Two Party Dictatorship, War Crime Impunity

MEDIA ROOTS – On this episode of Breaking the Set, Abby Martin interviews former governor of Minnesota, Jesse Ventura, about the two party “dictatorship” and corporate censorship. She highlights the live-streamers of Occupy Wall Street as the heroes and calls out Marianne Ny as the villain for her flimsy attempt to extradite Julian Assange with no evidence. Abby wraps up the show by discussing the Bush Administration’s crimes against humanity, and the fact that President Obama’s refusal to prosecute the officials has led to a cultural decay.

***

Jesse Ventura on the Two Party Dictatorship, US War Crime Impunity

***

Tune in from 6-6:30 EST M-F on your local cable station

OR watch live at http://www.RT.com/usa

OR SUBSCRIBE to the official YouTube channel @http://www.youtube.com/BreakingTheSet

LIKE Breaking The Set @ http://fb.me/BreakingTheSet

FOLLOW Abby Martin @ http://twitter.com/AbbyMartin

US Coup D’Etat, Photo Criminals, Monsanto Superbug

MEDIA ROOTS  On this episode of Breaking the Set, host Abby Martin brings up the issue of Corporate Personhood and unregulated political donations. Dr. Wilmer Leon is interviewed about what he calls a Coup D’Etat of American Democracy. BTS then exposes CNN censorship against truths about Bahrain through Hero Amber Lyon and reveals Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir as the Villain for his crimes against humanity. RT Web Producer Andrew Blake discusses how taking a picture might land you in an interrogation room, and finally Abby calls out GMO giant Monsanto for their agricultural mis-practices.

***

US Coup D’Etat, Genocide & Dissent, Photo Criminals, Monsanto Superbug 

***

 

Tune in from 6-6:30 EST M-F on your local cable station

OR watch live at http://www.RT.com/usa

OR SUBSCRIBE to the official YouTube channel @http://www.youtube.com/BreakingTheSet

LIKE Breaking The Set @ http://fb.me/BreakingTheSet

FOLLOW Abby Martin @ http://twitter.com/AbbyMartin

Drones, Iran War, Nuclear California, NYPD in Israel

MEDIA ROOTSOn Breaking the Set, Abby Martin brings up the issue of global surveillance, drone warfare and talks to NIAC Policy Director, Jamal Abdi, about the possibility of war with Iran. MSNBC is called out for political bias and RT Producer Ramon Galindo speaks about the impending doom of nuclear reactors built by fault lines in the US. Abby Martin then breaks down the NYPD’s corruption and asks: why are they bringing their criminal enterprises to Tel Aviv, Israel?

***

  Drones, Iran War, Nuclear California, NYPD in Israel | Breaking The Set


Tune in from 6-6:30 EST M-F on your local cable station

OR watch live at http://www.RT.com/usa

OR SUBSCRIBE to the official YouTube channel @http://www.youtube.com/BreakingTheSet

LIKE Breaking The Set @ http://fb.me/BreakingTheSet

FOLLOW Abby Martin @ http://twitter.com/AbbyMartin

***

No Easy Truth: Continuous Casualty of Conflict

MEDIA ROOTS – The Pentagon and the corporate media establishment are again attempting to control the 9/11 and War on Terror narrative by claiming that they are considering legal action against former Navy SEAL Matt Bissonnette (a.k.a. Mark Owen) for publishing his book No Easy Day. The supposed context for the publication of his story, scheduled for release on Tuesday, is that the veteran did not offer the manuscript to the Department of Defense for prior review and he now may face legal recourse from the agency. Additionally, his name was leaked by the Associated Press last week, resulting in possible threats to his life.

The book was originally scheduled for release on September 11 of this year. It was an attempt made by Owen to remain apolitical about arguably the most politicized event of the decade. But the current debate appears to be scripted for the history books as several hard questions about the death of bin Laden continue to be ignored and will most likely not be answered in the upcoming publication distributed by Dutton.

The first and probably the most obvious discrepancy is if military intelligence had known of his precise location for eight months prior to the raid, then why hasn’t more proof of his whereabouts been released to the American public? “Despite the intense surveillance effort the CIA was unable to obtain a photograph of Bin Laden or a recording of the voice of the mysterious man, presumed to be the al-Qaida leader,” states the Guardian the week after the raid.

With such precise knowledge of the bunker, why was bin Laden not captured for trial in a court of law? Attorney General Eric Holder answers that the operation was not only lawful according to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001) but was simply an act of national self-defense. But in a nation where children are taught the belief of liberty and justice for all, it’s quite contradictory for this nation’s leadership to not protect and promote these ideals worldwide.

Furthermore, Owen recounts a scene where bin Laden may actually have already been dead upon their arrival. “At first it was funny because it was so wrong,” Owen reflected in his account of May 1, 2011. This version is in direct conflict with that of the White House in which bin Laden was allegedly reaching for a weapon at the time of the fatal shots. Owen confirms that the suspected terrorist was unarmed at the time of his death and their team may have just been on a kill mission.

