by Calling Out Community, Posted July 24, 2015
“If a tree were to fall on an island where there were no human beings would there be any sound?”
– published in The Chautauquan, June 1883
The famous question above, now told in a hundred different ways since, has morphed over the decades from it’s original intent into some weird philosophical “thought experiment” that raised questions for decades about observation and knowledge of reality. People for decades have wanted to read into it, wanted to discover some deep esoteric meaning.
Only one problem with that – the 32-year old question was actually scientific in nature – no “Deep Thoughts with Jack Handey” (i.e. SNL skit) required. In April 1884, Scientific American published the answer to this question to educate/entertain their readers, the contents of which may surprise you:
“Sound is vibration, transmitted to our senses through the mechanism of the ear, and recognized as sound only at our nerve centers. The falling of the tree or any other disturbance will produce vibration of the air. If there be no ears to hear, there will be no sound.“
As Sigmund Freud is widely quoted as saying: “sometimes a cigar is just a cigar” – meaning that sometimes, there’s no symbolic meaning behind what you hear or see. It’s just facts as facts as presented. Becomes a bit ironic as Freud is widely quoted with this sentence, and there’s never been any evidence that he ever uttered a single word of it. Once again, an example of society’s perception of something morphing over time – being told something over and over again that’s not true, and suddenly it becomes true to the masses.
Fast forward to 2015, where we find the mainstream news media, particularly in North America, considering themselves to be just such a type of brainy bunch. Like the intellectually elite above, they love to analyze and share their expertise on virtually every subject imaginable – jack of all trades and masters of none. And often, like the ethereal crowd looking at the fallen tree question, the media loves to see things that aren’t there, and tell us that they are. They also like to ignore things that are there, and pretend they don’t exist.
It’s true that some in the media have been stellar at their jobs, and were / are even brilliant at it. The really good ones didn’t have to tell us they were- they showed it with their prose, depth of knowledge of the subject at hand, their ability to get the story (“just the facts”) no matter what the barriers – and their skills in presenting the information, which allowed the average Harry & Mary out there to make educated decisions and form logical opinions on the subject.
America wept with Walter Kronkite, as he broke the news on November 22, 1963 that an assassin’s bulletin had slain their young President in Dallas. And who doesn’t still get chills when they hear the live radio news report from Herbert Morrison, witnessing the Hindenburg explode and drop to the ground like a stone, killing 36 people. We trusted and respected guys like this for decades.
Not any more. Today’s 24-hour news cycle demands content, and suddenly the “talking head” was born. Around that same time, news organizations stopped caring so much about whether they got the facts straight (if they had any real facts at all) – because they could retract later. And the facts didn’t take long to tell – so they introduced their OPINION of what was taking place as well, like their opinion matters or means anything.
Today, there is virtually no news item that isn’t tainted by a touch of the “experts”, and there’s no universally accepted standard for the determination of an “expert” today in the news media – anyone can self-publish a book today and become an “expert” on the subject, even if they truly are just a wingnut with an undiagnosed mental illness and a lot of free time.
As our news outlets struggled at times to find suitable content to fill the 24-hour cycle allotted, some of these “journalists” committed the unpardonable sin of journalism – stretching the truth, letting hyperbole get the best of them, not fact checking a story because of time – or as we saw recently with Brian Williams, the anchor of NBC News, they just flat-out made up stuff.
Of course, the worst consequence of having the networks share their opionons with us is the birth of the “liberal” vs. “conservative” press – which naturally causes distrust in at least 50% of society right off the marker, even if the story they are giving you is 100% accurate. I liken it to when a person touches a perfume or cologne container, and the oil of their skin actually spoils the fragrance.
So, with this insane pressure everywhere to get a story, any story – and get it before your competitors do – you’d think that news organizations would fall all over themselves for a story that just naturally develops, such as the one on Wednesday evening, July 22 in New York City’s Times Square, when up to 12,000 people gathered to send a message to the US Congress not to vote “Yes” on the Iranian nuclear agreement, as presented to them earlier in the week by “Psychobama’s” goons.
Fox News was there, reporting that the crowd may have been “the largest protest ever held in Times Square”. The U.K.’s pre-eminent newspaper the Guardian was also on hand, as was the Jerusalem Post (their senior contributing editor, Caroline Glick, was a speaker) along with A-list speakers like former New York Governor George Pataki.
Even the CNN of the Arabic world, Al Jazeera, so mistrusted in the West for reasons stated above, showed up and gave a surprising well-balanced report, even presenting a new poll that the “suggested that of the 79 percent of Americans who heard about the deal [with Iran], 48 percent disapprove.”
Now, this is “massive” Times Square protest was happening in New York City of course – so it stands to reason that the New York Times (after which Times Square is named) – the paper that has boasted since 1896 that they cover “All the News That’s Fit to Print“- surely they would have been out in force, speaking with at least some of the thousands of their fellow New Yorkers who were very concerned about their futures because of this nuclear deal. Right?
Ummm – nope. Reporter Jonathan Weisman briefly brushed over it in a 27-word sentence (the whole article was one paragraph). He must have made a wrong turn and ended up at the wrong event, because the whole focus of the article was wrong. He wrote: “In New York, opponents of the accord organized a large protest in Times Square on Wednesday evening, drawing thousands of people to demand that Congress reject it.”
