|
In-House
Memos on Television And Print Media News Presentations
To see prior Installments of "Controlling the
News" click
here
During the middle of March, 2003, tbrnews received an email
from a man who claimed to be a mid-level executive with a major
American television network. He stated in this, and subsequent,
emails that he was in possession of “thousands” of pages of
in-house memos sent from his corporate headquarters in New York
City to the head of the network’s television news department. He
went on to say that these memos set forth directives about what
material was, and was not, to be aired on the various outlets of
the network.
This individual claimed he was developing serious doubts
about the strict control of media events and decided that he would
pass this material along to someone who might make use of it.
There was the question of his job security. If someone
published his name, it would be certain he was not only fired but
blackballed throughout his profession.
If tbrnews.org would agree to protect his identity, he
would send us these alleged thousands of pages of notes, going
back to 2001.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating so we accepted
his caveats and he then sent to us by disk the pages he spoke of.
All are on corporate stationary, signed or initialed by the
senders and again, signed or initialed by the recipients in the
news division.
It was always possible that this material consisted of a
very involved hoax or was something designed for the news site to
use and then have it revealed that it was not original. It would
not be the first time that spurious disinformation had been sent
to us in the hopes that it would be used.
There were not “thousands of pages” of memos but a
total of 1,497 separate pages involved. Many of them consisted of
short memos while others ran to a larger format.
Naturally, someone could easily have obtained correct
in-house network letterheads, made copies of them and prepared
false memoranda but the sheer size and depth of the collection was
impressive.
If these memos were true, they showed with a terrible
clarity that at least one part of the American mass media was
strictly controlled and that the news was so doctored and spun
that it might as well be official news releases from the White
House and Pentagon.
The best way in which to ascertain whether or not these
documents contained original information was to check the dates of
issuance and compare the information with subsequent news stories.
This was a terrible, time-consuming chore but by selecting
random memos and looking through the archives of various national
newspapers, checking AP releases and so on, the results indicated
that indeed, news was being managed.
However, it was also possible that someone else did this
and was preparing these after the fact and making the memos
conform to published material.
That having been said, we insisted on absolutely current
memos so that we could then check these against future
publications. If, for example, a corporate fiat was to show
certain pictures or spin a story in a certain way, it would be
relatively simple to simply read the press or watch television
news to see if these suggestions were implemented.
It was both shocking and gratifying to note that this
proved to be the case in a preponderance of cases and so we began
to put these up, either in toto or, more often, in excerpt
and watch as ordained news was created before our eyes.
When a corporate order states, for instance, that certain
pictures should be shown with accompanying commentary and the memo
predates a published story by a week or more, then it is more than
likely that the memos are not inspired guesswork but genuine.
When tbrnews put up the first two pages, there were two
basic forms of public response. One was to thank us for exposing
something many people believed; that the American media was
controlled and not free. (That much can easily be ascertained by
reading the websites of various reputable foreign publications
such as the Swiss NZZ, the British Guardian, the Canadian Toronto
Globe and Mail, Reuters News Service, AFP and the Jerusalem Post.
What any viewer can see on these sites is certainly not reflected
in the American media.)
The second response consisted of irate, and literate,
statements to the effect that all of these items were just stupid
hoaxes and should not be believed. “I believe,” one writer who
claimed to be a Professor of Journalism at an Ivy League college
said, “these are just disinformation designed to discredit
American journalists whose reputation for honesty and integrity is
certainly beyond question. You are performing a great disservice
in repeating these politically-motivated fictions…”
This is certainly a true statement because if it became
generally accepted that the American media was only a mechanical
parrot for various political organizations, it would no longer be
either believed or watched. If viewers turned off their television
sets, the networks would lose huge amounts of advertising revenue,
reporters would be laid off and people would turn instead to the
Internet for their news.
The file, “Controlling the News” has proven to be the
most durable and viewed section of tbrnews. As the result of our
earlier postings, we have been receiving a significant amount of
input that extends far beyond the scope of our original informant.
