VIDEO: FOXNews-12 yr old SanFrancisco Girl to Russian Troops: Thank You
Posted August 14th, 2008 by BoDeeDoe
output
12 Year Old Girl Tells the Truth on Fox News about Georgia. Fox News even had to cut them off right in the middle of the account of Georgian aggression even though they had just come from a commercial break 2 minutes prior to that.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Thank you for this post
I have spread it around other message boards and people have said "it's a real eye opener" many times. Thank you.
"It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect his country from its government."
— Thomas Paine
FOX News vs. 12yr old Ossetian Girl - part2
http://revolutionarypolit...
Russia reacts to Amanda Kokoeva's story and Faux news censorship.
http://RevolutionaryPolit...
Agreed, good points!
Agreed, good points!
bump bump bump
----------------------------------------
Ron Paul Supporter Since 1997
“We have allowed our nation to be over taxed and over regulated and overrun by bureaucrats, the founders would be ashamed of us for what we're putting up with” Ron Paul
Wake up your neibors and co workers.
I say this because for most people to know the truth, we have to tell them. Of course most of us here already realize this. By the way, the link you posted is a great site. Thank you. I think I am going to get my guitar out and put in some rage against the machine.
Thank you very much
We are very proud of our site and our whole purpose is to help spread the truth. I am happy you like it.
http://RevolutionaryPolit...
Thank you
from me too.
Reuters is not Russian Media pal...
http://uk.reuters.com/art...
Read the timeline! I saved this article on my hard drive because it seems that Reuters is changing the versions in later postings.... Take note of this here.
http://RevolutionaryPolit...
FVCK OFF WAR MONGERERS!
I don't care which side of this conflict you are on.
The US should have gotten into this mess and we shouldn't follow through. We should follow the founding foreign policy principle of non-intervention.
What no one is mentioning
What no one is mentioning is that fact that Saakashvilli the Georgian President and his Minister of Defense are ISRAELI NATIONALS. They are not even from Georgia. Why would free Georgian people "elect" an Isreali President and then let him appoint an Isreali Minister of Defense? Why, because Georgia is a U.S. puppet state and the Russians know it. This whole thing as been in the making for atleast 3 or 4 years. Israel was hoping that this would distract the Russians enough for them to launch an airstrike on Iran, supported by the U.S. Its been all over the news that Israel has been wanting to bomb Iran and the U.S. rejected it last week and also that there is a huge naval force massing in the Strait of Hormuz. What went wrong is that Georgia invaded to early. The neocons and Israelis were wanting this to happen later in the fall and closer to the election, the U.S. wasn't quite ready to strike Iran yet, and I also think they underestimated the Russian response. The Russians are tired of our B.S. and I don't blame them. This whole thing has the potential to go nuclear if we are not careful, but the Georgian government are not the victims here the Georgian people are.
There ARE two aggressors here
To say the media is wrong by calling the Russians invaders is misguided. The Russians did invade Georgia. That should not be under dispute.
Georgia was aggressive towards those living in South Ossetia (which is part of Georgia) and the Russian citizens there. The Russians invaded the sovereign nation of Georgia to protect their citizens but now they're putting even more military force into the area which can be seen as aggression in the hopes of permanently occupying and eventually annexing South Ossetia.
There are two aggressors in this instance. The aggression of Georgia against the Russian citizens and the aggression of Russia against the nation of Georgia.
Agree 100%
Agree 100% that both are agrressors. What to me is increasingly frustrating is the slanted reporting by the MSM. Tell it like it is - Georgia attacked South Ossetia which caused Russia to respond. They responded at first to protect the citizens of South Ossetia. What they are doing now is imperialistic and has substantial geo-political implications. But there too... wasn't the response predictable? Georgia or whoever orchestrated the attack on South Ossetia must clearly have been able to predict what Russia would do. So why do it? It's a "Grand Chessboard." The great chess-players think many many moves ahead and the players in this game are world champions.
http://RevolutionaryPolit...
It's still not clear who fired the first shot
the Georgians or South Ossetians. There's a lot of jumping to conclusions here due to preconcieved bias. The Russians could have even set it up. Among people on this forum, there seems to be an awful lot of faith in Russia and the Russian MSM, which is a bit disturbing. If you can't trust the U.S. MSM, you're going to trust the Russian MSM?
Did you read the timeline I posted?
Here it is again...
http://uk.reuters.com/art...
Please Read this... I don't want you to think I'm a "Commi-sympethizer"
Reuters is British if you didn't already know... Not Russian... Although they may have been infiltrated too right?
(sarcasm)
http://RevolutionaryPolit...
