Thursday, September 20, 2012

Fantasyland Media:

Each week, we cover the stories that are just left out of the US propaganda machine. News that the people in charge, the corporations and your government want to keep from the public eye.


Think Progress:
"On Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared on US Sunday talk shows, scaremongering about Iran's nuclear program. Meet the Press allowed Netanyahu to give a completely false picture of the Iran nuclear issue, without challenging his scaremongering through reference to known facts...

Here's what journalists on Meet the Press should have pointed out:

The most highly enriched uranium that Iran is currently known to be producing, and the sort which Netanyahu was referring to in his statement, is 'medium-enriched' uranium, not weapons-grade uranium. That enrichment is currently under UN inspection, so to convert it to weapons-grade uranium, Iran would have to first expel UN inspectors. A recent bipartisan experts' report, signed by former senior military and political officials from both Republican and Democratic Administrations, noted that UN inspections 'would almost certainly reveal any Iranian efforts to begin enriching uranium beyond 20% at declared sites.' Furthermore, the IAEA's most recent report stated that Iran's stockpile of 20% enriched uranium actually decreased in the three months period proceeding the report, since Iran converted a portion of the stockpile into fuel plates for use in their medical research reactor."

-->So why is the US mainstream media not questioning the Netanyahu line? That question goes back to the undue influence the Israeli Lobby has on all American foreign policy, from mainstream media to the US Congress.


Common Dreams:
"Does President Obama Want to Cut Social Security by 3 Percent? That is a pretty simple and important question. Unfortunately most voters are likely to go to the polls this fall without knowing the answer.

If the backdrop to this question is not immediately clear, then you should be very angry at the reporters who cover the campaign. One of the items that continuously comes up in reference to the budget deficit is President Obama's support for the plan put forward by the co-chairs of his deficit commission, Morgan Stanley director Erskine Bowles and former Senator Alan Simpson. On numerous occasions President Obama has indicated his support for this plan.

One of the items in the Bowles-Simpson plan is a reduction in the annual cost-of-living adjustment of roughly 0.3 percentage points. This would be accomplished by using a different index that, by design, would show a lower measured rate of inflation. It is important to recognize that this is an annual cut that would accumulate over time. After a retiree has been receiving benefits for 10 years the cut would be 3.0 percent, after 20 years it would be 6 percent. If a typical retiree lives long enough to get benefits for 20 years the average benefit cut over their years of retirement would be 3 percent."

-->And that is not the only cut in Social Security the Bowles-Simpson plan outlined. Why can't our mainstream media tell Americans then truth: that both presidential candidates plan cuts to Social Security?


The Guardian UK:
"Efforts to force reluctant Icelandic taxpayers to pick up the bill for unhonoured deposit guarantees extended to hundreds of thousands of British and Dutch savers are to be heard in a court in Luxembourg.

Despite repeated attempts to reach a negotiated settlement for Icesave customers, Icelandic voters have twice rejected proposals to repay the British and Dutch governments in a national referendum...

Lawyers for Iceland will argue on Tuesday that there is no requirement on the state to stand behind the guarantee fund, and, even if there were, the global financial crisis in the autumn of 2008 was so exceptional as to release Iceland from such a requirement."

-->Iceland didn't pay its debts to foreign banks? This story is a secret in the US media. In fact, Iceland has recovered from the dark days of its 2008 banking collapse precisely because it didn't slash social spending to pay international banks. For all The NY Times coverage of the Greek debt crisis, the experience of Iceland is always omitted. Our newspaper of record always sides with international banking.

No comments: