Topic: Perception, mentality and reflection (Read 6056 times)

Anonymous · « **on:** May 13, 2004, 11:46:53 AM »

http://www.gotthegeek.com/images/judgeavatar.jpg"> Submitted by TheJudge

Before you read on, I must inform you that my intent is not to piss off anyone by what you’re about to read. This is my perception, which may or may not be valid, of certain things that go on in the world that need to be questioned.

I’m sure you’re all aware of the events that occurred recently where an American, Mr Berg, was beheaded. I have seen the video. It’s very difficult to watch. I felt literally sick to my stomach when I saw the complete act. I had to get up from my workstation and head to the washroom because I wasn’t sure if I was going to vomit or not. If you choose to watch that video, that’s your right but I warn you that the images will trouble you deeply.

It seems not many people want to talk about it. I can understand that. It’s not easy. I am one of those people. Some days, I just want to unplug my TV and go live in a shack in the woods. I’m getting an overload of reality and the more I get, the more I think we should just blow ourselves up and make room for something better. I understand that by sheltering myself, I’m simply closing my eyes on reality and avoiding this harsh world we live in so instead, I write this article.

What prompted me to write this little piece is an American news station that I don’t even want to bother identifying who just took things to far. They ask viewers “should we air the video of the Berg beheading?” and they listed a URL for people to go and vote.

What the fuck is wrong with you people?

I almost stopped writing at this point because I figured the message was clear. But I have to keep writing. You see, this article isn’t related to the beheading at all. The question was just a trigger for me to stand up and say “enough is enough” because I scared myself with the very own thoughts which followed the question. My first reaction was to scream out loud to no one in particular “Fucking Americans!” I was angry. I could not believe what I just saw. And I was even more shocked at my reaction. For a split second in my mind, I branded every single American as fuckers, idiots, retards, inconsiderate self serving bastards, and the list goes on. Then I realized what I did and it scared me. Like I said, the thought only lasted for a split second. Unfortunately in other cases around the world, similar thoughts are becoming permanent. And for that, I partially blame the American media. There’s just no limits with these folks anymore. None.

America has a problem. They are being branded unfavourably and the perception of Americans by the entire world isn’t a true representation of your nation and nowhere near it. The media, who has the power to change that perception, doesn’t use that power. Instead, they make things worse by asking stupid questions like “Should we air the video of the Berg beheading?” I would like to think the typical American would be as disgusted by that question just as I am. This isn’t about censorship, or not wanting to face reality. This is about morale and ethic. My purpose is to tell you that your government and your media do not represent your best interest. I don’t want to turn this into a “Bowling for Columbine” debate although I feel Mr Moores had a good message for you. All I’m saying is that I can see where this hatred against America is coming from. The sad thing is that a very loud minority is the source of this misconception. A loud minority that I hope you will partly silence with the upcoming elections. I would also encourage you to watch only non American channels. Just try it for a month. Then go back to watching CNN and Fox and those other stations. Let me know if you see a difference in how the news is presented by other news stations from other countries. Let me know if you notice how the mentality of people is different, how they resolve conflict, how they deal with crime and politics. Let me give you an example: A Canadian electoral campaign doesn’t usually consist of selling the opponents as not fit for the job by pointing out their flaws. Instead, our candidates normally focus on their own strengths, their own views. They prefer to be successful in their campaigns by convincing people that they are the person for the job instead of convincing people why the opponent isn’t the person for the job. It’s based on merit rather than condemning the opponent. And that right there, as insignificant as it seems, is indeed a powerful illustration of different mentalities.

Would you want to see the Beheading video on the six o’clock new tonight?

Demosthenes · « **Reply #1 on:** May 13, 2004, 12:02:27 PM »

I think airing of such things is in extremely poor taste.

I also think that in spite of that, such things should not be suppressed.

Like the flag-draped coffin photos the White House wanted withheld from the media (which I don't even think are in poor taste, since all you see are rows of coffins with flags on them), suppressing such information does far more harm than not.

Even in Mr. Berg's case, I still believe that.

I haven't watched the video, but I would resent any kind of government action to suppress it.

I think the media should be responsible and act in good taste and with more respect, but that doesn't mean I think they should be forced to do so.

It's pretty easy to avoid the media, ultimately, if one is easily offended by poor taste and poor judgement.

That being said, my brother (who is on active duty in the US military) will be on his way to Iraq in a few months.

I am of course concerned for him, and that is all the more reason I think media coverage of this pointless, brutal war needs to continue.

People need to know what war is really about. It's necessary for the public to see what their presidential administration and his toadies are doing to the world, and what their Congress is allowing them to do.

