Friday, April 07, 2006

Re: [political-research] Re: Bloglines - Neocons Give Corporate Media Marching Orders

The page referencing the Associated Press was bogus.  It reads like an Onion story when you pay close attention, although not quite as well done.
 
The neocons don't give the corporate media marching orders, by the way.  The mainstream media are for the most part neocon/neolib-owned.  The owners of the mainstream media are much more powerful than most high-level government and think tank members and officials.  The government works for this international network of feudal billionaires, not vice-versa.
 
The actual situation that is developing is much scarier than the scenario suggested by this satire.


tim_howells_1000 <timothy.howells@lul.se> wrote:
From Another Day in the Empire, Kurt Nimmo:
Bill Frist ... "took a more defensive stance," according to Fox News. "Of course it raises some concerns, but we can't let this issue be blown out of proportion. Of course there have to be media guidelines. Hell, if we want to plant I.D. chips in people and torture their loved ones until they break, we will. I know the idea of governmental control over what the media can or cannot say during wartime may be an uncomfortable topic for some to digest, but it is a necessary fact of life when our enemies are trying to kill us."
I had to read Frist's quote a couple times because it was difficult to wrap my mind around the fact Frist, as one of the most powerful and influential men in Washington, has admitted we can expect to be microchipped and have our children or parents tortured if we dare to disagree with the government.
I'm still having trouble wrapping my mind around the Frist quote.  The source is this AP story on Fox:
Fox now has a pointer to this page that states:
Recently a satire piece went out that caught the attention of many, detailing how the Bush Administration and Viacom, among others, colluded to suppress dissent and infuse communities of color with negative and escapist entertainment.
The link can be found here.
It is satire and the link now reflects it as such.
However, the  page referenced is not labeled as satire, and in fact is labeled as an Associated Press story dated April 3 (as opposed to April 1). 
Does anyone know what is going on with this?
Tim Howells
 

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS






Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/

Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)