December 3 , 2001

Note: The BuzzFlash Mailbag is updated on an ongoing basis, with the newest material and comments on top. Again, we can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. Thanks again for your email and your patience.

If you haven't seen this article from today's NY times, I suggest you post it on your web sites. In addition, I recommend the segment from last weekend's On the Media from WNYC dealing with the 700% increase in hits on UK news sources since the WTC attacks. It shows that some of us, at least, are eager for decent news coverage. (If you can obtain a print copy, it would be excellent for those of us who don't have the patience, or sometimes the capability, to listen to web audio.)

Sincerely,

Elaine Shinbrot

Fox Portrays a War of Good and Evil, and Many Applaud
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/03/business/03FOX.html

Dear Buzz,

RE: The Right minded news media

Here I am, sitting at the PC keyboard lamenting over the subject coverage of cable new television. It seems that every now and then they will throw some news stuff against the wall, and as long as it sticks, they will continue to cover it. Some of it has been clinging to the walls for a long, long time. Lately it appears that something additional has been added to the clinging wall news reporting. Added adhesive apparently has been mixed into the news favoring the present administration. I am now convinced that during this period of revenge for the New York tragedy, many questionable activities go unreported. Even if President Bush were to be engaged in activities that would even embarrass ex President Clinton's sexual exploits, the event most likely go unreported. The right leaning media would just sweep it under the rug.

Another news concern of mine is about the few Black's that are being interviewed on television, and the way the nearly 100 percent White media chooses them. It is likely that 90 percent of Blacks will vote democratic in elections, but do you ever see a Black male in any of their television interviews that are democratic? Where do they find these people? Do they hang out around the broadcast stations, with a sign around their necks, that reads choose me because I'm an anomaly?

Have you been keeping tabs on the interview discussions themselves? I mean the ones where they have people from both the left and the right. If you have noticed, as I have, it is always the republican who is in the studio, and the democrat that is on the teleprompter. Often the hook up to the TelePrompTer is so badly wired that the democratic response cannot be heard. The person in the studio always has the advantage over the person in using the prompter. This is a clever method of appearing fair to their audience, without being fair at all.

Another beef I have is with the yelling of foul play by the far right zealots. You and I can watch the daily news coverage and get different views on how the news is reported. That wouldn't be too unusual. If you were really to keep score however, you will find that there are both many more republicans doing interviews and more republicans views being expressed by the networks than that of the Democrats. No matter how far they are ahead in the advantage column, the zealots yell loud and clear as to how liberal the media is. Contrary to what you might think. The media does nothing to expel the notion. Do you really have to wonder why?

Yes, they first choose what they will throw at the wall, and if it sticks with their formula, they will run it over and over. If Gary Condit were a republican, they would not have added the secret ingredient. Only the October 11th bombing was able to shake it loose from the wall. They, the media, also use the political exposure tricks to great advantage. They do this with the thought that no one is noticing, and apparently few are, or someone would be saying something about it. It certainly won't be mentioned on cable news.

What is that secret ingredient made of? My bet is money. Who is making money by slanting the news? Who owns the news networks? Another question is who would give them money for slanting the news? Big corporations you say, and now to the last one final question. Why would corporations want to give money to slant the news towards the republican agenda?

Richard Cross, who enjoys your to the point news coverage.

From VoterMarch:

WE HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN - EVENTS HIGHLIGHTING THE ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT DECISION IN BUSH V. GORE which stopped the legal hand count of votes in the Florida election by a partisan and unethical 5 Court majority of conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justices.

