Sunday, October 01, 2006

On the vote front...

Although I consider USA Today mediocre, I have always scoffed at the proposition that this periodical functions as nothing more than a propaganda organ. You hear that accusation often from the 9/11 Turthiness types, because eyewtnesses to the Pentagon crash included many USA Today employees.

The paper employs at least one top-flight writer: Andrew Kantor. Yesterday, he came out with a blistering attack on our unfavorite election machine company, Diebold:
And as for election and elected officials who insist that there is no danger in using Diebold machines, here's an important question: What will it take to convince them that these machines are not safe?

And I mean that. There has to be some threshold of evidence that will cause them to de-certify these machines. What is it? Does the San Diego Chicken have to be elected governor before you admit there's something wrong?

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

My goodness...that donation button is looking awful lonely. Maybe some people aren't making friends with it the way they should. If I hadn't literally lost my wallet yesterday, I would try to do more to help. Those of you who are not getting anally raped by God, gods, fate, misfortune, mental imbalance, LIVING IN A RED CITY IN A BLUE STATE FILLED WITH SLIMY, ASSHOLE FUCKWADS, or otherwise suffering greatly, should kick a few bucks Joe's way, though. HE LOVES US. And democracy.

Anonymous said...

sofla said:

Joe, the CIA's Operation Mockingbird was said by Carl Bernstein to involve 400 top media types in the country. After its own investigation, the NY Times thought it had found Bernstein quite mistaken, in that they reported the number was more like 800. The late DCI William Colby has been quoted to say that anybody who is anybody in the media is an agency asset.

Now, perhaps there is some reason to suppose that the Gannett chain, the owners/publishers of not just USA Today but all the service papers (Army Times, Navy Times, etc.), somehow didn't make the cut to have agency interest and control, but I doubt it. In fact, Gannett has been rather prominent in putting out reporting damaging to Bush, which I take to be in the service of their military and intel communities' state of war against this Bush regime.

Lest this be thought a contradiction to the notion that Gannett employees might have helped seed the 'legend' explanation the conventional wisdom has adopted about 9/11 without much if any evidence shown to the public, I think it's abundantly clear that 9/11 had its genesis and operational details in the works while or even before Bush was the governor of Texas.