Feed aggregator

Fréttir

Gunnar Skúli bloggar - Fös, 15/08/2014 - 21:59

Hvað eru fréttir? Hvað er mikilvægt fyrir almenning að vita um og ræða sín á milli. Ritstjórnarstefna fjölmiðils ákveður hvað er fréttnæmt eða ekki fyrir almenning. Þar sem stór hluti stærstu fjölmiðla heims er í eigu sömu aðila þá er það fámennur hópur og skoðanir þeirra sem skammta fréttir. ”Main stream” fréttir eru fréttir þeirra sem eiga miðlana og fjandsamleg yfirtaka á DV er kannski eitthvað í þessum dúr, hver veit. Það hentar er ekki Hr ”main stream” að það sé verið að bögga stjórnvöld sem að öllu jöfnu fylgja honum að málum. Að missa DV inn í heilaþvottaskrif elítunnar væri skaði. Það er frétt.

án titils

Sólveig Anna Jónsdóttir bloggar - Mán, 11/08/2014 - 22:53

Þetta kvæði er tileinkað konunum í Sjálfstæðisflokknum. Það er frekar lélegt og ort á korteri, en það verður að hafa það. Mér bara leið allt í einu eins og ég yrði að semja litla vísu, sérstaklega fyrir þær. Eitthvað smá flipp, eins og ég væri í Framsókn.

Allavega, hér er lítil partýpulsa handa ykkur, konur í Sjálfstæðisflokknum, ég er enginn Ahab og þið allsekki Moby Dick, ekki einu sinni Hanna Birna, ég er ekki með þráhyggju, allsekki, ég bara lagði mig og þegar ég vaknaði gat ég ekki hugsað um neitt annað í smástund. Ekkert nema ykkur.

- – – – -

Heyrðu?

Mætti ég kannski fá að skreppa?

Heldurðu að ég mætti nokkuð fá að gera eitthvað annað?

Ég var að spá hvort ég mætti kannski fá smá pláss einhversstaðar annarsstaðar?

Bara eitthvað lítið, bara fyrir mig.

Þá getur þú verið í friði.

- – – – -

Í tíuþúsund ár höfum við legið hérna, undir þessum feldi

Þessu flísteppi

Eða á þessum sólstól, undir rauða teppinu

Í tíuþúsund ár en mikið voru þau fljót að líða

Mér líður eiginlega eins og allt hafi gerst í gær

Í mesta lagi fyrir 10 árum síðan, að allt hafi gerst í síðasta lagi þá

Í gær fyrir þúsund árum

Fyrir tíuþúsund árum

Hvað tíminn er fljótur að líða

Mig minnir að það hafi verið eitthvað í gangi þegar ég lagðist

Á sólstólinn, það var ótrúlega kósý

Ég ætlað að lesa en dottaði í staðinn

Í tíuþúsund ár

Og það dró ekki ský fyrir sólu

Svona getur lífið verið notalegt hugsaði ég og var ánægð með að hafa lagst

Ansi er þetta góð hugmynd

En ég verð að viðurkenna að stóllinn var þarna, tilbúinn

Alveg eins og þau sem lögðust á undan mér í þessi árþúsund,

Það var allt tilbúið fyrir þau, bæði teppið og feldurinn

Auðvitað legst maður þegar allt er svona kósý,

Við í það minnsta, auðvitað gerum við það

Við höfum nægan tíma, ein þúsöld einn lúr undir mjúku teppi

Það var eitthvað að gerast minnir mig

En því miður er ég ekki alveg viss hvað það var, maður getur ekki munað allt.

En auðvitað lagðist ég.

Hver gengi fram hjá sólstólnum án þess að leggjast

Enginn sem ég þekki

Enginn sem ég hef þekkt í tíuþúsund ár

 

Hvað var aftur að gerast þegar ég lagði mig?

Ekki að mér finnist neitt óþægilegt að muna það ekki

En samt

En ég er auðvitað nývöknuð

Eftir allar þessar þúsaldir

Var ekki einhver að reyna að leggja sig?

