Getting Closer To Uncle Sam

"What awful dream is this: Stockwell Day and Gordon O'Connor throwing around the future of Canada like some coins for the collection plate. And Rick Hillier, too? Make that coins for the Roulette Table. - BC Mary"

Dream? Sorry Mary, it is happening. It is reality. In the backrooms, the unelected and un-re-elected conspire to change our 3 countries to benefit the corporations.

---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

No that there are more stories out, don't you think the big bad media simply missed the story instead of ignoring it? You should have been proud of getting a good scoop rather than whining about "the media". Especially since you are part of the media.

Missed it how? Is not Donald Rumsfeld coming to Canada a story? Is him meeting the Chief Defense Force - Gen Hillier, and his Mexican counterpart in Canada not a story? Is Mr. Rumsfeld meeting the PM not a story? Is not the PM meeting with current and former CIA officials not a story?

We are one little website in one tiny corner of the Internet, not the CBC. We didn't 'miss it', but somehow, they did?



---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

I'm not saying it's not a story. it's a great story. I'm
saying those papers weren't told about it. Missed it.
Didn't find out it was happening until it was over. Didn't
want to report it after they'd missed the whole thing.
Perhaps they don't scan the blogs, which in my opinion
is a shame. But I don't think they ignored it on purpose.

Vive, on the other hand, got te scoop and should be
proud of that. i'm just sick of this "msm conspiricy" crap.
There is no monolithic media.

Oh, and the CBC has reported it.

AND (sorry to post so much but I don't see an edit
function) Harper wasn't there and neither was
Rumsfeld. Not that that makes the story any less
important, but just saying...

(There is no edit function)<br />
<br />
Harper and Runsfeld have not been *confirmed* to be there, but if you read the Banff Crag and Canyon article (<a href="http://www.banffcragandcanyon.com/News/255375.html">http://www.banffcragandcanyon.com/News/255375.html</a>) there are persistant rumours. And the CBC and Toronto Star reported it, but only *after* we did. Kudos to us again!<br />
<br />
If you don't see that the MSM does not tell us the whole truth, go to the library and pick up a copy of "Nessecary Illusions" by Noam Chomsky. Read it, and get angry. And if it doesn't make you angry, read his essays on manufacturing public consent.<br />
<br />
I might buy that they missed it, and don't want to report on it, but how they can flog a young girl's disapperance in Aruba leads me to believe they can make any issue important if they want (and proving Chomsky right).<br />
<br />
Not being told about it is not an excuse. When high level people such as this show up to meet each other, it is a reporters job to find out why. Expecially after a similar meeting in Mexico in 2005.<p>---<br>"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden<br />

"No that there are more stories out, don't you think the big bad media simply missed the story instead of ignoring it? You should have been proud of getting a good scoop rather than whining about "the media". Especially since you are part of the media."

First of all, most people that post here are not part of the big bad media, so they can bitch about the media all they want - without being hypocrites.

Secondly, if the media missed this story, they have no business being in the journalism business. But then again, nobody really believes that today's media consists of real objective journalists, whose theoretical job is to uncover and report injustices in today's society. For the most part, mainstream journalists are viewed as a bunch of comical robotic mouthpieces working for their master spin doctors.

Most of these guys can't even read a teleprompter without stumbling over their words. Even if big daddy gave them permission, expecting them to get and report "the scoop" is a tad unrealistic

Yeah, sure, let's pat ourselves on the back for getting a "good scoop" and divert attention away from the neglectful actions of today's big bad bozo media. Nice try.