To the BS flung by 'bfling'
Your analogy of Mexico invading the US is not a like-for-like comparison of the situation w/ Georgia and Russia. A more appropriate comparison would be if a state in northern Mexico (i.e., Coahuila or Nuevo Leon), just south of TX, had fought a civil war w/ Mexico a couple of decades ago and won there independence (albeit not recognized by the UN) because they were more aligned (ethnically and politically) with the people in South TX than they were w/ those in Mexico. Then after winning their independence, 90-95% of them applied for and were granted US citizenship. They also invited several US military personnel to help maintain order and preserve the peace in their semi-autonomous state. After vowing to "reign in" this rebel enclave, Mexico's newest "democratically" elected leader decides to launch a full-scale surprise attack on this territory. But unlike the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, he instead targets the largest city and several small towns full of civilians, killing 1,500+ and 10 of the US peacekeepers.
Now you're telling me that the people of the US would not demand that their govt. take some military action against Mexico?? Please.
Continuing with this hypothetical scenario, we then find out that Russia has been training the Mexican army up until not even a month ago. And to top it off, they are going to fly additional Mexican troops home from another deployment to reinforce there front lines. Russia then has the nerve to demand that we stop "our" invasion of Mexico and to cease all aggression.
This is an apples-for-apples comparison, and I think it's safe to say we all know how the US public would respond.
'Would you be free men or slaves?'
Restore the Republic.
DIGG!
http://digg.com/world_new...
Special information for "bfling"
From wikipedia definition of propaganda: Propaganda is a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behaviors of large numbers of people. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense presents information in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the cognitive narrative of the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda.
Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.
This is exactly what FOX, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC and ABC are all about.
Notice in particular the phrase "lying by omission" with regards to the news coming from MSM about Georgia.
Love the talking head's final comment.
What BS!
___________
Lisa C.
www.dvds4delegates.com=Ron Paul, the 44th U.S. President
Join us at: www.campaignforliberty.com
Brought to you by: www.women4ronpaul.com
I love how the older woman,
says when they are being cut off for the commercial break, that "I know, you don't want to hear that", and gets a "disgusted of MSM" look on her face. The lies of the MSM are apparent to the entire world.
and then the announcer trys to belittle her experience,
by saying that what she said, "is certainly what the Russians want".
and then he pontificates that there "are gray areas in war".
Talk about a total smear job.
He might as well just called them liars.
Article of interest
Sorry for the double-post - but I thought the following was a good article that explains the history of the region, and how US intervention is once again causing problems:
http://www.atimes.com/ati...
Battling Lincolns?
Georgian Unionists and Russian Irredentists have run afoul of each other in their similar pursuits of Greater Republics. Thus far Mr Putin has shown himself to be quite Shermanesque in his handling of the inferior state of Georgia, as has been Mr Shaakashvili in his handling of the inferior states of Abkhazia & South Ossetia.
Please Stop Feeding The Troll
Arguing with the troll is what gives a troll its power and it pulls you away from working on something positive. Don't fall into it's trap.
We all know it's a troll, no need to point it out. Us longtime Dailypaulers can spot a troll a mile away.
Focus on something positive, ignore the troll.
Don't get embroiled in arguments, only discussions.
Haha...
Kinda like the dark side giving a sith it's power!!!
May the force be with us...
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
There is something called programming schedules.
Interviews are allotted a certain amount of time. Commercials have to be aired, by contract. Clearly the time alotted to the interview had elapsed and they to move on to a commercial. If it were true that they brought in a commercial because of what they woman was saying rather than because the time had elapsed and they HAD to bring on a commercial, then why did they allowed her to wait through the commerical break and give her 30 seconds to afterwards to give her a chance complete her thought? They would not have. They would have just ended the interview. They didn't have to bring her back on but they did. There is a programing schedule they have to keep up with so they had to make it quick.
If you're going to have a complain about the media, make it about something realistic. This is just stupid.
Your "stupid" assertation doesn't make sense since:
1. There had been a commercial 2 minutes prior
2. The host had not explained that it was Georgian bombs during the lead-up
3. The host minimized the interview by ending with the dismissive "there are gray aeas in war" statement (didn't seem gray to the people there)
and the biggest reason
4. Fox news coverage has been almost all AGAINST Russia.
Faux, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN...
They have all been repeating that its Russia...Russia "invaded", Russia "attacked"...the thing is, Georgia attacked and bit off more than they can chew, and now they are playing victim and begging for help from the rest of the world.
I believe the whole thing is a smoke screen for something bigger to come...
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
Russia DID invade
There is no question about that. Russia invaded a soveriegn country. It's a true statement. They're being filmed with cameras right now. They're there.
Saying that Russia invaded, is not saying that Georgia did not attack Ossettia.
Give it up already!!!
