it hasn't occurred to you that the made for TV "uprising" in this oil rich nation is fake.Ever seen photos of sexy color coordinated Palestinians fighting Israeli oppression on CNN?
The Plantation media is tripping over itself to broadcast tragic footage showing the death of a young Iranian woman allegedly at the hands of pro-Ahmadinejad forces in an effort to rally international opinion against the government of a Muslim nation ... that just happens to be soaking in oil.
A stark contrast to their complete and total refusal to broadcast footage of the hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children killed in Afghanistan and Iraq by U.S. and UK troops.
Neda Agha-Soltan has become a poster child for CIA / United Colors of Benetton revolution in Iran after video of her death were uploaded to You Tube and Twitter moments after she was gunned down in Tehran Saturday.
Now she is being hailed as a “martyr” and “the face of the Iranian protests” by Plantation Media outlets like CNN
The hypocrisy is of Biblical proportion. Hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children have been slaughtered in similar fashion by coalition forces during the bombardment and occupation of Iran's oil rich neighbor Iraq and Afghanistan.
Many of these deaths have been caught on camera. How many has the Plantation media shown you? Where is the video footage from the wedding party in Afghanistan where 23 children and 10 women were killed by coalition warplanes?
The footage of Neda’s death has already been broadcast more times by the Plantation Media than the thousands of victims whose deaths were caught on film in Iraq and Afghanistan COMBINED.
What does the Platation want you to think?
29 comments:
I can't tell from your post what part of this you think is fake, and for whose benefit.
How can you compare protests in Iran to combat in the occupied territories?
It's long been known that there is a fairly affluent segment of society in Iran, while Palestinians are living in what is little more than a very arid prison.
Break it down for me, I'm not sure how you are approaching this.
In the dualist's mind the unrest in Iran is a showdown between Western supported sell-outs and righteous nationalists.
Being a skillful propagandist in his own right, DV knows that accuracy technically matters very little. What counts is the forcefulness and vitality of the projections. It's the reason why he was beguiled by Barack Obama in the last campaign despite the fact that on economic and social issues he was in greater alignment with Ron Paul and Sara Palin.
I compared this to our dealings with China over at my spot.
China is just as oppressive as Iran. In fact, it's probably more oppressive.
When the Chinese refused to let protesters commemorate the anniversary of the Tiannenmen Square incident, it was a brief news brief and we moved on.
When they rounded up grannies and others for the Olympics, we moved on.
When they refused to allow their citizens access to unfiltered Google, we moved on.
We don't talk about toppling China. We don't talk about it's ridiculous human rights violations. We keep taking their money and their goods and we keep our mouths shut. We know they are working against us in many countries, and we keep our mouths shut.
I understand that the media is drawn to easy to quantify conflict, but I also see the rampant hypocrisy at throwing stones at one oppressive regime, and buying toys from another one.
China is just as oppressive as Iran. In fact, it's probably more oppressive.
big man, is either China or Iran as oppressive as is the United States?
"China is just as oppressive as Iran. In fact, it's probably more oppressive."
Orly? What about Peru's recent smashing of an indio uprising? Ever hear about that?
And what about Israel? Aren't they arguably the most oppressive racist apartheid in the world, today? How come South Africa got lambasted for racial apartheid and Mandela hailed a living hero - while Palestinians get labelled terrorists?
Funny how you ignore these far worse offenders, but single out Iran and China. Like a trained parrot to whatever the Zionist neocon media spoonfeeds you. You know nothing less, nothing more.
Anon
You can add Peru, Israel and the U.S. to the list if that makes you feel better.
It doesn't matter to me because I wasn't trying to make a definitve list of oppressive countries.
I was making that point that America picks and chooses which human rights violations it tolerates. That's true with Israel, that's true within our own borders.
The point was the hypocrisy, not making a list of which countries are bad guys.
Anon
You also made some massive assumptions about how I consume media provided information. But, it's cool Byrdeye, I understand what's important to you.
