Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of a kind you don´t get to see too often
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
  
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
 RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Piwin)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Piwin
So, I've been looking into both Panama and Paradise papers a bit more in-depth.
Each of them represent over 10 million documents...which seems like the most sensible answer as to why it took time to process and publish...Even with a team of over 300 journalists, that's still a hell of a lot of documents to analyze, cross-reference with other databases, etc. etc.
I haven't checked for the other news organization, but at least Le Monde was thorough enough to cross-reference all of these documents with the information they had on their own shareholders so they don't seem to have been particularly shy about denouncing those involved.
As for the issue of bribery you hint at, my guess is that it's simply outside the scope of the investigation. If there was bribe money involved, all the documents showed is what happened to that money once it was syphoned off to tax havens, but they didn't provide any hard evidence for where the money came from in the first place. An investigation into bribery would have to be a different investigation altogether and the sources required for that would probably not be a financial institution in some tax haven somewhere.
Yes, agreed. That is in accordance with what I was pointing at.
There is total ignorance of the entirely obvious. At the very latest in view of politicians.
I guess one could be asking any 8-year old. Politicians-> offshore account ->?
In fact it starts with the source already. Why would the list contain no sender?
Over here such is common (position at Transparency International: 182 or so), you can´t decipher where money came from. In Germany however any banks protocol lists source of incoming amounts, and I assume that to be pretty much banking standard.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 11 2017 9:36:40
 |
|
Piwin
Posts: 3559
Joined: Feb. 9 2016
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
In fact it starts with the source already. Why would the list contain no sender?
I guess you'd have to look into the nature of the documents that were leaked. It wasn't as simple as a list of financial transactions from one entity to another. The way I understand it, most of it is about shell companies set up with an individuals own funds. So the "sender" in that case would just be the individual trying to evade taxes. If there was bribery or if money changed hands at some point, it would have happened further upstream and these documents here wouldn't have allowed you to ascertain it. It's just outside the scope.
It just sounds weird to accuse journalists of not having looked into bribery in this specific investigation when the raw material they were working on didn't cover that. To me it's rather a good sign that they'd stick to the information they did have and what that proved, instead of going on a limb and speculating about which cases involved bribery and which didn't.
quote:
Fine.
You must have reason for considering common decisions against people´s health and interests as eventually plausible.
Care to explain how that could be looking like?
I think there's a wide variety of potential reasons behind that. And yes, in some cases, sheer greed might be the answer.
But that wasn't the point. The point is that saying "I can't think of any other reason therefore what I'm proposing must be true" isn't a good way of determining the truth. And the way to determine whether what you're saying is true or not is not to compare with something else and see if your theory is more likely than mine. My theory is irrelevant to whether yours is true or not. It has to stand on its own merit.
I've said elsewhere that I've worked with people getting out of religion, and one argument you hear often from those who still cling to religious beliefs is that: "yes, but if it's not god, what else explains it?" Well I don't have to have an answer to that. "I don't know" is a perfectly good answer. And the same happens here. Your claim seems to be along the lines that there is some sort of global shadow world" comprising the rich and powerful and that pretty much all ills of contemporary times can be traced back to corruption. I happen to disagree with that but I don't need to be able to provide an alternative explanation for all the ills of the earth to be able to justify that disagreement. I just don't find the evidence compelling. That doesn't mean I have any other explanation to offer. But even if I did, and you deemed that my explanation was unlikely, that wouldn't preclude the possibility that were both wrong.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 12 2017 0:20:27
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
Where did I say that journalists didn´t look for bribery? I said that the option of bribe is unanimously held exclusive from matter of Panama and paradise papers. That makes for two different things.
Nor did I say that journalists should speculate on individual politicians´ sponsors.
Instead that it would be the most natural thing to consider bribery too when politicians entertain offshore deposits. That again makes for two different things.
A preference of fading out principle and sticking to single items, shouldn´t be meaning that you would distort statements.
If you think it improper to mention the eventuality of bribe money, then cash laundry and tax evasion shouldn´t be in the headlines either. Because of them so far being assumption as well.
-You know, like all being declared and taxed funds, brought out of sight because of greedy wives who regal too much on lavish designer stilettos.
Anyway, nice 1x1 emulating of a coherent string. A pinch of advanced rhetorics on top and one could apply for any reactionary party upwards from municipal level.