WASHINGTON DC:

Dec. 1O, Mon., 7 PM, Election Forum
Democrats.com is sponsoring a forum to bring together authors of books about the 2000 election and its aftermath. The event will be held at the Kay Spiritual Life Center on the American University campus in Washington. More information about the event including a map of the AU campus may be found at http://www.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=250

Dec. 12, Wed. - East Front Capitol Steps, 1:00 pm to 5:00 PM
"We Have Not Forgotten - Washington DC"

Protest the one year Anniversary of the partisan US Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. Protest rally to be held at the East Front Capitol Steps, directly across from the United States Supreme Court, and will include march along the US Supreme Court sidewalk. Bring your signs and placards. No formal speakers schedule. Cosponsored by Voter March and Citizens for a Legitimate Government. For additional information, click on http://www.votermarch.org/Dec12WashDC.htm

NEW YORK CITY:

Dec. 12, Wed., 6:00 PM to 8:30 PM, Great Hall at Cooper Union,

Speakers forum sponsored by Democrats.com and cosponsored by Voter March. Distinguished list of speakers. For more information and to purchase tickets, for Rising from the Ashes: Towards Democratic Victories in 2002 and 2004, click on http://www.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=251

"WE Have Not Forgotten - New York City"
Dec. 12, 9:00 PM until ......@ Walker Stage, 56 Walker Street, Tribeca

Following the Democrats.com speakers forum at Cooper Union, Voter March will sponsor a reception and film festival at Walker Stage. Featuring the new documentary film of Vincent Bugliosi and Greg Palast at the Voter March - New York City event in July 2001 "Election 2000: The Stolen Presidency." Admission is free! Cash bar for beer, wine and soda. For more information, click on http://www.votermarch.org/Dec12NYC.htm

CALIFORNIA:

Dec. 9., Sun., COSTA MESA, CALIF. 1:00 PM, PROTEST RALLY

Patriotic Pro-Democracy rally and march in Costa Mesa at the South Coast Plaza for about 2-3 hours. For more information and updates, click on http://home.earthlink.net/~mhrichter/index.html

Dec. 12., Wed., OAKLAND, CALIF., 5 p.m., VIGIL

Vigil in front of the Federal Building, 1301 Clay, Oakland, CA, to remember the day the Supreme Court nullified our votes. Sponsored by Voter March West. For additional info., click on
http://www.voterwest.org/a-wake-for-democracy.html

Dec. 12., SANTA ANA, CALIF., 6:00 PM, CANDLE LIGHT VIGIL and MARCH

Santa Ana Federal Building to the Ronald Reagan Federal Courthouse. For more information and updates, click on http://home.earthlink.net/~mhrichter/index.html

Voter March One Year Anniversary Special:

Voter March was formed on November 14, 2000 in the wake of the Florida election debacle. To celebrate our One Year Anniversary, we are offering a special package consisting of two combined J20 counter-inaugural video tapes, the official Voter Rights March T-Shirt, the Democracy Chronicle inaugural issue, two Voter March bumper stickers and three Voter March buttons. All for only $25, including postage and handling. For more information and to order the Anniversary Special, or to order individual Voter March T-Shirts, buttons, bumper stickers and video tapes, click on http://www.votermarch.org/merchandise.htm

Dear Buzz,

For the first time I watched The O'Reilly Factor because Ariann Huffington was on. They also had an interview with the head of jetBlue Airlines. O'Reilly was complimenting them on being one of the few airlines who were making money and not losing it. During the interview the subject came up about the "giveaway" to the airlines and David Neeleman, the CEO, said they would receive approximately 20 million dollars. All this and a profit too. It makes one want to cry.

Phyllis Pircher

Dear BuzzFlash,

This is the best: Lee Brown is thanking many, many Dems for their help. Someone from the crowd yells: "Thank Bill Clinton!" The crowd cheers wildly. Lee Brown grins--big--and says "Indeed. Thank you, Bill Clinton!"

Liz

Dear Buzz,

The Bush/Ashcroft Tribunals are nothing new, they just dusted off old Judge Roy Bean of West Texas - "Give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em". Gawd, how that Georgie boy loves his history.

Besides, who knows whether a citizen is being tried before a tribunal? Strange things happen when power operates without democratic supervision or restraint. See Argentina and the "Disappeared Ones". And the penalty for an error in Tribunal Justice is . . .and for whom . . .?

