Connect With Us

“Project Censored shines a spotlight on news that an informed public must have . . . a vital contribution to our democratic process.” —Rhoda H. Karpatkin, president, Consumer’s Union
“Most journalists in the United States believe the press here is free. That grand illusion only helps obscure the fact that, by and large, the US corporate press does not report what’s really going on, while tuning out, or laughing off, all those who try to do just that. Americans–now more than ever–need those outlets that do labor to report some truth. Project Censored is not just among the bravest, smartest, and most rigorous of those outlets, but the only one that’s wholly focused on those stories that the corporate press ignores, downplays, and/or distorts. This latest book is therefore a must read for anyone who cares about this country, its tottering economy, and–most important– what’s now left of its democracy.” –Mark Crispin Miller, author, professor of media ecology, New York University.
“Project Censored is one of the organizations that we should listen to, to be assured that our newspapers and our broadcasting outlets are practicing thorough and ethical journalism.” —Walter Cronkite
“At a time when the need for independent journalism and for media outlets unaffiliated with and untainted by the government and corporate sponsors is greater than ever, Project Censored has created a context for reporting the complete truths in all matters that matter. . . . It is therefore left to us to find sources for information we can trust. . . . It is in this task that we are fortunate to have an ally like Project Cen-sored.” —Dahr Jamail
“The staff of Project Censored presents their annual compilation of the previous year’s 25 stories most overlooked by the mainstream media along with essays about censorship and its consequences. The stories include an 813% rise in hate and anti-government groups since 2008, human rights violations by the US Border Patrol, and Israeli doctors injecting Ethiopian immigrants with birth control without their consent. Other stories focus on the environment, like the effects of fracking and Monsantos GMO seeds. The writers point out misinformation and outright deception in the media, including CNN relegating factual accounts to the “opinion” section and the whitewashing of Margaret Thatcher’s career following her death in 2013, unlike Hugo Chavez, who was routinely disparaged in the coverage following his death. One essay deals with the proliferation of “Junk Food News,” in which “CNN and Fox News devoted more time to ‘Gangnam Style’ than the renewal of Uganda’s ‘Kill the Gays’ law.” Another explains common media manipulation tactics and outlines practices to becoming a more engaged, free-thinking news consumer or even citizen journalist. Rob Williams remarks on Hollywood’s “deep and abiding role as a popular propaganda provider” via Argo and Zero Dark Thirty. An expose on working conditions in Chinese Apple factories is brutal yet essential reading. This book is evident of Project Censored’s profoundly important work in educating readers on current events and the skills needed to be a critical thinker.” -Publisher’s Weekly said about Censored 2014 (Oct.)
“One of the most significant media research projects in the country.” —I. F. Stone
“Project Censored interrogates the present in the same way that Oliver Stone and I tried to interrogate the past in our Untold History of the United States. It not only shines a penetrating light on the American Empire and all its deadly, destructive, and deceitful actions, it does so at a time when the Obama administration is mounting a fierce effort to silence truth-tellers and whistleblowers. Project Censored provides the kind of fearless and honest journalism we so desperately need in these dangerous times.” —Peter Kuznick, professor of history, American University, and coauthor, with Oliver Stone, of The Untold History of the United States
“[Censored] should be affixed to the bulletin boards in every newsroom in America. And, perhaps read aloud to a few publishers and television executives.” —Ralph Nader
“Project Censored continues to be an invaluable resource in exposing and highlighting shocking stories that are routinely minimized or ignored by the corporate media. The vital nature of this work is underscored by this year’s NSA leaks. The world needs more brave whistle blowers and independent journalists in the service of reclaiming democracy and challenging the abuse of power. Project Censored stands out for its commitment to such work.” —Deepa Kumar, author of Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire and associate professor of Media Studies and Middle Eastern Studies at Rutgers University
“[Censored] offers devastating evidence of the dumbing-down of main-stream news in America. . . . Required reading for broadcasters, journalists, and well-informed citizens.” —Los Angeles Times
“In another home run for Project Censored, Censored 2013 shows how the American public has been bamboozled, snookered, and dumbed down by the corporate media. It is chock-full of ‘ah-ha’ moments where we understand just how we’ve been fleeced by banksters, stripped of our civil liberties, and blindly led down a path of never-ending war.” –Medea Benjamin, author of Drone Warfare, cofounder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK.
Buy it, read it, act on it. Our future depends on the knowledge this col-lection of suppressed stories allows us.” —San Diego Review
“Project Censored brings to light some of the most important stories of the year that you never saw or heard about. This is your chance to find out what got buried.” –Diane Ravitch, author of The Death and Life of the Great American School System.
“Activist groups like Project Censored . . . are helping to build the media democracy movement. We have to challenge the powers that be and rebuild media from the bottom up.” —Amy Goodman
“For ages, I’ve dreamed of a United States where Project Censored isn’t necessary, where these crucial stories and defining issues are on the front page of the New York Times, the cover of Time, and in heavy rotation on CNN. That world still doesn’t exist, but we always have Project Censored’s yearly book to pull together the most important things the corporate media ignored, missed, or botched.” –Russ Kick, author of You Are Being Lied To, Everything You Know Is Wrong, and the New York Times bestselling series The Graphic Canon.
“Censored 2014 is a clarion call for truth telling. Not only does this volume highlight fearless speech in fateful times, it connect the dots between the key issues we face, lauds our whistleblowers and amplifies their voices, and shines light in the dark places of our government that most need exposure.” –Daniel Ellsberg, The Pentagon Papers
“Hot news, cold truths, utterly uncensored.” —Greg Palast
“Those who read and support Project Censored are in the know.” —Cynthia McKinney

