The Jeremiah Wright You Won't Hear on FOX News

[bustr]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19837.htm

The Jeremiah Wright You Won't Hear on FOX News By Mike Whitney

29/04/08 "ICH" --- - Jeremiah Wright is 5' 10 '' of tightly-packed explosives. He may be the best public speaker since Martin Luther King. He is bright, passionate, insightful and erudite. When he speaks; the sparks fly and the ground shakes. Yesterday, when Wright took the podium at the National Press Club, he knew he'd be taken to task no matter what he said. He knew that every word he uttered would be twisted by the media to make him look like a hate-monger, or worse, a racist. But Wright faced his critics with dignity and delivered another barnburner. By the end of the speech, everyone in attendance was on their feet applauding wildly for the man the corporate media has chosen to destroy.






See Also...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright

 

[Twin Fist]

thats nice, but it doesnt change the fact that what we heard on Fox WAS Rev Wright

the usa invented aids to kill people of color
the usa and al quieda are equally evil
the usa deserved 9-11
nagasaki and hiroshima were terrorist acts
US of KKKA

yeah, I know ALL I need to about the good Reverand

 

[Big Don]

Hugh Hewitt did what none of the MSM has done, he posted the audio and the transcripts of the COMPLETE sermons by Rev Wright.
Here is the link
Here are some excerpts:

We believe we've got a right to all the oil on the face of the Earth, and we've got the military to take it if necessary

Oh, maybe liberals defend him because he says the same stupid things they do?

The government lied in its founding documents, and the government is still lying today.

Fine upstanding American.

The government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew the Japanese were going to attack. Governments lie. The government lied about the Gulf of Tonkin. They wanted that resolution to get us into the Vietnam War.

Yeah, you'd never hear that on the DailyKos or DemocraticUnderground...

The government lied about adventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color

 

[RandomPhantom700]

The media is omniscient; they remain invisible behind the camera lens. But there's no doubt about their objectives or that they've become a big player in the electoral process. The media sees itself as a "kingmaker"; their job is to shape public opinion using the tools at their disposal. This particular incident brings back the infamous "Dean scream", which was replayed on commercial TV over 900 times during a 48 hour period, with a background narrative which suggested that Dean was mentally unstable. It worked, too. Dean's approval ratings plummeted after the onslaught and the threat of an antiwar candidate appearing in the general election disappeared. Another triumph for the blue suits.

I really have a problem with this paragraph, for two reasons. 1) We all know that "the media" is actually a variety of very different sources, with a variety of different biases, as it should be. While there are certainly a number of common unifying truths such as "if it bleeds, it leads", they're still not a single omniscient, unilateral force. CNN may want to deify Obama, while FOX will want to bring him down, which leads to my next problem with this paragraph....

2) The author makes it sound like the "kingmaker" media is trying to destroy Obama, but up until the Rev. White scandal broke out, most of the political commentary was that the media was making a messiah of Obama. Is the media trying to tear him down or build him up? The answer is one of two: either a variety of different media have been doing one or the other, or the media as a whole took a big 180 when the Rev. White scandal broke out. Either way, the idea that a unified body called "the media" has had an agenda against Obama doesn't hold.

 

[Big Don]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
A wonderfully unbiased site...



ooops, that should read UNBALANCED, as in nucking futs

 

[crushing]

Don,

The quote you provided when questioning Rev. Wrights 'Americanism' or patriotism.

The government lied in its founding documents, and the government is still lying today.

1776, from the Declaration of Independence (arguably, one of the founding documents):

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Finally in 1865, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Then from the 15th Amendment ratified in 1870:

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Then not until 1920 the 19th Amendment:

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Can you see where someone could find a disconnect between the promise of the founding documents and how things really went down?

 

[Big Don]

Yes, and I see it CORRECTED, too.
As to his military service, Benedict Arnold, whose name is synonomous with treason today, was a big time hero...

 

[CoryKS]

He knew that every word he uttered would be twisted by the media to make him look like a hate-monger, or worse, a racist.

Interesting. Apparently, quoting someone verbatim == twisting his words.

 

[fireman00]

It has come to light that the Rev. Wright setup this week's dog and pony show - getting his 15 minutes of fame in the limelight. When most all religions preach humbleness he's out there looking to pimp his name.

Some folks need to wake up to the fact that the egomanical Rev Wright does NOT speak for the vast majority of blacks and that his comments are off the mark. His brand of religion does not strive towards reconciliation but divisiveness. Couple of good reads in today's papers include commentaries by the editor of the Easton Express Times and by Eugene Robinson.

 

[Big Don]

Victor Davis Hanson has a nice column on National Review today.
An excerpt:

The Scary Legacy of the 2008 Democratic Primary [Victor Davis Hanson]

One of the strangest things about the NAACP Wright pseudo-scientific speech on learning, and its enthusiastic CNN coverage and analysis, was the abject racialism of Wright. It was sort of an inverse Bell-Curve presentation, based on assumed DNA differences.

