I was reading through the “news feed” on Facebook and was surprised to see an item somebody had posted. It was about news that the US Senate had actually voted, by a very large margin, to at least make a procedural step to begin debate on a proposed amendment to the constitution to correct the absurdity of the “Citizens United” decision by the Supreme Court.
That, you’ll recall, is where the current Supreme Court passed down a decision that effectively said that the right for the wealthy or large wealthy organizations to spend as much money as they like to buy themselves subservient puppets in government office is not only fine and dandy, but “free speech” protected by the constitution against anybody who might try to restrict their right to buy the government fair and square.
[Wouldn’t it be nice if they were as diligent, shall we say, about protecting, say, the right to free speech and assembly, and of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, or right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, for the rest of us peasants.]
That was a surprise on two counts. One, that a predominantly bought and paid for set of politicians would even make this token move (a long way from actually passing a constitutional amendment), and second, that I was reading about this, while it seems to be completely missing from the news. Seriously, have you found anything in the news about this?
I’m not here to write about the proposed amendment, but rather the broader story that includes this event going missing. The news, or should I say, the “news”, with quotation marks to indicate euphemism, for the infotainment farce that now serves as news for most Americans, for anybody who doesn’t take it upon themselves to look a little harder, rather than being passive “consumers of news products”.
I did a web search for the story, and it pops up in a variety of websites, but I gave up on finding it on a webpage from a site of any of what you might call main news media, that is, the TV networks (including the cable news) or major newspapers (or any newspapers), after the second or third page of search hits.
Now, on the other hand, turn to, say, CNN, and what’s the news? Basically, checking now and then for a few minutes today, it went something like “ISIS ISIS ISIS! ISIS ISIS! ISIS ISIS ISIS ISIS! Football guy misbehavior! ISIS ISIS ISIS! ISIS ISIS!“, and then, every now and then, other vital news, “attention consumers, new Apple products! get out there and consume shiny new toys!”.
Somewhere in there another story managed to sneak in, about Dutch authorities releasing a report about the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17). I haven’t read it yet. Online items about it summarizing it seem to indicate there isn’t exactly a great revelation. It’s reported as saying that the crash was caused by “extrnal factors” (a bit obvious a long time ago). Beyond that, the reports about the report so far simply say that the damage that brought down the plane was caused by being struck by “high energy objects”.
“The damage observed in the forward section of the aircraft appears to indicate that the aircraft was penetrated by a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft,” the report said. “It is likely that this damage resulted in a loss of structural integrity of the aircraft, leading to an in-flight break up.”
A bit of chatter on CNN came from this guy whose name I forget, which is a little surprising because there were periods of time when I thought this guy was now employed full-time by CNN to yap endlessly about Malaysian airline disasters (first the still missing plane in the Indian Ocean region, then this one). He immediate took those words and jumped straight to the assertion that this obviously meant that it reinforced the shot down by a ground anti-aircraft missile narrative, althought there is apparently no such conclusion. That’s especially questionable considering that elsewhere, people examining the mystery and actually trying to find the true story, rather than making one up to fit some agenda and then arguing for that, looked at photos and found evidence indicating a different explanation.
Read these, for some indications that there’s mmore to it than what you’re usually hearing.
Flipping over to Fox News for a few minutes, I caught them talking about it, and it included a comment reminding people that the plane came down in “rebel-held territory”, but then throwing in an offhand comment saying “but if we’re honest, it’s Russian-held territory“, which isn’t honest at all, considering that despite all the bullshit being thrown around like this, there is nothing to support that assertion (typical of Fox News at most times, whatever the story) and doing everything just short of saying “why didn’t the Dutch just come out and say that the Russians shot it down?!”.
Incidentally, one more part of that Fox News commentary (from Fox anchor Shepard Smith) claimed that Dutch investigators are unable to visit the crash site because “the rebels won’t allow them”, which is not what was happening the last I heard. There were lots of problems reported immediately after the crash, of course, all revolving around the ugly reality that the wreckage was scattered over a large area in the middle of a war zone, in the middle of an ugly civil war, where the “rebel separatists” had the problems of being continually under attack by the Ukrainian military (even as the Ukranian coup government in Kiev was making all kinds of indignant noise about the problem being that the rebels would not allow people in to deal with the crash). At some point reports were saying that European investigators were able to get on the scene, and if there really is a cease fire now, as has been reported, this claim that nobody can get there to investigate the scene is simple raw lying.
Part of the reality twists, from Fox, specifically, involve repetition of all the propaganda flying around, as if the brief has come down from Fox News command “support the neocon narrative at all times” like CNN and the rest of the regular popular “news” media, with the Fox News-specific addition of “and always add ‘Obama’s weakness in foreign policy and failure to assert American leadership of the world has invited Russian aggression'” (even while actual fact is more and more supportive of the idea that Obama is either completely complicit or completely subservient to the neocon megalomaniacs).
Moving on, but still sorting out the sheer avalanche of fiction and nonsense surrounding everything about Ukraine these days, a very good article dissecting another tangled web of falsehoods pumped out by the New York Times:
It’s no wonder people are so confused.