These sources include, but are certainly not limited to; an
employee of a major American news magazine, a source inside the
corporate offices of a major media conglomerate, various military
sources, foreign press and intelligence individuals and persons
connected with official agencies who are greatly disturbed by the
machinations of the current Administration.
That these sources have requested anonymity is self-evident
In the final analysis, it is always up to the reader to
make up their own mind as to the truth, or fiction, of what they
read. The media has an opposite view of this.
It is fairly obvious that the average Americans get their
news either from TV, mostly, or, to a shrinking number, from the
print media. If someone in East Peoria, Illinois sees something on
CNN, the Voice of the White House, they have no reason to question
it. And don't. The establishment does not worry about a website
that, as in our case, reaches perhaps 100,000 people at a time
when they have control over NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN that can, and
do, reach millions a day.
What do they care about people who email messages back and
forth? Even if a Pentagon plan to nuke North Korea were up on
the net, all that would happen is that some would say, "See,
I told you so!" while others would say "Oh shame! You
are questioning our Glorious Leader (appointed to his high office
by Almighty God Himself!) and putting our Brave Troops in
danger!"
If the honesty of the American mass media is finally
brought into serious question, perhaps the ruling Establishment
cannot jam their lies down the public's throat with such ease.
Walter
Storch
Controlling
the News
Part
39
In
this issue, we are not publishing our regular “Controlling the
News” because we have received, from a reporter, a number of
comments and observations on life in the Bush White House that we
feel are of considerable importance. There have been a growing
number of comments about the persona of George Bush. Paul O’Neil,
his Secretary of the Treasury and others have written about the
difficulties of communicating with the President.
He is described at basically disconnected in conversations.
Bush has said that he does not read, getting his information
solely from his aides and only in abbreviated form. Bush does not
give press conferences, preferring to make short statements
instead.
I have seen Bush at a press conference held in Monterrey,
Mexico, aired on CSPAN. He was appearing at a joint conference
with Mexican President Fox. A reporter from Reuters asked Bush a
simple, non-offensive question and Bush became alarmed, couldn’t
answer directly and struggled to make some kind of coherent reply.
He merely repeated several slogans and stumbled about in a
thoroughly alarming way until Fox rescued him.
Others have seen similar incidents of total dysfunction on
the part of the President when confronted with any kind of a
question requiring either knowledge or thought.
It is well known, and published, that George Bush had a very
serious “substance abuse” problem as a young man. He drank
alcohol excessively and extensively. In fact, papers exist from
military medical examiners who recommend that because of
extensive, serious ongoing substance abuse on the part of Lt. Bush
and his adamant refusal to permit any testing, that he not be
permitted to fly US military jet aircraft.
After we published some of the comments by a current White
House reporter, we received a large number of communications,
among which were three from persons with medical backgrounds.
All three strongly suggested that their visual observations
of the President, coupled with published reports, indicated to
their trained eyes that the President had some kind of a disorder
that was either physical or psychological or both.
One suggested that we get a definition of Alzheimer’s
Disease and two commented on serious and permanent brain damage
that can be caused in some people by excessive drug or alcohol
use.
In his last two years in office, Franklin Roosevelt
exhibited increasing symptoms of advanced arteriosclerosis that
severely impaired his mental functions: Roosevelt would stop in
the middle of a speech, drool on his vest and stare blankly at the
papers in his hand. Frantic aides had to poke at him and point to
the script so he could go on.
Franklin Roosevelt was President during the Second World
War when acuity of judgment and rational understanding were vital.
By early 1944, Roosevelt, according to many of his biographers,
was ”often unaware of what he was saying, or what was said to
him.”
Earlier, Woodrow Wilson had a severe stroke while in the
White House and was completely unable to carry out his duties as
President. His wife filled in for him for months although she was
completely incapable of doing so. With all of this in mind, we
present:
THE MADNESS OF KING
GEORGE
The following
material is from a reporter with access to the White House and
Presidential press briefings. Some of this material has surfaced
before but only in small segments. If any of this is true and not
the product of an unhappy person, we are all in serious trouble.
Ed.
