Senate Investigation: Stories Planted in US Media to Shape Opinion

[wehateporn]

People are starting to realize that most of what's in the mainstream media is not true; it's actually there to push other people's objectives.

It's interesting when it becomes official, below they discuss a Senate Investigation into foreign attempts to manipulate the US media.

[Rochard]

This doesn't surprise me at all really.... I'm sure it's been going on for years!

[spazlabz]

rt.com, I read it's corporate profile and it is pretty interesting. I wonder if DirecTV will ever carry it. it seems at first blush to be unbiased

[Phoenix]

that group is a bit controversial as well

[Wizzo]

Fridge media is so much more un-biased then mainstream media! LOL

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

that group is a bit controversial as well

truth is always controversial

[MetaMan]

Israelis run American and Americans are stupid. Nothing new here.

You can see it reading GFY. Peoples opinions are shaped strictly by what the media says is the right opinion.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by spazlabz

rt.com, I read it's corporate profile and it is pretty interesting. I wonder if DirecTV will ever carry it. it seems at first blush to be unbiased

They are very anti US/Western Establishment and of course pro Russia. They pretty much "only" cover US related news that is bad for the US. So while it might be accurate they have no balance of good & bad it's only what is beneficial for Russia. (ie just like FOX news only covers what is beneficial for the Right Wing)

On the other hand they have overwhelming amount of "good" news story based around Russia's interests.

I mean really if you can't go to their site and see they are just as bad as Fox news in regard to funneling the viewer into the mindset they want, then you seriously have your eyes closed.

I did this once before.. but lets try it again..

Example of news headlines currently on RT.com in their "US" section..


1)Congress on the move to legalize torture
2)Judge won't let Citigroup get away with fraud
3)Military contractor launches smear campaign against Medal of Honor hero
4)Rand Paul vs Battlefield USA
5)Battlefield US: Americans face arrest as war criminals under Army state law


This shit goes on and on...nothing but Doom & Gloom reporting when it revolves around the US or our allies. Yet if the reporting revolves around Russia it's either defending themselves from evil America and Europe or rainbows & unions in motherland Russia.

RT is about as biased as they come.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by crockett

They are very anti US/Western Establishment and of course pro Russia. They pretty much "only" cover US related news that is bad for the US. So while it might be accurate they have no balance of good & bad it's only what is beneficial for Russia. (ie just like FOX news only covers what is beneficial for the Right Wing)

On the other hand they have overwhelming amount of "good" news story based around Russia's interests.

I mean really if you can't go to their site and see they are just as bad as Fox news in regard to funneling the viewer into the mindset they want, then you seriously have your eyes closed.

I did this once before.. but lets try it again..

Example of news headlines currently on RT.com in their "US" section..


1)Congress on the move to legalize torture
2)Judge won't let Citigroup get away with fraud
3)Military contractor launches smear campaign against Medal of Honor hero
4)Rand Paul vs Battlefield USA
5)Battlefield US: Americans face arrest as war criminals under Army state law


This shit goes on and on...nothing but Doom & Gloom reporting when it revolves around the US or our allies. Yet if the reporting revolves around Russia it's either defending themselves from evil America and Europe or rainbows & unions in motherland Russia.

RT is about as biased as they come.

koolaid.. it's not just for dinner.

for all this blab, you didn't really talk about the very real fact there IS a senate investigation and this WAS their findings.

[_Richard_]

and to move this conversation along, i am a staunch support of democractic process, not a communist, yet feel that if the poor fire the shots, they should call the shots too

[Fletch XXX]

not surprised at all.

is anyone?

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by crockett

They are very anti US/Western Establishment and of course pro Russia. They pretty much "only" cover US related news that is bad for the US. So while it might be accurate they have no balance of good & bad it's only what is beneficial for Russia. (ie just like FOX news only covers what is beneficial for the Right Wing)

On the other hand they have overwhelming amount of "good" news story based around Russia's interests.

I mean really if you can't go to their site and see they are just as bad as Fox news in regard to funneling the viewer into the mindset they want, then you seriously have your eyes closed.

I did this once before.. but lets try it again..

Example of news headlines currently on RT.com in their "US" section..


1)Congress on the move to legalize torture
2)Judge won't let Citigroup get away with fraud
3)Military contractor launches smear campaign against Medal of Honor hero
4)Rand Paul vs Battlefield USA
5)Battlefield US: Americans face arrest as war criminals under Army state law


This shit goes on and on...nothing but Doom & Gloom reporting when it revolves around the US or our allies. Yet if the reporting revolves around Russia it's either defending themselves from evil America and Europe or rainbows & unions in motherland Russia.

RT is about as biased as they come.