It's OBVIOUS that Russia is in Georgia...no one is disputing that. The point is the biased reporting by the media...making Russia look like the aggressor, when it's Georgia. The later is NOT being reported...do you get it!!!
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
Russia IS the agressor.
They invaded a soveriegn country. That's like Mexico invading the U.S. because of a internal dispute.
There are apparently two aggressors. Possible Georgia aggressed on Ossettia when they tried to secede, AND Russia aggressed on Georgia after this happened. An invasion is an aggression. Troops from one country being deployed on the soil of another country without that government's consent is by definition an invasion. It's aggressive.
You STILL didn't get the point...
it's really a shame. I'm not going to go over it again, but I present this:
South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia as the Republic of South Ossetia (not diplomatically recognized by the UN though) having it's own flag, President, Prime Minister, etc. Russia is acting as an ally to S. Ossetia when Georgia became the agressor.
If a State of the Union secedes from the United States and becomes independent from the U.S. and the U.S. becomes the aggressor (like Georgia) to take back, let say Arizona, Mexico (like Russia) could come in as Arizona's ally to help.
Do you get it?
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
It's still an invasion, an aggression.
If Arizona seceded from the U.S, and the U.S. tried to take it back, but then Mexico invaded the U.S. that would be a breach of U.S. soveriegnty. It's an invasion. Imagine how most Americans would feel. Russia could, if they wanted, be non-interventionists.
I don't see anything misguided about being suspicious of Russia's motives with the invasion. Why would Russia not want to take Georgia back?
one point that's being missed...
...is that Russia went in - in response to Georgia's aggressiveness - to protect RUSSIAN citizens. Apparently the vast majority of the people who live in South Ossetia have Russian visas. A comment I read the other day said that, if US citizens in Panama were under attacked by a neighboring country, we would be inclined to go rescue our citizens as well.
Georgia seceded from Russia... but doesn't want South Ossetia to have the same rights as they do.
Is Russia taking advantage of this situation? Perhaps. But that points to the larger issue - on-going US intervention in Georgia. Russia wants US troops on their border (Georgia borders Russia) as much as we want Russian troops on ours.
I thought the following was a good article that explains the history of the region, and how US intervention is once again causing problems:
http://www.atimes.com/ati...
Ummm...
Kinda like we did in the first Gulf War when we kicked out the aggressors (Sadaam) and pushed his troops all the way back to Baghdag? Does that make us the "aggressors" or "invaders" then?
Just using your logic...
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
Exactly.
Now you're getting it.
Still missing the point...
AND the sarcasm.
The points:
1. This thread is about the biased media....
2. You can not have two aggressors in a war...one side is the attacker
(aggressor) the other side is the defender. Just because Russia
kicked the attackers (Georgia) back to a point in their own country,
does not make them the aggressor. They are still defending S.
Ossetia at Gori http://en.wikipedia.org/w... so Georgia
does not try and go back into S. Ossetia, and will probably remain
their until a peace treaty occurs...basic military manuevers (battle
lines), happened throughout history.
Georgia = agressor, they attacked S. Ossetia.
Russia = defender, they are defending S. Ossetia from Georgia.
Media = biased...only reporting half the news.
You = ignorant, shill, troll, idiot...etc.
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
You can have two aggressors
in two different events. One event is the apparent attack by Georgia against Ossettia. The other event is the invasion of Georgia by Russia. Russia is not only trying to push back Georgia but went into Georgia. Broaching the borders of another country, whatever the reason, is by definition an invasion. Unless Russia was attacked, it's an aggression. Even if it's to defend Ossettia, it's an aggression against Georgia. Defense of one is aggression against another. Dr. Paul says our invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression, even though we we're trying in the process trying to defend the citizens of Iraq from the oppressive Iraqi regime by destroying that government. It's not analagous to me stepping in to protect you from someone attacking you personally. There's a different standard for aggression between states. If you don't like the term "aggression," fine. It's still an invasion. I havent heard the media use the term "aggression" anyway.
Huh?
Your story makes no sense.
You never said what happened to Arizona, what was that all about?
-
Show your support on the Ron Paul Map !
People worldwide support Dr. Paul too :-)
http://www.pollingmatrix....
Prove that there was a commercial
two minutes prior. Don't believe everything you read.
And if there was so what? There are lots of commercials on TV. Fox news is very profitable.
Why would the host say that it was Georgian bombs unless he had more evidence? Don't you want the media to be responsible? Right there is just a lot of hearsay going on. All we know for sure right now is that Russia invaded Georgia, based on an internal conflict. That is like Mexican troops coming in to the US because of something going on here, without the consent of the U.S. government. It's understandable that people would be concerned about that. The MSM will tend not to report something as being true until they more information than just hearsay, and as far as I've seen they have not reported or denied that Georgia attacked Ossietta.
