Forums

News in America...And the contorted image it presents

• stencil 455 Posts

  Tue, Jan 4 2011 7:33 PM

  The news is getting completely ridiculous now guys. It is almost all opinion and the stations know how to twist any story to make it entertaining to their audience. This is much like Fox news and CNN. Fox changes everything into a republican outlook. And CNN makes everything a democratic outlook. 

  My first gripe. This was really brought out to me while i spent 2 weeks in Italy in the summer. A woman saids"o america is so dangerous, rude, and flat out awful". She made this assumption because we didn't watch any news in Italy (couldn't understand the writing or language) and since we didn't already have those awful thoughts of crime in our head we thought is was so nice and beautiful. We would look at America like that if we didn't put blinders on and only watch news and not look around and make our own feelings of America without the thoughts of awful things in our head. This train of though could be avoided if the news channel didn't only show what we want to see which is robbery or killing or rape. They don't want to talk about someone helping an old lady across the street or someone returning a wallet that someone left at the gas station. If we showed more of the good we would have a better idea of the real USA.

  My next gripe...The news can make any story sound bad.  A perfect example is education in America. Several news stations are saying that America is dumb and is being passed by Asian and European countries. Although they fail to mention that America test EVERY SINGLE STUDENT whether the kid is mentally challenged or Bill Gates... which is why we have lower scores. Many countries in fact most... maybe all... in Asia and Europe only test their Bill Gates. Which will obviously elavate the scores. I guarantee you if the USA didn't test but the smart kids we would be right at the top again. Or if Asia and Europe were made to test every child then we would be near the top again.

  Hope you can digest all that and give a thoughtful reply.

  Stencil

• CharlemagneRH 1,054 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:43 AM

  I digested it and what I got out of it is that you must be about 15 years-old.

  If reality was shown on the TV, America would crumble.   That's why we can't see things like the Collateral Murder video, this video, or this video, testimony that US soldiers often engage in "sport killing" in Iraq, or the tens of thousands of other videos and documents that incriminate the USG, which are often classified for decades for "national security reasons."  Documents that remain classified go back at least until 1941, making it pretty clear that the only reason we can't see them is not because the information is still operationally relevant, but rather because the information would make the US look like the bad guy.  In other words, the only way in which such documents could possibly still remain classified for "national security reasons" is if their content is so vile that, upon reading them, the people might rise up and seek to replace the federal government.

  (The first linked video is graphic.  I shouldn't need to say this since people are supposed to be at least 18 to register, but there it is.)

  Even when it comes to things that are openly known (though mainstream media almost always denies their accuracy), we cannot we talk about how many people the US has killed in Iraq alone over the past 20 years: 2+ million.  Such things cannot be discussed on the television because if they are, you have things like 60 Minutes interviews where the US Ambassador to the UN says that she believes US sanctions, which killed 1,000,000 Iraqis (500,000 of them children) from 1990-1996 (date of the interview,) were "worth it."  Reality, therefore, is strictly prohibited from mainstream American media.

  Although the fact that we sold Saddam chemical weapons is mentioned at times, it is not mentioned that we did so while he was engaged in an offensive, illegal, unprovoked invasion of Iran -- a war which killed over 500,000 Iranians.  Also unmentioned is the fact that we sank Iran's navy for Saddam.  Iran's crime?  Fighting US hegemony by usurping their US puppet government, installed via CIA coup in 1953 -- unmentionable, of course.

  Also unable to be mentioned is the fact that we told him, in July 1990, that his border dispute with Kuwait (what sparked his August 1990 invasion) was "not our business" and that we would not interfere if he were to invade.  Also not mentioned is the fact that the US government did not disclose this fact when making its case to invade Iraq in 1990/1991, nor is it mentioned that almost every single piece of "evidence" used as part of a justification of our Jan 1991 invasion was completely and utterly false, which the government knew, but the government used it anyways.

  The fact that it is literally impossible that Saddam was the one that had gassed the Kurds is also unmentionable.  Also unmentionable is the fact that, even if it had been him that had gassed the Kurds, Turkey has killed roughly twice as many Kurds as Saddam but is considered the US' "ally in the war on terror."

  The fact that we funded the Indonesian military in their invasion and occupation of East Timor (~200,000 dead) cannot be discussed, nor can our longstanding policies of supporting ruthless governments (so long as they are friendly to Washington; one such example is another one of our "allies in the war on terror," Uzbekistan, where some have had their fingernails pulled out and been boiled alive [link 1, 2]; WARNING: LINK #1 FEATURES PICTURES OF ONE OF THE VICTIMS), nor our oppression of several South American countries, which we turned into banana republics through the use of, amongst other means, death squads.

