Makes sense if all those stories about Israel and the CIA supporting ISIS are true.
ABC News Broadcasts Fake Syria Bombing Video That’s Actually From a Kentucky Military Show in 2017 https://gizmodo.com/abc-news-broadcasts-fake-syria-bombing-video-thats-actu-1839028685
ABC News aired a video on Sunday that host Tom Llamas said depicted a Turkish attack in northern Syria against Kurdish civilians. Turkey is indeed pushing into Syria and slaughtering Kurds along the way, but the video ABC News played last night is from a military gun demonstration in Kentucky that was published to YouTube in 2017.
“This video, right here, appearing to show Turkey’s military bombing Kurd civilians in a Syrian border town,” Llamas said on the October 13 broadcast as the video played.
But the explosions in the video are identical to explosions seen in a video titled, “Knob Creek night shoot 2017.” Knob Creek Gun Range, in the town of West Point, Kentucky, hosts a biannual event called the “Military Gun Shoot & Military Gun Show” where weapons are fired at night. Members of the public can come and see the show for a fee in April and October.
Published October 23, 2002 By | Fox News
Amid speculation that President Bush is reconsidering what will constitute “regime change in Iraq,” one thing should be clear: Saddam Hussein’s willingness to “change” his attitude towards permitting the resumption of intrusive on-site U.N. weapons inspections will not, in fact, eliminate the danger posed by him and his ruling clique.
Indeed, what would be, at best, an ephemeral attitudinal adjustment on Saddam’s part would probably not even diminish meaningfully the threat from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. After all, were Saddam — against all odds and past practice — actually to cooperate with the U.N. inspectors and assist in the complete elimination of his chemical and biological arsenals, he could resume covertly stockpiling them again in as little as six-months time.
That period could be still shorter if he were to be rewarded for his “cooperation” by the elimination of international economic and trade sanctions against Iraq.
A news item published in the London Evening Standard last Monday provides, however, an important reminder of why the United States cannot safely accept any substitute for the toppling of Saddam’s regime.
Specifically, it summarizes evidence implicating Saddam Hussein in one or more deadly acts of terror against the United States, specifically the Oklahoma City bombing.
The Standard article draws on investigative reporting and forensic analysis into the Oklahoma City bombing performed over the past seven years by an intrepid and tenacious former TV journalist, Jayna Davis. She offers compelling, if circumstantial, indications that Iraqi operatives helped to plot, prepare and execute murderous attacks in Oklahoma City (and perhaps against other targets in the United States).
For example, Ms. Davis has identified a man whose photo matches that of a “John Doe #2” sought immediately after the Murrah Building attack. He appears to be a Palestinian by the name of Hussain Hashem Al Hussaini, who sported a tatoo suggesting he had served in Saddam’s elite Republican Guard.
According to Davis’ evidence, witnesses put Al Hussaini in the company of confessed bomber Timothy McVeigh a few days before the attack and near the site immediately beforehand. Ms. Davis has also found witnesses who say McVeigh and his convicted co-conspirator, Terry Nichols, had consorted with former Iraqi soldiers. Some of these former soldiers worked for a Palestinian who owned a truck very like one sought after the attack. These soldiers reportedly were absent from work on the day of the bombing and were seen celebrating after it occurred. It strains credulity that all of these dots are not connected.
What is more, Ms. Davis’ evidence appears consistent with findings by another investigator, Dr. Laurie Mylroie, who has devoted years of effort to the pursuit of Iraqi connections to the earlier World Trade Center bombing. Like Ms. Davis, Dr. Mylroie concludes that Saddam’s modus operandi is to employ cut-outs to cover his tracks.
Phil Donahue on His 2003 Firing from MSNBC, When Liberal Network Couldn’t Tolerate Antiwar Voices
In 2003, the legendary television host Phil Donahue was fired from his prime-time MSNBC talk show during the run-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The problem was not Donahue’s ratings, but rather his views: An internal MSNBC memo warned Donahue was a “difficult public face for NBC in a time of war,” providing “a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.”