2. Why Are We Ready In Somalia?

Sources: LOS ANGELES TIMES, Date: 1/18/93, Title: “The Oil Factor In Somalia,” Author: Mar Fineman; PROPAGANDA REVIEW, Date: No. 10, 1993, Title: “Somalia?*,” Author: Rory Cox; EXTRA!, Date: March 1993, Title: “The Somalia Intervention: Tragedy Made Simple,” Author: Jim Naureckas

SYNOPSIS: There was little ques­tion about the influence of oil on our decision to send troops to the Persian Gulf on behalf of Kuwait. But Somalia was strictly a matter of humanitarian aid. Right?

Or was the preponderance of tragic images of starving Somalis all over the major media outlets during the end of 1992 and the first half of 1993 merely a more refined and cynical method of selling yet another war for oil, asked Rory Cox in Propaganda Review.

Or, as Jim Naureckas asked in EXTRA!, “If the U.S. has not con­sistently acted in an altruistic manner toward starving people in Africa, why did it dispatch troops to Somalia at this point? There have been frequent media denials that geopolitical considerations might have entered into the decision. The Washington Post reported (12/6/92) that `Unlike previous large-scale operations, there is no U.S. strategic or economic interest in the Somalia deployments.”‘

Oddly enough, while the U.S./U.N. military involvement in Somalia began in mid-November, it wasn’t until January 18, two days before George Bush left office, that a major media outlet, the Los Angeles Times, published an article that revealed America’s oil connec­tion with Somalia.

Times staff writer Mark Fineman started his Mogadishu-datelined article with, “Far beneath the sur­face of the tragic drama of Somalia, four major U.S. oil companies are quietly sitting on a prospective for­ tune in exclusive concessions to explore and exploit tens of millions of acres of the Somali countryside. That land, in the opinion of geolo­gists and industry sources, could yield significant amounts of oil and natural gas if the U.S.-led military mission can restore peace to the impoverished East African nation.”

According to Fineman, nearly two-thirds of Somalia was allocated to the American oil giants Conoco, Amoco, Chevron and Phillips before Somalia’s pro-U.S. President Mohamed Siad Barre was over­thrown. The U.S. oil companies are “well positioned to pursue Somalia’s most promising potential oil reserves the moment the nation is pacified.”

