Watching cable news coverage of the violence in Baltimore over the past few days, it is now clear that Aljazeera America is not the most subversive network on air. CNN stands alone as the most subversive news outlet headquartered in the United States. They should stick to covering earthquakes, tsunamis or airplane crashes. Their attempts at reporting on domestic issues look like Pravda-driven hit pieces.
Baltimore Rioting, Looting OK According to Mayor
- Thread starter Pilgrim
- Start date
Uhm, the rioting in Baltimore is national news. Comments about the riots, especially controversial comments from an officer of the court, are going to be national news, as well.
You're the one who wants to see racism in it and are eating it up. The quote was about law enforcement being judge, jury and executioner rather than due process.
Actually, the very beginning of the quote she provides the full context herself with "So I am watching the news in Baltimore..." It's a direct reference to the rioting that was going on, and she made the Facebook post at the time the rioting was going on. She's not making some general statement about throwing bricks, she's making a statement about what was going on in the rioting, and her solution was to skip the arrest and the rest of the judicial process and just shoot 'em.
No, THIS refers directly to "protesters to turn violent," which includes both the brick throwing and the "etc."
It wasn't sloppily written at all. It just doesn't give the narrative you want it to give. The Washington Times link provides the full quote and the full context, and the story is the same story as the original link I provided and the Reuters piece you countered it with. None of the stories linked by your or me even mention race or racism. That's all you. You, for some reason, want to remake the narrative into being about the news media running stories of perceived white racism to advance an erroneous narrative, but none of those stories do anything of the kind. The story is, an officer of the court thinks people who throw bricks at police officers during a riot should be shot without arrest, charges or a trial, much less a jury being present. That's it. That's all there is to it. That's the full context of her statement.
Do you even know the definition of subversive?
Aljazeera America is actually pretty good at delivering the unimapssioned facts of a news story. CNN at least attempts to give the facts. MSNBC and Fox News gives facts, but only in the context of giving you your opinion about them, and only those facts that coincide with the opinion they want to give you.
More like blacks disproportionately commit more violent crime. White on black crime is minuscule compared to the opposite. But you might not know that because black on white crime rarely makes national news. It usually stays a local event and the racial angle is rarely reported on. It is the rare white on black crime story which often times is reported to be racial even when there isn't evidence of such, but makes national news. Similar to the assistant prosecutor( who happens to be white)being accused of racism when there isn't evidence of such. Just a bad, emotional comment, which could have been based on her knowing a few officers,and feared for their health. But that doesn't play as well.
Who in the national media has accused her of racism?
It is highly likely I knew and understood the definition of subversive 10 years before you first heard the word. Moreover, it isn't surprising when Democrats and other left-leaning observers hail CNN as objective. CNN is teetering very close to getting themselves in trouble. Hopefully, members of Congress and members of the press corps will start calling CNN out.
Considering you don't know how old I am, that's a bold statement. And likely incorrect.
No, it's not at all. I've never hailed them as objective, though, so if that was a veiled attempt at a shot at me, it was off the mark.
In what way?
I know they have ratings problems. Is Congress and the press corps going to call them out over that?
Her comments are being considered racist.by the news writers. Its how many of the stories are written. Like your original article link. It omitted the comment about protesters throwing bricks, etc. I can see someone reading that story, the way it was written, and not know she was talking about rioters throwing bricks and endangering officers. One can assume that she was talking about protesters doing just about anything of any degree of violence and think she was talking about a protester ripping down a sign, lighting any type of fire, looting a business. All violent acts, but not what she was talking about. She specifically was referring to the brick throwing,etc.(other projectiles) that were endangering officers. I first seen this story locally last night on the news, and again, they didn't say the part about throwing bricks. My first reaction was that she probably has some racist issues because the story was framed that she wanted protesters shot who turned violent. But she was talking about the officers lives being in danger from projectiles. i also heard this story on the radio today and the report only said that her remedy to stop the rioting was to shoot them. Again, it doesn't tell the whole story. Btw, I dont agree with her comments, but understand how she could have an emotional response to officers being injured. It was just went too far and she is in the public trust busniness.
Here is one article about what i'm talking about. It interjects race into the story so readers can easily make the assumption that she is racist.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/01/teana-walsh-protesters_n_7190944.html
Yes, she made the comment about shooting them, but her comment about shooting the protesters referred to the ones throwing bricks, etc. The etc. is other projectiles thrown at the officers and sending them to the hospital. I understand the narrative because I have observed it quite often. Your originally linked article didn't provide the total context with the bricks being thrown at the officers. The story had a different context to it. I provided the additional quote that included the bricks, which gave her statement a different context.
When the entire context isn't given, people can use their own biases sometimes to fill in the blanks erroneously. And then false narratives are created in the public.
