[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
War, War, War See other War, War, War Articles Title: Social Oncology, Race, and the Legacy Media "It´s Just a Lump. It Will Probably Go Away." I think I will don a loin cloth, stop bathing, and ascend a moutain where I will gibber, drool, and perhaps cástrate myself and wait to go to Hale-Bopp. This is a patrioitic plan. I don´t want to distance myself too much from my fellow Americans. Though, on thought, I may welsh on the castration part. Every morning, as I shamble through the heather of the internet in search of reason (any day now), I find another story of a savage racial attack on whites by blacks. At least, when a black man says, “I´m gonna kill the next white I see,” and does so, I begin to suspect a racial motive. Perhaps this is unfair. Perhaps the gentleman really meant to say, “…find a good book on Keynes and the Austrian school, and compare with Veblen.” I remain suspicious. Where is this taking us? In the past these attacks were carefully hidden by the Legacy Media, aka Mainstream. An argument, understandable if not satisfying, can be made for this. Detwaddled, it amounts to saying that the black underclass is permanent, that stopping the crime would require something close to martial law, and that ghastly riots would then ensue with unpredictable consequences. The path of wisdom is then togrin and bear it. This is a dismal analysis, but not unreasonable. However, it suggests a degree of intelligent design by the media that is contradicted by other regions of their behavior. Usually they appear to be trying to increase racial hostility. Note the deliberate distribution of a version of the Rodney King tape edited to make the use of force seem unjustified. Also note the editing of the Zimmerman audio by track by NBC to make him sound racially biased. Given an underclass that majorly can´t read and entirely doesn´t, this is dangerous incitement. And of course the media spin every story to make blacks believe that they are victims when they are not. If you work in the media in Washington, you see that there is no intention to do anything more than bask in narcissisitc appreciation of one´s preternatural rightness. As someone said, never suspect a conspiracy when stupidity is an adequate explanation.Many reporters know exactly what is going on, but saying so would cost them their jobs, so they don´t. Then you have the ideological lefties, who dominate most newsrooms. They, in my experience at any rate, genuinely don´t know what is happening. There are several reasons for this. For one thing, reporters run to combativeness instead of contemplation. For another, they are not thinkers but hurried fact-accountants. For a third, they spend their time with each other, reinforcing what they all think. They really truly believe that blacks are brutalized, beaten, mistreated, that they suffer discrimination of various sorts, chiefly invisible to others, and that white racists want to impoverish them. They simply reject as prejudice anything that doesn´t fit this view of the world. It makes no sense to the rational, but they are sincere. The psychology seems to be that if you deny the existence of something, such as a combination of grotesquely high crime rates and racial attacks, it will go away. If you point out (as I have done on many occasions) that the statistics on crime come from the Obama administration´s FBI (the Uniform Crime Reports) eyes glaze. It doesn´t get in. Say that the public schools of Washington are horrible, as documented by myriad studies and decried by black columnists, and you will be told that it isn´t true, that the reports are biased, and so on. If you don´t recognize the existence of a problem, how can you solve it? An ominous development is that the wall of protective silence begins to crack. In the past, the race of criminals simply wasn´t divulged. Then some television stations, though still saying nothing of race, played the surveillance footage while talking of “teens,” a word suggesting fun-loving striplings. Many papers now publish photos, and others often mention in graff fifteen that the assailants were “young black males” (though often girls are also involved). But the internet was the true fly in the ointment. The internet and the cell phone, I should say. Today web sites, some of them huge, regularly post stories and video of attacks on whites: the Drudge Report and World Net Daily News, for example. These have too much circulation to ignore. Further, stories that used to be covered only by local media that had no choice began to be picked up by the web, and thus became national. E.g., the Wichita Massacre. The upshot was that mention of racial problems became increasingly less taboo. Second-tier publications like The American Conservative began publishing pieces on black crime. And there was that curious new world of web-pubs too intelligent and well-written for the main stream, and utterly independent of the straitjackets muzzling the legacy media. The new kids on the block could talk about anything. And do. There is Taki´s Magazine, the American Spectator, or even, in a very minor way, Fred on Everything. Their