|
How the Washington Post Censors the
News [Note the highlighted
paragraph]
How the Washington Post
Censors the News
A Letter to the Washington Post by Julian C.
Holmes _________________________________________________________________
April 25, 1992 Richard
Harwood, Ombudsman The Washington Post 1150 15th Street
NW Washington, DC 20071
Dear Mr.
Harwood,
Though the Washington Post does not over-extend itself in
the pursuit of hard news, just let drop the faintest rumor of a
government "conspiracy", and a klaxon horn goes off in the news room.
Aroused from apathy in the daily routine of reporting assignations and
various other political and social sports events, editors and
reporters scramble to the phones. The klaxon screams its warning: the
greatest single threat to herd-journalism, corporate profits, and
government stability -- the dreaded "CONSPIRACY THEORY"!!
It is
not known whether anyone has actually been hassled or accosted by any
of these frightful spectres, but their presence is announced to Post
readers with a salvo of warnings to avoid the tricky, sticky webs spun
by the wacko "CONSPIRACY THEORISTS".
Recall how the Post saved us
from the truth about Iran-Contra.
Professional conspiracy exorcist
Mark Hosenball was hired to ridicule the idea that Oliver North and his
CIA-associated gangsters had conspired to do wrong (*1). And when, in
their syndicated column, Jack Anderson and Dale Van Atta discussed some
of the conspirators, the Post sprang to protect its readers, and the
conspirators, by censoring the Anderson column before printing it
(*2).
But for some time the lid had been coming off the
Iran-Contra conspiracy. In 1986, the Christic Institute, an interfaith
center for law and public policy, had filed a lawsuit alleging a
U.S. arms-for-drugs trade that helped keep weapons flowing to
the CIA-Contra army in Nicaragua, and cocaine flowing to U.S.
markets (*3). In 1988 Leslie Cockburn published Out of Control, a
seminal work on our bizarre, illegal war against Nicaragua (*4). The
Post contributed to this discovery process by disparaging the charges
of conspiracy and by publishing false information about
the drug-smuggling evidence presented to the House Subcommittee
on Narcotics Abuse and Control. When accused by Committee
Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY). of misleading reporting, the Post
printed only a partial correction and declined to print a letter of
complaint from Rangel (*5).
Sworn testimony before Senator John
Kerry's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International
Operations confirmed U.S. Government complicity in the drug trade (*6).
With its coverup of the arms/drug conspiracy evaporating, the
ever-accommodating Post shifted gears and retained Hosenball to
exorcise from our minds a newly emerging threat to domestic
tranquility, the "October Surprise" conspiracy (*7). But close on the
heels of Hosenball and the Post came Barbara Honegger and then Gary
Sick who authored independently, two years apart, books with the same
title, "October Surprise" (*8). Honegger was a member of
the Reagan/Bush campaign and transition teams in 1980. Gary
Sick, professor of Middle East Politics at Columbia University, was on
the staff of the National Security Council under Presidents Ford,
Carter, and Reagan. In 1989 and 1991 respectively, Honegger and Sick
published their evidence of how the Republicans made a deal to supply
arms to Iran if Iran would delay release of the 52 United States
hostages until after the November 1980 election. The purpose of this
deal was to quash the possibility of a pre-election release(an
October surprise). which would have bolstered the reelection prospects
for President Carter.
Others published details of this alleged
Reagan-Bush conspiracy. In October 1988, Playboy Magazine ran an expose
"An Election Held Hostage"; FRONTLINE did another in April 1991 (*9).
In June, 1991 a conference of distinguished journalists, joined by 8 of
the former hostages, challenged the Congress to "make a full,
impartial investigation" of the election/hostage allegations. The Post
reported the statement of the hostages, but not a word of the
conference itself which was held in the Dirksen Senate Office Building
Auditorium (*10). On February 5, 1992 a gun-shy, uninspired House of
Representatives begrudgingly authorized an "October Surprise"
investigation by a task force of 13 congressmen headed by Lee Hamilton
(D-IN). who had chaired the House of Representatives Iran-Contra
Committee. Hamilton has named as chief team counsel Larry Barcella, a
lawyer who represented BCCI when the Bank was indicted in 1988
(*11).
Like the Washington Post, Hamilton had not shown interest in
pursuing the U.S. arms-for-drugs operation (*12). He
had accepted Oliver North's lies,and as Chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee he derailed House Resolution 485 which had asked
President Reagan to answer questions about Contra support activities of
government officials and others (*13). After CIA operative
John
Hull (from Hamilton's home state). was charged in Costa Rica
with "international drug trafficking and hostile acts against the
nation's security", Hamilton and 18 fellow members of Congress tried
to intimidate Costa Rican President Oscar Arias Sanchez into
handling Hull's case "in a manner that will not complicate U.S.-Costa
Rican relations" (*14). The Post did not report the Hamilton letter or
the Costa Rican response that declared Hull's case to be "in as good
hands as our 100 year old uninterrupted democracy can provide to
all citizens" (*15).
Though the Post does its best to guide our
thinking away from conspiracy theories, it is difficult to avoid the
fact that so much wrongdoing involves government or corporate
conspiracies:
In its COINTELPRO operation, the FBI
used disinformation, forgery, surveillance, false arrests, and violence
to illegally harass U.S.citizens in the 60's (*16).
The CIA's
Operation MONGOOSE
illegally sabotaged Cuba by "destroying crops, brutalizing citizens,
destabilizing the society, and conspiring with the Mafia to assassinate
Fidel Castro and other leaders" (*17).
"Standard Oil of New
Jersey was found by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice
to be conspiring with I.G.Farben...of Germany. ...By its cartel
agreements with Standard Oil, the United States was effectively
prevented from developing or producing [fo rWorld War-II] any
substantial amount of synthetic rubber," said Senator Robert LaFollette
of Wisconsin (*18).
U.S. Government agencies knowingly withheld
information about dosages of radiation "almost certain to produce
thyroid abnormalities or cancer" that contaminated people residing
near the nuclear weapons factory at Hanford, Washington
(*19).
Various branches of Government deliberately drag their feet
in getting around to cleaning up the Nation's dangerous
nuclear weapons sites (*20). State and local governments back
the nuclear industry's secret public relations strategy
(*21).
"The National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society
and some twenty comprehensive cancer centers, have misled and
confused the public and Congress by repeated claims that we are
winning the war against cancer. In fact, the cancer establishment
has continually minimized the evidence for increasing cancer
rates which it has largely attributed to smoking and dietary
fat, while discounting or ignoring the causal role of
avoidable eposures to industrial carcinogens in the air, food, water,
and the workplace." (*22).