In pseudo sobriety elephant butts may be covered by paper fans of unspecific category, but the matter of presentation versus function, whether described by my own words or by the shade of yours, is not a virgin case example in a chamber of unknown parameter.
The sober painting might not sustain far enough for making use of hints, by I named an investigative archive covering decades and partially centuries of socio-economical reality we are living with. Not really occasional exceptions within pure authenticity of power and leadership, but plethora of cases of a systematic whole that has essentially nothing of equality and democracy, but oligarchy and plutocracy.
If ever interested into reading up about a whole German parliament on the payroll of one single man (and how everyone can keep following their career after revelation, nonetheless. -That was really quite a bold thing. I was expecting at least some tender puppet show, but played was merely the defer & fade-into-picadillo vanilla), make a search for the Flick affaire. If interested into matters of buying off of partial and whole parliaments in the EU look for a report series on cocaine cartels. Read on the largest coup in German history with the re-uninion cockaigne. Still not enough of sacking in, afterwards the creaming off of over 90% of German states property. See about the background, instigations and kickbacks with dissolving of the Eastern Block, next about fillings with expansion of the EU, and then on and on and on.
"Some cases", yeah.
Ever going sorts of 'business' constantly in place day after day, notwithstandingly though due to being only just single spots on the immaculate toadstool. National and global threadening, but it ought to be arrangement of just a few shady individuals, going unnoticed by a majority of guileless fellow politics and officials around. And that in realms where everyone is watching each other with Argus-eyes for to not lose out on opportunities. What steadfast sense off empirics and disclosures.
Funny firewall that is.
Since decades I have been trying to figure out how the psychological shielding looks like in methodical detail. And I thank you for having introduced me a little bit further into it.
Unfortunately, still nothing in sight for possibly cracking the mechanism though. Seems the snip after hypnosis ought to stay with the ecological collapse.
Yep, the regrets afterwards would supersede any intenseness of today´s and past dismissing; however, they won´t be worth a dime by then.
Fate likes to be ironic.
... And what if vice versa? If everything was love, piece and harmony twenty years from now? With things run pretty optimally / the world´s community in best shape feasible? If I turned out as totally missing ignorant aluminum hat?
It would be my pleasure to be thrown at with rotten tomatoes on a public stocks. Dancing after techno crap in underwear, or whatever could be entertaining to the distinguished moderates and their appropriate world-view. Only glad to have been erring. And me just wished anyway the very most of my past predictions had been wrong.
Hasta la vista.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 12 2017 14:16:25
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
My skepticism toward many conspiracy theories has probably been conditioned by living most of my life in a relatively open society. Contrast this with living in North Korea, The German Democratic Republic, or the Soviet Union as Larisa describes it to me.
U.S. reporters who go to North Korea often interview people who seem to be ordinary folks. Of course they may be specially vetted to interact with foreign reporters. Nonetheless, they manage to give the impression that they believe what they get from the state controlled media. Also we hear that North Korea has a relatively efficient security service, carefully monitoring a large number of individuals. A recent reporter visited a school. After he gave a short talk, he asked if there were any questions. An elementary school boy asked him why the USA wanted to start a war with North Korea. Again the boy may have been prompted, but the reporter thought it equally likely that he really believed it.
The East German Stasi was one of the most efficient intelligence services of modern times. I recall reading that a third of the population were Stasi informers, and that the Stasi had files on nearly everyone.
Larisa tells of people being denounced to the secret police just because somebody envied their apartment, getting the apartment as a reward.
Successful totalitarian regimes may be able to carry out large scale schemes in complete secrecy. Aleksandr Solschenytsin, despite his disparagement of the Soviet regime, notoriously said that Communism was ethically superior to capitalism in one respect. Its inefficiency made it less damaging to the environment. But Solschenytsin didn't know what the Soviets had done to the Aral Sea, nor other environmental disasters they perpetrated.
Contrast this with Mexico, which was ruled by a single party for 73 years. Though there was no escaping the PRI, there was a certain degree of press freedom. Other political parties were tolerated to some extent, as long as they didn't become too powerful. The average Mexican knew what was going on, disbelieved many of the falsehoods the government promoted, and was generally skeptical. But a significant factor in the downfall of the PRI was the exposure of one of their big lies.
