Bush and the history of war/nat'l debt per GDP

[Brent Crosby]

I noticed at Amazon there are plenty of books on the 9/11 Commission. Plenty that are conspiracy's on the cover-up of the Administration. I don't have an opinion either way, but I'm curious to know if conspiracy literature is nothing more than weak journalism? I enjoy them when given several outcomes or purport to show concrete ends. But I get the feeling usually neither are expressed with this type of subject.

There's a lot of "war for oil" going around, and I'm wondering if any of you would care to delve in to the "good" wars America has partaken in, and the "bad" wars. I'm just a bit uncertain and resentful of those who cry "anti-American" when an American questions their own country.

Finally, I was listening to Michael Medved, a conservative host, and I found it far reaching to believe the economy is better off now than with past presidents considering the 7 trillion (9?) debt doesn't look as bad when measuring the GDP. It seem to me one way to measure our economy is comparing it with the previous president considering the flux of left & right economic numbers out there. So if there are any economists, or experienced type?

[David Richardson]

I'm not an economist myself, by Paul Krugman usually writes sensible, credible stuff in the New York Times. He's currently writing a series of very interesting articles about the Bush Administration's plans to privatise Social Security.

Edited January 19, 2005 by David Richardson

[John Simkin]

I noticed at Amazon there are plenty of books on the 9/11 Commission.  Plenty that are conspiracy's on the cover-up of the Administration.  I don't have an opinion either way, but I'm curious to know if conspiracy literature is nothing more than weak journalism?  I enjoy them when given several outcomes or purport to show concrete ends.  But I get the feeling usually neither are expressed with this type of subject.

Journalists who write about political conspiracies are sometimes wrong. I suspect this is the case with 9/11. However, I would reject the idea they are lazy. What makes them valuable is their unwillingness to accept the truth contained in the press releases of the powerful. It is the traditional journalist who gets most of his information this way who deserves to be described as “lazy”.

Democracies desperately need journalists like Seymour Hersh and John Pilger who always assume that politicians lie to the public if they can get away with it.

Have you read on the forum about Operation Mockingbird, the CIA program to corrupt journalists. It is important to note that this included left-wing as well as right-wing journalists.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2935

[John Geraghty]

brent, you might consider having a look at the political conspiracies section of the site, there is one devoted to the 9/11 conspiracy if there was one.

I would like to read up more on it but im currently broke and I hate reading from the screen, I prefer to print things off and view them.

john