web analytics

Media snake-poison

By ATWadmin On November 3rd, 2006

I’d like to offer my congratulations to Reuters, the BBC, The Guardian and The Independent tonight. I’m sure that , even as I speak, the heads of these organisations are phoning each other up and patting each other on the back, and probably planning a huge joint party to celebrate the success of their media strategies.  This must be a proud day for them indeed, because after years of hard journalistic toil day in day out, it must be so gratifying to know that the continual spitting of their treacherous snake poison is having the desired effect upon their readers and listeners:

British believe Bush is more dangerous than Kim Jong-II

Yes, well done, you Guardianistas! "British voters see George Bush as a greater danger to world peace than either Kim Jong-il, or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"!! …Of course, it matters not one whit whether this perception is actually true or not.  The essential thing is that it must be "seen as" being the case. 

You see, the trick is to confuse "long-term peace" with "short-term safety" in people’s minds. Thus, the statement "In Britain, 69% of those questioned say they believe US policy has made the world less safe since 2001" is afforded an ambiguity it ought not have. In a way, I agree that US policy – the policy which says "we’re not taking this threat lying down; we’re going to fight back" – has indeed temporarily made the world rather less safe, for the time being. It’s called war. What do we want, a "safe war"?

As Chris Muir observed recently in his excellent cartoon-blog "Day By Day", you can’t take out a wasps’ nest without annoying the wasps in the process. You’ve got to clear the house of its civilian occupants and send in the professionals, and it’s going to be unwise to return to the house until the nest has been completely dealt with and the professionals give you the all-clear. Of course, you can always take the stance of "don’t do anything, it’ll only annoy them". Yeah, that works. That is safe. …until one day it’s too late, and then you’ll really wish you had called in the professional pest controllers before the wasps became a real problem.

The very idea that George Bush presents a greater danger to the world than the likes of Ahmadinejad is so utterly warped, and so utterly insulting to the Americans who lost their lives on 9/11, that it deserves nothing but contempt. The fact that so many people believe this nonsense to be the case is a sad reflection on the mainstream media’s abuse of its power, and another indictment of the liberal media’s contempt for the Allied soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

21 Responses to “Media snake-poison”

  1. Tom, As an American, I appreciate the sentiment. I think it was Alison who has expressed irritation at my countrymen who think Britian is going down the wrong road. But when the average American reads things like this in the paper, can you blame them? I am lucky enough to have met via the web people such as yourself and Alison and all the Tangled Webbers that give lie to this sort of tripe.

  2. Y’all need some balance over there. We need it over here as well. You have no idea the number of people with whom I speak that parrot the pap that the Philadelphia Inquirer dishes up every day.

    I am so glad to have found you all on the web. You provide a very important point of view that is not provided anywhere else here in the US of A. In fact, when I first found ATW several years ago I was floored. Who’da thunk?!

  3. I gurantee Dateraper is among the 69% that believe that… Along with a few others that lurk alongside him…

  4. "you can’t take out a wasps’ nest without annoying the wasps in the process"

    But you can take out a wasps’ nest without creating more nests and killing 650,000 additional people in the process.

  5. "I gurantee Dateraper is among the 69% that believe that"

    you bet your ass i am. whose got the capabaility to disrupt world peace? who has hundreds of global reach miltary systems? who has hundreds of military bases spread far and wide across the globe? who spends over 2/5 of the world military spending?

    its not iran, and its not N.Korea. its a no-brainer.

  6. You can read 500 or so comments that condemn the UK with as much spiteful venom over at LGF as is perceived in this poll of 1000 people. Just as its spiteful bullshit at LGF so is it here in the Guardians poll. Its been recommended I pay no heed to the comments at LGF (and elsewhere) and id recommend the same here. However – with blogs where you can freely find opinions I find it depressing that LGFs commenters cant get over themselves enough to discover what the British really think. This poll will no doubt be picked up at LGF and cited as precisely our opinion when it isnt. I view that as even more irritating than the silly poll itself given LGFs impact in the blogosphere. We do need some balance. Perhaps if US blogs recognise the fact that the Guardian has the fastest sinking circulation and lowest circulation of all the ‘qualities’ it might help put it in perspective. Equally the BBC has been utterly exposed lately..precisely because of a rising tide against a poisonous liberal mindset on its way out. The real issue we have isnt are Britons ‘awake’ to issues…the issue we face here right now is who will champion the silent majority. Right now it aint the Tories.

  7. Absolutely, Frank. I agree, taking out a wasps nest isn’t what creates new ones, the wasps do that themselves, regardless of what we do or don’t do. As for the 650K, that’s just more nonsensical snake poison from the same sources.

    Daytripper, it’s not merely the fact of having a large military that makes a country a threat in itself. It’s what that country does with its power. So how come Canada, Mexico, Europe haven’t all been invaded by the US if it’s such a threat? If the US went around saying "We’d like to see Europe wiped off the face of the map", that would make it a threat. Nope, its Iran that makes threats like that.

    Alison, I never visit LGF these days, it’s too insular. It’s not really a blog for debate. Agreed re the Tories too, actually Blair is more on "our" side re terrorism than Cameron seems to be.

