An unhealthy collusion of interest and disinterest

It would seem that one of the most dangerous threats to public knowledge is a story which would both discomfort American readers enough that they don't ask and embarrass the subjects of the story so badly that they keep their doings in the shadow. In between the public and the perpetrator should be the news media. Harsh questioning is in order to expose why MSM ignore these stories.
Truthout brings you stories which otherwise sink from view in the "readers don't care, writers won't share" news environment of MoneyStreamMedia. You should keep Truthout from sinking

If you are tired of this, if you just don't want to hear any more of the kind of news Halliburton buries and Truthout or Project Censored exhume, you are part of the problem. If you wait until something like the following quote is read to you on Fox or CNN, it will be a few weeks after Bush/Cheney order an attack on Iran. How better, after all, for Dick Vader to cover his tracks?

...
Cheney was the chief executive of Halliburton Corporation at the time he uttered those words. It was Cheney who directed Halliburton toward aggressive business dealings with Iran-in violation of US law-in the mid-1990s, which continued through 2005 and is the reason Iran has the capability to enrich weapons-grade uranium. It was Halliburton's secret sale of centrifuges to Iran that helped get the uranium enrichment program off the ground, according to a three-year investigation that includes interviews conducted with more than a dozen current and former Halliburton employees.

If the US ends up engaged in a war with Iran in the future, Cheney and Halliburton will bear the brunt of the blame. But this shouldn't come as a shock to anyone who has been following Halliburton's business activities over the past decade. The company has a long, documented history of violating US sanctions and conducting business with so-called rogue nations.

No, what's disturbing about these facts is how little attention it has received from the mainstream media. But the public record speaks for itself, as do the thousands of pages of documents obtained by various federal agencies that show how Halliburton's business dealings in Iran helped fund terrorist activities there-including the country's nuclear enrichment program.

When I asked Wendy Hall, a spokeswoman for Halliburton, a couple of years ago if Halliburton would stop doing business with Iran because of concerns that the company helped fund terrorism she said, "No." "We believe that decisions as to the nature of such governments and their actions are better made by governmental authorities and international entities such as the United Nations as opposed to individual persons or companies," Hall said. "Putting politics aside, we and our affiliates operate in countries to the extent it is legally permissible, where our customers are active as they expect us to provide oilfield services support to their international operations. "We do not always agree with policies or actions of governments in every place that we do business and make no excuses for their behaviors. Due to the long-term nature of our business and the inevitability of political and social change, it is neither prudent nor appropriate for our company to establish our own country-by-country foreign policy."

Halliburton first started doing business in Iran as early as 1995, while Vice President Cheney was chief executive of the company and in possible violation of US sanctions.

Why, for instance isn't this story about CIA finding lack of Iranian nuke development in today's NYTimes?