To keep the public from ever being able to get a firm handle on what's really going on, the White House colludes with the media to manipulate headlines, story slant, and even story content (which ranges from blatant omissions to outright lies). The tactics used are classic CIA, and can be divided into a few general categories:

DISTRACT AND REDIRECT: When a damaging story looms on the horizon, you distract the public's attention by creating an alternative "big story" focused as far away from the real story as possible. A classic example is the Jessica Lynch rescue. The damaging, real story was the slaughter of Iraqi civilians (including women and children) by US troops. The Lynch story distracted attention away from this story and redirected it to "HEROIC AMERICANS" and evil nasty Iraqis holding poor little blond white princesses hostage.

REWRITE AND CONFUSE: When an irrefutable story comes out, you create a parallel, but bogus story - parallel but different enough to confuse the public who then is no longer sure which story is which, or which is for real, unless they have read very attentively. The most successful example of this, perhaps, was how Bush and the media manipulated America into war against Iraq. The real story, of course, was that Al Queda was dominated by Saudi fundamentalist Muslims and that Saddam, a "secular" Muslim, did not like fundamentalist groups, including Iraq's Shiites, and had never harbored Al Queda members (according to all real FBI and CIA reports - not the later fudged reports). By the time the media and Bush had paired the name Saddam and Osama Bin Laden often enough, and covered stories of dubious evidence lingeringly enough, nearly 70% of the American public believed that Saddam and Al Queda were closely linked.


HISTORIC REWRITE: When your first line to the public doesn't fly or an unfavorable story makes it to the public eye,, just issue a " rewrite " that changes the story history. Example: When Bush first pushed for war, his story was that he only wanted to disarm Saddam, and had no interest in a regime change. When Saddam began to cooperate with weapons inspectors, who found no evidence of WMDs, Bush rewrote the story. According to the rewrite (picked up without any questions or qualification by the mainstream media), he had always felt that what was most important for the US to achieve in Iraq was a regime change.

BLACK HOLE That's where the biggest, most damaging stories go, at least temporarily, if the Bush folks get tipped off ahead of time. When Newt Gingrich made his big reentry into Washington some weeks back, the story of his disgrace (he used a fund intended to help inner city poor kids as a front for laundering donations to himself) has been notably absent from the news. If this had been "the reentry of Bill Clinton," you can rest assured that every story about the issue would include at least five or six paragraphs devoted to Gennifer Flowers, Monica or Paula "Professional Mudslinger" Jones.

Here’s just a sampling of how the media is being used to screen the Bush administration from the public, and to deceive the public on key issues of paramount importance to their well-being.

THE REAL STORY
5/19: Story breaks that war crimes charges are being filed this week in Belgium against the Bush administration, with Tommy Franks as the most accessible and appropriate first target. US human rights offenses against Iraqi civilians are detailed in the complaint.
DISTRACT AND REDIRECT
5/20: The story dominating the news: Homeland security terror alert rose to ORANGE!!!! Can't possibly worry about war crimes charges at a time like this, right?! [In fact, rumor has it that to make sure the public didn't dismiss the "danger", Bush operatives arranged to have bomb threats called into several major cities. Here in Baltimore, we had two bomb threats this week: one the day before the code orange and one the day the code orange was declared. Only thing a bit fishy, as several people caught in traffic on a bus with me pointed out: real terrorists don't call in to warn you. "Nope," said one man, "They just blow your ass up!").
REWRITE AND CONFUSE:
5/20 Media focuses on story of Bush meeting with Cuban dissidents and officials from Zimbabwe to talk about human rights offenses by brutal regimes telling their stories. The message: Tommy Franks and human rights abuses? Nah - ya heard it wrong. They meant Castro and those African guys!

THE REAL STORY
Week of 5/5: Some Iraqis formerly in management positions in the Iraq oil industry expressed extreme frustration to western journalists (one story appeared in the Washington Post) that they were being forcibly closed out of their offices by Halliburton people. Unable to work or even enter their own offices, the managers were angry, worried (none have any income now) and suspicious of US intentions
HISTORIC REWRITE: One week later, the Washington Post runs a story on Page One about how Iraqi oil managers are "afraid" to come to work despite constant "coaxing" by US!!


