Potential Risks Of New Alliance
The formation of a new political alliance across sectarian lines carries with it several risks, most notably the threat of increased violence. Al-Sadr's power comes from his ability to mobilize his militia. The Imam Al-Mahdi Army was behind two uprisings against U.S. forces in 2004, and al-Sadr could instigate another confrontation with U.S. forces if feels he is being politically marginalized. Could al-Sadr's isolation spur more violence, as in Al-Najaf in 2004? (AFP)
Also, ostracizing al-Sadr could radicalize him even further, and free him to unleash his militia on the Sunni Arabs, which in turn could lead to reprisal attacks and a steep rise in sectarian violence. If SCIRI leader Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim and al-Maliki move to exclude al-Sadr from the Shi'ite United Iraqi Alliance, it could also force Iraq's top Shi'ite religious authority, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, to intervene and stress the importance of Shi'ite unity above all else.
For Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, the leader of the Iraqi Islamic Party, a coalition with SCIRI and the Kurdish Alliance could alienate the other members of the main Sunni bloc, the Iraqi Accordance Front. The Iraqi People's Conference and the National Dialogue Council, the other two main components of the front, have so far not been involved in the talks.
Finally, the new alliance could be seen by the more radical Sunni elements in the insurgency as a vehicle for pushing through Shi'ite and Kurdish demands concerning federalism, a concept that many Sunnis fear will enable the breakup of Iraq.
USA Today
Iraqi VP says Bush wants coalition to counter al-Sadr (click on)
By Barbara Slavin, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is pressing Iraqi politicians to form a government to reduce the power of Muqtada al-Sadr, an anti-American cleric whose militia is responsible for much of the sectarian bloodshed in Iraq.
Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a moderate Sunni, said Thursday that President Bush told him the administration wants Iraqi politicians to form a coalition of "moderate parties." Al-Hashimi met with Bush on Tuesday.
Iraq's governing coalition includes mostly Shiite political parties and has six Cabinet ministers from al-Sadr's faction. A new coalition would reduce or eliminate al-Sadr loyalists and replace them with other Shiites, Kurds and moderate Sunnis, Al-Hashimi said.
Bush is weighing changes to U.S. strategy in Iraq. Military options include boosting the number of American advisers to Iraqi forces and reducing the number of combat brigades.
The administration position is that military operations alone will not solve Iraq's problems. The United States encourages Iraq's government to find a political solution that will bring the country's rival factions together.
THE HIGHLIGHTED TEXT is horse hockey as exampled by the noted text below. They are lies !
Bush is planning a blood bath of Shi'ites; allied with Saddam's former troops. He is coming from the south while the Saddam troops kill from within the city. He is planning genocide against the Shi'ites of the Grand Ayatollah al Sistani which he sees as an Iranian stronghold.
Al Sadr is a political block no different than any other in Iraq. It is powerful, it has it's own capacity to defend it's people and it has the clout to secede from Iraq.
There is a chance that Maliki has no intention of such actions. There is a better chance there will be legitimate peace talks. There is an even better chance the Shi'ites that are now the majority of any Baghdad Police force will maintain control when it comes to power, out from the shadows.
The Baghdad Police have taken a stand with the Unity Government providing them with some protection while the USA cannot contain the sanctioned kidnappings, killings and organized 'shadowed' resistance. There has been vast incidents of 'show of power' by the Baghdad Police. They have control. They do their own thing. The USA military doesn't like it. It is not the nation building Bush and Cheney want. So what. Evidently, the courts are not succeeding in maintaining enough of a presence to solidify a peace and the National Police and Military are struggling to contain crime. There is no war in Iraq. There is crime. The Iraqi National Forces, including Baghdad Police have been exhibiting the behaviors and strength of a shadow government for a long time now.
If Maliki is so certain that the USA is not needed in Baghdad, then that is the location of where most of the war as it exists today. We need not be there.
It is one thing to organize a coalition of political parties to resist a strong majority. It is actually heartening to see small, less influential parties in Iraq coming together to form political parties of cooperation. Maybe someday even just a two or three party system. THAT, I can relate to and admire.
It is quite another to plot to kill them. George Walker Bush and Richard Cheney need to remove their military from Kuwait, Baghdad and from Iraq unless they want to face the World Courts.
