|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Events / Responses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On June of 1998, Bob Novak was debating with a guess over the hypocrisy of trading with China, while maintaining an embargo against Cuba. Novak argued that we should maintain our embargo against Cuba because Fidel Castro is responsible for 70 percent of the drugs that come into the United States.
RESPONSE: The ultimate patriotic act that can be performed by a member of the American mainstream press is to condemn Fidel Castro. Since Castro fell out of favor with the U.S. government, the U.S. news media has carried out a relentless propaganda campaign against Castro. Bob Novak, like most Castro haters in the news media, are blinded by their own hate. When talking about Fidel Castro, people like Bob Novak tend to invent lies so people will support the U.S. government's position against Castro. It must be understood that Novak's commit was not simply a mistake. The commit was an intentional lie to paint Castro as a demon trying to harm America. The facts are that Fidel Castro is not responsible for 70 percent of the drugs that come into America. In fact, there is no evidence that Castro is responsible for any drugs coming into America. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that Novak is wrong. Facts bear out that 75 to 85 percent of our drugs come from Colombia and Mexico. This has been reported by the CIA, as well as the FBI. Before Novak tries to support his hypocritical policy of maintaining an embargo against Cuba, while supporting trade with China, which is far worst than Cuba, he seriously needs to consider taking a math course so he can better understand percents. If nearly 80 percent of our drugs come from Mexico and Colombia, it is impossible for Cuba to supply us with another 80 percent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On May of 2000, Bob Novak said that Bobby Knights' tactics as a coach were justified because he was teaching his players how to be men. This was after he showed Bobby Knight attempting to choke a player for running the wrong play in practice.
RESPONSE: Novak's commits are simply hypocrisy running amok. When Spreewell of the New York Knicks, a black basketball player, choked his coach, most of the whites in the media said that Spreewell should lose his million dollar contract and should be banned from the game of basketball. Whites in the media were demanding that this man's livelihood be permanently taken away, but the same sentiments were not express towards Knight. Sure, there were criticisms of Knight's actions, but, in comparison to the response Spree received, Knight's rebuke was mild. I would like to know the difference between Spreewell choking his coach and Knight choking one of his players. Whites are constantly accusing Blacks of playing the race card. Well, in this case, whites in the media have managed to play the whole deck. The media should have been just as critical of Knight, as they were with Spreewell. They should have demanded that Knight be permanently barred from his livelihood. The news media in America has a long history of making people of color appear far more threatening than their white counterparts, and the comments made by Novak and others in the press is evidence that this practice is still in existence.
|
|
|
On November 17, 2001, Kate O'Burn of CNN committed that unlike most nations, America has a long democratic tradition to protect.
RESPONSE: It has been a long tradition of the news media to portray the United States as being founded on the principles of democracy and justice. This emotional account contradicts the historical account. The inception of the United States was based on injustice for the many and democracy for the few. The emotional and nonfactual commit by Kate O'Burn is a feeble attempt to make the United States appear more righteous than other nations. The historical record clearly shows that the United States is no better than any other nation in regards to promoting democracy, and O'Burn is quite aware of this fact.
The founding fathers were bitterly opposed to universal democracy. Charles C. Pinckney and Edmund Randolph aired the views of the elitist class quite clearly when they respectively stated, "There is a need for stiff measures to restrain the urges of arrant democracy," and "The problems that the United States is experiencing at the time are due to the turbulence and follies of democracy." Under this long democratic tradition, women of various racial and ethnic backgrounds were denied access to the voting booth. African-Americans were shamefully enslaved to meet the economic needs of the property class. As of 1792, more than a third of the white male population were disfranchised because of the property qualification laws established by the property class. In most cases, individuals had to be worth more than 2,000 pounds in order to vote or hold elected offices.
As for African-Americans after the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, freedom and justice were an illusion. For the next one hundred twenty years, African-Americans endured overt racism that ranged from denial of voting rights to physical violence to unequal segregation policies.