The Bush Administration coverup of
its pre-Gulf-War support of Iraq "is yet another example of the
President's people conspiring to keep both Congress and the American
people in the dark" (*23).
If you think about it, conspiracy is a
fundamental aspect of doing business in this country.
Take the
systematic and cooperative censorship of the Persian Gulf War by the
Pentagon and much of the news media (*24).
Or the widespread plans
of business and government groups to spend $100 million in taxes to
promote a distorted and truncated history of Columbus in America (*25).
along the lines of the Smithsonian Institution's "fusion of the two
worlds", (*26). rather than examining more realistic aspects of the
Spanish invasion, like "anger, cruelty, gold, terror, and death"
(*27).
Or circumstances surrounding the U.S. Justice Department
theft from the INSLAW company of sophisticated, law-enforcement
computer software which "now point to a widespread
conspiracy implicating lesser Government officials in the theft
of INSLAW's technology", says former U.S. Attorney General
Elliot Richardson (*28).
Or Watergate.
Or the "largest
bank fraud in world financial history" (*29), where the White House
knew of the criminal activities at "the Bank of Crooks and Criminals
International" (BCCI) (*30), where U.S. intelligence agencies did their
secret banking (*31), and where bribery of prominent American public
officials "was a way of doing business" (*32).
Or the 1949
conviction of "GM [General Motors], Standard Oil of California,
Firestone, and E. Roy Fitzgerald, among others, for criminally
conspiring to replace electric transportation with gas- and
diesel-powered buses and to monopolize the sale of buses and related
products to transportation companies throughout the country" [in, among
others, the cities of New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, St. Louis,
Oakland, Salt Lake City, and Los Angeles] (*33).
Or the
collusion in 1973 between Senator Abraham Ribicoff (D-CT). and the U.S.
Department of Transportation to overlook safety defects in the 1.2
million Corvair automobiles manufactured by General Motors in the early
60's (*34).
Or the A. H. Robins Company, which manufactured the
Dalkon Shield intrauterine contraceptive, and which ignored repeated
warnings of the Shield's hazards and which "stonewalled,
deceived, covered up, and
covered up the coverups...[thus
inflicting] on women a worldwide epidemic of pelvic infections."
(*35).
Or that cooperation between McDonnell Douglas Aircraft
Company and the FAA resulted in failure to enforce regulations
regarding the unsafe DC-10 cargo door which failed in flight killing
all 364 passengers on Turkish Airlines Flight 981 on March 3,
1974 (*36).
Or the now-banned, cancer-producing pregnancy
drug Diethylstilbestrol (DES). that was sold by manufacturers
who ignored tests which showed DES to be carcinogenic; and who acted
"in concert with each other in the testing and marketing of DES for
miscarriage purposes" (*37).
Or the conspiracies among bankers and
speculators, with the cooperation of a corrupted Congress, to relieve
depositors of their savings. This "arrogant disregard from the White
House, Congress and corporate world for the interests and rights
of the American people" will cost U.S. tapayers many hundreds
of billions of dollars (*38).
Or the Westinghouse, Allis
Chalmers,Federal Pacific, and General Electric executives who met
surreptitiously in hotel rooms to fix prices and eliminate competition
on heavy industrial equipment (*39).
Or the convictions of
Industrial Biotest Laboratories (IBT). officers for fabricating safety
tests on prescription drugs (*40).
Or the conspiracy by the
asbestos industry to suppress knowledge of medical problemsrelating to
asbestos (*41).
Or the 1928 Achnacarry Agreement through which oil
companies "agreed not to engage in any effective price competition"
(*42).
Or the conspiracy among U.S. Government agencies and the
Congress to cover up the nature of our decades-old war against the
people of Nicaragua
a covert war that continues in 1992 with the
U.S. Government applying pressure for the Nicaraguan police to
reorganize into a more repressive force (*43).
Or the conspiracy
by the CIA and the U.S. Government to interfere in the Chilean election
process with military aid, covert actions, and an economic boycott
which culminated in the overthrow of the legitimately elected
government and the assassination of President Salvador Allende in 1973
(*44).
Or the conspiracy among U.S. officials including Secretary
of State Henry Kissinger and CIA Director William Colby to
finance terrorism in Angola for the purpose of disrupting
Angola's plans for peaceful elections in October 1975, and to lie
about these actions to the Congress and the news media (*45). And
CIA Director George Bush's subsequent cover up of
this U.S.-sponsored terrorism (*46).
Or President George Bush's
consorting with the Pentagon to invade Panama in 1989 and thereby
violate the Constitution of the United States, the U.N. Charter, the
O.A.S. Charter, and the Panama Canal Treaties (*47).
Or the
"gross antitrust violations" (*48) and the conspiracy of American oil
companies and the British and U.S. governments to strangle Iran
economically after Iran nationalized the British-owned Anglo-Iranian
Oil Company in 1951. And the subsequent overthrow by the CIA in 1953 of
Iranian Prime Minister Muhammed Mossadegh (*49).
Or the
CIA-planned assassination of Congo head-of-state Patrice Lumumba
(*50).
Or the deliberate and wilful efforts of President George
Bush, Senator Robert Dole, Senator George Mitchell, various
U.S. Government agencies, and members of both Houses of the
Congress to buy the 1990 Nicaraguan national elections for
the presidential candidate supported by President Bush (*51).
Or
the collective approval by 64 U.S. Senators of Robert Gates to head the
CIA, in the face of "unmistakable evidence that Gates lied about his
role in the Iran-Contra scandal" (*52).
Or "How Reagan and the Pope
Conspired to Assist Poland's Solidarity Movement and Hasten the Demise
of Communism" (*53).
Or how the Reagan Administration connived with
the Vatican to ban the use of USAID funds by any country "for the
promotion of birth control or abortion" (*54).
Or "the way the
Vatican and Washington colluded to achieve common purpose in Central
America" (*55).
Or the collaboration of Guatemalan strong-man and
mass murderer Hector Gramajo with the U.S. Army to design "programs to
build civilian-military cooperation" at the U.S. Army School of
the Americas (SOA) at Fort Benning, Georgia; five of the
nine soldiers accused in the 1989 Jesuit massacre in El Salvador
are graduates of SOA which trains Latin/American military
personnel (*56).
Or the conspiracy of the Comanche Peak Nuclear
Plant administration to harass and cause bodily harm to whistleblower
Linda Porter who uncovered dangerous working conditions at the
facility (*57).
Or the conspiracy of President Richard Nxion and
the Government of South Vietnam to delay the Paris Peace Talks until
after the 1968 U.S. presidential election (*58).
Or the pandemic
coverups of police violence (*59).
Or the always safe-to-cite
worldwide communist conspiracy (*60).