His convoluted explanation of African-American right-brain 'oral' culture as more creative, musical, and spontaneous versus European left-brain traditional analysis could never have been given by someone white to that audience without justifiably earning booing and catcalls.

But, democrats are never racist...

 

[ejaazi]

thats nice, but it doesnt change the fact that what we heard on Fox WAS Rev Wright

the usa invented aids to kill people of color
the usa and al quieda are equally evil
the usa deserved 9-11
nagasaki and hiroshima were terrorist acts
US of KKKA

yeah, I know ALL I need to about the good Reverand

And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?

 

[Tez3]

And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?

This is undeniably correct. You don't have to like or agree with the opinion just acknowledge he has the right to have one and express it if he wishes.
It's the test of free speech isn't it to allow people their say even when you abhor what they say?
Examining their viewpoints then refuting their arguments calmly and logically is much more effective than merely name calling or blandly stating this is biased or this is rubbish, it doesn't go anyway to making a coherent argument.
Posting up a site and saying merely it's biased isn't a great help to the non Americans here who have no idea who the personalities are in this. I know people that think The Sun and The Daily Sport over here are actually newspapers instead of being part of the porn industry here and quote them as being serious political commentators so we need a bit more before we can accept someones opinion as being fact.

 

[Big Don]

This is undeniably correct. You don't have to like or agree with the opinion just acknowledge he has the right to have one and express it if he wishes.
It's the test of free speech isn't it to allow people their say even when you abhor what they say?

Actually, it is to DEFEND his right to say it.

Examining their viewpoints then refuting their arguments calmly and logically is much more effective than merely name calling or blandly stating this is biased or this is rubbish, it doesn't go anyway to making a coherent argument.
Posting up a site and saying merely it's biased isn't a great help to the non Americans here who have no idea who the personalities are in this.

Did you look at the site's homepage? A few headlines from there:Black Hole in Bush's Brain, America's War for Global .Domination The Plan is for the United States to rule the World... the bias is clear and unambiguous.

I know people that think The Sun and The Daily Sport over here are actually newspapers instead of being part of the porn industry here and quote them as being serious political commentators so we need a bit more before we can accept someones opinion as being fact.

 

[CoryKS]

And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?

Absolutely, and no one has disputed it. We are entitled to our opinions too. My opinion is that someone who holds views like this is a moron who should be pointed to and laughed at. My opinion is also that anyone who would consider such a person a "spiritual mentor" should only see the White House by paying for the tour.

 

[Tez3]

You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.

So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who perceive that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.

 

[Ray]

You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.

So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who perceive that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.

Quite possibily we in the US are more afraid of the rest of the world dragging us into another global war. It's happened twice before. Could it be that we're trying to prevent the next one?

 

[FearlessFreep]

You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.

So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who perceive that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.

As an American, I have become somewhat curious, not about the world's opinions of the US but about the world's potential actions toward the US. I first started thinking about this in terms of global warming... If all the world sees global warming as a threat... and the US is seen as one of the biggest contributers... and the US is not doing anything about it...at what point does the rest of the world reach the conclusion that the US is a very real threat to the life of the rest of the world...and what will they do about it? I'm starting to have the same curiosities about politics. Regardless of of who gets elected President, the process has become very undemocratic and pretty messed up. Now, the person who *is* president will be in control of a huge military, lot's of nuclear weapons, and an economy that can steer the world's fortunes. Does there come a point where the method of choosing a president is perceived to produce a leader who cannot be trusted with that leadership? Especially since the ramifications are such that said leader has power, directly or indirectly, over a lot of people who had no part in the process.

Or to sum up...I'm curious at what point will someone, or a lot of someone's decide that the US is too dangerous to the rest of the world, environmentally, economically, militarily, politically, to be allowed to continue on it's present courses, and what would they do?

 

[Twin Fist]

And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?

He is absolutely entitled to that opinion.

And we are absolutely entitled to jeer, ridicule, and dismiss him BASED on that opinion. "Freedom of speech" means you can say it, it doesnt mean you are free from the consequences of that speech.

 

[Twin Fist]

You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.

So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who perceive that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.

yes, I have traveled the world and I have seen how the world views America.

1. they all want to come here, to big bad america
2. they hate us because we are the super power and they, the former world powers are now irrelevant
3. As soon as any country's butt is in the fire, they scream for America to come help
4. at the same time, they scream about american interference in the world

add it all up and I for one, and lots of other are getting sick of the rest of the worlds crap

 

[Bodhisattva]

thats nice, but it doesnt change the fact that what we heard on Fox WAS Rev Wright

the usa invented aids to kill people of color
the usa and al quieda are equally evil
the usa deserved 9-11
nagasaki and hiroshima were terrorist acts
US of KKKA

yeah, I know ALL I need to about the good Reverand

Some of those things are true.