I believe Mr. Maliki is capable of bringing about a peace with the Unity Government intact. He needs to do that without mass killings of Shi'ites prepared to lead a nation of their own due to the incompetency of the USA miltiary and Unity Government to date which they invested in heavily in elections and have completely disappointed them.
Richard Cheney, the Neocon of all Neocons is completely insane and he will not get away with this ! If there is bloodshed by the USA military against ONE ethnic group it HAS to be considered genocide of a peoples and the World Courts cannot look the other way.
We don't belong in Iraq.
We never did !
Saturday, December 16, 2006
"The coalition forces should not get involved in sectarian violence - this is a job for the Iraqi security forces to do"
This entire article is impressive. I have chosen one paragraph of a 'Must Read' authored by Mohammed bin Nawaf Al Saud, Sunday Telegraph. The people of the Middle East seek alliances no different than we do, however, they do not see themselves as reliquishing authority/sovereignty to those that would be terrorists. Quite the contrary, they see themselves as equally significant allies in return.
My mission here is to develop and improve our relationship on every level: culturally, economically and politically. Our security services have worked closely and cooperated in joint efforts to defeat the evil of terrorism. This is an evil that goes against everything we both value. We as a country have been scarred by terrorism and terrorist activity. We are the victims of terrorism. These evildoers have targeted us as us much as all and any of our friends. We are absolutely determined to defeat this evil within our own community, within the region and within the wider world.
If Prime Minister Maliki is so sure he wants nothing but Iraqi military in Baghdad, then what gives him that assurance? There is definately assurance in those words. He definately sees the USA military deployed out of Baghdad.
Why?
How can a Unity Government feel so self assured there will be control in Baghdad if the USA is deployed out?
Why isn't Bush? Big Brother know better? I don't think so. Why is Bush so SCARED of relinguishing control? What threat does he use and why is his power brokering preceived as significant to the Unity Government? Why are their plans so oppressed and Bush's rantings so present in the USA/British press?
My mission here is to develop and improve our relationship on every level: culturally, economically and politically. Our security services have worked closely and cooperated in joint efforts to defeat the evil of terrorism. This is an evil that goes against everything we both value. We as a country have been scarred by terrorism and terrorist activity. We are the victims of terrorism. These evildoers have targeted us as us much as all and any of our friends. We are absolutely determined to defeat this evil within our own community, within the region and within the wider world.
If Prime Minister Maliki is so sure he wants nothing but Iraqi military in Baghdad, then what gives him that assurance? There is definately assurance in those words. He definately sees the USA military deployed out of Baghdad.
Why?
How can a Unity Government feel so self assured there will be control in Baghdad if the USA is deployed out?
Why isn't Bush? Big Brother know better? I don't think so. Why is Bush so SCARED of relinguishing control? What threat does he use and why is his power brokering preceived as significant to the Unity Government? Why are their plans so oppressed and Bush's rantings so present in the USA/British press?
Do you know what your USA military is doing? I don't know about you but I haven't heard this level of detailed plans in any American or British press
Nuri al-Maliki, Iraq's prime minister, told visiting US congressmen that the government had a new security plan.
The government requires "more arms for the Iraqi army, more powers and training in order to be capable of handling security missions all over the country", he told the delegation.
Attacks
On Wednesday, a car bomb exploded in a busy market near the Shia al-Kamaliyah mosque in east Baghdad. At least 10 civilians were killed, with another 26 wounded.
Two more car bombs later detonated near the Sunni al-Samuri mosque, killing at least five people and wounding at least 10.
A policeman was killed by a bomb attack elsewhere in the province, while mortars hit a house in the nearby town of Hawija, killing a mother and two of her children.
Eight people were killed in attacks across the country, including five in Baquba, capital of the Diyala province.
Two suicide car bombs also hit the headquarters of the Iraqi army's 2nd Battalion near the city of Kirkuk, killing four soldiers and wounding 10.
Transition
The Unity Government has a plan. Maliki is not calling for more USA troops. He is calling for a return of the higher competency troops that brought order before. He wants the Sunnis to have a part in the federalized and elected government. He is not asking for more USA Troops, he is asking that those that defended Iraq do it again, only in conjuction with their brothers.
