What a difference 5-6 years indeed make.

The USA has truly lost its way with regards to its most basic democratic principles, as well as with regards to how one should treat one's closest friends - simply look the way of us Canadians to get a direct pulse of this ... not coincidently, I've dwelt on these subjects a couple of days ago ("Whither Goest Thou, America?"; http://pov-mentarch1.blogspot.com/2007/04/whither-goest-thou-america.html)("Ten Steps to Death of Democracy and Hell"; http://pov-mentarch1.blogspot.com/2007/04/ten-steps-into-death-of-democracy-and.html).

But as Mr. Greenwald most elegantly wrote in a previous post, there is a veritable "sea of change" rolling on across the USA.

I can only hope - fervently - that the outright aberrations perpetrated in the last 5-6 years upon the USA's most fundamental and moral principles will be corrected.

America's friends and neighbors are waiting for her to return to the light and rejoin us all ... and (why not?) reclaim her leadership role-by-example as reasoned, diplomatic and caring peacemaker, and human rights defender.

It is in good part due to the blogosphere that Mr. Greenwald's "sea of change" is happening. Let the blogosphere continue forth resolutely and with determination so that what has happened in the last 5-6 years in a democratically-founded country like the USA never occurs again ... anywhere.

That is my humble wish.

Manfield's arguments sound so familiar ... I just can't put my finger on it ... trying to recall ...

Oh, yes! Now I remember: these arguments are exactly the same as the rationalizations put forth by Romans in order to invest power to "temporary tyrants" in times of perceived dangers.

And we all know what happened eventually with the Roman Republic, right?

The march to authoritarism rolls on ...

Dear Mr. Greenwald;

Similarly and in parallel to tv entertainment,the serious aspects and the integrity of news in tv, radio and newspapers has gradually left way to tabloid products, not only imitating the talk-show and infotainment formulas but their practices as well.

Thus, it has become all about let's talk of celebrities, of crimes, of sports, of "heartwarming" stories and, especially, of the fear du jour. And forget about verifying facts.

Why is it that the majority of journalists seems nowadays only able to regurgitate propaganda (or spin) from our leaders, from corporation-paid-for organizations or corporations proper? Three reasons: a) to preserve a supposed "access" (which constitutes the formula used by infotainments with regards to studios, celebrities, etc.); b) too many journalists, editors, or producers search for the quick-and-easy; and c) too many journalists, editors or producers have fallen under the lure of gain and fame (after all, we should not forget that they too come from the same cultures as ours). Incidentally, the majority of the presumed "investigative reporting" shows are likewise suffering from superficiality or propaganda regurgitation, if not outight disinformation as well.

Consequently, we find ourselves right in the middle of the tabloid universe where the one who screams the loudest, who is the most incendiary, and/or the most controversial, turns out to be the one most watched or listened to - all media confounded.

Lastly, I will spare you the explanations as to how some of those televised news networks, especially Fox News, constitute paradigms of tabloid tv, bias, propaganda regurgitation and disinformation (because you, as well as all those who actually pay attention, know full well why). Suffice it to say that too many journalists nowadays simply do not bother to report the truth and reality anymore. Instead, they play the spin game while nitpicking facts and discarding those deemed "unpleasant".

So the question is: how have we come to this? "Ratings and profits, baby".

And, of course, the prevalence of the search for instant gratification which dictates said ratings and profits.

... this?

"05/22/2007 - The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

When additional support troops are included in this second troop “surge,” the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 – a record high number – by the end of the year."

Once again, it looks indeed like the NYT and Drudge fell for propaganda/disinformation again - granted, this is not surprising in the case of Drudge, but it is nonetheless disapointing in the case of the NYT (call me an eternal hopeful that one day the MSM will do right again by its role as the 4th estate, eh?).

From the Eight Principles of Incompetence:

"Fourth Principle: Incompetence does or says anything to defend itself.

Because of the previous four principles (Zeroth Principle: Incompetence is driven by intellectual sloth; First Principle: Incompetence surrounds itself with incompetence; Second Principle: Incompetence is ethics-impaired; and Third Principle: Incompetence abhors transparency and accountability), incompetents never take responsibility for their wrongdoings, or those of other incompetents within their "circle". This is what I wrote before: "Incompetents will do and say anything to defend themselves and other incompetents, including disassembling, obfuscating, lying and blaming others". Here's something else that I also wrote previously: "They lie, they misrepresent, they use decoy arguments and make ad hominem attacks. For them, the use of duplicity, of secrecy, of arguments of (non-existent) conspiracy, of fact (and non-fact) selectivity/cherry-picking, of quacks/fake experts, as well as putting forth logical fallacies, are simply means to an end." For incompetents, everything is about spin and truthiness - never about facts and truth. Even when they are blatantly caught, incompetents continue to react and reason with their intellectual sloth-driven infantile/adolescent immaturity - they will deny that they did anything wrong or that they have lied, then they will blame/attack (read: character assassinate) their 'accusers'. I call this: 'Lie and Cry'".