"In the current White House, attendance at daily
Christian Evangelical prayer meetings is mandatory."
"Vice President Cheney is the de facto President of the
United States. When he arrives at the White House for one of his
"briefings" of the President, all employees are cleared
from the West Wing and especially from the Presidential office
suites. Cheney arrives in an escorted armored limousine surrounded
by his own personal, heavily armed bodyguard and is always shown
directly into the President's office. It is reliably reported by
[redacted] that Bush has a thick pad of lined, yellow note paper
on his desk, placed there by [redacted] just before the Vice
President arrives."
"After Cheney's departure, the notes taken by the
President are transcribed by [redacted] and prepared as talking
points for the President..."
"At some
time in the past, according to both [redacted] and [redacted] the
President suffered what one of his aides called "a very minor
seizure" and as a result of this, the President has a very
difficult time following any unscripted conversations. For this
reason, his staff carefully and aggressively protect the President
from "unexpected" questions that he is not capable of
answering."
"The President takes oral medication at least twice a
day according to [redacted] because of an unspecified
"indisposition' and this subject is strictly off limits for
any casual staff conversation."
"At one point during a staff conference, the President
stood up and began to speak in an unknown language. Mr. Rove was
able to stop the President and get him to resume his seat. It was
reported by [redacted] that for a period of time (about fifteen
minutes) after this incident, the President appeared to be
'somewhat confused and very inarticulate.'"
"White House staff members report that they rarely see
the President during work hours and that when they do, he is
generally accompanied by Mr. Rove and almost never either looks at
or speaks to members of the staff. He does not appear to recognize
many of the staff members and almost all contact with these
individuals are carried out by his close aides, especially by Mr.
Rove."
“Bush hold as few meetings with the public, including the
press, as possible. We get reams of official papers informing us
of this or that new directive. Those of us who have an inside
track with the staff are taken to dinner and given the questions
to ask Bush. These are questions he has been thoroughly briefed on
and has memorized the answers for. Anyone who persists in pushing
the envelope gets a rocket from the Rove people and does not get
invited back.”
“Most of the staff are young, dedicated, almost fanatical,
and very, very Christian. The Ten Commandments are in each and
every office with nice pictures of Jesus accompanying them. I have
chatted up a few of these bright-faced kids and find out that they
Love Jesus, Hate Gays, Abortionists, Moslems, Blacks, Catholics,
some Jews, all Democrats, Liberals, Hindus, Chinese, Frenchmen,
Germans, and now, Spaniards.”
“There are daily parades of born-agains into the White
House, all chanting the praises of the Lord and Bush, in that
order of course. Most of them want all abortionists hung along
with gays (the Beltway and the Pentagon would be empty) and
godless Muslims and Buddhists. Orwell would have loved this place!
Yesterday [redacted] told me in strict confidence of course, that
if Diebold didn’t reelect George, the Lord would. They all wear
miniature US flags on their clothes but under the lapels they have
“hidden tokens of the True Faith” and they flip their lapels
with knowing smiles when they meet another True Believer.”
“In previous administrations, reporters assigned to the
White House press corps were very often permitted to speak briefly
with the President, either at his request or ours. In the present
White House, no one outside of Bush’s personal staff is ever
permitted to question him or to speak with him in any other
setting than a general press conference (of which he has held only
three in four years!). The President enters the briefing room,
surrounded by aides. He gives a set speech. Specific questions,
known in advance, are asked by favored reporters. The President
gives brief answers and then leaves the stage with no other
questions ever permitted.”
“[Redacted] has told us that Bush is irrationally fearful
of a terrorist attack (as is Cheney) and like Cheney, spends a lot
of his time in the White House underground air raid bunker, built
years before during the Cold War.”
“I heard Karl Rove say last week (week of March 22nd)
that the President never read anything but the Bible. Rove is even
more religious than Bush and when the President was drying out
from a lifetime of very heavy drinking, Rove got him involved with
CBS. No, not the television network but Christian Bible Studies.
