Latest installment of Fran Shure’s series examines how compliant and fearful journalists perpetuate the cover-up
October 29, 2017
By Barrie Zwicker (Special to Truth and Shadows)
It’s telling that one of the finest critiques of journalism’s abject and historic failure to simply report what’s known about 9/11 comes from a non-journalist.
Frances T. Shure, a psychotherapist from Denver, Colorado, has just completed “The Role of the Media: Act I, Whatever Happened to Investigative Journalists?” which is Part 21 of a series of essays written for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth entitled “Why Do Good People Become Silent—or Worse—About 9/11?”
Thankfully, Part 21 ranges well beyond AE911Truth’s well-chosen but specific orbit. As Shure’s disclaimer states, AE911Truth sticks to its knitting, “does not speculate as to the identity or motives of the perpetrators.” That may work in the fields of architecture and engineering, but serious critiques of mainstream and so-called alternative media that fail to expand their canvas to include imperialism and militarism, with monopoly capitalism at their core, are fatally incomplete, in this reviewer’s opinion. Shure does not shrink from examining the roots as well as the crowns of the forest of issues associated with media malfeasance — wherever evidence leads her.
It’s difficult to develop the courage to do that digging and scanning without an approach akin to Albert Einstein’s: seek out both the patterns and the minutiae; do not fear to theorize, because that’s essential; and retain an almost fierce independence from prevailing wisdoms.
It doesn’t hurt that Shure knows her psychology, because among the colours in her expanded canvas are human propensities. In the case of 9/11 the fear of nonconformity within the journalism community blends with the capacity for self-delusion and denial with an overlay of careerism. And Shure’s wide-ranging research has made her aware of the deep penetration of large numbers of embedded CIA “assets” within the media carrying out ideological gatekeeping. A prime directive from Langley to these assets obviously has led and continues to lead to serial infanticide at any and every sign of the birth of questioning of the official 9/11 narrative.
It’s not by chance that widespread surreptitious controls over an all-too-compliant media are most evident, for those with eyes to see, in the instance of arguably the most shocking political event of the 20th century, JFK’s assassination, and the most shocking geopolitical event so far in the 21st century, 9/11. Either one is a litmus test for those concerned about rogue state power and honest courageous reporting. Together, the two pivotal events form a telltale pattern spanning two centuries. The success of rogue state power in the service of capitalist imperialism paired with the failure of public media to even question, let alone investigate, these two outrages against democracy and morality is a double blow against the future of the world and all in it.
“What is wrong with the Western media?” Shure asks at the outset. “Why have they not jumped at the opportunity to cover the scoop of the century — the wealth of crystal-clear evidence that proves the government has been lying about the attacks of September 11, 2001, for the past sixteen years?”
In her 13,000-word essay, rendered jargon-free in a clear flowing style, she answers her own questions. In point form her answers can be summarized:
Fears and their outcomes emerge repeatedly, directly or implied, as a central thread. “The term ‘third rail’ is a metaphor referring to the high-voltage third rail in some electric railway systems. Stepping on this rail would usually result in electrocution. Thus, political third rail issues are those that are considered ‘charged’ and ‘untouchable,’ promising that any public official or media outlet that dares seriously broach these topics will suffer.”
Later she observes: “…with third rail issues such as the Israel-Palestine conflict, big-business profits, war, or the false flag nature of 9/11, mainstream media march in lockstep with their government and corporate news sources, repeating their narratives ad nauseam. Official suppression of the truth, journalists’ self-censorship, and prosecution of whistleblowers regularly accompany these third rail issues. As a journalist friend tersely remarked, ‘It’s okay to be liberal with domestic issues, but don’t mess with the empire.’”
“…journalists who step outside the echo chamber of an official account tend to be shunned by their peers at social or work functions. As I mentioned in the Introduction to this series, humans’ greatest fear may be social ostracism or even physical banishment. At a primal level, we’re aware of our dependence upon one another for survival as well as our strong need to belong and to connect with our fellow beings. Thus, there can be devastating psychological effects on reporters who are shunned or avoided in social or business functions.”
She observes: “Some Americans may fear that a real investigation into the events surrounding 9/11 could challenge our entire political system to the point of paralysis. But this is fear of fear itself and is a ruse of the mind.”
“Pressure produces fear,” Shure writes in introducing the eight specific fears below, “and, not surprisingly, fears abound in the ‘news factories.’” She concludes: “The stress resulting from those fears is enormous. Fear and stress, as we know, are anathema to truth-telling.”
