Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Scary News

Yesterday the news networks (tv,radio,net) were bursting at the seams with reports that Iran is willing to attack the US, on US soil. I saw all sorts of headlines online, on news tickers, email breaking news stories, etc and noted many people in the anti-Ron Paul groups jumping all over the news headlines, of course discussing their dislike of RP's 'foreign policy'... of course using the news to jump around shouting 'oooooOOOooo let's all be friends'.... sarastic obviously. But I didn't have time last night to go through anything to see what was up. All I made note of were headlines such as these (found again via Google and typing in Iran + Terrorist):

US intelligence: Iran could launch terror attacks on America

Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds

US spy chief: Iran could launch terrorist attacks on US soil if it feels threatened

US fears increased terror threat from Iran

 Well, you get the idea. It was alllllllll over the news, no matter the agency. But this morning I happened to catch the last hour of the Mike Church show and heard him discussing these news stories and reading from the actual intelligence statement. Lo and behold,,, there seems to be a problem. Mr Church linked to a blog post you can read for yourself at Lew Rockwell ... oh noooooooooo not that crazy lew rockwell blog eh? Well read it and see what you think. Then click on the link to the actual statement the post writer (michael rozeff) provides at  itself. What kind of words are missing? You see that the writer is correct - in that statement, the speaker does not use the word 'terrorist' or 'global jihadist - the statement's further definition of terrorist, as seen at the start of the statement', anywhere to do with Iran. Hmmm well why do all the headlines I copied and pasted straight from the major news networks above say 'terrorist attack'? That's strange. And you will also note that they like to remove the words 'real and' and just say 'perceived threat' . The statement goes on a later point to say that the biggest concern in the coming years is Iran (along with China and Russia) using cyber espionage. The statement also says that they do not believe Iran has nuclear weapon capability at this time, but they could be moving toward it maybe possibly. Nothing concrete, just guessing. 

you may wonder if we should sit around and wait for an attack instead of moving on Iran before the attack. But what exactly would that mean for all of us? Moving on a country that does NOT have nuclear weapons just because they *might* one day, and if they get them, they *might* decide to use them if they thought it would do any good. My guess is that Iran would have to make sure they had the mother load of nuclear weapons ready, taking out everyone at the same time, or they would be knocked off the face of the map themselves with all the retaliation that would definately without a doubt be heading their way. Do you think Iran is ready for that? Seriously ready to risk that? It's just something to think about.  My bet is that they would be annihilated before they had time to think about what they just decided to do. Sorry but I don't think that they have a death wish. The leaders like to send others to do the dirty work and keep themselves alive and happy. While a nuclear bomb would be devastating to whomever they aimed at, they must surely know that the remaining weapons around the world would be pointed straight at them and while putting a dent in Israel or America, they would end up being a big empty crater after the retaliation hit. I really do not think they would risk something like that. I don't think they are that crazy. But whatever, that is my personal opinion.

In the meantime, the real issue is the news reporting. We see this stuff coming across our televisions and internet from supposedly reputable news networks and assume it must be true. Only to find out that words were taken out of context, mixed together, words added in that did not appear in the text in the first place, and then spat out as a scary headline to make everyone blood thirsty for moving on Iran in the near future. That is just plain wrong, in my humble opinion. 



No comments:

Post a Comment


These are my views and opinions. If you don't agree or think I am sadly misguided, that is your view. Feel free to share your thoughts but I also reserve my right to moderate content (IE foul language, excessive flaming, etc).