Who is shaping opinion?
White Anglo-Saxon old boys, you think?
Take another look. A check of the stables of columnists for the New York Times and the Washington Post Writers Group does indeed disclose that African Americans and women seem to be under-represented, though a proper statistical analysis would be necessary in order to verify such a claim.
The Times has one African American columnist, Bob Herbert, and the Washington Post group one African American columnist, Eugene Robinson. This represents 1 of 10 Times columnists and 1 of 17 Writers Group regulars, for 10 percent at the Times and 5.8 percent at the Writers Group. Yet, blacks constitute about 13.4 percent of the national population. A Google search left me unsure of black demographic figures for the New York metropolitan area.
Two of 10 Times columnists (20 percent) are women and four of 17 Writers Group columnists (23 percent) are women.
The Times lists five of 10 columnists whose Jewish heritage is plain. That is, 50 percent of Times columnists have a Jewish ethnicity. The U.S. population is 2 percent Jewish and the metropolitan New York population is about 10 percent Jewish.
The Writers Group's 17 includes six persons whose biographical data or names imply Jewish heritage. However, one case was uncertain enough that I will say that only five of 17 have a Jewish heritage. This represents 29 percent of Group writers versus a national Jewish population of 2 percent.
It should be noted that the Washington Post Writers Group contributors are drawn from the Post and from various newspapers across the country. The syndicate markets its columnists nationwide. The Times also markets its in-house columnists nationwide.
Does all this imply a "Jewish conspiracy"? No. But it does imply a strong degree of ethnic favoritism, of the kind often attributed to WASPs.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Saturday, February 23, 2008
The 666 wing of the GOP
Well yesterday I set up two brand new Yahoo accounts in order to receive the daily Bible verse and Opednews. No Bible verse nor Opednews today.
I checked to make sure the Bible verse and Opednews accounts are up and running. They are.
I realize these sorts of oppressions aren't specifically Roger Stone's fault. But, I can't help but wonder whether under his American flag lapel pin there is a "666" in fine print.
Feb 25, 2008 So today no Opednews in either account. However, the Bible verse seems to have resumed in one account but not in the other. Huffington Post halted abruptly after I made a remark about it (below).
So what we have it appears is the need to demonstrate control over the Word of God, and First Amendment protected communications in general. True, I can now -- maybe -- read the daily Bible verse, but I am still getting the message that that is at the whim of persons who can get into my accounts -- which, as I've said -- I have strong reason to believe are under Justice Department supervision.
I would hope that Michael Mukasey would direct that these doings be checked on by the Office of the Inspector General, or other such watchdog. Considering that Mukasey defends an administration that sees torture as a useful weapon in the "war on terror," I don't think it's a stretch to think that federal operatives would consider non-lethal harassment, up to the level of torment, as a legitimate weapon against those persons who "aid the terrorist cause" by pointing out that 9/11 was an inside job. (In fact Bush himself has leveled that charge against 9/11 skeptics.)
I checked to make sure the Bible verse and Opednews accounts are up and running. They are.
I realize these sorts of oppressions aren't specifically Roger Stone's fault. But, I can't help but wonder whether under his American flag lapel pin there is a "666" in fine print.
Feb 25, 2008 So today no Opednews in either account. However, the Bible verse seems to have resumed in one account but not in the other. Huffington Post halted abruptly after I made a remark about it (below).
So what we have it appears is the need to demonstrate control over the Word of God, and First Amendment protected communications in general. True, I can now -- maybe -- read the daily Bible verse, but I am still getting the message that that is at the whim of persons who can get into my accounts -- which, as I've said -- I have strong reason to believe are under Justice Department supervision.
I would hope that Michael Mukasey would direct that these doings be checked on by the Office of the Inspector General, or other such watchdog. Considering that Mukasey defends an administration that sees torture as a useful weapon in the "war on terror," I don't think it's a stretch to think that federal operatives would consider non-lethal harassment, up to the level of torment, as a legitimate weapon against those persons who "aid the terrorist cause" by pointing out that 9/11 was an inside job. (In fact Bush himself has leveled that charge against 9/11 skeptics.)
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Real ID tangles with Constitution
Is the guarantee of state autonomy enshrined in the states rights amendment to the Constitution anything more than a string of hollow words from a bygone era? Are states now mere administrative districts controlled by Washington bureaucrats?
Don't states have an obligation to protect the basic freedoms of citizens from being handed over to federal bureaucrats? Has Congress, by passing the Real ID act, destabilized the system of checks and balances that gives states large discretion within their own borders?
The problem with Real ID, as former lawmaker Bob Barr warns, is that freedoms taken for granted in America are now to hinge on a card controlled by federal bureaucrats. And, by the way, how hard do you think it will be to cause computer glitches that cause political "undesirables" to be improperly penalized without due process of law?
The drive to erode state authority, of course, has been under way for decades, but in the Bush years has reached new levels. An egregious example: various states had used their constitutionally guaranteed right to form interstate compacts in order to promote reductions in greenhouse emissions. But, after Congress passed a law concerning new emission standards, a federal bureaucrat simply announced that he was voiding the state compacts.
