United States foreign policy is at best tenuous and the average American doesn't have a clue because the corporate news media is running stories about how the American Idol contestant was allegedly seduced by one of the hosts (Paula Abdul) and we are bombarded with the most minute details of the Michael Jackson case. Which is why most Americans are not aware of what is happening in Mexico where the people's presidential choice, Lopez Obredor is jailed, primarily because supporters of current president and Bush buddy, Vicente Fox doesn't want any competition. Most Americans don't know about changes of government in Ecuador and Bolivia
either. In most cases the people from these countries have decided that the American Free Market ideas help American business and hurt their countries. Globalization is a one way street and they want no part of it. New leaders have come to power in Ecuador, Bolivia, Uruguay, Brasil and Argentina all on this basic theme. Most Americans don't know about this. They also didn't know about the murder of Archbishop Romero and American nuns in Central America. These atrocious events and the murder of close to 50,000 Salvadorans and Hondurans all happened on the clock of John Necroponte, but he was never seriously challenged about his involvement by any of the senators during his confirmation hearings. Most Americans have no idea about the School Of The Americas(which had a name change so that it could be difficult to remember......something like the Organization of Hemispheric Peace and Cooperation.....well I guess it worked, I don't remember) that trains soldiers to kill their own people in defense of corporate interests.
Most Americans accept as gospel truth whatever passes as news on CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or CBS, which all have menus of government propaganda. It is absolutely ridiculous the claim of a left wing media bias when the exact opposite is the case. All major networks have a majority of conservative hosts(O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh et al.) Clear Channel controls the outdoor advertising business and almost 2,000 radio outlets. Sinclair Broadcasting is an overtly ultra-conservative outlet also with a huge number of affiliates. In addition to this we have the Right Wing Christian network of Pat Robertson and his 700 Club. We are inundated with conservative philosophy. The sole bastion of the center-left was PBS. Public Educational Television was originally conceived to independent, without commercials. That all changed in a flash. Now the new director Mr. Tomlinson is "concerned" about balance and now we will have an influx of more conservative commentators. The network that gave us Bill Moyers journal is now under siege, further proof that there is a concerted effort to stiffle free thought in this country. In the same manner that we were able to prevent Michael Powell at the FCC from giving corporate broadcast media 45% or more of our airwaves we must make our voices heard in regard to equal representation. On Rush Limbaugh's television show he put words into the mouths of people he disagreed with in his not-so-funny comedy routines. This were things these people never said in real life. The uninformed viewer would watch this and believe that it was true. WBAI of the Pacifica network does not screen calls. If a caller has a point of view contrary to that of the host he or she is encouraged to speak his/her mind. This is not the case with right wing pundits. Calls are carefully screened and if you have a contrary point of view you are not heard. A few years ago when US operatives assisted right-wing Venezuelans to overthrow Hugo Chavez the New York Times reported that 100,000 Venezuelans were in the streets demanding that Hugo Chavez step down. This was the truth and it was reported on the first page. The New York Times mistakenly has the reputation of being a "liberal" publication. What this "liberal" publication forgot to tell us was that there were 500,000 Venezuelans in the streets demanding that Hugo Chavez remain President of Venezuela. Of course the Times did make a retraction but it came quite some time after the initial event. Current US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice considers Hugo Chavez a "dangerous" man....but why? What crime did he commit? Is he a murderer? like let's say Saddam Huessein?.....absolutely not. This man simply wants the natural resources of his country to be used for the benefit of "all" the people of his country not just a selected elite with US ties. Robert Mugabe is another individual who is disliked by Bush, Rice et al. because he is taking land away from the former colonialists and giving it back to his people. If another country has something that you need you don't steal it...you negociate for a fair price. This ethically challenged administration of George W. Bush just doesn't understand that concept. The uninformed viewer probably does think that Hugo Chavez is a "dangerous" man who must be stopped because that is how he is portrayed to the American public. Very little will be said about the fact that he was elected four times. The same is true when it comes to Zimbabwe. Even though 7,000 foreigners monitored the election and said that it was fair we still saw accusations of the election being unfair and that people were "intimidated" The cruel irony here is that this is exactly what transpired in the United States presidential elections. Yet the uninformed viewer will also think that Robert Mugabe is a bad, dangerous man because that was how he was portrayed on television. Jean Bertrand Aristide was also elected numerous times and had the support of the vast majority of his people but the Haitian elite allied with US operatives did overthrow his elected government and then kidnapped him and sent him out of the country. When he said he was kidnapped the US government vehemently denied it, but there were several eyewitness accounts of the kidnapping. Haiti is a much smaller country than Zimbabwe or Venezuela so a coup would be much easier to enact. Once again the US media made no attempt to present Mr. Aristide's account of the coup. Once again the uninformed viewer would think that Mr. Aristide's overthrow was a good thing because it was reported by the corporate media that he was a bad man. This is precisely the reason nearly 50% of the American public still believe that Saddam Heussein had something to do with 9/11. People are deliberately not given both sides of important issues. This brings us back to Iraq. Even President Bush has been forced to admit that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but instead of admitting that it was a lie he blamed it on faulty information that was given to him by the CIA, the same CIA that told him explicitly there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Those of us who have been forced to rely on alternative media like those outside of the US, those of us who do make a conscious effort to be informed have to contact our elected officials and demand control of the airwaves, demand that PBS be the station that it was originally designed to be and not just another outlet of misinformation and disinformation. Let congresspeople, senators, governors and the FCC know now......before its too late.