H. M. Boruck
Bend, OR

Dear Buzz,

I've seem many posters and letter writers on this site and others who question the military state/ civil rights suppression invoked in this country since 9/ll (actually since Jan. 20th, 200l; the inauguration day of our illegitimate president).

The quote begins, "At first they came for the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew, so I didn't protest..."

Well, finally I've found the full quote and its author, as follows:

Pastor Niemller (Anti-Nazi Resistance Movement):

"First they came for the Jews, but I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade-unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade-unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I did not speak out because I was not a Catholic. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me." (1939)

Jo Ann Simon

Dear BuzzFlash,

Having lived under the Nazis for a time, I know a police state when I see one. And now I see one her!The Nazis spied on certain groups -religious and otherwise-as well as on families. Now we are sliding down this slippery slope right here! Cameras on street corners, bugged telephones, racial profiling, negating civil rights, searches ---soon, there will be no rights left to defend! This man Ashcroft is most dangerous and must be stopped!

Gustav A. Pohlig

Buzz,

I thought you might be interested in this little scenario I put together using what might be called a tightly focused reading of the authority Bush gave himself in his executive order:

Here is a selective quote from the Bush executive order definition:

"The term 'individual subject to this order' shall mean any individual who is not a United States citizen with respect to whom I determine from time to time in writing that:
(1)there is reason to believe that such individual at the relevant time...
(ii)has engaged in, aided or abetted, or conspired to commit...acts..that have caused, threaten to cause, or have as their aim to cause, injury to or adverse effects on the United States...economy...."

Here is a quote from a Wall Street Journal story of 11/30:

"The trading system's shutdown came in the wake of disclosures that Enron's directors and top officers approved a series of partnerships that moved debts off the company's balance sheet. In several cases, those partnerships enriched company officers but later produced huge losses for Enron.

That kind of "balance-sheet abuse" says Goldman Sachs analyst Jonathan Raleigh, might now "reduce overall liquidity and cause lenders to tighten credit standards" for the entire energy-trading industry. The result could be the kind of supply squeezes that led to six days of blackouts in California earlier this year."

So, we have "acts that have caused adverse effects on the United States economy..."

Now the question is, were non-U.S. citizens involved?

Quoting from the Enron 2000 annual report, there appear to be two candidates on the board of directors:

RONNIE C. CHAN (2, 3)
Hong Kong
Chairman, Hang Lung Group

JOHN WAKEHAM (2, 5*)
London, England
Former U.K. Secretary of State for Energy
and Leader of the Houses of Lords and Commons

Let the tribunals do their duty.

- Jack Minnis

Dear Buzz,

Apparently, too many people were reading Krugman's quite truthful columns on Bush, so he's now off the Sunday watch. Big surprise.

December 2, 2001

By THE NEW YORK TIMES

Beginning today, Thomas L. Friedman's column will appear
Sundays and Wednesdays. Paul Krugman's column will appear
Tuesdays and Fridays, as will Nicholas D. Kristof's column,
which begins later this month. The schedule for other
columnists will remain unchanged.

Link to New York Times

Sent to NYTimes:

I noticed you took Paul Krugman off the Sunday edition. I guess he told the truth about the Bush administration a few too many times to a few too many readers. Of course, that "justifies" relegating his excellent columns to less a conspicuous day than the Sunday edition.

The fact you moved his column completely proved the point Krugman made in "An Alternate Reality". If a journalist dares to stray from the party line and criticizes the powerful at the wrong time, he WILL be punished. Krugman is being punished for speaking the truth to a large Sunday audience.

SHAME ON YOU, NY TIMES. SHAME, SHAME.