THE REAL STORY:
May: the story was being circulated widely through independent media sources and questions were being asked of the military re: the heavy use of violent computer games to train soldiers. The bloody game "Doom," for example, was developed with Pentagon funding as a "training tool." The question raised: has the use of these two-dimensional fantasy games contributed to the extreme violence observed among US troops against civilians - a violence now observed (to the same degree) in Aussie or British troops.
REWRITE AND CONFUSE
In mid-May, a story began circulating throughout the mainstream media about the movie "The Matrix," raising the question that some people's obsession with the movie may have led them to commit murder. So, the superficial scanner of news (let's face it - most Americans!) will scratch their heads and wonder if the Matrix story was what he vaguely remembered hearing about computer games and violence.

THE REAL STORY:
May 20: The anti-environmental rightwingers, the charge led by Bush, is pushing to allow the logging industry into the national parks and forests to "thin" the woods (read "steal trees from the American public"). I'm from Maine - so believe me, there's no such thing as environmental "thinning" of the woods. You go in with an army of skidders and you are left with a horrendous mess - the ground trashed, trees gouged, half-uprooted, and broken, and "slash" (trunk and branch tree litter) left everywhere (which is responsible for many broken deer and moose legs), gas and oil pollution left behind, along with the inevitable logger trash. .
DISTRACT AND REDIRECT:
May 20: Bush makes a speech about how great his Healthy Forests Restoration plan is and focuses entirely on the plan to clear out the underbrush that fuels fires. Of course, he never mentions the thinning plan - leaving the public to assume that clearing underbrush and "thinning" are the same thing.

REAL STORY:
The BBC broke the story last weekend that the Jessica Lynch "rescue" was a staged Hollywood-director-managed phony event designed to distract attention from the stories of civilian deaths at the hands of US soldiers.
BLACK HOLE: Do YOU remember seeing this in the Washington Post, on FOX News or NBC, etc.? Didn't think so


SPEAKING OF PROPAGANDA TACTICS....

Was Bogus "Grubby Jew" comment inserted under article about Kissinger a CIA manipulation?

Someone posted my article/exposé on Henry Kissinger in India indymedia without my knowledge and maliciously entered a summary that includes a reference to Kissinger as "a grubby Jew." Anyone who has read the article on Kissinger knows that NOWHERE in the article is his race, religion or shoe size, for that matter, ever mentions. His evil supercedes all else, in any case. And, as my own great-grandfather was a Jew from Germany, I hardly think "grubby Jew" is a comment I would be likely to make!!

I also notice that the article was picked up, along with its phony summary by google.com, so that anyone looking for articles in my name will see the "grubby Jew" comment. It was listed not once but TWICE in google, as if they wanted to make sure it was seen.

I am quite curious as to why this summary was inserted. Either it was done by a total idiot with their own prejudices or it was done manipulatively and maliciously by a professional propagandist seeking to damage my credibility and thus undermine the article on Kissinger. I suspect the latter. I guess I should take it as a compliment that someone in the CIA or wherever considers my writing threatening enough to resort to dirty tricks to try to undermine it.

Also, I have suspected for quite some time that google, which now is in a special partnership with AOL (rightwing propaganda central), strategically manipulates its listings. To test this theory, I compared the lists that came up for various progressive writers and topics and found a BIG DIFFERENCE between google and, say, Teoma.com. Teoma.com appeared to be straightforward and predictable in its prioritization, while google results often seemed designed to confuse, redirect, or arouse suspicions in people searching for a given progressive topic. In addition, I noticed that google lists continually are changing - you can put in the same topic or name twice in the same 24 hour period and find that a different list comes up.For example - the India indymedia listing under my name came up on May 20, then disappeared, then reappeared on May 21st. Is this to throw anyone off the scent of what they are doing?

Anyway, I DID NOT POST THIS SUMMARY. Secondly, I would avoid google.com for ANY searches on progressive topics such as environmental issues or liberal websites and writers.

Last but not least, I urge all independent progressive journalists and activists to REGULARLY check what is getting linked to their names in google.com. You may be in for a nasty surprise.
Here's the article/summary as it appeared in India Indymedia:
india.indymedia.org/comment.php3