Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 21, 2006

WB: There's No Business Like Show Business


There's No Business Like Show Business

Posted by b on June 21, 2006 at 01:49 AM | Permalink


...yeah they all deserve oscars for lying with straight faces; Bush too, even if he is just a dummy.

Posted by: Rick Happ | Jun 21, 2006 2:27:58 AM | 1

Did anybody else catch the Frontline piece on TV last night ??

A great show detailing the stovepiping of intel by Cheney et al. Even for a news junkie like me, there was still a lot of new info.
How many of you know that the draft for Powell's UN speech/presentation was written by Scooter Libby ??

More on it here. Frontline: The Dark Side

Posted by: Chamed Ahlabi | Jun 21, 2006 12:41:56 PM | 2

Caught only the last hour of the dark side, and yes an interesting round up of all the bits and pieces, many of which we've chewed over here. But what stood out for me -- and this was most infuriating -- is how all these people involved, or those observing and now reflecting, could not or would not blow the whistle on the overwhelming and obvious conclusion that the cheney administration was re-arranging the entire field of evidence to fit their nefarious intent. And to watch those involved now act out this kabuki pantamine of grave concern about what was so obviously a total fabracation is truely outrageious. That by some magic spell all these career diplomats, analysts, and or agents or experts refused to see the forest for the trees simultaniously, and just went along for the ride is just incredilous on the face of it -- am I suppose to believe all these people are innocents, as babes incapable of wider reflection, exchanging notes with each other, or noticing the huge buerocratic shuffle going on within their midst -- well I kinda fucking doubt it. And if that were not bad enough, not one of these dip shits can seem to offer up even the most meger explanation as to the WHY!~!~!~! all this had to happen, that if these reasons for war were false, then WHY~!~!~! DID we go to war? So as good as the Frontline program was, we'll never get anywhere until we (the public) begin to answer these questions.

Posted by: anna missed | Jun 21, 2006 4:04:47 PM | 3

haven't read the transcripts, but you can do a lot in post-production - a snip here, a juxtaposition there, shape a clever narrative based on someone's subjective intrepretation of what the story was & what the audience will see. maybe some last minute edits after screenings by the new PBS overlords, or cheney's PR coordinating committee. or fear of a deluge of rightwing wackoo's. or having the plug on their remaining govt subsidies pulled.

maybe the interviewee's individually figure that they'll let someone else make those connections - they'll just state enough info that won't get them put on a list for one of cheney's hunting adventures. paranoia could be a big factor - frontline hasn't exactly been a strong investigative program for a number of years now - maybe this program is a honeypot for the new PBS overlords to catch more leakers. why take the risk in this national security state? might get renditioned on a light jet to bumfuck egypt.

or there's always brainwashing. oh wait - that's what's supposed to happen to the viewer. follow the line of responsibility for the program - it's the producer.

how's this for a dodge? the very first question in an online Q&A w/ producer michael kirk:

Pittsburgh, Pa: First of all, congratulations. A beautifully constructed report. It leaves several questions unanswered (why did so many people go along for the ride?), but an upsetting, well-produced piece.

Can I purchase the program on DVD?

Michael Kirk: Thank you. The response has been gratifying, and the ratings were very strong, which tells us people are interested in this matter to a very high degree. DVD's can be purchased at's that for a commercial right away....)

Posted by: b real | Jun 21, 2006 4:50:14 PM | 4

oh hell. i didn't watch the program & just now read thru the full list of interviewees. eight of 'em from langley, two from foggy bottom, a couple dod'ers, a couple "national security advisers" & a former editor from wapo. there's your answer.

Posted by: b real | Jun 21, 2006 5:09:13 PM | 5

Kurt Nimmo Television (He's Doing Film Work now...Impressive)

Are we looking at a new form of News media w/the DIY programs like youtube and others? I say bring it on... (pun intended).

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 21, 2006 8:36:54 PM | 6

Opps, try this one: Kurt Nimmo Television (He's Doing Film Work now...Impressive)

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 21, 2006 8:44:00 PM | 7

Yeah, all the "reasons" were debunked before the war by reputable experts. Then afterwards everyone looks surprised that the reasons don't hold up under 'tough questions'. But it's not enough to ask tough questions. It is not enough to conclude that there must have been another reason for the war. It is not enough even to ask the question 'so then why did we go to war?'

What they should be doing is saying "Here's why we went to war: Bush and Blair and congress and corporate media went to war for oil profit and subcontract profit. They lied because they are greedy enough to commit atrocities and they can't prove it ain't so."

