Join 3,496 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Greg Palast, You're My Hero
September 6, 2004 9:47 PM   Subscribe

So, does posting unreported news on mefi decrease the likelihood the corporate media will pick it up? Let's find out. Greg Palast is at it again, but is anybody listening? Former Texas Lt. Governor admits pulling strings to get Dubya into National Guard and then keeping quiet for big-time money.

... now all we need is a "control group" story. Any ideas? Email me.
posted by joe_murphy (25 comments total)

 
what brightens my day is thinking about the 'big money' that got him talking. more please. maybe they can bribe the media to do its fucking job.
posted by Tryptophan-5ht at 10:05 PM on September 6, 2004


This is probably very bad news for tharlan.

My guess is that if the story does get reported in the US, that it will get lost in a swirl of "look how dirty this campaign has gotten!" - style hand-wringing.
posted by drezdn at 10:11 PM on September 6, 2004


Sometimes I can't help feeling I'm part of some vast experiment, that all of this is some elaborate joke so that people of far greater intelligence than myself can watch my reactions and laugh themselves into a stupor.
posted by The God Complex at 10:11 PM on September 6, 2004


According to this article, Barnes is going to be on 60 Minutes II on wednesday, so CBS has already picked it up.
posted by homunculus at 10:15 PM on September 6, 2004


In 1994, George W. Bush was elected governor of Texas by a whisker.

+7.6% is a whisker? 53.5% of the vote is a whisker?

More important, I haven't made any pay-offs to silence those who could change my image from war hero to war zero.

Uh, First Palast says that GTech Corp payed Barnes, not George Bush. Then he implies (without evidence) that Bush paid Barnes off. Why can't Palast make up his mind? Maybe because he doesn't have any actual evidence that Bush pulled strings for GTech - just an anonymous letter. Wooo.

Barnes, not surprisingly, denies that Bush took care of his client in return for Barnes’ silence.

So what we have here is an anonymous document from 1997 that says "At this time I can't release my name, but at the proper time I will come forward and show this story to be true." So what's this mystery man waiting for?

Moreover, yes, Ben Barnes says he helped get George W. Bush into the Air National Guard. He admitted it under oath in 1999.

What I don't understand is how Greg Palast can claim that this story of his is still unreported - I mean he ran it in Hustler Magazine in September, 2003!
posted by techgnollogic at 10:31 PM on September 6, 2004


This is probably very bad news for Greg Palast.
posted by David Dark at 10:35 PM on September 6, 2004


hmmmm, so what Palast is really trying to do is recycle old material that never made it big before? I mean, he does mention:

By the way: I first reported this story in 1999, including the evidence of payback, in The Observer of London. US media closed its eyes.
posted by joe_murphy at 10:39 PM on September 6, 2004


What I'm waiting for are the guys that did coke with Bush back in the 70s. Where the fuck are they already? Let's get this election really ugly!
posted by mr_roboto at 10:40 PM on September 6, 2004


Maybe they're waiting for an actual human being to "come forward" and make these accusations, not some 7 year old crap photocopy.
posted by techgnollogic at 10:43 PM on September 6, 2004


Couldn't this have waited for the "60 Minutes" report? Everyone who reads a good bit about politics should know about the expected Barnes interview and reportage by now.
posted by raysmj at 11:01 PM on September 6, 2004


This is probably very bad news for Greg Palast

Just so long as his wife isn't a US intelligence operative doing crucial and secret work for the government. I can only forgive so much treason for the sake of political payback.
posted by willnot at 11:21 PM on September 6, 2004


Not to denigrate your love for Greg Palast or nothin', but this has been all over the web for at least a week. Your experiment, she is compromised.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:57 PM on September 6, 2004


What I'm waiting for are the guys that did coke with Bush back in the 70s. Where the fuck are they already? Let's get this election really ugly!