  Pretty much every single facet of US foreign policy is "not suitable" for television, and furthermore, certain people are not allowed on television because they are simply thought of as being too effective at arguing against US foreign policy; one of the more prominent ones being Norman Finkelstein, who has never been allowed on American television.  Chomsky is allowed on perhaps once a year on some sort of cable access show that only 5,000 will watch.

  I'd agree that it would be nice to see reality on television, but it is wrong to believe that it would somehow improve the reputation of the US, or at least our government.  While it might help the reputation of the average American citizen, it would, on the other hand, destroy the credibility of the USG and only bolster the Italian woman's position.

• x1524807 776 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 5:31 AM

  CharlemagneRH:

  Chomsky is allowed on perhaps once a year on some sort of cable access show that only 5,000 will watch.

  Read your post from open to close, and it is sad. We had a terrible tragedy in America when we lost 3000 fine Americans, and that is all the politicians will talk about. How bad those muslims were. So our counter to that was to kill GOD only knows how many Iraq's, knocked out their water and power systems for the last 5 years, and have actually committed murder against these people. NOW AMERICA, how does 3000 Americans sound

• CharlemagneRH 1,054 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:48 AM

  x1524807:

  CharlemagneRH:

  Chomsky is allowed on perhaps once a year on some sort of cable access show that only 5,000 will watch.

  Read your post from open to close, and it is sad. We had a terrible tragedy in America when we lost 3000 fine Americans, and that is all the politicians will talk about. How bad those muslims were. So our counter to that was to kill GOD only knows how many Iraq's, knocked out their water and power systems for the last 5 years, and have actually committed murder against these people. NOW AMERICA, how does 3000 Americans sound

  We obviously disagree on other matters, but your ability to put that aside and recognize the validity of my criticisms, and also the point you've made are respectable, so thanks.

  I added material about our good friend Uzbekistan, though, so maybe you should read that too... if you are able stomach the pictures. :)

• stencil 455 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:31 PM

  CharlemagneRH:

   the Italian woman's position.

  First off the woman was american from NY that was on the tour with me.

  CharlemagneRH:

  I digested it and what I got out of it is that you must be about 15 years-old.

  If i were 15 i wouldn't be talking about this. 15 yr. olds don't care about this. And most haven't been to Italy i would think.

  CharlemagneRH:

  I digested it and what I got out of it is that you must be about 15 years-old.

  If reality was shown on the TV, America would crumble.   That's why we can't see things like the Collateral Murder video, this video, or this video, testimony that US soldiers often engage in "sport killing" in Iraq, or the tens of thousands of other videos and documents that incriminate the USG, which are often classified for decades for "national security reasons."  Documents that remain classified go back at least until 1941, making it pretty clear that the only reason we can't see them is not because the information is still operationally relevant, but rather because the information would make the US look like the bad guy.  In other words, the only way in which such documents could possibly still remain classified for "national security reasons" is if their content is so vile that, upon reading them, the people might rise up and seek to replace the federal government.

  (The first linked video is graphic.  I shouldn't need to say this since people are supposed to be at least 18 to register, but there it is.)

  Even when it comes to things that are openly known (though mainstream media almost always denies their accuracy), we cannot we talk about how many people the US has killed in Iraq alone over the past 20 years: 2+ million.  Such things cannot be discussed on the television because if they are, you have things like 60 Minutes interviews where the US Ambassador to the UN says that she believes US sanctions, which killed 1,000,000 Iraqis (500,000 of them children) from 1990-1996 (date of the interview,) were "worth it."  Reality, therefore, is strictly prohibited from mainstream American media.

   

  Don't agree with the "sport killing" but i doubt this is happening in many places. Once again from my original post you can make it what you want. But since Mark McGuire and several other baseball players used steroids does that mean they all are doing it? No. Same thing in "sport killing" maybe one group does that cruel sick thing but i would say less than 3-5% "sport kill". And do i ever want the military to kill any human for that matter? No. But when the terrorist came over here in 2001 in the NYC terrorist attack we had to respond. We could not sit on our hand or we would have been terrorized over and over and over again. Do you want that to happen?

  CharlemagneRH:

  I'd agree that it would be nice to see reality on television, but it is wrong to believe that it would somehow improve the reputation of the US, or at least our government.  While it might help the reputation of the average American citizen, it would, on the other hand, destroy the credibility of the USG and only bolster the Italian woman's position.

  IMO a gov. has to do things the hard way sometimes. If we never participated in a war we would ultimately all be under a Czarist government. Do you want that? In the ultimate thought of war and killing people it is an awful thing. But without war the world and our nation goes nowhere it is the cold, hard, facts. Sorry.