Wow, deep – you or I could have written the same thing after reading my blog posting. His sentence was factually true, but the media doesn’t just tell the story today – it has to explain it, share how it feels about it, spin it. The New York Times is often accused of being President Obummer’s personal soapbox, which is unfortunate as they can hardly get to the bottom of issues like the deal with Iran, when they are practically sleeping with the enemy.
So this story involving 12,000 protestors, stunningly underwhelming, was buried by editors on page 16, and politically spun with the title “Campaign for Congressional Backing of Iran Nuclear Deal Begins”. The message? Forget the thousands screaming against this Accord outside. Congress is gonna love it. The problem with that is, of course, that Congress is PISSED about it. You’d have to be drinking Draino to think that the Republican-controlled Congress will pass what Governor Pitaka called a “God-awful deal” at the rally, after “President Barricade N. Bombem” snubbed Congress altogether and ran to the United Nations to get them to ratify the agreement without Congressional input in the first place.
It’s like going on a field trip with your school class to an extremely questionable art exhibit at a gallery that your parents find abhorrent and would never approve of in a million years – but not wanting to miss out, you forged a note from your parents giving you fraudulent permission to do so.
While that is certainly fodder for anothyer article, I want to state clearly that I believe there was no absolute authority granted to Obama to negotiate this nuclear deal in the first place on behalf of America, nor permission or authority to single-handedly offer Iran any of the top secret side deals that they have admittedly given away, and most assuredly, taking the agreement to the United Nations as if he spoke for America and everyone was in agreement with it, when the American Congress hadn’t even seen the deal yet (and some had already said they wouldn’t support it regardless)…. is unthinkable.
Sorry folks, but that type of government style can only be defined as dictatorship. Americans want to believe their Presidents have their best interests at heart. But seriously, how much evidence do Americans need that this guy is up to something, that he doesn’t quite seem to think the way most Americans do?
And now, it seems, the President seems to have accidentally forgotten the check and balances that were built by the founding fathers so abuse of power could not happen. Even in my Grade 7 social class in a Canadian school, I was taught that the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches of the U.S. Government are all clearly mapped out and defined in the U.S. constitution. How does President Obimbo not know about them?
Either Obama goofed and made a mistake in bypassing the structured order of things here, a basic flaw in understanding American politics which makes him an incompetent President after 6 years in office – or he did this on purpose, which makes him a dictator. Ask yourself these questions
- why on earth does this President think it is so important to do this deal with our sworn enemy right now. They had been negotiating for 10 years before with no success
- why did Iran so quickly sign this agreement with the Devil, the “Great Satan”? Could it be because they get back $150 billion in frozen assets, and still get to keep part of their nuclear program as well? And what will that money be spent on?
Remember, Iran wasn’t pulled to the table at the end of a war that they lost with us. They didn’t come to us in an act of surrender. The sanctions had not crippled them so effectively \that their people were starving to death. Yet, they were willing to sit down with the Devil and negotiate away a nuclear program they spent untold billions on already? Something doesn’t add up here.
Now Obama thinks that the Congress should actually vote to support this plan? “Trust me, it’s a good deal”, he tells us. “We couldn’t have done better”? Really? Because I think dismantling the nuclear capability altogether would have been better. Not giving back $150 billion in seized assets would have been better.
See, President Oblimpo, we know more you than we did 6 years ago. Your ties to socialist and even Communist groups in the U.S. and abroad is well-documented. Your birth as an American was in question from the beginning, and you never produced your birth certificate to prove it. You’ve added $13 trillion to the U.S. National debt – 4 times more than all of the previous Presidents cumulative debt combined, which has crippled America financially. You were quick to suddenly open diplomatic relations last month with communist Cuba after 50 years – announcing it, I noticed on a Sunday night when no one was paying attention.
Now, you’ve negotiated a deal with the #1 terror support system on earth, Iran, pushing a secret deal right past the U.S. Government to the international court of public approval, to be voted on by the Security Council – whose membership includes several countries that are outright enemies of the United Statss – and they unanimously supported the plan! And Americans still think that “Obama is da bomb”. I think you’re DA BOOB. You’re not misunderstood, misrepresented. I personally believe you might even be the most evil man to be President.
Americans looks at their Presidents with rose-colored glasses. But what if our greatest enemies – Communist nations, Islamic terrorists groups, etc. – actually were successful at getting their man into the White House? His name alone, and his possible connection with Islamic groups in the past, as well as socialist groups, should have been a red flag. But he smiles, he’s hip, he’s happening. He can’t be bad?
And our news media continue to propogate that message, which makes them just as liable even he’s a fraud as Joseph Goebbels was liable for Hitler’s monstrous policies. I personally think Obama should be arrested and charged with abuse of power and treason, the American side of the deal should be ripped up, and we should slap Iran with sanctions so crippling, they abandon their nuclear ambitions and support of terrorism, or they starve to death. We’ve been betrayed by this President, and you can dismiss this as mere rantings if you want, but you’ve left a lot of unanswered questions on the table when you do.
