Wednesday, 27 May 2009

Among the hazards of librarianship...

...I have to read sentences such as this:


In the post 9/11 era there is considerable opportunity for the media profession to give insight into what has compelled one side to act in a way that has enraged and empowered another side to act in a manner that further caused hostility or anger to become entrenched.


God help us, the person who wrote this is a journalist.

We will notice that it was also a male. This is important - a woman would have notice if she'd skipped that many periods...

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

ouch, bad pun.

litbrit said...

Jeezy-creezy, that sentence is the embodiment of FUBAR.

And yes, they do sling the word "journalist" around fairly loosely these days. If you're aiming to work for a mainstream news institution in this country, all that's required* is the ability to put fog on a mirror and thump out a few English words on a keyboard: You're hired!

* And a willingness to learn six or seven buzzwords like "opportunity" and use them incessantly.

Oh my, the verification word is HUNGTU. Yikes!

blubonnet said...

Seems like the phrase was a case of ricochet rhetoric.

I'm wondering Phoe, if you have further looked at the subject of 9-11-01. Have you? You should know that there are several members of the New Zealand government who have made statements as to the absurdity of the official US government story on it.

blubonnet said...

oops, I made a mistake. It's only one NZ person. If you are interested in more objective perspectives, go to www.patriotsquestion911.com

This is the NZ one I spoke of:

Jeanette Fitzsimons – Member of Parliament, New Zealand, 1996 - present. Co-leader of the Green Party. Member, Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. Member, Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee. Former Lecturer in Environmental Studies and Energy Planning, Department of Planning, Auckland University 1980-1992.

Personal statement in support of the Political Leaders petition for a new 9/11 investigation:

"There is so much that does not make sense about the official version of 9/11. I have read all 600 plus pages of Crossing the Rubicon and it appears to me to be well researched, though I still have an open mind on the matter of what exactly did happen. It is time we knew the truth one way or another, and an independent enquiry is the way to achieve this. If we do not know the truth of our history it will compromise our future." http://pl911truth.com


Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement:

"Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned.

They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations.

Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response.

We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now---not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books---so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed.

We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media."