Minnir mig

Hann var með svefnpoka

Og vekjaraklukku

Ég man ekki alveg hvernig þetta var

En hann var með svefnpoka og vekjaraklukku

Alveg rétt

Mér fannst mjög óþægilegt að heyra í klukkunni

Þetta var lítil klukka en tikkið var frekar hátt

Svona miðað við

Sérstaklega miðað við að við höfum ekki verið að nota svona klukkur

Frekar ósmekklegt fannst mér

Minnir mig

Að taka með sér klukku

En ok, hann ætlaði náttúrlega að leggja sig í svefnpoka

Það er öðruvísi en að leggjast undir feld

Hlýtur að vera, annars veit ég ekkert um það

En það hlýtur bara að vera

Þú getur varla notað svefnpoka ef þú ætlar að leggja þig í árþúsund

Þá þarftu teppi eða feld

Og sólstól ef sólin skín

Sem hún gerði einmitt

Allavega, okkur öllum fannst

Við vorum sammála um það

Að finnast þetta tikk, að finnast það satt best að segja  óþægilegt

Þannig var það bara

En ég man ekki alveg hvernig þetta var

En ég man að hann var með svefnpoka og ætlaði að leggjast í hann

En einhver sagði, hann er of sver fyrir þennan poka, alltof sver

Sjáiði, hann kemst ekkert í þennan svefnpoka

Þetta er viðkvæmur poki, hann á aldrei eftir að þola svona

Það segir sig sjálft

Og í tíuþúsund ár?

Það er augljóst að þessi poki á ekki eftir að endast í tíuþúsund ár

Ef þú ætlar að leggja þig í þúsaldir, eins og við gerum hér

Höfum alltaf gert

Við höfum aldrei notað svefnpoka

Þetta gengur aldrei

En ég man ekki alveg hvað gerðist

Ég er auðvitað nývöknuð

Eftir langan tíma

Það er alltaf þannig eftir svona langan tíma

Mig minnir að þetta hafi verið svona

Það var maður með svefnpoka og klukku

Við vorum sammála um að það gengi ekki og hann fór

Tók þetta  óþolandi tikk með sér

Og allt of lítinn svefnpoka

Minnir mig

En ég var auðvitað ekki að fylgjast sérstaklega vel með

Var að leggja mig

Sólin skein

Ég ætlaði að lesa í smástund en dottaði eiginlega um leið og ég lagðist

Sólin skein, þetta var ótrúlega notalegt

Eins og alltaf

Í tíuþúsund ár

Eins og alltaf

Eins og það hafi gerst í gær

Við lögðumst útaf, með teppi

Eins og við höfum alltaf gert

Í tíuþúsund ár.

 


