Terror inmates may be released in US: Intel Chief Dennis Blair

President Barack Obama's intelligence chief confirmed Thursday that some Guantanamo inmates may be released on US soil and receive assistance to return to society.

"If we are to release them in the United States, we need some sort of assistance for them to start a new life," said National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair at his first press conference.

"You can't just put them on the street," he added. "All that is work in progress."

Twenty men detained at the remote US naval base at Guantanamo Bay in southern Cuba have been cleared of terrorism charges, including 17 Chinese Uighurs ordered released by a US court in June, (Although all of them admit to receiving weapons, explosive and terrorist training in al Qaeda training camps and belonged to groups involved with attempts to disrupt the 2008 Olympics), seven years after their arrest. But the US says they may face persecution if returned to China. (Oh the horror that terrorists might face persecution!)

None of the 17 Uighurs are master terrorists on par with the likes of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. They were mostly new recruits at the time of their capture.

They are all affiliated with and/or members of a designated terrorist organization, received training at a training camp in the al Qaeda and Taliban stronghold of Tora Bora, and have admitted that they were trained by two known terrorists. And, on top of that, the group that trained them threatened to attack the Olympic Games in China last year.

"If we are to release them in the United States, we need some sort of assistance for them to start a new life," said National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair at his first press conference.

"You can't just put them on the street," he added. "All that is work in progress."

Welcome to Liberalthink 101.

You know why liberals think the way they do?

Because there never is any consequences for their actions.

Just look at Dodd, Frank and Rangle as examples. Oh wait, even better. Clinton lies to a grand jury, lies to the American people while wagging his fingers, gets impeached and instead of being disgraced he earns over a hundred million dollars for giving speeches to adoring crowds.

So when any of these people is caught in an act of terrorism or blows up a mall, a school or calling for Jihad in American mosques the administation and the Democrat party doesn't expect any real or damaging backlash.

But going back to Liberalthink 101, when these terrorists are released into the USA they will have the full protection of the Constitution. They may very well become instant celebrities. They will be surrounded by a flocked by drooling lawyers. Right out of the al Qaeda play book they will lie about their innocence and their treatment. They or their lawyers will do it on Ophra, 60 Minutes, Charlie Rose, Hardball, 20/20, Dateline, The NY Times They will make Club Gitmo the new Black Hole of Calcutta. Their assertions will be believed by a sizable portion of the American people and all this will be just as we enter the 2010 election season.

Freedom Tower name dropped for One World Trade Center. China influence?

Freedom Tower name dropped for One World Trade Center. China influence?

Maybe I am being conspiratorial. But as you read the story remember that the Chinese have signed the lease for 190,000 square feet of the building. Freedom is one of the words that is banned by Chinese internet users.

Freedom Tower name changed to One World Trade Center
BY CHAU LAM | chau.lam@newsday.com
11:08 PM EDT, March 26, 2009

The Freedom Tower is out. One World Trade Center is in.

The Port Authority, the agency that owns the building at Ground Zero, said Thursday that the signature skyscraper replacing the Twin Towers destroyed on Sept. 11, 2001, will be more commonly known as One World Trade Center.

The reason for the name swapping? One World Trade Center is more marketable, said Steve Sigmund, a spokesman for the Port Authority.

"We believe there's been a good response in the marketplace toward it," Sigmund said Thursday.

The 102-story building, under construction at the 16-acre site, was named the Freedom Tower in the first Ground Zero master plan. At the time, officials said the tallest, most symbolic of five planned towers at the site would demonstrate the nation's triumph over terrorism.

In the end, the tower's address, One World Trade Center, is the one that is easier for people to identify with, said Anthony Coscia, Port Authority chairman.

On Wednesday, the agency announced that the first commercial tenant, a Chinese real estate company, has signed a lease for space in the building. The Beijing Vantone Industrial Company has agreed to lease five floors - 64 through 69 - for nearly 21 years.

The office tower is scheduled to be completed in late 2013.

http://www.newsday.com/services/newspaper/printedition/friday/news/ny-nyfree2712590972mar27,0,6084299.story

So folks we are doing everything to bury the memory of 9/11.

There is no more Global War On Terror, no more Islamic Terrorists, no more Enemy Combatives and no more Freedom Tower.

The Port Authority has given China the naming rights for our symbol of our resolve in our fight against terrorism.

I'm so ashamed.

Government gone wild.

And we make fun of Hugo Chavez.

My God it is happening here and growing.

U.S. bill seeks to rescue faltering newspapers

Newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.

Define political endorsement? Well that is easy. Anything that any politician considers is a determent to his campaign.

With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.

"This may not be the optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains but it should be an option for many newspapers that are struggling to stay afloat," said Senator Benjamin Cardin.

A Cardin spokesman said the bill had yet to attract any co-sponsors, but had sparked plenty of interest within the media, which has seen plunging revenues and many journalist layoffs.

Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.

Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.

Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax exempt, and contributions to support news coverage or operations could be tax deductible.