Bush will do nothing without first consulting Rove and the
Bible…in that order. He does not like his father because he felt
bullied by him as a young man. Bush Sr. used to criticize Jr. for
his serious and chronic drinking and dismal grades at Yale
(D-.)”
“Meals or snacks at the Commissary at the White House are
dismal affairs. Staff members are almost always deeply engaged in
religious conversations and reporters are specifically excluded
from speaking with them. Some of them get pretty loud over soup
and ice tea so it is not difficult to glean their attitudes.
It’s like going to a forum at Bob Jones U, a favorite place for
the President.”
George
Bush's Strangeness
April
18, 2004
Sanity occurs when the
mind is in touch with reality. Insanity is a state where the mind
is out of touch with reality.
It is generally accepted
that when a person sees things that aren't there or talks to
people who aren't there that he/she is suffering from some form of
mental illness that includes delusions and/or psychosis.
People make exceptions
when it comes to religion, however.
In the world of
religion, it is perfectly acceptable to hold beliefs that cannot
be supported with evidence, to hear the voices of higher beings,
and to talk to Gods that nobody can see or engage in conversations
that nobody else can witness.
Tonight CBS's 60 Minutes aired
an
interview with Bob Woodward, who has just published a book, Plan of Attack,
which he describes as "the first detailed, behind-the-scenes
account of how and why the president decided to wage war in
Iraq."
Woodward described
Bush's actions after he gave the order to go to war. Woodward also
wondered whose advice Bush had sought making his decision.
Having given the order, the president walked alone
around the circle behind the White House. Months later, he told
Woodward: “As I walked around the circle, I prayed that our
troops be safe, be protected by the almighty. Going into this
period, I was praying for strength to do the Lord's will. I'm
surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that.
Nevertheless, in my case, I pray that I be as good a messenger of
his will as possible. And then, of course, I pray for
forgiveness."
Did
Mr. Bush ask his father for any advice? “I asked the president
about this. And President Bush said, ‘Well no,’ and then he
got defensive about it,” says Woodward. “And then he said
something that really struck me. He said of his father, ‘He is
the wrong father to appeal to for advice. The wrong father to go
to, to appeal to in terms of strength.’ And then he said, ‘There's
a higher father that I appeal to.’"
Beyond
not asking his father about going to war, Woodward was startled to
learn that the president did not ask key cabinet members either.
If so many people on
the face of this planet did not suffer from similar delusions, we
could call his condition what it is: mental illness, delusion,
psychosis.
Bush is delusional and
irrational. His mental illness has already caused thousands of
deaths. How many more will have to die?
Just because a delusions
is shared by huge numbers of people does not mean that it is not a
delusion. A delusion exists when beliefs cannot be reconciled with
reality. Reality is the only measure of who is sane and who is
insane. Sanity has nothing to do with the number of people who
share a particular belief.
UPDATE 4/19/2004: This
MSNBC/Newsweek article
gives some more details about Bush's thoughts about the war on
Iraq. As quoted above, Bush said he did not want to "justify
a war based upon God", but he also wanted to " be as
good a messenger of his will as possible." If you're claiming
to be as good a messenger of his will as possible, then you are
claiming that you are doing God's will. Bush wants to have it both
ways.
In his interview with Woodward, conducted over two
days in December of last year, Bush displayed no second thoughts
about Iraq's postwar miseries or the failure to turn up any WMD.
"I haven't suffered doubt," he told Woodward. When the
author—quoting Bush's political adviser Karl Rove—suggested
that "all history gets measured by outcomes," Bush
"smiled," reports Woodward. " 'History,' he said,
shrugging, taking his hands out of his pockets, extending his arms
out and suggesting with his body language that it was so far off.
'We won't know. We'll all be dead'."
Most
Christians believe that they will have to stand before God after
they die and face the consequences of their actions. But here Bush
indicates that the history of his actions will be unkown to him
after death and therefore it's not something he needs to worry
about.
http://binarycircumstance.typepad.com/bc_blog/2004/04/george_bushs_me.html
White House Brat
04/20/2004
@ 10:47am Brat
The
core conservative value I admire most is a respect for the past --
and for one's elders.