Börnin á Gaza

Gunnar Skúli bloggar - Lau, 02/08/2014 - 20:52

Morðin og limlestingarnar á Palestínumönnum eru myndbrot úr mikið stærri mynd. Ísrael er nauðsynlegt fyrir heimsvaldastefnu Bandaríkjanna. Það sem helgar þá stefnu er að ná undir sig auðlindum stórfyrirtækjum til arðráns. Þess vegna eru Bandaríkin verkfæri elítunnar. Að halda að það skipti einhverju máli hver er forseti Bandaríkjanna er miskilningur. Sama gildir um Evrópu, það er enginn munur á stefnu stjórnmálaflokka gagnvart hagsmunum elítunnar, elítan ræður för.
Elítan er nafn- og andlitslaus og illa skilgreind en hún stjórnar. Hún samanstendur af bönkum, seðlabönkum og alþjóðlegum stórfyrirtækjum. Hún hefur náð undir sig fjölmiðlum þannig að hún skapar almenningsálitið. Hefur gríðaleg ítök innan hergagnaframleiðslunnar, leyniþjónustu og þinga þjóðríkja. Markmiðið eru völd og hámarks gróði.
Palestínumenn skipta elítuna engu máli.
Elítan stjórnar öllum ríkisstjórnum sem við kjósum þannig að ekki er hægt að minnka völd hennar með kosningum. Það sem veitir elítunni sérstöðu er að bankar eru hluti hennar og þannig skuldsetur hún alla og gerir alla háða sér. Skiptir ekki máli hvort um er að ræða einstaklinga, fyrirtæki eða þjóðríki. Bankar hafa einkarétt á því að búa til peninga sem skuld og vistfræðilega er það fóðrið sem gefur þeim valdið til að stjórna heiminum.
Limlestingar og morð á Palestínumönnum vekur með okkur andstyggð á verkfærum elítunnar.
Til að skapa réttlæti er nauðsynlegt að afnema einkarétt banka til að búa til peninga sem skuld. Það er forsendan fyrir völdum elítunnar. Til að skapa réttltæti verðum við að færa það vald aftur til almennings. Það er það fyrsta sem við verðum að gera og hefur í raun lítið með pólitík að gera. Þjóðríki verða ein að hafa valdið til að búa til peninga en ekki einkafyrirtæki og þá mun hið lýðræðislega vald almennings hafa eithvað að segja. Þá getum við farið að rökræða mismunandi pólitík, hvernig við ráðstöfum peningunum.
Von barnanna á Gaza er að við hættum að kljúfa okkur niður í mismunandi pólitíska flokka og sameinumst um að færa valdið til að búa til peninga aftur til almennings frá einkafyrirtækjum. Þá fyrst getum við stöðvað blóðbaðið. Eða er pólitísk rétthugsun mikilvægari?

 

'Disgustingly Biased' - The Corporate Media On The Gaza Massacre

Media Lens - Fim, 24/07/2014 - 11:01

Soon after Malaysian Airlines MH17 crashed near Donetsk, Ukraine on July 18, killing 298 people, the BBC website quickly, and rightly, set up a 'LIVE' feed with rolling reports and commentary on the disaster. This was clearly an important and dramatic event involving horrific loss of life with serious political implications. The public would, of course, be searching for the latest news.

However, since July 8, ten days prior to the crash, Israeli armed forces had been bombarding the trapped civilian population of Gaza with airstrikes, drone strikes and naval shelling. As the massive Israeli assault ramped up on July 9, the World section of the BBC News website had this as its headline:

'Israel under renewed Hamas attack'

By July 18, around 300 people had been killed in Gaza, 80% of them civilians. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a key political issue of our time, one that was clearly developing by the minute after July 8. And yet at no point had the BBC set up a 'LIVE' feed with rolling news.

That finally changed on July 20 after so many days in which so many Palestinians had been killed. Why July 20? The answer appears to be found in the fourth entry of the live feed under the title 'Breaking News':

'Some 13 Israeli soldiers were killed overnight in Gaza, news agencies, quoting Israeli military sources, say. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the nation shortly.'

Despite this small number of military deaths compared to the Palestinian toll, it seems clear that the killing of the Israeli troops triggered the BBC live feed. It focused intensely on these deaths, with entries of this kind:

'Ben White, writer tweets: Israel has lost more soldiers in a 3 day old ground offensive than it did during Cast Lead & Pillar of Defense combined (12).'

And:

'View to the Mid East, a writer in Ashdod, Israel tweets: One of the soldiers who was killed in Gaza tonight prays at the same synagogue I go to. Grew up in the same neighbourhood.'

The feed incorporated no less than five photographs from two funerals of the Israeli soldiers but none from the far more numerous Palestinian funerals (one picture showed Palestinian relatives collecting a body from a morgue), with these captions:

'Friends and relatives of Israeli Sergeant Adar Barsano mourn during his funeral at the military cemetery in the northern Israeli city of Nahariya.'

And:

'Sagit Greenberg, the wife of Israeli soldier Maj Amotz Greenberg, mourns during his funeral in the central town of Hod Hasharon.'