There is not that much al Qaeda in Iraq that the USA has to create a greater magnet to Jihadists. That would be counter productive to peace. Al Qaeda is a reality in every Middle East nation. Actually, it is more than likely a reality in all countries. Do we all need a military presence to handle the al Qaeda elements in societies such as Saudi Arabia? No. We need better intelligence as provided by Interpol and MI5. We need cooperation of governments like Pakistan to dismantle those intent on Jihadist strategies. For God Sake, it's suicide of their young men and sometimes young women. It's unconscionable.
As the attacks continued, Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, al-Maliki's national security adviser, said the new security plan involved a swifter transition from US troops to Iraqi forces.
He said US forces would move to the outskirts of Iraqi cities to combat al-Qaeda fighters, while Iraqi forces would be charged with dealing with sectarian conflict in Baghdad.
"The coalition forces should not get involved in sectarian violence - this is a job for the Iraqi security forces to do," he told CNN.
On Tuesday, the White House said George Bush, the US president, would detail a new Iraq strategy in January.
Al-Rubaie's announcement indicates changes may already be under way.
That quick?
How does that happen?
That quick !
Wow ! They are onto something. Hm?
The government requires "more arms for the Iraqi army, more powers and training in order to be capable of handling security missions all over the country", he told the delegation.
Attacks
On Wednesday, a car bomb exploded in a busy market near the Shia al-Kamaliyah mosque in east Baghdad. At least 10 civilians were killed, with another 26 wounded.
Two more car bombs later detonated near the Sunni al-Samuri mosque, killing at least five people and wounding at least 10.
A policeman was killed by a bomb attack elsewhere in the province, while mortars hit a house in the nearby town of Hawija, killing a mother and two of her children.
Eight people were killed in attacks across the country, including five in Baquba, capital of the Diyala province.
Two suicide car bombs also hit the headquarters of the Iraqi army's 2nd Battalion near the city of Kirkuk, killing four soldiers and wounding 10.
Transition
The Unity Government has a plan. Maliki is not calling for more USA troops. He is calling for a return of the higher competency troops that brought order before. He wants the Sunnis to have a part in the federalized and elected government. He is not asking for more USA Troops, he is asking that those that defended Iraq do it again, only in conjuction with their brothers.
There is not that much al Qaeda in Iraq that the USA has to create a greater magnet to Jihadists. That would be counter productive to peace. Al Qaeda is a reality in every Middle East nation. Actually, it is more than likely a reality in all countries. Do we all need a military presence to handle the al Qaeda elements in societies such as Saudi Arabia? No. We need better intelligence as provided by Interpol and MI5. We need cooperation of governments like Pakistan to dismantle those intent on Jihadist strategies. For God Sake, it's suicide of their young men and sometimes young women. It's unconscionable.
As the attacks continued, Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, al-Maliki's national security adviser, said the new security plan involved a swifter transition from US troops to Iraqi forces.
He said US forces would move to the outskirts of Iraqi cities to combat al-Qaeda fighters, while Iraqi forces would be charged with dealing with sectarian conflict in Baghdad.
"The coalition forces should not get involved in sectarian violence - this is a job for the Iraqi security forces to do," he told CNN.
On Tuesday, the White House said George Bush, the US president, would detail a new Iraq strategy in January.
Al-Rubaie's announcement indicates changes may already be under way.
That quick?
How does that happen?
That quick !
Wow ! They are onto something. Hm?
Will it work? Will Prime Minister Maliki's plan for Iraq work? Why not? Could it be USA Bush Interference with the Iraqi Peace Process? Yes.
Neutrality
Major General William Caldwell, a US spokesman, said US forces would remain as advisers with Iraqi forces to train them and ensure they remain neutral.
He said: "Their real purpose is to provide leadership, mentoring and coaching, but they in fact will be able to observe what we call professionalism to make sure [the Iraqis] are not acting in a sectarian manner out there."
Caldwell said more effort was needed by Iraqi political leaders to stem the violence.
"Until that political process gets more engaged and the political leadership and the political parties become more concerned about this than anyone else, we are not going to see a turn in the levels of violence," he said.