Interesting, I skimmed the headlines and looked at their company profile. it is odd that a station located in so many countries and broadcast in the US would have such an anti-american bent to their stories ... curious

[crockett]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

koolaid.. it's not just for dinner.

for all this blab, you didn't really talk about the very real fact there IS a senate investigation and this WAS their findings.

You aren't seeing the trees for the forrest..

The news can be accurate, but still presented in a biased way. This is what I was stating.

Do you not agree that Fox news is biased in their presentation of news? It's still mostly accurate but they present the news in a distorted manor that favors the right wing and the GOP.

RT.com is exactly the same. They might present accurate news but they present it in a distorted manor that favors what is good for Russia vs by showing nothing but distorted negative reports against the US.

Just because it's what "YOU" want to hear does not mean it's not biased. As I said in the other topic, "EVERY" news agency is biased to what their viewers want to hear. Otherwise they soon would not have any viewers because people don't want to hear what they don't agree with.

example.. on RT.com is this story with headline..

"Military contractor launches smear campaign against Medal of Honor hero"

Really a smear campaign?? They didn't go on some "smear campaign", they gave him a negative review to a future employer. While yes that is actually illegal to do, it is far from as the headline suggests going on a "smear campaign".

It's obviously just a case of bad management and not such a great employee if you read what he did.

Yet RT.com makes it seems like big bad evil US arms sale company tries to ruin medal of honor hero's life. Now obviously they are in the wrong because it's against the law to give a bad review to another employer. However he was fired for a very legit reason.. He disobeyed his employer and was causing problems because he felt they shouldn't be selling arms to Pakistan.

Now ask your self, if you are an employer are you going to keep a employee around that tries to dictate who you can and can't do business with? Obviously not and they had every right to fire him, however they broke the law at the point of giving a future employer a bad review of the guy. Hence the lawsuit.

So while their story might be accurate in some terms it skews the facts trying to shove the reader into an agenda that is set forth right from the headline.

In short they are as biased as they come.

[ajrocks]

LOL Americans are just figuring this out now? How come the rest of the world knows it?

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by crockett

You can't seethe trees for the Forrest..

The news can be accurate, but still presented in a biased way. This is what I was stating.

Do you not agree that Fox news is biased in their presentation of news? It's still mostly accurate but they present the news in a distorted manor that favors the right wing and the GOP.

RT.com is exactly the same. They might present accurate news but they present it in a distorted manor that favors what is good for Russia vs by showing nothing but distorted negative reports against the US.

Just because it's what "YOU" want to hear does not mean it's not biased. As I said in the other topic, "EVERY" news agency is biased to what their viewers want to hear. Otherwise they soon would not have any viewers because people don't want to hear what they don't agree with.

example.. on RT.com is this story with headline..

"Military contractor launches smear campaign against Medal of Honor hero"

Really a smear campaign?? They didn't go on some "smear campaign", they gave him a negative review to a future employer. While yes that is actually illegal to do it is far from as the headline suggests going on a "smear campaign".

It's obviously just a bad employers and probably not such a great employee if you read what he did.

Yet RT.com makes it seems like big bad evil US arms sale company tries to ruin medal of honor hero's life. Now obviously they are in the wrong because it's against the law to give a bad review to another employer. However he was fired for a very legit reason.. He disobeyed his employer and was causing problems because he felt they shouldn't be selling arms to Pakistan.

So while their story might be accurate in some terms it skews the facts trying to show the reader into an agenda that is set forth right from the headline.

In short they are as biased as they come.

that is a great example..

for reference, the reason pakistan just downed our supply line is due to what the US military is referring as a 'mortar attack'.. incidently, the very product this medal of honour winner had issue with selling to pakistan, and eventually resigned over

we really don't know shit here.. maybe this sole MOH winner ran through a mortar attack to save people, i am not sure the story

everything on the planet is biased. what i do know, however, is this is the first time i have heard of this story, as well as the first time i have heard of russia rearming cuba

everything is biased, but i am curious when russia became the new hope for the free world

[crockett]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

that is a great example..

for reference, the reason pakistan just downed our supply line is due to what the US military is referring as a 'mortar attack'.. incidently, the very product this medal of honour winner had issue with selling to pakistan, and eventually resigned over

we really don't know shit here.. maybe this sole MOH winner ran through a mortar attack to save people, i am not sure the story

everything on the planet is biased. what i do know, however, is this is the first time i have heard of this story, as well as the first time i have heard of russia rearming cuba

everything is biased, but i am curious when russia became the new hope for the free world

The same story was on either CBS or ABC news sites yesterday (I forget which). They also favored the Marine in the story IMO in kind of a biased way.