M E Buccieri

Dear BuzzFlash:

What a joy it is to read your website everyday. I hope next year I will be able to contribute again soon. I just want Buzzflash to know about a letter I received in the mail from "Qwest", my internet server. I have until January 21, 2002, to switch from Qwest to
MSN; an agreement made between Bill Gates and Qwest! If I, like millions of other Qwest users do not change from Qwest to MSN or another server, I will be "automatically changed by Qwest to MSN!" I have no say so about my pass word or anything else. First, Judge Green does away with the Bell Systems: Second, Bill Gates has created a monopoly
and now Qwest is telling their user they will no longer allow "personal computers user" to have Qwest as Internet server provider? Qwest are keeping people who use Qwest Internet server for business and home office use only. That is okay. If I am forced to change it means I cannot use Netscape, which I like. I am being force to change all
because of Bill Gates, Qwest, and I will say the Justice Department and the FCC. This is wrong! Qwest has gotten so big that they do not care about anyone except profit just like that idiot who is sitting in the White House. Big Business only! Everyday the true American people born and raise in this country our losing our rights more and more.

Thank you BuzzFlash for letting me to tell you about Qwest & Bill Gates.

A. Carlson
Helena, MT

Hey Buzzflash,

I submitted a question for the 20/20 interview: I asked if Bush's oil company, Arbrusto, got money from a member of the bin Laden family. (as if...) Maybe if enough of us rattle the cage we can get a real question asked at the softball tournament.

Wally Carr

Dear Buzz,

Fwd: I Sent these questions To ABC New's Ask the President and First Lady

1. Now that the Rosy Economic forecasts that you have used to pass your Taxcut have proved to be fuzzy math (False)

You used a $4.6 trillion surplus projected by the Congressional Budget Office back on Tuesday, October 3, 2000 in your speech Setting The Record Straight - Part 1

My tax cut plan reserves $1 trillion in new money for Social Security over five years - and $2 trillion over the next 10 years

A) Is that money still reserved ??

B) Why should the Tax cut not be repealed in light of the FACT that America has now moved from multi year Surpluses to multi year Deficits.

Now that the Social Security lockbox has been totally raided. Why should Average Americans be willing to give up their social security money to finance this War on terrorism when the Top 1% of wage earners do not need to give up their tax cut?.

2. Why do you continue to tell the American people. "We are at War" when in fact the US has not issued a declaration of war.

Without a declaration of war. How long are American troops allowed to remain/fight in Afghanistan? or elsewhere.

3. Why are you and John Ashcroft bypassing congress in your effort to dismantle our constitution and Bill of rights. Is it not true that you both have sworn to uphold and protect our constitution?

4. Why are you trying keep President Reagan's administration's papers secret. Why are your own records in regards to your governership in Texas now off limits. What are you trying to hide ??

5. Is it true
A)That the moonies paid for (in any way) the G.W Bush 2001 inauguration.
B)That Rev Moon was a guest of VP George Bush at the Reagan Inauguration.
C) Is it true your father was paid over $100,000 for his Moonie Buenos Aires appearance.
D) That the Moonies have made great inroads into buying the Christian Conservatives and Republican party
E) Its interesting that your sex education plan of abstinence neatly coincides with the Moonie philosophy. Would the Moonies be eligible to receive money from the government under your faith based initiative plan.

6. please explain the following statements that you have made.
A) There should be a limit on freedoms
b) A Dictatorship would make it a lot easier
c) You can fool some of the people all of the time , and those are the one's I'm interested in.

7. Why are you breaking your promise on aid to New York.

8. With the release of the consortium NORC data that shows that if all of the votes had been counted, Al Gore would be President. And that the only reason you were sworn into office is because your campaign adamantly refused to count all of the votes.

Why are you pushing right-wing policies that are not favored by the majority of Americans, as if you have a Mandate?

How can you look Americans in the eye and say "Your vote counts"?

Tim
Gardner , Mass

Dear BuzzFlash,

I have been curious about something for a while, and now that we have been talked into a recession, I started to do a little digging.

I was stunned when, in December, bush suddenly said he was concerned about a looming recession. As far as I could remember, this was the first he had mentioned it. So far, my research has proven me right. The only "recession" bush alluded to was an "education recession".

