Does anyone else believe if Watergate happened in contemporary times....?

[SarahB]

Nothing would be done about it?
Since mainstream media is owned by right leaning companies to varying degrees (some center-right, other far-right), I honestly believe Watergate wouldn't even be a blip on the media radar screen now. Even in 1987, when Iran-Contra broke, there were hearings, but even then, I remember there was an entire media blitz of "Ollie North was a patriot and gee... look at his cute secretary- find out more about her". :eyes:

Now, it seems almost beyond hope. Makes me sad. Makes me ill. :(

[Maat]

1. I've had these thoughts also, SarahBelle.

It is very discouraging. But, I'm still trying to find a positive in all of this - maybe progressives will unite like never before.

[The Zanti Regent]

32. Something WORSE than Watergate is going on and Woodward covers it up!

This is what happens when you have a state controlled press!

[molly]

2. Gosh, I must be older than I thought!

I remember it like it was yesterday. The main difference NOW is that THEY own too much. That should not stop us.

[Bertha Venation]

29. You read my mind.

I was just 11 when Nixon resigned, but I remember, vaguely, the headlines during the two years that led up to that day. I, too, remember it like it was yesterday.

[LynnTheDem]

3. Of course. bush has done WORSE by far than Watergate and nothing

was done about it.

bush will do worse by far than Watergate, and nothing will be done about it.

[barb162]

4. Katherine Graham and Ben Bradlee of the WashPost were great

supporters of their employees. There was also INVESTIGATIVE journalism at that time. I am afraid that is gone and nothing would be done today. All the media basically is owned by pugs. I can think of several things on which Bush should have been impeached, like lying to Congress, etc. It is beyond hope now and I am despondent. Not a damn thing I can do. With the Supremes, Congress and the administration all GOP-controlled, there literally is zero hope.

[NAO]

5. EXACTLY. The news networks would report *allegations*, but because

there would be no follow up, no investigations, nothing would come of it except for angry, bruised progressives.

The book "Into the Buzzsaw" is a collection of essays by journalists explaining the mechanics of how investigations into sensitive areas of government or corporate wrongdoing are suppressed. It's ghastly what can be done, right out in the open, in front of everyone and the press, and have nothing come of it.

[SarahB]

10. Yes, and of course when it comes to Democratic Candidates & Presidents...

They can be assassinated and have it covered up.
Their opponents can secretly meet with enemies to help insure election victories and a release of American hostages at a more optimal time for their agenda.
They can have billions poured into federal investigations regarding their sex lives.

War is Peace. All is well. Paris Hilton is the real news. :puke:

[NAO]

13. Paris Hilton? You forgot Janet Jackson's boob!

[BrotherBuzz]

15. Hmmm, didn't "Into the Buzzsaw" touch on Gary Webb's plight?

[NAO]

18. Gary Webb wrote an essay on his whole "Dark Alliance" saga

I re-read it after his death. It is amazing that someone who broke such a major story, with such solid evidence, could be so effectively censored and marginalized.

His career was ruined and the mainstream press was entirely responsible for destroying an accomplished journalist and suppressing a major story.

I wonder if journalists working in the MSM have read "Into the Buzzsaw" and if they are ashamed and worried.

[BrotherBuzz]

34. You've piqued my interest....

Interesting, Christine Craft had Kristina Borjesson, author of Buzzaw, on her Sacramento radio program "Talk City" when they were discussing Gary's death. I had a lot on my mind and didn't pursue the book at that time, but thanks to your post, you jogged my mind and I just put a hold on a copy at my library via the internet..

"Our liberty depends on freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." - Thomas Jefferson

[Deja Q]

6. Nothing at all. And I'm ill over it too. No accountability.

But Monica sucked Clinton's seed and that's the most immoral act of them all. :eyes: x( :grr:

[SarahB]

11. Oh yes.

Sex is evil and women are mere baby factories. We shouldn't enjoy sex or have opinions, but be there to spawn. :eyes:

[cruadin]

7. I think the MSM has been on life-support for a while.

I mean, who really takes them seriously anymore?

They've been exposed over and over as nothing more than shills for their corporate interest, and their interest is the bottom line, profit.
Luckily, there is the internet and the independent writing, investigating, communicating, organizing power of the people.

[Kahuna]

8. What's worse is, Bob Woodward would probably keep a lid on it.

:puke:

[NAO]

14. Keep a lid on it? I think Woodward would cover it up with a tell all book

that misdirects things away from the real crimes and is sympathetic to the perpetrators.

