Last year the consent manufacturers at the New York Times consciously decided to ignore completely on their front page the eleventh anniversary of Islam's 9/11/01 attacks on America. At first bewildering, it was insulting and ultimately proved embarrassing to the Times when Islam attacked again that same day. Throughout the Islamic world on September 11, 2012 Muslims besieged American embassies. The American consul in Benghazi, Libya, Christopher Stevens, was murdered by Islam. The state/media oligarchy immediately went into overdrive: The Times and other "opinion leaders" were joined by then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice to disseminate their propaganda: The worldwide attacks were not "terrorism," a word banished by the Obama administration,* they were reaction to...a movie.
There are few consequences for the consent manufacturers when they feed the public a lie. The Times hasn't suffered, hasn't apologized, hasn't corrected the record, has criticized congressional hearings investigating Benghazi with its dismissive "move on" tone. Susan Rice, the automaton of that weekend's talk shows, Oh she was denied the State Department but-Look at her now!-she's the president's National Security Advisor. Yes, she landed on her feet, she's "got game." There was a story on Rice, in the Times, when the Master of the Sand Traps was on Martha's Vineyard and Egypt was falling apart: She was the voice of "pragmatism" whispering in the president's ear, said the Times.
What will be on the front page of the New York Times this year, on the twelfth anniversary of 9/11/01 and the first anniversary of 9/11/12? Perhaps a review of Innocence of Muslims by their film critic? An interview with Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, aka Sam Bacile, from his jail cell? Ms. Rice, what would be the "pragmatic" thing for the Times to do? Will you be on any Sunday talk shows next weekend, Ms. Rice?
*The administration now uses the word freely to justify NSA's activities.
There are few consequences for the consent manufacturers when they feed the public a lie. The Times hasn't suffered, hasn't apologized, hasn't corrected the record, has criticized congressional hearings investigating Benghazi with its dismissive "move on" tone. Susan Rice, the automaton of that weekend's talk shows, Oh she was denied the State Department but-Look at her now!-she's the president's National Security Advisor. Yes, she landed on her feet, she's "got game." There was a story on Rice, in the Times, when the Master of the Sand Traps was on Martha's Vineyard and Egypt was falling apart: She was the voice of "pragmatism" whispering in the president's ear, said the Times.
What will be on the front page of the New York Times this year, on the twelfth anniversary of 9/11/01 and the first anniversary of 9/11/12? Perhaps a review of Innocence of Muslims by their film critic? An interview with Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, aka Sam Bacile, from his jail cell? Ms. Rice, what would be the "pragmatic" thing for the Times to do? Will you be on any Sunday talk shows next weekend, Ms. Rice?
*The administration now uses the word freely to justify NSA's activities.
