Last Friday as I was searching the headlines for noteworthy and interesting news articles I came across a fairly lengthy and detailed story on Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi. Considering the saturated state of this recent CIA slaying story and the reporting source, I almost skipped the article, but then, something caught my eye; something easy to miss with the naked eye, at least those of gullible US Media readers-believers. It wasn’t the story itself, nor was it the flowery details in an attempt to make it a possible future ‘Hollywood Action Drama’ worthy of a six figure movie rights offer. It also wasn’t due to the authors, since neither one of them was familiar to me. No, it was none of that. What caught my attention and held it there for the next few hours was the very calculative and selective usage of a word in the title; Victim:

“In Afghanistan attack, CIA fell victim to series of miscalculations about informant”

With that word, victim, in mind, I quickly checked a few other media sites, and sure enough the word was there. I will give you a couple of quick examples, starting with NY Daily News:

Among the CIA victims, including several contractors, was a mother of three who directed operations and intelligence gathering at Forward Operating Base Chapman, a secretive site in Khowst province on the Pakistan border that also houses a State Department reconstruction team.

An eighth American victim was a State Department worker. An Afghan also was killed in the attack and six other Americans were wounded.

…

And the next excerpt from the so-called lefty PBS:

Families of some of the CIA victims have released information about their lives. Harold Brown Jr., 37, from Massachusetts, had a wife and three children; Jeremy Wise, 35, was a former Navy SEAL and worked as a security contractor; Scott Michael Roberson, 39, worked as a security officer and had a wife who was eight months pregnant; and Dane Clak Paresi, 46, was a contractor and retired soldier.

…

First, let’s get the very simple facts straight here: Read more ?

Melvin Goodman discusses the steady decline of the CIA in the last three decades. He provides his well-argued criticism of the mainstream media, especially the Washington Post Editorials which have been acting as defenders and apologists for the CIA. Mr. Goodman talks about Robert Gates’ record during the Reagan Era, the broken political and policy making process in Washington today, the CIA torture & Secret Assassination team, Blackwater, needed reforms within the Intelligence Community, and more!

Melvin A. Goodman is a fellow at the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC and adjunct professor of international relations at Johns Hopkins University. He served at the CIA as senior Soviet analyst from 1966-1990 and as professor of international security at the National War College from 1986-2004. He resigned from the CIA in 1990 to protest the politicization of intelligence on the Soviet Union and testified to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in 1991 against the confirmation of Robert M. Gates as director of central intelligence. At the time of his resignation, Goodman was a member of the Senior Intelligence Staff. He is the author and co-author of five books on international relations including “The Wars of Eduard Shevardnadze,” “The Phantom Defense: America’s Pursuit of the Star Wars Illusion,” and “Bush League Diplomacy: How the Neoconservatives are Putting the World at Risk.”

Here is our guest Melvin Goodman unplugged!

 

 Interview with Melvin Goodman [76:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The Art of Pimping Reaches New Heights

I’ve been planning to write a piece on the role of ‘Corporate’ in the US Mainstream Media for Part IV of our ‘Dissecting MSM Series.’ Then, right before the Fourth of July holiday, this stinking scandal came out via Politico:

“Publisher Katharine Weymouth said today she was canceling plans for an exclusive “salon” at her home where for as much as $250,000, the Post offered lobbyists and association executives off-the-record access to “those powerful few””

By ‘those powerful few’ they mean, and they actually list: Obama administration officials and members of Congress, and also include Post’s own hotshot reporters and editors.

So, how did Politico get a whiff of this sensational leak?

“The astonishing offer was detailed in a flier circulated Wednesday to a healthcare lobbyist [Emphasis Added], who provided it to a reporter because the lobbyist said he felt it was a conflict for the paper to charge for access to, as the flier says, its “health care reporting and editorial staff.””

Yep, it’s that bad. They’ve gotten so shameless and awful that even lobbyists are blowing their whistles! We all knew how bad things were with our mass media, but you must admit this exceeds even our expectations.

“With the Post newsroom in an uproar after POLITICO reported the solicitation, Weymouth said in an email to the staff that “a flier went out that was prepared by the Marketing department and was never vetted by me or by the newsroom. Had it been, the flier would have been immediately killed, because it completely misrepresented what we were trying to do.” “

How is this for a pathetic twisting? Come on, you’d think with all their ‘fiction’ reporters and editors and their ‘highly imaginative’ writers, they’d come up with a better excuse than this pathetically lame line!

“Executive editor Marcus Brauchli was as adamant as Weymouth in denouncing the plan promoted in the flier. “You cannot buy access to a Washington Post journalist,” Brauchli told POLITICO. Brauchli was named on the flier as one of the salon’s “Hosts and Discussion Leaders.””

And here, this Brauchli guy gets even better:

“Brauchli said in an interview that he understood the business side of the Post planned on holding dinners… Brauchli said that Post employees on the business side — not the newsroom — would have been responsible for seeking participants for this event.”

‘Business’ Side’??!! As if there is any other side to this long-tainted industry? As far as we know, and we’ve known all along, when it comes to our popular press there is the ‘Big Business Side’ and in our government the entrenched ‘Pro-Establishment Side’; and since both happen to be on the same side, that makes it only one side.