Air pollution in Mexico City got worse and worse in the 1970s and 1980s. I remember a day when you couldn't see to the end of a city block, due to sulfur dioxide haze. I went home to Austin with a sore throat. The government insisted it was all due to automobiles and to poor people cooking on charcoal--nothing whatsoever to do with the big steel mills on the north side of town. Then came the 1985 earthquake. The steel mills were shut down for several days, but people still drove and cooked on charcoal. The air cleared up. The PRI was caught in a huge lie, and it went steeply downhill for them afterward.
In the USA information is pretty freely available, compared to dictatorships of one kind or other. Edward Snowden stole great numbers of National Security Agency documents, because the Agency trusts its employees and subcontractors after they have been vetted. There have been scandalous NSA leaks since Snowden.
During the first months of the Trump administration, the White House didn't just leak, it gushed sensitive information as factions jockeyed for power.
My 43 years of experience in the defense business, often at the highest levels of security, has made me incredulous of claims of large scale conspiracies conducted by the U.S. government. Stuff leaks, even from the most "secure" projects. People like to talk and there are many, many ways to do so without suffering serious consequences.
Of course there is political collusion. People in the oil and coal industries pay big sums to congressional election campaigns, and even bigger sums to lobbyists and tame "scientists" to dispute human agency in global warming. The Trump administration's attempts to sabotage the slowing of climate change, unopposed by Republicans in Congress, is not a secret conspiracy. Everybody who pays attention knows what those politicians are doing. It is a brazen power play, conducted quite openly. The same goes for the FCC's attack on net neutrality.
So I make two points. First, it takes a very efficient dictatorship to secretly perpetrate a large scale conspiracy. Second, one's tendency to believe or disbelieve in large scale conpiracies of any kind, secret or not, may well be influenced by whether they have lived under such a regime.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 14 2017 0:43:28
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
quote:
Contrast this with Mexico, which was ruled by a single party for 73 years. Though there was no escaping the PRI, there was a certain degree of press freedom. Other political parties were tolerated to some extent, as long as they didn't become too powerful.
The major factor in the PRI's lengthy rule without facing upheaval from the opposition was its ability to co-opt the opposition. Or to put it another way, the opposition's acceptance to being co-opted by the PRI. In this regard, the PRI offered a lesson to any group who wishes to rule but faces opposition.
An example in the US of a failure to include and attempt to co-opt perceived opposition was Hillary Clinton's attempt at health care reform during President Clinton's first term. Hillary assembled a team of like-minded reformers who all operated in secrecy. Her big mistake was she excluded the American Medical Association and other mainstream health-care professionals from the deliberations and design of the final product. The result, as we all know, was her plan went down in flames. Perhaps if she had included and attempted to co-opt the opposition she would have had better results.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 14 2017 2:57:16
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
quote:
Second, one's tendency to believe or disbelieve in large scale conpiracies of any kind, secret or not, may well be influenced by whether they have lived under such a regime.
Your observation above no doubt has some validity, but I would suggest it is problematical given the number of people in the United States who believe in conspiracies. Just note the number of believers in the absurd proposition that the United States government planned and executed the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Think about the number of people who took Oliver Stone's movie "JFK" to heart, believing that the military, the CIA, and other organs of the U.S. government conspired to kill President Kennedy. And many still believe it. Alien abduction, Area 51, chemtrails, and other such nonsense are serious topics of discussion and belief among a wide swath of conspiracy theorists in the U.S.
We have a president today who puts more faith in Vladimir Putin, Julian Assange and Wikileaks than he does in our own intelligence community. That's not necessarily a conspiracy, but it does demonstrate a tendency to believe the unbelievable. Not to mention the belief among many that the MMR vaccine causes autism, and that those who deny it are just shills for "Big Pharma."
I wish it were only those who lived under dictatorships who believed in such nonsense. Unfortunately, that does not seem to me to be the case.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 14 2017 3:17:09
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
See, now I don't know if you're just trolling or if you actually believe that anyone here thinks this...
Not trolling, Piwin.
People who prefer viewing establishment as authentic presentation of public interest, think that skeptics were ignoring clues of their perceived world, whereas we who see reign in the hands of networks and mafia are of the impression that sheepish majority was ignoring overwhelming clues to an opposite of democracy.
quote:
Political failure to act is just one aspect in their manifest (and corruption isn't mentioned anywhere in it so I suppose you'd have to accuse them of "ignoring the obvious too, just like the press, right?).
