The NY Times gets some credit for their story on the newly disclosed Justice Department legal memorandum, written in March 2003, that authorized the military’s use of extremely harsh interrogation techniques by American troops at the Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo Bay, and elsewhere. But let's take a quick look at what the NY Times left out:
"The brief, provided to the Pentagon days before the invasion of Iraq, allowed slapping, poking and shoving without legal consequences. Maiming a detainee, defined as disabling or cutting out the nose, eye, ear, lip, tongue, or limb, was deemed a defensible interrogation tactic if the military could prove it had no advance intention to maim."
"The 9/11 attacks allowed the military and White House to invoke a broad right to self-defence, the brief argued. 'The defendant could claim he was fulfilling the executive branch's authority to protect the federal government and the nation from attack after the events of September 11, which triggered the nation's right to self-defense,' read the brief, written by former Bush administration lawyer John Yoo."
"Referring to Bush as 'the sovereign,' Yoo gave him the right to override laws 'at his discretion'."
The Guardian newspaper in the UK told the unvarnished story. The NY Times left out the parts that made the US and the Bush Administration look bad. Media as propaganda in the US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/03/usa
-----------
In the past two weeks, the following events transpired. A Department of Justice memo, authored by John Yoo, was released which authorized torture and presidential lawbreaking. It was revealed that the Bush administration declared the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights to be inapplicable to “domestic military operations” within the U.S. The U.S. Attorney General appears to have fabricated a key event leading to the 9/11 attacks and made patently false statements about surveillance laws and related lawsuits. Barack Obama went bowling in Pennsylvania and had a low score.
Here are the number of times, according to NEXIS, that various topics have been mentioned in the media over the past thirty days:
“Yoo and torture” - 102
“Yoo and Fourth Amendment” — 16
“Obama and bowling” — 1,043
“Obama and Wright” — More than 3,000 (too many to be counted)
“Obama and patriotism” - 1,607
“Clinton and Lewinsky” — 1,079
Published on Salon.com
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/05/8103/
-----------
Joshua Holland just wrote the piece "Obama and Hillary Spin a 'Big Lie' About Iraq," which states: "On the campaign trail, the two candidates often speak of bringing the troops home and ending the war, and Democratic primary voters, 80 percent of whom want U.S. troops out of Iraq within 12 months, reward them with boisterous applause. ... Both Clinton and Obama have been very clear -- in the fine print -- about the fact that they will leave a significant number of 'residual forces' in Iraq, albeit with a more limited mission than the Bush administration has pursued."
Holland told the Institute for Public Accuracy today: "For example, Obama has played this trick of calling for the removal of all 'combat troops' in 16 months; what the campaign doesn't highlight is that it plans to leave 'non-combat troops,' but the idea of 'non-combat' troops in Iraq makes no sense. Also, the campaign is backing off of the 16 months pledge: 'Obama Advisor: 60,000 Troops Should Stay In Iraq Through 2010.'"
Why are the American people being fed the myth about how Democrats will end the war? The establishment elites in this country have no intention of ending the Iraq occupation. It is too profitable. And ending it would be to admit it was wrong in the first place. Mainstream media plays its part by obscuring how Democrats will continue the war, and possibly escalate it into Iran and Pakistan.
Published by the Institute of Public Accuracy
http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0407-14.htm
-----------
New research by the Indiana University School of Medicine shows that 59 percent of doctors support legislation to establish a national health insurance system, up from 49 percent in 2002. Only 32 percent of doctors said they were opposed.
The NY Times ran a story last week about an Indiana University School of Medicine study. It was about escalator injuries among the elderly. The universal healthcare story didn't make it.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080402_doctors_and_patients_agree/