- Fear of not meeting financial analysts’ expectations for the next quarter’s increase in profits.
- Fear of low TV news ratings.
- Fear of litigation by powerful corporations such as Phillip Morris and Monsanto or by other non-corporate but equally powerful entities.
- Fear of the withdrawal of ads by Madison Avenue’s mega advertisers.
- Fear of attacks by other media outlets if reporters or editors veer from a “consensus” viewpoint.
- Fear of persecution by an employer if the reporter refuses to toe that media outlet’s party line.
- Fear of the consequences of not telling a story that other media are telling, even if it is not a credible story.
- Fear of offending influential local public figures or groups.
Sacred myths. U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski told Shure what some journalists confided in her: “…to question the government story about 9/11 is to question the very foundations of our entire modern belief system regarding our government, our country, and our way of life. To be charged with questioning these foundations is far more serious than being labeled a disgruntled conspiracy nut or anti-government traitor, or even being sidelined or marginalized within an academic, government service, or literary career. To question the official 9/11 story is simply and fundamentally revolutionary.” (Kwiatkowski adds: “In this way, of course, questioning the official story is also simply and fundamentally American.”) Perhaps a quaint thought.
Writes Shure: “Outworn beliefs have enormous inertia… They die a protracted death, as we discovered in Part 8 on brain research. But at least they do eventually die, as the Gallup polls confirm — sometimes when people change their views to fit new facts, and other times, unfortunately, by the death of members of the current older generation.”
Careerism. A few reporters still exist “chomping at the bit to expose the mounds of evidence that clearly contradict the official tale of 9/11.” But “they must remain silent to keep their jobs.”
The CIA illegally embedding gatekeeping agents inside media organizations and deceptively meddling in U.S. political affairs. “Both are indicative of a corrupt agency responsive to wealthy individuals who operate behind the scenes in Washington politics — that is, outside normal democratic processes — for the purpose of shaping public policy to benefit themselves.”
Internal censorship by editors in thrall of the media’s corporate owners. “We shall also discover how investigations crucial to an open and democratic society are, across the board, being thoroughly censored by editors, by media’s corporate owners, and by intelligence agencies. And we shall see that this censorship is not unique to the topic of 9/11 — not by a long shot.”
Neutered accounts. When outright censorship is not applied, “well-researched, well-documented exposés of high crimes by officials… even if they do make the news, are rendered … into watered-down, impotent versions, unrecognizable to the authors.”
Delusions. “Western” journalists self-identify as free and actually superior to those who worked or work in Russia or China, for instance. In a section devoted to the nightmare ordeal of U.S. Marine Bobby Garwood, one-time POW in Vietnam, Shure suitably uses the term “[U.S.] puppet media.” This description has been cavalierly applied by generations of “Western” journalists to Pravda, Granma, or any Chinese state media outlet. One is reminded of a line by author W. A. Swanberg in his Pulitzer Prize-winning Luce and his Empire: “Luce had perfected a method of propaganda that was to Pravda as a thousand flashing rapiers are to a clumsy bludgeon.”
The intertwining of the powers of state agencies and corporations. Shure writes: “I am unavoidably reminded of the words of former CIA director William Casey, who remarked in early February 1981 to then-incoming President Ronald Reagan: ‘We’ll know our disinformation program is a success when everything the American public believes is false.’ So, once again, we see that big media, the Department of Defense, the intelligence community, and big business are all tightly intertwined.”
Again: “When the curtain is pulled back, we discover powerful puppeteers such as the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, military intelligence, media owners with conflicting political agendas, the White House, advertisers, powerful family dynasties, and extremely wealthy individuals pulling the strings of the marionette media.”
And: “Our global media have become subsidiaries of massive corporate conglomerates that do business in many other industries, including the manufacture of weapons for the military. These mega-corporations, in turn, contribute huge sums of money to members of Congress as well as enormous research grants to universities.”
The media are incapable of shame. “Bush, Congress, and the media are all incapable of shame.” — Daniel Ellsberg. This, of course, is a vast and partially unfair generalization. But it stands, as a generalization.