Last edited:
Now you're just repeating the same thing over and over. It's clear you don't understand what you read. The full and correct context has been in both articles I posted and both articles you posted. And it's not about the bricks. And, the story about the prosecutor's statement, whether she mentioned bricks or not, is not about invented racism of whites by the media to illuminate a particular narrative.
Incidentally, the mere mention of someone's race is not even remotely close to interjecting "race into the story so readers can easily make the assumption that she is racist," particularly since the mention of race in the Huff article was about a completely different story.
You keep demonstrating that you cannot understand what you read, that you read things that aren't even there, and completely miss the primary points that are being made in the text. If you believe the prosecutor was taking about bricks and whatever you want "etc" to be, and that news outlets intentionally failed to mention "bricks" so as to make the entire world think he's racist, so be it. In any case, since intelligent conversation remains impossible with you, I'm done insofar as this topic is concerned.
Incidentally, the mere mention of someone's race is not even remotely close to interjecting "race into the story so readers can easily make the assumption that she is racist," particularly since the mention of race in the Huff article was about a completely different story.
You keep demonstrating that you cannot understand what you read, that you read things that aren't even there, and completely miss the primary points that are being made in the text. If you believe the prosecutor was taking about bricks and whatever you want "etc" to be, and that news outlets intentionally failed to mention "bricks" so as to make the entire world think he's racist, so be it. In any case, since intelligent conversation remains impossible with you, I'm done insofar as this topic is concerned.
I understood the whole context of what she said . The original link didn't provide the entire quote. To completely understand and accurately know who she was referring to you would need the entire quote to provide context. Yes, I know she was referring to protesters who turned violent AND who threw bricks , etc. She wasn't referring to a looter, a sign flipper. a fire starter or anyone else, Just a brick thrower or an etcetera thrower hurling and endangering an officer. No one else .
BTW, the post with the original link is when someone first interjected race into the story.
BTW, the post with the original link is when someone first interjected race into the story.
Speaking of throwing bricks, I found this story very interesting. Particularly the mention of "Police announced shortly before noon that they had a credible threat" [about gangs intending to hurt people]. They don't say which gangs, but there's a photo out there showing a Crip with his arm around a Blood, saying "We don't want nobody [sic] gettin hurt". I think the officials ought to have to share their "credible" source, myself.
Read this:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/04/how-baltimore-riots-began-mondawmin-purge
Read this:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/04/how-baltimore-riots-began-mondawmin-purge
CNN is anything but objective. They have been called out previously but not by the typical 'mainstream media' other than Fox News. Watch groups and other news outlets have illustrated in great detail their lack of objectivity.
just this morning as I am scanning through the TV channels, I stop to listen to uber-liberal Bill Press, formerly a host of CNN's "Crossfire" derail the media coverage of the Baltimore riots. Bill Press singles out CNN's coverage as the most outrageous, with particular mention of CNN reporter Miguel Marquez's performance on air as "incendiary." Bill Press went on to lament how CNN sends reporters into the riots without any filter for the inflammatory rhetoric spewing from reporters which could incite a mob to even greater violence.
CNN should stop throwing matches on the tinderbox of social unrest. In their desperate search for increased viewership, CNN inserts itself as a bad actor. The Cable News Network won't skirt culpability much longer.
CNN should stop throwing matches on the tinderbox of social unrest. In their desperate search for increased viewership, CNN inserts itself as a bad actor. The Cable News Network won't skirt culpability much longer.
I don't get news/info from TV, and the more I hear & read about it, the less I understand how anyone who does can consider themselves informed. Whether it's Fox or MSNBC. I do know that "news" programming is much more cost effective for the purveyors, [which explains why there's so much of it], but I can't see where the typical news report does anything but create more questions than it answers. 
paullud
Veteran Expediter
The media send reporters out to be used like those whacky waving arm guys at a used car dealership.
Fox News reporter Mike Tobin reported firsthand that at approximately 2:45 ET "Well, about 2:45 we saw a guy running from the cops here right at the intersection of North and Pennsylvania where the — you know which has been the epicenter of the unrest here — and as he was running away that officer drew his weapon and fired and struck the individual who was running away."
"As he was running away, that officer drew his weapon and fired and struck the individual who was running away."
"He ran right in front of us. I never saw the individual turn and do anything I would consider an aggressive act, but we did see the officer draw his weapon and I counted one gunshot."
Even Shepard Smith had to call BS on that one.
Fox News - We Report. You Decide.
"As he was running away, that officer drew his weapon and fired and struck the individual who was running away."
"He ran right in front of us. I never saw the individual turn and do anything I would consider an aggressive act, but we did see the officer draw his weapon and I counted one gunshot."
Even Shepard Smith had to call BS on that one.
Fox News - We Report. You Decide.
He reported first hand huh! Will this cost him his job ala Brian Williams? It should!