Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:

Xenox News (satire), Australia - Jun 3, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

The Smoking Bullet in the Smoking Gun
Common Dreams, ME - Jun 3, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

A Public Secret
Iraq Occupation Watch, CA - Jun 2, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

A Public Secret
Yahoo News - Jun 1, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
Infoshop News - May 31, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an ...

Smoking Bullet in the Smoking Gun?
uruknet.info, Italy - May 29, 2005
... 1) Did the RAF and the United States military increase the rate that they were dropping bombs in Iraq in 2002? ... any such increase in the rate of bombing in Iraq ...

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
uruknet.info, Italy - May 29, 2005
May 29, 2005 - THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving ...

US and RAF bombing raids on Iraq
Questions and Observations - May 29, 2005
It's remarkable what passes for news these days: THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to ...
US aircraft doubled bombing raids on Iraq in 2002 to provoke ...

Collective Bellaciao, France - May 29, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an ...
As new revelations surface in London, congressman readies new ...

Raw Story, MA - May 29, 2005
... 1) Did the RAF and the United States military increase the rate that they ... was the justification for any such increase in the rate of bombing in Iraq at this ...

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
Times Online, UK - May 28, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an ...

The war before the war
New Statesman, UK - May 26, 2005
... British officials insist that no RAF aircraft opened ... when the Prime Minister discussed Iraq with President ... had retaliated against the bombing offensive, thus ...

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 01:40:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You just proved my point by listing a dozen places where, in the US, I can read this story. In China, where the government actually does censor the press (and the Internet), there are stories that are simply not available at all.

A bad mainstream media is different from censorship.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/aptech_story.asp?category=1700&slug=China%20Microsoft

by asdf on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 07:46:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
One week ago when I did a search for stories on "illegal""war""Iraq" stories from USA were 3.5% of all 2,040 stories listed, and of those 99% were letters to the editor or alternative media.  Today stories from USA "illegal war iraq" are more like 20% of total. MSM.

I guess we are in shades of grey here.  Where the situation in China where Google is under agreement to censor the term "democracy" is the extreme end and what I have experienced which is a blackout that has become more conspicuous as time goes on.

Michael Getler, ombudsman for the Washington Post addressed the issue in his article, "News Over There, Not Over Here."  He took his paper and Walter Pincus to task for not covering the Downing Street Minutes.  Walter said he was too busy covering the UK election.

Within a week, Getler said that the story should have been front paged, that it was "journalistically mandatory."

I am talking about managing the news, filtering the news and managing public opinion.  The news stories that are not to be found are "illegal""war""Iraq."  The UK, involved in the same war, and the Blair administration involved in the same illegalities.. their coverage of "illegal""war""Iraq" outnumbers US stories by about 8 to 1.

More Americans are getting their US news from UK sources than ever.  There is a reason for this.  

I can't find a journalist to say, "My editor would not let me run this story because it cast too harsh a light on the Bush administration's questionable basis for going to war in Iraq."

To institute editorial standards like this is the opposite of good journalism, and an abdegnation of the role of the fourth estate as watchdog over all the branches of government, especially to keep an eye on the executive branch and foreign policy.  

So I say the news is managed, filtered controlled and blacked out, although in answer to the hue and cry in the last 6 weeks, there has been more of a biting edge to some journalists... who seem to have been waiting... asking "Is it safe to come out?"

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 08:50:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well I certianly agree that the news is managed, filtered, controlled, and blacked out by the news media. But that's nothing new; every news source has a viewpoint.

What bothers me about the cry of "censorship" is that there is a big, big difference between a government that actively prevents people from finding out what is going on, like in North Korea and China, and a news media that responds to its readers by giving them what they want--even if what they want is trash.

Here in the U.S. the information is available, but we're just too disinterested, or lazy, to care about it. That's not censorship.

by asdf on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 11:21:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Earlier I was thinking about things you said, and I had a little argument all prepared... it went like this.  person a is saying that it's bad to have so much chemical additives in their food and person b is saying compare yourself to someone who has no food.

i don't mind.  of COURSE there's a big big difference, but who is going to fight the encroachment of Big Brother?  Who is going to even notice it?  It is subtle.  

Now the woman who said "Sure, there's censorship of the news in America," she's Irish.  Michael in the kitchen he's Irish too.  The whole country is full of Irish.  And the consensus opinion here is that news is censored in America, but that you're not allowed to say it, and you wouldn't be able to prove it.

Anytime you're not allowed to say something, that's censorship.  These people are saying there are certain stories you're not allowed to report.  That's their understanding.  

There's three people here.  One the Irish woman, two there's me, and three an Italian woman.  Now our consensus opinion is that there is censorship, or management to make sure things don't get said or reported, in America.  That's what we seem to be saying.

That it is not as bad as somewhere else doesn't make it not so.

I grew up in freedom.  It was a condition I enjoyed.  I know what it was like, and what it is like now.

Freedom is a fight.  A constant fight.  Taking risks and taking the heat.  Complacency gives the powers that be license to encroach even more.

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 11:37:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Impeachment gets real

by ARGeezer - Jan 17
9 comments

A Final Warning

by Oui - Jan 10
96 comments

Environment Anarchists

by Oui - Jan 13
4 comments

More Spanish repression

by IdiotSavant - Jan 6
8 comments

Occasional Series