Omitted from news stories about Farrakhan's speech this weekend

[dookie joe]

I just read both News and Freep stories about Farrakhan's speech this weekend. Somehow, both papers managed to omit his incredibly racist opening remarks, in which he rails against white people, who he says were "unfortunately" created 6000 years ago.

The media is giving ammunition to their critics by downplaying this kind of thing. They're not always bad, but in cases like this, they do seem to skew things. And now is the time when the media needs to call out bigotry wherever they see it. No matter who is doing it.

Here's Farrakhan's shocking opening remarks, which somehow was deemed not newsworthy:

“Unfortunately, 6000 years ago, a new people came onto our planet by Allah’s permission, and they were given power and dominion over … every creeping thing that crawls upon the earth. But because they would be mischief makers, and cause the shedding of blood, the angels themselves were a little disturbed with Allah, and questioned him according to the Holy Koran, and asked him: “You’re going to place a ruler in the earth? What kind of ruler will he be, except that which creates mischief and causes the shedding of blood?” But Allah said to the angels, “I know what you know not,” and so the world of the Caucasian came into being. For 6000 years the people of the earth have suffered under a mischief-making rule. Bloodshed and war, hatred and strife, all because a man with a new color, or the lack thereof, thought that he was better than all of those who inhabited the earth before he was even a thought. But I’m here to announce today the end of his world, and the beginning of a brand new reality.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQSX3e3cr4c

[Former_Detroiter]

Don't blame the media. The news means just that; new information. Neither Farrakhan or anything coming out of his mouth is new.

[dookie joe]

Don't blame the media. The news means just that new information. Neither Farrakhan or anything coming out of his mouth is new.

Bullcrap. Under this logic, you're saying if David Duke comes to Detroit and spews racism, it's ok for the media to omit the racist stuff because everyone already knows Duke is racist?

[Bham1982]

Bullcrap. Under this logic, you're saying if David Duke comes to Detroit and spews racism, it's ok for the media to omit the racist stuff because everyone already knows Duke is racist?

Everyone knows that Farrakhan is a bigot and there has been plenty of coverage of his racist statements.

My sense is that this thread isn't about Farrakhan but you trying to A. Spin some "the media lies" fake news trash and B. Justify white racism by pointing out a black bigot. The media is basically the only institution protecting us from fascism right now.

[dookie joe]

Everyone knows that Farrakhan is a bigot and there has been plenty of coverage of his racist statements.

My sense is that this thread isn't about Farrakhan but you trying to A. Spin some "the media lies" fake news trash and B. Justify white racism by pointing out a black bigot. The media is basically the only institution protecting us from fascism right now.

No, this thread is about the media and Farrakhan's open bigotry in the very first words of his speech not warranting a mention. By your logic, the next time Donald Trump tells a lie, the media should not report it, since it's already been well-reported.

[Bham1982]

No, this thread is about the media. By your logic, the next time Donald Trump tells a lie, the media should not report it, since it's already been well-reported.

If you followed actual, legitimate media sources [[and it's clear you don't) you would be well-informed of Farrakhan. Both Detroit papers covered his visit, and both referred to his racist statements.

The problem isn't the media; it's that too many Americans are either dumb and/or ignorant and refuse to accept reality. This is how we have a international disaster in the White House.

[dookie joe]

If you followed actual, legitimate media sources [[and it's clear you don't) you would be well-informed of Farrakhan. Both Detroit papers covered his visit, and both referred to his racist statements.

The problem isn't the media; it's that too many Americans are either dumb and/or ignorant and refuse to accept reality. This is how we have a international disaster in the White House.

I read both the News and Freep stories. Neither one mentioned that he opened his remarks by blaming white people for all the evil in the world.

I also see tepid references to his racism, buried way down in the stories.

Again, address my point; don't speculate what I do and don't read. My point: The next time Trump tells a lie, should the media just gloss over it, since it's established that he lies?

[southen]

Comparing the remarks of the leader of the free world to Farrakhan is silly. For reference though, here is what the Freep wrote regarding a visit by Milo...

http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...tate/95089626/

Seems like they omitted a lot of his hate too doesn't it? Calm down. A sensational clown came to town and spewed some crap. It happens and the news doesn't have to print it word for word.