While oil industry spokesmen, along with Bush/Clinton adminis­tration spokespersons, deny these allegations as “absurd” and “non­sense,” Thomas E. O’Connor, the principal petroleum engineer for the World Bank, who headed an in-depth three-year study of oil prospects off Somalia’s northern coast, said, “There’s no doubt there’s oil there …. It’s got high (commercial) potential … once the Somalis get their act together.”

Meanwhile, Conoco is playing an intimate part in the U.S. govern­ment’s role with the humanitarian effort in Somalia. Conoco agreed to “rent” its Mogadishu corporate compound to U.S. envoy Robert B. Oakley, who transformed it into a temporary U.S. embassy.

One Conoco executive said, “With America, there is a genuine humanitarian streak in us … that many other countries and cultures cannot understand.” Nonetheless, the cozy relationship between Conoco and the U.S. intervention force, coupled with America’s well­ known need for oil, has left many Somalis and foreign development experts disturbed.

It may well be that the Oper­ation Restore Hope slogan was less representative than Operation Restore Oil.

SSU Censored Researcher: Kristen Rutledge

COMMENTS: Jim Naureckas, investigative journalist and editor of EXTRA!, noted that Somalia has received two intense bursts of cov­erage in the media. “The second burst, obviously, corrected some of the simplistic assumptions of the first-but in many cases simply replaced them with new stereo­types. Some information, like the role of oil companies in the Somalian intervention, has never gotten adequate attention. And there has still not been the sus­tained discussion of the causes of famine that we (EXTRA!) called for.

The general public would ben­efit from wider exposure of this subject since it was given minimal information on which to base a judgment on the Somalian inter­vention, Naureckas added. The lim­ited amount of information “led to shock and disillusionment when it turned out military intervention was not the easy solution it had been sold as. U.S. citizens need realistic discussions of the real causes of famine if humanitarian efforts are to have real success.”

Naureckas charged that the pri­mary beneficiaries of the flawed coverage of Somalia are “the U.S. military and foreign policy appa­ratus, who treated Somalia as an opportunity for a p.r. victory, while treating Somalis as a conquered people. The oil companies with stakes in Somalia are secondary beneficiaries.”

Author Rory Cox, who examined the influence of oil on our Somalian policy for Propaganda Review, said that “While U.S./U.N. involvement in Somalia has been covered widely, scant information is available on the oil-producing potential of the region. This was the gist of my piece, and since I wrote it the story has continued to be virtually ignored, though strangely enough I’ve heard a few talk-radio hosts rant about it.”

Cox feels the public should be aware of the oil potential since “there seems to be a general sense of confusion about the mission in Somalia and its changing nature, i.e. from feeding the starving to chasing a warlord. If the public knew about the oil angle on all of this, they/we would have a clearer picture of the situation, and that there is potentially a resource for us to use (or for oil companies to profit from).”

Cox adds a caveat to his com­ments, noting that he has not per­sonally been to Somalia, nor is he an expert on the region, but “regardless of what role oil plays, it’s potential in Somalia is a well­ documented fact, and one that should be considered in any debate on the subject.”

Mark Fineman, staff writer with the Los Angeles Times, who exam­ined the “oil factor in Somalia,” was on assignment in Cypress and not available to comment on his story.

Clarence Page, a syndicated columnist in Chicago, raised another little known fact about our Somalia involvement in his column published October 14, 1993. In trying to understand how we got into the mess in Somalia, Page said “one comes across an ominously familiar name from the past: April Glaspie. Yes, the same former ambassador to Iraq who many believe inadvertently signaled during a meeting with Saddam Hussein that the Bush administra­tion would not get all that upset if he invaded Kuwait.

“Glaspie has re-emerged like the Typhoid Mary of American diplo­macy as a senior adviser to the United Nations in Somalia, our latest disaster,” Page said.

Page reports that Glaspie may have played a key role in turning Aidid against the U.N. and the United States at a time when he was cooperating with peacemaking efforts.

Facebook Comments