The missing red line...

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...t-a-crisis-the-media-are-accused-of-ignoring/

Venezuela is on fire.

Civil unrest brought on by the dictator Nicolás Maduro’s treatment of his people has rocked the country.

Hundreds of protesters have been injured and at least 3 have even been killed by government forces, the Associated Press reports. However, information coming out of the nation is scarce.

Images that have leaked out of the country are eerily similar to what we are seeing unfold right now in Kiev, Ukraine.

However, as noted by Venezuelan journalist Francisco Toro, there’s one major difference between Venezuela and Ukraine: The media seemingly aren’t interested in covering the former.

For some, the silence surrounding Maduro’s brutal suppression of his own people is a little startling.

“Throughout last night, panicked people told their stories of state-sponsored paramilitaries on motorcycles roaming middle class neighborhoods, shooting at people and storming into apartment buildings, shooting at anyone who seemed like he might be protesting,” Toro wrote in the Caracas Chronicles.

More at link...
 
So, lets see... three killed in Venezuela. Hundreds killed in Kiev.

Venezuela has been an unfriendly repressive government for many years.

Ukraine has been a friend, but is now in a struggle between Eastern and Western forces. Venezuela is involved in an internal conflict.

Now, I am not saying the Venezuela story is unimportant. In fact it is very compelling and I hope that the efforts of the students there will lead to reform and a new more responsive and open government. But to ascribe some intent or agenda on the part of the media for not covering one over the other is silly and conspiratorial, but I expect that from The Blaze.

In fact the side of the Ukrainian story I find particularly interesting at the moment, that is not being reported is how close Ukraine is to Sochi. You have such frivolity as the Olympics so close to an epic story about a nation trying to break away from the grasp of Russia.
 
Additionally, the media does what pays most for the least cost. People in the Ukraine are providing most of the footage, while people in Venezuela are being censored and are unable (for the most part) to provide footage of what is going on. The Ukraine has western reporters who easily attain access. Venezuela has ousted the vast majority of unbiased fair reporters so getting the story is more costly and dangerous than getting the Ukraine story.
 
yet you idiots still think that americans are too passive and cowardly to effect violent change LOL

I don't and never has said that. I think our government is too responsive and wiling to make change to spark Americans to effect violent change.

In history that type of violent change requires a significant spark. Hunger is the most popular of these, but we don't allow our citizens to get too hungry. extremely high and extended periods of unemployment, without a safety net will also do it. Mob rule that allows widespread murder without attempts at justice is what seems to be sparking the violence in Venezuela. I am not sure what it is that is sparking the protesting in Ukraine, I haven't studied it much yet.
 
I don't and never has said that. I think our government is too responsive and wiling to make change to spark Americans to effect violent change.

In history that type of violent change requires a significant spark. Hunger is the most popular of these, but we don't allow our citizens to get too hungry. extremely high and extended periods of unemployment, without a safety net will also do it. Mob rule that allows widespread murder without attempts at justice is what seems to be sparking the violence in Venezuela. I am not sure what it is that is sparking the protesting in Ukraine, I haven't studied it much yet.

what do you think happened in LA after the acquittal of 4 violent cops?
 
what do you think happened in LA after the acquittal of 4 violent cops?

I had some personal issues going on around that time and don't know much about it, I remember once looking at the television and being surprised by what I saw, but that's about it.

The unrest in LA was short lived and not directed at a particular element of the government. There was not a goal of particular reform. It was not an attempt at overthrowing any particular element of the Government. The riot/protesters did not have an organized agenda.

From what I know about it, it was a different thing than what is occurring in Kiev or around Venezuela.
 
I had some personal issues going on around that time and don't know much about it, I remember once looking at the television and being surprised by what I saw, but that's about it.

The unrest in LA was short lived and not directed at a particular element of the government. There was not a goal of particular reform. It was not an attempt at overthrowing any particular element of the Government. The riot/protesters did not have an organized agenda.