Oh yeah, he did that already.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

9. You are all sooooo depressing!!!!! STOP IT!!

WE HAVE WILL PITT!! WE HAVE GREG PALAST!! WE HAVE AMY GOODMAN!! WE HAVE WAYNE MADISON!!!

Sorry for yelling. But do not give up! Dammnit!
:spank:

[SarahB]

12. We shouldn't give up.

They are doing amazing work. Realistically facing what we're up against makes it all the more honorable that they are doing the work they do.

[NAO]

16. You are enumerating the staff of the Progressive News Network

that I am going to buy if I become a multi-billionaire.

Greg Palast and Amy Goodman would be news anchors.

When pundit/commentators were needed, we'd tap people like Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal, Paul Krugman, etc.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

23. I'll buy stock!!

Wonder if I can use my 401K? LOL:eyes:

[Nothing Without Hope]

19. And we have Conyers and more...and these things can take time

to unfold. It's only been two months since the election and look how far we've come. Now "sources" say that there WILL be at least one senator standing with Conyers and the other representatives on Jan 6. And that's only one more step in a long process.

I promise you, it took more than two months for the truth about Watergate to come out. This is going to be a very interesting year. And it's not just the racist voter suppression and election fraud that they are trying to hide from the public -- there are lots of other ugly Bush cartel scandals bubbling to the surface. The truth is out there and it is going to come out.

Please don't talk yourselves into thinking it's hopeless, because it isn't. But it will become so if enough people give up.

[ashmanonar]

26. yea, where the hell is greg palast?

his book on the 2000 election was one of the most informative i've ever read about politics, i'm def buying the one he's surely writing about 2004...

[bearfan454]

17. If you control the information

you control the people.

[Lizzie Borden]

20. Bingo!

Give that guy a prize!

[Cobalt Violet]

21. Worse things have happened recently and nothing is being done.

[Solly Mack]

22. I wonder what Watergate actually covered up. Nothing was what it seemed

even then.

Maybe the part we know was just told to keep something else hidden.

Maybe more people are just aware of how crooked government and the media can be...

yes, it's gotten worse but I think it was probably bad then too

[NAO]

24. Watergate misdirected attention from COINTELPRO

[Solly Mack]

25. True...but I believe there's more than just that

A friend of mine was a lawyer in the COINTELPRO lawsuit trials...and I really think there's more we don't know than we do know.

[NAO]

27. Watergate as coverup for COINTELPRO (background & context)

*From Noam Chomsky’s book Understanding Power:

...(person asks what ‘COINTELPRO’ is)

…that makes my point, because the COINTELPRO exposure were a thousand times more significant than Watergate.

Remember what Watergate was, after all: Watergate was a mater of a bunch of guys from the RNC breaking into a Democratic Party office fro essentially unknown reasons and doing no damage. Okay, that’s petty burglary; it’s not a big deal.

Well, at the exact same time that Watergate was discovered, there were exposures in the courts an through the Freedom of Information Act of massive FBI operations to undermine political freedom in the United States, running through every administration back to Roosevelt, but really picking up under Kennedy.

It was called COINTELPRO…It included the straight Gestapo-style assignation of a Black Panther leader; it included organizing race riots in an effort to destroy the black movements; it included attacks on the American Indian Movement, on the women’s’ movement…

It included fifteen years of FBI disruption of the Socialist Workers Party – that meant regular FBI burglaries, stealing membership lists and using them to threaten people, going to businesses and getting members fired from their jobs, and so on.

Well, that fact alone – that the FBI had been burglarizing and trying to undermine a legal political party – is already vastly more important than the fact that a bunch of Keystone Cops broke into the DNC HQ one time…look at the comparison in treatment – I mean, you’re aware of the comparison in treatment, that’s why you know about Watergate and you don’t know about COINTELPRO.

[Solly Mack]

35. Do you think the media was aiding in the covering up of COINTELPRO?

(for so long)....I do.
Until it was exposed...and even then, did everything come out? I don't think so.

[Bertha Venation]

28. Hard to say, SarahBelle. The Washington Post* is responsible

for unearthing Watergate and ultimately bringing Nixon down. Thirty years later, the paper press is no longer the country's main source of news. Cable is. You know where that statement goes. :eyes:


*Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein, their editors, and Katharine Graham, the publisher. If you've never read All The President's Men nor seen the film, I highly recommend it.

[molly]

30. Hey, I have a book "WORSE than Watergate"

written by John W. Dean. I have not read it yet, but wonder how many here have?