So
I was startled to hear that George W. Bush never sought his
father's advice before deciding to invade Iraq -- and, what's
more, he then went and basically bragged about it, speaking to a
journalist about his own father with something bordering on
contempt.
Bob
Woodward, who interviewed the President for his new book, says
he asked him whether, in pondering a war with Iraq, he'd ever
asked his father's advice.
"And
President Bush said, 'Well, no,' and then he got defensive about
it," Woodward says.
"Then
he said something that really struck me. He said of his father,
'He is the wrong father to appeal to for advice. The wrong father
to go to, to appeal to in terms of strength.' And then he said,
'There's a higher Father that I appeal to.'"
So
let's get this straight: There's only one other living person in
the whole entire world who's ever seriously faced the question
before our president -- whether to send American ground forces
into a land war in the Middle East. This person did so,
successfully, leaning upon the exact same men: Dick Cheney and
Colin Powell. And miracle of fortunate miracles -- what are the
odds? -- this person is the President's own father. Hey, get him
on the phone! He's your dad; he'll give you his best and most
honest and well-intentioned read, and as an adult you then thank
him and make up your own mind.
Instead,
the President refuses to even seek his own father's advice (which,
if heeded, might have saved us a helluva lot of trouble); gets us
bogged down in a miniature Vietnam that makes no sense whatsoever;
tells a press conference he can't
think of a single mistake he's made since 9/11; and
then, no doubt feeling defensive about things, he lashes out at
... his father.
In
the most public of forums -- a journalist's interview -- the
President of the United States runs his father down as a weakling
-- "the wrong father to ... appeal to in terms of
strength."
How
old is this President again? Eleven years old? Twelve? Remind me
again how our Republic ended up in the hands of this petulant
child?
Letters
to the Editor
From: LKoerber889@aol.com
To: tbrnews@hotmail.com
Subject: the memo about Bush, brain damage and religion
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 00:19:19 EDT
I
am very very curious about the story posted about the possibility
that Bush has seizure-induced brain damage and that he is
virtually a puppet of Rove and Cheney. The information
came from an unnamed reporter.
Is
the reporter trying to provide any verification for any of his/her
story? Will there be any follow-up? Have
you tried to evaluate this information or the source?
Who
are you? What are your credentials?
I
hope you don't mind getting these questions. Your site
is the scariest one I've run across.
Laura Koerber
Dear Ms. Koerber:
We
have been swamped with comments (all favorable let me add) about
the Madness of King George.
The
reporter in question is accredited to the White House and has
access to the place and, on a limited basis, many of the lesser
staff. He is an Orthodox Jew who is really offended by the
rampant, aggressive Pentecostalism practiced there and having
heard about us from a friend, decided to pump all kinds of
delightful information into our dispersing machine.
So
far, we have had quite a bit of confirmation on this or that fact
which, in the aggregate, is most impressive.
I
run this site by myself, with some technical help, and politically
I am a moderate Republican, somewhat liberal in my social views
and very conservative in my fiscal ones.
It
is my personal view that George W. Bush is a very bad president
and has done, and will continue to do, terrible damage to
America's domestic structure and further, has devastated our
relations with the rest of the world.
I
maintain that those soldiers who die in Iraq do so solely because
of the actions of the President. He wanted the war, he lied to
have it, he has prosecuted it and worst of all, he refuses to
honor his dead soldiers by attending any public memorial services.
He is, in the terms of his own religious supporters, a man against
whom God has witnessed.