Obviously, Israeli suffering also merits compassion, but these military deaths were overshadowed by a far higher loss of Palestinian lives, most of them civilian men, women and children. The toll currently stands at 746 Palestinians killed and 4,640 wounded. Israel has suffered 32 military and two civilian deaths. One foreign worker from Thailand has also been killed.

In the following days (and at time of writing) the live feed was cancelled; a period that has seen hundreds of Palestinian deaths and a handful of Israeli military deaths.

For some time on the morning of July 21, the sole Gaza content on the BBC News home page was 'Breaking News' of an 'Israeli soldier missing in Gaza'.

Remarkably, on the morning of July 23, when 18 Palestinians were killed, the BBC set up a live feed for the wrecked Italian cruise liner Costa Concordia, which showed the ship being towed to Genoa. There was no live feed for Gaza.

The BBC has supplied names, ages, pictures and emotive background stories of the Malaysian air crash victims while, with rare exceptions, Palestinian dead have been presented as nameless figures, briefly mentioned, then forgotten.

The level of BBC bias was emphasised by an article headline that placed inverted commas around the siege in Gaza, as if it were a matter for debate: "Palestinian PM says lift Gaza 'siege' as part of ceasefire". The BBC subsequently changed the title, but a tweet promoting the article with the original wording remains.

The BBC has also implied that 'Rockets fired from Gaza' are comparable to 'Gaza targets hit by Israel'. Readers are to understand that attempted attacks by unguided, low-tech rockets are comparable to actual bombings by state of the art bombs, missiles and shells. The BBC's source? 'Israel Defence Forces.'

On July 21, BBC News at Ten presenter Huw Edwards asked a colleague live on air:

'...the Israelis saying they'll carry on as long as necessary to stop the Hamas rocket attacks. Do you detect any signs at all that there's a hope of a coming together in the next few days or weeks, or not?'

In other words, BBC News presented Hamas rocket attacks as the stumbling block to peace, exactly conforming to Israeli state propaganda.

In a report on the same edition of News at Ten, the BBC's world affairs editor, John Fidler-Simpson CBE, asserted that 'one reason why casualties on the two sides are so out of proportion' is because 'Israel has developed the world's most effective anti-missile defence'.

This suggested a more or less equal fight with Israel simply better able to protect itself. Fidler-Simpson added:

'The Iron Dome system's ability to knock Hamas missiles out of the sky has been a remarkable achievement for Israel during this crisis. The success rate is quite phenomenal.'

Back in the real world, weapons experts Ted Postol of MIT and Richard Lloyd of Tesla Laboratory, argue that claims for Iron Dome are wildly exaggerated, estimating a success rate of less than 5 per cent. Peter Coy of BloombergBusinessweek comments:

'Lloyd e-mailed me a copy of a 28-page analysis that's the most detailed critique yet of the holes in the Iron Dome system - holes so big that, if he's right, would justify calling it Iron Sieve.'

BBC bias has also been typified by its downplaying, or complete blanking, of large-scale demonstrations in several UK cities protesting BBC coverage. As activist Jonathon Shafi noted of the BBC's lack of interest:

'It is misinformation of the worst, and it is an insult to journalism.'

After the four Palestinian Bakr boys, aged between 9 and 11, were killed by an Israeli shell, the New York Times headline on July 16 read:

'Boys Drawn to Gaza Beach, and Into Center of Mideast Strife'

This worked well to obscure the truth that the boys had been killed while playing football on a beach. Artist Amir Schiby produced a wonderful, moving tribute to the Bakr boys.

Even indisputable evidence here and here that Israel had fired on hospitals in Gaza, major war crimes, brought little outrage from politicians and media. Jonathan Whittall, Head of Humanitarian Analysis at Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF), reminded the world (citing MSF General Director Christopher Stokes on the crisis in Libya in 2012):

'Our role is to provide medical care to war casualties and sick detainees, not to repeatedly treat the same patients between torture sessions.'

Despite the unequal battle and high civilian death toll, no high-profile advocates of the West's 'responsibility to protect' ('R2P') civilians in Iraq, Libya and Syria have been calling for 'intervention'.