They mention that there is pressure required on politcians.
Why would that be? Because 4 decades of pretty obvious ecological and scientifical clues leading to the conclusion that pollution and ruinous exploitation won´t matter? Or maybe because of major parties staff being comprised of illiterates?
Only just not coincidence of pecuniary power odering behind the odd conviction, right. Shakespeare might have named it "As you like it".
That common phrase of "political failure" tends to raise my hair.
Whatever case of corruption, even those already investigated and legally proven, common sense will call it "failure" or "mismanagement".
The very most of high-caliber mismanagement however, -be it the classical waste and drain of states´ budget and property, or the classical private dodge when combine´s upper management outsources either actual service or even just nominal nada like "consultant services" without actual content to fellow brothers in crime or to stooges for kickbacks- ... or when subcontractors are being blackmailed to shed commission onto managers´and their surroundings´ private accounts, respectively letter-box companies, to then accept the respective sub´s delivery under overpriced conditions (both of last examples especially notorious in the automotive industry), are no mistaking at all. Instead successful conduct of very intended operations.
"Political failure". What do you make of the blatant elephant butt that reliably 'fails' to the benefit of industry and financial aristocracy? If it is "failing", why hardly ever to the benefit of pedestrians? What with those failings in tax rules that open a plethora of escapes for large budgets, but hardly any for small ones?
The failure of having tax offices allegedly being "understaffed", so that whole combines get away unchecked, whilst (surprise, surprise!) Joe average is being checked very reliably and meticulously at that?
What with failures that mean loaning back from privatiers at market interests what has been lent to them at nominal value in the first place? What with failure to mention subsidies in federal budget? Failure - ... no, resistance against fighting tax havens? Etc.pp.
Would your errors in math tests tend to result in values beyond (or alternatively below) correct number?
quote:
Take overpopulation for instance. How do you relate this to corruption in any way? Isn't it first and foremost a cultural and educational issue?
In that order, indeed. Corruption as primary, culture and education secondary.
Corruption in that the existence and effects of inhumane / undemocratic economics of exploitation and usury / price gauging are not allowed to surface in public perception, hence are assisted to prevail as 'just a choice of economizing'.
The largest gap through inhumane human source market however (affluent that is) is not opended in the industrial home countries, but in underdeveloped countries. These, having either been run down already historically or been of indigene / peasant civilisation, served as cockaigne of slavery-like labor conditions for mineral and agrarian resourcing. Extreme conditions of exploitation not only served the industrialized nations as profiteering pedestal, but left behind corresponding poverty with no social security and old-age pension to balance.
Before new age colonialism much of humbly living people in the Third World had sources of self-supply, which have been lost in the course of the new economy. Increased numbers of offspring essentially contributed to overpopulation, aimed as security for old-age pension, and again as counter measure against child mortality (give birth to some more as prohylaxis).
Without the western rising, backwarded cultural conditions alone, like male-prioritized child raising and religious call to give as much birth as possible for 'replacing infidels', would not had led to such an enormous demographic explosion that we have seen since mid last century.
-
Regimes of any kind can arrange large yet secret events. The propagandistic campaign during the Viertnam war is an example. (That wouldn´t become obvious throughout many years, inspite of so many diplomats and militaries witnessing actual whereabouts at the front.) Or the atrocities in Nevada, including purposeful exposing of soldiers and staff for to study secondary consequences of explosion or outfall.
Also during Cold War the majority of US-Americans who lived abroad were supposed to be briefed by the CIA. Still, there seem very little public releases in the sense of "My time as a spy in X-land" or such. And it seems not really far fetched that there ought to have been built huge construction projects for military purposes in USA that are secret none the less.
Just take the global net of those 100-m ø underground antennas which the USA used in countries abroad for to frisk electronic communication in the pre-digital times. Who in those countries would be aware of them? -And who would tell you about them at home in the US?
Just like with the looting of the German state´s silverware, on big scale launched under chancler Kohl. It needed a good measure of administrative assistance and hosts of people to have that rolling. Still, it gained as little of public attention as possible, and when fractions were mentioned, disguised as efficiency matter; in spite of any mediocre economist knowing better.
Under the "failure" and down-playing category also industrial bribing of politicians, which I addressed before.
quote:
A mental routine that after the fact gladly unhooks secret handings of cash-filled attaché cases as "party donation", of course not private bribe to the receiver. And if party treasurer can´t produce receipt, -accountary will have been sloppy.
