Mad Media Bedfellows: Amy Goodman Paid by CIA to Cover-up 9/11 Truth?

Share this post...

Submit to DiggSubmit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn

An assembled pair of audio clips from Condon explaining the purpose of his resolution can be heard at and an audio clip of the entire discussion - and votes - can be heard at (at Part 1 of the Sept. 17 meeting from 0:03:32 to 0:41:25). In the clips, Condon, in particular - although he denies it several times - makes it clear that Goodman is the target of his resolution.

A Counterpunch article by Iain Boal entitled “The New Crisis at Pacifica” provides some of the political context for this attack; it can be found at

Condon based the claimed need to dissect the finances of Democracy Now! on purported allegations that DN has received “CIA conduit funding” through the Ford Foundation to suppress information about the 9/11 “Truth” Movement.
As the White House “debates” its Afghan options, are we hearing a balanced media presentation on the issues? Or are many media outlets doing what they did before and during the invasion of Iraq, the details of which I documented in my books Embedded, When News Lies, and my film WMD. Have they learned anything?

The answer has to be no way.

On Friday night, there was Charlie Rose advising us that he would soon interview his “friend” Michael Moore, as friendly and supportive an interview as I have every seen. It was amusing to see Charlie concurring in an attack on Capitalism given that he is a frequent host at every major corporate meeting and “friend” to every CEO.

Only it was preceded by a half hour of let’s escalate in Afghanistan spiels by two “experts” –one an Australian counter-insurgency advisor and former aide to General Petraeus, the other a Boston-based academic/expert/war booster—who couldn’t agree with each other more than more troops were the only solution.

On Sunday morning, Meet the Press did its usual Hawkish thing—just a few days after David Gregory, all 6’ 7 inches of him schmoozed on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. He offered up four guests, two ex Generals and two Senators, one a Democrat and the other a Republican, saying pretty much the same thing. We are in Afghanistan to stay, A British General was even quoted to the effect that they will there for about another 40 years, confirming Dick Cheney’s LONG WAR theory. No real critic there.

And then the New York Times, I will let Jeremy Scahill tell you about their latest crime against fairness: “The ‘paper of record’ complains that Robert Greenwald’s film is unbalanced with no ‘sympathy’ for pro-war views. Horrors!

“Perhaps more than any other major corporate news outlet, The New York Times played a central role in promoting the Bush administration’s fraudulent case for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The “reporting” of Judith Miller and Michael Gordon basically served as a front-page fiction laundering factory for Dick Cheney’s fantasy of a “mushroom cloud” threat from Saddam Hussein looming on the immediate horizon, topped off with a celebratory slice of yellowcake. More recently, the paper’s propagandists, William Broad and David Sanger, have aimed their sights on reporting dubious claims about Iran’s nuclear program.

Readers of the Times, therefore, should take with a huge grain of weaponized salt the paper’s “review” of Robert Greenwald’s new documentary, Rethink Afghanistan. With no sense of the painful irony of writing such jibberish in the Times, reviewer Andy Webster declares that the film could “use balance, something in short supply here:”

At an almost breathless pace that leaves little room for reflection, Mr. Greenwald presents a flurry of sights, voices and figures, many of them compelling but all reflecting his point of view. A historical summary is fleeting. What appears, again and again, are terrifying images of children: dead, hideously maimed or, in one instance, almost put up for sale by a frantic civilian in a refugee camp. Military engagements, it seems, are messy and claim innocent lives.

If it takes Greenwald’s “point of view” to see the human costs of the U.S. war in Afghanistan in the form of deformed, maimed and dead civilians, then his film should be required viewing for anyone purporting to support the war.

Anyone who has actually seen the film knows that a string of former top intelligence officials, perhaps most significant among them the former head of the CIA’s Counter-terrorism Center, Robert Grenier, are heard meticulously deconstructing the dominant justifications for the continued U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. What does Grenier know? Oh, he was just the CIA station chief in Islamabad, Pakistan, where he was one of the Agency’s top officials planning the U.S. invasion.”See the film on the Brave New Films website.


Mark Crispin Miller writes:

Here’s a little masterpiece of red-baiting, as Glenn Beck goes after Bob McChesney and Free Press (a “Marxist group”), as well as Mark Lloyd and FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski–all of them, says Beck, conspiring with Obama to snuff the First
Amendment and install a communist dictatorship:


It would take a lot of time, and space, to deal with all the lies, half-truths and distortions in this diatribe. And why bother? No-one with half a brain buys anything that Glenn Beck says, while his rapt audience buys everything he says no matter what.

In any case, this shot at Bob McChesney and Free Press is actually good news–because it makes clear that the owners of the media cartel are scared to death of media reform; and they have every reason to be scared, because the vast majority of Americans would back a tough reformist program in a heartbeat.

