 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:43 pm Post subject: General Sanchez Speech |
 |
|
Everywhere I see all the headlines on the speech selectively quoting the Sanchez criticisms of the war.
But why has the MSM not reported on the first half of his speech?
The General absolutely EVISCERATES the Press!!!
(emphasis mine)
| Quote: | THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS. WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME IS THAT YOU ARE PERPETUATING THE CORROSIVE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT IS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND KILLING OUR SERVICEMEMBERS WHO ARE AT WAR.
MY ASSESSMENT IS THAT YOUR PROFESSION, TO SOME EXTENT, HAS STRAYED FROM THESE ETHICAL STANDARDS AND ALLOWED EXTERNAL AGENDAS TO MANIPULATE WHAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SEES ON TV, WHAT THEY READ IN OUR NEWSPAPERS AND WHAT THEY SEE ON THE WEB. FOR SOME OF YOU, JUST LIKE SOME OF OUR POLITICIANS, THE TRUTH IS OF LITTLE TO NO VALUE IF IT DOES NOT FIT YOUR OWN PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS, BIASES AND AGENDAS.
IT IS ASTOUNDING TO ME WHEN I HEAR THE VEHEMENT DISAGREEMENT WITH THE MILITARY'S FORAYS INTO INFORMATION OPERATIONS THAT SEEK TO DISSEMINATE THE TRUTH AND INFORM THE IRAQI PEOPLE IN ORDER TO COUNTER OUR ENEMY'S BLATANT PROPAGANDA. AS I ASSESS VARIOUS MEDIA ENTITIES, SOME ARE UNQUESTIONABLY ENGAGED IN POLITICAL PROPAGANDA THAT IS UNCONTROLLED. THERE IS NO QUESTION IN MY MIND THAT THE STRENGTH OUR DEMOCRACY AND OUR FREEDOMS REMAIN LINKED TO YOUR ABILITY TO EXERCISE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS - I ADAMANTLY SUPPORT THIS BASIC FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY AND COMPLETELY SUPPORTED THE EMBEDDING OF MEDIA INTO OUR FORMATIONS UP UNTIL MY LAST DAY IN UNIFORM. THE ISSUE IS ONE OF MAINTAINING PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND STANDARDS FROM WITHIN YOUR INSTITUTION. MILITARY LEADERS MUST ACCEPT THAT THESE INJUSTICES WILL HAPPEN AND WHETHER THEY LIKE WHAT YOU PRINT OR NOT THEY MUST DEAL WITH YOU AND ENABLE YOU, IF YOU ARE AN ETHICAL JOURNALIST.
FINALLY, I WILL LEAVE THIS SUBJECT WITH A QUESTION THAT WE MUST ASK OURSELVES--WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE ETHICAL STANDARDS OF THE PROFESSION IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT OUR DEMOCRACY DOES NOT CONTINUE TO BE THREATENED BY THIS DANGEROUS SHIFT AWAY FROM YOUR SACRED DUTY OF PUBLIC ENLIGHTENMENT? |
Read it all at: Powerline
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To appear "balanced," the lamestream media may include some of his other comments, buried in the middle of an article or near the bottom, thinking that the average reader doesn't read the entire article.
Sometimes, I think the days of honest journalism, if it ever existed, is over.
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dcornutt
PO3
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 267
Location: Brooklyn, NY
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
It ended the day that Walter Cronkite took off his glasses, looked at the camera and interjected his personal feelings about the war in Vietnam (ie..that we had lost). That's when the evening news started to transition to being "opinions" about the evening news and daily events.
Now, it's mostly opinion...little news and about repeating it as often as possible to make the storyline stick.
I'm in awe of the capability (and balls) of media to make up a story, fabricate whatever to back it up, then drive it home with a hammer until it sticks and it's growing like yeast. Then, a few weeks later when nobody notices...print a BS retraction of the factual basis of the story in a way nobody notices...without admitting it basically.
They call that "getting out ahead of the story" ...or "driving the story" in journalism terms. Funny, we used to just call it lieing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy wife
Research Director
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Posts: 353
Location: Arlington, VA & Ft. Worth, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The speech, in toto, is published on www.militaryreporters.org along with a good article about it. I'd like the speech written into the Congressional Record!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harvuskong
Seaman
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 174
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Navy wife wrote: | | The speech, in toto, is published on www.militaryreporters.org along with a good article about it. I'd like the speech written into the Congressional Record!! |
I am a little hazy on the Congressional Record requirments at the moment.
But, is it possible that that enough people- voters - demanding that their Congress Critter, House and/or Senate, could get the speech, in toto, written into the Congressional Record??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy wife
Research Director
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Posts: 353
Location: Arlington, VA & Ft. Worth, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Harvuskong,
I just did a google on the subject of getting things into the Congressional Record and here's an excerpt from Slate that covers it.
http://www.slate.com/id/2130799
| Quote: |
What's in the Congressional Record?Anything your congressman wants.
By Daniel Engber
Posted Monday, Nov. 21, 2005, at 6:12 PM ET
<snip>How does a member of Congress put something in the Congressional Record? He writes it down, signs his name, and hands the paper to a clerk. Anything a member of Congress says on the floor gets printed, more or less verbatim, in that day's Record. (Members do have the right to edit their words before publication.) But a congressman can also get material in the Record without saying it out loud. A senator can insert a document into the Record with unanimous consent, which is almost always granted. Members of the House don't even have to ask permission (though they sometimes do): They can choose instead to submit a signed copy of their comments directly to the House clerks.<snip> |
] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JN173
Commander
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 341
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Navy wife wrote: | Harvuskong,
I just did a google on the subject of getting things into the Congressional Record and here's an excerpt from Slate that covers it.
http://www.slate.com/id/2130799
| Quote: |
What's in the Congressional Record?Anything your congressman wants.
By Daniel Engber
Posted Monday, Nov. 21, 2005, at 6:12 PM ET
<snip>How does a member of Congress put something in the Congressional Record? He writes it down, signs his name, and hands the paper to a clerk. Anything a member of Congress says on the floor gets printed, more or less verbatim, in that day's Record. (Members do have the right to edit their words before publication.) But a congressman can also get material in the Record without saying it out loud. A senator can insert a document into the Record with unanimous consent, which is almost always granted. Members of the House don't even have to ask permission (though they sometimes do): They can choose instead to submit a signed copy of their comments directly to the House clerks.<snip> |
] |
And that is how the "Winter Soldier" testimonies were enter into the Congressional Records in toto 
_________________
A Grunt
2/503 173rd Airborne Brigade
RVN '65-'66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anker-Klanker
Admiral
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 1033
Location: Richardson, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | It ended the day that Walter Cronkite took off his glasses, looked at the camera and interjected his personal feelings about the war in Vietnam (ie..that we had lost). That's when the evening news started to transition to being "opinions" about the evening news and daily events.
Now, it's mostly opinion...little news and about repeating it as often as possible to make the storyline stick. |
You're absolutely right! The steady trend towards "opinionated news" began with Walter Cronkite, but something happend in the 2004 election that very few people took notice of. That's when journalists actually published papers and advocated the change to "agenda journalism."
So, now there are no more REPORTERS; all we have are COMMENTATORS. And, of course, they are all taught in journalism school - Columbia University probably being the single biggest source of "journalists" going into the NE media market - how to think, and how to write to advance one's agenda.
All one has to do is to look at the content of the front page of almost any newspaper. In my own hometown rag, you simply will not find any news. The front page is dominated by sociological and political commentary, or sports (and even the sports field is getting infected with commentary). There are no REPORTERS any more, and that's a fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
