Tuesday, 3 October 2017

On media credibility

Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the shooting in Las Vegas, which resulted in more than fifty dead and hundreds injured. This claim has been dismissed by US authorities and the corporate media. The FBI has stated that there is no evidence that the shooter was linked to any international terrorist group. The authorities have instead claimed that he was mentally ill and was acting alone. The corporate media have taken these claims at face value and added the spin that Islamic State routinely falsely claims responsibility for acts of violence. However, there is simply no evidence of Islamic State making such false claims - and there is a great deal of evidence of the political media elite making false claims: so much so that one could reasonably characterise it standard operating procedure.

According to Amaq, Islamic State's news agency, Mr Paddock converted to Islam some months ago. The news agency gives his name as Abu Abd Abdulbar al Ameriki and states that he had apparently planned the attack for some time. The publication is of a piece with previous claims of responsibility, which have invariably turned out to be true. This stands in stark contrast to claims made by Washington and repeated as facts by the corporate media, which often turn out to be completely false.

Another problem with the official narrative is that according to witnesses, about forty-five minutes prior to the attack a woman warned the crowd that they were about to die. This testimony casts doubt on the notion that Paddock/Abdulbar was acting alone. It also seems odd that this woman, who was removed by security, does not appear to have been interviewed by law enforcement officers.

It may also be worthy of note that some months ago Islamic State called for an attack on the Las Vegas strip.

Given the political and media elite's track record of lies and propaganda, it will not be surprising if many people find the official story lacking in credibility. 

No comments:

Post a Comment