Or maybe the socially
responsible, secret consortium to publish The Satanic Verses in
paperback (*61).
Conspiracies are obviously a way to get things
done, and the Washington Post offers little comment unless conspiracy
theorizing threatens to expose a really important conspiracy that,
let's say, benefits big business or big government.
Such a
conspiracy would be like our benevolent CIA's 1953 overthrow of the
Iranian government to help out U.S. oil companies; or like our illegal
war against Panama to tighten U.S. control over Panama and the Canal;
or like monopoly control of broadcasting that facilitates corporate
censorship on issues of public importance (*62). When the camouflage of
such conspiracies is stripped away, public confidence in the conspiring
officials can erode -- depending on how seriously the citizenry
perceives the conspiracy to have violated the public trust. Erosion of
public trust in the status quo is what the Post seems to see as a real
threat to its corporate security.
Currently, the Post has mounted
vituperative, frenzied attacks on Oliver Stone's movie "JFK", which
reexamines the U.S. Government's official (Warren Commission. finding
that a single gunman, acting alone, killed President John F. Kennedy.
The movie also is the story of New Orleans District Attorney Jim
Garrison's unsuccessful prosecution of Clay Shaw, the only person ever
tried in connection with the assassination. And the movie proposes that
the Kennedy assassination was the work of conspirators whose interests
would not be served by a president who, had he lived, might have
disengaged us from our war against Vietnam.
The Post ridicules a
reexamination of the Kennedy assassination along lines suggested by
"JFK". Senior Post journalists like Charles Krauthammer, Ken Ringle,
George Will, Phil McCombs, and Michael Isikoff, have been called up to
man the bulwarks against public sentiment which has never supported the
government's non-conspiratorial assassination thesis. In spite of the
facts that the Senate Intelligence Committee of 1975 and 1976 found
that "both the FBI and CIA had repeatedly lied to the Warren
Commission" (*63) and that the 1979 Report of the House Select
Committee on Assassinations found that President Kennedy was probably
killed "as a result of a conspiracy" (*64), a truly astounding number
of Post stories have been used as vehicles to discredit "JFK" as just
another conspiracy (*65).
Some of the more vicious attacks on
the movie are by editor Stephen Rosenfeld, and journalists Richard
Cohen, George Will, and George Lardner Jr (*66). They ridicule the idea
that Kennedy could have had second thoughts about escalating the
Vietnam War and declaim that there is no historical justification for
this idea. Seasoned journalist Peter Dale Scott, former Pentagon/CIA
liaison chief L. Fletcher Prouty, and investigators David Scheim and
John Newman have each authored defense of the "JFK" thesis that Kennedy
was not enthusiastic about staying in Vietnam (*67). But the Post team
just continues ranting against the possibility of a
high-level assassination conspiracy while offering little justification
for its arguments.
An example of particularly shabby scholarship
and unacceptable behavior is George Lardner Jr's contribution to the
Post's campaign against the movie. Lardner wrote three articles, two
before the movie was completed, and the third upon its release. In May,
six months before the movie came out, Lardner obtained a copy of the
first draft of the script and, contrary to accepted standards, revealed
in the Post the contents of this copyrighted movie (*68). Also in
this article, (*69). Lardner discredits Jim Garrison with
hostile statements from a former Garrison associate Pershing Gervais.
Lardner does not tell the reader that subsequent to the Clay Shaw
trial, in a U.S. Government criminal action brought against Garrison,
Government witness Gervais, who helped set up Garrison for prosecution,
admitted under oath that in a May 1972 interview with a New Orleans
television reporter, he, Gervais, had said that the U.S. Government's
case against Garrison was a fraud (*70). The Post's 1973 account of
the Garrison acquittal mentions this controversy, but when I
recently asked Lardner about this, he was not clear as to whether he
remembered it (*71).
Two weeks after his first "JFK" article,
Lardner blustered his way through a justification for his unauthorized
possession of the early draft ofthe movie (*72). He also defended his
reference to Pershing Gervais by lashing out at Garrison as a writer
"of gothic fiction".
When the movie was released in December,
Lardner "reviewed" it (*73). He again ridiculed the film's thesis that
following the Kennedy assassination, President Johnson reversed
Kennedy's plans to de-escalate the Vietnam War. Lardner cited a
memorandum issued by Johnson four days after Kennedy died. Lardner says
this memorandum was written before the assassination, and that it "was
a continuation of Kennedy's policy". In fact, the memorandum was
drafted the day before the assassination by McGeorge Bundy (Kennedy's
Assistant for National Security Affairs) Kennedy was in Texas, and may
never have seen it. Following the assassination, it was rewritten; and
the final version provided for escalating the war against Vietnam (*74)
-- facts that Lardner avoided.
The Post's crusade against
exposing conspiracies is blatantly dishonest:
The Warren Commission
inquiry into the Kennedy Assassination was for the most part conducted
in secret. This fact is buried in the Post (*75). Nor do current
readers of this newspaper find meaningful discussion of the Warren
Commission's secret doubts about both the FBI and the CIA (*76). Or of
a dispatch from CIA headquarters instructing co-conspirators at field
stations to counteract the "new wave of books and articles criticizing
the [Warren] Commission's findings...[and] conspiracy theories
...[that] have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization" and to
"discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite
contacts, especially politicians and editors "and to "employ propaganda
assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. ...Book reviews
and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.
...The aim of this dispatch is to provide material for countering and
discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists..."
(*77).
In 1979, Washington journalist Deborah Davis published
Katharine The Great, the story of Post publisher Katharine Graham and
her newspaper's close ties with Washington's powerful elite, a number
of whom were with the CIA.
Particularly irksome to Post editor
Benjamin Bradlee was a Davis claim that Bradlee had "produced CIA
material" (*78). Understandably sensitive about this kind of publicity,
Bradlee told Davis' publisher Harcourt Brace Jovanovich ,"Miss Davis is
lying ...I never produced CIA material ...what I can do is to brand
Miss Davis as a fool and to put your company in that special little
group of publishers who don't give a shit for the truth". The Post
bullied HBJ into recalling the book; HBJ shredded 20,000 copies; Davis
sued HBJ for breach of contract and damage to reputation; HBJ settled
out of court; and Davis published her book elsewhere with an appendix
that demonstrated Bradlee to have been deeply involved with producing
cold-war/CIA propaganda (*79). Bradlee still says the allegations about
his association with people in the CIA are false, but he has
apparently taken no action to contest the xetensive documentation
presented by Deborah Davis in the second and third editions of her book
(*80).
And it's not as if the Post were new to conspiracy
work.