Because newspaper profits have been falling in recent years, "no substantial loss of federal revenue" was expected under the legislation, Cardin's office said in a statement.

Cardin's office said his bill was aimed at preserving local and community newspapers, not conglomerates which may also own radio and TV stations. His bill would also let a non-profit buy newspapers owned by a conglomerate.

"We are losing our newspaper industry," Cardin said. "The economy has caused an immediate problem, but the business model for newspapers, based on circulation and advertising revenue, is broken, and that is a real tragedy for communities across the nation and for our democracy.

Newspaper subscriptions and advertising have shrunk dramatically in the past few years as Americans have turned more and more to the Internet or television for information.

In recent months, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the Rocky Mountain News, the Baltimore Examiner and the San Francisco Chronicle have ceased daily publication or announced that they may have to stop publishing.

In December the Tribune Company, which owns a number of newspapers including The Baltimore Sun, The Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times filed for bankruptcy protection.

Two newspaper chains, Gannett Co Inc and Advance Publications, on Monday announced employee furloughs. It will be the second furlough this year at Gannett.

*
There is one main reason why newspapers are going out of business.

They are going out of business because the majority of Americans are rejecting their political slant. They are no longer trusted. Even in liberal bastions like San Francisco their liberal newspaper the Chronicle is going out of business because there isn't enough liberals to keep it alive.

It isn't the internet that is doing them in. It isn't talk radio that is doing them in. It is their liberalism that is doing them in.

The majority of Americans reject them and seek out other news outlets.

Today, here in Chicago they made the decision to raise the price of their newspaper from .50 cents to .75 cents because not enough people are buying it. So with the natural intuitive of a liberal they figure the way to fix it is to raise the price.

Just like liberals believe that raising taxes will fix everything they raise the price of their rag and believe that more people will buy it.

I damn sure don't fear liberals because they are smarter than me. I fear them because they are just so stupid and there are so many of them.

There is a reason that God didn't put signs at the edges of cliffs. But we had to screw that up.

Canada to take a year off from war on terror

Military will need break when Afghan mission ends: Canadian army chief

The military may need a one-year break from operations starting July 2011 when the Afghanistan mission winds down, the head of Canada's army said Monday.

Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie told the Senate defence committee Monday that the Canadian Forces have been strained by the mission that began seven years ago and need time to regroup.

But some equipment apparently isn't even being used.

There are 40 Leopard 2 battle tanks sitting unused in a Montreal warehouse and another 40 stored somewhere in Europe awaiting the federal government to hire a firm to refurbish them, Leslie said.

The tanks need to be outfitted with heavy armour to resist roadside bomb blasts.

The slightly used tanks have been in storage in Montreal since last November after Canada bought 100 surplus tanks from the Netherlands in 2007.

The Canadian army had borrowed 20 Leopard A6Ms from Germany in the summer of 2007 to quickly replace its own nearly 30-year-old Leopard tanks, which were not suited for use in Afghanistan.

The German loaners were returned once the newer Dutch tanks were delivered.

"Until such time as the contract is let and they're actually delivered from the manufacturer, who is going to refurbish them, into the hands of the army, they don't belong to the army," Leslie said outside the committee room.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay said the government intends to get the Leopard 2's into action expeditiously, though he didn't elaborate.

"Clearly the intention is to get those into theatre as quickly as possible. So we're determining how to do that," he said.

"Those Leopard tanks are lifesavers. They are game changers, and we want to get those tanks where they can be used to save lives and to further the aims of the mission."

Neither the Public Works Department, which is responsible for awarding government contracts, nor the Defence Department were immediately available to comment on the tanks.

Most military base equipment out of service

Earlier, Leslie told senators that more than 70 per cent of equipment used on military bases across Canada to train soldiers before they deploy to Afghanistan is out of service at any given time.

Vehicles aren't being repaired because the military lacks skilled mechanics and technicians, he said. And as more vehicles break down, he added, fewer are available for soldiers to train on before deploying to Afghanistan.

Citing figures from last month, Leslie said 33 per cent of the army's light-armoured vehicles (LAVs) are out of service, along with 76 per cent of its Coyotes, 100 per cent of its tracked light-armoured vehicles (TLAVs), 73 per cent of its Bisons and 71 per cent of its Leopard tanks.

"This situation is extremely serious because the number and types of equipment that have to be repaired and replaced continues to increase at a rapid pace, and their use is much greater than planned when they were originally purchased," Leslie said.

He said the military is now using all its equipment in "extremely demanding" conditions and so time-consuming maintenance and repair is needed.

Leslie called on Ottawa to cut some of the red tape that often bogs things down.

"We have to eliminate process," he said. "Or reducing the amount of paperwork and the decision time and the decision cycles… to fix equipment that's broken."

The liberals must be envious that we don't have a military just like this.

It fits into my theory that liberals believe that if you don't have a powerful military then you can't project military might and thus you have to rely on diplomacy solely.

