Visión: A reason to evade accountability.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2319459095001/politics-and-the-boston-terror-situation/?playlist_id=1621774019001
Politics and the Boston Terrorist situation that is the subject of this evening's talking points memo.

Even while the two suspects were at large, people like Barney Frank were politicizing the Boston terror bombing and incredibly some in the press were doing that as well.

I send my deepest condolences to the victims and families in Boston. President Obama said that what happened in Boston was an act of terrorism. I would like to ask: ¿Do you consider the US bombing in Afghanistan earlier this month, that killed that left eleven children and women killed a for of terrorism? ¿Why or why not?

White House spokesmen says: Well I would have to know more about the incident and obviously the department of defense would have answers to the questions on this matter.

Back to Bill O'Really: Here is how ridiculous that question really is. The USA is fighting a war in Afghanistan and in every war, collateral damage happens, civilians are killed, there is no way to prevent it.

It is not US policy to target civilians in Afghanistan in fact we go out of our way not to. Everybody knows that. Yet this woman has the nerve at a White House press conference to equate military battle field action with the bombing of civilians in Boston. Very disturbing.

But here is something even more provocative.

Former NBC News Anchor Tom Brokaw apparently putting some of the motivation of the Boston bombings on his own country.

Tom Brokaw says: I think we also have to examine the use of drones that the United States is involved in and there are a lot of civilians that are innocently killed in drone attack in Pakistan, in Afghanistan and in Iraq and I can tell you it happens a lot of time over there, young people will come up to me on the streets and say: "We love America but if you farm one hair on the head of my sister I would fight you forever" and there is an enormous rage against what they see on that part of the world as a presumption of the United States.

Bill O'Really: So let me get this straight Tom. We shouldn't use drones to attack Al-Qaida leadership or a Taliban terrorist hiding in the mountains of Pakistan. We shouldn't do that.

¿So how exactly would you fight the war against terrorism Tom?

¿You want to Invade Pakistan? ¿Is that what you want to do or do you want to sit back and let terrorists hatch their plots and watch Americans die and watch Americans die at home and at the battle field?

It's either or Tom, either or, one or the other.

I challenge you to come on to this broadcast and answer that question. Of course Tom Brokaw will not do that and he would not associate with the peasants here in The Factor. Nope, he is up here. Drives me crazy, this stuff really makes me angry.

Now it is worth noting that during World War two US did target civilians in Japan and Germany. It did what it had to do to win the war and to deal with Tojo and the Nazis. But now we have a cadre of Americans who for some reason don't feel that the USA has a right to defend itself.

Any decent person laments civilian casualties, anyone. But again in war they happen so it's time to knock of the nonsense. The war on terrorism is real. The dead and wounded in Boston are real and this ridiculous left wing moral equivalency is insulting and that is the memo.

Luego dice:
 
And here is what Carney should have done to that ridiculous women:

¿Are you kidding me? ¿Are you kidding me?

¿You are making a comparison between what happened in Boston to Afghanistan? ¿To drones? ¿Is that what you are doing lady?

Let us look at this closer:

I send my deepest condolences to the victims and families in Boston. President Obama said that what happened in Boston was an act of terrorism. I would like to ask: ¿Do you consider the US bombing in Afghanistan earlier this month, that killed that left eleven children and women killed a for of terrorism? ¿Why or why not?

Note that the reporter, which is a women only asked for accountability, she only asked a simple question, nothing more. She never said that what happened in Afghanistan was the same thing as what happened in Boston, so she never equated that. In fact Bill knows for sure he is not sure that  she actually did that equation because he asks about it:

¿You are making a comparison between what happened in Boston to Afghanistan? ¿To drones? ¿Is that what you are doing lady?

By making a question he is effectively saying he is not sure what her intentions were... She did not equate she only asked and asking is never equating in that case.

That bombing, the whole drone bombing campaign is to cause fear on Al-Quaeda leaders, or so they say... Thus it is to cause fear on Al-Quaeda, which was created by the US by the way... If it is to cause fear then it is to cause terror on Al-Quaeda and if it is to cause terror then it is terrorism. It is as simple as that. So yes, drones are a scare tactic and scare tactics are terrorism, no doubt.

But she gave an open window so that the person could respond, never saying that both things were terrorism even if they were. Terrorism is terrorism be it as a tactics of a "legitimate war" or not. Just like killing is killing be it that the military does it, a police men or a criminal. But that is not the point so lets not go beyond the limits here, she did not say that both things were the same, all she did was ask for accountability.