Former
Washington Post publisher Philip Graham "believing that the function of
the press was more often than not to mobilize consent for the policies of
the government, was one of the architects of what became a widespread
practice: the use and manipulation of journalists by the CIA" (*81). This
scandal was known by its code name Operation
MOCKINGBIRD. Former Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein cites a former
CIA deputy director as saying, "It was widely known that Phil Graham was
someone you could get help from" (*82). More recently the Post provided
cover for CIA personality Joseph Fernandez by "refusing to print his name
for over a year up until the day his indictment was announced ...for
crimes committed in his official capacity as CIA station chief in Costa
Rica" (*83).
Of the
meetings between Graham and his CIA acquaintances at which
the availability and prices of journalists were discussed, a former
CIA man recalls, "You could get a journalist cheaper than a good
call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month" (*84). One may wish
to consider Philip Graham's philosophy along with a more recent
statement from his wife Katharine Graham, current Chairman of the Board
of the Washington Post. In a lecture on terrorism and the news media,
Mrs. Graham said: "A second challenge facing the media is how to
prevent terrorists from using the media as a platform fortheir views.
... The point is that we generally know when we are being manipulated,
and we've learned better how and where to draw the line, though
the decisions are often difficult" (*85).
Today, the Post and
its world of big business are apparently terrified that our elite and
our high-level public officials may be exposed as conspirators behind
Contra drug-smuggling, October Surprise, or the assassination of
President Kennedy. This fear is truly remarkable in that, like most of
us and like most institutions, the Post runs its business as a
conspiracy of like-minded entrepreneurs -- a conspiracy "to act or work
together toward the same result or goal" (*86). But where the Post
really parts company from just plain people is when it pretends that
conspiracies associated with big business or government are
"coincidence". Post reporter Lardner vents the frustration inherent in
having to maintain this dichotomy. He lashes out at Oliver Stone and
suggests that Stone may actually believe that the Post's opposition to
Stone's movie is a "conspiracy". Lardner assures us that Stone's
complaints are "groundless and paranoid and smack of McCarthyism"
(*87).
So how does the Post justify devoting so much energy to
ridiculing those who investigate conspiracies?
The Post has
answers: people revert to conspiracy theories because they need
something "neat and tidy" (*88) that "plugs a gap no other generally
accepted theory fills', (*89. and "coincidence ...is always the safest
and most likely explanation for any conjunction of
curious circumstances ..." (*90).
And what does this response
mean? It means that "coincidence theory" is what the Post espouses when
it would prefer not to admit to a conspiracy. In other words, some
things just "happen". And, besides, conspiracy to do certain things
would be a crime; "coincidence" is a safer bet.
Post Ombudsman
Richard Harwood, who, it is rumored, serves as Executive Director of
the Benevolent Protective Order of Coincidence Theorists, (*91)
recently issued a warning about presidential candidates "who have begun
to mutter about a press conspiracy". Ordinarily, Harwood would simply
dismiss these charges as "symptoms of the media paranoia that
quadrennially engulfs members of the American political class" (*92).
But a fatal mistake was made by the mutterers; they used the "C" word
against the PRESS! And Harwood exploded his off-the-cuff comment into
an entire column -- ending it with:"We are the new journalists,
immersed too long, perhaps, in the cleansing waters of political
conformity. But conspirators we ain't".
Distinguished investigative
journalist Morton Mintz, a 29-year veteran of the Washington Post, now
chairs the Fund for Investigative Journalism. In the December issue of
The Progressive, Mintz wrote "A Reporter Looks Back in Anger -- Why the
Media Cover Up Corporate Crime". Therein he discussed the difficulties
in convincing editors to accept important news stories. He illustrated
the article with his own experiences at the Post, where he says he was
known as "the biggest pain in the ass in the office"
(*93).
Would Harwood argue that grief endured by journalists at the
hands of editors is a matter of random coincidence?
And that
such policy as Mintz described is made independently by editors without
influence from fellow editors or from management? Would Harwood have us
believe that at the countless office "meetings" in which news people
are ever in attendance, there is no discussion of which stories will
run and which ones will find inadequate space? That there is no
advanced planning for stories or that there are no cooperative efforts
among the staff? Or that in the face of our news-media "grayout" of
presidential candidate Larry Agran, (*94) a Post journalist would be
free to give news space to candidate Agran equal to that the Post
lavishes on candidate Clinton? Let's face it: these possibilities are
about as likely as Barbara Bush entertaining guests at a soup
kitchen.
Would Harwood have us believe that media critic and former
Post Ombudsman Ben Bagdikian is telling less than the truth in his
account of wire-service control over news: "The largely anonymous men
who control the syndicate and wire service copy desks and the central
wire photo machines determine at a single decision what millions will
see and hear. ...there seems to be little doubt that these
gatekeepers preside over an operation in which
an appalling amount of press agentry sneaks in the back door of
American journalism and marches untouched out the front door as 'news'"
(*95).
When he sat on the U.S. District Court of Appeals in
Washington, Judge Clarence Thomas violated U.S. law when he failed to
remove himself from a case in which he then proceeded to reverse a $10
million judgment against the Ralston Purina Company (*96). Ralston
Purina, the animal feed empire, is the family fortune of Thomas'
mentor, Senator John Danforth. The Post limited its coverage of the
Thomas malfeasance to 56 words buried in the middle of a 1200-word
article (*97). Would Harwood have us believe that the almost complete
blackout on this matter by the major news media and the U.S. Senate was
a matter of coincidence? Could a Post reporter have written a story
about Ralston Purina if she had wanted to? Can a brick swim?
Or
take the fine report produced last September by Ralph Nader's Public
Citizen. Titled All the Vice President's Men, it documents "How the
Quayle Council on Competitiveness Secretly Undermines Health, Safety,
and Environmental Programs". Three months later, Post journalists David
Broder and Bob Woodward published "The President's Understudy", a
seven-part series on Vice President Quayle. Although this series does
address Quayle's role with the Competitiveness Council, its handling of
the Council's disastrous impact on America is inadequate. It is 40,000
words of mostly aimless chatter about Quayle memorabilia: youth,
family, college record, Christianity, political aspirations,
intellectual aspirations, wealthy friends, government associates, golf,
travels, wife Marilyn, and net worth -- revealing little about Quayle's
abilities, his understanding of society's problems, or his thoughts
about justice and freedom, and never mentioning the comprehensive Nader
study of Quayle's record in the Bush Administration (*98).
Now,
did Broder or did Woodward forget about the Nader study? Or did both of
them forget? Or did one, or the other, or both decide not to mention
it? Did these two celebrated, seasoned Post reporters ever discuss
together their jointly authored stories? Did they decide to publish
such a barren set of articles because it would enhance
their reputations? How did management feel about the use of precious
news space for such frivolity? Is it possible that so many pages
were dedicated to this twaddle without people "acting or working
together toward the same result or goal"? (*99) Do crocodiles
fly?