As for the Native Americans, the United States government engaged in wholesale murder of the indigenous population. America's genocidal policies toward the Natives were equivalent to those of Nazis Germany. Moreover, absolute deception was the official policy of the federal and state governments when dealing with the Natives. Nearly every treaty signed by the U.S. government with the Native Americans was broken.
Kate O'Burn is quite aware of these blights against American democracy, but just like most individuals in the mainstream media, her function is not to present the truth but to preserve the image of the United States. And in doing so, she can in good conscious over look years of injustices perpetrated against people of color and women in this country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On November 6, 2001, Paula Zahn of CNN interviewed the son of Mohammed Reza Pahlevi. During the interview, Phalevi's son stated that Afghanistan's problems are due to the fact that the leaders of Afghanistan lacked the commitment to establish a democracy as his father had done in Iran. Zaun agreed with the commits made by Pahlevi.
RESPONSE: While the commits made by Pahlevi were totally absurd, there is a good reason for why Paula Zahn would concur with the outrageous lie made by Pahlevi. Zahn was simply performing her patriotic duty of protecting the image of the United States. During Pahlevi's reign in Iran, the United States deeply supported his brutal methods of subjugation over the Iranian people. If the true nature of Pahlevi's rule was ever to be revealed to the American public, then, Americans may come to realize that their government is not in the business of promoting democracy through out the world.
When Pahlevi claimed that his father's rule was democratic, he was knowingly lying to protect his father's legacy. Mohammed Pahlevi, with British and American aid and support, first came to power after over throwing the democratic elected government of Mossadeq. With the help of the CIA, Pahlevi was able to systematically repress the Iranians. He installed the SAVAK, a brutal secret police force that terrorized the entire country. News organizations critical of Pahlevi were shut down. Political dissidents were arrested and murdered for simply protesting Pahlevi's actions. During the Shah's reign, the UN and amnesty international incessantly reported that the Iranian government was guilty of gross human rights violations. In his last act of cruelty, some 400 Iranians were burned to death in the Rex Theater in Abadan after police chain and lock the exit doors and 10,000 anti-Shah demonstrators were massacred at Teheran's Jaleh Square. Keep in mind, Pahlevi's undemocratic policies occurred under the auspice of the U.S. government. Sadly, while the U.S. government ignored the atrocities in Iran, the U.S. news media obediently did the same and chose to remain silent, just like Zahn chose to remain silent when confronted with Pahlevi's outrageous lie.
|
|
|
On December 2, 2001, Wolf Blitzer of CNN informed to his audience that they should not forget that Saddam Hussein was guilty of invading a neighboring country and of using chemical weapons against his own citizenry.
RESPONSE: Blitzer's commentary is a gross example of news reporting based on half truths and extreme biasness. Yes, Saddam Hussein is a despot who is guilty of crimes against humanity and worthy of condemnation, but, that is only half of the story. The news media intentionally excises from their reporting the United States' egregious relationship with Hussein. For obvious reasons, Hussein should be condemned for his past transgressions, which includes, but not limited to, using chemical weapons against his own people and invading Kuwait. But what Blitzer and others in the mainstream press fail to emphasize is that the United States and many western nations defended and encouraged Hussein's actions every step of the way. During the eighties, Iran and Iraq went to war over Shatt Al Arab. Officials in the United States government were cognizant of Hussein's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds, as well as against the Iranians. On several occasions, the United Nations tried to impose sanctions and other forms of punishment against Hussein, but the United States on nearly every occasion refused to recognize any actions that would hurt Hussein's war efforts.
The United States and its allies committed an even more egregious act by supplying Iraq with military and technical weapons. Yes, the weapons and technology for Hussein's biological and chemical weapons came from the west. When intelligence reports revealed that Hussein had murdered thousands of own citizenry with chemical weapons, the United States government chose to ignore the carnage and continue support. The U.S. official policy was to downplay and cover up the use of chemical weapons by Saddam's armed forces, our ally.