Beck can slime McChesney all he wants. The fact is that whenever Bob, or Mark Lloyd,or John Nichols, or I myself, or any other activist for democratic media reform goes out and talks to living, breathing citizens about this subject, what always brings the house down is the notion that we need to cut Big Media down to size, through radical trust-busting above all. Such is the response in the Kiwanis Clubs and churches just as it is on “humanistic” college campuses.

Nobody likes Time-Warner, Disney, News Corp. or GE as such, just as nobody really likes the crap that those huge players keep churning out–as the declining sales throughout the culture industries make very clear. If Clear Channel could no longer own 900 radio stations, would there be furious protesters in the streets? Would people rally to defend the cable companies’ monopolies? Would there be any grass-roots opposition to free, nationwide wireless Internet access?

Let’s remember that, when Michael Powell, Bush/Cheney’s FCC chair, tried to make it even easier for one company to gobble up the lion’s share of TV/radio stations, cable systems, newspapers, etc., the national grass-roots “NO!” was mammoth and
ideologically diverse, including both the NRA and NOW, and Brent Bozell along with Norman Lear.

So it’s good news that Glenn Beck is trying to cast the effort to democratize our media system as a blow against the First Amendment–because it tells us that his overlords are terrified that their long death-grip on our free speech can be broken, once the people learn the truth about real media reform.


Speaking of Media, none other than Rupert Murdoch was in China at a big media conference telling Beijing they have to support “free media” (even as he works overtime to get us all to pay for content on the internet.) The Chinese were meeting with the chief of Reuters and other western media big wigs. Meanwhile there was a report that Haim Saban, a right-wing Israeli billionaire has offered to buy or buy into Al Jazeers. A friend at the network in Qaatar says the report carried by Iran’s Press TV is not true.

OTHER NEWS: PHILADELPHIA — Secured creditors of Philadelphia’s major daily newspapers can use the $300 million debt they’re owed to bid for the company in a bankruptcy auction, a judge ruled Thursday.The ruling could determine who takes over The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News


AP: Argentine Senate overwhelmingly approves media law - Yahoo! Finance

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — Argentina’s Senate overwhelmingly approved a law that will transform the nation’s media landscape on Saturday, and President Cristina Kirchner said she would sign it immediately.

Senators voted by a surprisingly high 44-24 margin for the law, celebrating the end of dictatorship-era rules that enabled a few companies to dominate Argentine media. Opponents say it instead gives the government too much power and will curtail freedom of speech.

The new law preserves two-thirds of the radio and TV spectrum for noncommercial stations, and requires channels to use more Argentine content. It also forces Grupo Clarin, the country’s leading media company, to sell off many of its properties.

“The initiative is moderate and democratic,” said Sen. Miguel Angel Pichetto, a ruling party leader, during nearly 20 hours of uninterrupted debate that ended Saturday morning. “It allows for companies to have an adequate position, but not a dominant one.”


David Zirin, The Nation, The NFL Must Flush Rush

National Football League owners could be on the verge
of a catastrophic error in judgment. In a league that
is 70 percent African-American, an unapologetic racist
is in talks to buy a team. Yes, Rush Limbaugh, along
with St. Louis Blues owner Dave Checketts, is close to
buying the St. Louis Rams. In 2003 Limbaugh infamously
lasted less than a month as an NFL commentator on ESPN
after saying the Philadelphia Eagles’ Donavon McNabb
was overrated because the media wanted to see a black
quarterback succeed.

Limbaugh said to KMOX radio, “Dave and I are part of a
bid to buy the Rams, and we are continuing the process.
But I can say no more because of a confidentiality
clause in our agreement with Goldman Sachs.” So Rush
Limbaugh, champion of East Coast elite-bashing, is in
financial cahoots with bailout world champion Goldman


The author talks about how a plague of positive thinking is permeating our society, from medicine to business, and is even contributing to our financial crisis.


This so-called “NASA experiment” is a hostile act of aggression and a violent intrusion upon our closest and dearest celestial neighbor. Does any love song or poem or fairy tale worth its salt not mention the Moon? Who can take a walk in the Moonlight with a lover and not feel the romance to your very soul? At night, when the Moon rules, we sleep, and we can visit the Moon in our sleep with ease. The Moon is our night light, our blanket, our grandmother, our mother—it is woman, child, domestic life, tides, bodies of water, liquids, circulation, comfort, nurturing, paintings by Remedios Varo,
stories by Jules Verne, and so much more….

We need to communicate to the Moon. Talk to her in our dreams, trances, or meditations, and prepare her for this shock and wound as best we can…

We pledge solidarity with the Moon and promise we will do everything that we can to help heal her and to prevent any further such stupid, short-sighted, self-serving, man-made acts of obscene violence against her.


Bear in mind that many Native Americans do not mark it as a holiday of ethnic pride. but a time of shame and humiliation.

Comments to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  

Share this post...

Submit to DiggSubmit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
back to top