Reply #129: On February 5, 2003, could you find ANYTHING in the...

[Peace Patriot]

...U.S. mainstream news that would have led you to believe that Colin Powell's speech to the United Nations on Iraq "weapons of mass destruction" was a complete crock of crap from first word to last?

I found a web site in Russia that cast some doubt on it. Finally, I found Scoop in NZ, the BBC and a few other news sources OUTSIDE THIS COUNTRY that were reporting what the UN weapons inspectors, Scott Ritter, France, Germany and the rest of the world thought about it. (Also, Democracy Now--radio.)

Now, granted, it's a problem when the USMSM doesn't report something. They thereby create an alternative reality in which a 100% crock of crap replaces the truth. I have a very smart sister who believed Colin Powell. That's what they do. They can suck in even the smart.

It took about a year for the truth to leak into the country under the Iron Curtain of the MSM, at which point Americans voted these liars, thieves and mass murderers out of office, in overwhelming numbers. And now THIS story is not being reported.

But I repeat, it is a PROBLEM when the USMSM doesn't report something. But their not reporting it does not make it unreal. It just makes it a problem to be solved (a big one, granted).

Everyone in the US including the MSM--even including most diehard Bushites (not that it makes any difference to them)--now understand that THERE WERE NO WMDS IN IRAQ. How did that happen? By tough investigative journalism by the MSM? By the MSM pounding the administration every day with relentless questions? By Dan Rather asking every night at the conclusion of the news: Mr. Bush, where are the "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq?

Ha, ha, ha. Don't we wish!

No, it happened much like THIS story is happening--with relentless BLOGGERS running down the truth, with people in New Zealand and Canada helping out, with reports in the Vermont Guardian and the Lone Star Iconoclast--and two or three other tiny but independent US newspapers--and a few stray radio shows (i.e., Demcracy Now), and a few courageous whistleblowers who would not shut up....etc.

We really have to change the name we use for the MSM. They are NOT mainstream. They are only "mainstream illusion creating." But that's a mouthful (the "mainstream illusion creating media"--MICM).

Let's start a contest.

The Pandering Media. PM.
The War Mongering Media. WMM.
The Kiss Bush's Ass and Make a Profit Media. KBAMPM. (pronounced Ka Bamp 'em).
The Corporate Propaganda Media. CPM.
The War and Hairdo Media. WAHM.
The Tax Cuts for the Rich Media. TCRM.
The Tax Cuts for the Rich and Propaganda Media. TCRAP media.
The Truth Is What We Say It Is Media. TIWWSIIM (as in "twist 'em"--not bad).
The Media of the Matrix. M&M.
The US-only media. USOM.
The Forget What You Heard Yesterday Media. FWYHYM.

I liked SCLM quite a lot, because I pronounced it to myself as "Scum." (..."so-called liberal media"--for those who don't know this great acronym).

But I think I like this one the best (my first hit): the "mainstream illusion creating media"--MICM. (--could be pronounced "mike 'em").

I'm going to start using it.

If John Kerry takes on this great task--the task of invading the MICM with the truth--it will not take a year (as with Iraq WMDs). It could happen in the next two weeks.

If he doesn't, it will be harder and take longer.

The 2000 Election Fraud has a similar lies-to-truth arc as Iraq WMDs. This time, though, the consequences of accepting a second fraudulent election are far more serious as to long term demoralization of the American people.

They need quick action, quick revelation--which gives them a chance themselves to fight this regime, to rally to the cause-- which I am sure they will do--their only problem is THEY DON'T KNOW!