This brings us to the Gulf War. Once again, the mainstream press have chosen to tell have the truth. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in August of 1990, the U.S. news media exploited the event for all it was worth. In big bold print and breaking news coverage, newspapers and news stations described in complete detail of Iraq's naked aggression against Kuwait and the U.S. government's outrage at the event. But what the media failed to report were the events occurring before the actual invasion. We now know that the U.S. state department and Hussein discussed his possible invasion of Kuwait days before he decided to act against his neighbor. In a meeting with Ambassador Glaspie, the Iraqi leader inquired about the United States' opinion of his possible invasion. Glaspie responded that America had no opinion of Arab-Arab conflict, such as the dispute between Iraq and Kuwait. In essence, the state department gave Hussein the green light to invade Kuwait.
Yet, Blitzer and others in the mainstream press refuse to hold the United States government culpable for its actions. Should not the nations that encouraged and supported Hussein while he committed acts of terror be held with equal contempt? Blitzer in his commits completely ignored America's culpability. If Hussein was wrong for using chemical weapons against innocent civilians, then, the United States was wrong for supplying him with chemical weapons. If Hussein was wrong for invading Kuwait, then, the United States was wrong for not telling him the consequences of his actions when government officials had the opportunity. Like most journalists, Blitzer lacks courage and will to report the true relationship that existed between Hussein and the United States prior to the Gulf War. Instead, he sells the government line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In October of 1998, Augusto Pinochet, former dictator of Chile, was charged by a Spanish Magistrate on grounds of murder, kidnapping, and torturing political opponents while he was in office. Bob Novak of CNN stated that the actions of the Spanish Magistrate was a travesty and an insult to Pinochet who happened to be a fine and remarkable leader.
RESPONSE: The comments made by Novak are an insult to the thousands upon thousands of civilians who perished in Chile during Pinochet's reign as dictator. Novak's comments also illustrates how the mainstream press is willing to deceive the American public and the rest of the world in order to preserve the imaged of the United States government and its allies. In 1973, Augusto Pinochet, with the help of the United States' secret service, led a murderous coup to overthrow the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende in which 2,000 people lost their lives. A dark cloud was now cast over Chile's luminous democracy. For the next seventeen years, Pinochet and his military police force, the DINA, engaged in every form of torture, which included priests and children. No one would be spared. Anybody who questioned his legitimacy were subject to acts of terror. At the behest of Chile's dictator, waves of assassinations against political enemies were systematically carried out. Hundreds of citizens disappeared never to be seen again. Free speech was eradicated as Chilean news agencies critical of Pinochet were given the option of closing or facing more severe consequences. Editors refusing to acquiesce were murdered. By 1977, the United Nations Human Rights Commission, as well as other human rights organizations, issued a severe condemnation of his regime for its torturing of political detainees. By the mid 1980s, the CIA had confirmed that over 4,000 Chileans had lost their lives through the nefarious acts of Pinochet.
Through out the seventies and eighties, a reign of terror gripped Chile. Pinochet became the quintessence of evil in the eyes of many. Millions of Chileans lived in immense fear of their lives as one of the strongest democracies in Latin America became a military dictatorship over night. In the midst of Pinochet's assault on democracy, free speech, and basic human rights, the mainstream press in America refused to print or air the horrendous details of Pinochet's regime. The United States government saw Pinochet as an alley against communism, which meant the press had to see Pinochet as a just, benevolent leader. Anything short of favorable reporting of Pinochet would have been unpatriotic. Unfortunately, in regards to Pinochet, members of the press, including Novak, are still taking their cues from the government. Because of the press' complicity, the America public will never fully realize the nightmarish atrocities that began with the United States undemocratic activities in 1973. Novak did not unknowingly misspeak, he knowingly lied when he said Augusto Pinochet was a great man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more information:
Straight Talkers
Email: enavy@straighttalkers.com
© Copyright 2008 Straight Talkers Site. All Rights Reserved.
|