It doesn't matter if diplomacy fails because the underlining rule is war is bad and if you don't have an army you can't participate in war and by not having a military that can project it's power no one will feel threaten and everyone will like us.

I wonder if Mr. Obama will initiate a study to find out what Canadians are doing and insure that we follow their example.

And as someone said before about NATO, they have been minor characters in the defense of their own countries since the end of WW2 and instead have used their money and resources to prop up their socialist lifestyles.

I love how the Democrats have insisted that the Iraqis step up to the plate in a very and almost impossible short timetable when they never demanded that Europe do the same in the forty five since VE day.

The Real Bush Record. All that is fit to print. - Topic Powered by eve community

The Real Bush Record. All that is fit to print. - Topic Powered by eve community

Myths and Facts About the Real Bush Record

More on how news sources influence the thinking of the general public.

News sources have many means available to them in reporting the news. Some but not all of them are:

News prominence. This is where in the newspaper, magazine or broadcast the story is covered. Front page or page 32 section B. Is it a full column, large paragraph or a couple of sentences. Cover story or just listed listed in the index and also were it ranks in the index. Top story of the broadcast with coverage or a one line sentence just before going to sports or weather. And lastly but most important their discretion as to the news worthiness of the story and whither it is reported at all.

Spin off stories. A technique use to keep a news story on the front burner for a longer period of time to insure public saturation. Spin off stories usually retells the original story with one or two minor details added. Sometimes new details are replaced with speculations.

Writer's or Editorial slant. One of the most well known techniques and is the basis for many arguments over right wing vs. left wing coverage.

Collusion. Now this is venomously denied by the major news sources. It makes you wonder though. An example would be when you flip through the major evening newscasts they all have the same lead story. This in it's self is not that unlikely but it gets more interesting when you start flipping between ABC, NBC, CBS and the second, third stories are all the same.

Part of the issue may be that the people reporting and producing these shows all come from the same schools and backgrounds and to some extent people with exceptionalness and creativeness are weeded out by the system. But it must make you wonder.

After all there is collusion on when commercials, are run, (a long known agreement among broadcasters to prevent audience drifting), and their reporting is so similar.

Again it makes you wonder.

Recently we saw John Zigler's Zogby poll that prove that a majority of voting Americans were either uninformed or misinformed about the issues between the presidential candidates.

Now to the Myths and Facts of the Bush Record.

As the year draws to an end and President Bush enters his final month in office, there is much commentary about the Administration's record over the past eight years. Unsurprisingly, many of these stories assail and distort the President's record and recycle myths and unfounded allegations that have been leveled for the better part of his two terms. Historical accuracy requires a response to the litany of attacks leveled against President Bush, and while there's not enough space to respond to all of them, here are five of the most egregious:

Myth 1: The last eight years were awful for most Americans economically and President Bush's deregulatory policies caused the current financial crisis.

Reality:

President Bush's time in office is ending as it began, with our economy under stress. The recession President Bush inherited as he entered office ran through the attacks of September 11, 2001, but during the recovery that followed, and due in no small part to the tax relief President Bush worked with Congress to provide, this country experienced its longest run of uninterrupted job growth - 52 straight months, with 8.3 million jobs created.

This reflected six consecutive years of economic growth from the Fourth Quarter of 2001 until the Fourth Quarter of 2007. From 2000 to 2007, real GDP grew by more than 17 percent, a remarkable gain of nearly 2.1 trillion dollars. This growth was driven in part by increased labor productivity gains that have averaged 2.5 percent annually since 2001, a rate that exceeds the averages of the 1970s, '80s, and '90s. In the same period, real after-tax income per capita increased by more than 11 percent, and there was a 4.7 percent increase in the number of new businesses formed. The current economic challenges, which the President and his Administration have responded to aggressively, threaten to reverse some of these gains - but the gains cannot be denied.

As for the current crisis, the President and his economic team have taken unprecedented actions to stabilize the financial sector and avert a collapse. While there are a number of causes of the housing and credit crises that are at the root of our current economic troubles, deregulation by the Bush Administration is simply not one of them. In fact, one of the circumstances that contributed to the crisis was the failure of the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which President Bush long tried to subject to greater regulation. In April 2001, three months after taking office, the President warned in his first budget that the size of the two GSEs were a "potential problem" that "could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." In 2003, the Administration began calling for a new GSE regulator, and over the next five years, the Administration continued to call for GSE reform only to be accused by Democrats in Congress of creating artificial fears and advocating for ill-advised proposals. By the time Congress finally acted in 2008 to provide the oversight the President requested, it was too late to prevent systemic consequences. Had the Administration's initial reform proposals been adopted, some of today's turmoil in our financial markets may have been averted.

Myth 2: President Bush's tax cuts only benefitted the wealthy and were paid for by sacrificing investments in health care and education.