Al-Maliki has promised to hold a national reconciliation conference on December 16. It is unclear which factions will attend.
DOES Bush's new agenda, completely contrary to The Iraq Study Group, have neutrality in mind?
Bush likely to support "surge" of additional U.S. troops to Iraq (click on)
WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President George W. Bush is likely to support a plan for a "surge" of additional American troops to Iraq, ABC News reported Saturday.
The surge could involve more than 30,000 additional troops and last as long as two years, sources were quoted as saying. That could bring the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq to at least 164,000, the highest total since the war started in March 2003.
The White House insisted that no decisions had yet been made, and that the president continued to weigh his options.
President Bush Calls for End To Last-Minute Spending Measures in Congress (click on)
President Bush has called on Congress to implement reforms that would eliminate last-minute spending measures being added to bills.
In his weekly radio address, Mr. Bush said Congress can impose more discipline on federal spending by eliminating such measures, known as earmarks. He said earmarks are usually added at the last minute, so they never get debated or discussed. He said the number of such measures has exploded in the past 10 years, from 3,000 in 1996 to 13,000 in 2006.
The president said Congress agreed to a temporary moratorium on such measures this year, but added that much more needs to be done.
THE TWO issues go together. There cannot be tax cuts and escalation of military forces without more spending cuts on domestic programs. This is not a call for fiscal restraint by Bush, this is a strategy to ignite greater war.
Major General William Caldwell, a US spokesman, said US forces would remain as advisers with Iraqi forces to train them and ensure they remain neutral.
He said: "Their real purpose is to provide leadership, mentoring and coaching, but they in fact will be able to observe what we call professionalism to make sure [the Iraqis] are not acting in a sectarian manner out there."
Caldwell said more effort was needed by Iraqi political leaders to stem the violence.
"Until that political process gets more engaged and the political leadership and the political parties become more concerned about this than anyone else, we are not going to see a turn in the levels of violence," he said.
Al-Maliki has promised to hold a national reconciliation conference on December 16. It is unclear which factions will attend.
DOES Bush's new agenda, completely contrary to The Iraq Study Group, have neutrality in mind?
Bush likely to support "surge" of additional U.S. troops to Iraq (click on)
WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President George W. Bush is likely to support a plan for a "surge" of additional American troops to Iraq, ABC News reported Saturday.
The surge could involve more than 30,000 additional troops and last as long as two years, sources were quoted as saying. That could bring the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq to at least 164,000, the highest total since the war started in March 2003.
The White House insisted that no decisions had yet been made, and that the president continued to weigh his options.
President Bush Calls for End To Last-Minute Spending Measures in Congress (click on)
President Bush has called on Congress to implement reforms that would eliminate last-minute spending measures being added to bills.
In his weekly radio address, Mr. Bush said Congress can impose more discipline on federal spending by eliminating such measures, known as earmarks. He said earmarks are usually added at the last minute, so they never get debated or discussed. He said the number of such measures has exploded in the past 10 years, from 3,000 in 1996 to 13,000 in 2006.
The president said Congress agreed to a temporary moratorium on such measures this year, but added that much more needs to be done.
THE TWO issues go together. There cannot be tax cuts and escalation of military forces without more spending cuts on domestic programs. This is not a call for fiscal restraint by Bush, this is a strategy to ignite greater war.
The people of the USA know their own will?
Have Shadow Governments existed before? Of course, they have. They 'sorta' exist in every political party? Candidates? Planks to a platform. They are all part of a 'wannabee' agenda for the people of the USA.
Or.
Are they 'wannbe' exploitation of the power granted them by mistake of people mislead in the USA.
Have there been other Shadow Governments in other countries?
Absolutely.
It there one in Iraq?
Wow.
Loaded question?
There is felt in some circles the USA is a Shadow Government to the Iraqi people.
THE ROVING EYE
The shadow Iraqi government (click on here)
By Pepe Escobar
The ideal White House/Pentagon script for Iraq calls for a pro-American government, total control of at least 12% of the world's known oil reserves and 14 military bases to make it happen. Reality has been churning up other ideas.