If revealed, it always ends up as "donation to the party". (Really nice of politicans to spare donators the hazzles and to forward the money personally, innit?) Private enrichment? Nah, how could that ever be? Such would never come to mind, naturally.
Check out the procedures after the Flick affaire for bold example. How state and obliging courts would shove private recipience towards party donation. Not really necessary to prove receipt at the partie´s cashbox. Under buddies ...
I must be having an old shoe box full in the cellar with only just a tiny fraction of the most bold and unpunished cases of corruption and nepotism. It really is spectaculous to me how anyone above 72 IQ points, not to think of intelligent heads can fancy authenticity and democracy.
Leaving daily details aside: Without the rest of beings being remotely close to idle, we have reached to single individuals accumulating funds up to states´budgets. Reserving minorities who trample on the needs of the rest of the world, all blessed by constitutions and judidicary, and you believe in human rights, equality and democracy existing in the same time?
And how you imagine that states and officials could be staying immune against power of such mighty, that is the most unworldly of it all.
To withstand would take the utmost of idealism and integrity (which again would definitly yield an entirely different political agenda and operation from status quo). And you are of the impression that characteristics like the latter would be equaling your common poltical careerist? ... And that such sincere personality could be let through in the apparatus to start with?
See how the green party started in the German national parliament and think again.
PS:
I´ve mentioned it before on the foro. When the magazine "Fokus" (an actually conservative paper) started out, it estimated that about 60% of German NGP was falling prey to corruption. After all those years of informing myself, that appears like a realistic number to me. With probably most of national economies looking similar to that.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 14 2017 13:25:34
|
|
Piwin
Posts: 3559
Joined: Feb. 9 2016
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
Not trolling, Piwin.
It's just that I didn't get why you were presenting this recent manifest as somehow supporting your own worldview (as opposed to mine). I happen to agree with most of it and yet, as you've seen in this conversation, I don't agree at all with your diagnosis of the problem.
quote:
That common phrase of "political failure" tends to raise my hair.
And I'm starting to see why. Seems like pretty much everything means "corruption" to you, whereas I think corruption, political failure to act and mismanagement are three different concepts (that can intersect of course, but they're still different concepts). To take one example: mismanagement was when Sarkozy's administration tried to meld together several different social security organizations and just failed miserably (ah those were the days... one year I got taxed at almost 100% of my gross income because of that clusterf*ck!). Political failure to act was when the Hollande administration did absolutely nothing to remedy the situation despite the fact that they knew all SMEs were struggling to deal with the dysfunctional system the previous administration had created. And in that specific case, they managed just fine to make life hell for us, no corruption required. Nobody stood to gain from that situation. It was good idea gone terribly wrong followed by an administration who just didn't have the balls to spend its political capital on trying to do something about it.
quote:
blatant elephant butt
Seriously though, if you're located right in that unfortunate spot where the elephant's sh*t falls, then honestly you're probably in the worst place possible to be able to identify what kind of animal it is. I wouldn't blame anyone for mistaking an elephant's big gray wrinkled *ss for a rhino's gray wrinkled *ss. It is true though that most people use that tired trope of the five blind men touching an elephant without ever thinking of that poor guy who got the bad end of that deal!
quote:
What with those failings in tax rules that open a plethora of escapes for large budgets, but hardly any for small ones?
Well, there are plenty of problems with taxes, some of which are just technical. I come from a country where last year only 43% of households had to pay any income tax at all because the rest were below the taxable threshold. And the top 10% paid up to 70% of the total amount the State cashed in on income tax. Sure, there are plenty of reasons to complain about how the tax system is set up, but there are also some good things about it too.
The one that gets to me the most is VAT. 21% over here, irrespective of your socio-economic status. But anyways, I'm not even sure the loopholes are necessarily reserved for the rich. The thing is that if you're poor, you probably only have one type of income so the amount of loopholes are limited to that (plus you don't necessarily have the knowledge to use those loopholes). Rich people diversify and have many different sources of income, and the amount of loopholes just multiplies.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 14 2017 15:10:39
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
Bill, I call partisan obstruction. Clinton was attacked by a partisanship ploy. After repubs formulated a health care package and could not pass it. Later 2010 Senate Republicans secretly drew new district maps, voted them in quickly. Dems weren't able to oppose, they tactically won. Obama Care is a version of the same package repubs introduced after obstruction of Hillary's package, not secret, it was their own package from 20 years earlier. They obstructed.
