BOB WOODWARD: A ‘Very Senior’ White House Person Warned Me I’d ‘Regret’ What I’m Doing

Brett LoGiurato
BUSINESS INSIDER

Bob Woodward said this evening on CNN that a “very senior person” at the White House warned him in an email that he would “regret doing this,” the same day he has continued to slam President Barack Obama over the looming forced cuts known as the sequester. CNN host Wolf Blitzer said that the network invited a White House official to debate Woodward on-air, but the White House declined.

“It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, ‘You’re going to regret doing something that you believe in,’” Woodward said.

“I think they’re confused,” Woodward said of the White House’s pushback on his reporting.

The White House aide who Woodward said threatened him was Gene Sperling, the director of the White House Economic Council, BuzzFeed’s Ben Smith reported.

Earlier today on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Woodward ripped into Obama in what has become an ongoing feud between the veteran Washington Post journalist and the White House. Woodward said Obama was showing a “kind of madness I haven’t seen in a long time” for a decision not to deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf because of budget concerns.

The Defense Department said in early February that it would not deploy the U.S.S. Harry Truman to the Persian Gulf, citing budget concerns relating to the looming cuts known as the sequester.

“Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, ‘Oh, by the way, I can’t do this because of some budget document?’” Woodward said on MSNBC.

“Or George W. Bush saying, ‘You know, I’m not going to invade Iraq because I can’t get the aircraft carriers I need?’” Or even Bill Clinton saying, ‘You know, I’m not going to attack Saddam Hussein’s intelligence headquarters,’ … because of some budget document?”

Last weekend, Woodward called out Obama for what he said was “moving the goal posts” on the sequester by requesting that revenue be part of a deal to avert it.

Read more

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

RUMOURS OF BACKLASH AGAINST BLOGGERS: Details surface after Slog asked to delete links

The Slog Dec 11, 2012 Having been tipped off last week about the pulling together of a Government plan to attack bloggers via McAlpinesque legal threats, The Slog received in short order a series of requests from a variety of blogospherists, asking for links to articles about leading politicians to be deleted. Jeremy Hunt and Boris Johnson were the anti-free speech fanatics most often cited. Now more details of a new Bill to complement that strategy are starting to surface. It isn’t looking pretty. Useless legislator and empty suit Nick Clegg may be about to pull off the one achievement of his risible Deputy Premiership: new powers to monitor email and internet use need a “fundamental rethink”, he says. And he “vowed” (always beware the vow) to block the draft Communications Data Bill, instead pushing alternative plans that would reduce liberty infringement to a minimum. His comments came as a committee of MPs and peers criticised the bill’s scope, with several voices on all sides at Westminster increasingly prepared to view the Leveson Report as a Trojan Horse crammed with new laws to stifle online debate, revelation and speculation. Leveson himself was notably quick to cite the Aussie DJ phone-call prank as another example of the need for tougher privacy laws….an interesting comment given that it has nothing whatever to do with the internet or the press media. (See a new Slogpost asking valid question about this case) Justice Leveson blew all his credibility when he released the ‘finding’ that Jeremy Hunt had acted fairly and without bias in the BSkyB takeover saga. If he acted fairly at all, then it was a mode he was forced into as post-Dowler public pressure grew for the entire Murdoch clan to be put down. The takeover of BSkyB was thus abandoned. There remain at least four question-marks over Hunt’s behaviour before and during this time: none of them have been satisfactorily answered or investigated. And lest we forget, Hunt himself was involved in the choice of Leveson: his signature is on the appointment confirmation. So while Clegg’s hour may have come, we can all assume that his interest in this issue is purely opportunistic. The broader policy (which I am sure he privately supports) will be to put the legal frighteners on anyone telling the truth about contemporary issues, while using GCHQ as a means of reminding site owners that Big Brother is watching. Already, it seems clear to me the strategy is working. We need to stop and think here about the sheer variety and volume of bogus news being fed to the MSM at the moment. The Syrian conflict, the EU-UK negotiation standoff, the move towards an EU referendum, the emphasis on McAlpine’s heart bypass rather than systemic paedophile abuse, the hijacking of the Rotherham scandal by pointless UKip speculation, endless NHS spin hiding a reality of preparing for privatisation….there is a lot at stake for those who wish to hide rather than share. But I wouldn’t hold your breath looking for support from the MSM: this sort of stuff will suit everyone from the Guardian via the Mail and the Mirror to the Telegraph and the Times: none of the Rusbridger-Trinity-Dacre-Barclay-Murdoch axis want to sustain a vibrant internet. For one thing, it doesn’t follow their agenda of complicity; for another, we’re putting them out of business… (…) I confess to being at the stage with Fellows where I suspect he’s living in a film script written by his namesake, but on the other hand there’s a reasonable chance he’s being fed this stuff with a view to delivering more scare-tactics into an already hyperventilating blog community… Read the full Slog here  facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Like the Taliban, BBC Erase Banksy Artwork Which Exposed Their Internal Savile Cover-up

What Do The Taliban And The BBC Have In Common?

