To the OP, your user name says all I need to know. Every government and country is corrupt and fucked up. Tell us we suck because we are the USA. Not like Americans don't hear that shit all the time. This country was founded on ideology. You should visit abovetopsecret.com. You would fit right in.
I do visit abovetopsecret.com sometimes.
This is not from them however.
This is mainly based on the words of a professor from MIT, who was once the most cited living man on the planet. Good luck debunking this one. Many have tried. Of the hundreds of thousands of pages that Chomsky has written over the decades, nothing substantial has EVER been shown to be factually inconsistent. Believe me, they want nothing more than to shoot him down.
He was called "arguably the most important intellectual alive" by the NY Times-the most widely read newspaper at the time, and what is used as the official record.
Today he is simply ignored by mainstream.
Like Ghandi said,
First the ignore you
then they laugh at you
then they fight you
then you win
chomsky's on about his 100 go at that.
So feel free to have a go at him. could be interesting.
What is the point in debunking what is not fact but perception.
So its OK to killed hundreds of thousands because Saddam was a bad man. So why not invade Somalia or Zimbabwe. The situations there are by far worse than it ever was in Iraq.
My point about about the insurgents targeting the local police and military seems to be lost on you jlew. Like much of the arguments in this thread or any other thread about the middle east conflicts. Your opinion seems set in stone and like alot of conservitives you pick a sentence or a phrase and take it out of context instead of giving a rebuttle based on the complete statement put before you.
What is the point in debunking what is not fact but perception.
It can be proven. Pick an event, and compare it. Many studies have been done, by plenty of reputable institutions.
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict is a good example.
Palestinian casualties are under reported, and the reverse is true for Israeli's.
Which distorts reality if you're only getting your info from mainstream, which a lot of people do. Which in turn can affect policy, more support for Israel, right? Never mind accuracy in reporting, they are slanting perception. Whoever is responsible. Andthe fact that it is primarily slanted in a pro-US light, is evidence of a system.
Its not an opinion.
If country A kills 5000 people.
And country B kills 100,
But the media only reports on country B, everyone will think B is the bad guy. But reality suggests otherwise.
And if country A happens to be a US ally, and country B an official enemy, its interesting. When there are numerous accounts like this, in different parts of the world, it suggests a motive. Evidence of propaganda carried out by the state.
Also, as citizens of a country, it does no good for the media to report on atrocities committed by enemies. What can we do but bang the drums of war when we hear about Saddam's atrocities? And if we were to hear about the much worse atrocities in Turkey, as extensively, there just may be a large movement in the United States to put pressure on the political leadership in this country to put an end to them, which could have a very real impact over there. I"m not saying don't report on things done by official enemies, but doing so extensively, as they have done with Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan and a dozen others before, inevitably leads to 1 thing.
There are a number of very serious events in history, genocides, for example, that could have been stopped had there been responsible journalism. When Indonesia invaded East Timor (10 days after Kissinger left), the media was absolutley silent about it. Not only was the time spent reporting on an equally atrocious genocide in Cambodia (carried out by an official enemy) but the genocide in East Timor ended with a word from Washington. As soon as people found out about it stopped.
More evidence of propaganda, which in this case cost hundreds of thousands of lives.
SLC 11/2/95, Park City 6/21/98, Boise 11/3/00, Seattle 12/9/02, Vancouver 5/30/03, Gorge 9/1/05, Vancouver 9/2/05, Gorge 7/22/06, Gorge 7/23/06, Camden I 6/19/08, MSG I 6/24/08, MSG II 6/25/08, Hartford 6/27/08, Mansfield II 6/30/08; Eddie Albany 6/8/09, 6/9/09; Philly 10/30/09, 10/31/09; Boston 5/17/10
I thought the world...Turns out the world thought me
Comments
What is the point in debunking what is not fact but perception.
My point about about the insurgents targeting the local police and military seems to be lost on you jlew. Like much of the arguments in this thread or any other thread about the middle east conflicts. Your opinion seems set in stone and like alot of conservitives you pick a sentence or a phrase and take it out of context instead of giving a rebuttle based on the complete statement put before you.
It can be proven. Pick an event, and compare it. Many studies have been done, by plenty of reputable institutions.
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict is a good example.
Palestinian casualties are under reported, and the reverse is true for Israeli's.
Which distorts reality if you're only getting your info from mainstream, which a lot of people do. Which in turn can affect policy, more support for Israel, right? Never mind accuracy in reporting, they are slanting perception. Whoever is responsible. Andthe fact that it is primarily slanted in a pro-US light, is evidence of a system.
Its not an opinion.
If country A kills 5000 people.
And country B kills 100,
But the media only reports on country B, everyone will think B is the bad guy. But reality suggests otherwise.
And if country A happens to be a US ally, and country B an official enemy, its interesting. When there are numerous accounts like this, in different parts of the world, it suggests a motive. Evidence of propaganda carried out by the state.
Also, as citizens of a country, it does no good for the media to report on atrocities committed by enemies. What can we do but bang the drums of war when we hear about Saddam's atrocities? And if we were to hear about the much worse atrocities in Turkey, as extensively, there just may be a large movement in the United States to put pressure on the political leadership in this country to put an end to them, which could have a very real impact over there. I"m not saying don't report on things done by official enemies, but doing so extensively, as they have done with Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan and a dozen others before, inevitably leads to 1 thing.
There are a number of very serious events in history, genocides, for example, that could have been stopped had there been responsible journalism. When Indonesia invaded East Timor (10 days after Kissinger left), the media was absolutley silent about it. Not only was the time spent reporting on an equally atrocious genocide in Cambodia (carried out by an official enemy) but the genocide in East Timor ended with a word from Washington. As soon as people found out about it stopped.
More evidence of propaganda, which in this case cost hundreds of thousands of lives.
The evidence is all around.
I thought the world...Turns out the world thought me
care to elaborate?
Right, because Democracy and liberty means being subservient to power and not fighting for the rights of your fellow man, right?