But the greatest and most pertinent question has still not been asked: was Osama Bin Laden actually killed on May 1, 2011? This past March, the online hacker group Anonymous was able to obtain emails from the intelligence analysis group Stratfor which directly contradicts the official story about what happened with bin Laden’s body after the raid. While possibly the smoking gun of a White House cover-up, several news stories reported before the raid also directly contradict the official narrative. Below are a just few examples:

2001 – “Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader.” [Fox News]

2002 – “Pakistan’s president says he thinks Osama bin Laden is most likely dead because the suspected terrorist has been unable to get treatment for his kidney disease.” [CNN]

2006 – “Saudi intelligence services seem to be sure that Osama bin Laden is dead. The elements gathered by the Saudis indicate that the head of Al Qaeda was the victim, while he was in Pakistan on Aug. 23, 2006, of a strong case of typhoid fever that led to a partial paralysis of his lower limbs.” [France’s Directorate-General for External Security]

2007 – “… he also had dealings with Omar Sheikh, the man who murdered Osama bin Laden.” [Benazir Bhutto]

2008 – “The last relatively reliable bin Laden sighting was in late 2001.” [Time]

2009 – “What if everything we have seen or heard of him on video and audio tapes since the early days after 9/11 is a fake – and that he is being kept ‘alive’ by the Western allies to stir up support for the war on terror? Incredibly, this is the breathtaking theory that is gaining credence among political commentators, respected academics and even terror experts.” [Daily Mail]

The War on Terror is riddled with unanswered questions that range in depth and consequence. From numerous eyewitness accounts of what actually hit the Twin Towers to this morning’s attack at a US military base, the corporate media hardly scratches the surface of investigation, often simply regurgitating government propaganda. But as more individuals combat societal ignorance, becoming proactively aware of the atrocities committed by their military establishment and the history of their empire, the War on Terror is destined to end.

Oskar Mosco for Media Roots.

Photo provided by Flickr user Ben Sutherland.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Reply

Media Wars: Question More on RT America

MEDIA ROOTS — Ever since the Internet took off there has been a positive push back against the corporate controlled mainstream media establishment. Many educated people now rightfully believe that they are being lied to and manipulated by these large corporate organizations that use sensationalism, fear mongering and titillation to emotionally effect the viewer into reacting on a base reptile level rather than with their higher critical brain. 

In response to the criticisms about RT being ‘state sponsored propaganda,’ Abby Martin did a segment called ‘Media Wars’ for RT America where she breaks down the ownership of the corporate and state media establishment while encouraging viewers to critically think in the face of a barrage of differing media/infotainment/news bombardments.

Robbie Martin for Media Roots

***


Abby Martin on RT America, ‘Media Wars’


***

RT – Here at RT our motto is “Question more.” What that means is that audiences should critically think of what is being fed to viewers by the mainstream media. We like to provide a different angle to news stories and cover certain topics that are taboo to other media outlets. RT’s Abby Martin has more.

***

SALON A new news show hosted by Julian Assange debuted yesterday on RT, the global media outlet funded by the Russian government and carried by several of America’s largest cable providers. His first show was devoted to an interview with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah (video below), who has not given a television interview since 2006. The combination of Assange and a Russian-owned TV network has triggered a predictable wave of snide, smug attacks from American media figures, attacks that found their purest expression in this New York Times review yesterday of Assange’s new program by Alessandra Stanley.

Much is revealed by these media attacks on Assange and RT — not about Assange or RT but about their media critics. We yet again find, for instance, the revealing paradox that nothing prompts media scorn more than bringing about unauthorized transparency for the U.S. government. As a result, it’s worth examining a few passages from Stanley’s analysis. It begins this way:

When Anderson Cooper began a syndicated talk show, his first guest was the grieving father of Amy Winehouse.

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, unveiled a new talk show on Tuesday with his own version of a sensational get: the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

That contrast — between one of America’s Most Serious Journalists and Assange — speaks volumes already about who is interested in actual journalism and who is not. Then we have this, a trite little point, impressed by its own cleverness, found at the center of almost all of these sneering pieces on Assange’s new program:

Mr. Assange says the theme of his half-hour show on RT is “the world tomorrow.” But there is something almost atavistic about the outlet he chose. RT, first known as Russia Today, is an English-language news network created by the Russian leader Vladimir V. Putin in 2005 to promote the Kremlin line abroad. (It also broadcasts in Spanish and Arabic.) It’s like the Voice of America, only with more money and a zesty anti-American slant. A few correspondents can sound at times like Boris and Natasha of “Rocky & Bullwinkle” fame. Basically, it’s an improbable platform for a man who poses as a radical left-wing whistleblower and free-speech frondeur battling the superpowers that be.

Let’s examine the unstated premises at work here. There is apparently a rule that says it’s perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer (GE/NBC/MSNBC), or by the U.S. and British governments (BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of America), or by Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal (Wall St. Journal/Fox News), or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments (Politico), or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government (Kaplan/The Washington Post), or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties (National Review/TPM/countless others), but it’s an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government. Where did that rule come from?

Also, while it’s certainly true that the coverage of RT is at times overly deferential to the Russian government, that media outlet never mindlessly disseminated government propaganda to help to start a falsehood-fueled devastating war, the way that Alessandra Stanley’s employer (along with most leading American media outlets) did. When it comes to destruction brought about by uncritical media fealty to government propaganda, RT — as the Russia expert Mark Adomanis documented when American media figures began attacking RT  – is far behind virtually all of the corporate employers of its American media critics.

Read more of Glenn Greenwald’s awesome article Attacks on RT and Assange Reveal Much About the Critics.