. . . .
Former MSNBC host Ed Schultz revealed that he was told what to cover and what not to cover at MSNBC, saying that the President of MSNBC Phil Griffin was a “watchdog.” An example he gives is when he wanted to cover Bernie Sanders announcing his run for president, and Phil Griffin calls him telling him to report on something else.
MSNBC canceled Ed Schultz’s show and removed him entirely from MSNBC. Schultz was informed of this July 2015.
. . . .
In a biting resignation letter published in full by CNN on Wednesday, longtime NBC News reporter, commentator, and military analyst William “Bill” Arkin blasted the corporate media network for embracing U.S. “national security leaders and generals” while “ignoring the empirical truth of what they have wrought: There is not one country in the Middle East that is safer today than it was 18 years ago. Indeed the world becomes ever more polarized and dangerous.”
“I find it disheartening that we do not report the failures of the generals and national security leaders. I find it shocking that we essentially condone continued American bumbling in the Middle East and now Africa through our ho-hum reporting.” —William Arkin, former NBC News commentator
Cenk Uygur, like him or hate him, also had some things to say about MSNBC.
He left, he said, because the “head of MSNBC” – who is MSNBC President Phil Griffin – told him that “people in Washington tell me that they are concerned about your tone.”
. . . .
During a conversation on Morning Joe today, co-host Mika Brzezinski made an on-air claim that during the election, Hillary Clinton’s campaign wanted her take off television for being overly critical of their candidate.
. . . .
Patrik Markström, one of the administrators of the Facebook group Stå Upp För Sverige (Stand Up For Sweden), faced court for not deleting eight “grossly insulting” comments made by other people in the group.
Eskilstuna District Court said in a statement on Tuesday that it agreed with the prosecutor that the comments were clearly to be considered acts of agitation against ethnic groups.
Markström denied responsibility, saying he had not seen the comments.
However, according to the verdict seen by The Local, the court found that he must have seen six of these comments himself and actively intended not to remove them. The other two comments had also been brought to his attention, but he “remained passive” and showed “gross negligence” by not deleting them.
The court based its ruling on Sweden’s law on bulletin board systems, which states that a person who provides such a forum could also be responsible for what is written by other users.
The law dates back to the late 1990s, before Facebook existed, but the court ruled that the social media site falls under the same legislation – a decision that could set a legal precedent in Sweden.
Legal experts said they believe the case could be appealed to Sweden’s Supreme Court.
banned Paul Joseph Watson, Alex Jones, Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos, Louis Farrakhan and others earlier this year after defining them as “dangerous individuals” and now they’ve changed their rules to allow calls for violence against them.
Facebook’s latest Community Standards update reads:
Do not post:
Threats that could lead to death (and other forms of high-severity violence) of any target(s) where threat is defined as any of the following:
– Statements of intent to commit high-severity violence; or
– Calls for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organization or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy, or is described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses, wherein criminal/predator status has been established by media reports, market knowledge of news event, etc.)
– Including content where no target is specified but a symbol represents the target and/or includes a visual of an armament to represent violence; or
– Statements advocating for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organization or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy, or is described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses, wherein criminal/predator status has been established by media reports, market knowledge of news event, etc.); or
– Aspirational or conditional statements to commit high-severity violence (unless the target is an organization or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy, or is described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses, wherein criminal/predator status has been established by media reports, market knowledge of news event, etc.)
FB has since changed this.
The New York Times caused a mass triggering on Monday after publishing a report showing religious conservative women have the happiest marriages.
“It turns out that the happiest of all wives in America are religious conservatives, followed by their religious progressive counterparts,” the NY Times reported late Sunday. “Fully 73 percent of wives who hold conservative gender values and attend religious services regularly with their husbands have high-quality marriages.”