![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jun. 30th, 2004 07:56 amPrejudice and hate is just awesome, even in europe!
Europe vs. Italy: http://www.infonegocio.com/xeron/bruno/italy.html
Europe vs. Italy: http://www.infonegocio.com/xeron/bruno/italy.html
Jun. 30th, 2004
(no subject)
Jun. 30th, 2004 09:19 amToday's government notes (from Mike Causey, paraphrased): What about intelligence failures prior to 9/11?
About twenty years ago the US Congress ("Church Committee") ordered the CIA and FBI not to associate with known criminals or terrorists or to infiltrate such organizations. President Carter's CIA Director fired nearly 1,000 employees from the covert operations unit, on the grounds that satellites could gather the same information. Now these organizations are being raked over the coals for NOT having such information gathering capabilities - as they obeyed the law.
10 years ago Congress told the IRS to use private debt collectors to get back taxes, and for IRS agents to be more aggressive in pursuing debts. The public howled, and Congress then told the IRS to stop using collectors and to be less aggressive. Now that collections are down, Congress is telling the IRS that perhaps if they hire private debt collectors...
...and so the cycle continues...
I'm also a little freaked about how biased the news has appeared as of late.
The Supreme Court is currently credited with allowing porn sites to solicit minors. NOT TRUE - the case was about whether sites would be required to collect credit card info and other invasive things, rather than just have people check YES I'M OVER 18 boxes, and not punishing the sites for having kids lie. I mean this law was essentially the same as giving fines for kids digging old playboy mags out of the trash (where I grew up, men typically left 'adult' mags outside the trash barrels in the trash room, and a strange porn recycling bond existed between boys/men).
Pledge of allegiance: was announced as still allowing it to be said, rather than noting it was just the 'under god' phrase that was added in the 50s to fight communism. Sure they told the whole story if you looked deep enough, but why would the headline claim the 'pledge' was safe? The pledge was never under attack!
Blow to war on terror - this was yesterday's lie: allowing people to hear the charges against you, and requiring them to either be held by the geneva convention standards or be tried in a court...this is helping terror? The idea was to simply admit that the Bush admin's BS concept of stripping human rights from people for years at a time was not allowed no matter what insane label they created to cover their asses.
These biased headlines are really freaking me out. The supposedly liberal media seems to be working as a PR firm for the Bush administration.
About twenty years ago the US Congress ("Church Committee") ordered the CIA and FBI not to associate with known criminals or terrorists or to infiltrate such organizations. President Carter's CIA Director fired nearly 1,000 employees from the covert operations unit, on the grounds that satellites could gather the same information. Now these organizations are being raked over the coals for NOT having such information gathering capabilities - as they obeyed the law.
10 years ago Congress told the IRS to use private debt collectors to get back taxes, and for IRS agents to be more aggressive in pursuing debts. The public howled, and Congress then told the IRS to stop using collectors and to be less aggressive. Now that collections are down, Congress is telling the IRS that perhaps if they hire private debt collectors...
...and so the cycle continues...
I'm also a little freaked about how biased the news has appeared as of late.
The Supreme Court is currently credited with allowing porn sites to solicit minors. NOT TRUE - the case was about whether sites would be required to collect credit card info and other invasive things, rather than just have people check YES I'M OVER 18 boxes, and not punishing the sites for having kids lie. I mean this law was essentially the same as giving fines for kids digging old playboy mags out of the trash (where I grew up, men typically left 'adult' mags outside the trash barrels in the trash room, and a strange porn recycling bond existed between boys/men).
Pledge of allegiance: was announced as still allowing it to be said, rather than noting it was just the 'under god' phrase that was added in the 50s to fight communism. Sure they told the whole story if you looked deep enough, but why would the headline claim the 'pledge' was safe? The pledge was never under attack!
Blow to war on terror - this was yesterday's lie: allowing people to hear the charges against you, and requiring them to either be held by the geneva convention standards or be tried in a court...this is helping terror? The idea was to simply admit that the Bush admin's BS concept of stripping human rights from people for years at a time was not allowed no matter what insane label they created to cover their asses.
These biased headlines are really freaking me out. The supposedly liberal media seems to be working as a PR firm for the Bush administration.