MSNBC edits footage to mislead viewers

reply to post by pieman


Where are you? I want to see what you have to say about this other clip. Why is MSNBC cropping out this particular footage? Dont you think this sort of thing is way over the line? I don't think even Fox has done this sort of blatant editing, but even if they did I'm sure there was massive outrage about it.

Originally posted by Wimbly
Read what I said and not just what you want to see.

i've re-read your OP several times, you clearly suggest that the protesters are demonized as racist in the clip, give it up.

reply to post by Credge

or they could be suggesting it is an anger driven attempt to intimidate, which is the way i read it.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


that's more like it, there is clearly a suggestion here, although, again, the commentator takes pains to say that racism is simply an element, there are other issues involved. to claim there is no racism involved in this is a stretch but there is an obvious attempt to clearly associate racism with the protests in your clip.

a black guy carrying a rifle wouldn't sit well but then it wouldn't invalidate the point either, interesting.

Originally posted by Wimbly
Dont you think this sort of thing is way over the line?

i think the media are a bunch of lying, spin doctor infested crap factories, that hardly excuses you for posting rubbish when we should be trying to cut through all that.

the second clip showed an example of what you were discussing, your clip didn't. the fact that it goes on doesn't excuse your behaviour, you knew your clip didn't show it and you still posted it with a suggestion that it did.

it's your behavior i have an issue with, not your point.

reply to post by pieman

i've re-read your OP several times, you clearly suggest that the protesters are demonized as racist in the clip, give it up.

No, I didn't and now that you've been proven wrong you still deny it. Why wont you gives us a reason for the edit?

Here is the unedited footage of the guy with the AR15, so that you can compare it to the MSNBC footage and see clearly that they didn't want people to know hes black.

i think the media are a bunch of lying, spin doctor infested crap factories, that hardly excuses you for posting rubbish when we should be trying to cut through all that.

the second clip showed an example of what you were discussing, your clip didn't. the fact that it goes on doesn't excuse your behaviour, you knew your clip didn't show it and you still posted it with a suggestion that it did.

it's your behavior i have an issue with, not your point.

I'm sorry, but you're just full of it. I watch the original clip I posted and Chris implies again and again that there are "other reasons" than the 2nd amendment. This is in line with the segment just before this one where they were outright calling them racists. For whatever reason, you're trying to find anyway to discredit me and this post. I clearly stated in the OP that this was something happening on Hardball and "all day on MSNBC".

One last time, why did they edit that clip if it wasn't to hide the man's skin color?

[edit on 19-8-2009 by Wimbly]

Originally posted by FlyersFan

We should have perm. stick ups in the media forum. One for each of the MSM 'news' (agenda) outlets. CBS (See BS), NBC, ABC, FOX, CNN ... and in each of the stickups we could report as we find things like this.

Report when you find these things to each of the threads ...
It would be GRAND!
(and given the amount of agenda flowing from those sources, we'd all be very busy little bees, I'm sure!)

Agreed. Maybe finally people would stop trusting these "news" sources (at least on this site) once and for all.

We could call it the 'MSM exposure project'. In time people would take them about as seriously as they take the Nat'l Enquirer or Globe.

Originally posted by pieman

reply to post by Credge

 

or they could be suggesting it is an anger driven attempt to intimidate, which is the way i read it.

So the what is intimidation and the why is anger?

I would agree if they didn't bring up assassination.

Originally posted by Credge
So the what is intimidation and the why is anger?

I would agree if they didn't bring up assassination.

i assumed that they were suggesting that the threat of assassination was the intimidation. the "liberal" commentator says something like "those who can afford it use lobbies to push back against change and those who can't afford lobbyists strap on guns to push it back".

i assumed he meant that the guns were meant to be used as a threat rather than as a weapon. that's just what i took from it, i might be wrong.

Besides all of the rhetoric about the left being so frightened of these perceived 'racist' groups coming to protest. Does anyone honestly believe that these guys ever got close enough to the President to be deemed a threat?

It's fear mongering from the Obama news network once again.

Originally posted by Wimbly
One last time, why did they edit that clip if it wasn't to hide the man's skin color?

one last time, the MSM's spin does not excuse your spin. i have no issue with the idea that the MSM spin stories, i have an issue with the idea that you expect to spin a story on ATS and not be called out on it.

clearly it was intentional, you didn't put your hands up and say "oops" straight away. fine. you want to spin, that's up to you. i will just treat your information as "not credible", check it if i feel like it and point out the spin when i feel like it, it's no big deal for me.