Reality:

There are not 116 million "wealthy Americans," but that's how many taxpayers benefited from the President's tax relief. The across-the-board tax cuts provided tax relief to every American who pays income taxes, created a new bottom 10 percent bracket rate, doubled the child tax credit to $1,000, and actually increased the share of the Federal income tax burden paid by the top 10 percent of individual earners from 67 percent in 2000 to 70 percent in 2005. Furthermore, this Administration removed 13 million low-income earners from the income tax rolls completely.

The economic growth spurred by tax relief also spurred growth in Federal tax receipts. In fact, the Federal Treasury realized the largest three-year increase of revenue in 26 years, and tax receipts grew more than $542 billion between 2000 and 2007. And yes, much of that money went to investments in health care and education.

President Bush provided more than 40 million Americans with better access to prescription drugs by creating the market-based Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. And it is one of the rare government programs that actually costs less than expected. Projected overall program spending between 2004 and 2013 is approximately $240 billion lower, nearly 38 percent, than originally estimated, thanks to the market-oriented principles included at President Bush's insistence.

Despite the heated rhetoric over children's health insurance (S-CHIP) legislation last year, estimates from a 2007 Federal survey show that the number of uninsured children under the age of 18 actually declined by 800,000 from 2001 to 2007. From 2007 to 2008, the number of people covered by affordable and portable Health Savings Account-eligible plans increased 35 percent. Additionally, since President Bush took office, more than 1,200 community health centers have opened or expanded nationwide, which has helped provide treatment to nearly 17 million people.

Federal spending on education has increased nearly 40 percent under President Bush. Additionally, Pell Grant funding nearly doubled during the Administration, which is expected to help more than 5.5 million students attend college in the 2008-09 school year, 1.2 million more students than were assisted by Pell Grants in the 2001-02 school year. This financial aid assistance also helps account for the fact that 66 percent of high school graduates from the class of 2006 enrolled in colleges, compared to 63 percent in 2000.

Perhaps more importantly, the President's No Child Left Behind Act has delivered tangible results to students. Since the law was enacted, fourth-grade students have achieved their highest reading and math scores on record, eighth-grade students have achieved their highest math scores on record, and African-American and Hispanic students have posted all-time high scores in a number of categories, narrowing the gap between minority students and white students.

Myth 3: The President's "go it alone" foreign policy ruined America's standing in the world.

Reality:

Rarely can one see revisionist history occurring in the present, but this charge is nothing short of that. The United States acted with a multilateral coalition of partner nations to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq after he failed to comply with the will of the international community, including numerous United Nations Security Council Resolutions. To ignore this fact is not only a distortion of history, but it is also an insult to the service members of our coalition partners who sacrificed their lives to contribute to the success we are now witnessing in Iraq. And in Afghanistan, approximately forty countries are currently deployed with American forces, including every one of our NATO allies.

The President also created a worldwide coalition of more than 90 nations to combat terrorist networks by sharing information, drying up their financing, and bringing their leaders to justice. To date, we have captured or killed hundreds of al-Qaeda leaders and operatives with the help of partner nations. Furthermore, the Administration established the Proliferation Security Initiative, which now includes more than 90 nations, and other multilateral coalitions to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

The President successfully pushed for expanding NATO membership, generated international pressure on Iran to stop it from developing nuclear weapons, and organized the Six-Party Talks, which have resulted in North Korea committing to give up its nuclear weapons and abandon its nuclear programs. Verifying North Korea's commitment will be a challenge, but at the most recent Six-Party Talks meeting, there was strong consensus among the five parties that North Korea must submit to a comprehensive verification regime that accords with international standards.

U.S. ties in Asia have been strengthened over the past eight years, and the Administration has built strong relationships with China, Japan, and South Korea, among others. We have signed an historic civilian nuclear power agreement with India, reflecting a fundamental change in our relationship. Pro-American leaders have been elected in Germany, France, and Italy. Eastern European countries such as Georgia, Ukraine, and Kosovo treasure their relationships with the United States, and no president has done more to improve health and security in the nations of Africa. We have also strengthened cooperation with Latin America, including initiatives with Brazil on biofuels and with Mexico and Central America on fighting organized crime. Finally, when the President took office, America had trade agreements in force with only three countries, versus 14 today - with three additional agreements approved by Congress but not yet in force and agreements with three countries that are awaiting Congressional approval.

Myth 4: The war in Iraq caused us to "take our eye off the ball" in Afghanistan and with al Qaeda.

Reality:

Iraq and Afghanistan are two fronts in the same war, and while the success of the surge in Iraq has been visible, we have also had a quiet surge in Afghanistan. The U.S. has continuously and aggressively fought side-by-side with Afghans and our allies to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The United States has provided nearly $32 billion for security, political, and economic development assistance and the international community has provided more than $55 billion to Afghanistan since 2001.

An additional U.S. Marine battalion deployed to Afghanistan in November and they will be followed by an Army combat brigade of about 3,400 troops in early 2009. U.S. forces now total approximately 31,000, and are joined by nearly as many coalition troops. The United States and our allies are working with Afghanistan to help it nearly double the size of the Afghan National Army over the next five years, from 79,000 now trained to 134,000 in 2014.