Of particular concern to those of us focused on the shame of media malfeasance and worse on the subject of 9/11Truth are those otherwise progressive and critical and seemingly independent writers such as Robert Parry, Chris Hedges and many more (and a few broadcasters, such as Amy Goodman). Why do they look like deer in the headlights when they’re asked where they stand on 9/11? Shure wisely turns to and quotes in full Kristina Borjesson, editor of Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press. Borjesson’s response deserves to be seen in full:
“They are talented journalists and have worked hard to navigate between reporting that goes right up to the line of what is acceptable to the powers-that-be and reporting that goes over the line and would cost them everything. It took Parry years to get over being blackballed for his Newsweek reporting on Iran-Contra. When he was at The New York Times, Hedges was reprimanded by his bosses after he criticized what was happening in Iraq while giving a commencement address in 2003. These individuals would immediately become targets for marginalization, loss of funding, and/or outlets for their work, or even worse forms of retaliation if they crossed the line, because they have achieved a “critical mass” audience — i.e., a big enough audience to create problems for the powers-that-be if used to counter official narratives on third-rail issues. If they did that they would attract dangerous if not fatal attention from powers-that-be. The fact that they are widely viewed as good journalists not beholden to the powers-that-be makes them dangerous, but not too dangerous. They would only become dispensable if they invested that credibility in scrutinizing the ultimate third rail issue — 9/11. They’re doing a lot of good carefully hoeing the rows they’re hoeing now, and that would all go down the tubes if they turned their attention to looking into whether or not the official narrative about 9/11 is true.”
I couldn’t agree more. I was also curious to find out how Into the Buzzsaw fared when it came to reviews, so I emailed Borjesson about that and received this reply:
“…although Buzzsaw didn’t get any mainstream airtime on TV or reviewed in The New York Times, it was reviewed in the New York Review of Books and lots of papers and magazines around the country.
“The real story is the silence on my second book, FEET TO THE FIRE: The Media After 9/11, which is more closely tied to 9/11 because 9/11 opened up the space for launching the propaganda campaign to go to Iraq. The book contains interviews with major journalists and news executives talking about the run-up to the war and their failure to get it right. The book was ignored by EVERYBODY (even the Columbia Journalism Review) even though major household-name journalists and top news executives were featured in it.
“At one point, when I asked the editor of the Columbia Journalism Review why the book was not covered in the magazine (I also happen to be an alumna of their J-School), he said that they had written something on it, but decided not to run it at the last minute because of lack of space [yeah, right].”
Shure, being positive by nature, notes: “…we 9/11 Truth activists have done exactly what [Kristina Borjesson and others] have done: We’ve become the media. Observe the research being undertaken; the books and films and articles and online blogs being written; the array of videos, from pithy to lengthy, that are being produced. Witness the perseverance and passion of 9/11 victims’ family members, who are intent on winning a real investigation into the greatest crime of the 21st century. All around me, I see warriors for truth who are refusing to let information be stifled and are mounting vigorous grassroots media efforts that, according to many polls, have successfully challenged the mainstream media’s repetition of the official 9/11 account.”
In her next installment, to be called “Part 22: The Role of the Media: Act II — History, Corporate Blowback, and How the System Censors,” Shure plans to briefly chronicle the history of the American press and delve more into the causes of censorship. But before she does so she writes, “I’ll tell a personal story about a public altercation I had with a 40-year journalist from The New York Times.” Good cliffhanger. It has me hooked.
Even the media became silent about the terrorists that keep on killing the white farmers in South Africa. Nobody wants to report on anything. Every week farmers gets murdered and there wives get raped. Over 4000 dead in South Africa.So much darkness in this world…
Most wars aren’t about doing what’s right. They are about conquest and profit; money, resources, strategic gain. “To the victor goes the spoils” – It’s about the spoils.
The nations with nothing to exploit and plunder, or if there is no feasible or cost effective means of doing so, are of no interest to the MIC.
Why does this article not contain an actual *link* the the article being discussed…? (“The Role of the Media: Act I, Whatever Happened to Investigative Journalists?”)
Just added a note to Barrie’s piece that the article is being posted this week on the AE911Truth website. I’ll add the link in just as soon as it’s available.
This week huh? You do great work Craig, so I’m not blaming you, but it is ridiculous how little AE911truth posts on its website. It’s been well over a week and they still haven’t gotten the latest Frances Shure article up like you said they would. Who runs that website? Why are they letting it die on the vine?
I don’t know why they haven’t posted it. I know they have tons on the go and everybody is working very long hours. But I’ll give them a nudge.
Well Craig, thanks for trying, but the latest in the Shure series STILL is not up. I guess the person who runs that site just doesn’t care very much, perhaps they should hand it over to somebody who does.
I don’t know why it has been delayed. If I had known I would have waited myself. But I’m told it’s coming this week for sure.