It's obviously much more viewer friendly to report on the side of the MoH hero vs some arms company. (ie every news agency is biased to what the "viewers want to hear".)

While I'm sure the company involved is obviously in the wrong by taking things too far at the end, the Marine is also in the wrong as it's not up to him to try and dictate whom they can and can't sell their products to. It should of just ended with him losing his job.

btw the CBS or ABC article said the company was selling night vision optics not mortars.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by crockett

The same story was on either CBS or ABC news sites yesterday (I forget which). They also favored the Marine in the story IMO in kind of a biased way.

It's obviously much more viewer friendly to report on the side of the MoH hero vs some arms company. (ie every news agency is biased to what the "viewers want to hear".)

While I'm sure the company involved is obviously in the wrong by taking things too far at the end, the Marine is also in the wrong as it's not up to him to try and dictate whom they can and can't sell their products to. It should of just ended with him losing his job.

btw the CBS or ABC article said the company was selling night vision optics not mortars.

In a lawsuit recently uncovered, Meyer?s attorneys say that shortly after joining the staff of military contractor BAE, the soldier became concerned over the company?s contract with the country of Pakistan. BAE, says Meyer, was selling advanced war weaponry to Pakistan, and as a former fighter of the Taliban in nearby Afghanistan, Meyer was concerned over what the artillery could do in the hands of insurgents.

are you claiming this MOH recipient and his lawyers are lying?

[porno jew]

yes and a kremlin funded news organization if the font of objective news.

[porno jew]

anyways how this ground breaking news. old news is old.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

are you claiming this MOH recipient and his lawyers are lying?

No I said that the other article said they were selling Night Vision Optics and said nothing about them "selling artillery". It seems to me that this is a case of RT.com claiming they were selling "artillery" not the lawyers which means either RT.com is skewing the facts or they know something everyone else doesn't..

From the ABC News article..

http://abcnews.go.com/US/medal-honor...0#.TtaDnrL0tW8

In March 2011, Meyer began working at BAE Systems, a British military contracting company, where he learned the company was trying to sell advanced thermal optic scopes to the Pakistani military.

"We are taking the best gear, the best technology on the market to date and giving it to guys known to stab us in the back," Meyer wrote to BAE Systems manager Bobby McCreight, his former co-worker, according to the lawsuit. "These are the same people killing our guys."

Almost word for word except RT.com alleges it's weapons & artillery meanwhile the ABC website says it was advanced thermal optic scopes.

Now it seems someone isn't telling the truth..be it RT or ABC.. seems Fox News & CBS also report it as thermal optic scopes/ sniper scopes.

Yet a quick look at BAE webpage and their list of products shows that they sell pretty much everything including both the thermal optic scopes and artillery shells.

http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/index.htm


IMO if you read the guy's quote he said "best gear" which to me means stuff troops would use like optical scopes or other equipment that a soldier would use. Now on the other hand I think if it were artillery he would has said ammunition or weapon systems, but that's just my opinion.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by crockett

No I said that the other article said they were selling Night Vision Optics and said nothing about them "selling artillery". It seems to me that this is a case of RT.com claiming they were selling "artillery" not the lawyers which means either RT.com is skewing the facts or they know something everyone else doesn't..

From the ABC News article..

http://abcnews.go.com/US/medal-honor...0#.TtaDnrL0tW8

In March 2011, Meyer began working at BAE Systems, a British military contracting company, where he learned the company was trying to sell advanced thermal optic scopes to the Pakistani military.

"We are taking the best gear, the best technology on the market to date and giving it to guys known to stab us in the back," Meyer wrote to BAE Systems manager Bobby McCreight, his former co-worker, according to the lawsuit. "These are the same people killing our guys."

Almost word for word except RT.com alleges it's weapons & artillery meanwhile the ABC website says it was advanced thermal optic scopes.

Now it seems someone isn't telling the truth..be it RT or ABC.. seems Fox News & CBS also report it as thermal optic scopes/ sniper scopes.

Yet a quick look at BAE webpage and their list of products shows that they sell pretty much everything including both the thermal optic scopes and artillery shells.

http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/index.htm


IMO if you read the guy's quote he said "best gear" which to me means stuff troops would use like optical scopes or other equipment that a soldier would use. Now on the other hand I think if it were artillery he would has said ammunition or weapon systems, but that's just my opinion.

the other interesting thing about the articles is who approved what

one says the pentagon did, the other said the pentagon didn't

i suppose we could always see if the lawsuit courtfilings were public domain

[Lucy - CSC]

Israel and Zionist running America. Hardly headlines. They took over in 1913 with the US Federal Reserve Bank.



Israel loves scaring the shit out of American to get them to fight wars for them.