We have also deployed Provincial Reconstruction Teams to ensure security gains are followed by real improvements in daily life, and we have helped local communities strengthen their economies and create jobs, deliver basic services, improve governance and fight corruption, and build or repair key infrastructure such as roads, bridges, hospitals, and schools. More than six million children, approximately two million of them girls, are now in Afghan schools, compared to fewer than one million in 2001.

In this Global War on Terror, we do not have the luxury to fight on one battlefront at a time. To defeat the terrorists, we must fight them overseas so we don't have to fight them here at home. Since 9/11, we have successfully captured or killed dozens of al-Qaeda's senior leadership and hundreds of al-Qaeda operatives in two dozen countries, removed al-Qaeda's safe-haven in Afghanistan and crippled al-Qaeda in Iraq, and disrupted numerous al Qaeda terrorist plots against the U.S., including a 2006 plot to blow up passenger planes traveling from London.

Myth 5: This Administration has been bad for the environment and ignored the problem of global warming.

Reality:

Given the liberal media's failure to acknowledge this Administration's true record on alternative energy, conservation, and climate change, it's not surprising this charge has stuck. But here are some irrefutable data points: From 2001 to 2007, air pollution decreased by 12 percent, and fine particulate matter pollution is down 17 percent since 2001. Ethanol production quadrupled from 1.6 billion gallons in 2000 to 6.5 billion gallons in 2007, wind energy production has increased by more than 400 percent, and solar energy capacity has doubled. In 2007, solar installations increased more than 32 percent and the U.S. produced 96 percent more biodiesel (490 million gallons) than in 2006. The Administration also provided nearly $18 billion to research, develop, and promote alternative and more efficient energy technologies such as biofuels, solar, wind, clean coal, nuclear, and hydrogen.

This Administration has improved and protected the health of more than 27 million acres of Federal forest and grasslands, protected, restored, and improved more than three million acres of wetlands, and established the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, the world's largest fully protected marine conservation area (nearly 140,000 square miles).

Much of the misperception about the President's environmental record is born out of the President's withdrawing the United States from the Kyoto Protocol, which did not include the effective participation of major developing countries such as India and China. Instead, the President worked to address climate change by launching the Major Economies Process, which convened the leaders of the world's major economies, both developed and developing, to work on ways to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve energy security without harming our economies or giving any nation a free ride. Finally, the President set the country on course to stop the growth of greenhouse gas emissions below projected levels by 2025 and invested more than $44 billion in climate change-related programs.

Some other items that are infrequently mentioned about the real record of the Bush Administration but are worth noting: Teenage drug use has declined 25 percent; in 2007, the violent crime rate was 43 percent lower than the rate in 1998; between 2005 and 2007, the chronically homeless population decreased approximately 30 percent; funding for veterans' medical care has increased more than 115 percent; and as of 2005, the most recent abortion rate is at its lowest since 1974.

And one last fact: Our homeland has not suffered another terrorist attack since September 11, 2001. That, too, is part of the real Bush record.

Of course some members here who suffer from BDS will attempt to pick apart his record and will say this or that or this wasn't enough or list what they believe to be as detractors such as the Patriot Act, Gitmo, etc. That is fine and expected. But the record is what it is.

GOOGLE admits staff will 'pick and choose search results'.

GOOGLE admits staff will 'pick and choose search results'.

I am a big time google user and through business I am familiar with how businesses "work" their page ranking. I've also been given projects to see how a company I worked for ranked, its services and products, compared to it's competition using various wordings and phrases and comparing them on 5 of the major search engines.

So a couple of years ago I started to notice a "disturbance in the force".

Something wasn't right. I went nosing around and looked into the owners of Google and just what kinds of things they are up to when not "in the office".

Well from my point of view it didn't look good. Was it paranoia? After all I also belong to conspiracy organization, VRWC, so it is easy to look at shadows and see nefarious things in them.

But Google says that it's searches are all done by computers using their patented algorithm. That is why people have faith in the search engine. It is interest driven and isn't bias.

It is akin to a charity that publicizes that 95 cents of all donations go to the cause that the money is given to and only 5% goes to administration. You have faith in the charity because if it is found out that only 25% goes to the cause and 75% goes to the fat cats running it no one would contribute to it. The charity has cut it's own throat.

So it is an issue of faith. So Google became the #1 search engine because people have faith that they are going to get honest results for their inquiries.

I don't know. Maybe it is because that Google is now so big and does so many other things. It does everything that Microsoft Office can do and it's free. It has it's own email, Google Earth, YouTube, Blogs, News, IM, it's own browser...

Well lets just say that they are now diversify.

But now I have validation for my suspicions. Why was there such a wide difference when using multiple search engines when looking up lets say conservative issues?


Google cranks up the Consensus Engine

Manufacturing isn't dead - it just went to Mountain View

Google this week admitted that its staff will pick and choose what appears in its search results. It's a historic statement - and nobody has yet grasped its significance.

