Crimes of the Times
FICTION AND SUPPRESSION
Posted June 9, 2005 thepeoplesvoice.org
By: Ted Lang
“True democracy presupposes two conditions: first, that the vast majority of the people have a genuine opinion upon public affairs; secondly, that electors will use their power as a public benefit.” - Andre Siegfried
The continued suppression by The New York Times of the Downing Street Memo will eventually backfire, but the enormous immediate benefit to the Bush administration will only be calculable relative to the latter’s ability to initiate new blitzkrieg invasions of either Syria or Iran, or both. At this time, the only thing holding back the Bush administration is their uncertainty as to the degree of public opinion that has been generated by America’s true press: the Internet.
It is the imminent, illegal, unjust, unconstitutional invasion of these sovereign nations, in obedience to the direction given to the Bush administration by Israel’s Ariel Sharon, along with the totally unnecessary losses on the part of our military, which will constitute the very real crime of a direct collaboration by the Times in these events. Any deaths, dismemberments, psychological damage or prison time for conscientious objectors, should be prosecuted via legal action in the courts by members of our military and their respective families who have been so seriously harmed by the Times’ silence.
As Siegfried points out, public opinion, which the Times so arrogantly takes for granted as being their optional and discretionary sole domain of responsibility, would not only generate such a public outcry as regards the immoral invasion and horrific slaughter of innocent civilians, but preclude as well any continued, forced sacrifices by our military to satisfy the sole imperial interests of Israel.
A cursory look at all that is wrong with our society immediately points to a lack of accountability by those who perpetrate wrongdoing upon US, whether at all levels of American government, or the establishment media , or the American “education” industry and its massive labor union. This crime of omission by the Times must serve as a turning point in that newspaper’s self-initiated immunity for responsible behavior.
Following Lenin’s lead, the Jewish revolution in Russia, termed the “Bolshevik Revolution,” which ushered in the brutal Soviet Union, Dictator Josef Stalin did indeed “break some eggs to make a [Communist] omelet.” A notable example was the statist concept of taking privately-owned land away from its owners, or driving rightful property owners off their land by other means, in order to give loyal Communist Party members and their designees new ownership over the stolen lands. This represented the greater efficiency expected of the state omelet in the name of increased agricultural productivity.
Stalin’s “citizen militias” [read government-loyal armed goons and thugs] descended upon Ukrainian farmers and employed those “other means.” They forced landowners and farmers to give up all their life-sustaining assets for the betterment of the state. They looted everything at gunpoint from the hapless landowners. Food stored in root cellars, sheds and silos, as well as livestock and long-term provisions, were taken from the Ukrainian landowners; even tools and equipment were looted for “the greater cause of the state.” Needless to say, those that resisted were killed; those that didn’t faced cold, hunger, sickness, disease, and eventually death. Innocent men, women and children died – the very young as well as the very old. They just represented “broken eggs” or “collateral damage.”
Walter Duranty was The New York Times reporter in the Soviet Union at the time. He had regular meetings with Stalin when they would discuss strategy. http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=446194 What those meetings really represented were propaganda planning sessions; Duranty and Stalin collaborated and composed fiction, a dangerous fiction. In 1932, the Soviet Union wasn’t all that powerful, and if word had leaked out that Stalin was starving millions of Ukrainians to death, world opinion might have changed things such that at least some of the condemned millions might have been spared. And Stalin provided Duranty with a prostitute for companionship.
In this regard, I contend that The New York Times was directly complicit, and therefore, jointly guilty, in the perpetration of those mass murders. Duranty and The New York Times knew the truth, but elected to deliberately present fraudulent “news” to stifle public outcry and negative opinion towards the “Bolshevik Revolution.” Even now, that this most egregious crime against humanity has been pointed out by the Internet, the arrogant Zionist elites at the Times won’t return Duranty’s 1932 Pulitzer Prize for all the deadly fiction he wrote.
And recall that Tarpley had pointed out the collaboration of the Zionist B’nai B’rth and The New York Times in allowing Hitler to come to power: “This seal of approval for Hitler, coming from a famous Jew [Max Warburg], was just what Harriman and Bush required, for they anticipated rather serious ‘alarm’ inside the U.S.A. against their Nazi operations. http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm On March 29, 1933, two days after Max’s letter to Harriman, Max’s son, Erich Warburg, sent a cable to his cousin Frederick M. Warburg, a director of the Harriman railroad system. He asked Frederick to ‘use all your influence’ to stop all anti-Nazi activity in America, including ‘atrocity news and unfriendly propaganda in foreign press, mass meetings, etc.’ Frederick cabled back to Erich: ‘No responsible groups here [are] urging [a] boycott [of] German goods; merely excited individuals.’ Two days after that, On March 31, 1933, the American-Jewish Committee, controlled by the Warburgs, and the B'nai B’rth, heavily influenced by the Sulzbergers (New York Times), issued a formal, official joint statement of the two organizations, counseling ‘that no American boycott against Germany be encouraged,’ and advising ‘that no further mass meetings be held or similar forms of agitation be employed.’”