Guess who did talk about a recession, in great detail? Al Gore. Here is an excerpt from a Houston Chronicle article, Section A, Page 1; Saturday, August 5, 2000; Republican Convention 2000 / GOP keeps momentum at full steam / To Gore, it's hot air; by Kim Cobb:

"...Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore charged Thursday that Republican opponent George W. Bush's Social Security and economic plans are a recipe for recession. Bush countered saying Gore is trying to scare the elderly into voting Democratic..."

Just thought that in light of the fact that the "r" word is now being used, we should remember who warned us that the bush policies would bring the economy to its knees.

Liz

Buzz,

RE: "The 680 Illegal Votes of Bush's Electoral Crime and How The NY Times Misleads"

Can you do anything with that headline? I just made it up, but it seems to describe the content of the "Gore Vidal on the New York Times" link you posted.

The article is so great...parsing, graph by giraffe, the distortions of both the Times and Bushites...illustrating how the Truth got buried at the bottom, beneath an edifice of misleading headlines and leading paragraphs.

I think Mr. Vidal's efforts should be better rewarded on your page. But alas, I also think you (and I) should also be better rewarded. Thanks for posting it. You are the man...

Kind regards,
Dave Beckwith
Charlotte

Hi, Buzz:

Just as it is a contradiction in terms to say "compassionate conservative", how can one tell if the normally berserk Dick Armey goes berserk?

Your friend,

Liz

Dear BuzzFlash:

Congratulations everyone - I'm so delighted to hear those well deserved contributions are going your way. You people do such a wonderful job and work so hard, it would be impossible for you not to succeed.

I for one am very grateful to you - I would feel lost if I didn't have your website to turn to. So many of my friends and family are so apathetic about what is happening to our Country - I know I bore them when I rant on & on, so mostly I just shut up. When I log on to your site, I realize I'm not nuts -- others feel just as strongly as I do and believe me -- that is a comfort.

Your interview with Gene Lyons was awesome. Isn't he great? I have been a big fan of his for years and hope he stays around a long, long time.

Have to tell you -- when I received your T shirt I never looked at the back. When my dear husband put it on I laughed so hard when I saw the Wall St. Journal quote on the back. It is too funny.

Again congratulation on a job well done.

Regards,
Marlene Wagner

Dear Buzz,

Thank you. Oh, thank you!

I'm one of those people who searched for news BEFORE 9/11/01. Your site has been linked to mine for about a year now.

Since 9/11, I've been greatly impressed with the selection and speed incorporated by Buzzflash to cover the news.

You've saved me hours, if not days, of searching the Net for important news about current events, many of which will be turned into pages for my website.

While I continue to refer to my other news sources, Buzzflash remains my first stop.

Thank you!
Morgana

Dear BuzzFlash,

After two months of the shrub administration screaming about foreign terrorists spreading anthrax through our postal system, I found it to be very strange that Ashcroft referred to Waagner as a "warrior" in the pro-life war. What happened to "terrorist"? Ashcroft finally receives enough political prodding to begin investigating the years of threats against abortion (women's health care) clinics and now the terminology must change to suit his views? I hope that every Democrat who sat back on his confirmation will realize what their passiveness has unleashed on this country.

Peace,
Midge

Dear BuzzFlash,

Submitted to the ABC site:
---
please ask Mr. Bush, "As someone who once proclaimed "I trust the people, not the government", how can you justify sealing the presidential papers from public view? After all, if "It's Your Money", shouldn't you be proclaiming "It's Your Papers" too!

And if he responds with some inane "National Security" response, ask him how he feels about the quote by Abraham Lincoln, "I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts."

Thank you for your consideration.

Dave Jahns
Portland, OR

Hi Buzz,

Your site is my salvation. In your mail box an article entitled - Remember the Clinton Administration? Was posted. I truly believe everything Cathy said is just so true and have tried to put it in writing several times but each time have scrapped it because it just never sounded right -- but Cathy did a wonderful job of expressing my exact thoughts & I wish I could personally thank her.

When the economy was booming, during the last two years President Clinton was in office, Alan Greenspan raised the interest rates over and over. His reasoning was the economy was growing too quickly and Companies simply could not find people to work for them.