Georgia attacked Ossietta!
Just because they don't report it on the the MSM does not mean that it isn't true.
These interviewees confirmed "Georgian bombs". Too bad they were cut off by a media intent on villianizing Russia.
Correct!
The AP mentioned it a little in their article:
http://hosted.ap.org/dyna...
"There was no immediate response from Russia to the claims. Both sides have made conflicting statements since fighting broke out Aug. 7, when Georgia sought to retake the breakaway province of South Ossetia." -from the AP of all places!!
"We dare not forget that we are heirs of that first revolution" -JFK
So there you go.
So why are people here claiming that the MSM is claiming that Georgia did not attack Ossetia? It's a straw man.
This proves that you are a friggin MORON
Since when is the AP or Associated Press the MSM? How often do you watch or are you persuaded by the AP Channel on television? They are a news wire service. What the MSM does, is conveniently pick out what stories they would like to carry, and those would be the ones that go by the White House talking points which seems to LIE BY OMISSION. But we all know why you are here, and you won't be around for long. Hope you had a nice stay at the Daily Paul Hotel!
You truly are a moron. I think I'll go watch the AP channel now...LOL Dumbass.
Dale in O.K. and others.
Both sides are aggressors, in different acts of this drama. You say tomatoes, I say tomatoes. The reasoning that suggests there can only be ONE AGGRESSIVE party, is odd to me.
That discussion can go on ad nauseum. Dale, what interests me more is your assertion that the AP is not an element of the MSM.
QUOTE:
"Since when is the AP or Associated Press the MSM? ...What the MSM does, is conveniently pick out what stories they would like to carry,"
END QUOTE
They along "with the other wire services"are the mother load of the MSM. Every major network uses their stories, most newspapers print their stories verbatim, and yet they are not the MSM....? Without the AP, the MSM would be dog paddling trying to fill it's column inches and segments. With due respect, the distinction you've construed is absurd. They are one of the lifelines of the MSM. They have ( or at least used to) have their own video news feed. Pre-packaged video/ sound and stand alone packages, fed directly to newsrooms around the country and the world.
Networks do have contractual obligations to their advertisers, and they (especially on cable) have numerous commercial breaks. Too many by my estimation, but that's the way it is. If Fox news really wanted to shut down this girls comments, they would not have given her a chance to re-state them after the break. End of story.
This is not a particular defense of Foxnews, rather it's just a little factual information on the news media, that is sadly lacking in this discussion. "bfling" tried to interject some factual info about how broadcasting actually works and he's castigated as a "Neo-Con disinfo" among other less creative slights. I believe you favor the oldie but a goody- "moron".
It's disturbing how quickly a mob mentality ensues on this site, when someone attempts to offer information that is not predicated towards a certain assumed group interpretation . Bflings attempt to actually provide factual information, and critical analysis gets a response more akin what you'd find in the Scarlet Letter, not what I'd expect on this site.
In general, the absolute ignorance displayed about how the media works, for good or bad- is tremendous. What operates all too often here is a fancied superstition about everything and anything that is either not agreed with or understood in regards to the media.
Sorry, but regurgitating some variation of "Neo-con"- fill in blank... is not a substitute for knowledge, rational discussion or debate. This is the kind of name calling that I would expect to find on the Daily Kos, or on Redstate.com. It's the same behavior typified by what this movement is in opposition to- the totalitarian folks.
Frankly, the attacks on bfling in this thread are disturbing. On a site that is geared towards fighting fascism, there is a disturbing amount of fascist behavior and antics here.
I never it wasn't true.
A little girl and and old lady are not confirmation. I don't want the media to report that Georgia attacked Ossettia based on comments like this. I want harder evidence before things are reported as true. On the other hand, you want a media that reports hearsay as truth.
Yes, about 1:15 for the girl
Yes, about 1:15 for the girl and a little less than that for the aunt is plenty of time for a unique perspective that contradicts most of the reporting in this country. These two had a first-hand account of who was committing the aggression and who was helping... Perhaps we could have learned more detail from them but for this programming schedule. Maybe you're right and FOX News will have them up again to flesh out in more detail their experiences... Maybe FOX can hold those commercials off for 3 or even 4 minutes, uninterrupted.
--------------------------
"I killed the banks"
Where have you seen it reported
that Georgia did NOT attack Ossetia? What does what the woman saying contradict?
Is Bfling just a disinfo pusher?
Its baffleing (bfling)how you could be viewed any other way.
You are a Neo-Con disinfo
Scumbag. Period.
In other words
you don't have a counter argument. All you have is a personal attack. Either there is no good counter argument to what I just said or you're just not smart enough to come up with one. Which is it?