Whenever there is a so-called "transfer of power" in Mesopotamia, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, like clockwork, steps on a plane to Baghdad. On his latest trip designed to issue orders for the new, supposedly sovereign Iraqi government, Rumsfeld, in a splendid Freudian slip, let it be known on the record the US "does not have an exit strategy" in Iraq: only a "victory strategy". This is code for "we're not going anywhere".
Reality had intervened two days before Rumsfeld arrived, when about 300,000 Shi'ite nationalists occupied the same Firdaws Square of "liberation day", April 9, 2003, but this time with no Saddam-toppling photo-op intent. Their messages were clear: out with the occupation; and Bush equals Saddam Hussein.
WHO WERE THOSE PEOPLE?
Who were those people in Firdaws Square of 'liberation day", April 9, 2003?
The USA invasion was March 19-20, 2003.
Who were these people?
More than that.
Where did they go?
I think I might know.
Or.
Are they 'wannbe' exploitation of the power granted them by mistake of people mislead in the USA.
Have there been other Shadow Governments in other countries?
Absolutely.
It there one in Iraq?
Wow.
Loaded question?
There is felt in some circles the USA is a Shadow Government to the Iraqi people.
THE ROVING EYE
The shadow Iraqi government (click on here)
By Pepe Escobar
The ideal White House/Pentagon script for Iraq calls for a pro-American government, total control of at least 12% of the world's known oil reserves and 14 military bases to make it happen. Reality has been churning up other ideas.
Whenever there is a so-called "transfer of power" in Mesopotamia, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, like clockwork, steps on a plane to Baghdad. On his latest trip designed to issue orders for the new, supposedly sovereign Iraqi government, Rumsfeld, in a splendid Freudian slip, let it be known on the record the US "does not have an exit strategy" in Iraq: only a "victory strategy". This is code for "we're not going anywhere".
Reality had intervened two days before Rumsfeld arrived, when about 300,000 Shi'ite nationalists occupied the same Firdaws Square of "liberation day", April 9, 2003, but this time with no Saddam-toppling photo-op intent. Their messages were clear: out with the occupation; and Bush equals Saddam Hussein.
WHO WERE THOSE PEOPLE?
Who were those people in Firdaws Square of 'liberation day", April 9, 2003?
The USA invasion was March 19-20, 2003.
Who were these people?
More than that.
Where did they go?
I think I might know.
The Iraq Study Group
How can a man in the lead of the Executive Branch hold authority of a democray in esteem with complete and utter disregard of the will of the people he leads? George Walker Bush was able to take the power of the Executive Branch to a level of self gratification without a second thought because of the corruption that was all too welcome including a House and Senate majority that would 'cover his ass' when he broke the law, as an example, Senator Spector's pandering Senate Judical Committee and the issue of spying on Americans.
Wasn't there an understanding about all that? Wasn't there a complete 'set of rules' outside that of what the American people expected of their two term president?
Yes, there was.
They were based in a form of entertainment that played the electorate as puppets on a string. You'll remember such follies as Terri's Law. Rules for a group of elected officials to live by without deviation from it. A Shadow Government within the USA Government intent on overthrowing the USA Constitution.
A Coupe. The assault on Habeous Corpus is still lingering and people like John McCain still linger in finding no fault with it.
No doubt in my mind.
Were these men a shadow government? Did they make up rules? Did they live by them?
They commanded attention by millions. They were loved in this country. They entertained us and brought wider horizons to our lives. They gave us social rules to interact with in areas not necessarily familiar.
Do entertainers today. Documentarians. Does J. Leno provide social engagement that softens the political reality we are guided by, abide by? The Daily Show. Bill Maher. The list is long and distinguished.
Do we live in a society of shadow governments? With the overwhelming Democratic vote this November did we just displace one. One that was sanctioned by the administration in 'power' and 'control.' For the chronic disapproval of Bush's job ratings, always below any fifty percent of the populous except a terrified electorate, was he not in control with a crony House and Senate actually of a shadow government?
What is a synonym for this? Don't know what a synonym is? Look. It. Up. You're on the net. (click on)
1b : to rule without sovereign power and usually without having the authority to determine basic policy
The Rat Pack - they loved being involved with politics
to govern -1 a : to exercise continuous sovereign authority over; especially : to control and direct the making and administration of policy in
1b : to rule without sovereign power and usually without having the authority to determine basic policy
"Me and My Shadow" sang in duet; Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis, Jr.