We asked passionate 'R2Pers' like David Aaronovitch, Jonathan Freedland and Menzies Campbell if they felt 'we must do something'. They did not reply. Freedland commented in a BBC interview that the death toll was 'very lopsided' – a polite euphemism for a massacre that, according to Unicef, has claimed 10 children per day. E-International Relations website reports:

'While the conflict has generated near blanket international media coverage it has been strangely ignored by the three most prominent and vociferous organisations established to promote the idea of "The Responsibility to Protect", namely The International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect (ICRtoP), the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P) and the Asia Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (APCR2P)...

'Since the operation began these groups have published myriad tweets, posts and articles – on issues ranging from the rights of women, the treatment of refugees, mass atrocity cries and the provision of medical aid... Yet, coverage of the crisis in Gaza has been negligible.'

'Disgustingly Biased' - The Corporate Media On The Gaza Massacre

Media Lens - Fim, 24/07/2014 - 11:01

Soon after Malaysian Airlines MH17 crashed near Donetsk, Ukraine on July 18, killing 298 people, the BBC website quickly, and rightly, set up a 'LIVE' feed with rolling reports and commentary on the disaster. This was clearly an important and dramatic event involving horrific loss of life with serious political implications. The public would, of course, be searching for the latest news.

However, since July 8, ten days prior to the crash, Israeli armed forces had been bombarding the trapped civilian population of Gaza with airstrikes, drone strikes and naval shelling. As the massive Israeli assault ramped up on July 9, the World section of the BBC News website had this as its headline:

'Israel under renewed Hamas attack'

By July 18, around 300 people had been killed in Gaza, 80% of them civilians. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a key political issue of our time, one that was clearly developing by the minute after July 8. And yet at no point had the BBC set up a 'LIVE' feed with rolling news.

That finally changed on July 20 after so many days in which so many Palestinians had been killed. Why July 20? The answer appears to be found in the fourth entry of the live feed under the title 'Breaking News':

'Some 13 Israeli soldiers were killed overnight in Gaza, news agencies, quoting Israeli military sources, say. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the nation shortly.'

Despite this small number of military deaths compared to the Palestinian toll, it seems clear that the killing of the Israeli troops triggered the BBC live feed. It focused intensely on these deaths, with entries of this kind:

'Ben White, writer tweets: Israel has lost more soldiers in a 3 day old ground offensive than it did during Cast Lead & Pillar of Defense combined (12).'

And:

'View to the Mid East, a writer in Ashdod, Israel tweets: One of the soldiers who was killed in Gaza tonight prays at the same synagogue I go to. Grew up in the same neighbourhood.'

The feed incorporated no less than five photographs from two funerals of the Israeli soldiers but none from the far more numerous Palestinian funerals (one picture showed Palestinian relatives collecting a body from a morgue), with these captions:

'Friends and relatives of Israeli Sergeant Adar Barsano mourn during his funeral at the military cemetery in the northern Israeli city of Nahariya.'

And:

'Sagit Greenberg, the wife of Israeli soldier Maj Amotz Greenberg, mourns during his funeral in the central town of Hod Hasharon.'

Obviously, Israeli suffering also merits compassion, but these military deaths were overshadowed by a far higher loss of Palestinian lives, most of them civilian men, women and children. The toll currently stands at 746 Palestinians killed and 4,640 wounded. Israel has suffered 32 military and two civilian deaths. One foreign worker from Thailand has also been killed.

In the following days (and at time of writing) the live feed was cancelled; a period that has seen hundreds of Palestinian deaths and a handful of Israeli military deaths.

For some time on the morning of July 21, the sole Gaza content on the BBC News home page was 'Breaking News' of an 'Israeli soldier missing in Gaza'.

Remarkably, on the morning of July 23, when 18 Palestinians were killed, the BBC set up a live feed for the wrecked Italian cruise liner Costa Concordia, which showed the ship being towed to Genoa. There was no live feed for Gaza.