[Bham1982]

I read both the News and Freep stories. Neither one mentioned that he opened his remarks by blaming white people for all the evil in the world.

Well, much of the evil in the world is due to white people. That certainly isn't an inaccurate statement.

Do you have a transcript of his speech and could you point us where he claimed that "all the evil in the world is the fault of white people"?

Again, address my point; don't speculate what I do and don't read. My point: The next time Trump tells a lie, should the media just gloss over it, since it's established that he lies?

Farrakhan's bigotry has nothing to do with Trump's lies, so I have no idea why you're trying to connect the two. Trump is also about 100,000 times more important/newsworthy than the leader of some small cult.

No, I don't think the President of the U.S. should be allowed to lie with impunity because a racist nut happened to give a speech in Detroit last week.

And no, I see no issue with the media's coverage of Farrakhan, and if anything, the media is far too deferential towards Trump.

I hold the media partially responsible for the Trump phenomenon in that they glossed over his lies and idiocy during the election, treating him as a carnival clown rather than an existential threat to humanity.

[dookie joe]

Comparing the remarks of the leader of the free world to Farrakhan is silly. For reference though, here is what the Freep wrote regarding a visit by Milo...

http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...tate/95089626/

Seems like they omitted a lot of his hate too doesn't it? Calm down. A sensational clown came to town and spewed some crap. It happens and the news doesn't have to print it word for word.

Um, yeah, that link proved my point. Here's the first paragraph:

"Avowed anti-feminist and internet provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos will speak at Michigan State University today as part of his nationwide college tour...."


If the Freep/News stories had led with "avowed anti-white Nation of Islam leader..." I wouldn't have as much of a problem with their accounts.

But they don't. The Freep led with:

"Speaking to thousands gathered in Detroit on Sunday, Minister Louis Farrakhan said African-Americans shouldn’t place their faith in Democrats or Republicans, criticizing both parties for neglecting the black community."


We don't get a mention of his racism until way down in the story, and at that it's tempered by "some think he's racist." I didn't see a similar treatment of Milo, which would be "described by some as anti-feminist..."


The News led with:

"Detroit — Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan offered two observations Sunday to the U.S. president: Be careful about sending the National Guard to Chicago and be wary of following the lead of Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s president, in wading into the Middle East talks...."

Again, the racism stuff is touched on briefly, way down in the story.

Your link proves my point. This Milo clown's transgressions are in the very first paragraph, even though, as you try to point out, everyone knows he's a clown.

You have no argument. Whenever someone comes to town and spews hatred against any race, that should be the highlight of the story. No matter what the race of the person spewing the hatred. You're saying otherwise?

[dookie joe]

Well, much of the evil in the world is due to white people. That certainly isn't an inaccurate statement.

Do you have a transcript of his speech and could you point us where he claimed that "all the evil in the world is the fault of white people"?



Farrakhan's bigotry has nothing to do with Trump's lies, so I have no idea why you're trying to connect the two. Trump is also about 100,000 times more important/newsworthy than the leader of some small cult.

No, I don't think the President of the U.S. should be allowed to lie with impunity because a racist nut happened to give a speech in Detroit last week.

And no, I see no issue with the media's coverage of Farrakhan, and if anything, the media is far too deferential towards Trump.

I hold the media partially responsible for the Trump phenomenon in that they glossed over his lies and idiocy during the election, treating him as a carnival clown rather than an existential threat to humanity.

1. Dude. I provided a link to his speech, and transcribed the pertinent part.

2. I'm not trying to compare Trump to Farrakhan; I'm poking holes your argument, which is that, because everyone already knows Farrakhan hates white people, it shouldn't be newsworthy.

Forget Trump. Let's stick with apples-to-apples and use my earlier example, David Duke. If Duke comes to Detroit and makes a speech, and the first words out of his mouth is a bunch of racist crap against blacks, your argument is that the media should just gloss over that because everyone already knows he's a racist, and thus his racist comments aren't newsworthy.

Your argument holds no water.