Because of the fact that she asked for accountability on the White House's concept of terrorism she was exposed, her picture placed to expose her to the hatred of people.

Now to the second part, the case about Tom Brokaw.

Let us look:

Tom Brokaw says: I think we also have to examine the use of drones that the United States is involved in and there are a lot of civilians that are innocently killed in drone attack in Pakistan, in Afghanistan and in Iraq and I can tell you it happens a lot of time over there, young people will come up to me on the streets and say: "We love America but if you farm one hair on the head of my sister I would fight you forever" and there is an enormous rage against what they see on that part of the world as a presumption of the United States.
 
Nowhere does it say, anywhere that drones should not be used. It simply does not say it, at all. It does have something interesting... It asks for the program to be examined. Now if you ask for something to be examined then you are asking for accountability and that is what Tom has in common with Amina, they both dared to question...

Asking things and demanding accountability is not good for corrupt media so they use extremism to try to make that questioning into something ridiculous or even in favor of terrorism. Like if questioning was an act of terrorism in itself.

Bill converted the need for accountability and the right to question into an unpatriotic act that threatens the security of the nation... When the truth is that accountability is in fact a treat to him and his biased, extremist lies...

Now, media can hurt people, it can cause severe pain on people. It can destroy a nation just like a weapon so obviously it can cause civilian casualties.

But then there is greed, slavery, corrupt media that do not work well if they are held accountable. They do not want to be questioned and they do not want people to study it because they are using the media for their greed and interest and not for the interest of the people so they commit crimes that benefit them, like gangsters and they do not care if the lack of accountability hurts or polarizes society. That is criminal media.

Criminal media can cause civilian casualties as well...

Any decent person laments civilian casualties, anyone. But again in war they happen so it's time to knock of the nonsense. The war on terrorism is real. The dead and wounded in Boston are real and this ridiculous left wing moral equivalency is insulting and that is the memo.

The best way to stop the people from questioning or holding the media accountable is thus: Justifying it on a war.

So criminal media needs a war, even if it is an abstract or against the ghost of terrorism anywhere on the planet to maintain the fear factor that justifies media crime for the benefit of the gangster that run mafia media.

The excuse is: Do not hold us accountable, let us hurt who we want and do all the corruption that we want because we are on a war...

So if there is no war... ¡Then create one! To justify the lack of accountability.

The fact is that the United States is in no position of doing a war against world accountability and even less a war against the world.

Now for Bill's question:

¿So how exactly would you fight the war against terrorism Tom?

If the business is fear mongering, like we just saw Bill do at his program the Factor then a good way we can start fighting terrorism is...

REDUCING CORRUPTION BY HOLDING MEDIA ACCOUNTABLE.

Mafia media needs war to justify it's criminal activities and corruption including like we just say exposing journalists, in this case a female reporter to public hatred, with name, last name and picture, which puts her security at risk. All that for asking the White House what is the official view on terrorism. Ask and be stoned, ask and be burned alive at the stake, when the crime is to fight corruption and asking for accountability.

Accountability is not equating corruption with righteous, transparent acts and I remind Bill that most of the money to reconstruct Iraq was stolen... Simply gone, no accountability at all. So no, not even war is an excuse to not have accountability and to evade responding with sincerity.

Holding FoxNews accountable for it's actions and thus all media is not a crime, is not a terrorist act, it is not justifying terrorism and it is not even justified when at war because in that case it would be a war crime.

Those who do a righteous war, like for example fighting Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did not need to try to justify corruption in the name of justice.

And that is what Bill O'Really is doing by relating the question (about the concept of terrorism of the White House and asking for accountability on the drone program) to a national security danger...

Not even war can be used as an excuse to allow corruption and persecute or ridicule those that ask for accountability.

War is NO REASON why Media should not be held accountable. That logic was specially true when John F. Kennedy was alive, a little before he was killed.

War is also no reason to promote, stimulate and finance corruption all over the world for the interest of some mafia leaders, like for example supporting extremely corrupt politicians and media all over the America's to profit from the crimes product of the lack of accountability.

Only a corrupt soldier justifies a corrupt war on the basis of corruption. A righteous war is accountable, transparent and sincere and that is not what we saw in Iraq where as I said a huge amount of money was stolen...

It is time that the pretext of war is not used as a pretext to justify corruption.