The BBC has supplied names, ages, pictures and emotive background stories of the Malaysian air crash victims while, with rare exceptions, Palestinian dead have been presented as nameless figures, briefly mentioned, then forgotten.

The level of BBC bias was emphasised by an article headline that placed inverted commas around the siege in Gaza, as if it were a matter for debate: "Palestinian PM says lift Gaza 'siege' as part of ceasefire". The BBC subsequently changed the title, but a tweet promoting the article with the original wording remains.

The BBC has also implied that 'Rockets fired from Gaza' are comparable to 'Gaza targets hit by Israel'. Readers are to understand that attempted attacks by unguided, low-tech rockets are comparable to actual bombings by state of the art bombs, missiles and shells. The BBC's source? 'Israel Defence Forces.'

On July 21, BBC News at Ten presenter Huw Edwards asked a colleague live on air:

'...the Israelis saying they'll carry on as long as necessary to stop the Hamas rocket attacks. Do you detect any signs at all that there's a hope of a coming together in the next few days or weeks, or not?'

In other words, BBC News presented Hamas rocket attacks as the stumbling block to peace, exactly conforming to Israeli state propaganda.

In a report on the same edition of News at Ten, the BBC's world affairs editor, John Fidler-Simpson CBE, asserted that 'one reason why casualties on the two sides are so out of proportion' is because 'Israel has developed the world's most effective anti-missile defence'.

This suggested a more or less equal fight with Israel simply better able to protect itself. Fidler-Simpson added:

'The Iron Dome system's ability to knock Hamas missiles out of the sky has been a remarkable achievement for Israel during this crisis. The success rate is quite phenomenal.'

Back in the real world, weapons experts Ted Postol of MIT and Richard Lloyd of Tesla Laboratory, argue that claims for Iron Dome are wildly exaggerated, estimating a success rate of less than 5 per cent. Peter Coy of BloombergBusinessweek comments:

'Lloyd e-mailed me a copy of a 28-page analysis that's the most detailed critique yet of the holes in the Iron Dome system - holes so big that, if he's right, would justify calling it Iron Sieve.'

BBC bias has also been typified by its downplaying, or complete blanking, of large-scale demonstrations in several UK cities protesting BBC coverage. As activist Jonathon Shafi noted of the BBC's lack of interest:

'It is misinformation of the worst, and it is an insult to journalism.'

After the four Palestinian Bakr boys, aged between 9 and 11, were killed by an Israeli shell, the New York Times headline on July 16 read:

'Boys Drawn to Gaza Beach, and Into Center of Mideast Strife'

This worked well to obscure the truth that the boys had been killed while playing football on a beach. Artist Amir Schiby produced a wonderful, moving tribute to the Bakr boys.

Even indisputable evidence here and here that Israel had fired on hospitals in Gaza, major war crimes, brought little outrage from politicians and media. Jonathan Whittall, Head of Humanitarian Analysis at Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF), reminded the world (citing MSF General Director Christopher Stokes on the crisis in Libya in 2012):

'Our role is to provide medical care to war casualties and sick detainees, not to repeatedly treat the same patients between torture sessions.'

Despite the unequal battle and high civilian death toll, no high-profile advocates of the West's 'responsibility to protect' ('R2P') civilians in Iraq, Libya and Syria have been calling for 'intervention'.

We asked passionate 'R2Pers' like David Aaronovitch, Jonathan Freedland and Menzies Campbell if they felt 'we must do something'. They did not reply. Freedland commented in a BBC interview that the death toll was 'very lopsided' – a polite euphemism for a massacre that, according to Unicef, has claimed 10 children per day. E-International Relations website reports:

'While the conflict has generated near blanket international media coverage it has been strangely ignored by the three most prominent and vociferous organisations established to promote the idea of "The Responsibility to Protect", namely The International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect (ICRtoP), the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P) and the Asia Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (APCR2P)...

'Since the operation began these groups have published myriad tweets, posts and articles – on issues ranging from the rights of women, the treatment of refugees, mass atrocity cries and the provision of medical aid... Yet, coverage of the crisis in Gaza has been negligible.'