On March 20, front-page headlines in the Wall Street Journal,
the New York Times, USA Today, and the Washington Post read
respectively:
TSONGAS DROPPED OUT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE CLEARING
CLINTON'S PATH
TSONGAS ABANDONS CAMPAIGN LEAVING CLINTON CLEAR PATH
TOWARD SHOWDOWN WITH BUSH
TSONGAS CLEARS WAY FOR
CLINTON
TSONGAS EXIT CLEARS WAY FOR CLINTON
This display of
editorial independence should at least raise questions of whether the
news media collective mindset is really different from that of any
other cartel -- like oil, diamond, energy, (*100) or manufacturing
cartels, a cartel being "a combination of independent commercial
enterprises designed to limit competition" (*101).
The Washington
Post editorial page carries the heading:
AN INDEPENDENT
NEWSPAPER
Is it? Of course not. There probably is no such thing.
Does the Post "conspire" to keep its staff and its newspaper from
wandering too far from the safety of mediocrity? The Post would respond
that the question is absurd. In that I am not privy to the Post's
telephone conversations, I can only speculate on how closely the media
elite must monitor the staff. But we all know how few micro-seconds it
takes a new reporter to learn what subjects are taboo and what are
"safe", and that experienced reporters don't have to ask.
What
is more important, however, than speculating about how the
Post communicates within its own corporate structure and with other
members of the cartel, is to document and publicize what the Post does
in public, namely, how it shapes and censors the
news.
Sincerely,
Julian C. Holmes
Copies to:
Public-spirited citizens, both inside and outside the news media, And -
maybe a few others.
Notes to Letter of April 25,
1992:
1. Mark Hosenball, "The Ultimate Conspiracy",
Washington Post, September 11, 1988, p.C1
2a. Julian
Holmes, Letter to Washington Post Ombudsman Richard Harwood, June
4,1991. Notes that the Post censored, from the Anderson/Van Atta
column, references to the Christic Institute and to Robert
Gates.
2b. Jack Anderson and Dale Van Atta, "Iran-Contra
Figure Dodges Extradition", Washington Merry-Go-Round, United
Feature Syndicate, May 26, 1991. This is the column submitted to
the Post (see note 2a)..
2c. Jack Anderson and Dale Van Atta,
"The Man Washington Doesn't Want to Extradite", Washington Post,
May 26, 1991. The column (see note 2b). as it appeared in the
Post (see note 2a)..
3a. Case No. 86-1146-CIV-KING, Amended
Complaint for RICO Conspiracy, etc., United States District
Court, Southern District of Florida, Tony Avirgan and Martha
Honey v. John Hull et al., October 3, 1986.
3b. Vince Bielski
and Dennis Bernstein, "Reports: Contras Send Drugs to U.S.",
Cleveland Plain Dealer, November 16, 1986.
3c. Neal Matthews,
"I Ran Drugs for Uncle Sam" (based on interviews with Robert
Plumlee, contra resupply pilot)., San Diego Reader, April 5,
1990.
4. Leslie Cockburn, Out of Control. New York: Atlantic
Monthly Press, 1987.
5a. Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan
Marshall, Cocaine Politics, University ofCalifornia Press, 1991,
p.179-181.
5b. David S. Hilzenrath, "Hill Panel Finds No
Evidence Linking Contras to Drug Smuggling", Washington Post,
July 22, 1987, p.A07.
5c. Partial correction to the
Washington Post of July 22, Washington Post, July 24,1987,
p.A3.
5d. The Washington Post declined to publish
SubCommittee Chairman Rangel's Letter- to-the-Editor of July 22,
1987. It was printed in the Congressional Record on August 6,
1987, p.E3296-7.
6a. Michael Kranish, "Kerry Says US Turned
Blind Eye to Contra-Drug Trail", Boston Globe, April 10,
1988.
6b. Mary McGrory, "The Contra-Drug Stink", Washington
Post, April 10, 1988, p.B1. 6c. Robert Parry with Rod Nordland,
"Guns for Drugs? Senate Probers Trace an Old Contra Connection to
George Bush's Office", Newsweek, May 23, 1988, p.22.
6d.
Dennis Bernstein, "Iran-Contra -- The Coverup Continues",
The Progressive, November 1988, p.24.
6e. "Drugs, Law
Enforcement and Foreign Policy", A Report Prepared by the
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International
Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States
Senate, December 1988.
7a. Mark Hosenball, "If It's
October ... Then It's Time for an Iranian Conspiracy Theory",
Washington Post, October 9, 1988, p.D1.
7b. Mark Hosenball,
"October Surprise! Redux! The Latest Version of the 1980
'Hostage- Deal' Story Is Still Full of Holes", Washington Post,
April 21, 1991,p.B2.
8a. Barbara Honegger, October Surprise,
New York: Tudor, 1989.
8b. Gary Sick, October Surprise, New
York: Times Books, Random House, 1991.
9a. Abbie Hoffman
and Jonathan Silvers, "An Election Held Hostage", Playboy,
October 1988, p.73.
9b. Robert Parry and Robert Ross, "The
Election Held Hostage", FRONTLINE, WGBH-TV,April 16,
1991.
10a. Reuter, "Ex-Hostages Seek Probe By Congress",
Washington Post, June 14,1991,p.A4.
10b. "An Election Held
Hostage?", Conference, Dirksen Senate Office Building Auditorium,
Washington DC, June 13, 1991; Sponsored by The Fund For New
Priorities in America, 171 Madison Avenue, New York,
NY, 10016.
11a. David Brown and Guy Gugliotta, "House
Approves Inquiry Into 'OctoberSurprise'", Washington Post,
February 6, 1992, p.A11.
11b. Jack Colhoun, "Lawmakers Lose
Nerve on October Surprise", The Guardian, December 11, 1991,
p.7.
11c. Jack Colhoun, "October Surprise Probe Taps BCCI
Lawyer", The Guardian, February 26, 1992, p.3.
12. See
note 5a, p.180-1.
13a. See note 4, p.229, 240-1.
13b.
Report of the Congressional Committees Investigating
the Iran-Contra Affair, Senate Report No. 100-216, House Report
No. 100-433, November 1987, p.139-141.
14a. Letter to His
Excellency Oscar Arias Sanchez, President of the Republic of
Costa Rica; from Members of the U.S. Congress David Dreier, Lee
Hamilton, Dave McCurdy, Dan Burton, Mary Rose Oakar, Jim Bunning,
Frank McCloskey, Cass Ballenger, Peter Kostmayer, Jim
Bates, Douglas Bosco, James Inhofe, Thomas Foglietta, Rod
Chandler, Ike Skelton, Howard Wolpe, Gary Ackerman, Robert
Lagomarsino, and Bob McEwen; January 26, 1989.
