> I would love to hear from critical mainstream journalists like Seymour Hersh, Maureen Dowd, Paul Krugman, and Helen Thomas.

Well, I wouldn’t, except, perhaps, to hear why they have proven unable and unwilling to write about the great hoax that was 9/11.

The fact that these complicit (of silence, at least) “journalists” (snicker) names come up while discussing media reform indicates that that is all it is: talk.

As in, distraction/diversion from the (real scope of the) real problem: our institutions are corrupt, and not really intending to serve the purposes they claim to endeavor to serve.

For instance, how can it be that not one person in the television industry has noticed that the ‘Osama’ in the government’s fake 911 confession video looks nothing like Osama?

I’ve left voice mails with Professor Krugman on at least 3 occasions over the past year+.

Or how can it be that no Democrat has noticed and mentioned that Bush has repeatedly incriminated himself with regard to the very beginning of the “secret” “terrorist” attack on the WTC?

I’ve told staffers of just about every U.S. Senator, Republicans and Democrats. I contacted the Kerry campaign. I contacted the DNC. I’ve contacted the leading Dems, including the party chair, in my state.

…the Dems couldn’t care less

So how is that bogus “media reform” about which Danny wrote going to solve anything, when our whole system is so incredibly corrupt?

Journalism is obviously dead.

This isn’t the first time I’ve pointed this out ‘here’.

So what’s Danny’s excuse for remaining silent? Ignorance? Fear?
Apathy?