Not so very long ago, Google disclaimed responsibility for its search results by explaining that these were chosen by a computer algorithm. The disclaimer lives on at Google News, where we are assured that:

The selection and placement of stories on this page were determined automatically by a computer program.

A few years ago, Google's apparently unimpeachable objectivity got some people very excited, and technology utopians began to herald Google as the conduit for a new form of democracy. Google was only too pleased to encourage this view. It explained that its algorithm "relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page's value. "

That Google was impartial was one of the articles of faith. For if Google was ever to be found to be applying subjective human judgment directly on the process, it would be akin to the voting machines being rigged.

For these soothsayers of the Hive Mind, the years ahead looked prosperous. As blog-aware marketing and media consultants, they saw a lucrative future in explaining the New Emergent World Order to the uninitiated. (That part has come true - Web 2.0 "gurus" now advise large media companies).

It wasn't surprising, then, that when five years ago I described how a small, self-selected number of people could rig Google's search results, the reaction from the people doing the rigging was violently antagonistic. Who lifted that rock? they cried.

But what was once Googlewashing by a select few now has Google's active participation.

This week Marissa Meyer explained that editorial judgments will play a key role in Google searches. It was reported by Tech Crunch proprietor Michael Arrington - who Nick Carr called the "Madam of the Web 2.0 Brothel" - but its significance wasn't noted. The irony flew safely over his head at 30,000 feet. Arrington observed:

Mayer also talked about Google’s use of user data created by actions on Wiki search to improve search results on Google in general. For now that data is not being used to change overall search results, she said. But in the future it’s likely Google will use the data to at least make obvious changes. An example is if “thousands of people” were to knock a search result off a search page, they’d be likely to make a change.

Now what, you may be thinking, is an "obvious change"? Is it one that is frivolous? (Thereby introducing a Google Frivolitimeter™ [Beta]). Or is it one that goes against the grain of the consensus? If so, then who decides what the consensus must be? Make no mistake, Google is moving into new territory: not only making arbitrary, editorial choices - really no different to Fox News, say, or any other media organization. It's now in the business of validating and manufacturing consent: not only reporting what people say, but how you should think.

Who's hand is upon the wheel, here?

The Real Bush Record. All that is fit to print. - Topic Powered by eve community

The Real Bush Record. All that is fit to print. - Topic Powered by eve community

Myths and Facts About the Real Bush Record

More on how news sources influence the thinking of the general public.

News sources have many means available to them in reporting the news. Some but not all of them are:

News prominence. This is where in the newspaper, magazine or broadcast the story is covered. Front page or page 32 section B. Is it a full column, large paragraph or a couple of sentences. Cover story or just listed listed in the index and also were it ranks in the index. Top story of the broadcast with coverage or a one line sentence just before going to sports or weather. And lastly but most important their discretion as to the news worthiness of the story and whither it is reported at all.

Spin off stories. A technique use to keep a news story on the front burner for a longer period of time to insure public saturation. Spin off stories usually retells the original story with one or two minor details added. Sometimes new details are replaced with speculations.

Writer's or Editorial slant. One of the most well known techniques and is the basis for many arguments over right wing vs. left wing coverage.

Collusion. Now this is venomously denied by the major news sources. It makes you wonder though. An example would be when you flip through the major evening newscasts they all have the same lead story. This in it's self is not that unlikely but it gets more interesting when you start flipping between ABC, NBC, CBS and the second, third stories are all the same.

Part of the issue may be that the people reporting and producing these shows all come from the same schools and backgrounds and to some extent people with exceptionalness and creativeness are weeded out by the system. But it must make you wonder.

After all there is collusion on when commercials, are run, (a long known agreement among broadcasters to prevent audience drifting), and their reporting is so similar.

Again it makes you wonder.

Recently we saw John Zigler's Zogby poll that prove that a majority of voting Americans were either uninformed or misinformed about the issues between the presidential candidates.

Now to the Myths and Facts of the Bush Record.

As the year draws to an end and President Bush enters his final month in office, there is much commentary about the Administration's record over the past eight years. Unsurprisingly, many of these stories assail and distort the President's record and recycle myths and unfounded allegations that have been leveled for the better part of his two terms. Historical accuracy requires a response to the litany of attacks leveled against President Bush, and while there's not enough space to respond to all of them, here are five of the most egregious:

Myth 1: The last eight years were awful for most Americans economically and President Bush's deregulatory policies caused the current financial crisis.

Reality:

President Bush's time in office is ending as it began, with our economy under stress. The recession President Bush inherited as he entered office ran through the attacks of September 11, 2001, but during the recovery that followed, and due in no small part to the tax relief President Bush worked with Congress to provide, this country experienced its longest run of uninterrupted job growth - 52 straight months, with 8.3 million jobs created.