Yet, does a state compact necessarily die because Congress passes a law?
If federal bureaucrats can nix state compacts, what chance do you think a lonely dissident will have in the face of federal opposition, especially when the feds have this new citizen control tool?
Obviously the 9/11 attacks are used to justify this police state gimmick, which is likely to degenerate within a few years into an "internal passport" like those used in the old Soviet Union to keep people pinned down. And the Congress that OKd Real ID has also been on the whole highly supportive of playing dumb about the blatant treason that occurred on that fateful day.
So, there's a key. State officials who are really serious about resisting Real ID have got to make the point that Real ID will in fact be controlled by the secret federal agencies that carried out the 9/11 atrocities. This calls for real grit, especially because the major media in every state tend to be under tight control of those with a vested interest in promoting 9/11 coverup.
Don't states have an obligation to protect the basic freedoms of citizens from being handed over to federal bureaucrats? Has Congress, by passing the Real ID act, destabilized the system of checks and balances that gives states large discretion within their own borders?
The problem with Real ID, as former lawmaker Bob Barr warns, is that freedoms taken for granted in America are now to hinge on a card controlled by federal bureaucrats. And, by the way, how hard do you think it will be to cause computer glitches that cause political "undesirables" to be improperly penalized without due process of law?
The drive to erode state authority, of course, has been under way for decades, but in the Bush years has reached new levels. An egregious example: various states had used their constitutionally guaranteed right to form interstate compacts in order to promote reductions in greenhouse emissions. But, after Congress passed a law concerning new emission standards, a federal bureaucrat simply announced that he was voiding the state compacts.
Yet, does a state compact necessarily die because Congress passes a law?
If federal bureaucrats can nix state compacts, what chance do you think a lonely dissident will have in the face of federal opposition, especially when the feds have this new citizen control tool?
Obviously the 9/11 attacks are used to justify this police state gimmick, which is likely to degenerate within a few years into an "internal passport" like those used in the old Soviet Union to keep people pinned down. And the Congress that OKd Real ID has also been on the whole highly supportive of playing dumb about the blatant treason that occurred on that fateful day.
So, there's a key. State officials who are really serious about resisting Real ID have got to make the point that Real ID will in fact be controlled by the secret federal agencies that carried out the 9/11 atrocities. This calls for real grit, especially because the major media in every state tend to be under tight control of those with a vested interest in promoting 9/11 coverup.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Random conspiracy theory
Gee I must have been doing something cool lately. Hacker harassment is back. My Yahoo accounts -- which have long been compromised no matter what steps I take -- are capriciously refusing to receive daily Bible verse mailings and the daily Opednews mailing.
I checked with Rob Kall of Opednews, who said he wasn't blocking me. I then tried changing an account setting, and thereupon received one mailing, after which, nada. Back when, the White House mailings wouldn't start up, then capriciously showed up for a couple of months before spontaneously self-destructing prior to arrival. Haven't seen one in months, though I never unsubscribed.
Wait! Maybe it's not government cut-outs "showing who's boss." Maybe that's just a convenient smokescreen for Google, which would love to make Yahoo look bad by sabotaging its would-be prey. Yeah, and Google has plenty to explain concerning the episodes of censorship of one of my Google/Blogger accounts -- actions which strongly suggested that a secret national security order was being imposed.
Or, maybe it has something to do with Microsoft's hostile takeover bid...
Feb. 20, 2008 Same deal. No Opednews. No Bible verse. I guess this exercise in raw power is to last an indeterminate length of time.
Alternative conspiracy theory
See post below and you connect some dots... and consider this: some months back I was receiving Google and Yahoo news and web page alerts on the subject of "9/11." Some of those URLs came from Opednews. I then signed up with Opednews so that I might submit an article, if I wished. After that, no more Opednews url's showed up in my Yahoo or Google alerts, though plenty of stuff was still being written on Opednews about 9/11.
Quite a coincidence. Sure seemed like someone was moving to limit my impact.
Feb. 21, 2008 Still at it. But, for some reason, the Huffington Post daily alert, which was also blocked for a couple of days, is arriving handily.
I realize that it is easy to attribute such hacking to phishers, who steal private data by setting up bogus email pages. Yet, I have numerous reasons to believe that my email and other internet accounts are tightly controlled by some federal agency, which limits what I can receive. So phishers are either hackers who are "useful idiots" for a clandestine agency or who are witting assets of such an agency.
I checked with Rob Kall of Opednews, who said he wasn't blocking me. I then tried changing an account setting, and thereupon received one mailing, after which, nada. Back when, the White House mailings wouldn't start up, then capriciously showed up for a couple of months before spontaneously self-destructing prior to arrival. Haven't seen one in months, though I never unsubscribed.
Wait! Maybe it's not government cut-outs "showing who's boss." Maybe that's just a convenient smokescreen for Google, which would love to make Yahoo look bad by sabotaging its would-be prey. Yeah, and Google has plenty to explain concerning the episodes of censorship of one of my Google/Blogger accounts -- actions which strongly suggested that a secret national security order was being imposed.
Or, maybe it has something to do with Microsoft's hostile takeover bid...
