Freedom of the Press should be subject to new restrictions? Senator Byrd.

[Free the Press]

In heated speech, veteran senator seeks NSA probe ... RAW STORY

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Senator_Byrd_to_call_for_special_0215.html

"Already we have heard suggestions from the Attorney General and others that Freedom of the Press should be subject to new restrictions."

[Surya Gayatri]

1. So, now Sen. Byrd is worried about

Constitutional guarantees? Didn't seem so concerned when he voted Alito onto the bench a couple of weeks ago. Loves to hear himself bloviate more like. Go figure!

SG:eyes:

[kster]

2. Kick n Recommended.nt

[Trillo]

3. I liked what he said about the 4th Amendment.

I'd been concentrating (in my thinking) on the phrase "unreasonable search and siezure", but Byrd's argument (in the article) was about the phrase, "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause", which is precisely what FISA was suppose to allow with secrecy to insure that search isn't unreasonable.

I admit I like reading about our Senators using Constitutional arguments in their statements. Especially now.

[Hosnon]

7. Also remember that the 4th doesn't require warrants - FISA is a good

safeguard for reasonableness.

[fearnobush]

4. Gonzo needs to be locked up.

Put away before he locks us all up for speaking our minds. If this Satanic admin is allowed to continue, we will all be locked up for speaking our minds. Without a major couse correction in our current path, we will have two choices, become a sheep or go to jail.

[undergroundpanther]

5. That's what those new prison camps are for

That haliburton is building.
Along with a host of non lethal weapons for crowd control.

[Free the Press]

6. Can the military "stand in" for the free press? How would you know?

There is already a substantial number of actual instances of print journalists who have been paid by the US government for domestic propaganda pieces.

These links are merely to point you in the direction of these instances:

http://www.ilcaonline.org/print.php?sid=1632

http://hnn.us/articles/20418.html

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/37/9592

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54651-2005Jan6.html

***

How do you know whether or not Anderson Cooper, for example, is not a CIA operative operating domestically in support of a US secret interest or program?

Of course, I am not claiming that Anderson Cooper is working for the military and CNN as a propagandist.

However, it is no longer far-fetched to consider the potential for military and/or US Government control over the media and free press as fantasy or flight of mind.

Here is a little background on the very personable and capable Anderson Cooper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_Cooper

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Vanderbilt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Claypoole_Vanderbilt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Judson_Kilpatrick

***

On the subject of direct control over the media you could look at the links between those who have substantial backgrounds in the military and federal government and who currently or recently wielded controlling authority over domestic media outlets.

An example here:

http://www.viacom.com/directors.jhtml

"Mr. Redstone served in the Military Intelligence Division during World War II. While a student at Harvard, he was selected to join a special intelligence group whose mission was to break Japan’s high-level military and diplomatic codes. Mr. Redstone received, among other honors, two commendations from the Military Intelligence Division in recognition of his service, contribution and devotion to duty. Mr. Redstone is also a recipient of the Army Commendation Award."

***

On the subject of media consolidation and manipulation, you can look at the links that illustrate examples of how corporate control of the media is in the hands of few but corporations with interlocking relationships and economic interests.

Examples of this are here:

http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Corporations/Owners.asp

http://www.fair.org/media-woes/interlocking-directorates.html

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=7&issue_area_id=26

***

Finally, on the subject of military intent to wage control over media outlets and the domestic media message, you can look at links to documented instances of such activity.

Examples are here:

http://www.giantleap.org/envision/press.htm

http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q4/war.html

***

You be the judge!

[bobthedrummer]

8. Rumsfeld and other DoD spokespersons acknowleged that

some of the psychological operations, cover and deception and other components of the perception management programs intended for foreign audiences have migrated here.

No explanation was given.

Perception management is also part of this administration. The people and organizations involved in these operations scoff at reality.

Here's a link to some good background on the military's perception management programs (but remember that there are many "privatized" sources too) it seems as though the closed Office of Strategic Influence's agenda has continued imo.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/awc-pcep.htm#perception_mgt