Lesson, Gingrich started a partisan war. Blame's war on Clintons and Dems. McConnell inherited the war, perpetuates the bickering- also a factor, Congress members don't intermingle across party lines as they did in the pre Gingrich era when members of Congress still brought their families to DC- now Congress members only listen to singular regional voices of their own district. Bipartisan listening was torpedoed during the Clinton admin. Both Dems and repubs tried to stop it, but misogynist war against Hillary was too easy not to pass up by Gingrich faction. Shooting down her health plan was the shot over the bow that began the current partisanship war.
Hillary as collateral damage in a war that was already brewing, and since she was a bright outspoken woman she was as a great target for misogynist politicians.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 0:35:16
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
I don't deny anything you wrote about Republican partisanship against Hillary's plan, Stephen. But the fact still remains that Hillary chose her collaborators in designing her health care plan in 1993, and she did it behind closed doors, in secret, and stiff-armed any of the mainstream health organizations and individuals who might have been amenable had she attempted to include them in the deliberations and design of her plan. Had she widened her collaborators to include mainstream health care professionals she still might have failed to gain support. By excluding them she guaranteed failure.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 1:15:35
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Bill, you have presented a valid example to reflect upon, but I would also point out most policy is drafted in seclusion and then sent out to be modified during public review. An example would be the TPP, which was drafted in private, but foolishly rejected by populist Sanders faction without him emphasizing that it would later stand a six month review period. Now all the players have gathered from in Asia and had the TPP meeting and the Canadians we're there, meanwhile DJT is claiming he will unilaterally make deals on behalf of the US, and those deals will be made in secret. And out the window goes safety checks in trading which are built into the TPP. Trump and Sanders Hoodwinked the voters.
Moving on, DJT and Intel community- simple, he's not playing on our team, he's gone rouge and plays with his own groups which will benefit him. He's not on the American team, such as it is.
Oliver Stone is a phenomenal waste of money and celluloid.
Chemtrails, I have no problem with paranoid fools thinking it's teal, but please do not ever let these idiots teach any kind of school classes.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 2:22:52
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
But back to journalism. I have my own personal experiences with the U.S. version. I've no doubt written some of this here previously, but there are some newer members, so excuse me if I repeat myself.
I used to keep a copy of Scientific American magazine on the bookshelves near my desk. When someone would take the bait, I would say it was special. It had a feature article about the Space Surveillance Network. I would tell people it was the only article in the general press I had ever read about a project I was involved in, which did not contain serious errors of both fact and emphasis.
I was involved in a few projects which were headline news--that is headlines for people whose news intake was not exclusively about fake celebrities and the like. Almost all journalists in the general press--newspapers, TV, etc.--consistently got some important stuff wrong. Some specialist publications, like Aviation Week did pretty well. Their writers were technically educated, and cultivated and checked with well informed sources.
But even Scientific American made a more subtle mistake. It ran a series by Kostas Tsipis, a respected MIT professor. He would take a current project and say it was useless, because the enemy could defeat it using certain technology.
When I would occasionally run into him I would say, "Kostas, this is war--cold war, but war nonetheless. Of course technology X can be defeated by technology Y, but it will take our adversaries at least ten years to develop technology Y. Meanwhile, they are behind the eight- ball. Furthermore, technology Y can be defeated by technology Z, which is already crouched in our starting blocks, and will be ready in five years--five years before the other guys will have technology Y. In your articles time stands still, with us stuck at now, and the adversaries already at ten years from now. You're a scientist. You can understand this."
Then he would write another one, and Scientific American would publish it.
Later, at Kwajelein, I hosted for a week a New York Times photographer and a Washington Post reporter who were doing a book on strategic missile defense. I showed them around for an hour a day, and we would drink a little single malt and smoke a cigar at the beach in the evening. They were brilliant, hard working men, sincere in their efforts to portray the truth. On their last day they aked me to reconsider my refusal to be quoted or paraphrased, either on or off the record. "Richard," they said, "you have said some interesting things about this."
"But you have neither the space nor the conceptual buckets to contain what I think. So if you write your take on it, it won't be what my thoughts really are. So, no thanks."