Head spinning yet? Well, then let’s get back to the spin itself. The only photo in the New York Times article was of Secretary of State John Kerry coming out a briefing with U.S. Congressional officials on the Iran deal. It’s now my favorite photo of him (see left). Not only is he on crutches, giving that air of …umm…strength and confidence – but his face says “I think I just crapped myself”. Round it out with the bloodshot eyes and the face that looks like a whoopie cushion – after the whoopie, and a star is born. (Barf)
This was the best they could come up with? I mean, it takes solid WORK for the Times to ignore 12,000 protestors just 3 blocks from your office, while you write a story about Congress approving something that even the Tooth Fairy and Easter Bunny will tell you ain’t gonna happen. Put down the crack pipe and start doing some real journalism, NYT.
Kudos, however, to the New York Post – they had a great article, clearly actually talked to people that were there, and they have a good sense of the issues. But then, that’s probably because “severely normal” people read their paper, and they are used to telling it like it is and getting in idiots’ faces. Long live the Post.
So, the New York Times tanked, gett ing a “D” for being true dipsh–s, for burying this story because it goes against their lunatic-left-leaning, Obama-ass-kissing viewpoints. Well, there’s always their sister CNN or CNN International to come to the rescue – the “world’s news leader”. Christina AMansPower, Wolf is Blitzered, and Anderson Pooper – right? Do a search on CNN’s website for stories about “Times Square”, and here is the most recent search result:
#ivorycrush: U.S. destroys ton of ivory in Times Square (05:11 AM, Jun 20, 2015) The message was crushingly loud and clear: Stop the illicit ivory trade. And to highlight it, the U.S. destroyed more than a ton of elephant ivory.
Ummm. Errrr. So 12,000 protestors didn’t make the cut, but some story about ivory crushing in the same Times Square a month earlier gets one – oops no TWO – separate stories back in June. Well, it must have been an important story, let’s review:
…The United States destroyed more than a ton of elephant ivory in New York’s Times Square on Friday. Lawmakers, wildlife officials, conservationists and bystanders watched the ivory turn into sand-like powder as an industrial rock crusher descended on carvings and raw tusks.
The “United States” did this? Or maybe you meant to say “6 environmental wingnuts from fringe groups protesting the ivory trade did this“? Must have been an auto-correct error. The A-list speakers included the Director of U.S. Fish and Wildlife – though I miss the obvious connection between African elephant poaching and his job title. Jessica Alba was there – and of course we care what one of the Fantastic Four has to say about elephant tusks. And sorry, can I get some explanation for how destroying ivory saves elephants. And isn’t there like an elephant tusk soup or something out there in Chinese food restaurants? I would have loved to follow that dump truck full of ground up ivory – I wonder where it went. (snicker)
Speaking of Chinese food – one of my favorite speakers in the video shown was the Asian female “US representative” speaker – from Queens, New York. Again, not seeing what expertise she had on the subject of elephants? Africa? Ivory poaching? I wanted to hear her talk about the horrifying practice of sawing off their tusks while the elephant may still be alive or how incredibly cruel the hunters are to these beautiful, intelligent animals. But her take on it was very simple: we should save the elephants “because they are interesting creatures and they create communities“.
Say what? Ok, you just described piranha and maggots too, honey – what’s your point? Have you actually ever seen an elephant? No no, not Babar. Discovery Channel is cheating. A real elephant – like in a zoo maybe? It suddenly dawned on me why she was there. The event was lame-assed, and no one else was gonna go – she picked the short straw. Or some store nearby had a shoe sale. The woman didn’t have a clue. And THIS was deemed to be of more value than 12,000 protestors? The largest assembled protest in the history of Times Square
It wasn’t covered, of course, because it doesn’t make their boyfriend Obama look all manly and stuff. But CNN didn’t just bury the story, they ignored it like it didn’t happen. Excellent journalistic instincts. And inviting Jessica Alba along to hand ivory to some gimp on a rock crusher to destroy in Times Square? Priceless. Worth every second of both stories own the event that CNN ran that day. And the video. The mind numbing, seemingly never-ending video. And all that grinding….sigh
Protest against Obama? Oh hell no, they aren’t going to let that get on the Mother Network. Well, thankfully the thousands who assembled at the rally that CNN is pretending didn’t happen are in the know – and the millions more in the silent majority across America – are not getting the wool pulled over their eyes. Fortunately THEY don’t get their news primarily from CNN or the New York Times. This “invisible” rally was organized by people who know full well that you don’t push something out the door to the United Nations, bypassing your own Constitutionally-designed Legislative branch of government – unless the item you’re pushing either stinks, has been stolen or its a secret you don’t want revealed – or in this case, all of the above.
Let me propose a question to my readers today:
“If 10,000 people were to gather on a Wednesday evening for possibly the largest protest ever held in Time Square, and most of the mainstream media outlets ignored it, did it actually happen? And if millions of people were to be concerned about the contents of a deal with Iran that has top secret elements and a bypass of the U.S. Congress marked all over it – do those millions of people exist?
Like that tree falling on the island, I think I’m starting to hear something here….