Jayson Blair was yet another fiction writer for the “Red Lady.” http://slate.msn.com/id/2082741/ And of course, the Second-Amendment hating New York Times assigned Blair to the D.C. Sniper Shootings. Where better to employ a creative fiction writer considering The New York Times’ penchant for gun control. The Blair incident brought focus upon the “culture of the New York Times and lead to the resignation of editor Howell Raines and managing editor Gerald Boyd on June 5,” as reported by Journalism.org.
Even now, and in spite of the soiled record of the Times as regards Duranty, Blair, Raines and Boyd, what really has changed at The New York Times? The Downing Street Memo will now become the Times’ most prominent uncrowning achievement! Nothing has changed at the Times, except for a worsening of their sick, anti-American culture! There is no excuse for this behavior other than to point out, just like the Bush administration they are protecting, they are at the beck and call of Israel!
So far, I have seen the Downing Street Memo reported at only two American news entities: The Star-Ledger in New Jersey and in an article written for FOXNews.com by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos entitled, “Downing Street Memo Mostly Ignored in U.S.” http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,158228,00.html Vlahos starts her article saying, “A British government memo that critics say proves the Bush administration manipulated evidence about weapons of mass destruction in order to carry out a plan to overthrow Saddam Hussein has received little attention in the mainstream media, frustrating opponents of the Iraq war.”
Referring to the London Sunday Times article of May 1st, Vlahos continues: “The memo suggests that British intelligence analysts were concerned that the Bush administration was marching to war on wobbly evidence that Saddam posed a serious threat to the world.” Vlahos mentions the Congressman John Conyers letters to Bush and the 88 Democrats that co-signed that demand for an explanation. The article relates, “Conyers says the mainstream media have ignored the story and let President Bush off the hook. He noted that liberal blogs and alternative media have been keeping the story alive. ‘But these voices are too few and too diffuse to overcome the blatant biases of our cable channels and the negligence and neglect of our major newspapers,’ Conyers said in a recent statement. White House spokesman Scott McClellan has said there is ‘no need’ to respond to the memos, the authenticity of which has not been denied.”
Of course Mighty Mouth McClellan can utter the astonishing absurdity that there is “no need” for him, or anyone in the administration for that matter, to reply to Conyers and almost 25% of the membership of the House of Representatives in the US Congress. They are just representatives of the people, and Bush’s position with respect to the American voter and taxpayer has always been: The public be damned! Conyers is right – without mainstream establishment media pressure, there will be no general public outcry. And without any modicum of public disgust and outcry with regard to the criminal activities of the Bush administration, Bush can go right on doing whatever the hell he damn well pleases.
This oneness of the “American” press and “American” government would be dangerous in and of itself, but consider the crimes against not only America, but all humanity perpetrated by the criminal Bush regime. George Bush and his administration have:
This is only a smattering of the crimes perpetrated by Bush, and doesn’t even begin to address illegal sole-sourcing of war-generated government contracts and oil deals in blatant and egregious violation of Federal Acquisition Regulations and the Anti-Deficiency Act.
Consider all these malicious acts and events, and consider as well their sparse coverage in the mainstream establishment press. And keep in mind that The New York Times is the media enabler and gatekeeper for all news outlets in America, as pointed out by media insider Bernard Goldberg in his two books.
In spite of the evidence of all the crimes against both the Constitution and humanity in general, Jim Pinkerton, a “conservative” columnist for Newsday and a regular on FOX News Watch, defends the excessive restraint in the mainstream media saying in the FOX Vlahos article, “This is a test of the left-wing blogosphere.” Pinkerton pointed out that the article was only published by the London Times to promote opposition to Prime Minister Tony Blair’s re-election. Blair himself put town the article with the comment: “This is old news.” Whether the report surfaced as a result of political competition or whether it is or isn’t “old news” is not the issue; it’s the truth that matters!
The New York Times will win in the end in the arena of public opinion. As long as the general public is deprived of the news, there will be no public outcry. Network and cable television could go around the Times, but they know it is unadvisable given the control and power Israel and its powerful lobby, AIPAC, have over each and every member of Congress. And then there’s the potential ridicule from FOX and Rush Limbaugh citing a biased “liberal” media. Regrettably, the public now recognizes this bias in the past antics of Dan, Tom and Peter, and because of this recognized bias, won’t believe the report of a Downing Street Memo as anything other than yet another partisan swipe at Bush and Republicans.
The only hope is for citizens groups who can prove suffered harm and who seek money damages for the horrific pain and suffering caused by the Bush regime and The New York Times. It is such groups, collaborating with religious organizations, that may eventually succeed in holding the conspirators in the White House, the Pentagon and the press accountable.
© THEODORE E. LANG 6/5/05 All rights reserved.
Ted Lang is a political analyst and a freelance writer.