readers were not great in number, but high in intelligence. This was, as we say in Pentagonese, a force multiplier. Then came Ann Coulter´s book, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama, about race hustlers and black crime (which I recommend without qualification: highly intelligent, well-researched, and blunt). The book, methinks, constitutes something of a watershed. So far as I know, it is the first time a major, respectable writer, not remotely of the fringe, has written a book saying, “OK, boys and girls, here is what is going on, here´s the scam, and here´s who is doing it.” In sum, as the major media incite an already angry black underclass, the internet and, increasingly, the legacy media incite white anger by publicizing attacks. Does no one understand that this can have really, really ugly consequences? My question is: What now? Television will continue to control the idiot demographic, but as more and more of the sentient realize what is happening, and that they can talk about it, things will change. Just how I don´t know. But we had better do some thinking. The racial divide is the worst danger this country has faced, or refused to face. If we don´t think of something to do about it, it´s going to wreck the joint, and nobody will like it. I am now going to climb my mountain and await Hale-Bopp. Without surgery. Poster Comment: ""There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar weekly salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities, and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes." ~ John Swinton, spoken at a NY Press Club Banquet ca. 1880 The "Press" is NOT in the business of reporting "news" - they are in the business of selling newspaper advertising space and promoting the fetishes of the "Newspaper"'s owners. The same applies to any of the major media. CNN AND PSYOPS Military personnel from the Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, have until recently been working in CNN's HQ in Atlanta. Article originally published 03/26/00 By Alexander Cockburn Military personnel from the Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, have until recently been working in CNN's hq in Atlanta. CNN is up in arms about our report in the last issue of CounterPunch concerning the findings of the Dutch journalist, Abe de Vries about the presence of US Army personnel at CNN, owned by Time-Warner. We cited an article by de Vries which appeared on February 21 in the reputable Dutch daily newspaper Trouw, originally translated into English and placed on the web by Emperor's Clothes. De Vries reported that a handful of military personnel from the Third Psychological Operations Battalion, part of the airmobile Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, had worked in CNN's hq in Atlanta. De Vries quoted Major Thomas Collins of the US Army Information Service as having confirmed the presence of these Army psy-ops experts at CNN, saying, "Psy-ops personnel, soldiers and officers, have been working in CNN's headquarters in Atlanta through our program, 'Training with Industry'. They worked as regular employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production of news." This particular CounterPunch story was the topic of my regular weekly broadcast to AM Live, a program of the South Africa Broadcasting Company in Johannesburg. Among the audience of this broadcast was CNN's bureau in South Africa which lost no time in relaying news of it to CNN hq in Atlanta, and I duly received an angry phone call from Eason Jordan who identified himself as CNN's president of newsgathering and international networks. Jordan was full of indignation that I had somehow compromised the reputation of CNN. But in the course of our conversation it turned out that yes, CNN had hosted a total of five interns from US army psy-ops, two in television, two in radio and one in satellite operations. Jordan said the program had only recently terminated, I would guess at about the time CNN's higher management read Abe de Vries's stories. When I reached De Vries in Belgrade, where's he is Trouw's correspondent, and told him about CNN's furious reaction, he stood by his stories and by the quotations given him by Major Collins.For some days CNN wouldn't get back to him with a specific reaction to Collins's confirmation, and when it did, he filed a later story for Trouw, printed on February 25 noting that the military worked at CNN in the period from June 7, (a date confirmed by Eason to me) meaning that during the war a psy-ops person would have been at CNN during the last week. "The facts are", De Vries told me, " that the US Army, US Special Operations Command and CNN personnel confirmed to me that military personnel have been involved in news production at CNN's newsdesks. I found it simply astonishing. Of course CNN says these psyops personnel didn't decide anything, write news reports, etcetera. What else can they say. Maybe it's true, maybe not. The point is that these kind of close ties with the army are, in my view, completely unacceptable for any serious news organization. Maybe even more astonishing is the complete silence about the story from the big media. To my