14b. Peter
Brennan, "Costa Rica Considers Seeking Contra Backer in U.S. --
Indiana Native Wanted on Murder Charge in 1984 Bomb Attack
in Nicaragua", WashingtonPost, February 1, 1990.
14c.
"Costa Rica Seeks Extradition of Indiana Farmer",
Scripps-Howard News Service,April 25, 1991.
15. Press
Release from the Costa Rican Embassy, Washington DC, On the Case
of the Imprisonment of Costa Rican Citizen John Hull",
February 6, 1989.
16. Brian Glick, War at Home, Boston:
South End Press, 1989.
17. John Stockwell, The Praetorian
Guard-- The U.S. Role in the New World Order, Boston: South End
Press, 1991, p.121.
18. Hearings Before the Committee on
Patents, United States Senate, 77th Cong., 2nd Session (1942).,
part I, as cited in Joseph Borkin, The Crime and Punishment of
I.G. Farben, New York: The Free Press, Macmillan, 1978,
p.93.
19. R. Jeffrey Smith, "Study of A-Plant Neighbors'
Health Urged", Washington Post, July 13, 1990, p.A6.
20.
Tom Horton, "A Cost Higher Than the Peace Dividend -- Price
Tag Mounts to Clean Up Nuclear Weapons Sites", Baltimore Sun,
February 23, 1992, p.1K.
21. "The Nuclear Industry's
Secret PR Strategy", EXTRA!, March 1992, p.15.
22a. Samuel
S. Epstein, MD et al, Losing the War Against Cancer: Need for
PublicPolicy Reform", Congressional Record, April 2,
1992, p.E947-9.
22b. Samuel S. Epstein, "The Cancer
Establishment", Washington Post, March 10, 1992.
23a. Hon.
Henry B. Gonzalez, "Efforts to Thwart Investigation of the BNL
Scandal", Congressional Record, March 30, 1992,
p.H2005-2014.
23b. Hon. David E. Skaggs (CO)., White House
Spin Control on Pre-War Iraq Policy", Congressional Record, April
2, 1992, p.H2285.
23c. Nicholas Rostow, Special Assistant to
the President and Legal Adviser, Memorandum to Jeanne S.
Archibald et al, "Meeting on congressional requests for
information and documents", April 8, 1991; Congressional Record,
April 2, 1992,p.H2285.
24a. Michio Kaku, "Operation
Desert Lie: Pentagon Confesses", The
Guardian, March11, 1992,
p.4.
24b. J. Max Robins, "NBC's Unaired Iraq Tapes Not a
Black and White Case", Variety Magazine, March 4, 1991,
p.25.
25. Emory R. Searcy Jr., Clergy and Laity Concerned,
Spring 1991 Letter to"Friends", p.1.
26. Jean Dimeo,
"Selling Hispanics on Columbus -- Luis Vasquez-Ajmac Is Hired to
Promote Smithsonian Project", Washington Post, November 18, 1991,
p.Bus.8.
27. Hans Koning, "Teach the Truth About Columbus",
Washington Post, September 3,1991, p.A19.
28a. James
Kilpatrick, "Software-Piracy Case Emitting Big Stench", St. Louis
Post/Dispatch, March 18, 1991, p.3B. Elliot L. Richardson,
"A High-Tech Watergate", New York Times, October
21,1991.
29. "BCCI -- NBC Sunday Today", February 23, 1992,
p.12; transcript prepared by Burrelle's Information Services. The
quote is from New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau who is
running his own independent investigation of BCCI.
30.
Norman Bailey, former Reagan White House intelligence
analyst; from an interview with Mark Rosenthal of NBC News. See
note 29, p.5.
31. Jack Colhoun, "BCCI Skeletons Haunting
Bush's Closet", The Guardian, September 18, 1991, p.9.
32.
Robert Morgenthau. See note 29, p.10.
33. Russell Mokhiber,
Corporate Crime and Violence, San Francisco: Sierra ClubBooks,
1989 paperback edition, p.227.
34. See note 33,
p.136-7.
35. Morton Mintz, At Any Cost: Corporate Greed,
Women, and the Dalkon Shield, NewYork: Pantheon, 1985. As cited
in Mokhiber, see note 33, p.157.
36. See note 33,
p.164-171.
37. See note 33, p.172-180.
38. Michael
Waldman, Who Robbed America?, New York: Random House, 1990. The
quote is from Ralph Nader's Introduction, p.iii.
39. See note
33, p.217.
40. See note 33, p.235.
41. See note 33,
p.277-288.
42. See note 33, p.323.
43. Katherine Hoyt
Gonzalez, Nicaragua Network Education Fund Newsletter, March1992,
p.1.
44. William Blum, The CIA -- A Forgotten History,
London: Zed Books Ltd., 1986,p.232-243.
45a. John
Stockwell, In Search of Enemies, New York: Norton, 1978.
45b.
See note 44, p.284-291.
46. See note 17, p.18.
47a.
Letter to President George Bush from The Ad Hoc Committee
for Panama (James Abourezk et al)., January 10, 1990; published
in The Nation, February 5, 1990, p.163.
47b. Philip E.
Wheaton, Panama, Trenton NJ: Red Sea Press,
1992, p.145-7.
48a. Morton Mintz and Jerry S. Cohen,
Power, Inc., New York: Bantam Books, 1977,p.521.
48b. "The
International Oil Cartel", Federal Trade Commission, December 2,
1949. Cited in 48a, p.521.
49a. See note 44,
p.67-76.
49b. See note 48a, p.530-1.
50. Ralph W.
McGehee, Deadly Deceits, New York: Sheridan Square Publications,
1983,p.60.
51. HR-3385, "An Act to Provide Assistance for
Free and Fair Elections in Nicaragua". Passed the U.S. House of
Representatives on October 4, 1989 by avote of 263 to 136, and
the Senate on October 17 by a vote of 64 to 35.
52. Jack
Colhoun, "Gates Oozing Trail of Lies, Gets Top CIA Post",
The Guardian,November 20, 1991, p.6.
53. Carl Bernstein,
Time, February 24, 1992, Cover Story p.28-35.
54. "The U.S.
and the Vatican on Birth Control", Time, February 24, 1992,
p.35.
55. "Time's Missing Link: Poland to Latin America",
National Catholic Reporter,February 28, 1992, p.24.
56a.
Jim Lynn, "School of Americas Commander Hopes to Expand
Mission", Benning Patriot, February 21, 1992, p.12.
56b.