Glæpurinn

Gunnar Skúli bloggar - Lau, 19/07/2014 - 21:47

Heimsfréttirnar eru ömurlegar þessa dagana. Ísraelar murka lífið úr nágrönnum sínum, jafnt ungum sem öldnum. Í Bagdat og nágrenni sprengja þeir hver annan í loft upp og okkur er trúað fyrir því af heimspressunni að slíkt eigi sér upptök í mismunandi trúarsetningum. Farþegaflugvél hrapaði yfir Úkraínu og Rússum er kennt um það. Reyndar er rannsóknin á slysinu ekki hafin en söngurinn minnir okkur á þegar Afganistan var sprengt í tætlur eftir 11. september, hann bjó reyndar í Pakistan eftir allt saman. Síðan er hungursneyð hér og þar í Afríku, heimsálfa sem brauðfætt gæti allan heiminn. Að lokum, þá rignir svakalega mikið á Íslandi.
Sjálfur liggur maður á strönd í Karlskrona í Svíþjóð og les bókina ”En man som heter Ove”. Á milli þess sem maður bælir niður hlátursrokurnar í kæfandi hitanum heyrir maður í börnunum leika sér frjáls í öllum regnbogans litum og enginn spyr þau hvort þau séu réttdræp hér og nú, vegna einhvers, enda væri slíkt talið glæpur.
Á Íslandi er núna Ríkisstjórn sem vill afhenda fáum útvöldum öll auðæfi þjóðarinnar. Hvað svo sem það kostar. Valdhafar heimsins vilja afhenda fáum útvöldum öll auðæfi, hvað svo sem það kostar. Það er það sem við heyrum um í heimsfréttunum enda er það ekki talið glæpur.
Þarfir sérhvers manns eru einfaldar og skiptir þá ekki máli trú eða litur. Vatn og matur á borðið og að börnin séu hamingjusöm. Ekki þvælast fyrir öðrum og skapa sér og sínum örugga framtíð.
Að auðgast á kostnað annarra hvað svo sem það kostar með öllum tiltækum ráðum; að ná einokun, að tryggja sér völd, að hertaka auðlindir; að koma af stað styrjöldum eða hungursneyð, að skapa smá bankakreppu eða hvað sem er, er ekki glæpur í heimsfréttunum. Það eru bara hörmungar einhverra.
Kannski er það mesti glæpurinn að liggja í leti á strönd og segja ekki það augljósa, hinir útvöldu eru ekki við og þeir eru í minnihluta.

A Tale Of Two Titans – Jon Snow of C4 News And Jeremy Bowen of BBC News

Media Lens - Fös, 11/07/2014 - 00:58

On July 4, Independence Day in the United States, Channel 4 News broadcast a Jon Snow interview with Hillary Clinton, former US Secretary of State and presumed presidential candidate. For a self-proclaimed 'pinko liberal' like Snow, this was a glorious opportunity to ask hard-hitting questions about US foreign policy and Clinton's own role in shoring up the American Empire.

In the event, the interview was largely a series of soft questions, culminating in a cosy epilogue about Clinton looking forward to being a granny. As John Hilley of the Zenpolitics blog observed, it was 'a safely-moderated version [of what] passes for "probing journalism".'

'Where', asked Hilley, 'was the serious indictment of US-directed murder and mayhem in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt and Syria? What of Washington's protection of terror state Saudi Arabia?'

Why did Snow ask Clinton a loaded question about the West's supposed 'failure' to press Israel on illegal settlements; as though the US, in particular, is a hapless and helpless bystander to Israel's major international crimes?

Hilley continued:

'why didn't Snow highlight America's role as a principal and criminal supporter of Israel, and specify the $3 billion a year it gifts the Israeli state to continue its brutal military occupation? Why didn't he call out the US as a fundamental cause of the problem, and grill Clinton on her own complicit part in that "failure"?'

Also deeply unimpressed by Snow's performance was Media Lens reader Ed Murray. He sent the journalist a scathing email in which he described the interview as 'a party political broadcast on behalf of the American Imperialist Party.'