I love the flowery adjectives used in the following two paragraphs:

“”Underwriting Opportunity: An evening with the right people can alter the debate,” says the one-page flier.”Underwrite and participate in this intimate and exclusive Washington Post Salon, an off-the-record dinner and discussion at the home of CEO and Publisher Katharine Weymouth. … Bring your organization’s CEO or executive director literally to the table. Interact with key Obama administration and congressional leaders.””

“The flier promised the dinner would be held in an intimate setting with no unseemly conflict between participants. “Spirited? Yes. Confrontational? No,” it said. “The relaxed setting in the home of Katharine Weymouth assures it. What is guaranteed is a collegial evening, with Obama administration officials, Congress members, business leaders, advocacy leaders and other select minds typically on the guest list of 20 or less. …”

“Intimate & Exclusive” in ‘a relaxing setting’ of a ‘home.’ How relaxing? It doesn’t say. But since it is guaranteed to be ‘intimate, relaxing, and homey,’ I envision dimly glowing red lanterns and soft springy lounge sofas decorating this ‘reserved saloon’ at Weymouth’s nest. Seriously, it reads like an ad for one of those high-priced hookers connection events held for ‘discreet’ public figures. Don’t you agree?

‘Interact with Obama Administration & Congressional Leaders’: Well, based on the flier, the high-priced hookers who will be provided ‘intimately & exclusively’ for an annual fee of $250,000 happen to be all the president’s men & our elected officials. Please don’t take me wrong. I don’t intend this to be insulting. Not at all. After all, business is business, and prostitution happens to be the oldest of all. Now I know our government considers this old established line of business, at a lower level, street-vendor style, illegal; against our laws that is, but that’s another story for another day. For this piece, I intend to focus on the business side of this story: The Corporate Media and their intimate, exclusive, and obviously lucrative pimping for Big Business (those that ‘really’ count’), offering up Statesmen members of our legal and prestigious Red Light District.

Back to dissecting the rest of this highly enlightening expose:

“The first “Salon” was to be called “Health-Care Reform: Better or Worse for Americans? The reform and funding debate.” More were anticipated, and the flier described the opportunities for participants:

“Offered at $25,000 per sponsor, per Salon. Maximum of two sponsors per Salon. Underwriters’ CEO or Executive Director participates in the discussion. Underwriters appreciatively acknowledged in printed invitations and at the dinner. Annual series sponsorship of 11 Salons offered at $250,000 … Hosts and Discussion Leaders … Health-care reporting and editorial staff members of The Washington Post … An exclusive opportunity to participate in the health-care reform debate among the select few who will actually get it done. … A Washington Post Salon … July 21, 2009 6:30 p.m. …”

So, since lately healthcare reform debate has been a hot issue, and since timing is everything when it comes to ‘business,’ our entrepreneurial Washington Post justifiably picks it for it’s first ‘intimate saloon’ offering.

They sent invitations to Big Business CEOs and Executive Directors; the movers, shakers, and ultimate decision makers in those issues ‘cosmetically debated’ in our congress and ‘cunningly promised’ by our presidents; you know, our ‘real Mastahs.’ Oh, before I forget, I just caught the following typo or mis-wording in the invitation’s header: ‘”Health-Care Reform: Better or Worse for Americans?”’ What they meant was better or worse ‘for your businesses.’

As Weymouth has already admitted, the flier, the invitation, was prepared by the ‘marketing’ division of The Washington Post, so I’m sure the price of $25,000 per ‘saloon’, and of course the enticing discount of $250,000 for advance purchasing, was determined wisely, professionally, and based on well-researched and surveyed analyses. Meaning: the current going rate for our representatives and president’s men offered and guaranteed on an intimate and exclusive basis in a private relaxing homey saloon is a quarter million dollars per year.

I can’t help but envisioning Madame Nancy half sitting half laying on a fluffy chaise lounge, her face half obscured by the shadows in the dim light cast from the red lanterns above, softening her famous crusty deep wrinkles. She is making circles on the rim of her exquisite crystal champagne glass, another sophisticated touch offered by Weymouth at her intimate saloon sessions. Next to her, a balding CEO dressed in a Ferré tailored yet softly crafted suit is kneeling just enough to reach her right ear, whispering intimately and exclusively, while three junior congresswomen a few steps away watch intently, as part of their training. Seated a few sofas away are Walter Pincus, a big Chunky BlackWater Man, and Senator Johnnie the Arms’ Committee Man. Neither of the men is drinking the ‘fu fu’ bubbly, instead they hold their crystal glasses filled with a Real Man’s Johnny Walker; straight up. They don’t whisper either; after all, they are not girlie men. Their topic of the night: ‘How to dodge accountability yet look great in the papers.’ There’s no disagreement, of course. All three know: It’s been done before and will be done again, and then again.

The three-way partnership is one of those rare perfect ones: Win, Win, and Win. The big corporate clients secure all they need, the members of Washington Red Light District guarantee another term or two, and the Pimping Press remains as the connecting bridge, sustaining its own survival while insuring that of the other two. As for us, the majority, the people? We’ve never mattered before and we don’t matter now.

Cartoon by Paul Jamiol