OF COURSE THEY COULD FIND PEOPLE TO WORK FOR THEM, THE HITCH WAS:

They actually had to pay a fair and decent wage.
They actually had to provide good health care benefits for their employee and family.
They actually may have had to provide a perk or two, such as stock options, etc.

Now, this was unacceptable and Cathy is correct, the common guys were just getting too big for their britches -- things had to be made right again. The Employers had to get richer. Employees must be made grateful to even have a job, benefits or not. Corporate America needed to get back the correct balance -- the rich get richer, the middle class just barely hang in there and the poor, well keep them poor as those minimum wage workers really come in handy. And by the way, an election was nearing and the economy, for the sake of our Republican buddies, simply had to be showing a slight decline so those increased interest rates became an important factor in that respect also.

The common guys also discovered the NASDAQ - entrepreneurship was the name of the game. Over & over Greenspan stated it was overvalued -- so did the big shots in the stock world like Abbey Lowell. So, of course, the bottom dropped out and how many common guys lost everything? How many, if they could, would ever have the nerve to enter that privileged world again?

So much of what President Clinton worked so hard to accomplish has been thrown to the wind. Cathy's last statement: Let's face it. In 11 short months the common Joes have been put in their places and it looks suspiciously by careful design. I couldn't agree more. Don't mean to sound like a broken record but again, I would like to ask, where has my Democratic party been?

Thanks again for your wonderful site.

Regards,
Marlene W.

Dear Buzz,

On Thursday I was intrigued to see a post in BuzzFlash that asked if FreeRepublic.com may be in trouble. I clicked on the link and was taken to a discussion thread on the FreeRepublic.com site, titled "Is Free Republic A Fraud? Is It Time For Free Republic To Go Away?" Dozens of panicked freepers were offering contributions, suggesting monthly access fees, and the like. One even offered to buy the site.

Having heard that "freepers" delete users that offer dissenting opinions, I decided to give it a try. I established the screen name "Equal_Protection_My_Ass" and posted on the board, and several freepers were responding to me. Most just called names. One told me the dems were cooked, and I pointed out no republican had unseated a democrat in a major election during 2001. I was pulled away from my exchanges by other commitments, but intended to return Friday.

I attempted to log in Friday morning, but to no one's surprise, my posting privileges had been revoked. I looked for the discussion thread from Thursday regarding FreeRepublic.com's demise, and it was gone. However a new thread had popped up, something to the effect of "Now the rest of the story...FreeRepublic is here to stay". The head freeper explained the prior thread was just to "call out" enemies. The same freepers that had been duped by the previous thread were now thanking the powers-that-be for staying around.

I found it quite curious none were taken aback by the deception, and I wondered how much money had been sent as a result of the phony Thursday thread. Then again, they are repugs, so they probably admired the sham.

Michael Pickney

Dear BuzzFlash,

Just want to tell you all (whoever you are) what an invaluable source of information you have become in my home. I check your site several times a day for the latest news . You are doing an outstanding job!

T.Friedman
Glen Cove,NY

Dear Buzz,

(From Is Our Children Learning) Bush said it in 1998.

He said it on December 18, 2000.

Was it in the summer of 2001 that he said it again?

Yvone Provencher

Dear BuzzFlash,

Well, it looks like Al Gore was right again.

The tax cuts Bush wanted for the wealthy have proven to be a "Risky Scheme" that has driven us straight into deficits which we now know will last BEYOND Bush's first term and are seriously jeopardizing Medicare and Social Security.

As much as Gore was ridiculed for calling Bush's tax cuts to the wealthy a "Risky Scheme", he was dead right. Gore also warned us about how unexpected emergencies could change everything, which is why he argued for keeping a "contingency fund."

Well, we all know what Gore and other Democrats said in 2000 about the budget is completely correct. The question is, why aren't Democrats saying that before we undertake yet another risky tax cutting scheme?

Anne Wharton