Thank you for your
comments. Walter Storch
From: LKoerber889@aol.com
To: tbrnews@hotmail.com
Subject: the madness of king george
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 15:31:07 EDT
Dear
Mr. Storch, Thank you for replying to my questions. I
am glad moderate Republicans are beginning to see Bush for what he
really is. I am a life long Democrat but I have never
felt that Republicans shouldn't exist or that their ideas had no
place in public discourse. However the leadership of
the Republican party is now in the hands of people who literally
do not support democracy. Without exaggeration they
want to create a one-party government that tolerates no dissent. I
hope moderate Republicans will be able to purge their party of
these extremists. I also hope to see a coalition of
moderates form to re-establish a center in the political spectrum
and to restore civility to public debates. Again thanks
for the response, Laura Koerber
Note:
We listed a number of observed and pubic actions of the President,
sent them to a major hospital in the New York area to the
attention of the Department of Neurology. In this communication,
we indicated that the symptoms belonged to a relative who was at
the head of an important American business entity. This is the
reply from the head neurologist at the hospital complex. Needless
to say, we have redacted his name but anyone else can get an
identical response from a neurologist in their own area.
To:
tbrnews@hotmail.com
From: (redacted)
Date: Sat. 24 Apr 2004 09:17:56 EDT
Subject: Your inquiry
Dear
Mr. Storch:
Your
letter of inquiry about your brother-in-law was forwarded to me
this morning.
It
would be impossible for me to make an accurate diagnosis of your
relative’s purported problems without my first having conducted
a proper face-to-face evaluation so any responses I might make are
based entirely on your observations.
In
your communication you state that your brother-in-law is ceo of a
very important national corporate entity and that he has been
displaying symptoms which have alarmed you.
In
summation, these symptoms include the inability to respond to even
the most basic questions. Your relative apparently understands the
questions but is completely unable to formulate any kind of a
responsive answer to even the simplest question. Your relative has
apparently developed strong rigidity of mind insofar as his views
are concerned and cannot be dissuaded from them. He also, as you
report, seems to fixate on relatively unimportant matters to the
exclusion of more pressing and important issues. Also, he appears
to have problems remembering recent facts and has a growing
inability to respond to outside counsel on matters of vital
importance to the running of his business. Given his age and your
report of earlier and extensive substance abuse (i.e., alcohol and
drugs) it is entirely possible that your brother-in-law may have
suffered sufficient brain damage as to bring about an early
appearance of Alzheimer’s Disease. There are other possibilities
here, of course, but in view of your extensive analysis of his
persona, it is my suggestion that you or another member of his
family seek medical advice and further, that he be tested by a
neurologist for the possible onset of this disease.
I should note that
the prognosis for Alzheimer’s Disease is not good. The disease
is progressive and always fatal. I should advise you that persons
suffering from this disorder should not be permitted to engage in
any kind of enterprise calling for memory or judgment skills. This
would include driving a motor vehicle and would also extend to his
moving about outside the house without strict supervision.
If
his physician indicates that the subject has this disease, he
should be persuaded to relinquish his business posts as soon as
possible. Alzheimer’s Disease patients are quite capable of
giving the company away to prostitutes, for example, or to behave
in increasingly erratic and irresponsible ways.
Also,
you should prepare your sister for the inevitability of her
husband’s being totally incapacitated and in need of 24 hour
supervision and, if necessary, physical restraint.
For
your information I am attaching herewith a basic primer on
Alzheimer’s Disease with a suggestion as to whom you, or your
sister, might wish to contact for further information.
I
summation, and again without a personal interview with the
subject, I would say that there appears to be very persuasive
evidence, based upon your observations, that your relative has
some kind of neurological problem the stated symptoms of which, in
my professional opinion call for immediate diagnosis.
I
trust I have been able to answer your questions and I assure you
that I readily understand your reluctance to discuss personal
family business with strangers.
Alzheimer’s
Disease can be an emotional disaster to the unprepared and I
extend my sympathy to you and your family.
Most
sincerely,
ALZHEIMER’S
DISEASE DEFINED
What
Is Alzheimer's?
Alzheimer's
is a progressive, degenerative disorder that affects the brain. It
damages the brain cells responsible for intellectual functioning
in the brain, including memory,
intelligence, judgment, and speech. Alzheimer’s
leads to the loss of mental and physical functions.
Alzheimer's
is the most common cause of dementia in older people. It affects
the parts of the brain that control thought, memory, and language.
A small percentage Alzheimer's patients are under 50 years of age.
However, most are over 65 years of age. A rare and aggressive form
of Alzheimer's can happen in some people in their 40s and 50s.