From what I know about it, it was a different thing than what is occurring in Kiev or around Venezuela.

Do you consider the police a part of the government? That is who the protest was directed at and there sure as hell was a goal of reform and that was for the cops to quit mistreating blacks in LA.
 
Do you consider the police a part of the government? That is who the protest was directed at and there sure as hell was a goal of reform and that was for the cops to quit mistreating blacks in LA.


You're right, but it was still a far cry from what is happening in Ukraine and Venezuela.
 
Do you consider the police a part of the government? That is who the protest was directed at and there sure as hell was a goal of reform and that was for the cops to quit mistreating blacks in LA.

Ok, you are correct. But protesting against the police, an element of city government, is not the same thing as such directed toward an institutional portion of the governmental structure.. . Like a protest against the President, or the Congress, or the Governor. The LA riots were not the same thing that is going on in Kiev or even Venezuela.
 
No, I think Americans are too complacent and comfortable to effect violent change. You'd have to find a really divisive rallying point to get everyone's attention.

I think if something happened that changed the comfort level, the complacency would disappear rapidly. That's kind of my point. People, not just Americans, don't take action until they are uncomfortable. (Hungry, Scared, poverty stricken) In LA the people were afraid, because they felt the police were actively against them and instead of protecting them working against them. ( I guess that is in a small way similar to what is occurring in Venezuela. )
 
So, lets see... three killed in Venezuela. Hundreds killed in Kiev.

Venezuela has been an unfriendly repressive government for many years.

Ukraine has been a friend, but is now in a struggle between Eastern and Western forces. Venezuela is involved in an internal conflict.

Now, I am not saying the Venezuela story is unimportant. In fact it is very compelling and I hope that the efforts of the students there will lead to reform and a new more responsive and open government. But to ascribe some intent or agenda on the part of the media for not covering one over the other is silly and conspiratorial, but I expect that from The Blaze.

In fact the side of the Ukrainian story I find particularly interesting at the moment, that is not being reported is how close Ukraine is to Sochi. You have such frivolity as the Olympics so close to an epic story about a nation trying to break away from the grasp of Russia.

Venezuela is a socialist Mecca. You should be on bended knee genuflecting toward a monument of Chavez
 
Venezuela is a socialist Mecca. You should be on bended knee genuflecting toward a monument of Chavez


I am not particularly opposed to socialism if that's what a nation choses but I am not a socialist per se, so why would I care about Chavez?

The things I disliked about Chavez were not his balance toward Socialism, it was his authoritarian rule and use of force and violence to remain in power.
 
I am not particularly opposed to socialism if that's what a nation choses but I am not a socialist per se, so why would I care about Chavez?

The things I disliked about Chavez were not his balance toward Socialism, it was his authoritarian rule and use of force and violence to remain in power.

Socialism(the left), along with its "mother", Communism(the far left) require authoritarian rule....
 
I am not particularly opposed to socialism if that's what a nation choses but I am not a socialist per se, so why would I care about Chavez?

The things I disliked about Chavez were not his balance toward Socialism, it was his authoritarian rule and use of force and violence to remain in power.

Are you willfully naive? True Socialism can only be brought about with authoritarian rule. There can be no other way.

Sure there are people like you who will gladly give up their liberties. But those of us who cherish freedom and private property rights must be dealt with by the socialists. That is where the violence inevitably comes into play. History is replete with examples. That you choose to ignore them is on you
 
No, I think Americans are too complacent and comfortable to effect violent change. You'd have to find a really divisive rallying point to get everyone's attention.

President Obama said that the Ukrainian government would face "consequences" if it crosses the line in cracking down on protesters in Kiev.

and it will be no surprise that Putin will assist the Ukrainian gov. in any retaliation....

So....is Obama threatening military action on the Ukrainian gov. and Russia as he threatened Syria ?.....or is he pissing on our leg and telling us its raining.
 
Back
Top