You have the rest of your lives to waste on it. Surely a week isn’t going to matter much.
A relevant article (on how to navigate in orthodox social climates):
Jon, thanks for the link to ‘slatestarcodex’.
That third rail is ‘live’ alright…so much charge running through it that when the intellectual, or journalist, or politician, stumbles upon it, the flash arcs out cognitive function allowing discovery. discernment, truth, beauty and justice.
All that education.
Suddenly lobotomized, the ‘elite’ are stunned into mullets of silence [learned helplessness], unable to recognize and argue physics and forensics until then considered sacrosanct.
Yet somehow remain powerfully able to identify ‘tenure.’
Great article, spells it out quite nicely.
The media basically functions as the advertising department for the military industrial complex. The CIA functions as a sales and management agent, working deals and starting wars and whatnot, to include infiltrating and manipulating media.
Now what? Hey, I know, …just point it out some more, then go try to see if they’ll let you explain it on TV. That’ll show ’em.
It’s not like the CIA and MSM facilities needs to be burned and the employees hanged for willfully facilitating genocide and a number of other crimes against humanity.
Frances and Barry are being too kind to Chris Hedges, Robert Parry and Amy Goodman. Those three are doing more to maintain the established order than dissolve it.
While in complete agreement, it takes an extraordinary individual to risk it all, including one’s very life, by speaking out forcefully on the 9/11 deception and crime of the 21st century. The issue doesn’t get any more dangerous on this Earth, explaining these and other so-called anti-war progressives’ silence, yet it seems unforgivable for men and women to know the truth about 9/11 but refuse to speak out. Peace.
Are you kidding? People are stupid.
They have been trained to think inside of a box that is their comfort zone. Present them with anything outside of that box and they reject it to protect their ego. There is no danger or risk to telling the truth because they won’t accept or believe it anyway.
Their ego is attached to a system they have invested their whole lives into. It cannot be evil or they have invested their whole lives into evil.
You could show them video of a whole series of conversations of the conspiracy with everything checking out as to authenticate it, and they would reject it, rationalize it as anything but what it is.
Trying to convince the world of a conspiracy is a lost cause. Those who can be reached, have been. They see it and either don’t care or it isn’t worth bothering with, otherwise there would already have been a bloody revolt.
The root issue is government by demand of billions of people. The people won’t correct because they are brainwashed selfish or stupid. If you want to change anything you have to kill about 4-6 billion people. Otherwise it is a wasted effort.
Well, it’s nice to have a ballpark figure.
You could add Glenn Greenwald (The Intercept), Edward Snowden and Julian Assange to the list
Good points, thank you. I’ll add that entire classes of important alternative opinion-makers who would normally press the U.S. media–both mainstream and marginal–to objectively report on 9/11 are also missing in action. Amnesty International hardly has never formulated the concern–to put it mildly–that the deaths of the Twin Towers’ occupants may have been disguised extrajudicial executions. The North Korean media, who can be very imaginative as they vomit hellish portrayals of the USA, have never deviated from the 9/11 orthodoxy. Just about all the other bully pulpits that would normally pressure the U.S. media to do their job have not done theirs either.
This brings the possibility that the very real problem of what looks like a censorship of 9/11 in the U.S. media would be part of a much larger problem whose scope would cut across geography and ideology.
I think a big part of the silence is due to Israeli involvement in 9/11. As Alan Sabrosky put it, if the trail of evidence had led to anywhere other than Israel there would have been a media feeding frenzy.
No, that is just ridiculous to consider that those who call themselves Jews would be anything but perfect angels. They are never wrong because they’ve had cultural difficulties.
You must be racist if you even consider the possibility of thinking of pondering whether or not you might want to negotiate the idea that ‘Jews’ would be involved.
You hit the nail right on the head. It’s also why the Hollywood elite has been getting away with rape and twisted versions of history for decades
The irony: Excluding the third rail subject (Israel’s role in 9-11) from an article featuring the concept of the third rail impeding ‘others’ from exposing 9-11. Gatekeeping occurs until the inner sactum is reached (exposed). Some of the most visible 9-11 leaders have achieved a cover-up of Israeli involvement as their first priority. Present company is included.
Reblogged this on jamesrobertcoyle and commented:
Fran Shures latest is reviewed by Craig McKee.
Actually, the piece was written by Barrie Zwicker, who has reviewed an installment of Shure’s series before.