We highlighted Murray's email via Twitter:

'An uncomfortable email for @jonsnowC4 to read - which he will likely ignore or brush away.'

Snow chose the second option:

'Intriguingly, Media Lens post delightfully critical material, but no option to reply!'

This was a peculiar, clodhopping response from a veteran journalist with, one might think, the skills to navigate resources and dig out information. But somehow Snow had missed that Media Lens has a messageboard where he is welcome to post, an email address to contact us, and a lively Facebook page. He could have replied to our 'delightfully critical material' on Twitter. He could even have responded via his own Channel 4 blog which reaches a national, indeed global, audience. Instead, he went for another diversionary tactic:

'Media Lens: 18,000 Tweets; 14,000 followers/ JSnow 8,500 Tweets 424,000 folowers:If only you were more constructive, you might help!'

This turgid display of Twitter willy-waving was, as more polite and erudite readers pointed out, merely argumentum ad populum. By Snow's logic, perhaps we should bow down before the political wisdom of Justin Bieber (27,200 tweets and 52.7 million followers) or perhaps the remarkably tweet-efficient Beyoncé (only 8 tweets, but a stonking 13.4 million followers).  

A Tale Of Two Titans – Jon Snow of C4 News And Jeremy Bowen of BBC News

Media Lens - Fös, 11/07/2014 - 00:58

On July 4, Independence Day in the United States, Channel 4 News broadcast a Jon Snow interview with Hillary Clinton, former US Secretary of State and presumed presidential candidate. For a self-proclaimed 'pinko liberal' like Snow, this was a glorious opportunity to ask hard-hitting questions about US foreign policy and Clinton's own role in shoring up the American Empire.

In the event, the interview was largely a series of soft questions, culminating in a cosy epilogue about Clinton looking forward to being a granny. As John Hilley of the Zenpolitics blog observed, it was 'a safely-moderated version [of what] passes for "probing journalism".'

'Where', asked Hilley, 'was the serious indictment of US-directed murder and mayhem in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt and Syria? What of Washington's protection of terror state Saudi Arabia?'

Why did Snow ask Clinton a loaded question about the West's supposed 'failure' to press Israel on illegal settlements; as though the US, in particular, is a hapless and helpless bystander to Israel's major international crimes?

Hilley continued:

'why didn't Snow highlight America's role as a principal and criminal supporter of Israel, and specify the $3 billion a year it gifts the Israeli state to continue its brutal military occupation? Why didn't he call out the US as a fundamental cause of the problem, and grill Clinton on her own complicit part in that "failure"?'

Also deeply unimpressed by Snow's performance was Media Lens reader Ed Murray. He sent the journalist a scathing email in which he described the interview as 'a party political broadcast on behalf of the American Imperialist Party.'

We highlighted Murray's email via Twitter:

'An uncomfortable email for @jonsnowC4 to read - which he will likely ignore or brush away.'

Snow chose the second option:

'Intriguingly, Media Lens post delightfully critical material, but no option to reply!'

This was a peculiar, clodhopping response from a veteran journalist with, one might think, the skills to navigate resources and dig out information. But somehow Snow had missed that Media Lens has a messageboard where he is welcome to post, an email address to contact us, and a lively Facebook page. He could have replied to our 'delightfully critical material' on Twitter. He could even have responded via his own Channel 4 blog which reaches a national, indeed global, audience. Instead, he went for another diversionary tactic:

'Media Lens: 18,000 Tweets; 14,000 followers/ JSnow 8,500 Tweets 424,000 folowers:If only you were more constructive, you might help!'

This turgid display of Twitter willy-waving was, as more polite and erudite readers pointed out, merely argumentum ad populum. By Snow's logic, perhaps we should bow down before the political wisdom of Justin Bieber (27,200 tweets and 52.7 million followers) or perhaps the remarkably tweet-efficient Beyoncé (only 8 tweets, but a stonking 13.4 million followers).  

Syndicate content