The Needle Taliban Before……. and After the Taliban BBC Before and……and After the BBC Yes, that’s right, they both destroy great works of art in pursuit of their closed minded ideology. Banksy, to my mind the UK’s greatest living artist (and actually, yes, I could justify that statement) created a piece of meaningful art outside of BBC Television Centre in central London which summed up just how disillusioned the British public, especially of my generation, feel right now. It was the poignant image of a young boy dropping his ‘Jim’ll Fix It’ medal into a drain. The BBC sent the workmen in to scrub it away. Why ? Because it implied criticism of the corporation. All great art speaks, all great art stimulates thought, all great art, from Giotto via Manet’s ‘Olympia’ and beyond Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ to the present day, has been provocative. The cultural philistines at the BBC can have as many Yentob inspired documentaries as they like but until they put artistic creation above managerial expediency they can never be a Corporation that Broadcasts for the British license fee paying public. And do they own that hoarding ? Does the BBC actually own that piece of hardboard that Banksy chose to place this artwork ? And if the BBC are sued because a precious work of art has been destroyed and they didn’t own the hardboard hoarding opposite BBC Telivision Centre, who pays ? Not the BBC management on their ludicrously high salaries, but all of us who pay the BBC license fee. Just like McAlpine’s £185,000.

RELATED: THE BBC: IT’S THE VATICAN AND THE MAFIA ALL ROLLED INTO ONE

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Argentina Censors Millions Of Websites

Argentine ISPs Use Bazooka to Kill Fly  . By Jillian York August 22, 2011 On Tuesday, eff reported that Argentina’s National Telecommunications Commission (CNC) had issued a directive to local ISPs to block two websites- leakymails.com and leakymails.blogspot.com- in response to an order from a federal judge. Today, on Google’s Latin America blog (in Spanish), Senior Policy Counsel Pedro Less Andrade writes that Google records indicate that some service providers in Argentina are blocking access to the IP address 216.239.32.2, which is linked to more than one million blogs hosted on Google’s Blogger service. IP blocking is a blunt method of filtering content that can erase from view large swaths of innocuous sites by virtue of the fact that they are hosted on the same IP address as the site that was intended to be censored. One such example of overblocking by IP address can be found in India, where the IP blocking of a Hindu Unity website (blocked by an order from Mumbai police) resulted in the blocking of several other, unrelated sites. As Andrade points out, “There are other less restrictive technical procedures than the one used, which allow ISPs to comply with court orders fully, while affecting only the sites involved.” In this case, it would appear that the block is likely related to the aforementioned case, and that ISPs–in an attempt to comply with the court order–have enacted the overbroad measure of IP blocking rather than blocking the site’s URL. Google reports that they are working with stakeholders to restore access to the hundreds of thousands of blocked blogs and other sites in Argentina. Reprinted From eff and Active Politic under a Creative Commons Attribution License. -facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Exclusive: “Internet was never free or open and never will be…”

By Nathan Diebenow RAW STORY December 14, 2010 Author: If Americans want a truly free network, ‘we’ve got to build it from scratch’ Secrets outlet WikiLeaks’ continuing struggle to remain online in the face of corporate and government censorship is a striking example of something few truly realize: that the Internet is not and never has been democratically controlled, a media studies professor commented to Raw Story. “[T]he stuff that goes on on the Internet does not go on because the authorties can’t stop it,” Douglas Rushkoff, author of Program or be Programmed: Ten Commands for a Digital Age and Life, Inc.: How Corporatism Conquered the World and How to Take it Back”, said. “It goes on because the authorities are choosing what to stop and what not to stop.” Rushkoff told Raw Story that the authorities have the ability to quash cyber dissent due to the Internet’s original design, as a top-down, authoritarian device with a centralized indexing system. Essentially, all one needs to halt a rogue site is to delete its address from the domain name system registry. “This is not rocket science,” said Rushkoff, who also teaches media studies at The New School University in Manhattan. For example, the Dutch teenager arrested Thursday for helping to organize a denial of service attack on an ‘Operation Payback’ online chatroom: “They just took him off. He had his own server, and they just go, ‘Oh, nip this one!’” Rushkoff said. This is why, he noted in a recent CNN editorial, the actual threat to PayPal, Visa, MasterCard and Amazon last week were “vastly overstated” in most media.

The best I.T. talent may soon gobble the red pill and test their skills down the rabbit hole.

“The forces of bottom-up anarchy have reached a similar impasse, and the authorities of the Internet have once again demonstrated their ability to fend off any genuine peer-to-peer activity,” he explained. “This is a tightly controlled network, and you know, that’s why I think the Chinese do have it right in that they understand, ‘Oh, we can control this thing. We just censor the fuck out of it… ” READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE RELATED STORY:

Who is Behind the Demonization of the Web?

 facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest