The Real Real News Dot Com Network

Twelve minutes and eight seconds into the Real News Network's interview with Eugene Jareki about his documentary "Why We Fight," and its accompanying book, The American Way of War, comes the pitch. It will last for three minutes and eight seconds and constitute one of the strangest appeals I've ever heard.

Strange and smooth at the same time, I might say---like a Rockefeller asking for spare change to get a cup of coffee, which, I submit, is exactly what is happening below the surface. For a news network claiming to be "truly independent [...] of corporations, governments, and political parties," "with ordinary people's interests in mind," to step out of the blue in 2007 and host such a slickly done interview with Jareki, whose seamless film explores issues aiming at the epicenter of American deep power and politics, is to invite curious examination just to see whether or not Jareki hits the bull's eye.

For me, this became the entire point of watching his film. Then for Mr. Karl Marx to hit us up in a PBS-pledge-styled drive looks simply like a transparent cover. Real News Network obviously has all the heroin-and-cocaine trading money, or arms sales receipts, the covert world could come up with, given its slick style and production values---its the human values that don't come through quite as well.

Jareki styles himself as an expert and hero worshiper of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and his film opens with the common and famous black-and-white television broadcast of Eisenhower's January 17, 1961 farewell address to the nation, with its warning against the undue influence of the "military-industrial complex," treating it as some sort of revelation. This makes me feel I am being talked down to. Eisenhower's offspring tell us that before delivering the speech, the President edited out the word "congressional" from the now lesser-complexed complex, but this news is delivered without any irony whatsoever. Why did Eisenhower do that, we wonder? Was it because he now thought differently, or because the politics had changed and he was delivering a feint? That's called lying in my book.

More startling to me however, is why Eisenhower didn't warn us about the undue influence of the rising media-whore complex, as his big face was being beamed throughout American living rooms on the three licensed network channels that the federal government gave away the airways too. Do you think that process wasn't thought through?

We won't even talk about the undue influence of big oil---then in its approximate 70th year---now more like its 120th, undue, year.

It's Eisenhower's post-war experience which I think history will judge him badly by. Wikipedia puts it this way

Upon full discovery of the death camps that were part of the Final Solution (Holocaust), he ordered camera crews to comprehensively document evidence of the atrocity for use in the war crimes tribunals. He made the decision to reclassify German prisoners of war (POWs) in U.S. custody as Disarmed Enemy Forces (DEFs), thus depriving them of the protection of the Geneva convention. As DEFs, their food rations could be lowered and they could be compelled to serve as unfree labor (see Rheinwiesenlager). Eisenhower was an early supporter of the Morgenthau Plan to permanently remove Germany's industrial capacity to wage future wars.

I read something extremely odd in the phrase "upon full discovery" of the hidden "death camps," as if Dresden wasn't also a "death city" that needed burying and forgetting. I read an obvious abandonment of the "quaint" Geneva convention in regards to slave labor and starvation diets; like George W. Bush, Eisenhower simply changed the nomenclature to "Disarmed Enemy Forces," the precursor to Guantanamo circa 2003. It likely was as abusive of human rights then as now.

Wikipedia doesn't mention the nine million Germans who starved to death after the war ended under victorious American paternalism, beyond saying "their food rations could be lowered," but we get the drift---they were.
The camera crews spoken of, were not trained military documentarians, but Hollywood directors of fantasy, like Billy Wilder, who entered Buchenwald, and accidentally stepped into his own film at one point, for proof.

Jareki is described as a "public policy thinker," but he doesn't seem to have fully thought through the public relations value in his use of a Jewish New York City policeman named Wilton Sekzer, father of Jason Sekzer, who was an up-and-coming young bond trader at Cantor Fitzgerald, the wholesale bond trading house, who supposedly lost his life on 9-11. Jareki uses Sekler as the emotional centerpiece character in the film, but unlike the rest, Wilton is more than just another candidate for prosecution for insurance fraud.

That describes the physical, non-human experience of September 11th, 2001. Never before had "Jewish lightning" paid such big profits and propaganda value, but then again---never before did Jews involve so many dumb Christians in their business, which alas, turned out rather badly, didn't it?

Wilton Sekzer is one of the clearest smoking guns directly binding the events of September 11th, 2001 with the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq in 2003. Playing an obviously blatant public relations role in favor of war, Mr Sekzer senior had prevailed upon the United States Marine Corp to hand sign some high explosives with Mr. Sekzer junior's name. Given the art form, the results were desultory in the extreme, but that's neither here nor there at this stage.

And in the most damning element of all, binding the entirety of the American Media Whore Complex in yet another collective and transparent episode, in a massive effort to distance himself from George Bush's failing war, at the fifth anniversary mark in 2006, Wilton Sekler told his story of shock at hearing President Bush say there was no connection between 9-11 and Saddam Hussein. "What does he mean. I nearly fell out of my chair," he says!

What effort goes in to Real News.com, goes in to make up fake left-wing credentials, but the only real binary isn't a left/right one, it's the insider/outsider model, and with a film top heavy in insider Washington and Pentagon talking heads, each one more oleaginous with the greasy patina of the secrets, I'd say Mr. Jay and Mr. Jareki could use some outsider lessons. Jay now says

"There are times when reality just asserts itself. Despite the haze created by television news and entertainment, sometimes crisis rips a tear in the fabric of myth and propaganda.

Now a profound economic crisis has ripped asunder the American dream itself, with millions of people losing jobs and homes. They lack proper health care and any real sense of security. Since 2001, worker's wages have fallen and remained stagnant, even though worker productivity has risen almost 33 percent. By 2006, the top one percent of households were receiving 23 percent of all pre-tax income---more than double what it was in the 1970's.

It's the greatest concentration of income since 1928 (little shimmy to the neck and head.) As unemployment rises, we need to know why this crisis is happening and what we can do to defend ourselves. Why are wages so low? Why is the society so laden with debt? Is it in ordinary American's interest to have a trillion dollar military budget to project power across the globe?

Corporate television news won't ask these questions let alone try to find answers. Only a truly independent news network can tackle these questions with courage and with ordinary people's interests in mind. We need a news network that's independent of corporations, governments, and political parties. We need the Real News.

But there won't be a Real News network unless we raise substantial funds right away. The current financial crisis has hit our funding hard. Together, we do have the power to turn it around. There are already hundreds of thousands of people watching the Real News every month. If everyone pitches in we can build an internet and cable television network that will change the face of media forever. You can organize house parties, talk to friends at school and at work. Send email blasts and spread the word. Distribute this video to everyone you know. Pick up the phone and call a few friends and suggest they visit the Real News.com. Invest just ten minutes a day to ask friends and colleagues to join the campaign to create a truly independent source of internet and television and news. Together we can build this network. Just 50,000 people at ten dollars a month, gets us to our first level of sustainability. You can help us reach this goal, and when we do, we'll move to television and millions of homes across North America. Help us reach an audience in the millions, Please contribute generously. Spread the word. Let's make the Real News television network a reality.

It damns him that he even has to ask the questions rhetorically, like "why are wages so low? Why is the society so laden with debt? Is it in ordinary American's interest to have a trillion dollar military budget to project power across the globe?"

The answers are: because jobs were shipped overseas to the places with the lowest possible labor costs; unrestrained illegal immigration flooded American communities with an oversupply of labor, which drove down wages; advances in automation, like that seen here at Kawasaki Robotics (USA), Inc. only benefited capitalists; predatory lending tricked families into insurmountable indebtedness; and, no, it's not in ordinary American's interest to have a trillion dollar military budget to project power across the globe. Any other questions?

An online Real News junkies page is not up-to-date, and very sad.

Since the second and third portions of the interview also contain three-minute appeals for support, it's apparent a symbiosis is afoot. This explains something I've observed in settings likely staffed with covert operatives, and that's the similarity in the level of expression---the sense of ''where you're coming from'' and the ''where you're going.'' Although stylistically distinct Paul Jay and Eugene Jareki come across as over rehearsed and lacking in spontaneousness.
The American Way of War pt.2

Jewish War Whore Wilton Sekler:

"When I was in Vietnam, I remember, we used to get requests, can you put my father's, my son's name on the side of the helicopter, can you put it on a rocket.

"You know what, that's a good idea. I'm going to do that. I'm going to try and do that. So I sent out emails to the secretaries of all the armed forces. 'I am a retired New York City Police Department Sargent, and proud Vietnam veteran. I lost my son on 9/11. I can't tell you in words what his loss means to me. I would respectfully request, if you could put his name on some piece of armament in the Iraq war.'

"You know, we haven't caught bin Laden, but let's do something. Who is responsible---come on, let's hit him! Iraq was responsible? OK, good, let's go. You say Iraq? Good, let's go get in there, let's kick hell out of em.

"Bush: No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September 11th. Now, what the Vice-President said was...

"What did he just say? I mean, I almost jumped out of the chair. 'I don't know where people got the idea that I connected Iraq to 9-11?' What is he nuts? What the hell did we go in there for? We're getting back for 9-11 We'll if he didn't have anything to do with 9-11, why are we going in there? I was mad. I was mad. My first thought is: you are a liar.

"I am from the old school. Certain people walk on water. The President of the United States is one of them. If I can't trust the President of the United States...I don't know...it's a terrible thing, when American citizens can't trust their President. You begin to wonder---what the hell is with the whole system. There is something wrong with the entire system

"The government exploited my feelings of patriotism. Of a deep desire for revenge, for what happened to my son. But I was so insane with wanting to get even, I was willing to believe anything.

"Undoubtedly, there are people who may listen to my statements and think that I'm no good, that I'm a SOB, and a war monger, and this and that and whatever, and I should have never put my son's name on it, I should be ashamed that I put my son's name on it.

"Am I sorry I asked my son's name to be put on the bomb? No, because I acted under the conditions of that time. Was it wrong? Yeah, it was wrong, but I didn't know that, so. Is it regrettable? ....?

"We have become a monster in the eyes of the whole world – a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us… No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we’ll kill you." – Hunter S. Thompson