Politics / Press Releases

Actor Sean Penn’s El Chapo ‘Interview’ Puts New Focus on the Quality of News Coverage, says AMAC

newsReporters don’t need a license, but they do need integrity

WASHINGTON, DC, Jan 22 –Activist actor Sean Penn should be used to controversial media coverage by now, considering some of the outrageous statements he has made over the past few years.  But his recent attempt to identify himself as a journalist after publishing an “interview” with drug kingpin El Chapo caused quite a stir, said Dan Weber, president of the Association of Mature American Citizens.

“Penn is no journalist and the narrative he penned [apology] is what the Statesman Journal described in an editorial as ‘a vanity project, movie treatment, friendly chat between celebrity and sociopath.’  Whatever you call it, Penn’s antics put a new focus on the quality of media coverage in the 21st Century, a time when so-called citizen journalists abound on the Internet and social media.  They lack sources, report rumors as fact and put pressure on traditional reporters to get on top of the story, whatever it may be,” according to Weber.

Penn insisted that you don’t need a license to practice journalism, the AMAC chief noted.  But, he added, reporters do need integrity.  “It’s their job to provide the facts; it is our prerogative to interpret those facts.  We don’t need their spin.”

It is interesting to note that it was Rolling Stone magazine that published Penn’s article, the same publication that got into trouble last fall as the result of an article written by one of its own reporters, Sabrina Rubin Erdely.  She claimed that a young woman was raped in a University of Virginia fraternity house.  But, the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism conducted an independent inquiry and found that the story was made up.

“It was no mistake on Erdely’s part.  She was using the fabricated rape to make a point: that  sexual assault is a problem on many college campuses.  It was not a very honest or ethical way to deal with such an important problem,” said Weber.

And then there was the incident involving George Stephanopoulos at ABC-TV News.  Everyone knows that he was had long-standing ties to the Clinton family, but few knew he had been contributing tens of thousands of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.  Stephanopoulos used his position as a “reporter” to take on Clinton critic Peter Schweizer who authored the book, Clinton Cash.

Even the liberal New York Times described the incident as a case of Stephanopoulos “facing accusations that he was effectively trying to buy favor with his former employers as Mrs. Clinton seeks the presidency for a second time.”

Without integrity journalists become irrelevant, Weber explained.  They become “partisan hacks, hitmen for personal causes.  More important, they erode the confidence the public has in them and in all news reporters.

The majority of journalists adhere to the rules and stick to the facts; they know that there’s swift justice for writers who stray.  But, too many reporters have been taking liberties in recent years and getting away with it, especially some of those who cover social and political issues.

“Indeed, news reporters do not need a license to practice their profession, but they are bound by a code of ethics.  They must stick to the facts.  They do not take advantage of the stories they are covering to promote a personal agenda.  The integrity principle needs to be taken seriously by those who would be news men and women and, if they stray, there are editors who strictly enforce the code.  Editorials are for the editorial pages,” Weber concluded.

ABOUT AMAC

The Association of Mature American Citizens [http://www.amac.us] is a vibrant, vital senior advocacy organization that takes its marching orders from its members.  We act and speak on their behalf, protecting their interests and offering a practical insight on how to best solve the problems they face today.  Live long and make a difference by joining us today at http://amac.us/join-amac.


If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!


Subscribe
Notify of
39 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
TerriA
6 years ago

I was guilty of jumping on the public opinion because of Penn’s reputation for irresponsibility and bad judgment; however after listening to him on Charlie Rose two nights, I found him to be extremely quick and intelligent, and while I still think it was a lapse in common sense to undertake the challenge, I could certainly understand his motivation. He was so right about the state of journalism. The media has personalities that cal themselves journalists, where Penn stands out in a field not his own, totally outshines their integrity. Being educated in a higher education that is genuinely socialist, like Columbia, the birth of Fabianism, shows there is no surprise in the lack of true journalists out there. Charlie Rose is a true one. Penn is proving himself to be also. When did journalism change from being the information avenue and becoming the propaganda and tunnel visioned hacks? Getting the information out there and allow the public to form opinions is the purpose of true journalism. Getting the news all one dimensional is for single interests and not the general public and they should identify themselves that way, as the National Review did in the past…I say the past because this week they too took on the left wing style of rampant disregard for integrity in reporting. while John’s journalism teacher is turning over in his grave, so is William Buckley. Journalism and integrity is an oxymoron.