Vicky Imerman, "U.S. Army School of the Americas
Plans Expansion", News Release from S.O.A. Watch, P.O. Bo 3330,
Columbus, Georgia 31903.
57. 60 MINUTES, CBS, March 8,
1992.
58. Jack Colhoun, "Tricky Dick's Quick Election Fix",
The Guardian, January 29,1992, p.18.
59a. Sean P. Murphy,
"Several Probes May Have Ignored Evidence Against Police", Boston
Globe, July 28, 1991, p.1.
59b. Christopher B. Daly, "Pattern
of Police Abuses Reported in Boston Case", Washington Post, July
12, 1991, p.A3.
59c. Associated Press, "Dayton Police Probing
Erasure of Arrest Video", WashingtonPost, May 26, 1991,
p.A20.
59d. Gabriel Escobar, "Deaf Man's Death In Police
Scuffle Called Homicide", Washington Post, May 18, 1991,
p.B1.
59e. Jay Mathews, "L.A. Police Laughed at Beating",
Washington Post, March 19, 1991, p.A1.
59f. David
Maraniss, "One Cop's View of Police Violence", Washington Post,
April 12,1991, p.A1.
59g. From News Services, "Police Abuse
Detailed", Washington Post, February 8, 1992,p.A8.
60.
Michael Dobbs, "Panhandling the Kremlin: How Gus Hall
Got Millions", Washington Post, March 1, 1992, p.A1.
61.
David Streitfeld, "Secret Consortium To Publish Rushdie
In Paperback", Washington Post, March 14, 1992, p.D1.
62a.
See notes 48 and 49.
62b. See note 47b, p.63-76.
62c.
"Fairness In Broadcasting Act of 1987", U.S. Senate Bill
S742.
62d. "Now Let That 'Fairness' Bill Die", Editorial,
Washington Post,
June 24, 1987. The Post opposed the Fairness
in Broadcasting Act.
63. David E. Scheim, Contract on America
-- The Mafia Murder of President John F.Kennedy, New York:
Shapolsky Publishers, 1988, p.viii.
64. See note 63,
p.28.
65a. Chuck Conconi, "Out and About", Washington Post,
February 26, 1991, p.B3.
65b. George Lardner Jr., "On the
Set: Dallas in Wonderland", Washington Post, May19, 1991,
p.D1.
65c. George Lardner, "...Or Just a Sloppy Mess",
Washington Post, June 2, 1991,p.D3.
65d. Charles
Krauthammer, "A Rash of Conspiracy Theories -- When Do We Dig Up
BillCasey?", Washington Post, July 5, 1991, p.A19.
65e. Eric
Brace, "Personalities", Washington Post, October 31,
1991, p.C3.
65f. Associated Press, "'JFK' Director
Condemned -- Warren Commission Attorney Calls Stone Film 'A Big
Lie'", Washington Post, December 16, 1991, p.D14.
65g.
Gerald R. Ford and David W. Belin, "Kennedy Assassination:
How About the Truth?", Washington Post, December 17, 1991,
p.A21.
65h. Rita Kemply, "'JFK': History Through A Prism",
Washington Post, December 20,1991, p.D1.
65i. George
Lardner Jr., "The Way it Wasn't -- In 'JFK', Stone Assassinates
the Truth", Washington Post, December 20, 1991, p.D2.
65j.
Desson Howe, "Dallas Mystery: Who Shot JFK?", Washington
Post, December 20,1991, p.55.
65k. Phil McCombs, "Oliver
Stone, Returning the Fire -- In Defending His 'JFK' Conspiracy
Film, the Director Reveals His Rage and Reasoning", Washington
Post, December 21, 1991, p.F1.
65l. George F. Will, "'JFK':
Paranoid History", Washington Post, December 26,
1991,p.A23.
65m. "On Screen", 'JFK' movie review, Washington
Post, Weekend, December 27, 1991.
65n. Stephen S.
Rosenfeld, "Shadow Play", Washington Post, December 27, 1991,
p.A21.
65o. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "The Paranoid Style",
Washington Post, December 29,1991, p.C7.
65p. Michael
Isikoff, "H-e-e-e-e-r-e's Conspiracy! -- Why Did Oliver Stone
Omit (Or Suppress!). the Role of Johnny Carson?",
Washington Post, December 29, 1991,p.C2.
65q. Robert
O'Harrow Jr., "Conspiracy Theory Wins Converts -- Moviegoers Say
'JFK' Nourishes Doubts That Oswald Acted Alone", Washington Post,
January 2, 1992, p.B1.
65r. Michael R. Beschloss,
"Assassination and Obsession", Washington Post, January 5, 1992,
p.C1.
65s. Charles Krauthammer, "'JFK': A Lie, But Harmless",
Washington Post, January 10,1992, p.A19.
65t. Art
Buchwald, "Bugged: The Flu Conspiracy", Washington Post, January
14, 1992,p.E1.
65u. Ken Ringle, "The Fallacy of Conspiracy
Theories -- Good on Film, But the Motivation Is All Wrong",
Washington Post, January 19, 1992, p.G1.
65v. Charles Paul
Freund, "If History Is a Lie -- America's Resort to Conspiracy
Thinking", Washington Post, January 19, 1992, p.C1.
65w.
Richard Cohen, "Oliver's Twist", Washington Post
Magazine, January 19, 1992, p.5.
65. Michael Isikoff,
"Seeking JFK's Missing Brain", Washington Post, January 21,1992,
p.A17.
65y. Don Oldenburg, "The Plots Thicken -- Conspiracy
Theorists Are Everywhere", Washington Post, January 28, 1992,
p.E5.
65z. Joel Achenbach, "JFK Conspiracy: Myth vs. the
Facts", Washington Post, February 28, 1992, p.C5.
65A.
List of books on the best-seller list: On the Trail of
the Assassins is characterized as "conspiracy plot theories",
Washington Post, March 8, 1992,Bookworld, p.12
66. See
notes 65n, 65w, 65l, 65b, 65c, and 65i.
67a. Peter Dale
Scott, "Vietnamization and the Drama of the Pentagon Papers".
Published in The Senator Gravel Edition of The Pentagon Papers,
Volume V,p.211-247.
67b. Peter Dale Scott, The War Conspiracy
-- The Secret Road to the Second Indochina War, Indianapolis/New
York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1972, p. 215-224.
67c. L. Fletcher
Prouty, The Secret Team, Copyright 1973. New printing, Costa Mesa
CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1990, p.402-416.
67d.
See note 63, p.58, 183, 187, 194, 273-4.
67e. John M. Newman,
JFK and Vietnam, New York: Warner Books, 1992.
67f. Peter
Dale Scott, Letter to the Editor, The Nation, March 9, 1992,
p.290.