All states have formal and informal systems of social control. What is occurring in Iran reflects tension between state power and political power.
No one in the American Power Elite has any moral grounds for questioning an election in Iran.
Most definitely not the vote-stealing Republicans. Nor the punk-ass Democrats who allowed the Repubs to run a vote fraud train up their ass in 2000 and 2004.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7tjnuG-l6g
Per Paul Craig Roberts.......
In Iran’s system, election fraud has no purpose, because a small select group of ruling mullahs select the candidates who are put on the ballot. If they don’t like an aspiring candidate, they simply don’t put him on the ballot.
When the liberal reformer Khatami ran for president, he won with 70% of the vote and served from 1997-2005. If the mullahs didn’t defraud Khatami of his win, it seems unlikely they would defraud an establishment figure like Mousavi, who was foreign minister in the most conservative government, and is backed by another establishment figure, Rafsanjani.
As Mousavi was seen as Rafsanjani’s man, why is it “unbelievable” that Ahmadinejad defeated Mousavi by the same margin that he defeated Rafsanjani in the previous election?
Neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman let the cat out of the bag that there was an orchestrated “color revolution” in the works.
Timmerman’s organization, Foundation for Democracy, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) for the explicit purpose of promoting democracy in Iran. According to Timmerman, NED money was funneled to “pro-Mousavi groups who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.”
We know that the US funds terrorist organizations inside Iran that are responsible for bombings and other violent acts. It is likely that these terrorist organizations are responsible for the burning buses and other acts of violence that have occurred during the demonstrations in Tehran.
The unexamined question is Mousavi and his motives. Why would Mousavi unleash demonstrations that are obviously being used by a hostile West to discredit the government of the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the US puppet government? Are these the actions of a “moderate”? Or are these the actions of a disgruntled man who kept his disaffection from his colleagues in order to gain the opportunity to discredit the regime with street protests? Is Mousavi being manipulated by organizations funded with US government money?
John Bolton laid out the US strategy. First we try to destabilize the regime. Failing that, we strike them militarily.
As this strategy unfolds, Iranians will pay in lost independence or in blood for the naiveness of its secularized youth and for the mistake the mullahs made in trusting Mousavi.
US killed a million Iraqis already. Don't recall seeing a single one of that footage all over the mainstream news.
Shell has spilled an Exxon Valdez of oil annually, for 50 years, in Nigeria. Talk about oppression. Don't recall any mainstream coverage on that, tho.
So, let's cut the BS out about a single "election martyr." Or is 1 Iranian woman worth more than 1 million Iraqis?
Well, I guess to the corporate media's political agenda, she sho iz!
Guys, I strongly believe that the woman you see dying on tv was just a plant. I think that video was faked.
Honestly, and maybe i'm just too gotdamn cynical lately, it looks fake to me. She looks directly at the camera as she's supposedly "dying". If i'm shot, and seriously bleeding to death, i'm more worried about paramedics getting there than a camera. Also, wouldn't her eye coordination be off a bit if she's lost that much blood. Yet she seems completely aware of what's going on, able to focus effortlessly from the camera to the people who walk up. What about the glazed look that people supposedly get when they're dying? None of that here.
Also, looking at it again-- The bullet wound is apparently between her chest and neck, where the man in blue and white stripes is applying pressure. So why the sudden gushing of blood over her face. It looks to me like a bad acting job, someone who's seen too many slasher flicks and doesn't understand that real deaths don't necessarily look like what you see on tv. (Also notice that the blood appears all over her face only moments after "blue and white striped shirt man" puts his hand near her mouth. Plus, that's one hell of a lot of blood coming out of her face for a chest injury. The wound's too high to have punctured a lung, so why would she be coughing up so much blood. Am I trippin', or does it look like he's got something in his hand that he sprays the blood on her face with?
Why is the blood pooling around her head, and not her torso, because that's what looks better on CNN at 7 in the evening?
I've been researching a ton of police/forensics stuff for a book i'm writing, and this all just looks wrong to me.