On a vaguely related note, famous saxophonist and “anti-semitic philosopher” Gilad Atzmon recently gave a talk to an apparently 9/11 aware group in London and posted the video to his website yesterday with the title “Balfour Declaration, History and Concealment”.
He seems to be promoting a ‘Jewish’ variant of the “someone would have spoke” idea. A few parts caught my attention:
“Jewish Power. What is Jewish power? Jewish power is the power to suppress questioning to do with Jewish power. This is exactly what happens to us with the Balfour Declaration. This is exactly what happens to us AIPAC, with the Conservative friends of Israel, with the Labour friends of Israel who are basically the same people. With the CRIF in France. And this is something that may upset many of you … a lot of Israeli critics speak about Jewish conspiracies, Zionist conspiracies … I’m sure that some of you think that Israel did 9/11. Fine. I’m not so sure. You know why? Because Jews do all of it in the open! This is the trick! They do everything in the open. The Balfour Declaration, before it was destroyed by me, within seconds it was out. It was out everybody knew about it. They were bragging about it.”
“There no Jewish conspiracies! [at this point we hear a woman’s voice seemingly agree ‘no’, while others appear uncomfortable and move around, touch their face etc.] … they do all of it in the open. CFI. CRIF. In France Bernard-Henri Levy said me, I as a Jew, liberated Libya, before it turned into a disaster. AIPAC was lobbying to a war against Syria. Against Iran. Against Libya. I don’t know if Israel did 9/11 or not, but if it did they would brag about it. For a week. And my mother and fath … I don’t wan .. huh .. we can get into this discussion later. And my mother would tell me “Do you know Moshe? ‘Yeah, sure’ His mother, her cousin, his sister, he was the … in Israel there are no secrets [scratches his ear]. Do you know Israeli girls always complain that Israeli boys are very quick? And the reason is they want to run to tell the lads.”
“What is a Jerusalemite environment? In this book I argue and by the way I didn’t invent this matrix, we have a philosopher here, its actually the person who introduced Athens vs Jerusalem to the English speaking world, was Leo Strauss, a Jewish philosopher. I really love him.”
I hope I got that right.
Then today he wrote about a Conservative politician fired for secret meetings with her Israeli counterparts.
“This is the crux of the matter — Jews hate ‘Jewish conspiracy theories.’ Why? Because Jews do not conspire or operate in clandestine manner. They do it all in the open. Jews wrote the Balfour Declaration on behalf of Lord Balfour and made sure everyone knows who really wrote it. They make sure we know that it was Leó Szilárd and Albert Einstein who initiated the Manhattan Project. AIPAC, CFI, LFI and the CRIF openly push for immoral interventionist wars in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Iran while JC writers Nick Cohen and David Aaronovitch advocate these global wars in the media. All this is not merely a ‘Zionist agenda.’ Jewish anti Zionists employ the same technique to claim that it is down to progressive Jews to define the boundaries of free speech on Israel. I reiterate -there are no Jewish conspiracies. Everything is done in the open. And this was Patel’s mistake. She foolishly attempted to conceal her loyalty to our foreign rulers.”
craig: I changed my display name from captivescientist.
@elias quoting Atzmon ” I’m sure that some of you think that Israel did 9/11. Fine. I’m not so sure. You know why? Because Jews do all of it in the open! This is the trick! They do everything in the open.”
But they don’t do it in the open when it becomes an existential threat to Israel. This is why “liberal jews” like Norman Finkelstein, Chomsky, Amy Goodman etc, don’t support a 9/11 investigation. Sabrosky (yes, Jewish name):
Why The Military Knows Israel Did 9/11
3:40: Sabrosky “Mossad did it. If they do understand that, Israel is going to disappear from this Earth. If Americans ever know that Israel did this they’re gonna scrub them off the earth and they’re not going to give a rat’s ass what the cost is” … 5:25: “the Zionists are playing this as truly an all or nothing exercise. Because if they lose this one… [interviewer: “that’s it”] … they’re done”. The complete 48 min. interview can be found here:
I still have a lot if respect for Atzmon. Follow him here:
“I’m sure that some of you think that Israel did 9/11. Fine. I’m not so sure. You know why? Because Jews do all of it in the open! This is the trick! They do everything in the open.”
I`m going to have to disagree with Gilad here. Israel`s existence depends heavily on US support. They`re not going to jeopardize that by admitting they murdered 3,000 Americans. Also, I don`t think only Israel was involved. All the guilty parties would have agreed beforehand to keep their mouths shut.
