FERGUSON ON STEROIDS: 10 SHOT OVERNIGHT IN CHICAGO

How many nine-year-old Antonio's need to die in Chicago before the national media will park its satellite trucks in front of Mayor Rahm Emanuel's City Hall and demand answers and action.

How many black people, including black children, need to die in Chicago before the national media stops counting civilian casualties in Gaza as a political weapon against Israel and starts counting them in one of our own cities.

Overnight in Chicago 10 people were shot. One night. One. How many more until the national media cares enough to look into the root causes of the violence, poverty, despair, terrible schools, and broken families.

There are no question marks after the above questions because those are rhetorical questions.

There is no political upside for the media to do good in Chicago, so they won't.

There is no number of murdered children that makes the risks of focusing on the root causes of this violence worth it for the media. You could pile dead Chicago kids like cordwood in front of CNN's national headquarters; the staffers wouldn't even notice.

Good heavens, CNN actually did go to Chicago. This is what happened.

The national media will go to Ferguson, Missouri, and scream about white versus black before the facts are known. They will do that all day long. Because there's a political upside. Racial division gets the midterm vote out and ensures the truth of how far we've come as a nation is never told. Racial healing and moving on might collapse the Jenga Tower that is the Democrat base.

Our national media is meticulously and cynically counting dead civilians in Gaza but ignoring them in Chicago.

Do two acts of bigotry equal progressivism?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journa...dia-doesnt-care-10-shot-overnight-in-chicago/
 
The leftist media won't look and they have a very good reason for not looking. They are terrified they'll expose the truth, and that truth destroys the leftist myth that leftist policies have been helping blacks.
 
Neither the left nor blacks themselves will even touch this issue. After all, over the 4th of July weekend, there was 80 shootings and 20 murders and they said NOTHING about that. Therefore, don't hold your breath waiting for either group to address the REAL issue.
 
How many more until the national media cares enough to look into the root causes of the violence, poverty, despair, terrible schools, and broken families.

They've cared for decades, but nobody else does except for the faithful. The "media" is a business. As such they have to focus on what increases viewership or, in the case of the internet, "clicks". If no one is interested in what they're covering, they move on to something else. This is true whether the subject is CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, or even breitbart.

The problem is not the media per se but the audience that the media serves.

It is possible for "media" to hammer away at something it considers to be important enough to pursue doggedly, persistently, unrelentingly, as Ed Murrow did with McCarthy, but there are few if any journalists of that caliber working today. And given that there are no longer just a handful of news sources but hundreds, whatever effect one crusading journalist might have is negligible.

"Our national media . . . meticulously and cynically count dead civilians in Gaza but ignor[es] them in Chicago" because that's what sells. That's what people want to see and hear. They can get all safely moral about Palestinians, but to do the same thing regarding their own countrymen requires some sort of action, and that is unacceptable, particularly if and when they've persuaded themselves that racism no longer exists in this country and that there would be no problem if only the "race-baiters" would stop bringing it up.

As for the media "screaming" about white v black because there's a "political upside", no. The media are not nationalized. They cover what sells. The media couldn't care less about politics in and of itself but only those aspects of it to which people want to attend. And if people aren't interested, no coverage.

As for "racial healing and moving on", really? The right-wing media do nothing to foment racial division?
 
From what I see the "right wing media", ie Fox and a couple of websites, react to race hustling. They certainly didn't try to turn Ferguson or Zimmerman into excuses for rioting, looting and persecuting innocent people.

The media's only answer for black gang violence is more gun control. Since Chicago already has had unconstitutionally onerous gun control, actually prohibition, for decades, there's little to argue there. In fact, it exposes the bankruptcy of the whole anti-gun crusade.

Watching Ferguson unfold, you can undersstand why the notoriously corrupt Chicago police force is content to allow blacks to kill each other. Why get involved and find yourself thrown to the wolves to mollify Sharpton?
 
From what I see the "right wing media", ie Fox and a couple of websites, react to race hustling. They certainly didn't try to turn Ferguson or Zimmerman into excuses for rioting, looting and persecuting innocent people.

The media's only answer for black gang violence is more gun control. Since Chicago already has had unconstitutionally onerous gun control, actually prohibition, for decades, there's little to argue there. In fact, it exposes the bankruptcy of the whole anti-gun crusade.

Watching Ferguson unfold, you can undersstand why the notoriously corrupt Chicago police force is content to allow blacks to kill each other. Why get involved and find yourself thrown to the wolves to mollify Sharpton?

It was an unprecedented headline in Iceland this week — a man shot to death by police.

Traci Tong

"The nation was in shock. This does not happen in our country," said Thora Arnorsdottir, news editor at RUV, the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service.

She was referring to a 59-year old man who was shot by police on Monday. The man, who started shooting at police when they entered his building, had a history of mental illness.

It's the first time someone has been killed by armed police in Iceland since it became an independent republic in 1944. Police don't even carry weapons, usually. Violent crime in Iceland is almost non-existent.

"The nation does not want its police force to carry weapons because it's dangerous, it's threatening," Arnorsdottir says. "It's a part of the culture. Guns are used to go hunting as a sport, but you never see a gun."

In fact, Iceland isn't anti-gun. In terms of per-capita gun ownership, Iceland ranks 15th in the world. Still, this incident was so rare that neighbors of the man shot were comparing the shooting to a scene from an American film.

The Icelandic police department said officers involved will go through grief counseling. And the police department has already apologized to the family of the man who died — though not necessarily because they did anything wrong.

"I think it's respectful," Arnorsdottir says, "because no one wants to take another person's life. "

There are still a number of questions to be answered, including why police didn't first try to negotiate with man before entering his building.

"A part of the great thing of living in this country is that you can enter parliament and the only thing they ask you to do is to turn off your cellphone, so you don't disturb the parliamentarians while they're talking. We do not have armed guards following our prime minister or president. That's a part of the great thing of living in a peaceful society. We do not want to change that. "

Update, August 20, 2014: We checked back in with the Icelandic Police to get an update on this shooting in December. The superintendent says the police have not used firearms since.
 
Isn't this the same place our president came from most recently, as most of his "friends," and of course, political pals who've fought free people wanting to defend themselves? Interesting.. I would have also imagined he'd address this issue, being "his" city and his people dropping like flies vs a single shooting in Missouri. Even more Interesting...
 
Back
Top