Granted I could be wrong, and this could be me putting a collossal digital foot in my mouth, but...
Show me her family.
Tell me when the funeral's gonna be. (Who wants to take bets on her body being cremated, quote, "according to the family's wishes".)
Like doubtin' Thomas said, Show me the stigmata, baby.
Doc,
It didn't look fake to me. If it was she needs an Oscar, and the special effects were dope. Just sayin'.
Doc,
By the way...find your collarbone, put your finger in the space just slightly above it. Under the skin and muscle is the top of your lung (yep it goes that high, you might be surprised at how far down it goes in the back). That area of your lung is called the copula.
Also from the video fair game for injury was any of the following: the lungs, subclavian blood vessels, superior vena cava, arch of the aorta, pulmonary artery, carotid artery, heart, trachea, esophagus--put simply anything in her chest. And you can't rule out any injury by merely looking at the surface ballistic injury. Depending on where the bullet entered (and because they do funny things after impact) she might have had exploration of both her chest AND abdomen if she were to make it to a trauma center, which I doubt. Bullets have been known to tumble, bounce off bone, or fragment and then enter another part of her body. And we don't know the angle of entry, caliber, velocity, type of bullet, or distance.
Why is she bleeding into her nose and mouth? Can't say for sure, however a massive bleed in her chest and injury to the trachea or esophagus could explain it, as could lung injury, left heart failure, neck injury, etc.
Also there's blood coming from her nose while she is laying supine. Remember all the waterboarding talk recently? And the reaction people get when water flows into their nose? Imagine what her reaction would be with a liquid substance flowing into her nasal cavity if she were faking.
So do I think the video is fake? I'm not that cynical and it appears plausible. But until I see a patient being wheeled into the trauma bay I'll reserve judgment.
Yes it's all fake like a good gangsta rapper...
The Doc
I've really tried to ignore most of the Iran coverage but my wife came to me this morning 'cause she was all shook up that they kept showing that chick die on camera. She just thought it was too graphic, even for an adult.
I pointed out to her that she felt that way because rarely does the American news show an AMERICAN die on camera. Let alone die with blood streaming from their bodies. We typically avoid that kind of graphic material unless it features "others."
But, then she described the death scene you just described, and I started shaking my head. I doubt most people would be able to find the camera that easily as they died.
Big Man,
I don't know if I have a good sense of what's graphic anymore having, unfortunately, seen my share of up close and personal death.
I too find it odd that we only are able to watch "others" die horrible deaths. But then again, I find that I'm more saddened when I hear about people with whom I share similarities die. That's human nature I suppose.
Everyone is saying that she's looking into the camera. Maybe Submariner can confirm this. I see her eyes abnormally deviating to the right involuntarily. But again, this is second hand through a camera.
"I too find it odd that we only are able to watch "others" die horrible deaths."
You. Watch. What. You. Are. Shown.
"You. Watch. What. You. Are. Shown."
Of course. That's why it's important to dig deeper for facts and evidence, to make sure what you've been shown is close to the truth. You know I'm consistent.
DMG
I get the natural reaction to feel a connection to people you know.
I'm talking about the way certain lives are devalued by the media.
See, they don't show Americans die like that out of respect for the victims and their families. But, when folks from other countries are getting hurt, that respect stuff goes out the window.
I remember when there was a big debate over whether the news should keep showing hte planes crash into the towers and show people jumping to their deaths. Think about how often we watched that chick in Pakistan get offed, from various angles, and consider why here death wasn't too graphic to show?
Brown people are at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to the value of their lives. The darker you are, the further down you are.
People!.. Did you all forget the multiple people jumping to their deaths from the very tops of the World Trade center... On NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, TNT, HBO, PBS...
Secondly.. We as a nation are soft/spoiled.. We don't have to live with constant massive conflict for now unlike other nations. Maybe it's good we see what the balance of the world is like considering only 13% of U.S. citizens travel outside of the borders.
Big Man,
I agree. Every time I see Nancy Grace on TV this message is reinforced.