You’re both correct and incorrect. It’s something else altogether. But you’re never going to know the real truth because I have decided to render your movement impossible on account of it being of little importance.
It is apparently unnecessary to know who did it, how or why, or have complete information in order to prove conspiracy or assign blame and accountability though. Just ask Craig. Simply take the collective egos of those leading the truth movement, and part of the truth, to a resistant audience who will go to great lengths to reject your ‘theories’. With any luck, you might convince media to admit that the official story is a tiny bit suspicious after a couple of more decades.
It’s all downhill from there.
How much more openly can you get than dancing on cartops videotaping the WTC buildings as events happen, driving around NY in a van with a mural of a plane crashing into a WTC tower, driving around in vans full of explosives and explosive residue, being photographed in their 90th floor art studio surrounded by boxes full of electronic devices for initiating explosives, telling other Israelis to avoid the buildings on 9/11 or move their offices, and in the case of Netanyahu, telling the media that 9/11 was good for Israel. It would seem the Israelis couldn’t have made their involvement less obvious but since the entire operation involved top branches of the American powers that be, the public’s possible awareness via the MSM of any agency other than bin Laden and his Al Qaeda extremists was quickly squashed.
Does Fran Shure support the investigative reporting (writings) of Christopher Bollyn? Bollyn’s WAR ON TERROR: PLOT TO RULE THE MIDDLE EAST is a ‘must read’, IMO. On YouTube, the Adam Green interviews of Bollyn are revealing.
Nation of Islam takes a stand about Israeli involvement in the 9-11 crimes: http://noi.org/911Revisited
It is time to commence indictments, make arrests and interrogate the key suspects. http://911JusticeCampaign.org
It took a lot longer than expected, but Fran Shure’s article that this post comments on is up on the AE911Truth website: http://www.ae911truth.org/blog-categories/psychology/393-news-media-events-shure-part-21-the-role-of-the-media-act-1.html
From a Canadian MSM perspective
A quote from Jim Reed, 3 time Gemini award winner – RIP great Canadian journalist – W5/CBC Newsworld- regarding the not so covert censorship of the MSM with regards to the military – Afganistan war, the PMO and the Israel Palestine conflict – So it wouldn’t be too much of a leap to consider the CBC might even be more concerned about the issue of 9/11. – aptly demonstrated in the you tube piece to follow with the National Post’s Jonathan Kay – think Leslie Hughes and CBC –
“Please feel free to pass this on.
This note is highly anecdotal and therefore suspect by some; it’s not based on evidence or knowledge, just on personal experience.
Personally, I don’t believe there is an official black list at CBC or any other MSM outlet, either for individual commentators or for important issues.
However I do believe that there’s an unofficial blacklist and I believe that I’m on; I also believe that an issue/subject in which I am professionally interested in is also on it…and I’ll tell you why.
For more than 3 years I wrote pieces for cbc.ca. My speciality, as you know, is the Middle East and South Asia. I have always written carefully about matters concerning these regions, because so many people are sensitive about them. I was always careful to buttress any assertions I made to Israel with accurate, scholarly and reasonably credible references.
In the course of these writings, I was often asked in emails and other correspondence, why it was that Israel had so much influence on U.S. foreign policy. So I decided to write about that in the column you can see here.
“It’s The Lobby Stupid” was the second last piece I wrote for cbc.ca. There was a huge outcry and a big onslaught on the Ombudsman’s office about me being “anti-Semitic”. I was told by my editor that there were “heavy duty” concerns about “bias”. (To their credit, CBC has kept the piece in their archive…although it’s not CBC policy to destroy material they have already published…not yet at least). It wasn’t quite the end of my association with them, but the end was near.
NB – CBC has a long history both on the radio side and the TV side, of downplaying any criticism of Israel. So a warning flag went up and I do know that there were discussions about my role at cbc.ca – at fairly high levels.
My final column “Finding A Way Forward” was apparently regarded by the PMO as “over the top”…at least that’s what I was told unofficially. After that I was told that budget cuts meant that cbc.ca could no longer take material from me.
So that’s my personal experience and assessment.
I have no doubt that there is a “closet policy” of “hands off” both Israel and the PMO as well as all issues that are considered “marginal” by the powers that be.
I hope this may shed some light.”
Also demonstrated re – 9/11 in the Leslie Hughes – former CBC journalist turned politician – story
then the National Post’s Jonathan Kay (Foundation for Defense of Democracies) discussing the “scoop of the century” with conscientious academics