<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
Joan et. al.<BR>
<BR>
After I sent the reference to "Manufacturing Consent" by Noam Chomsky today, I pondered that the way the public and the US Congress was led to support the invasion of Iraq in Gulf War Two actually fit Chomsky's theories on media and manipulation of public opinion far better than the examples Chomsky gave in his great book and political video documentary of the same name. <BR>
<BR>
This was classic case of "manufacturing consent" through deliberate use of the media to spread false information by repetition of the desired content and marginalizing protesting voices: to institute control via inspiring fear, and exploiting the anger from and need for revenge for the 9/11 attacks. The media filters in place operated with precision though there was no coordinated top down conspiracy to enforce them. All that had to be suggested was that a journalist was not being patriotic or supporting the Commander In Chief in a time of war to silence wide spread dissent. Bush played the good vs. evil card to great effect, one of the oldest tricks in the book, but it still works. How little human beings have changed in thousands of years!<BR>
<BR>
Kerry is not my first choice for President. Politicians who are eager to militarize the image of the civilian position of President, as Kerry is doing, make me very nervous, with control of the US military ostensibly in civilians hands, however much cynics may laugh at this. Of course, Kerry is trying to steal the "Commander In Chief" image from Bush, but still... Maybe we must have a candidate who does militarize the image of President to defeat Bush. <BR>
<BR>
I guess this is the obvious political strategy. My idealism is out the window on this... The lesser of two evils makes so much sense now.<BR>
<BR>
The upcoming Supreme and Federal Court judge appointments alone justify supporting Kerry over Bush, even if Kerry's Iraq policy is identical to Bush!<BR>
<BR>
If I hear another Nader lunatic tell me there is no difference between Kerry and Bush, like they said about Bush and Gore, I will become apoplectic.<BR>
<BR>
If Gore had entered the White House, as he surely should have according to the will of the American people, we would not have invaded Iraq, I am certain. <BR>
<BR>
I expected you to call me on the error in my last post on this Kerry's Iraq war vote subject, where I gave a numbered list preceded by the statement:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">"the following facts or intelligence sourcing by the Bush administration (used to justify the most frightening image Bush spoke directly to the American people in a speech, the "mushroom cloud" over America) were false or misleading."</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Of course this might imply that I thought Hans Blix and Scott Ridder were being false or misleading, as they were listed as the 5th on my list, but of course I meant that to dismiss them was a false or misleading approach by the Bush administration.<BR>
<BR>
Details, details... I might be happier if I followed our Commander In Chief and just stopped reading the newspapers. The higher father in heaven will guide us ... who needs the facts?<BR>
<BR>
Ted Moffett</FONT></HTML>