Warren Hinckle and the Glory that was Ramparts

[Scott Kaiser]

Scott, the word is "bearer" not barrier.

And that was not my point.

Don't want to put words into Scott's mouth, Jim, but I believe Scott meant to type " carrier" and mistyped.

IMO

IMO

No worries, everybody has one!

[Scott Kaiser]

Scott, there is a slight difference between a typo and using the opposite word that one should use. (And you have done worse than this btw, may I? Like getting the wrong Tom Scully at Spartacus.)

And then saying, Why I knew it all along and now I get to indicate a typo? And you missed two others in the piece by the way.

If you have nothing to say, then just don't say anything.

Especially when you missed my point about the Iraq War.

Geez, Scott, do you really think it was about oil? Or was it about W wanting to one up his father?

Either way it does not compute, since that is not what I meant, but I guess you did not follow the argument. WHIch is pretty SOP with you.

Keep on working on those A 4's buddy.

Keep on working on those A 4's buddy.

I'm still waiting on you to prove me wrong? BTW... Did you like my comment in the interview below? Truth, I heard it's worst then telling a lie, it hurts?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsSACp2j1Ck

[Jim DiEugenio]

Scott, the word is "bearer" not barrier.

And that was not my point.

Don't want to put words into Scott's mouth, Jim, but I believe Scott meant to type " carrier" and mistyped.

IMO

Oh thanks Ray, I guess that was part of his A-4 "carrier" idea?

[Jim DiEugenio]

There are two things that, in my opinion, contribute to the lack of journalistic integrity that you describe:

1. More and more media outlets are being owned by fewer and fewer people, including the buying up (and smothering) of smaller "upstart" publications.
2. The fact that online journalism is so easy. Every asshole with a keyboard can express their opinion on anything, and they often do. It becomes impossible to sort the wheat from the chaff, and there is no editorial standards behind most of what's published. Even if a well written piece is presented, it's hidden among the mediocrity and disinformation.

In the latter part of the article, what really surprised me was the lack of any integrity in the online community. Like TPM, Daily Kos, Huffpo etc. It was like they did not want to tell the truth, they really wanted to be the new MSM, except online. And in some areas, they even cooperated with the NY Times. Just link to that article I wrote about them at the end when I went up against Jane Hamsher. These online journals even practice censorship, which I think everyone knows about.

That is why I wanted to show that there really was a journal at one time that did try and tell the truth about events like the JFK case. And it worked! And it was not a nutty Alex Jones operation. It was real journalism, well written and well documented.

[Scott Kaiser]

Every asshole with a keyboard can express their opinion on anything, and they often do.... Even if a well written piece is presented, it's hidden among the mediocrity and disinformation.

I have to disagree, everything that is hidden or in the dark will eventually to come light. They can "monitor" ones publication, but the only other way to hide it, is to have it removed. A perfect example is here, any asshole here can say what they want, and, they do. Whatever someone posts can be monitored, however, it can't be hidden unless the monitor hides your comment, or someone from the government intervenes with a program to remove your comment, otherwise, any comment and or publication written by that asshole is up for the reading, and those who read that assholes information whatever that material might be is then decided among other assholes for truth or fiction, right Jim?

[Tracy Riddle]

TPM, DailyKos, HuffPost, etc. don't do conspiracy theories, except when they do (I remember Rachel Maddow doing a lot of speculatin' about Bridgegate and Chris Christie, and some of it got pretty inventive). The partisan media is designed to keep people in their little boxes, distract them with trivia, and not encourage independent thought about big issues.

My favorite incident recently was where MSNBC was attacking "conspiracy theorists" (= Trump supporters, Alex Jones, Breitbart), and then they later played a clip of Hillary in the late 1990s complaining about the "vast right wing conspiracy" against the Clintons. So some conspiracy theories are perfectly fine.


Oh, and the Iraq War was about planting a US military footprint in the region, and removing an enemy of Israel. The oil was secondary.

[Jim DiEugenio]

But here is the question I was posing, perhaps a little too subtly:

Why would the online generation want to mimic the MSM?

It is the MSM that has brought us to the point we are at today: where the economy almost went off the cliff, where you can literally fabricate out of whole cloth the reason for a war that literally made everything in the region worse than it was, where elections gets stolen and everyone knows about it and the Supreme Court validates it etc etc etc.

Why did the so called Netroots follow that path? Why is it so controlled to the point they actually censor Jesse Ventura on 9-11?

Ramparts did not do that and they succeeded. That is why I tried to hold them up as model of what real journalism was and can be. I really don't understand it.

[Scott Kaiser]

But here is the question I was posing, perhaps a little too subtly:

Why would the online generation want to mimic the MSM?

It is the MSM that has brought us to the point we are at today: where the economy almost went off the cliff, where you can literally fabricate out of whole cloth the reason for a war that literally made everything in the region worse than it was, where elections gets stolen and everyone knows about it and the Supreme Court validates it etc etc etc.

Why did the so called Netroots follow that path? Why is it so controlled to the point they actually censor Jesse Ventura on 9-11?

Ramparts did not do that and they succeeded. That is why I tried to hold them up as model of what really journalism was and can be. I really don't understand it.

Welcome to Democracy Jim! SMH....

[Scott Kaiser]

That is why I tried to hold them up as model of what really journalism was and can be.

Should it read, That is why I tried to hold them up as (a) model of what *real* journalism was and can be. Just saying, I know.... It's a typo.

[Jim DiEugenio]

Now I think its true that Moulitsas actually served an internship with the CIA, right?