Dr Quail
6 years ago

BRAVO, for a well written essay on the behavior of the Formerly respected fourth estate. Journalism is being taught as a method of SOCIAL ENGINEERING, not a source of information so people can make informed judgements. The great unread masses have become a tool for the Anti-American establishment and unfortunately are allowed to vote in spite of their lack of knowledge of anything except what they are told by the manipulative media. These quislings (the media) take their marching orders from the likes of George Soros and folks who own the liberal left.

JohnB
6 years ago

Thanks.
I think there is some fault with Penn too. But I think they is a ‘strike first and get the headline and worry about the fall later’ attitude in the media. My old Journalism teacher must be rolling over in his grave.
…John

Jack
6 years ago

This was NOT a conversation between a celebrity/journalist and a sociapath! This was between a nut job and a CRIMINAL. Abbetting the criminal. Breaking the law himself. Knowing the whereabouts of a hunted felon. WHY IS HE NOT NOW IN JAIL????????????????

Roy Bailey
6 years ago

To me, Sean Penn is still the character he played in “Fast Times at Ridgemont High”. And when did Rolling Stone have integrity to lose?

Gran Torino
6 years ago

You’re right…..they don’t need a license but do require integrity. What’s even worse is they all feel the need to give their slant or opinion. All they really need to do is report facts but even that seems to be something they are unable to do for the most part. They should save their slant/opinions for the editorial pages or a program that professes to be a program of opinions.

I could care less what some news anchor or Hollywood actor thinks. I can’t believe how these people have such big egos to think most of America cares what they think one way or another. But there are a lot of sheeple so…..

Socrates
6 years ago

I do find some honest and good local journalists, but it seems that even they need to become Establishment flunkies in order to have any chance of advancing to regional or national coverage.

Liam Corbett
6 years ago

I take issue your statement that the majority of journalists adhere to the rules and stick to facts. I’d say it’s just the opposite. The media is definitely liberal biased and this bias slant comes forth in just about every media story printed or broadcast.

Rodney Burke
6 years ago

what quality? I haven’t seen much from the brain dead leftist media. They are doing all they can to drown out the right or middle. Sean Penn is a leftist idiot and should be ignored.

JohnB
6 years ago

The collective comments on changes in journalism triggered by the Sean Penn article is interesting. Is today’s news Edward R. Morrow or Walter Cronkite clean? No, but the main difference is in news deadlines. Television has made news viable RIGHT NOW! I would guess less than a third of the news is run by an editor (not counting weather, sports, and charity events) due to beating the other television newscasters to the punch.
The real culprit is not Penn, it is the fact that major news sources have owners and backers that want what seems like big news rather than accurate news. The more sensational, the better. Things that go on in the world or Washington or your state… well, someone else can do that stuff.
we’ll get that later.
Hey, is that a fire engine I hear?

Ruel D
6 years ago
Reply to  JohnB

JohnB,
I think you hit the nail on the head about the instant deadline. I also think that 24 hour availability has cheapened news journalism as well. As far as Mr. Penn goes, I agree its not him, but a societal problem. In the late 19th century, actors were held at arm’s length socially out of a (possibly incorrect) perception of their lack of morals. Today we can’t wait to have some entertainer tell us how to live our daily lives and vote. I think this has something to do with the accessibility of movies and television making millionaires out of actors, thus giving them some kind of respectability in many peoples’ minds. Andrew Carnagie worked for his money. Sean Penn play-acted for his. This major difference is often forgotten in today’s society. I do, however, think that it is up to Mr. Penn as a good citizen, to control his ego and not get himself into disastrous affairs like the one discussed in the article.

Scotontheblock
6 years ago

Sean Penn is clearly searching for some substance in his life.
An individual who thinks he much more to offer. Not just his ability to play act.
Perhaps if he did not follow the mediocre path of liberalism.
If he approached life in a realistic and mature manner.
Then he just might find some self worth.
Otherwise, he is destined to continue on this futile foolish path, with no resolve.

Mike
6 years ago

I think it is immoral to interview a criminal unless he has already been captured or serving/served his sentence.

ellis hanes
6 years ago

This is the problem with news being reported today. The msm fabricates news instead of reporting the news. I don’t like to watch the msm news anymore because they are so biased. Fox news are the nearest factual news there is but even they stray once in a while.