  Stencil

   

   

   

   

   

• CharlemagneRH 1,054 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:56 PM

  stencil:

  when the terrorist came over here in 2001 in the NYC terrorist attack we had to respond. We could not sit on our hand

  Actually, we could've just changed our foreign policy, and the threat would've gone away on its own.  And we would've been much better off for doing so.  We wouldn't be hated, and we wouldn't be bankrupt.

  It also isn't a course of action that can be reconciled with the teachings of Jesus, which most of the country claims to worship, though you would never know it, seeing as how they basically ignore everything that he ever said.

  stencil:

  or we would have been terrorized over and over and over again. Do you want that to happen?

  I find it hard to believe that any right-thinking person, after reading what I wrote, all of which can be easily substantiated, could still believe that the United States is the party being terrorized.

  The United States is clearly the terrorizer, not the terrorized.

  CharlemagneRH:

  If we never participated in a war we would ultimately all be under a Czarist government. Do you want that? In the ultimate thought of war and killing people it is an awful thing. But without war the world and our nation goes nowhere it is the cold, hard, facts. Sorry.

  I'll assume that, by "czarist," you mean a government that is tyrannical and commits atrocities against its own people.  The statement, then, is completely false.

  When the citizenry is armed, no government that is largely disliked by the people can exist for more than a few months.

  With all of the vast resources that we have spent in our wars, we can't even control two relatively easily policeable countries.  Iraq is pretty much exclusively desert.  Nobody can survive outside of town very long, and anybody that is outside of town can be easily spotted.

  Furthermore, despite all of our war-making, our liberties, our wealth, etc. have all eroded greatly.  If, hypothetically speaking, your premise was not so easily identified as complete bullsh*t, and the courses of action that we have taken in the past few decades are the best strategy possible for preserving liberties, then the struggle is futile and analogous to attempting to save a sinking boat with a bucket, despite the fact that the water is coming in ten times as fast as you can pitch it overboard.

• stencil 455 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:27 PM

  CharlemagneRH:

  I'll assume that, by "czarist," you mean a government that is tyrannical and commits atrocities against its own people.

  .

  Excuse me is is spelled. Tzarist which is when a country is ran by a monarch. And totally controlled by the monarch.

  CharlemagneRH:

  The United States is clearly the terrorizer, not the terrorized.

  That is completely wrong. Did you see the terrorist attacks in Spain and Europe a couple months ago from the Taliban and affiliated groups? Yea that's what i call killing innocent humans. And have you heard the 2012 olympics in London is in fear of terrorist attacks from those same groups? Yeah and America is the terrorist? completely wrong.

  stencil

   

   

   

• neildiamond11790 1,115 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:32 PM

  I can see both your points from an outsiders view, with Charle being a little more nasty in his opinion of the US than what is needed to make a point.  You come off as the type that many will see as you just wanting to be hated.

  The only thing I can see in your side Charle is much like some others I have seen on the site, all well to say if we just changed our foreign policy and did this or that the world would be a better place, but that didnt happen and unlikely you can rally more to your side to take enough action (which you wont with the words you use to describe this country) to make the difference you see we need.

  All I know of war is its no good for anyone, can be necessary, and war is about one side prevailing over the other with big guns.  There will always be casualties, there will always be civilians killed in the line of fire, its part of war, new technology can only do so much to avoid the public when the enemy is hiding within the public.

  Its stinks and as far as the rest of the worlds view of us, well for the most part they still depend on us to deal with us for most things.  Typical Type 0 civilization.

• CharlemagneRH 1,054 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:38 PM

  stencil:

  Excuse me is is spelled. Tzarist which is when a country is ran by a monarch. And totally controlled by the monarch.

  My argument still holds, no matter what you meant.

  stencil:

  That is completely wrong. Did you see the terrorist attacks in Spain and Europe a couple months ago from the Taliban and affiliated groups? Yea that's what i call killing innocent humans. And have you heard the 2012 olympics in London is in fear of terrorist attacks from those same groups? Yeah and America is the terrorist? completely wrong.

  Our recent wars are completely asymmetric, and there is no question which party is committing the overwhelming majority of crimes.  If the Taliban, et al. are terrorists, then the United States must be some sort of mega-terrorist.

  You are absurd and ought to be, but clearly are not, ashamed of yourself.

• CharlemagneRH 1,054 Posts

  Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:44 PM

  neildiamond11790:

  I can see both your points from an outsiders view, with Charle being a little more nasty in his opinion of the US than what is needed to make a point.  You come off as the type that many will see as you just wanting to be hated.

  The only thing I can see in your side Charle is much like some others I have seen on the site, all well to say if we just changed our foreign policy and did this or that the world would be a better place, but that didnt happen and unlikely you can rally more to your side to take enough action (which you wont with the words you use to describe this country) to make the difference you see we need.

  You are also absurd.