This reflected six consecutive years of economic growth from the Fourth Quarter of 2001 until the Fourth Quarter of 2007. From 2000 to 2007, real GDP grew by more than 17 percent, a remarkable gain of nearly 2.1 trillion dollars. This growth was driven in part by increased labor productivity gains that have averaged 2.5 percent annually since 2001, a rate that exceeds the averages of the 1970s, '80s, and '90s. In the same period, real after-tax income per capita increased by more than 11 percent, and there was a 4.7 percent increase in the number of new businesses formed. The current economic challenges, which the President and his Administration have responded to aggressively, threaten to reverse some of these gains - but the gains cannot be denied.

As for the current crisis, the President and his economic team have taken unprecedented actions to stabilize the financial sector and avert a collapse. While there are a number of causes of the housing and credit crises that are at the root of our current economic troubles, deregulation by the Bush Administration is simply not one of them. In fact, one of the circumstances that contributed to the crisis was the failure of the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which President Bush long tried to subject to greater regulation. In April 2001, three months after taking office, the President warned in his first budget that the size of the two GSEs were a "potential problem" that "could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." In 2003, the Administration began calling for a new GSE regulator, and over the next five years, the Administration continued to call for GSE reform only to be accused by Democrats in Congress of creating artificial fears and advocating for ill-advised proposals. By the time Congress finally acted in 2008 to provide the oversight the President requested, it was too late to prevent systemic consequences. Had the Administration's initial reform proposals been adopted, some of today's turmoil in our financial markets may have been averted.

Myth 2: President Bush's tax cuts only benefitted the wealthy and were paid for by sacrificing investments in health care and education.

Reality:

There are not 116 million "wealthy Americans," but that's how many taxpayers benefited from the President's tax relief. The across-the-board tax cuts provided tax relief to every American who pays income taxes, created a new bottom 10 percent bracket rate, doubled the child tax credit to $1,000, and actually increased the share of the Federal income tax burden paid by the top 10 percent of individual earners from 67 percent in 2000 to 70 percent in 2005. Furthermore, this Administration removed 13 million low-income earners from the income tax rolls completely.

The economic growth spurred by tax relief also spurred growth in Federal tax receipts. In fact, the Federal Treasury realized the largest three-year increase of revenue in 26 years, and tax receipts grew more than $542 billion between 2000 and 2007. And yes, much of that money went to investments in health care and education.

President Bush provided more than 40 million Americans with better access to prescription drugs by creating the market-based Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. And it is one of the rare government programs that actually costs less than expected. Projected overall program spending between 2004 and 2013 is approximately $240 billion lower, nearly 38 percent, than originally estimated, thanks to the market-oriented principles included at President Bush's insistence.

Despite the heated rhetoric over children's health insurance (S-CHIP) legislation last year, estimates from a 2007 Federal survey show that the number of uninsured children under the age of 18 actually declined by 800,000 from 2001 to 2007. From 2007 to 2008, the number of people covered by affordable and portable Health Savings Account-eligible plans increased 35 percent. Additionally, since President Bush took office, more than 1,200 community health centers have opened or expanded nationwide, which has helped provide treatment to nearly 17 million people.

Federal spending on education has increased nearly 40 percent under President Bush. Additionally, Pell Grant funding nearly doubled during the Administration, which is expected to help more than 5.5 million students attend college in the 2008-09 school year, 1.2 million more students than were assisted by Pell Grants in the 2001-02 school year. This financial aid assistance also helps account for the fact that 66 percent of high school graduates from the class of 2006 enrolled in colleges, compared to 63 percent in 2000.

Perhaps more importantly, the President's No Child Left Behind Act has delivered tangible results to students. Since the law was enacted, fourth-grade students have achieved their highest reading and math scores on record, eighth-grade students have achieved their highest math scores on record, and African-American and Hispanic students have posted all-time high scores in a number of categories, narrowing the gap between minority students and white students.

Myth 3: The President's "go it alone" foreign policy ruined America's standing in the world.

Reality:

Rarely can one see revisionist history occurring in the present, but this charge is nothing short of that. The United States acted with a multilateral coalition of partner nations to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq after he failed to comply with the will of the international community, including numerous United Nations Security Council Resolutions. To ignore this fact is not only a distortion of history, but it is also an insult to the service members of our coalition partners who sacrificed their lives to contribute to the success we are now witnessing in Iraq. And in Afghanistan, approximately forty countries are currently deployed with American forces, including every one of our NATO allies.

The President also created a worldwide coalition of more than 90 nations to combat terrorist networks by sharing information, drying up their financing, and bringing their leaders to justice. To date, we have captured or killed hundreds of al-Qaeda leaders and operatives with the help of partner nations. Furthermore, the Administration established the Proliferation Security Initiative, which now includes more than 90 nations, and other multilateral coalitions to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

The President successfully pushed for expanding NATO membership, generated international pressure on Iran to stop it from developing nuclear weapons, and organized the Six-Party Talks, which have resulted in North Korea committing to give up its nuclear weapons and abandon its nuclear programs. Verifying North Korea's commitment will be a challenge, but at the most recent Six-Party Talks meeting, there was strong consensus among the five parties that North Korea must submit to a comprehensive verification regime that accords with international standards.