Ivan Berry
6 years ago

So, which is it, the majority sticking to the rules and adhering to the facts, knowing there is swift justice for those who stray, or too many taking liberties and getting away with it?
How about the fact that reporters are being forced to conform to managements bias in order to keep their jobs and editors using editorials as news items instead of sticking to the old standard of editorials as opinion and news as news?
Appreciation goes to those who posted earlierand Ruel D’s editorial and PAULE’s news were well suited in bringing clarity to the muddle above.
As an aside, this is the second week in a row that no newsletter was sent to my email. You guys still getting one, or not?

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  Ivan Berry

Week two of NOT getting my newsletter via e-mail either Ivan.

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  Ivan Berry

By the way Ivan, most current reporters in the mainstream media aren’t getting their arms twisted to report the news from a progressive slant. The vast majority of people reporting the news on the air today or employed by the major newspapers as lead writers are openly progressive in their views when off the clock. I will agree with you that those not adhering to the progressive ideology do tend to get weeded out by not getting their employment contracts renewed.

Ivan Berry
6 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Even Mark Stein and Jonah Goldberg pulled their punches when writing for “Nat’l Review” by evidence in reading books by each of them where they took more liberty with exposing their true and more complete views.
Today a candidate for local district Constable stopped by. After questioning him on experience, positions and beliefs, he was presented with a supply of copies of our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to share with his family and those he introduced himself to on the campaign trail. His appreciation was evident. We even discussed positions on the hot topics as well as old standbys.

James G
6 years ago

In my opinion there are three type of true AMERICANS. Those who are born here, those who are born here and wave the American flag and those who are born here, wave the flag and honors the CONSTITUTION. It is hard not to judge and Sean Penn shows no honor to MY country. His honor is himself.

Angela
6 years ago
Reply to  James G

Sean Penn lost my respect a long time ago. I regret that he has so many followers. Bad for our country.

James g
6 years ago
Reply to  Angela

Angela
Followers is a key word. My experience is man nor woman is in control. GOD is in control and look at those who follow HIM. Whether you believe or not, just think about this. Climate control, immigration, police brutality, mass shootings and on and on. Humans cannot solve the problems, we are the problem. Sean Penn is a glory seeker of his own kind. What did he accomplish. zero

Angela
6 years ago
Reply to  James g

James, the human race is very faulty, that’s why we need God’s help. People like Penn think they are gods! That’s why they should be ignored. Yes, I believe God will help us; that’s why I pray a great deal.

james g
6 years ago
Reply to  Angela

Angela
I fully agree with you.
In conversation It was said “why do we fear tomorrow when GOD is already there.”

Angela
6 years ago
Reply to  james g

I like your last statement…very faith full.

DA
6 years ago

Commies wax poetic on the subject of freedom of speech, demanding the right to ‘push the envelope’ ever outwards, but are constantly prowling in the weeds looking for ways to curtail this right for those they disagree with. We should all know by now that when they drop, apparently, issues like the fairness doctrine, it doesn’t mean they’ve given up. They do this as a tactic to take attention away. It WILL be back. My question of the moment is whether a president Trump would embrace it as a way of stifling criticism. I wonder what others think.

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  DA

Interesting question DA. The Trump phenomena is highly unusual and somewhat difficult to understand in that he is obviously quite popular in every national poll posted to date and he does turn out amazing numbers at all his campaign events. Yet he is still very much the same New York Democrat he was just two short years ago, that endorsed Bill de Blasio, a self-proclaimed Marxist supporter, for Mayor and was very much on board with almost all the standard New York City progressive views. The comparisons in the mainstream media to Trump somehow being another Reagan make no sense at all, since Reagan held deeply conservative views and lived them for almost 40 years before becoming President. Trump, if he is to be believed, had some miraculous conversion to what he calls conservative values less than two years ago. However even now, many of his so-called solutions are just re-packaged big government, top down ideas more at home with standard progressive protectionist policies, a la FDR, than anything else. So should he win the Republican nomination and then continue on to win the presidency, I guess I could see him reviving the fairness doctrine. He would probably pitch it to the people as part of “the deal” necessary to get anything done in Washington.