  8. "Daytripper, it’s not merely the fact of having a large military that makes a country a threat in itself."

    yes it is. look at a mad of the middle east bases the US has aquired in the last number of years. its imperialism by stealth. its strategic in nature, and specifically aimed at control of the most resource rich region on the planet. it constituets the greatest threat to world peace. i spoke before about the threat of provocation and a "Tonkin" style incident. Its happening.

    dont take my word for it tho, speak to the experts.

    http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2171176&C=mideast

    http://www.c7f.navy.mil/news/2006/october/3.htm

    Also heres a nice bit of news. a bit of legislation slipped in along side the Military Commissions act

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MOR20061029&articleId=3618

  9. Does anyone care to comment on the other survey results in the linked article, particularly those from Israel?

    "Only one in four Israeli voters say that Mr Bush has made the world safer, outweighed by the number who think he has added to the risk of international conflict, 36% to 25%. A further 30% say that at best he has made no difference."

  10. Ahem, when you look at the sort of person who’s behind GWB it makes you wonder. I’m sure we all heard the latest revelation (Yea, brothers!) concerning one Ted Haggard, a man who has "a hotline to Bush". Some of us will remember him as the Bible thumper who wished to thump evolutionist Richard Dawkins. See YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ8_bIji7gQ

    Seems that Mr. Haggard is guilty of gross hypocrisy, by leading the fight against gay rights, while he … well, read for yourself:

    ——-

    Haggard case fuels debate over hypocrisy
    DAVID CRARY
    Associated Press

    With the Mark Foley scandal still troubling Republicans, one of the nation’s top evangelical leaders is now accused of paying for gay sex. Heading into Tuesday’s election, when voters in eight states will decide on gay marriage bans, liberals and some conservatives are saying the party that prides itself on family values has a hypocrisy problem.

    Ted Haggard, a staunch foe of gay marriage and occasional participant in White House conference calls, resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals and head of his Colorado church following allegations he met monthly with a gay prostitute for three years. Haggard denies having sex with the man, but admits receiving a massage and buying methamphetamine.

    Five weeks ago, Foley – a vocal advocate for exploited children – resigned from Congress because of sexually tinged messages to male pages. Rep. Don Sherwood, R-Pa., a married father of three, has been burdened by revelations about his five-year affair with a mistress who says he physically abused her.

    "The attention focused on these cases will inescapably lead people to think about these people’s hypocrisy," said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "They make a career out of defaming gay people and preaching family values, when it’s clear that it’s just a veneer."

    Full story here: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/elections/15923683.htm

    ——–

    Beware of preachers who protest too much….

  11. Beware of male prostitutes/drug dealers who are in bankruptcy, have a political agenda and fail lie detectors. By his own admission he wants to influence the election against those who are against gay marriage. Apparently he received enough money for this to get out of bankruptcy.

  12. Yeah yeah. That’s what Paul Berry said too, Monica, if not in so many words.

  13. "Does anyone care to comment on the other survey results in the linked article, particularly those from Israel?"

    no doubt they are all self-hating jews. which could never be construed as an anti-semetical insult.

  14. DT,

    Here’s a real example of a real Jew-hating Jew:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/4/newsid_2514000/2514437.stm

  15. So The Guardian considers Osama Bin Laden to be a ‘world leader’. And presumably those who read it and/or share its opinions would belive so as well. Would any one of those fools explain why OBL is a ‘world leader’? How about FOD or Daytripper?

  16. Allan,

    I’m not FOD or DT, but maybe I’ll do. The ICM poll results can be found at http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2006/Guardian%20-%20world%20leaders/guardian-world-leaders-2006.asp.

    Here’s question # 4:

    Q4. Now I’m going to read a list of political leaders and ask how much danger you think they pose to world peace.

    The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad

    The leader of North Korea, Kim Jong II

    The leader of Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden

    The leader of Lebanese Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah

    The Israeli acting Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert

    The President of the United States, George W. Bush

  17. Let’s try that link again:

    http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2006/Guardian%20-%20world%20leaders/guardian-world-leaders-2006.asp

    You know, David, this site is very touchy about punctuation after links.

  18. I’m asking why The Guardian (and presumably its readership) would consider OBL to be a world leader? I consider him to be the leader of a terrorist group. But at least OBL got more votes than GWB in the ‘great danger’ category.

  19. Not sure I understand Alan McDonald’s Rabin link. Were Timothy McVeigh and Mark Chapman Christian-hating Christians?

    Allan@Aberdeen: I believe they’re calling him a political leader not a world leader. Alas, he is certainly of worldwide importance.

  20. Fanny,

    My apologies for the confusion in the Rabin link. It was a comment to Daytripper’s line about "self-hating Jews" which in turn harkens back to earlier comments from earlier threads. In other words, both comments are lost for want of context.

    Here is the context (or, at least, my view of it). Many commenters on ATW call any opposition to the actions of the government of Israel to be anti-semitic. Any Jew who expresses such opposition is said to be self-hating. It was a coinicidence that it was the anniversary of Rabin’s assassination when Daytripper pre-empted the usual suspects in playing the slef-hating Jews card on my comment about the Israeli data in the Guardian poll.

    Farschtein?

  21. Alan,

    in case that didn’t post: nu, ich farschtei 🙂