Posted by: gylangirl | Jun 21, 2006 8:54:01 PM | 8

Sorry kids, techical difficulties ,pleez standby...or go to American Samzidat and scroll down a wee bit...

Amsam seems to be under attack by the indirect means of blogger leaving it out to dry...

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 21, 2006 8:56:26 PM | 9

Postscript on Societies of Control

Oh and wmd's??? fox news is claiming that wmd's were found in Iraq. Is it ethical to state as truth that which was been unconfirmed by anyone but one person? Depending on how this pans out, this could continue the shift of approval that started last week.

Is this a counter PR assault on PBS?

Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 21, 2006 9:28:48 PM | 10

CNN has the story too. looks like a blitz to me...

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 21, 2006 9:37:37 PM | 11

Ron Suskind on CNN (sorry if I'm repeating someone on an earlier thread)

says some important things-

such as, Al Jazeera was deliberatly targeted. (which has been the conventional wisdom here and on most progressive blogs for years -- in spite of reich wing denials.)

Remember the attack on the Palestine Hotel, that Christiane Amanpour said was deliberate, too? The Spanish journalist that was killed? So the message for those journalists was that if you cover the war independently, you are perceived as a legit target for attack by the Cheney govt... to send a "message."

Editor and Publisher has covered the attacks on journalists since 2003.

...and the CIA determined that Osama was making a video to support Bush's re-election in 2004 --b/c it is in bin Laden's interest to have such reactionary imbeciles in power here.

hmmm, so, that reich wing talking point about liberals and bin Laden sounding alike...would that mean they and bin Laden ARE alike...they share the same goal?

so why do they hate America? why do they send young men and women to kill and be killed for Dr. Strangelove-Cheney?

THIS is the question (which calls for responses that may be taken to the American public:

What is it about the war on terror that makes bin Laden want to have Bush as president?

...this is the question that has to get past the fear in Americans to make them stop the current shame them into looking at what America has become...yes, I know it was already, but it was NOT an open admission to Americans.

they need to get that ole time religion and ask themselves why it's okay to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi babies if they do, but not if anyone else does.

...with god on our side.

Posted by: fauxreal | Jun 21, 2006 9:41:46 PM | 12

Uncca- of course they are claiming this to counter the truly explosive info that Susskind has published and that Frontline is trying to tell the American ppl.

with the information about deliberately targeting al jazeera, isn't this enough information to call for an independent investigation to see if we should remand the top people in the Bush admin for war crimes prosectutions...for crimes against humanity?

the wmd story is a firescreen. I bet the story is gone in two days...oops, not quite.

Posted by: fauxreal | Jun 21, 2006 9:44:56 PM | 13


isn't this enough information to call for an independent investigation to see if we should remand the top people in the Bush admin for war crimes prosectutions...for crimes against humanity?

That threshold was passed a long time ago. With a Republican majority in congress it won't happen. Democrats are probably too spineless to do that much even if they win control. Also, with Bush renouncing the world court treaty not much can happen internationally.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 21, 2006 10:07:27 PM | 14

so then, Uncca- if we have a lawless regime in power, what other recourse do we have to get rid of them?

do we have to camp out in front of congress and demand that they honor our treaties? aren't treaties the rocks that crush partisan papers and bipartisan scissor kicks away from the shores of decency?

Posted by: fauxreal | Jun 21, 2006 10:18:16 PM | 15


That's the thing that pisses me off the most. Anyone standing even slightly outside the American corporate media/political system could see that the whole thing was made up. I read that staffers from the UN debunked the whole Niger uranium thing by doing a Google search for the name on the documents. And yet there's still a 'mystery' about it which we need experts to debunk.

Posted by: Rowan | Jun 21, 2006 10:27:23 PM | 16


so then, Uncca- if we have a lawless regime in power, what other recourse do we have to get rid of them?

I have no answers only questions...

The Power of the Powerless

Václav Havel
Translated by Paul Wilson

A specter is haunting Eastern Europe [America]: the specter of what in the West is called "dissent" This specter has not appeared out of thin air. It is a natural and inevitable consequence of the present historical phase of the system it is haunting. It was born at a time when this system, for a thousand reasons, can no longer base itself on the unadulterated, brutal, and arbitrary application of power, eliminating all expressions of nonconformity. What is more, the system has become so ossified politically that there is practically no way for such nonconformity to be implemented within its official structures.