DA
6 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Thanks for the reply. Didn’t know he endorsed deblasio. I’ve been ‘whistling past the graveyard’ regarding trump, hoping that he is truly a convert, but my doubts are mounting rapidly. I see his support emanating from frustrated apolitical folk, who are embracing a nationalistic tune seemingly devoid of detailed plans. Another cohort would seem to be people who are so angry at the current potus that they will try anything. I fear that trump represents what you have so often warned against: a quick fix solution, as if one election could possibly repair the damage from 100 yrs of progressivism. In the early eighties a great many people who were awakened politically by carters bumbling promptly went back to sleep. I suspect the desire for slumber to be part of this; turning things over to able hands who will do what needs done. At the least, I reckon putting T in office to be about the biggest gamble an electorate could take. What I mean is that it could go a couple if ways. He could turn out to be what he’s presenting himself to be, or not. With the other side there’s no question of the substance, only how quickly and decisively they move to curtail freedoms.

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  DA

Yes DA, this is going to be one hell of a gamble for America’s future with Trump. He was a big campaign and financial supporter of Hillary in 2008. He was an out-spoken supporter of Obama in 2012. There are literally decades of video tape of Trump espousing what Cruz rightly called “NY values” (big government progressive solutions, old-line tax and spend politics, calls for universal health care via single payer, calls to allow for more illegal immigration, etc.), yet the public at large seems disinterested in any of it. I too am getting the sense that many of his supporters are simply so desperate to “be saved” via some ethereal quick fix, that they are willing to overlook the obvious reality staring them in the face.

I’ve listened to almost all of Trump’s on-air speeches and looked at his official campaign web site and the few editorials he has had published recently under his name. The almost total lack of any specifics or meaningful detail ito any of his so-called “solutions” is amazing. Have the American people learned nothing after buying into the vague “Hope and Change” of Obama? Trumps entire solutions message boils down to “I will make America great again!. Just trust me.” Yes, I get people have endured a horrible eight years of a socialist president (oops he doesn’t like being called that…he prefers progressive) that has, in many, many ways, succeeded in “transforming America” and NOT for the better. However, people have to start making intelligent choices or they’ll likely end up at the same dead end the other party is racing us towards. Just at a slower pace.

I agree with you the only difference between Hillary and Bernie is merely how fast our remaining freedoms are quickly curtailed and we all get to enjoy the venefits of the typical socialist Utopia: equality of poverty and suffering for everyone. With either one, it will be a quick process.

Rik
6 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Hi PaulE, have you noticed that Trump exhibits the typical Progressive response when he is attacked? … He just turns the tables and goes on attack! … What’s wrong with people? … How can you believe someone who says he will build a wall at our southern border and have Mexico pay for it! … With what? Mexico doesn’t have any money!

I do expect Hillary to be forced to drop out and be prosecuted. Bernie will never be the candidate, he’s a sure loser! … And don’t expect Biden otherwise Obama would have encouraged him to run sooner. … Obama’s choice is obvious … the first woman to be President … Elizabeth Warren!

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  Rik

Hi Rik,

The reason Trump acts like a typical Progressive when attacked or criticized is because he IS a typical Progressive. I cannot believe so many people have been so fooled by his so-called conversion to conservative values. As for his “solutions”, none of them have any credibility. Mexico isn’t going to fork over billions of dollars to build a wall in the U.S. to keep they very Mexican people that Mexico is actively encouraging to leave. These aren’t their best and brightest that Mexico is pushing our way. These are the low-skilled, under-educated or completely illiterate people that Mexico would have to find some way of supporting for their entire lives if they stayed. Hell the Mexican government prints up instructions and road maps on how to sneak into the United States to encourage these people to leave.

As for China, if Trump enacts a 45 percent tariff on all Chinese goods shipped to the United States, China will just refuse to buy any more of our Treasury debt (causing a major spike in interest rates to us to encourage other nations to make up part of the slack) and then impose reciprocal tariffs of their own on our exports to them. FDR tried this protectionist nonsense in the 1930’s and all it did was crush a lot of U.S. businesses and extend the Great Depression by several more years. It’s the same with much of the other items Trump is promising to do.

As for Hillary, if either the FBI doesn’t recommend a prosecution or the Justice Department decides not to move forward with a prosecution, that would signal the end of the rule of law in the United States. A lot of rank and file FBI agents would certainly question why they should be doing their jobs, if political considerations out way whether someone is arrested and prosecuted for breaking several federal laws.