Casper
I didn't forget the people jumping from the Towers. I also didn't forget how quickly the news stopped showing that.
And I don't remember seeing pictures of mangled bodies strewn about the street either.
Do you?
You don't learn about the world through pictures of street fighting and dying girls.
The way this conflict as been presented on television has not provided much context about our relationship with Iran, about that country's political system or about the actual politics of the guy who lost the election. What we have received are pictures of police officers beating people wearing green scarves. I don't think that benefits the public or teaches them anything about the world.
Denmark Vesey is right. The public is being trained to view Iran in a certain way to justify some future action. Whether those are the wishes of our president, or some other group, I do not know. But, everyday I'm more convinced that the next step in Iran is going to involve a lot more violence. And Americans will be the ones doing the violence this time.
Were the deaths of the Americans who were beheaded in the Middle East after the wars started shown on tv? I don't remember if I saw it on tv or the internet...
Big Man Said..
"The public is being trained to view Iran in a certain way to justify some future action."
So if no future action materializes then DV and you are wrong in your assesment correct?? I am personally not so paranoid to believe every news report is setting me up for a headfake so Obama can come down the middle for a Kobe dunk on Iran! I think many times people (DV) overthink! Thus trip themselves up!
Pink
"Were the deaths of the Americans who were beheaded in the Middle East after the wars started shown on tv?"
Def. on the web Pink.. and enough on TV.. Needless to say.. the reality is that in either case it wasn't american journalist who recorded Neda dying or the beheadings. Which is my point. Oversees their tolerance for such events is beyond ours (U.S.)Only Hollywood has license to create and display at $12 a head. Only the underexposed turn it into conspiracy theory number #105..
Casper
Calling my comments paranoia is a cop out.
I don't have a reputation for being paranoid, nor can you point to me looking for the bogeyman behind every news report.
I broke down exactly how hypocritical the current news coverage is on my blog yesterday, check it out if you are so inclined.
When the Bush Administration wanted to invade Iraq, how did they set it up?
With news reports about WMDs and chemical weapons, talk about Iraqi's welcoming us as saviors and kinds of other crap.
Reporters were fed BS reports about weapons, they were fed classified info on CIA agents.
If you think politicans and agenda makers don't use the media to advance certain causes, you are woefully ignorant of how the media business works. Sometimes the reporters are in on the game, other times they are just pawns.
It's not paranoia, it's how the game works. Look at the images we're being fed. Ask yourself why this particular conflict is so important, why this particular countries election problems are worth our concern? Then ponder why people are pushing for some sort of decisive action from our president. Why the media tone is all about how "something must be done."
Then think about our past history with Iran. The far past and the current past. Think about which countries hate Iran, think about which political groups have used WAR with Iran as a talking point for months. Then connect the dots.
If you think all that stuff isn't connected, it's not because I'm paranoid, it because you refuse to actually consider that their ulterior motives to most actions.
Casper
Did you read my post?
They showed the chick DIE on the 10 p.m. news. My wife watched it. She was disturbed and wondered why they showed it.
You just said:
Needless to say.. the reality is that in either case it wasn't american journalist who recorded Neda dying or the beheadings. Which is my point. Oversees their tolerance for such events is beyond ours (U.S.)Only Hollywood has license to create and display at $12 a head. Only the underexposed turn it into conspiracy theory number #105..
Now explain this to me since I'm so underexposed, if we have a low tolerance for graphic violence in our news, why are we showing an Iranian girl DIE on the news?
Doesn't that seem odd? We don't typically show graphic death scenes, but will make this exception when it comes to this Iranian girl.
Why?
I already gave my reason for why it occurred, now you present a counterpoint that is actually grounded in reality. I have actually studied media presentation, I have a graduate degree in a related field. You explain to me where I'm wrong about how the media presents death and dying in other countries. You compare the "body shots" from 911 to the body shots from the Asian Tsunami.
You'll find that "others" are not afforded the same level of humanity as Americans, particulary brown "others."
Post a Comment