[edit on 19/8/09 by pieman]

reply to post by pieman


Its not spin at all! Everything I said is verifiable by watching the clips. You're just trying to save face after being proven wrong.

It starts at :30 in the MSNBC video, she states whether it's a racial issue, and goes on about white people showing up at the rally. Kind of snowballs from there, as another commentator chimes in and continues with the race issue.

In the first clip, notice around marker 25 seconds -
unlicensed Loaded gun near a SCHOOL then at second 28 you hear 2 sounds that are much like gun shots. NLP?

I don't know much about NLP, but I know that certain words, especially when used together, generate fear in a lot of people - Looks and sounds like it to me.

I've heard a lot of anti-gun folks say that the very SOUND of gunfire scares them.

You know...watching more...maybe it is like LEFT and RIGHT are like 2 different neural architechtures. MSNBC programs the folks that have the left one, and Fox the right one. Sorta like Macs and PCs. We argue those too.
Either way, both are programmed.

Maybe some of us are SPARCs.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by hadriana]

First off, thanks to Wimbly because I found the clip to be absolute evidence of something...spin.

Secondly, I would just like to know what the solution is to distributing the news? Everyone on the left hates FOX, everyone on the right has suspect to hate for everyone else. If nobody ever believes that anything is ever true because it comes from a set of letters we don't happen to "support" than how the heck are we supposed to ever know what is going on? We are all letting them win!

This clip is a clear attempt to spin and mislead the public yet the OP is taking shots for posting and being accused of spin himself? Why isn't everyone on here simply furious that the clip was clearly edited to further a hate-filled agenda? Because of some weird allegience to a news venue or a political party? ...my gosh the proof is right in front of you and it is still called spin.... Let's just all keep arguing while the current administration finishes off the job and throws freedom right down the toilet forever. Blah.

reply to post by pieman


So... they're intimidating the president?

Maybe, but not with threats of assassination. That's a fairly important distinction.

Originally posted by Wimbly
reply to post by pieman

 

Its not spin at all! Everything I said is verifiable by watching the clips. You're just trying to save face after being proven wrong.

I say let it go.

Pieman is clearly here on a mission to derail your thread.

The meaning of what you and others have posted is clear for (most) all to see. To try and pick it apart based on semantics and syntax is an often used tool of the left.

reply to post by Credge


i'm not sticking up for the points of view of these people, i have absolutely no interest in supporting the media, i'm just telling you what i perceived the panelists meant. i don't really give a damn why they were walking around with guns strapped to them.

Originally posted by Credge
reply to post by pieman

 

So... they're intimidating the president?

Maybe, but not with threats of assassination. That's a fairly important distinction.

Some very timely quotes.

‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’

— Abraham Lincoln

‘‘Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States’’

— Noah Webster, 1888

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Congress and the President should be intimidated to listen to the American public, rather than dictate to the American public as they have been doing. I am glad to see Americans showing up to these meetings reminding Congress and the President of the freedom to bear arms, that so many in the left-wing media are so afraid of. "OH MY GOD! POLICE ARE LETTING AMERICANS DO LEGAL STUFF! WHAT ARE WE EVER GOING TO DO!"

If this all does come down to us, the American public, having to take away the power from these Washington politicians, then so be it. That is one choice we do still have, thanks to the U.S. Constitution, and those who have preserved and protected it throughout the years.

[edit on 8/19/09 by Ferris.Bueller.II]

reply to post by Wimbly


Well to be fair, there were two guys there with an AR-15. One was black, the other white.

reply to post by pieman


Well there's no harm in that . I'm just trying to have some casual debate on it is all. No harm meant or anything.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


I do agree. However, there's a difference between an intimidation by showing unwillingness to conform to unconstitutional standards and intimidation by threatening violence or violent acts.

The real question is "why". Why did MSNBC "choose" to edit out the skin color of the person with the semi-automatic rifle? Let's there those on the left answer that one. I suppose it was just an "innocent" omission, eh? It's obvious that MSNBC is playing up the "guns are at President Obama's rallies because whites are afraid of a black President" angle. Would showing that it wasn't only whites with guns blow that argument up?