Feb. 20, 2008 Same deal. No Opednews. No Bible verse. I guess this exercise in raw power is to last an indeterminate length of time.
Alternative conspiracy theory
See post below and you connect some dots... and consider this: some months back I was receiving Google and Yahoo news and web page alerts on the subject of "9/11." Some of those URLs came from Opednews. I then signed up with Opednews so that I might submit an article, if I wished. After that, no more Opednews url's showed up in my Yahoo or Google alerts, though plenty of stuff was still being written on Opednews about 9/11.
Quite a coincidence. Sure seemed like someone was moving to limit my impact.
Feb. 21, 2008 Still at it. But, for some reason, the Huffington Post daily alert, which was also blocked for a couple of days, is arriving handily.
I realize that it is easy to attribute such hacking to phishers, who steal private data by setting up bogus email pages. Yet, I have numerous reasons to believe that my email and other internet accounts are tightly controlled by some federal agency, which limits what I can receive. So phishers are either hackers who are "useful idiots" for a clandestine agency or who are witting assets of such an agency.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Trade center engineer backs new collapse probe
An international panel of experts should re-examine the collapses of the World Trade Center towers, says a retired engineering executive whose firm was a major contractor for the World Trade Center.
"On Sept. 11, I watched a live TV broadcast of the progressive collapse of the World Trade towers with disbelief, as the mass and the strength of the structure should have survived," reads a statement by Richard F. Humenn, former vice president of Joseph R. Loring and Associates, a major trade center contractor. Humenn endorsed a petition, being circulated by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, urging formation of such an investigative group.
Humenn, who specialized in electrical engineering, was listed as an alumnus of Brooklyn Polytechnic High School on one page I located, where his background with Loring as a 40-plus-year careerist was given.
(However, Google and other search engines were highly uncooperative prior to locating that page and when I tried to call it up again I got a replacement that said that Humenn was only listed in links. The 911blogger.com search engine returned "no match" for Humenn even though a post about him appears. As I write this, a "security token" emblem shows up saying "your request could not be processed" -- almost as if to explain the computerized difficulties in verifying Humenn's background.
At any rate, Loring's web site shows that it was a major contractor for the World Trade Center complex, having been "selected for the original electrical design" of the trade center in 1964; having conducted HVAC, fire protection and telecommunications maintenance for the entire life of the buildings; and having been responsible for extensive upgrading of various building systems.
I could not verify an online claim that Humenn was the trade center's top electrical engineer with 60 people working under him before his retirement in 1998 (a date that I could not check again after pages started vanishing), but the claim doesn't seem to be exaggerated in light of his position at Loring and in light of the firm's motto encouraging ambitious young engineers to progress inside the firm.
Humenn's statement (I was unable to view it directly at AE911truth.org but found it reproduced at 911blogger.com and at opednews.com) asserts that after viewing the video presentation given by Richard Gage, a founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Humenn became convinced that "fuel and planes alone could not bring down the towers" and urged that an international group of professionals investigate all "plausible causes for the virtual free fall and almost total destruction of the WTC structures."
One blogger reported that Humenn was nevertheless wary of the idea that the U.S. government plotted the destruction of the two major trade towers and building 7 hours later.
"On Sept. 11, I watched a live TV broadcast of the progressive collapse of the World Trade towers with disbelief, as the mass and the strength of the structure should have survived," reads a statement by Richard F. Humenn, former vice president of Joseph R. Loring and Associates, a major trade center contractor. Humenn endorsed a petition, being circulated by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, urging formation of such an investigative group.
Humenn, who specialized in electrical engineering, was listed as an alumnus of Brooklyn Polytechnic High School on one page I located, where his background with Loring as a 40-plus-year careerist was given.
(However, Google and other search engines were highly uncooperative prior to locating that page and when I tried to call it up again I got a replacement that said that Humenn was only listed in links. The 911blogger.com search engine returned "no match" for Humenn even though a post about him appears. As I write this, a "security token" emblem shows up saying "your request could not be processed" -- almost as if to explain the computerized difficulties in verifying Humenn's background.
At any rate, Loring's web site shows that it was a major contractor for the World Trade Center complex, having been "selected for the original electrical design" of the trade center in 1964; having conducted HVAC, fire protection and telecommunications maintenance for the entire life of the buildings; and having been responsible for extensive upgrading of various building systems.
I could not verify an online claim that Humenn was the trade center's top electrical engineer with 60 people working under him before his retirement in 1998 (a date that I could not check again after pages started vanishing), but the claim doesn't seem to be exaggerated in light of his position at Loring and in light of the firm's motto encouraging ambitious young engineers to progress inside the firm.
Humenn's statement (I was unable to view it directly at AE911truth.org but found it reproduced at 911blogger.com and at opednews.com) asserts that after viewing the video presentation given by Richard Gage, a founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Humenn became convinced that "fuel and planes alone could not bring down the towers" and urged that an international group of professionals investigate all "plausible causes for the virtual free fall and almost total destruction of the WTC structures."
One blogger reported that Humenn was nevertheless wary of the idea that the U.S. government plotted the destruction of the two major trade towers and building 7 hours later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)