knowledge, my story was not mentioned by leading American or British newspapers, nor by Reuters or AP." Here at CounterPunch we agree with Abe de Vries, who told me he'd originally come upon the story through an article in the French newsletter, Intelligence On-line, February 17, which described a military symposium in Arlington, Virginia, held at the beginning of February of this year, discussing use of the press in military operations. Colonel Christopher St John, commander of the US Army's 4th Psyops Group, was quoted by Intelligence On-Line's correspondent, present at the symposium, as having, in the correspondent's words, "called for greater cooperation between the armed forces and media giants. He pointed out that some army PSYOPS personnel had worked for CNN for several weeks and helped in the production of some news stories for the network." So, however insignificant Eason Jordan and other executives at CNN may now describe the Army psyops tours at CNN as having been, the commanding officer of the Psy-ops group thought them as sufficient significance to mention at a high level Pentagon seminar about propaganda and psychological warfare. It could be that CNN was the target of a psyops penetration and is still too naïve to figure out what was going on. It's hard not to laugh when CNN execs like Eason Jordan start spouting high-toned stuff about CNN's principles of objectivity and refusal to spout government or Pentagon propaganda. The relationship is most vividly summed up by the fact that Christiane Amanpour, CNN's leading foreign correspondent, and a woman whose reports about the fate of Kosovan refugees did much to fan public appetite for NATO's war, is literally and figuratively in bed with spokesman for the US State Department, and a leading propagandist for NATO during that war, her husband James Rubin.If CNN truly wanted to maintain the appearance of objectivity, it would have taken Amanpour off the story. Amanpour, by the way, is still a passionate advocate for NATO's crusade, most recently on the Charlie Rose show. In the first two weeks of the war in Kosovo CNN produced thirty articles for the Internet, according to de Vries, who looked them up for his first story. An average CNN article had seven mentions of Tony Blair, NATO spokesmen like Jamie Shea and David Wilby or other NATO officials. Words like refugees, ethnic cleansing, mass killings and expulsions were used nine times on the average. But the so-called Kosovo Liberation Armmy (0.2 mentions) and the Yugoslav civilian victims (0.3 mentions) barely existed for CNN. During the war on Serbia, as with other recent conflicts involving the US, wars, CNN's screen was filled with an interminable procession of US military officers. On April 27 of last year, Amy Goodman of the Pacifica radio network, put a good question to Frank Sesno, who is CNN's senior vice president for political coverage. GOODMAN:"If you support the practice of putting ex-military men -generals - on the payroll to share their opinion during a time of war, would you also support putting peace activists on the payroll to give a different opinion during a time of war? To be sitting there with the military generals talking about why they feel that war is not appropriate?" FRANK SESNO: "We bring the generals in because of their expertise in a particular area. We call them analysts. We don't bring them in as advocates. In fact, we actually talk to them about that - they're not there as advocates." Exactly a week before Sesno said this, CNN had featured as one of its military analysts, Lt Gen Dan Benton, US Army Retired. BENTON: "I don't know what our countrymen that are questioning why we're involved in this conflict are thinking about. As I listened to this press conference this morning with reports of rapes burning, villages being burned and this particularly incredible report of blood banks, of blood being harvested from young boys for the use of Yugoslav forces, I just got madder and madder. The United States has a responsibility as the only superpower in the world, and when we learn about these things, somebody has got to stand up and say, that's enough, stop it, we aren't going to put up with this. And so the United States is fulfilling its leadership responsibility with our NATO allies and are trying to stop these incredible atrocities." Please note what CNN's supposedly non-advocatory analyst Benton was ranting about: a particularly bizarre and preposterous NATO propaganda item about 700 Albanian boys being used as human blood banks for Serb fighters. So much for the "non-advocate" CNN. CP Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Does no one understand that this is really, really, intentional? It even extends to Internet Forums where provocateurs, and useful idiots, inflame already existing grievances and resentments? "“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha "You'd better get that looked at."
Support bacteria. (The world needs more culture)
Oh, they've been watching me for a long, long time. I have known that since I was in High School. I had it confirmed, indirectly, when I was in the service.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||