It was media coverage that led to uproar over our involvement in Vietnam, and it is the media coverage happening now that is leading to increasing unease and uproar over what is happening in Iraq.

As vulgar and reprehensible as some media agencies have been in some of their questionable coverage, I still think it needs to be made available because to do anything else would be dishonest, and right now the public needs to see that violent, despicable reality in no uncertain terms, because it is the only thing that will lead to its conclusive end.

BTW, good article, Judge. I can tell you put some thought into your opinions, and I can really respect that, even if I don't always agree with them.

Anonymous · « **Reply #2 on:** May 13, 2004, 12:21:35 PM »

heh! I knew you'de be the first to reply!

Just to clarify, I don't want the coverage to stop or the government to legislate content. The media must cover and expose the facts. But they should use more judgement in how they do this. They should always be neutral. And in both cases, I find that the american media tends to score low grades compared to the rest of the world. The same applies to your government. I'm not against governments, I just want them to be responsible, ethical and morale. And I want this especially from the US government because of the technology they have at their disposal.

Hell, I want to US to disarm. I can't make them unfortunatly. Bush wanted sadam to disarm so he made him. He found and destroyed multiple weapons of minor destruction.

But if others want tu US to disarm, will Bush do that? Disarming is good for everyone else but him? How do you justify that?

I am more affraid of what the US can do than what Sadam could ever do.

gorgeous_si · « **Reply #3 on:** May 13, 2004, 12:32:50 PM »

Demo's right - the video should not be supressed. But it should not be shown on prime time TV! Can you imagine the effect it could have on someone who just happens to turn on at the wrong time?

Maybe it could be run at 2 in the morning, and people who want to watch it can stay up or tape it, or the news channels could make it available on the internet.

I for one, don't want to watch it. Someone offered me a copy online yesterday, and I found the idea repulsive ... but I can understand why some people may want to see it.

pbsaurus · « **Reply #4 on:** May 13, 2004, 01:17:21 PM »

I'll probably check it out just because I've never seen anything like it.

Anonymous · « **Reply #5 on:** May 13, 2004, 02:08:34 PM »

Quote from: pbsaurus

I'll probably check it out just because I've never seen anything like it.

That's why I did. And I never want to see anything like it again.

pbsaurus · « **Reply #6 on:** May 13, 2004, 02:47:55 PM »

Yeah I know, but I'll still probably have to see it for myself, just because.

Anonymous · « **Reply #7 on:** May 13, 2004, 02:52:51 PM »

I have no regrets. But like I said, this topic isn't about the beheading at all.

Anonymous · « **Reply #8 on:** May 13, 2004, 08:13:09 PM »

Normally I stay clear of things like that video, but this time I watched it. I didn't watch the Daniel Perl video, and he too had his head cut off. This video had about a long 5 minute speech before they actually killed Berg.

To be honest, there wasn't as much blood as you think there would have been. The quality of the video was rather low, which might have concealed the amount of blood. I can imagine, however, that A LOT of blood did come out when they cut off his head. Either way, it was disturbing to watch them hold up the man's head after what they had done.

This is starting to become too drawn out for many Americans to even want to support anymore. Maybe some countries want to be left in the stone age - fine, fuck them. Let them. If they want to be like America, let them become more civilized and then maybe we'll let them come to the dinner table to talk about trade, or something else that would help both parties involved.

When Bush first announced war with Iraq, I supported it because Bush led everyone, including me to believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Now here we are over a year later, and we have yet to find anything that counts as such a weapon. It's one thing to lie to one person, it's another to lie to your entire country. There's no way in hell that man is going to be elected for office once again after this term is up - Especially after such a fuck up as the Iraqi prisoner abuse - Although he may not have given the orders for such treatment to be carried out, his administration's appearance has been soiled beyond repair. And whoever did give the orders for such treatment and abuse of the Iraqi people lowered themselves as low as the thugs in Somalia that dragged US troops through the streets. It's a disgrace to the United States - We're better than that, we don't need to go that low.

bobo · « **Reply #9 on:** May 13, 2004, 11:35:56 PM »

I think there is another perspective on this and here it is.

To put things in perspective:

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
January.... in the fair city of Detroit (Michigan) there were 35 murders in
the month of January. That's one American city folks, about as deadly as the
entire war torn country of Iraq! The World Health Organization reported August 24, 1999 that there were approx. 8 thousand deaths per day worldwide, caused by indoor air pollution. There were 42,815 highway deaths in the USA in the year 2001. That's approx. 120 per day just driving on the highway.