Over
the course of years, as the disease progresses, individuals loose
their ability to perform the basic tasks that are part of everyday
life and usually end up requiring constant care and supervision.
Symptoms
The
first noticeable symptoms of Alzheimer's are: loss of memory,
trouble performing tasks, poor judgment, misplacing things,
inability to think and understand and gradual changes in
behavior.
Memory loss - Memory loss is usually the
first noticeable sign of Alzheimer's. Memory loss starts slowly,
but soon the episodes become more and more frequent. People with
Alzheimer's forget things very often. They have trouble
remembering answers to questions they may have asked a short time
earlier. This causes the person to ask the same question
repeatedly.
Trouble
performing familiar tasks
- As the disease progresses, patients have trouble performing
tasks that they have done for a lifetime. Simple, little everyday
tasks that we perform without even thinking about may become major
obstacles for the Alzheimer's victim.
Poor
judgment -
Judgement becomes a problem as the disease develops. An example of
poor judgment is: The patient may wear clothing that is not
suitable for the weather.
Misplacing
things -
Alzheimer's patients may misplace things often. When the items are
found, they are usually in inappropriate places. For instance,
food may be put in the clothes closet instead of the refrigerator.
Disorientation
- People suffering from Alzheimer's disease may be unable to tell
you where they are, who they are or what they happen to be doing
at that moment. They might even forget where live.
Recently,
scientists have focused on a type of memory change called mild
cognitive impairment (MCI), which is different from both AD and
normal age-related memory change. People with MCI have ongoing
memory problems, but they do not have other losses like confusion,
attention problems, and difficulty with language. Scientists
funded by the NIA
are studying information collected from the Memory Impairment
Study to learn whether early diagnosis and treatment of MCI might
prevent or slow further memory loss, including the development of
AD.”
Further
information may be obtained from: American Health Assistance
Foundation, 22512 Gateway Center Drive, Clarksburg, Maryland 20871
1-800-437-2423, (301) 948-3244, Fax: (301) 258-9454
Their beliefs are bonkers, but
they are at the heart of power
US
Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy
by George
Monbiot
April 20, 2004
The
Guardian
To understand what is happening in the Middle East, you must
first understand what is happening in Texas. To understand what is
happening there, you should read the resolutions passed at the
state's Republican party conventions last month. Take a look, for
example, at the decisions made in Harris County, which covers much
of Houston. The delegates began by nodding through a few
uncontroversial matters: homosexuality is contrary to the truths
ordained by God; "any mechanism to process, license, record,
register or monitor the ownership of guns" should be
repealed; income tax, inheritance tax, capital gains tax and
corporation tax should be abolished; and immigrants should be
deterred by electric fences. Thus fortified, they turned to the
real issue: the affairs of a small state 7,000 miles away. It was
then, according to a participant, that the "screaming and
near fist fights" began.
I don't know what the original motion said, but apparently it was
"watered down significantly" as a result of the shouting
match. The motion they adopted stated that Israel has an undivided
claim to Jerusalem and the West Bank, that Arab states should be
"pressured" to absorb refugees from Palestine, and that
Israel should do whatever it wishes in seeking to eliminate
terrorism. Good to see that the extremists didn't prevail then.
But why should all this be of such pressing interest to the people of a
state which is seldom celebrated for its fascination with foreign
affairs? The explanation is slowly becoming familiar to us, but we
still have some difficulty in taking it seriously.
In the United States, several million people have succumbed to an
extraordinary delusion. In the 19th century, two immigrant
preachers cobbled together a series of unrelated passages from the
Bible to create what appears to be a consistent narrative: Jesus
will return to Earth when certain preconditions have been met. The
first of these was the establishment of a state of Israel. The
next involves Israel's occupation of the rest of its
"biblical lands" (most of the Middle East), and the
rebuilding of the Third Temple on the site now occupied by the
Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosques. The legions of the
antichrist will then be deployed against Israel, and their war
will lead to a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. The
Jews will either burn or convert to Christianity, and the Messiah
will return to Earth.
