How Corporate Media Paved the Way for Trump’s Muslim Ban

Discussion in 'Media & Commentators' started by Horhey, Feb 7, 2017.

  1. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [video=youtube_share;5X30Gkp9FVs]http://youtu.be/5X30Gkp9FVs[/video]​

    The same Paper that took us into Iraq with fake news reviewed the film American Sniper and denounced:

    The Times is also the paper that approved of U.S. war crimes in Fallujah, beginning with the Marine's takeover of the General Hospital there, reporting that:

    Therefore, such a propaganda weapon is a legitimate target, particularly when "inflated civilian casualty figures" - inflated because the president said so - had "inflamed opinion throughout the country, driving up the political costs of the conflict." Now after weeks of U.S. bombing, "the Americans are rushing in engineers who will begin rebuilding what the conflict has just destroyed." Emphasis on, "what the conflict has destroyed."

    The Times neglected to mention the provision of the Geneva Conventions stating that "fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service may in no circumstances be attacked, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict." Thus the Paper of Record was cheerfully depicting war crimes for which U.S. administration officials could be sent to prison under U.S. law.

    The Times also told us 7 days later the U.S. military "achieved nearly all their objectives well ahead of schedule," as "much of the city lay in smoking ruins." But it was not a total victory. The reporter didn't see any dead "packrats" in their "warrens" or on the streets, "an enduring mystery." U.S. forces did discover "the body of a woman on a street in Falluja, but it was unclear whether she was an Iraqi or a foreigner."

    :salute:

     
  2. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you're alleging serious war crimes were committed by the US military yet your singular target of derision is a newspaper which simply reported it?
     
  3. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The mission is presented as a success not a war crime. The Times also didn't mention that it was a war crime. The casual reader is thus left with the impression that it was simply a successful mission and not a war crime. In other words, it's the way the reporting is framed that is the problem. So just ask yourself, how would the Nation have reported it?
     
  4. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Correct me if I'm wrong but you believe it was an actual war crime though? You're saying that nature of the reporting is the problem which would mean you don't think the actual war crime would be a problem at all?
     
  5. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's framed as a point for the good guys. And yes, it is a war crime.
     
  6. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, apparently framed that way by everyone involved. If anyone in the military, either on the ground or in command, thought they were doing anything wrong, let alone committing a war crime, why would they have allowed such open reporting of it in the first place? You’re the only one saying it was a war crime yet despite that you’re not attacking the people you believe committed that crime at all or the people who should prosecute a war crime with such clear evidence in the public domain, only the people who reported it, apparently factually but without the spin you want to see.
     
  7. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The reporter was embedded with the Marines, who already knew it would be framed in the way I described. How could you believe it's not a war crime? Imagine if Russian forces took over a hospital in Syria and forced all the patients on the floor and tied their hands behind their backs. How would the Times have framed their reporting on that?

    I hate repeating myself:

     
  8. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    One last point. A journalist is supposed to be a voice for the voiceless, to act as a check against government and corporate abuses. They're not supposed to "reflect the consensus of powerful elites of the state-corporate nexus," which is what the establishment media does every day.
     
  9. lemmiwinx

    lemmiwinx Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2016
    Messages:
    8,069
    Likes Received:
    5,428
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That was Noam Chomsky? I could have sworn it was Stephen Hawking.
     
  10. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m not willing to leap to any conclusions, be it on whether what actually happened was a war crime or otherwise breeched any laws or regulations, or whether the reporting of it was accurate and appropriate. I will repeat the point that, as you’re highlighting yourself, the sequence of events you believe definitely proves a war crime was committed was openly reported in a major US newspaper. If it was as clear cut as you believe, why does it seem that literally none of the wide range of organisations, charities and individuals, domestic and international, focused on such things had a word to say about it?

    Regardless, my questions to you are only based on your assertion that it was a war crime. On that basis, you appear to be completely ignoring the soldiers who actually committed the war crime. You seem to have zero interest in seeing these alleged criminals brought to justice. Your entire focus has been exclusively on attacking the journalists for the manner in which the events were reported with a wider motive of attacking the media as a whole.
     
  11. Horhey

    Horhey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is simply not a cogent argument.
     

Share This Page