I had parlayed 20 years of business journalism into a consultancy practice with a bank client, a major railway firm and a defunct international service organization (one of Arthur Andersen affiliates in Asia) through its Offshore Systems Development Centre. I have since shifted to technology and computers focusing on security...My interest in Newstrust was stoked by the high regard accorded by a former CBC reporter to this organization. I felt this could be an opportunity and a venue to unravel "perception engineering" practices, crisis PR, and intelligence agency or information warfare spins on stories. The need to guide people on real news to trust became more urgent when WH and W Bush started to become almost delusional...masking big business' real agenda by making war an instrument of national policy for the world's last policeman..
It gives a shap shot of what's happening worldwide and why the $700 B bailout is no longer relevant. The Brit move to bailout Bradford and Bingley already represents a third of the proposed US money earmarked for the massive bailout...it means therefore that quite simply $700 B may not be enough!!!
It raises an issue: One of the provision is that the Secretary can buy out assets amounting to P700 B at any one time...does it mean if the assets is revalued back to zero, the government raises another P700 B again to be able to buy assets?
Its American propaganda material woven into a story picked from out of thin air and attributed to "military sources." The source of the story was the raid on six tents near the Syrian border and alleged "terrabytes" of data taken from "those tents." Only the American military maintain terrabytes of data which is why both China and the former Soviets have such a wealth of info on the US...it's almost a steal.
It's coming from a weird perspective. Microsoft's European experience clearly indicates that fighting a legal war do not necessarily preserve its monopoly. It's similar to the Adobe case where Adobe actually used the FBI against a Russian programmer who discovered the algorithm that cracked its proprietary program. These are clearly lawyer's game. Superior technology however is the only way to go. I am cheering for open source.
This article had been heavily edited. It doesn't even provide a link to the proposed oil bill which states that US petroleum companies will have first crack in developing "alternative production sites" aside from the 27 oil wells currently on line. If this law is passed, Bush will no doubt approve a cosmetic withdrawal and concentrate US forces around these "new" oil sites. Note that what is being distributed to the Iraqis are "revenues" not control of their patrimony.
Just one more testimonial against the White House gang that started the war in Iraq -- Cheny, Wolfowitz and other neocons. The galling thing about this story is that the same group of people continue to lie...
This is an opinion based on the jaded concept of Sunnis battling Shiites...a manufactured spin right from the start with US special forces and surrogate Iraqi death squads killing Sunnis one night and then exploding some Shiite market etc. the next -- to fuel a low intensity conflict. Nothing is further from the truth. There is a third force inside Iraq that is neither Al Qaeda (Islamist) nor nationalist Baathist but indeed a force to reckon with once its real power is unleashed..Its the Iraqi Communist Party who celebrated its anniversary recently...I hope armchair analyst like Mr. Neumann expand his intelligence sources so that he will not be victimized by spin doctors from both sides of the Atlantic. Better still, why not ask an Iraqi?
Probably would be good contextual story if justaposed with troop surge, recycled troops, Army training stretched, and the prospect of going to war in 6 more countries...
Dems once again barks on the wrong tree...wants to press Bush to change Iraq strategy but shifts pressure to Iraq puppet government "to meet benchmarks" ...
Mr. Douglas Feith had been vehement in denouncing the US intelligence community either of incompetence or outright fakery. He even appeared on a CNN show to defend his treatise: the Saddam-Al Qaida connection. This is the reason why he was told to get it out of the "policy channel and into the analytical channel." The guy probably didn't even know how to use the Link Analysis software which intel analyst uses to assemble thousands of small details in order to get the big picture. I have a hunch he relied more on his gut feel driven by his penchant for "stove piping" to gain insider points within the Defense department. If one is to draw a parallel, a review of an old movie called "Enemy of the State" almost exactly duplicates ... More »
This has been an annual ritual for almost five decades now or even more. The sad twist to this spectacle is the fact that almost all the "volunteers" in these yearly crucifixions believe that performing this extreme sacrifice will result in God's grant of their most fervent wishes. Some of the volunteers are former convicted prisoners who admits having murdered a number of people, some have a wife or child who is terminally ill, others beseech God for wealth and prosperity. A few believe they need to do it to "strengthen a talisman or an amulet" or some paranormal activity. And after this exercise in faith, all actually believe they had been blessed. A convicted killer whom I had interviewed for a news story some time back, ... More »
Well-balanced story that broadly stated the facts on the ground and the illusion (or is it dementia) of one man.
This is a Mossad plant. In a related story, a reporter quoting a Mossad sources Uzi Arad (Israel rethinks...) saying there is no other option with Iran but to bomb it. Then a Jerusalem post feed of a missile attack, quoting Russian intelligence, saying that the US will attack Iran on Good Friday. It then says the Russian Defense ministry called the attack "myths" and that there was no immediate response from Washington. Whoever crafted this story must really have a twisted mind! What crap.