And as far as your claiming "much of the evil in the world is due to white people," that's ridiculous. All people have committed evil, and done great things. Evil knows no skin color. What a stupid thing to say.

[Bham1982]

Um, yeah, that link proved my point. Here's the first paragraph:

My take: you're desperately hunting for some nugget to delegitimize the regular media, so you can feel comfortable relying on hate-media and can rationalize your support for the Trumpenfuhrer.

Milo is much more blatantly racist than Farrakahan, much more of a current news topic, and in cahoots with the bigots controlling the White House. His entire message is outrageous racism. Farrakhan is a relic of the Black Power, separatist era, and his racism is peripheral to the overall message.

And I see no major difference between the news coverage of the two. Both articles pretty clearly demonstrate that these are controversial, hateful characters peddling in bigotry.

[swan]

"Everyone knows that Farrakhan is a bigot and there has been plenty of coverage of his racist statements."

Since we know he is a bigot and we all know he makes racist statements, why report anything about his speech? And since they both chose to report about his speech, why not report it all?

[Bham1982]

1. Dude. I provided a link to his speech, and transcribed the pertinent part.

Dude, no you didn't. You never posted anything from Farrakhan that claimed "white people are responsible for all the evil in the world".

2. I'm not trying to compare Trump to Farrakhan; I'm poking holes your argument, which is that, because everyone already knows Farrakhan hates white people, it shouldn't be newsworthy.

No, this was never my argument. I never claimed Farrakhan wasn't newsworthy. And you're misrepresenting Farrkhan to try and draw some false equivalence. You're trying to fabricate some argument to justify your support for white racists.

Forget Trump. Let's stick with apples-to-apples and use my earlier example, David Duke. If Duke comes to Detroit and makes a speech, and the first words out of his mouth is a bunch of racist crap against blacks, your argument is that the media should just gloss over that because everyone already knows he's a racist, and thus his racist comments aren't newsworthy.

David Duke isn't remotely apples-to-apples to Farrakhan. Duke is an ally of the White House power structure, the former head of the KKK, and represents much of the base of the President's support. He's an extremely popular former U.S. Representative. Farrakhan is a nut and has no power. And his racism is peripheral to his message.

And, yeah, when David Duke makes public statements, they're not covered in a manner all that different as Farrakhan.

And as far as your claiming "much of the evil in the world is due to white people," that's ridiculous. All people have committed evil, and done great things. Evil knows no skin color. What a stupid thing to say.

Of course, race plays absolutely no role in systemic oppression, duh. That's why our former President and First Lady were commonly called "apes", that's why our current President calls Mexicans "rapists and murderers, that's why the U.S. is building walls and blocking brown immigrants. All is fine and dandy, unless you're a "poor white American male".

You obviously have a racial hangup, don't like minorities and are trying to justify your worldview. Sorry if you're one of the many "oppressed white males" who had no choice but to elect a carnival of belligerent, racist idiots to the White House. David Duke has a direct message of hate, and has direct connections to the White House. Farrakhan has never had such power.

Can't wait until your generation is gone.

[Hermod]

I just read both News and Freep stories about Farrakhan's speech this weekend. Somehow, both papers managed to omit his incredibly racist opening remarks, in which he blames all the bloodshed in the history of mankind on...white people, who were "unfortunately" created 6000 years ago. Don't believe me? Look it up.

No wonder nobody trusts the media. Here's his opening remarks.

“Unfortunately, 6000 years ago, a new people came onto our planet by Allah’s permission, and they were given power and dominion over … every creeping thing that crawls upon the earth. But because they would be mischief makers, and cause the shedding of blood, the angels themselves were a little disturbed with Allah, and questioned him according to the Holy Koran, and asked him: “You’re going to place a ruler in the earth? What kind of ruler will he be, except that which creates mischief and causes the shedding of blood?” But Allah said to the angels, “I know what you know not,” and so the world of the Caucasian came into being. For 6000 years the people of the earth have suffered under a mischief-making rule. Bloodshed and war, hatred and strife, all because a man with a new color, or the lack thereof, thought that he was better than all of those who inhabited the earth before he was even a thought. But I’m here to announce today the end of his world, and the beginning of a brand new reality.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQSX3e3cr4c

Old Louie must have slept through World History class in high school. For all but the last five hundred years, the Europeans were bottled up in a tiny and unprofitable corner of the world constantly being subject to slave raids from Africa and Asia. It was only with the discovery of long distance sea navigation and ship building that Europeans became a real force in the world. Up until 1500 or so, more slaves went from Europe to Africa than went from Africa to Europe. A lot of the towns on the Mediterranean coastline were virtually depopulated both from the raids and from people moving inland because of the threat of the slave raids from Africa.

