[spectre] Re: SPECTRE digest, Vol 1 #26 - 9 msgs

[Chris Byrne]

Philip,

This seems to come down to subject lines.

I had no idea your message was in fact a reply to my message, until
reviewing the list systematically. So maybe we both need to think about the
appropriateness of our subject lines in context.

You accuse me of a great deal which I did not say. The inference is your
own. What are we to read into your quoting of Nostradamus?

I simply forwarded a message, leaving the subject line intact. I added my
qualification to indicate that I could not verify the source of the
information. At a time when the most powerful government on the planet has
declared a state of war, I think we need to be careful to think about the
sources of our information. A thread has started in this list about the
statements and counter-statements regarding the authenticity of the footage
in question.

There has been much hysteria in the media lately, perhaps this shows the
difficulty the journalists have in coming to terms with this terrible
attack, which is not only a very real human tragedy but a global media
event. Regardless of the authenticity of said footage, its widespread
dissemination by the global media not only clearly enraged US government
spokesmen last week, but was a rather convenient emotional justification
for Israel's military activity prior to the recently declared ceasefire.

My point was that, like the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over the Scottish
town of Lockerbie, we may never discover the truth about who killed
thousands of people in New York. Political expediency always wins out.

We may find it unpalatable that there are some who apparently celebrate
this act of mass murder. But it is undeniable that the US government is the
perpetrator of far greater crimes in the past 50 years. And the same
government is now using the New York attack as a justification for
increased surveillance, permission for the CIA to assassinate suspected
terrorists, covert special forces operations, and who knows what else they
haven't released to the media.

The question is not 'Does Time Warner AOL hate Palestinians?'. It should
be: are journalists checking their sources before repeating verbatim
statements from the US government? Are they questioning any of the
assumptions made in these statements? It seems that many are now doing
this, but last week it was hard to detect any sign of analysis from
broadcast media.

Chris

At 1:57 pm +0200 15/9/01, philip pocock wrote:
>spectre-request@mikrolisten.de wrote:
>
>> From: Chris Byrne <chris@mediascot.org>
>> Subject: [spectre] Fwd: Lies about Palestinian celebration
>>
>
>as a person who is cleary concerned about human rights, then 'spin' like
>your subject is no more that the unfolding of blame and
>confusion. it infers that the media giant warner/aol hates palestinians.
>that is a heavy statement and like the accusations against all
>one must have grounds and remember a basic human right of innocence until
>proven guilty. this does not exclude the media. by reporting
>things in such clear ascii while writing in amail that you have no proof,
>undermines any who criticize spuermedia powers and its the 'boy
>who cried time-warner! aol! aol!'
>
>it only damages credibility and blame breeds hate and intolerance.
>
>i think that the virus of militant religious fanaticism can not be healed
>with a hammer. it requires anti-bodies, and as we are all
>'cells', like mini leibnitz increments on a curve we call earth, we can
>fight against war by being free. and freedom is openness,
>tolerance and as dostoevsky wrtoe responsiblity.
>
>ask yourself, i understand your vertigo of consciousness, i share that,
>but is it responsible to point fingers at anybody without simple
>bald-faced facts? even against such a convenient 'beast' as cnn? i
>remember the oil-soaked bird in the gulf war so there is of course
>valid suspicion.
>
>i can add there was a report from cologne, footage of jubilant fanatics at
>a mosque near there, one of whom spoke to the camera and ranted
>against america and praised bin laden. that was german media. there was
>also a report from gaza of a storefrotn displaying the portrait of
>bin laden and a baseball cap wearing 20 something guy praising him as a
>hero. again german media.
>
>as a net person i realize the insignificance of this in terms of numbers
>and the illusion of size and scale that broadcaasting creates.
>mountains out of molehills is the history of television news. but do you
>really beleive that there is no cathartic release by a small
>number of persons whose lives are already disjointed and full of human
>suffering. that of course can foster a certain ignorance and just
>spark outbursts of an almost unconscious sort.
>
>this is how i read those reports and as soon as there is a broadcast or
>tape turned up from these questionable reports, 'lies' as you call
>them, i will rethink things and imagine the enormity of that. it is a very
>scary thought should there be a time-warner / aol conspiracy to
>destroy a peoples as you incubate with your subject line.
>
>i can not accept your methods.
>
>______________________________________________
>SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe
>Info, archive and help:
>http://post.openoffice.de/mailman/listinfo/spectre


--------------------------------------------------------
Chris Byrne                          chris@mediascot.org
--------------------------------------------------------
New Media Scotland                 tel: +44 131 477 3774
P.O. Box 23434, Edinburgh EH7 5SZ  fax: +44 131 477 3775
Scotland, UK                    http://www.mediascot.org
--------------------------------------------------------