Who are these so-called dissidents? Where does their point of view come from, and what. importance does it have? What is the significance of the "independent initiatives" in which "dissidents" collaborate, and what real chances do such initiatives have of success? Is it appropriate to refer to "dissidents" as an opposition? If so, what exactly is such an opposition within the framework of this system? What does it do? What role does it play in society? What are its hopes and on what are they based? Is it within the power of the "dissidents"-as a category of subcitizen outside the power establishment-to have any influence at all on society and the social system? Can they actually change anything?

I think that an examination of these questions-an examination of the potential of the "powerless"- can only begin with an examination of the nature of power in the circumstances in which these powerless people operate....

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 22, 2006 12:55:50 AM | 17

Well, the WMD claim didn´t survive long: Lawmakers Cite Weapons Found in Iraq

Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, and Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) told reporters yesterday that weapons of mass destruction had in fact been found in Iraq, despite acknowledgments by the White House and the insistence of the intelligence community that no such weapons had been discovered.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Santorum said.
The U.S. military announced in 2004 in Iraq that several crates of the old shells had been uncovered and that they contained a blister agent that was no longer active. Neither the military nor the White House nor the CIA considered the shells to be evidence of what was alleged by the Bush administration to be a current Iraqi program to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

Last night, intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.

Posted by: b | Jun 22, 2006 1:34:13 AM | 18

'blister agent': white phosphorus? what US troops used on civilians at fallujah?

Posted by: gylangirl | Jun 22, 2006 10:17:11 AM | 19

chamed...I saw Frontline the other night too..aptly entitled: "The Dark Side", it details the tentacles of power that Cheney has established and his orchestration of the war in iraq both behind the scene and in front of the camera on Sunday morning talk/manipulation shows. Absolutely chilling.
It can be watched online now @

Posted by: byteb | Jun 22, 2006 12:52:58 PM | 20

NASA Floats De-Corporatization
Shuttle Launch May Be Its Last

API - Cape Rumsfeld, Florida
26 June, 2006

Faced with almost certain demise of either
their shuttle crew, or their mission budget,
senior NASA administrator's offered up today
the almost unthinkable - de-corporatizing our
national monument to unachievable vanity and
unimaginable waste, by taking NASA private.

Fourteen seats on the very last shuttle flight
still authorized and budgeted, will be auctioned
off at London's Southerby Auction House over the
4th of July (not an English holiday). Asking
price for the auction will be $2B per seat, the
annual budget of NASA, divided by the fourteen
chances to fly in the very last space shuttle (VLSS).

NASA's colossal $28B auction will be televised
and reported on by NASA's own 28 media staff,
which will make them, if the auction goes off
with the success anticipated for it, the most
highly successfully 'advertising' journalists in
the entire history of the Hawking's Universe.

President Bush, eager to salvage at least one
surplus from his failed administration, and so
get his paws on $28B to divert to war in Iraq
and siphoned back to his campaign, upped the
offer with an official White House memorial.

The winning bidders will be offered momentos
commemorating their contribution to America.

A bid of $50,000,000 earns them a Ranger plaque
cast in bronze, while a bid of $500,000,000 earns
them a Pilgrim statue cast in sterling silver.
Any bid over $1,000,000,000 earns the lucky
bidder a naked Tinkerbelle medallion, cast in
24K gold and sprinkled with a halo of diamonds.

Charters of Freedom.

Creosine bidders who top $10,000,000,000 for the
chance to ride the VLSS will have their personal
signatures engraved onto the original United
States Bill of Rights in the Charters of Freedom
Hall in Washington DC, next time it comes up for
cleaning and re-soldering in about, oh, 2018.

The group of lucky bidders will undergo five
months of intense training at the space shuttle
academy at Fort Ticonderoga, in order to weed out
those unfit for space flight, or public glory.

A followup lottery will be held at the Belagio
Hotel in Las Vegas on Christmas Day, December
25th (definitely not a holiday in Nevada), to see
which of the remaining successful bidders will
actually get lobbed into LEO on the VLSS.

The VLSS itself did not return our calls, when
asked for an interview. Instead, it just sat there on the launch pad, smoking in the sun,
lost in its own private fantasies of what you
could really do with $28,000,000,000.

Think of all that sweet, sweet, hydrazine-tang!

Posted by: Palacio Madras | Jun 23, 2006 1:02:02 AM | 21

You got an link/addy for that? I'd like to pass it on. Cut and paste is fine, I'll repost it as a html link.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 23, 2006 2:02:17 AM | 22

Hehe... API, American Petroleum Institute.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 23, 2006 2:04:29 AM | 23

The comments to this entry are closed.