Like the wallpaper sticks to the wall
Like the seashore clings to the sea
Like you'll never get rid of your shadow
Frank, you'll never get rid of me
Let all the others fight and fuss
Whatever happens, we've got us.
Me and my shadow
We're closer than pages that stick in a book
We're closer than ripples that play in a brook
Strolling down the avenue
Wherever you find him, you'll find me, just look
Closer than a miser or the bloodhound's to Liza
Me and my shadow
We're closer than smog when it clings to L.A.
We're closer than Bobby is to J.F.K.
Not a soul can bust this team in two
We stick together like glue
And when it's sleeping time
That's when we rise
We start to swing
Swing to the skies
Our clocks don't chime
What a surprise
They ring-a-ding-ding!Happy New Year!
Me and my shadow
And now to repeat what I said at the start
They'll need a large crowbar to break us apart
We're alone but far from blue
Before we get finished, we'll make the town roar
We'll make all the late spots, and then a few more
We'll wind up at Jilly's right after
Toot's Shore
Life is gonna be we-wow-whee!
(Here comes the party!)
For my shadow and me!
Say Frank?What is it, Sam?
Do me a favor?
What do you want, now?
Would you mind taking it, just one more time?
From the top?
No!
From the ending!
Wonderful!
And while we are swinging, to mention a few
We'll drop in at Danny's, The Little Club too
But wind up at Jilly's, whatever we doLife is gonna be we-wow-whee!
(Wow!)
For my shadow and me!
Frank?
Oh, forget it Sam.
Like the seashore clings to the sea
Like you'll never get rid of your shadow
Frank, you'll never get rid of me
Let all the others fight and fuss
Whatever happens, we've got us.
Me and my shadow
We're closer than pages that stick in a book
We're closer than ripples that play in a brook
Strolling down the avenue
Wherever you find him, you'll find me, just look
Closer than a miser or the bloodhound's to Liza
Me and my shadow
We're closer than smog when it clings to L.A.
We're closer than Bobby is to J.F.K.
Not a soul can bust this team in two
We stick together like glue
And when it's sleeping time
That's when we rise
We start to swing
Swing to the skies
Our clocks don't chime
What a surprise
They ring-a-ding-ding!Happy New Year!
Me and my shadow
And now to repeat what I said at the start
They'll need a large crowbar to break us apart
We're alone but far from blue
Before we get finished, we'll make the town roar
We'll make all the late spots, and then a few more
We'll wind up at Jilly's right after
Toot's Shore
Life is gonna be we-wow-whee!
(Here comes the party!)
For my shadow and me!
Say Frank?What is it, Sam?
Do me a favor?
What do you want, now?
Would you mind taking it, just one more time?
From the top?
No!
From the ending!
Wonderful!
And while we are swinging, to mention a few
We'll drop in at Danny's, The Little Club too
But wind up at Jilly's, whatever we doLife is gonna be we-wow-whee!
(Wow!)
For my shadow and me!
Frank?
Oh, forget it Sam.
What to talk about tonight?
I happened upon an interesting 'talk' today on a cable news network. They had engaged in a 'casual like' talk about the internet and it's DIVERSITY of topics. Diversity does not lend itself to a 24 news channel although for the life of me I don't understand why.
But.
To place a topic for another day into perspective there is a path they are heading down that is treacherous and I am not going to leave people alone on that path.
The internet holds interest in subjects far longer than television does for some reason. People sometimes specialize their interests as if a 'study' of a subject. Katrina is nearly never mentioned in the news these days except for what might be impacting issues that resulted from that in the way legislation or in the case of New Orleans gentrification that is causing some land prices to rise out of control and out of the reach of the people, those still alive, that used to live there. It is an important dialogue that still continues on the net. People still have grievances. The subject of the negligence of this administration to protect the people they are supposed to serve is very much still alive and will be for decades. There will be no silencing the issues that surround Katrina and this White House. If Bush is looking for history to paint him a brilliant strategist in the Middle East, that is not worth venturing into, but history will forever never forgive him for the thousands dead and still missing and most likely still buried in Louisiana mud. Delta mud.