When I was working I used to get my information first hand from technical intelligence collections, second hand from Soviet 'emigres' or third hand from the handlers of sources in the Soviet sytem. Now I read the newspapers, whose information has passed through an unknown number of unknown hands, and is subject to some of the most powerful distorting forces on the planet.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 4:37:13
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
Current example of "failure": 'Weak negotiation abilities' of national TV channel ARD, -as usual.
The tax financed channel ARD has been the major financier of 38 mio € for the new series "Babylon Berlin".
Minor contributors having been pay-tv channel Sky, and Beta Film who engages in the international distribution of the make. They have sold the production already to 60 countries where it will be aired on pay-tv as well as on free-tv. Beta is being said to about already amortize production costs.
Sky who just boradcasted the late production are cheering as well for millions of viewers.
"BB" is turning out enormously popular.
Only for the ARD gains remain uncertain, for them being bound to airing it first time at the end of 2018.
A series that is due to be aired and distributed internationally through minor private partners first, before German tax payers come to see it, confuses even the reporters. -At least those who havn´t yet realized differing facility of states´and privatier´s euros.
-
Self-evidently, there exist such and such qualities of reporting. The editorial that I gathered a vast of information from e.g., after right-winger and former minister of defense F.-J. Strauß´ attempt (before my reader times, naturally) to close down the publisher (and seize evidence, sue and arrest journalists) opened its own legal department, which since prophylactically double-checked about waterproof facts.
It doesn´t mean that there wouldn´t ever occur minor erring still in special subjects, -and definitely way more so today with the "new" adjustment to mainstream and intellectual decline-, but in their high-times and those investigative decades they just had to make sure about having their essential and specially political research and facts right. Always prepared to be called to court. After all they were under tightest lurk in history of the FRG, while in the same time, with officials as their main readers, far as could be from going unnoticed.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 10:39:46
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
the TPP, which was drafted in private, but foolishly rejected by populist Sanders faction without him emphasizing that it would later stand a six month review period. Now all the players have gathered from in Asia and had the TPP meeting and the Canadians we're there, meanwhile DJT is claiming he will unilaterally make deals on behalf of the US, and those deals will be made in secret. And out the window goes safety checks in trading which are built into the TPP. Trump and Sanders Hoodwinked the voters.
Moving on, DJT and Intel community- simple, he's not playing on our team, he's gone rouge and plays with his own groups which will benefit him. He's not on the American team, such as it is.
Oliver Stone is a phenomenal waste of money and celluloid.
You are spot-on regarding the TPP. The TPP would have been very good for the United States. Multi-lateral trade organizations like the TPP and NAFTA are good for everyone by lowering tariff barriers, opening up markets, and creating jobs. Good for business and good for consumers. The job losses due to trade agreements are minimal, as most job losses in the US over the last 30 years, particularly in manufacturing, have been due to automation and increased efficiency, not to so-called "off-shoring," as both Trump and Sanders wrongly claim.
If Trump were really puttijng "America First" he would embed the US in these trade deals instead of pulling out of multilateral trade agreements. We will lose platforms that give us influence. Instead, particularly in Asia, we are ceding the playing field to the Chinese. And Putin, who is no friend of the US but is much smarter than Trump, is playing Trump like a violin, and Trump doesn't even know it. Meanwhile he trashes our own intelligence community.
Historians thirty years from now will look back on this as one of the strangest periods of American history, a period in which we appear to have worked against our own best interests in practically every field of endeavor. "America First" indeed!
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 12:46:23
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Must-see docu on journalism, of ... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
Such as long bows, for reach,
The long-bow was one of warfare's great advances. Like the tactical nuclear weapons we used to have pre-positioned in Germany during the Cold War to offset the much larger conventional forces of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, the long-bow enabled a smaller force to defeat a much larger one.
The Battle of Agincourt in 1415 is considered one of England's greatest victories, alongside those of Trafalgar and Waterloo. King Henry V led a force of some 6,000 men against a French force of 25,000, many of whom were on horseback and wearing armor. Henry placed his long-bowmen on the flanks of his force, and they rained deadly arrows down on the French force, who were further hindered by their fallen horsemen creating a barrier to forward movement.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Nov. 15 2017 13:06:56
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.15625 secs.
|
Printable Version
What´s there not to like? 