[Bham1982]

"Everyone knows that Farrakhan is a bigot and there has been plenty of coverage of his racist statements."

Since we know he is a bigot and we all know he makes racist statements, why report anything about his speech? And since they both chose to report about his speech, why not report it all?

Both local papers reported on his speech, and reported on his hateful statements. Sorry if they weren't adequately sensationalist. No one has posted anything from his speech that is particularly racist, or remotely analogous from what we get from the White House, or David Duke, but I guess we'll have to take your word for it.

If you personally have some problem with this reporting, and feel horribly oppressed as a American white male, I suppose you can tune into the KKK News or Breitbart Weekly and can have your worldview valdiated.

[Bham1982]

Old Louie must have slept through World History class in high school. For all but the last five hundred years, the Europeans were bottled up in a tiny and unprofitable corner of the world constantly being subject to slave raids from Africa and Asia. It was only with the discovery of long distance sea navigation and ship building that Europeans became a real force in the world. Up until 1500 or so, more slaves went from Europe to Africa than went from Africa to Europe. A lot of the towns on the Mediterranean coastline were virtually depopulated both from the raids and from people moving inland because of the threat of the slave raids from Africa.

Now THIS is some revisionist history. Apparently this explains all the blonde Germans in the Congo; they were apparently brought as slaves prior to 1500, duh.

[dookie joe]

Dude, no you didn't. You never posted anything from Farrakhan that claimed "white people are responsible for all the evil in the world".



No, this was never my argument. I never claimed Farrakhan wasn't newsworthy. And you're misrepresenting Farrkhan to try and draw some false equivalence. You're trying to fabricate some argument to justify your support for white racists.


David Duke isn't remotely apples-to-apples to Farrakhan. Duke is an ally of the White House power structure, the former head of the KKK, and represents much of the base of the President's support. He's an extremely popular former U.S. Representative. Farrakhan is a nut and has no power. And his racism is peripheral to his message.

And, yeah, when David Duke makes public statements, they're not covered in a manner all that different as Farrakhan.



Of course, race plays absolutely no role in systemic oppression, duh. That's why our former President and First Lady were commonly called "apes", that's why our current President calls Mexicans "rapists and murderers, that's why the U.S. is building walls and blocking brown immigrants. All is fine and dandy, unless you're a "poor white American male".

You obviously have a racial hangup, don't like minorities and are trying to justify your worldview. Sorry if you're one of the many "oppressed white males" who had no choice but to elect a carnival of belligerent, racist idiots to the White House. David Duke has a direct message of hate, and has direct connections to the White House. Farrakhan has never had such power.

Can't wait until your generation is gone.

1. Reading is fundamental. Did you even read that paragraph I transcribed? Or are you so eager to bolster your agenda, instead of actually reading what I wrote, you instead pull out the handbook and start accusing me of bad things? Which leads into my next point:

2. WTF are you talking about when you claim I'm supporting white racists?What did I write that indicates that? I despise any kind of bigotry, and think it should be called out. Especially when it's the first thing someone says in a speech. The difference between you and me, apparently, is that I'm not selective about when bigotry disgusts me.

3. You're clearly bending over backward to push your sad, skewed worldview. You either denounce racism or you don't. It's that simple. And you're apparently perfectly fine with the media omitting or downplaying it if it's a certain type of person doing the hating.

