In the dark days before the internet we were at the mercy of the power brokers and the political elite. Unless one directly compared a printed news story to that of a foreign outlet or listened to international news on short-wave radio, you took for granted that because we live in a "free" society you were getting information free of political slant and free of a writers prejudices. We Americans hold the moral high ground and the editorial staffs are dedicated to this principal, right? RIGHT?
Today we have the ability, the duty to sift through the information presented as facts and form opinions based on a preponderance of evidence. The dependence upon a single source or even a limited number of sources for news is lazy and inexcusable and results in a myopic view of not only the news but of the world. And yet, despite the incredible number of sources available to the average American, we seem to be woefully uninformed and pigheadedly stubborn in our ignorance.
Case in point: George Zimmerman vs. Trayvon Martin.
The spin started with the traditional race baiters trying to paint the incident as a white security guard with a chip on his shoulder gunning down an innocent black youth on his way home from purchasing candy at the neighborhood 7-Eleven. All of the usual talking heads crawled out of their holes to wag their fingers at society in general. Rev. Al Sharpton trotted out the family for photo ops crying "foul" that the "shooter" wasn't in jail. Rev. Jesse Jackson mumbled his way through a dozen interviews in which he denounced the police, the district attorney, and society as a whole for the death of the poor, innocent black child who was in his words "profiled, stalked, callously targeted and murdered solely because of his race". The New Black Panthers put a bounty on Zimmerman's head!!
Each and every public statement, candlelight vigil or announcement by law enforcement was covered ad nauseum by the mainstream media accompanied by a picture of Zimmerman and a picture of Martin. The picture of Zimmerman was a mugshot from years before in which he looks surly and disheveled, admittedly not his best moment. While Martins picture is also of an earlier time; he is pictured as a happy 12 year old. It was not disclosed initially that the "innocent boy" did not live in the gated community, was on suspension from school for drugs and violence, and fancied himself on social websites as a "thug". He was in Zimmerman's neighborhood where there had been a rash of break-ins by a black youth matching his description. Furthermore, there was a witness that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman on the ground and Zimmerman's head and nose were bloodied when Police arrived on the scene.
While I can dismiss the rantings of the Crybaby Reverends because that is their schtick and we all know that they are not to be taken seriously, the suppression of information and the twisting of facts by the media are another matter. This is disinformation on the level of Soviet era apparatchiks disseminating propaganda. With no shame they have begun to slowly leak the complete circumstances, but the damage has been done and the sheep that refuse to look for the truth are already bleating the "Justice for Trayvon" meme.
It is now a political issue. President Obama has once again inserted himself into a news story and once again it is on the wrong side of an issue. This follows a pattern of his using the bully pulpit to cause division rather than being a calming, unifying force. We are now divided as a nation over yet another issue. An issue in which the outcome, whatever that may be, will have no winners. Another faux issue with a phantom antagonist manufactured solely to cause dissension and set up the final confrontation between the oppressed and the oppressors played out once again in a deeply flawed legal system.
Originally released photos vs. Current Photos
Photo of Zimmerman's injuries
Did the Rev.'s That Cried Wolf know the facts before stirring up the hatred? Would Obama have said that "Trayvon could have been my son" if he had known the facts? Is is possible that Zimmerman is telling the truth, that he acted in self defense? It's a damn shame that I think the answer to all three of those questions is probably yes.
