Why does our media seem to support our enemies?

The American Thinker ^ | August 24th, 2005 | Noel Sheppard

[JarheadFromFlorida]

Because the MSM (old) media IS the enemy. The are part of the left and the majority of the left in this country sees America as a bad and racist country and they don't think that it is fair that America is the only superpower no matter how much good and how much foreign aide America gives around the world.

[TigersEye]

They approve of the jihadists because they are jihadists themselves, just with different methods and a different cause, one that they do not realize is long dead.

By golly I think you're right. I call them fanatical elitists.

What causes fanaticism and why it is dangerous.

The fanatic has an elitist view of himself. He holds a firm belief that he is "special" and has something that others, not like him, do not and that this unique "something" imparts an unquestionable and unassailable power to himself. Because of this basic self-view any disagreement with the elitist or any resistance to his actions causes anger. This "supreme" view of himself is an excuse for justifying his anger and thus justifying any act from deception to murder against those who disagree or refuse to comply with him. He is comfortable with hatred, revenge, lying or any gross deception in defense of his "superior" position and will act out against those who do resist or refuse to validate his view.

It is impossible to reason or negotiate with someone who holds the POV that they are morally and/or ethically superior by virtue of the belief that they are inherently so. Everything you do to accomodate his "concerns" (demands), short of complete capitulation, will be discounted due to your "inherent" inferiority. Any resistance to him, anything other than complete submission, becomes self-evident proof of his superiority. The elitist's POV presupposes the rationale of rightness and righteousness as inherent to himself by virtue of his personal belief not as a measure of the qualities of his actions or the resulting consequences. His belief that he is superior may hang on an ideology or philosophy but regardless of whether the doctrine supports his view or not he is simply never wrong about himself. Of course the opposite is true for non-elites in the fanatic's mindset. You can never be right if you're not one of the "righteous" simply because you are not. More precisely; you are not "him."

It should be obvious why a fanatic is dangerous. Any and all negative and evil acts can be justified on the basis of any disassociation with his self-view and the "inherent authority" he carries with that. The intent and motivations of an outsider are irrelevant no matter how positive. The results of an outsider's actions are irrelevant no matter how accomodating or constructive. The non-elites are always wrong because they don't hold or submit to the fanatic's view.

The world is full of fanatics of every kind and they can base their elitist self-view on any pretext. Some belong to large groups of "like-minded" fanatics and some are individuals who cling to the delusion that they alone are "special."

In today's world the United States in particular, and western civilization in general, is under a concerted assault from two separate groups of fanatic elitists. Fundamentalist Muslims and leftists. The Islamo-nazis and the Marxists. Both leftists and Islamo-fascists hold a firm belief that they have something that rednecks and infidels don't have that carries a special authority with it. For leftists it is "intellect" and "social sophistication" and for Islamo-nazis it's a "call from Allah," a "holy annointing."

Both groups are manifestations of a mass psychological disorder resulting in fanatic elitism. Both are extremely unstable and are unfounded upon and unaffected by reasoned logic. Convinced of their own "inherent" superiority they will both press their respective agendas as far as they can without regard for the consequences to themselves or to others. In both cases the blame for all of their actions will "logically" fall on the shoulders of others, the "outsiders." Negative consequences of their actions simply become another tool for self-vindication.

The fanatic elitist's mindset is like the mindset of a rabid dog. Nothing and no one that exists has any meaning other than being a validation of their power or a threat to it. Nothing can have any other meaning; their POV is, by design, set from the outset and purposely unchangeable by external influence of any kind. Change can only occur from within and this means a change in the "prime directive," the core premise of their relation to the world. Change requires the abdication of their most basic point of reference, their self-view, the view that they are unique in a superior, inherent and authoritarian way. This is a view that reasonable people must either completely reject or ultimately submit to. Those are the only choices the fanatic will leave to "the others."

TigersEye - 7/27/05

[okie01]

Why do they denigrate the system that gave them their wealth and freedom to do these things?

Because, when their side is out of power, they go insane.

[okie01]

That explanation works today but what is the reason the press has distorted the news in favor of our enemies before that? I'm thinking at least as far back as the "The Tet Offensive crushed American forces..." line of BS.

Because LBJ wasn't "their guy". JFK had been "their guy". And, now, they were supporting Eugene McCarthy.

[Steely Tom]

Why does our media seem to support our enemies?

I don't believe that there are too many in the media who actually, conciously support our enemies (although there are some).

You don't have to believe there are traitors in the media to come up with reasons why they seem to support our enemies:

1:
First and foremost, the people who make, film, edit, and broadcast the news know they won't be killed if they attack the United States and it's political leadership. They know that too much attacking of our enemies (Islamic enemies in particular) will get them killed in a very grisely manner. If they attack the US and it's leadership, they can go to work every day, do their jobs, and no one will physically threaten them or even hassle them. If they attack Islam or otherwise antagonize our enemies, they won't be able to get any reporters or cameramen or other staffers to even get on a plane to locations in approximately three-quarters of the world.

Other reasons:

2:
The people in the media think of themselves as "objective." By attacking their own country and culture, they are able to tell themselves that they're "really objective." That this is silly and foolish matters not a whit. Most of the people in the MSM are silly and foolish, and ignorant to boot. They were chosen for their jobs based on criteria that have nothing to do with these characteristics.

3:
Bad news gets attention. If it bleeds, it leads.

4:
Why put someone's good news on the air free of charge? Put the bad news on, then get the affected parties to pay to put the truth out (i.e. commercials, including political commercials).

5:
Many in the MSM think of themselves as creative. They work in close proximity to, and do stories about, people who truly are creative. They covet and envy the gifts of the truly creative people they observe, without being able really to understand them. They have observed that, frequently, creative people do things that appear counter-intuitive, self-destructive, or even absurd. Therefore, the brainiacs in the MSM think that if they say things and make editorial decisions that are counter-intuitive, self-destructive, and absurd, they are being creative too. They are too dumb and ignorant to see the difference between themselves and people who genuinely contain the spark of creativity.

There are other reasons, but I've got to get some work done.

(steely)

[timestax]

bttt

[HitmanLV]

The liberal mind isn't willing to make judgment calls on people or groups: they have great difficulty labeling someone good or bad, for example (though conservatives of course are bad). Justice and injustice is too complex: since they can't make small judgments, they can't make larger ones. Their mind is preoccupied with shades of gray, unwilling to isolate black and white, tho oblivious to the fact that without black and white, there can't be a gray.

Anyway, their mind sees things in terms of who has power and who doesn't. That's who they decide to back: emotionally, politically, etc. For many of them, they see a dynamic of someone powerful and someone weak, and they naturally associate bad with power and goodness with weak.

That's silly, of course. But they don't see it as silly. It's genuinely a mental hangup they have.

[knews_hound]

Well strip my gears and call me shiftless.

The Media sides with our enemies?

You could have knocked me over with a feather when I read that.

Next thing you know, they will be telling me bears shit in the woods.

Cheers,

knewsd hound

[timestax]

bttt

[timestax]

bttt

[Mush MouthPhil]

Because the media is controlled by America's enemies:global government socialists.