U.S. ties in Asia have been strengthened over the past eight years, and the Administration has built strong relationships with China, Japan, and South Korea, among others. We have signed an historic civilian nuclear power agreement with India, reflecting a fundamental change in our relationship. Pro-American leaders have been elected in Germany, France, and Italy. Eastern European countries such as Georgia, Ukraine, and Kosovo treasure their relationships with the United States, and no president has done more to improve health and security in the nations of Africa. We have also strengthened cooperation with Latin America, including initiatives with Brazil on biofuels and with Mexico and Central America on fighting organized crime. Finally, when the President took office, America had trade agreements in force with only three countries, versus 14 today - with three additional agreements approved by Congress but not yet in force and agreements with three countries that are awaiting Congressional approval.

Myth 4: The war in Iraq caused us to "take our eye off the ball" in Afghanistan and with al Qaeda.

Reality:

Iraq and Afghanistan are two fronts in the same war, and while the success of the surge in Iraq has been visible, we have also had a quiet surge in Afghanistan. The U.S. has continuously and aggressively fought side-by-side with Afghans and our allies to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The United States has provided nearly $32 billion for security, political, and economic development assistance and the international community has provided more than $55 billion to Afghanistan since 2001.

An additional U.S. Marine battalion deployed to Afghanistan in November and they will be followed by an Army combat brigade of about 3,400 troops in early 2009. U.S. forces now total approximately 31,000, and are joined by nearly as many coalition troops. The United States and our allies are working with Afghanistan to help it nearly double the size of the Afghan National Army over the next five years, from 79,000 now trained to 134,000 in 2014.

We have also deployed Provincial Reconstruction Teams to ensure security gains are followed by real improvements in daily life, and we have helped local communities strengthen their economies and create jobs, deliver basic services, improve governance and fight corruption, and build or repair key infrastructure such as roads, bridges, hospitals, and schools. More than six million children, approximately two million of them girls, are now in Afghan schools, compared to fewer than one million in 2001.

In this Global War on Terror, we do not have the luxury to fight on one battlefront at a time. To defeat the terrorists, we must fight them overseas so we don't have to fight them here at home. Since 9/11, we have successfully captured or killed dozens of al-Qaeda's senior leadership and hundreds of al-Qaeda operatives in two dozen countries, removed al-Qaeda's safe-haven in Afghanistan and crippled al-Qaeda in Iraq, and disrupted numerous al Qaeda terrorist plots against the U.S., including a 2006 plot to blow up passenger planes traveling from London.

Myth 5: This Administration has been bad for the environment and ignored the problem of global warming.

Reality:

Given the liberal media's failure to acknowledge this Administration's true record on alternative energy, conservation, and climate change, it's not surprising this charge has stuck. But here are some irrefutable data points: From 2001 to 2007, air pollution decreased by 12 percent, and fine particulate matter pollution is down 17 percent since 2001. Ethanol production quadrupled from 1.6 billion gallons in 2000 to 6.5 billion gallons in 2007, wind energy production has increased by more than 400 percent, and solar energy capacity has doubled. In 2007, solar installations increased more than 32 percent and the U.S. produced 96 percent more biodiesel (490 million gallons) than in 2006. The Administration also provided nearly $18 billion to research, develop, and promote alternative and more efficient energy technologies such as biofuels, solar, wind, clean coal, nuclear, and hydrogen.

This Administration has improved and protected the health of more than 27 million acres of Federal forest and grasslands, protected, restored, and improved more than three million acres of wetlands, and established the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, the world's largest fully protected marine conservation area (nearly 140,000 square miles).

Much of the misperception about the President's environmental record is born out of the President's withdrawing the United States from the Kyoto Protocol, which did not include the effective participation of major developing countries such as India and China. Instead, the President worked to address climate change by launching the Major Economies Process, which convened the leaders of the world's major economies, both developed and developing, to work on ways to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve energy security without harming our economies or giving any nation a free ride. Finally, the President set the country on course to stop the growth of greenhouse gas emissions below projected levels by 2025 and invested more than $44 billion in climate change-related programs.

Some other items that are infrequently mentioned about the real record of the Bush Administration but are worth noting: Teenage drug use has declined 25 percent; in 2007, the violent crime rate was 43 percent lower than the rate in 1998; between 2005 and 2007, the chronically homeless population decreased approximately 30 percent; funding for veterans' medical care has increased more than 115 percent; and as of 2005, the most recent abortion rate is at its lowest since 1974.

And one last fact: Our homeland has not suffered another terrorist attack since September 11, 2001. That, too, is part of the real Bush record.

Of course some members here who suffer from BDS will attempt to pick apart his record and will say this or that or this wasn't enough or list what they believe to be as detractors such as the Patriot Act, Gitmo, etc. That is fine and expected. But the record is what it is.