Worst president in history?

The following appeared in the Durham, NC local paper as a letter to the
editor.

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war. They complain
about his prosecution of it. One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst
president in U.S. history. Let's clear up one point: We didn't start the war
on terror. Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.

Let's look at the "worst" president and mismanagement claims.

FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did.

>From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never
attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,333
per year.

John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked
us. I think history might show Eisenhower committed the troops and Kennedy
was honoring that commitment.

Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were
lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never
attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times
by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated
two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear
inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and
captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost 600
soldiers, an average of 300 a year. Bush did all this abroad while not
allowing another terrorist attack at home.

Worst president in history? Come on!

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch
Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy
the Medina Republican Guard than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police
after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in
Florida!!!!

xolik · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2004, 12:48:20 AM »

Bobo, you silly boy. EVERY Republican president is TEH WORST PRESIDENT EVAR!!!11!!!11!. You should know this by now.

Quote from: bobo

We didn't start the war
on terror. Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.

We didn't land on Plymouth rock. Plymouth rock landed on US! "Try to remember.." I love that. Like we'll ever forget about what happened. 9/11. What's that? I don't know. Did something happen that day? You mean there used to be two big towers in New York? What do you mean a plane went into them? Why wasn't this ever reported? Who else knew about this?

Quote from: bobo

A bunch of partisan crap from outside sources

Ask any Republican and you'll be shocked to find out every Democratic President was TEH WORST EVAR!!1!!1! also.

Quote from: Chris

There's no way in hell that man is going to be elected for office once again after this term is up...

Oh, I beg to differ. He signed a contract with me! Two terms and a book deal. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

phyre · « **Reply #11 on:** May 14, 2004, 01:31:51 AM »

Quote from: xolik

Oh, I beg to differ. He signed a contract with me! Two terms and a book deal. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Sure, but which one of you had posession of your hands when all was said and done?

xolik · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2004, 01:33:08 AM »

Quote from: phyre

Sure, but which one of you had posession of your hands when all was said and done?

They're always touching me in...places.

Binoboy · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2004, 09:34:54 PM »

Summary of Bobo's post: Clinton did it.
Least that's what I got from it.
Maybe he said pro-choicers or Communist secular humanist freemasons.

Anonymous · « **Reply #14 on:** May 17, 2004, 06:54:52 AM »

Quote from: bobo

To put things in perspective:

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

And that is one of the problems. Bush sold half the world on going to war with Iraq based on the threat of weapons of mass destruction, which he had no proff off so he just lied instead. He had suspicions based on flawed data. He called the bluff only to find that Sadam didn't even have a pair of two's in his hands. And when I saw the cards layed out on the table, I was pissed because we were lied to. At this point, even if they found some Weapons of mass destruction, I would have doubts in the back of my head. Doubts that perhaps they would have been planted on purpose by the US. Because I have no trust in the current administration. They proven more than once that they don't understand the term "moral".

At a minimum, you need some sort of solid evidence prior to making a decision that will lead to the death of tousands.

And that is still not justification to start a war. If that's all it took, then the rest of the world should be fighting the US because they obvisouly fit the requirement. That's the irony in all of this.

Bobo, no one said the US started the war on terror. But the response is certainly typical of one who is terrified: Irrational.

MISTER MASSACRE · « **Reply #15 on:** May 17, 2004, 11:26:18 AM »

Because of the very nature of television--it's an image box that shows you things the second you turn it on, and anyone can turn it on--I think it's probably a bad idea to air the Nick Berg video. To be fair, the internet is rife with download sources for the thing, so anyone who really wants to get a copy of it should be able to do so with little or no problem.

Leonidas · « **Reply #16 on:** May 17, 2004, 09:28:43 PM »

Airing the video on television is a bad idea, in my opinion. This medium gives the viewer almost no input on what is shown. Keep it restricted to the Internet, where viewers have a choice to view or not to view. I myself have seen this video, and I would not recommend anyone see it, because it is graphic and disturbing. Give people the choice to view it, don't air it on television and surprise people with it, but don't withold it completely, either.

TerrorDronze · « **Reply #17 on:** May 23, 2004, 03:38:40 PM »

Americans are sick people.... putr it on pay-per-view, and the government would make a fair amount of cash on the deal, and only those who wanted to see it would. it makes enough sense, it can be on TV, and only those who really want to see it can see it. In the end, it works out nicely.

News:

Recent Forum Posts

Shout Box

Author Topic: Perception, mentality and reflection (Read 6056 times)

Anonymous

Anonymous

Anonymous

Anonymous

Anonymous

Anonymous