This is a funny perspective considering that it was Haliburton who sold the basic hardware that enabled Iran to develop its nuclear experiments. Iran is feared by Bush hardliners because it has singularly made itself the most influential Islamic force in the Middle East. During the Iran-Iraq war, the US had trained and supported Saddam's armed forces, air force and provided armaments simply to tie-down this country's capabilities for over 10 years. In effect, US policy drove or rather developed Iran into what it is -- basically a hostile country. The same US policy is impacting the entire Middle East region in the same way. Iran's mullahs have only one agenda on the table -- survival either through war or through inane diplomacy.
This is a classic example of how journalistic technique in reporting could overshadow substance -- good prose trying to mask lazy, non-incisive thinking. It is no more than a well-tailored piece of re-hashed reports.
Despite a heavy reference to baseball "heavy hitters", the tone is down to earth and small town. The analysis was made after the fact (blunders made by those named) and is current as current can be.
Basically, coffee shop talk showing the author maybe out of the loop. But the opinion seem sensible enough. There is no attempt to put a spin except to cite relevant provisions of the Congress bills. On hindsight, the article shows -- to an outsider in American politics -- that the Democrats and Republicans seem to be the same party. The bills from both House and Senate barely had key differentiating elements. Same old dog - two different collars.
The column piece is highly partisan bordering as bare-faced Republican propaganda. The world sat in awe when the US announced its global anti-terror policy. The 9/11 incident justified US war posturings. The US military action in Afghanistan was peddled by the Bush administration as a defensive move, a swift stroke to defend the homeland. Somewhere in between, something changed somewhere. Iraq was a war started to pre-empt weapons of mass destruction, a claim that was later proven to be a lie. Mr. Krauthammer's view that jihadist or (suicidist?) are going en mass to Iraq thus making it the "real war front" loses sight of the fundamental reason why the conflict was initiated in the first place. Weapons of mass destruction or ... More »
I have reporters I had previously trained who now works for Aljazeera after being recruited from BBC. The reporting was crisp and to the point. Most of the time, since they are the only organization allowed to cover "the enemy", the point of view and perspective they gather are almost as important as the usual rantings from London. I would suggest to Tony Blair that if he believes he can do it, why not go to war with Iran?
Tempest on a teacup? The story's author totally wasted her effort at being credible by piecing together incidents that if placed in timeline would probably mean nothing at all. For instance, she had pictures of the American hostages in Iran during the Carter era, using totally uncorroborated facts such as Iran's bid to attract more American tourists by paying $20 for each body brought to Iran etc. This story must have lined up her bank account and only the Brits I suspect pays in pounds. This story is total rubbish and should not have been placed in NewsTrust.
A magnificent psy-war piece! If one reads between the lines, the US military actually wants to pinpoint his location, fomenting an alleged dissension among Iraq's only authentic fighting force, while trying to see if their analysis -- a much abused phrase in intelligence nowadays -- would find a fit "on the ground." They can't make up their mind if he is in Iran or Qom! The continued presence of US troops in Iraq is the only unifying force needed to keep this carnage going. Only an American mindset such those exhibited by Col Gavrilis, an alleged expert, will continue to give credence to such jaded concepts as "perception." "Perception engineering" or the attempt to twist reality previously known as agitation propaganda -- is ... More »
Is it the chimney calling the kettle black? A Bush threat of a veto can trigger further dissension within the Republican party. As it is, with the help of two Republicans the bill passed Congress with a specific time frame for the troops' return but on different dates. This is already symbolic of Bush' defeat in the home front and possibly signal a huge carnage in the making inside Iraq between warring factions once the US forces leaves. The four-year war had visibly drained the US military's volunteer force since it is not designed for asymmetric warfare. It had also lost a lot key middle level officers. Further, the behemoth needs battlefield timelines, objectives and a mass concentration of opposing forces. So far, the ... More »
This is standard output for wire reports done in a hurry and on a budget of no more than 200 words...It is probably accurate in the sense that direct quotes were made..It is definitely single-sourced and nothing more than government propaganda to counter Wall Street jitters... This is similar to a John McCain interview in which he asserted that Gen. Petreus (?) walks the streets of Bagdhad without escorts and unarmed. When important news sources portray a different reality, journalists gets screwed. This kind of reality is a shared ailment perhaps even a mental derangement so common under the Bush administration.
Another rush job for deadline time, but the reporter was honest enough to admit the State Dept. did not return calls or emails. The shift in story sourcing from White House to a Congress letter appears to be an effort to put muscle to an otherwise lean story (information wise)...What would a non-confirmable US Afghan narco and corruption czar be doing? Spying on local warlords? Conducting another Iran-Contra deal -- that is selling Afghan opium to finance a war on Iraq..there is a lot of possibilities here. But as usual deadline is the enemy
I have yet to see soldiers on patrol in Iraq limping in the streets. I have seen a lot being hit by Iraqi marksmen on YouTube. Surely, there should be other chores for wounded soldiers to do. But then again, you kind of think, if the US had planned to attack no less than seven countries as Gen. Wesley Clark admitted in an interview, how can the US possibly win a war?