[Bertha Venation]

33. I was waiting for the election to read it. Guess I'll pick it up soon.

Or maybe my hypertension requires that I wait until after the '09 inauguration. :shrug:

[proud2BlibKansan]

31. I agree

It was the media that exposed Watergate, beginning with Woodward and Bernstein.

Another important point to remember is that this happened in the days before the internet and a jillion news channels on cable TV. All we had back then was the print media and THREE network news agencies. The idea of bias in the media was far fetched. We all trusted Walter Cronkite.

[flaminbats]

36. the audience is just as guilty..

We have moved from an era of high expectations of public leaders..to more crap in politics so who really gives a fuck? Many people I know today no longer vote because of Watergate. Whenever I express my distrust of this Administration or the Republican Congress they respond by asking "why do you think government has such evil intentions?"

But I still vote, and unlike those who don't, I don't equate distrust with evil or intentionally destructive actions. I set high standards for those in office, and any who fail to meet these standards will not get my vote! That doesn't mean they are my enemy or that I hate them, it means we should hold all public servants accountable for what they do with our tax money and require them to obey the same laws we do. Too many people no longer vote because they view politics only as a battle between good and evil, but most who start with such insular views only grow more isolated and detached from the problems of reality.

If Watergate was enough to stop millions from voting, who will be around to oppose politicians when ruling ruthlessly? At least younger voters know what to expect from their government, but demand better.

[scarletwoman]

37. First of all, stop buying into the myth of Watergate!

Bringing down Nixon was NOT, I reapeat, was NOT a triumph of investigative journalism! It was a purge perpetrated by the BFEE faction of the power elite to get rid of an inconvenient loose cannon. There were no good guy winners, the George H. W. Bush druglord faction of the CIA, their right-wing Cuban exile allies, and various other deep political nasties pulled this off in order to further consolidate their power.

Woodward came out of Naval Intelligence -- why do you think he gets such access to Duhbya? He's one of the BFEE players, and has been all along.

Look up "Project Mockingbird". The Washington has been intimately tied into the intelligence community from its earliest days. See: http://www.onlinejournal.com/Media/020504Hasty/020504hasty.html

<excerpt:>

In an article published by the media watchdog group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), Henwood traced the Post's Establishment connections to Eugene Meyer, who took control of the Post in 1933. Meyer transferred ownership to his daughter Katharine and her husband, Philip Graham, after World War II, when he was appointed by Harry Truman to serve as the first president of the World Bank. A lifelong Republican, Meyer had been "a Wall Street banker, director of President Wilson's War Finance Corporation, a governor of the Federal Reserve, and director of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation," Henwood wrote.

Philip Graham, Meyer's successor, had been in military intelligence during the war. When he became the Post's publisher, he continued to have close contact with his fellow upper-class intelligence veterans—now making policy at the newly formed CIA—and actively promoted the CIA's goals in his newspaper. The incestuous relationship between the Post and the intelligence community even extended to its hiring practices. Watergate-era editor Ben Bradlee also had an intelligence background; and before he became a journalist, reporter Bob Woodward was an officer in Naval Intelligence. In a 1977 article in Rolling Stone magazine about CIA influence in American media, Woodward's partner, Carl Bernstein, quoted this from a CIA official: "It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from." Graham has been identified by some investigators as the main contact in Project Mockingbird, the CIA program to infiltrate domestic American media. In her autobiography, Katherine Graham described how her husband worked overtime at the Post during the Bay of Pigs operation to protect the reputations of his friends from Yale who had organized the ill-fated venture.

After Graham committed suicide, and his widow Katharine assumed the role of publisher, she continued her husband's policies of supporting the efforts of the intelligence community in advancing the foreign policy and economic agenda of the nation's ruling elites. In a retrospective column written after her own death last year, FAIR analyst Norman Solomon wrote, "Her newspaper mainly functioned as a helpmate to the war-makers in the White House, State Department and Pentagon." It accomplished this function (and continues to do so) using all the classic propaganda techniques of evasion, confusion, misdirection, targeted emphasis, disinformation, secrecy, omission of important facts, and selective leaks.

Graham herself rationalized this policy in a speech she gave at CIA headquarters in 1988. "We live in a dirty and dangerous world," she said. "There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."

Look behind the curtain, not at the Kubuki show being played out front to distract and disinform the public. Understand that Watergate was merely part of the continuing coup that began with the JFK assassination -- there is a direct line running from from 1963 to today of the same players in the power elite maneuvering their way into ever greater control of our governmental/economic/media institutions.

sw

[ashmanonar]

38. please don't hit me cuz i'm dumb!

but what exactly is the BFEE?