What I try to do here on this blog supplied through the imagination and generosity of Google which has seen stock prices skyrocket, is bring a 'revisit' in may instances to events still an issue and not necessarily paid attention to by the news media. It's called 'filling in the cracks.' I believe it is important and then at least once a week I try to let any readers of this blog know I have a brain in my head and have opinions. And frequently those opinions are also reflected in the newspapers I visit and carry home.
"Filling in the cracks" is important. People get cheated out of life if they fall through them. That for a democracy that is STILL HANGING ON (Applause, applause) is vitally important for every man, woman and child should have a firm foundation to live on and not one with cracks that keep their voices oppressed, invisible and causes them hardship.
You know this is the year 2006. It's not 1906. We don't read from printing presses and there are some in media business who would like a return to that "One Way" conversation with only approved 'Letters to the Editor' as a venue of decent. Ask yourself one question; "Would Michael Moore's Letter to the Editor" ever make it to print? No. So, the venue that Google brings with blogs and "You Tube" regardless the controversy has saved our democracy. The blogs of people like Mike Moore has found 'the truth' and reminded us everyday of the precious freedom and democracy that was literally slipping though our fingers.
Needless to say I have strong passions about all this and can go on for awhile but in order to do the subject of journalism 'Then and Now' justice I want to not rush into the subject. I love journalism and feel it is The Fourth Branch of government. BUT. Also the most endangered to a survival of profit and loss and government oppression. It is an art. But it is also a science and the science of journalism is less upheld than it should be. We could not live without medicine, law, spiritual guidance of whatever the venue, and we cannot live without "Freedom of the Press." So. For another day.
Let's see......hm........
But.
To place a topic for another day into perspective there is a path they are heading down that is treacherous and I am not going to leave people alone on that path.
The internet holds interest in subjects far longer than television does for some reason. People sometimes specialize their interests as if a 'study' of a subject. Katrina is nearly never mentioned in the news these days except for what might be impacting issues that resulted from that in the way legislation or in the case of New Orleans gentrification that is causing some land prices to rise out of control and out of the reach of the people, those still alive, that used to live there. It is an important dialogue that still continues on the net. People still have grievances. The subject of the negligence of this administration to protect the people they are supposed to serve is very much still alive and will be for decades. There will be no silencing the issues that surround Katrina and this White House. If Bush is looking for history to paint him a brilliant strategist in the Middle East, that is not worth venturing into, but history will forever never forgive him for the thousands dead and still missing and most likely still buried in Louisiana mud. Delta mud.
What I try to do here on this blog supplied through the imagination and generosity of Google which has seen stock prices skyrocket, is bring a 'revisit' in may instances to events still an issue and not necessarily paid attention to by the news media. It's called 'filling in the cracks.' I believe it is important and then at least once a week I try to let any readers of this blog know I have a brain in my head and have opinions. And frequently those opinions are also reflected in the newspapers I visit and carry home.
"Filling in the cracks" is important. People get cheated out of life if they fall through them. That for a democracy that is STILL HANGING ON (Applause, applause) is vitally important for every man, woman and child should have a firm foundation to live on and not one with cracks that keep their voices oppressed, invisible and causes them hardship.
You know this is the year 2006. It's not 1906. We don't read from printing presses and there are some in media business who would like a return to that "One Way" conversation with only approved 'Letters to the Editor' as a venue of decent. Ask yourself one question; "Would Michael Moore's Letter to the Editor" ever make it to print? No. So, the venue that Google brings with blogs and "You Tube" regardless the controversy has saved our democracy. The blogs of people like Mike Moore has found 'the truth' and reminded us everyday of the precious freedom and democracy that was literally slipping though our fingers.
Needless to say I have strong passions about all this and can go on for awhile but in order to do the subject of journalism 'Then and Now' justice I want to not rush into the subject. I love journalism and feel it is The Fourth Branch of government. BUT. Also the most endangered to a survival of profit and loss and government oppression. It is an art. But it is also a science and the science of journalism is less upheld than it should be. We could not live without medicine, law, spiritual guidance of whatever the venue, and we cannot live without "Freedom of the Press." So. For another day.
Let's see......hm........
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)