As a member of the print media, I find your generalization extremely insulting (not to mention that you generalize yourself by sounding like a parody of the stereotypical blogger). Many reporters, including myself, work our asses off 12-14 hours a day for less pay than we would earn working at Wal-mart, let alone at a PR or advertizing job. We could do PR with our journalism degrees and make five times the money but many of choose not to out of a genuine desire to inform the public. We are understaffed and we get complaints constantly. The left feels we're too right. The right feels we're too left. Even though each of us reports on hundreds of complex issues a year we get chastized for everything we had no time to fit in. Yet there is a lack of responsability among many members of the public, who would rather read (or more likely watch) one or two sources of news and then blame the media for their own ignorance. And then we have to get second-guessed at every turn by people who have an adolescent level of media saviness, where they know enough to criticize everything we do but not enough to know what goes into what we do. Among more sophisticated media critics there is much more of a sense of empathy for reporters. For example, they look at the general post-9-11 reporting letdown with a sense of what reporters actually went through and how they could do better next time instead of going on about the media overlords. The paper I work for is owned by three huge layers of media companies, each larger than the last, and I have never been told not to write something because it goes against the big owner's ideology or doesn't fit in with the New World Order. In fact, my friend Aaron Paton, who wrote the Banff Crag and Canyon piece featured here, works for the very same company but in a different paper. It has a local, regional chain, national, and hypernational conglomerate level of ownership, and yet somehow he was still able to write the story without the Monopoly Man phoning and nixing the piece on behalf of George W. Bush, Starbucks and the MSM council.

Stardog,

You obviously are feeling very unappreciated considering your many posts on this subject. I have a couple of questions if you would?

Why are you bothered by people complaining about you either being too right or too left? It's my opinion that only opinions are to be agreed with or disagreed with. Are you an opinion piece writer? And even if you are an opinion writer I shouldn't agree with a good journalist 100% of the time. That tells me they are being objective about their subject matter rather than reactive and sensationalizing it. You are there to report the news not make it. But, if you are an informant then my one true objection to much of what is journalism today is that most journalists do not ask good, hard, investigative questions. The who, what, where, when, and why of journalism is gone as far as I can tell. I end up with more questions that need answering after many articles rather than feeling I have been informed of something I needed to know about. When this happens I can only conclude that the "journalist" does not really care about informing or certainly don't care about the subject they are looking into and it's all just white noise. I know I have read or heard a good piece of journalism if I come away feeling a sense of satisfaction, a conclusion of sorts for the 5 "W"s.

And,what did the media go through post 9/11 in your opinion?

Oh, and, I thought of something else to ask you. Will you be looking into a reporting more on the NAU and the behind closed doors meeting that are taking place? This is a very important issue that Canadians NEED TO KNOW ABOUT!

---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche

I would join 4Canada in asking if you are committed to keeping on the NAU developments and informing the public about what has occurred to date. You found your way here, you know about the NAU now, what do you intend to do with your newfound knowledge and desire to inform the public? If I was a reporter, or editor, I might wonder why Vive got the info when I didn't, and I might wonder why such a story of huge significance didn't make it onto the MSM radar. I might even wonder why the powers that be held a huge tea party on my home turf and didn't invite the press. Rumsfeld on the invitee list and no buzz whatsoever? Dr. Caleb nailed it, it's kind of monumental as big as Rice in Halifax, and it SHOULD eclipse the lost in Aruba grade stories, but it didn't. How come? Next after the big questions, I might think to do some background research on the subject to satisfy myself the info was legitimate, then I might think of doing a piece on what the NAU is, what's happened to date, who the players are, what's the the timeline, and where is the NAU headed. The MSM as an institution has failed us, that is how I found my way here. I believe that individuals in the MSM fail the public, however good their intentions are, because the system is designed to ensure they fail. Hey, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe reporters, and researchers, and editors are busy as I type, and the MSM will make the NAU a household "word" across this country. In hours the most mundane bits of trivia can of circle the globe and become common knowledge so the apparatus is in place, either the will or the freedom isn't.

I would third that call Stardog! Go with it, apparently, you're one of a select few with the knowledge and the outlet.

---
Dear Abby, Dear Abby my fountain pen leaks, my wife hollers at me and the kids are all freaks