The seriousness of the beginning of the end, has been unleashed in the land
of Palestine. The level of escalation has been scaled up to reach the inevitable final conflict. The agony of suffering and
distress is for all to see. The prospect for peace is virtually dead. The basis for the inescapable is not a rejection of
free will or the ability to choose an armistice. No it is the result of an eager willingness to fulfill a destiny of animosity
between factions from the same ancestry.
Into this exigency, the United States has abandoned any semblance of a neutral
broker and has openly condoned the Israeli military strikes against the Yasser Arafat camp. Hamas is now the new next target
marked for destruction. Annihilation of terrorism is the stated purpose. If in the process of this campaign the prospects
of an independent Palestinian state and a lasting settlement is destroyed, no one will be shocked. Information Minister Yasser
Abed Rabbo says: "This is a war against Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority and not against terror".
Conclusions and culpability are drawn in this conflict from the usual suspects.
You have heard of the notoriety from the Bernard Goldberg book "Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News".
The response from the media culture has been singular. Golberg has been called a traitor. How could he abandon his own kind!
Well, take this mindset to the next plateau. Even a causal viewing of the
latest media reporting on the MiddleEast, would clearly demonstrate that Israeli military actions are condoned and openly
praised. Even the 'fair and balanced' channel FOX news, has put out the party line. MSNBC and CNN sound like and function
as the public information agency for the Knesset. And the big three broadcast networks 'beat the drums' as if the Apocalypse
is a long over due mini series and Armageddon is scheduled for sweeps week.
What would be the response from CBS News president Andrew Heyward or the outrage
from the Dan Rathers', if we had objective reporting on the MiddleEast? What would New York Times hack, Tom Friedman do if
confronted with facts and evidence from the other side? The fundamental conclusion is that other positions are never allowed
a hearing. Sincere and honest reporting is a myth. Propaganda is the standard, and the only accepted format. If the clear
bias of Liberal thinking is the core of the media culture, devotion to Israel is its basic test of membership. No one is allowed
a forum, without supporting the policies of the masters of the message.
Can you imagine allowing Aljazeera a slot on cable? Even satellite requires
the use of those old C-Band dishes for feeds. Having reports from Qatar as a replacement for Geraldo Rivera, is as likely
as achieving a lasting peace. It's not going to happen, folks! And that is the reason that mind pollution is the main media
product. One needs not accept the reporting or commentary of Aljazeera, as being true and valid. If it is pure brainwashing,
just what is the content of the broadcast U.S. media newspeak? Indoctrination of the only acceptable foreign policy line,
is the hallmark of the 'PC' propagandists, who claim to pass as professional reporters. If you doubt that cultural censorship
is pervasive, you must be watching the shopping channels.
The media has always made their prevalent views known. Now they demand total
uniformity during this time of upheaval. If Golberg was told not to ask Dan Rather any tough questions for his book, can you
imagine what the imperial wizards of journalism would say about exposing the crimes of Ariel Sharon? If CBS calls "Gary Bauer,
the little nut from the Christian group", and one of their reporters Eric Engberg refers to Steve Forbes' tax reform ideas,
as "wackiest"; what can we expect them to say to someone who challenges their most sacred doctrine?
If you adopt the role of a pundit, rabid rhetoric is acceptable. But if you
represent yourselves as objective observers and reporters of current affairs, you are not permitted to be a toady. When the
New York Times criticizes FOX News for having a pro American bias, they are using code words to castigate anyone, who even
dares raise issues that may oppose a slanted policy.
So why do people read, watch, hear and accept such substitutes for real news?
Simply put, you cannot get ahead in most any role of influence, within the corporate/state axis if you buck the apparatus
of power. The agony of this reality is not new. The consequences are eminently clear. And the struggle to overcome the forces
of deceit and deception is continuous.
The troubles in the MiddleEast are unsolved, and will remain that way, until
a total and complete airing of the multiple sins of all sides are confronted and understood. At this time, any willingness
to chart that course, has long been set aside. The American government has now openly taken up the Israeli cause. More than
the loss of fair and balanced reporting, will follow. When the structure of the media and the culture of their participants
deny that they are but a prisoner to a false value system, they forfeit all credibility. It is time to expose their disloyalty
and ignore their assault on truth. The choice is yours, who do you believe?
SARTRE - December 5, 2001