You accused me of being a Trump supporter, which shows you don't know what the hell you're talking about. People like you, who are willing to look the other way as long as racism is propogated by people you're aligned with, and whose first instinct is to start calling people racist whenever they disagree, are a huge reason why that moron is President in the first place. It's not that so many people voted for him because they're racist, sexist, etc. It's that they're getting tired of Hilary and her ilk wagging a finger at them and telling them they're racist, etc.

[belleislerunner]

If you were paying attention in civics class - you'll recall that hate speech is still protected speech in the US. By the Supreme Court - that's what makes America different from most countries.

We don't ban people we don't agree with - otherwise who determines what is "hate" speech?

Some universities and colleges have started to ban select speakers because they don't believe in a free exchange of ideas and actually turn into censorship wind tunnels.

Like Voltaire said - I may not agree with any of your views - but I will defend to my death your right to say them.

Regardless of how vile, fake, insensitive, oppressive or derogatory they may be.

Learn to think on your own. Stop letting other people telling you who should and shouldn't speak. If people come to hear him speak and not you - work on your delivery.

[dookie joe]

"Everyone knows that Farrakhan is a bigot and there has been plenty of coverage of his racist statements."

Since we know he is a bigot and we all know he makes racist statements, why report anything about his speech? And since they both chose to report about his speech, why not report it all?

Yeah, these guys are going through all sorts of conniptions in order to advance their crazy worldview. I don't get it. Either you're against bigotry and think it should be called out, or you don't. It's not ok to gloss over it because it contradicts a certain agenda.

[dookie joe]

If you were paying attention in civics class - you'll recall that hate speech is still protected speech in the US. By the Supreme Court - that's what makes America different from most countries.

We don't ban people we don't agree with - otherwise who determines what is "hate" speech?

Some universities and colleges have started to ban select speakers because they don't believe in a free exchange of ideas and actually turn into censorship wind tunnels.

Like Voltaire said - I may not agree with any of your views - but I will defend to my death your right to say them.

Regardless of how vile, fake, insensitive, oppressive or derogatory they may be.

Learn to think on your own. Stop letting other people telling you who should and shouldn't speak. If people come to hear him speak and not you - work on your delivery.

I agree with everything you said here. However, whoever said anything about banning anybody? I don't recall that even coming up in this discussion, so why are you saying people shouldn't be banned for hate speech? I'm just saying if a bigot comes to town saying bigoted things, the news media should inform people of that.

[southen]

I am white. Stop whining. A small gathering of people don't like white people. Oh gosh. Brush it off and keep in mind that as a white male in this country you have every advantage someone could ask for as well as a history of keeping women and minorities from enjoying the same advantages. I look forward to your war on Christmas post...

[Zacha341]

...as a white male in this country you have every advantage someone could ask for as well as a history of keeping women and minorities from enjoying the same advantages.

I hear what you are saying, but white men don't particularly have a corner on the oppression of women. Think parts of Africa, Asia and in larger part much of the Middle East, current and ongoing.

[Zacha341]

Well, much of the evil in the world is due to white people. That certainly isn't an inaccurate statement.

Well that's kinda 'tight' for white folks, ain't it? Per your comment! Rather 'burdensome' to carry about, with a good helping of self-loathing - and a teaspoon of white guilt. Does confession bring any ease? [[I'm asking rhetorically not as an attack to you).

I'm black but just not feeling the statement in that it does not seem to fix anything. No one self loathes too easily as in an op-positional state from supremacy. Most folks are somewhere in the middle, trying to live their life.

For certain, whites have had a technological lead in weaponry for the most part, yet there's no exclusivity of violence and murder beyond that. It depends on what time in history and what fascist/ despot ruler was active.

I am sure Farrakhan remarked on this and more he used to in the past [[used to go see him from time to time back in the 80's - 90's.).

He's even more to say on race when speaking to his congregants only.

The Savior's day Sunday message is for 'mass' consumption, ala his form of ecumenism -- as he invites Christians, etc to attend. I always remind people of that when they go see him.

[Former_Detroiter]

Bullcrap. Under this logic, you're saying if David Duke comes to Detroit and spews racism, it's ok for the media to omit the racist stuff because everyone already knows Duke is racist?

Where exactly did I say anything about David Duke and why are you assuming everyone knows who he is...