As for Bernie, my concern is more the massive support he is obviously getting. This shows we have a lot of people in this country who think socialism / communism is the way to go. They don’t just vanish if Bernie is taken off the Democrat ticket. Nor do they vote for ANY Republican, even Trump, because what they are looking for is the kind of socialist paradise Bernie is pitching. Yes, Bernie is a loser. He always has been, but look at the number of fools buying his message. Sure the DNC can replace him with someone else, like they are already hinting at by dropping Biden and Warren’s names to the press. However, we both know Biden would go nowhere and the Democrats want to keep the WH to keep all of Obama’s policies in place. Elizabeth Warren is actually more dangerous than Bernie, because she is a lot smarter and more committed to the socialist movement.

Shine
6 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Trump is (in my opinion) in bed with same Republicans that allowed Obama to get elected. They all have tunnel vision toward one world government and they all think they will be running it. They are scared to death that a real conservative will be our next President. Therefore I think if Trump wins it will be politics as usual. They may pull up the Obama reigns a little, go down a different street to throw us off but they will head in the same direction. If we want change we will have to change!

Ivan Berry
6 years ago
Reply to  DA

DA, I call it the emaculate deception. Trump’s claim as savior to make America great again is no different from Obama’s and his hope and change. The same type who voted in an Obama may well vote in a Trump.
Former Czeck Republic premiere Vaclav Klaus said, “The danger…is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama…than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man as president. The problem is much deeper…than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him president.”
Enter Mr. Trump to get the never voted and the disenfranchised who wish for salvation without works. And Trump the deal maker has a deal for America. You can bet that with an advisor like Carl Ichan (sp?), mentioned by Trump on the campaign trail at least twice, a deal will be made, or a few. Suppose to whose benefit? It likely will not be America’s.

Ruel D
6 years ago

By the way, I’d like to add that I think Mr. Penn will pay quite dearly for his little adventure. I think that whoever linked his interview with El Chapo’s capture is going to be guilty of murder at some future point.

Ruel D
6 years ago

I don’t mind a slant so much, its what human beings do, and they’ve been doing it for a long time. I’m presently reading up on Tombstone, AZ in the 1880’s; the time of the Earp/Clanton gunfight. The town had two newspapers; the Nugget and the Epitaph. One was openly Republican, one was openly Democrat. One came down on the side of the Earps, the other came down with the Clantons. It wasn’t disguised. I came back from my second tour of Germany in the early ’80s. Once someone explained to me what cable TV was, I ran out and got me some o’ that. The had this neat channel, CNN, that provided 24 hour news. I couldn’t wait. So, early one Saturday morning, I’m watching a CNN reporter going to a site in Central America where the nasty right wingers committed a massacre. The reporter gets to the site and is told to come back tomorrow, the site is not ready. Swear to God, this investigative genius turns around, comes back the next day, gets shown a couple of skulls and is telling us all about the right wing massacre. Last time I watched CNN. Rush Limbaugh makes no secret of his conservatism. Fox News, which I don’t really like, has the “fair and balanced” pitch, but once again, don’t make a secret of where their feelings lie. CNN, the Huffington Post, the New York Times, etc., etc., all want us to believe that they are unbiased news organs. This is utterly untrue and causes me to immediately treat them with great suspicion. If you won’t tell me what you’re selling. I have to wonder why. I’ll take your bias straight up, please. No ice. No soda. Now, having said all this, there have been journalists with integrity. I grew up watching Huntley, Brinkley, and Cronkite deliver the news. I was very surprised to learn, after his death, that Mr. Cronkite was against the Viet Nam war. If you want to see how low we’ve sunk in the last 60 years, compare the three named gentlemen with the fatuous bimbos delivering the news on most channels today. I remember in a half hour news show, the commercials got ten minutes, the weather two, and sports maybe five. Now we’re getting advice on how to put on make up correctly and how to lose a few pounds. Its not news anymore, its entertainment.

Rik
6 years ago

Today’s journalists bound by a code of ethics? … Beginning when?

You mean those same journalists who fail to report anything bad about any Democrat? … Where is President Obama being called out on his obvious lies? … “If you like your doctor, etc., etc.” … or maybe his phony gun crime statistics, or about Fast and Furious, or Benghazi, or his phony Christianity, or that he’s really not a Muslim? Or when Obama can’t say radical Islamist terrorist? … Fact is, when has Obama or Hillary ever told the truth about anything? … And when has the media ever called them out about it?

