Hacker News Reader

Comment by cinquemb | Hacker News Reader

This is what amazes me about our country:

We can get riled up over being told by mainstream media that we are being watched despite whistle blowers telling us so for years, incited by the same media to riot over an incident that happens every day untelevised, and not bat an eyelash when our own citizens are assassinated for the world to see by our government.

"Today, nobody cares… but tomorrow, they will…"

View on HN

The government has leverage to control mainstream media, and thus manipulate people's perceptions. If you're labeled a terrorist by their organization, you are not human anymore and your rights are nullified. Sad, but power does what it wants.

If you're labeled a terrorist, you are not human anymore and your rights are void.

Well, from what we have seen, it's more like if you are even within a kill zone of the latest guided bomb of someone who has been labeled a terrorist, you are not human anymore and your rights are now null.

And we will have to be naive if we think it will stop here…

No, but you most likely will be labled a combatant after the fact. Even when you were a young child, that got killed in a drone attack. Only recently the US did tell its people, that the so called precision strikes (mostly from the CIA) did kill innocent people.

Until then it was: "We did only kill terrorists, enemy fighters and combatants."

Sorry, to say that, but the EX-POTUS Jimmy Carter seems to have gotten it right:

"America does not have any functioning democracy"

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=...

And everything above I said knowing, what is said of the killed father. Knowing him allegedly being an Al-Qaeda-Member and recruiter and so on. If the government had so much on him (and his son), why not trial him (even in absence) and let a jury decide?

Why use methods, worthy of some ruthless dictator, or the governments from humanities darkest moments?

Coming from Germany (and knowing, that our government is not one bit better, but not equipped that efficiently) I really do not understand, how any sane American official can tell the world, that the US is the democratic role-model for all to follow.

As per today's developments, I think the conspiracy theories related to the government controlling the media and labeling them unhuman terrorists can stop. See: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover of the Rolling Stone.

I'm actually pretty happy about that cover.

We need to start having a more nuanced view of people. A common thread between the three people in this discussion: Trayvon Martin, Dzhokar Tsarnev, and Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki is that they are all young men who were killed and can be commonly reduced to stereotypes to fit a narrative (young black man up to no good, terrorist, terrorist).

But, when you dig a little deeper, it turns out there's a person under that sterotype! I'm happy to see the media start to see this and a national conversation grow around this; hopefully it will make us better human beings.

> A common thread between the three people in this discussion: Trayvon Martin, Dzhokar Tsarnev, and Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki....

They were all also unarmed when they were murdered.

Dzhokhar is alive, he's in custody.

Thanks. I misread the name.

When people insinuate government control of the media, they aren't implying that the editorial boards of every form of media run their material by a government representative, to which they get a yay/nay. It's quite a bit more nuanced that that.

So I'm not sure that seeing Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover of a mainstream magazine should end the "conspiracy theories".

It's much more subtle than some people realize. There's not much need for a formal conspiracy when the incentives align themselves.

Hold on. Why do so many civil liberty proponents such as yourself insist on dismissing and trivializing the Trayvon Martin case?

Isn't it possible to care about both racism and wiretapping/drones/secrecy a the same time?

Isn't racism one of the most serious issues in the US?

Why are you so sure any riots were 'incited by the media', rather than an autonomous response from the many people directly affected by racism?

As a black man, who grew up in the "ghetto", seen friends killed by former friends, and robbed by my own friends, I learned a little bit to know that if you are going to go out into the streets against the same government (if at best, most of the time it is just to rob some stores and burn down a popeyes in anger) that commits acts of violence against is own citizens extrajudicially, then you aren't really trying to solve any problems…

civil liberty proponents

I just love it when people place this label upon me because I adapted to train of thought of not wanting to fight anyone else's battles… when you get called a nigger by refs at your soccer games when you're the only black kid on the field and keep on playing with your team because you just want to play, come back and tell me how I should respond.

Both are serious issues, but the mainstream coverage and outcry over the Trayvon Martin case drastically overshadowed Abdulrahman al-Awlaki's. It's very telling of the power of those in government and mainstream media and how if they stamp you as a terrorist and drone you without due process, most of their constituents will accept it without a second thought.

Serious, no, tapping is serous the drones are HORRIBLE!

The media trivialised the Trayvon Martin case by demanding moral absolutism for an incident with only two witnesses, one of whom was dead.

The whole incident is appalling, however there was never going to be a satisfactory conclusion to that trial unless a lot of solid evidence one way or the other had somehow turned up.

It can be appalling and trivial at the same time. It was a highly local event that the media picked up as a national story under the guise of racism. The actual trial hinged on the law as it should, as apposed to emotionally charged outrage. It is appropriate now to examine the law, but it is a Florida law. Maybe worth a passing mention in national news.

The fact that the Attorney General of the United States gives speeches about a closed court case in which he has no authority to interject (Florida's Stand Your Ground Law) instead of addressing the slew of national and international hot topics, speaks to the damage control attitude of our officials at the moment. The fact that not a single mainstream reporter is pressuring officials to focus on these other topics highlights their complacency and populist pandering. Better not ask the wrong questions or go off topic, least you be removed from the White House press corp.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com