68a. See note 65b.
68b. Oliver Stone, "The
Post, George Lardner, and My Version of the JFK Assassination",
Washington Post, June 2, 1991, p.D3.
69. See note
65b.
70. Jim Garrison, On the Trail of The Assassins, New
York: Warner Books, 1988, 315/318.
71. Associated Press,
"Garrison, 2 Others, Found Not Guilty Of Bribery Charge",
Washington Post, September 28, 1973, p.A3.
72. See note
65c.
73. See note 65i.
74. See note 67e,
p.438-450.
75. John G. Leyden, "Historians, Buffs, and
Crackpots", Washington Post, Bookworld, January 26, 1992,
p.8.
76a. Tad Szulc, "New Doubts, Fears in JFK Assassination
Probe", Washington Star,September 19, 1975, p.A1.
76b. Tad
Szulc, "Warren Commission's Self-Doubts Grew Day by Day -- 'This
Bullet Business Leaves Me Confused'", Washington Star,
September
20, 1975, p.A1.
76c. Tad Szulc, "Urgent and
Secret Meeting of the Warren Commission -- Dulles Proposed that
the Minutes be Destroyed", Washington Star, September 21,
1975,p.A1.
77. "Cable Sought to Discredit Critics of Warren
Report", New York Times, December 26, 1977, p.A37.
78.
Deborah Davis, Katharine The Great, New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, 1979,p.141-2.
79a. Eve Pell, "Private
Censorship -- Killing 'Katharine The Great'", The Nation,
November 12, 1983.
79b. Deborah Davis, Katharine The Great,
Bethesda MD: National Press, 1987. Davis says, "...corporate
documents that became available during my subsequent lawsuit
against him [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich chairman, William
Jovanovich] showed that 20,000 copies [of Katharine the
Great] had been "processed and converted into waste
paper"".
79c. Daniel Brandt, "All the Publisher's Men -- A
Suppressed Book About Washington Post Publisher Katharine Graham
Is On Sale Again" National Reporter, Fall 1987, p.60.
79d.
Deborah Davis, Katharine The Great, New York: Sheridan
Square Press, 1991. "...publishers who don't give a shit",
p.iv-v; bullying HBJ into recalling the book, p.iv-vi; lawsuit
and settlement, p..
80. Benjamin C. Bradlee, Letter to
Deborah Davis, April 1, 1987. See note 79d, p.304.
81. See
note 79d, p.119-132.
82. Carl Bernstein, "The CIA and the
Media -- How America's Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in
Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church
Committee Covered It Up", Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977,
p.63.
83a. Daniel Brandt, Letter to Richard L. Harwood of The
Washington Post, September 15, 1988. The letter asks for the
Post's rationale for its policy of protecting government covert
actions, and whether this policy is still in effect.
83b.
Daniel Brandt, "Little Magazines May Come and Go", The
National Reporter, Fall 1988, p.4. Notes the Post's protection of
the identity of CIA agent Joseph F.Fernandez. Brandt says,
"America needs to confront its own recent history as well as
protect the interests of its citizens, and both can be
accomplished by outlawing peacetime covert activity. This would
contribute more to thesecurity of Americans than all the
counterterrorist proposals and elite strike forces that ever
found their way onto Pentagon wish-lists."
83c. Richard L.
Harwood, Letter to Daniel Brandt, September 28, 1988. Harwood's
two- sentence letter reads, "We have a long-standing policy of
not naming covert agents of the C.I.A., except in
unusual circumstances. We applied that policy to
Fernandez."
84. See note 79d, p.131.
85. Katharine
Graham, "Safeguarding Our Freedoms As We Cover Terrorist Acts",
Washington Post, April 20, 1986, p.C1.
86. "conspire",
ß4ßRandom House Dictionary of the English Language, Second
Edition Unabridged, 1987.
87. Howard Kurtz, "Media Notes",
Washington Post, June 18, 1991, p.D1.
88. See note
65y.
89. See note 65n.
90. See note 65d.
91.
William Casey, Private Communications with JCH, March
1992.
Richard Harwood, "What Conspiracy?", Washington Post,
March 1, 1992, p.C6.
93. p. 29-32.
94a. Washington
Post Electronic Data Base, Dialog Information Services Inc.,
April 25, 1992. In 1991 and 1992, the name Bill Clinton
appeared in 878 Washington Post stories, columns, letters, or
editorials; "Jerry" Brown in 485, Pat Buchanan in 303, and Larry
Agran in 28. In those 28, Agran's name appeared 76 times,
Clinton's 151, and Brown 105. In only 1 of those 28 did Agran's
name appear in a headline.
94b. Colman McCarthy, "What's
'Minor' About This Candidate?", Washington Post, February 1,
1992. Washington Post columnist McCarthy tells how television and
party officials have kept presidential candidate Larry Agran out
of sight. The Post's own daily news-blackout of Agran is not
discussed.
94c. Scot Lehigh, "Larry Agran: 'Winner' in Debate
With Little Chance For the Big Prize", Boston Globe, February 25,
1992.
94d. Joshua Meyrowitz, "The Press Rejects a Candidate",
Columbia Journalism Review,March/April, 1992.
95. Ben H.
Bagdikian, The Effete Conspiracy And Other Crimes By The Press,
NewYork: Harper and Row, 1972, p.36-7.
96a. 28 USC Section
455. "Any justice, judge, or magistrate of the United States
shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which
his impartiality might reasonably be questioned." [emphasis
added]
96b. Alpo Petfoods, Inc. v. Ralston Purina Co., 913
F2d 958 (CA DC 1990)..
96c. Monroe Freedman, "Thomas'
Ethics and the Court -- Nominee 'Unfit to Sit' For Failing to
Recuse In Ralston Purina Case", Legal Times, August 26,
1991.
96d. Paul D. Wilcher, "Opposition to the Confirmation
of Judge Clarence Thomas to become a Justice on the U.S. Supreme
Court on the grounds of his JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT", Letter to U.S.
Senator Joseph R. Biden, October 15, 1991.
97. Al Kamen
and Michael Isikoff, "'A Distressing Turn', Activists
Decry
What Process Has Become", Washington Post, October 12,
1991, p.A1.
98. January 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 1992, p.A1
each day.
99. See note 86.
100. Thomas W. Lippman,
"Energy Lobby Fights Unseen 'Killers'", Washington Post,April 1,
1992, p.A21. This article explains that "representatives of the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of
Manufacturers and the coal, oil, natural gas, offshore drilling
and nuclear power industries, whose interests often
conflict, pledged to work together to oppose amendments limiting
offshore oil drilling, nuclear power and carbon dioxide emissions
soon to be offered by key House members".
101. "cartel",
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary,
1977. | |