Tuesday, July 19, 2011
While the British ordinary citizens are buried under piles of news about Murdoch's empire hacking into the voicemails of the royal family , celebrities, high-ranking politicians, a murdered teenager and the relatives of the dead soldiers , almost all media fail to report Murdoch's worst allegation : the endorsement of illegal war in Iraq.
Media observers accuse Murdoch's newspapers of being the main newspaper propagandizing the fraudulent military conflicts.
The media tycoon had given his full support to the illegal Iraq war, and many times praised former Prime Minister Tony Blair for his courage saying: "I think Tony is being extraordinarily courageous and strong on what his stance is in the Middle East."
News International papers began doing their best convincing people about what they called the grave threat of Saddam Hussein weapons, even two years before the publication of the government's dossier on Iraq's non-existent Weapon of Mass Destruction.
As the UK government was beating the drums of the war louder in 2003 , Murdoch's newspaper initiated even more pro-war propaganda. Murdoch who was the strong supporter of attacking Iraq and ousting Saddam, even said:"The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy, if you could put it that way, would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in the any country." However after the invasion News International never apologized for the false information they had published pushing the economy to the brink of collapse.
The futuristic group equated Google’s topical action against them to the tittle-tattles of activists being banned from various social sites like Facebook,Twitter, Youtube and administration blocking websites using internet expurgation tools.
As a retort, Anonymous has strong-willed to create their very own social networking site which they named ‘Anonplus’, i.e. Anonplus.com.
The site has only been proclaimed. At the bottom left hand corner, it says “Revision: 0.1 Alpha.” this version number is predestined to be a sign of the site very early in development. There is still no way to sign up or interact. The slogan is “Social NetworkingAnonymously,” while the caption is “Welcome to Anonplus.com the Anonymous Social Networking site.”
Although the inventiveness sounds odd since it says whatever Anonymous is regarding but it is possible to build such a social network which shares only the information you allow it to and so Anonymous might be aiming for that, they most probably would keep your personal details clandestine unless you want to share them yourself. The world of social networking is really heating up and that’s called true globalization!
An Anonymous spokesperson wrote in a statement “This is one social network that will not tolerate being shut down, censored, or oppressed – even in the face of blackout. We the people have had enough…enough of governments and corporations saying what’s best for us – what’s safe for our minds. The sheep era is over. The interwebz are no longer your prison.”
uly 19 (UPI) -- Low-information voters who watch a lot of television appear more influenced by candidates' good looks than those who watch little TV, U.S. researchers say.
Study co-authors Chappell Lawson and Gabriel Lenz of the Massachusetts and colleagues used data from the 2006 U.S. Senate and governors' races and found for every 10-point increase in the advantage a candidate has when rated by voters on his or her looks, there was a nearly 5 percent increase in the vote for that candidate by less-informed voters who watch a good deal of television.
That same advantage in looks was worth only about a 1 percent increase among low-information voters who watch little television.
"It's not that this effect influences all voters exactly the same way," Lawson says in a statement. "Voters who watch a lot of television but don't really know much about the candidates, besides how they look, are particularly susceptible."
The researchers used two 2006 surveys of American voters -- one that sampled 36,500 citizens about their voting choices, levels of knowledge and television-watching habits, and one that asked voters to choose, based solely on appearances, which candidates seemed more competent in 64 U.S. Senate and gubernatorial races.
The study, published in the American Journal of Political Science, finds the appearance advantage among low-information voters translates into a substantial edge at the ballot box, the size of the effect is roughly equivalent to the influence of incumbency.
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/07/19/Some-voters-favor-good-looking-candidates/UPI-52791311051981/#ixzz1SYEuZHJV
While Robert Baer didn’t reveal the sources behind his , he referred to former Mossad chief Meir Dagan’s warnings of an Israeli attack on Iran as “no bluff.”
Dagan: Israeli airstrike on Iran nuclear plant 'foolish'
The September Conundrum (premium)
Barak: Dagan jeopardized Israeli deterrence against Iran
Baer told the KPFK Radio on Tuesday recent comments made by Dagan that an Israeli attack on Iran could lead to a regional war, “tell us with near certainty that [ Binyamin] Netanyahu is planning an attack, and in as much as I can guess when it’s going to be, it’s probably going to be in September, before a [UN General Assembly] vote on the Palestinian state.” radio show.