What makes the story so appealing to Christian fundamentalists is that
before the big battle begins, all "true believers"
(i.e., those who believe what they believe) will be lifted out of
their clothes and wafted up to heaven during an event called the
Rapture. Not only do the worthy get to sit at the right hand of
God, but they will be able to watch, from the best seats, their
political and religious opponents being devoured by boils, sores,
locusts and frogs, during the seven years of Tribulation which
follow.
The true believers are now seeking to bring all this about. This means
staging confrontations at the old temple site (in 2000, three US
Christians were deported for trying to blow up the mosques there),
sponsoring Jewish settlements in the occupied territories,
demanding ever more US support for Israel, and seeking to provoke
a final battle with the Muslim world/Axis of Evil/United Nations/
European Union/France or whoever the legions of the antichrist
turn out to be.
The believers are convinced that they will soon be rewarded for their
efforts. The antichrist is apparently walking among us, in the
guise of Kofi Annan, Javier Solana, Yasser Arafat or, more
plausibly, Silvio Berlusconi. The Wal-Mart corporation is also a
candidate (in my view a very good one), because it wants to
radio-tag its stock, thereby exposing humankind to the Mark of the
Beast.
By clicking on www.raptureready.com,
you can discover how close you might be to flying out of your
pyjamas. The infidels among us should take note that the Rapture
Index currently stands at 144, just one point below the critical
threshold, beyond which the sky will be filled with floating
nudists. Beast Government, Wild Weather and Israel are all trading
at the maximum five points (the EU is debating its constitution,
there was a freak hurricane in the south Atlantic, Hamas has sworn
to avenge the killing of its leaders), but the second coming is
currently being delayed by an unfortunate decline in drug abuse
among teenagers and a weak showing by the antichrist (both of
which score only two).
We can laugh at these people, but we should not dismiss them. That their
beliefs are bonkers does not mean they are marginal. American
pollsters believe that 15-18% of
US voters belong to churches or movements which subscribe
to these teachings. A survey in 1999 suggested that this figure
included 33% of Republicans. The best-selling contemporary books
in the US are the 12 volumes of the Left Behind series, which
provide what is usually described as a "fictionalised"
account of the Rapture (this, apparently, distinguishes it from
the other one), with plenty of dripping details about what will
happen to the rest of us. The people who believe all this don't
believe it just a little; for them it is a matter of life eternal
and death.
And among them are some of the most powerful men in America. John
Ashcroft, the attorney general, is a true believer, so are several
prominent senators and the House majority leader, Tom DeLay. Mr
DeLay (who is also the co-author of the marvellously named
DeLay-Doolittle Amendment, postponing campaign finance reforms)
travelled to Israel last year to tell the Knesset that "there
is no middle ground, no moderate position worth taking".
So here we have a major political constituency - representing much of the
current president's core vote - in the most powerful nation on
Earth, which is actively seeking to provoke a new world war. Its
members see the invasion of Iraq as a warm-up act, as Revelation
(9:14-15) maintains that four angels "which are bound in the
great river Euphrates" will be released "to slay the
third part of men". They batter down the doors of the White
House as soon as its support for Israel wavers: when Bush asked
Ariel Sharon to pull his tanks out of Jenin in 2002, he received
100,000 angry emails from Christian fundamentalists, and never
mentioned the matter again.
The electoral calculation, crazy as it appears, works like this.
Governments stand or fall on domestic issues. For 85% of the US
electorate, the Middle East is a foreign issue, and therefore of
secondary interest when they enter the polling booth. For 15% of
the electorate, the Middle East is not just a domestic matter,
it's a personal one: if the president fails to start a
conflagration there, his core voters don't get to sit at the right
hand of God. Bush, in other words, stands to lose fewer votes by
encouraging Israeli aggression than he stands to lose by
restraining it. He would be mad to listen to these people. He
would also be mad not to.
George
Monbiot's book The Age of Consent: a Manifesto for a New World
Order is now published in paperback
www.monbiot.com
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1195568,00.html
|