Who really trusts the media to report the truth anymore? … If I want the truth about anything, I can do my own research on the Internet and be closer to the “real” truth! … Oh wait, the government knows this and are now wanting to control that too. … Fact is, we’re ALL LEARNING to NOT TRUST the Media or ANY Career Politician (especially the professional liars, ALL attorneys)!!!

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  Rik

Well said Rik. The mainstream media has been overwhelming populated by like-minded liberals or full-bore progressives for decades now. You can go all the way back to the late 1950’s and early 1960’s to see numerous examples of how all forms of the mainstream media have always slanted news reporting to support the agenda of the left whenever possible.

Up until the late 1980’s, most people had no other outlet from which to get their news information other than these organizations dominated by the left. Sure there were always a limited number of sources one could go to get a real reporting of the facts, but they were few and far between and most people were either unaware of them or frankly content with whatever the nightly news or local newspapers reported. So the majority of people simply accepted that what was reported in the media, on a daily basis, was indeed the unbiased truth and not some slanted version of the facts or a completely distorted representation of what was really occurring to protect and promote the acceptance of the progressive agenda.

Once cable TV and to a much larger extent the Internet proliferated, along with the death of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine”, designed to stifle any alternative viewpoints or contrary facts to the mainstream narrative being promoted to the general public became widely available, it became increasingly apparent, to more and more of the public. that the mainstream media wasn’t necessarily reporting the news in an unbiased fashion. Rather most of the mainstream media was in reality reporting what was essentially highly filtered propaganda. Anything critical of the left’s position on any number of topics was either completely suppressed or inaccurately reported to paint a distorted picture of the subject in the public’s mind. On the other hand, anything that promoted any area of the progressive agenda was pushed and lionized as “being the smart approach”, “being the right thing to do” or “being the socially responsible thing to do”. Thus continually conditioning the public to accept and ever more progressive view of what public policy should be and how this country should be run.

Now however, people can not only get their news in real-time, via both cable TV and to a greater extent the Internet, but they can compare how various stories are reported around the world. In essence, giving people a much broader perspective on virtually any subject and the ability to fact check almost everything with enough research.

As an example, the recent New Year’s Eve attacks on young women in Germany by recent “immigrant refugees” (European news outlets are prohibited by law from mentioning the ethnicity or country of origin, other that “north Africa” which by their standards signifies Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey, etc.) wasn’t limited to just one city in Germany as reported here in the United States by most the mainstream media. All designed to dispel any notion in the American public’s mind that any of the “refugees” Obama will be importing here will be anything but peaceful, well educated people looking to assimilate into American society. There were in fact over a dozen other cities in Germany involved at the same time, as well as and similar attacks reported and confirmed at the same time by authorities in other northern European countries, Over 200 incidents with hundreds of “recent immigrant refugees” involved just in Germany. One Muslim cleric in Germany has come forward to say that it is not the fault of the Muslim men in custody. That Islam is, as they keep telling us over and over again, a religion of peace. Rather the cleric has said on German TV that it is the women’s fault for being “dressed inappropriately” and for wearing perfume, which is apparently a sign of a harlot in Islam.

In any case, to expect the American media to report the news in an unbiased manner and to be driven by a high ethical standard is unfortunately wishful thinking at this point. Yes there are a few news organizations that strive to do this, but the vast majority of the mainstream media is simply unwilling to do so. They are, for lack of a better term, functioning as a propaganda machine to distribute the progressive message. Neither Rolling Stone nor Sean Penn have been relevant for years now and are simply desperate to get back in the lime light.

Maggie
6 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Oh, yes, yes, yes. Question – the day “Benghazi” happened, I am sure I read there was a coordinated attack on multiple embassies – over 20 if I remember. To this day, I cannot find any information on that headline, it’s all just about the one. Does anyone else remember this?

PaulE
6 years ago
Reply to  Maggie

There were two other attacks, much less successful and of much shorter duration, within the 36 hour period surrounding Benghazi in other Middle East countries. Authorities in both those countries quickly stepped in to end the attacks. The story was covered by a few European news outlets at the time, but the story was quickly suppressed by the mainstream media here in the United States. The reporting of such events would NOT have fit the narrative Obama had laid out that terrorism was essentially defeated with the death of bin Laden.

Maggie
6 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Thanks, Paul. I guess my memory inflated the number! I’m glad to have verification that there were other attacks, though.

39
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x