Feeling grateful to the Bush administration is a rare experience. But sometimes the White House can do something right, even if for the wrong reasons. The administration’s gift to the nation was to openly attack journalists. “[M]ore than any other White House in history, Bush’s has tried to starve, mock, weaken, bypass, devalue, intimidate, and deceive the press,” David Remnick… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (9)Page 1 of 1 pages“not even in the war on terror”
The way I spot an author of worth vs. a worthless flak is in their take on Bush’s “war on terror.”
A useless pundit merely repeats the phrase, as in the above, “not even in the war on terror...”
A serious thinker does not regurgitate the official myths without qualification. If I were to even acknowledge the presumed existence of this alleged “war on terror,” it would certainly be pointed out as a novelty concept, not something I subscribe to, myself, and wholly suspect and in dispute as a legitimate terminology.
Mr. Allen, who believes government assistance of the 9-11 attacks has no legitimate evidence to support it, and so must be on “faith,” seems to swallow the Bush mythology about a “war on terror” without thought, without qualification, and without any real investigation.
I’d rather read professor Chossudovsky’s grocery lists than any more of Allen’s limited hangout claptrap:
‘Al-Qaeda is a U.S.-sponsored Intelligence Asset used to Justify War in the Middle East: Interview with Michel Chossudovsky
The Use of 9/11 as a Pretext to Wage War
Posted by johndoraemi on Jul 20, 2006 at 6:40 PM JOHN
In a classic case of misdirection, a president who undermined national security by illegally taking this country to war, by condoning torture, by violating the Constitution and by destroying the world’s goodwill is attacking the New York Times for “put[ting] our citizens at risk.”
I too would have prefered to see “"""""" war on terror “""""" !
“Seems to swallow” .......? think ?
She has written 14 articles here. The first 12 I agreed with.
No 13 wa 911faith, and now this .On 911Faith , we have discussed various interpretations of this “limited hangout “ stuff ------ but , whatever the article, at least it provides a forum for a real debate ?
more later, must work.....
Posted by frog on Jul 21, 2006 at 1:38 AM Ms Allen,
Why don’t you just admit that there is no War On Terror, just a War Of Terror and it is being perpetrated by the NeoCon Corporatocracy beginning with their opening act on 9/11.
Posted by Rabbit on Jul 21, 2006 at 5:35 AM It seems that the point of this article has been lost. “War on Terror”, War of Terror”, War on Terrorism”.....This article is not about a “War on Terminolgy”, it’s about the obvious break down of the free press. I agree with Ms. Allen’s point of view. The members of the press have, for the most part, done their master’s bidding and they have still been reprimanded for it. Maybe this new attack by the Bushies will be the wake up call and the good, swift kick in the pants the media need to start doing their job again.
Posted by TakeInAPlay on Jul 24, 2006 at 4:06 PM Well Rabbit, at least you know Terry isn’t a “right winger” now. I think I told you so.
Whatever disagreements she may have with the decision to go to Iraq, and the contention that the NYT has needlessly and gleefully exposed classified information regarding our efforts to track and identify terrorist activites, I doubt she agrees with your fringe view.
I doubt she agrees with Michael Moore when he says: “There is no terrorist threat.”
Terry?
No politician in this country is going to get elected to any national office on that sort of stance on national security. I doubt in yours either.
Posted by Natalie on Jul 24, 2006 at 9:24 PM Natalie don’t please bore me with your kindergarten left wing/right wing analogies.
We are progressed beyond such childish antics you and your rabbit.
Rabbits don’t fly despite their inestimable beauty and grace, and Bats don’t make good pets due to their odd behaviour and dirty habits.
Posted by Rabbit on Jul 25, 2006 at 6:20 AM natalie, allen’s remarks are feeble. and you are feeble -minded.
Posted by dougshaeffer on Jul 25, 2006 at 3:54 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Terry J. Allen
- Cancer: Cause and Defects
- Regulating Good Government
- Paving the Road to Hell
- High Court May Immunize Big Pharma
The FDA's new "preemption" doctrine jeopardizes consumers' right to sue for drug-caused injuries - Change We Can Reasonably Assess
- McCain’s Aches and Pains
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