They were busy talking to Kitty Kelley.
posted by pmurray63 at 12:52 AM on September 7, 2004


FWIW, Josh Marshall is reporting that Ben Barnes' appearance is on the original Sixty Minutes on Sunday, Sept. 12th, not on Wednesday's Sixty Minutes II as some reports are stating... So, you know, you don't set your TiVo wrong or anything...
posted by JollyWanker at 5:38 AM on September 7, 2004


What I'm waiting for are the guys that did coke with Bush back in the 70s. Where the fuck are they already? Let's get this election really ugly!

White House Child Sex Ring good enough for you?
posted by delmoi at 6:48 AM on September 7, 2004


I'm with raysmj. The MeFi front page is not a lab for mass-media "experiments," whether tongue-in-cheek or otherwise, and that's the only rationale for reposting something that's already been posted and discussed to death within the past week - and which will doubtlessly be posted again once 60 Minutes airs.
posted by soyjoy at 7:37 AM on September 7, 2004


Has anyone else here read Greg Palast's book, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy"? The back cover proclaims it a great work of journalism, but most of Palast's "investigations" amount to tracking down obscure documents and drawing untenable conclusions from them. By arguing that unconnected dots are hard and fast evidence, he does his cause more harm than good. I don't take anything he says seriously.
posted by croutonsupafreak at 8:08 AM on September 7, 2004


Sounds just like Michael Moore...
posted by techgnollogic at 9:15 AM on September 7, 2004


Sounds just like Michael Moore...

...and?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:40 AM on September 7, 2004


techgnollogic - your brain doesn't seem to work.

Pay attention, dummy.

1. Barnes assisted Bush in avoiding service in Vietnam by getting him into the Texas National Guard, despite Bush having mediocre qualifications and a really long waiting list.

2. During the '94 gubernatorial campaign, Bush denies any special treatment coming from his father or his fathers' friends in his efforts to avoid the draft.

3. Gtech has a huge contract servicing the Texas Lottery. The contract is set to lapse and probably will not be renewed.

4. Barnes hooks up with Gtech because he has the leverage of knowing things that other people don't (namely, the scoop on how Bush got into that elite unit of the Texas Air National Guard).

5. He calls the Governor's Office and uses this leverage.

6. Gtech gets their contract renewed. Barnes gets 23 million. Bush remains an everyday, just plain folks, self-made millionaire from West Texas who likes to clear brush, eat pretzels, and not read.

Do you get it yet?
posted by chris0495 at 9:42 AM on September 7, 2004


What I'm waiting for are the guys that did coke with Bush back in the 70s. Where the fuck are they already? Let's get this election really ugly!

Now i'm reminded of that guy they threw in jail so he couldn't talk about selling Quayle pot repeatedly thru the years.
posted by amberglow at 9:56 AM on September 7, 2004


Barnes denies #4 and #5, and Bush said if anybody helped him get into the National Guard he never knew about it. Barnes revealed his claim 5 years ago, before the 2000 election, so nothing new there. Without your mystery letter writer, who hasn't come forward in 7 years, you got nothing.
posted by techgnollogic at 11:26 AM on September 7, 2004


you got nothing.

it won't matter.
posted by quonsar at 11:43 AM on September 7, 2004


FYI, Josh is now reporting that it in fact will be on this Wednesday: "But, I'm told by several sources that the Barnes' interview is only a relatively small part of the package 60 Minutes is running. There's other stuff that CBS has -- newly discovered, or at least newly-revealed, documents that shed light on Bush's guard service or lack thereof."
posted by theonetruebix at 3:43 PM on September 7, 2004


There's an overall question running through this thread that I'd like to make explicit :

Does news which is ignored by mainstream media but publicized in tiny alternative media backwaters still retain it's value as "news", or does one wearing - at what amounts to a mostly private party - reduce such stories to "old news" ?
posted by troutfishing at 8:11 PM on September 7, 2004


« Older Coral: The NYU Distribution Network...  |  A returned U.K. expat on Engli... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments