiliations. Ran into a couple of people I knew but met many I didn't before. It didn't take but a few minutes into the second speaker to know where the money behind the agenda was coming from. (Dick Armey and Faux News, as it turns out) While a good number of people were there for that, to my relief, most were not.

We can wring our hands and mutually masturbate each other vilifying the "others" that are so inferior to our obvious elite stature, assisting in the most effective way possible to divide and conquer in favor of the status quo OR..
We can step out of our "comfort zone" and reach out to obviously concerned fellow community members who are not pleased with where we find ourselves and find a couple of very important issues that need DIRECT attention and work together toward a solution.

We have endless examples of organizations that throw their money and resources behind "causes" to further an agenda. The point your missing is that within these "events" and groups are REAL PEOPLE and opportunities to network with people you'd otherwise never meet and find common ground.

It's not like any of us own a TV station or newspaper. Try doing this at the mall sometime.

Thank you Luisa for an excellent provocative read and thank you Kit for the forward and especially your passionate diligence, I really missed you!

Luisa Fox (144)
Monday March 15, 2010, 7:37 am
Locan, good post. Glad we're still looking at this issue...

Locan Sleeping-Squirrel (209)
Monday March 15, 2010, 7:43 am
Sorry I'm so late, Luisa

Luisa Fox (144)
Monday March 15, 2010, 10:01 am
No problem Locan, glad to see you. Take care.

Lawrence D. (0)
Sunday April 18, 2010, 12:20 pm
Once again Gordon Duff reaches into his garbage can to pull out trash.I am still waiting to learn one fact from his prolific rhetoric.

How is it possible that a veteran with a 100% PTSD disability have such fine credentials as he posts on every article that he writes and espouses on the web at every opportunity?A Marine grunt who exhibited mental problems caused by service was more than likely a lower ranking enlisted man yet he claims to be advisers to government,business and agencies.He walks on water through the lands of war and intrigue.

He has consistently deleted anything I have to say because I speak right from the hip.And my nose is highly capable of detecting fecal matter when present.

Luisa Fox (144)
Sunday April 18, 2010, 2:15 pm
Laurence, obviously you seem to have an intense dislike for Gordon. However, do you really think this article is trash? And why don't you address the article rather than attack the messenger.
Lawrence wrote:
How is it possible that a veteran with a 100% PTSD disability have such fine credentials as he posts on every article that he writes and espouses on the web at every opportunity?

Why not? Obviously not everyone is as bright at Gordon Duff, or as prolific. The fact that he is 100% PTSD and a Marine grunt, speaks for itself. It speaks to Duff's battle with life and being alive from day to day. In my view this is something to be admired rather than scorned.

It seems to me Lawrence, instead of attacking the messenger, why don't you address specifics relating to his articles or this article for that matter, so we can discuss them in a productive way.

With all due respect Lawrence, it appears your beef with Duff is about having your articles consistently deleted is part of what fuels your dislike for Duff. Duff speaks from the hip too so perhaps your apparent disdain has more to do with having your articles deleted rather than substantive matters at hand. Or maybe your hip is on the right and Duff's hip is to the left and sometimes left of left, and never the twain shall meet.

I will be glad to continue this conversation and maybe bring it to some fruition. I hope I haven't offended you, because I too speak from the hip... The left hip. ;-)
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.