Close to death a person may be weak or ill or both. At time of death a person is frail and vulnerable or susceptible to harm and is therefore a time for privacy, sorrow and soft tender care by family members. Death on the battlefield and execution of death row prisoners is a painful, less comfortable, sometimes instantaneous death.
Why should the media be allowed to sensationalize and portray death or killing as a viable solution to end conflict when such portrayal constitute a harm to society. Freedom of speech or expression is cherished by the American people. Seems to me American society has given a carte-blanche or blanket approval to all kinds of expression other than expression which can result in personal persecution and death. Think Wikileak’s Julian A. Why should the CIA be concerned about wikileaks if not true. The CIA is concerned because it’s the truth about how American government operates in a immoral reprehensible fashion. CIA wants to exact revenge on him for exposing the truth.
In films and computer games media portrayal of killing humans or bad guys by a hero or group of super heroes as a solution resulting in personal victory or national victory is a freedom of expression that constitute harm to society. Immature young minds are most susceptible.
In most films hero kills dozens of people without giving a second thought and that’s unfortunately okay. He or she is never considered to be a murderer rather the opposite a hero. In media taking human life is a solution which eradicates the conflict problem through murder.
In media there is no understanding of the graveness or seriousness of death. Taking human life or murdering is abundant or commonplace and is trivialized in film and computer first person shooter media. This is encouragement to immature, young emotions cloud thought people to solve problem by turning school premises into villain or bad guy killing place.
After all their government, military, CIA does the same. By first labeling the perceived problem person terrorist or bad guy to next justify the killing. Death is complete solution to the problem. They set a bad example all over the globe. Supplying weapons in Africa where people do not have food to eat. Horrifying image i have seen of a malnourished very young child wearing shreds however bearing a semiautomatic rifle nearly the height of the African child.
Supplying F16 interceptors to Pakistan and taking a step further building a F16 interceptor plant in India. If USA must have weapons they should keep them inside their own country to serve the purpose of self defense. Why does USA supply instruments of death to poor impoverished and underdeveloped countries in Africa and Asia. Does USA not have enough wealth that they must earn revenue by selling expensive weapons in Africa and Asia. For wealth and political power and desiring setback through continuous conflict, USA govt. or military supply weapons to countries outside USA and play a role in murder of perceived by them bad guys or dictators who have fallen out with USA.
Rehan Azeem Hashmi.
Please do not reply to post. If you reply post may be deleted.
Why should the media be allowed to sensationalize and portray death or killing as a viable solution to end conflict when such portrayal constitute a harm to society. Freedom of speech or expression is cherished by the American people. Seems to me American society has given a carte-blanche or blanket approval to all kinds of expression other than expression which can result in personal persecution and death. Think Wikileak’s Julian A. Why should the CIA be concerned about wikileaks if not true. The CIA is concerned because it’s the truth about how American government operates in a immoral reprehensible fashion. CIA wants to exact revenge on him for exposing the truth.
In films and computer games media portrayal of killing humans or bad guys by a hero or group of super heroes as a solution resulting in personal victory or national victory is a freedom of expression that constitute harm to society. Immature young minds are most susceptible.
In most films hero kills dozens of people without giving a second thought and that’s unfortunately okay. He or she is never considered to be a murderer rather the opposite a hero. In media taking human life is a solution which eradicates the conflict problem through murder.
In media there is no understanding of the graveness or seriousness of death. Taking human life or murdering is abundant or commonplace and is trivialized in film and computer first person shooter media. This is encouragement to immature, young emotions cloud thought people to solve problem by turning school premises into villain or bad guy killing place.
After all their government, military, CIA does the same. By first labeling the perceived problem person terrorist or bad guy to next justify the killing. Death is complete solution to the problem. They set a bad example all over the globe. Supplying weapons in Africa where people do not have food to eat. Horrifying image i have seen of a malnourished very young child wearing shreds however bearing a semiautomatic rifle nearly the height of the African child.
Supplying F16 interceptors to Pakistan and taking a step further building a F16 interceptor plant in India. If USA must have weapons they should keep them inside their own country to serve the purpose of self defense. Why does USA supply instruments of death to poor impoverished and underdeveloped countries in Africa and Asia. Does USA not have enough wealth that they must earn revenue by selling expensive weapons in Africa and Asia. For wealth and political power and desiring setback through continuous conflict, USA govt. or military supply weapons to countries outside USA and play a role in murder of perceived by them bad guys or dictators who have fallen out with USA.
Rehan Azeem Hashmi.
Please do not reply to post. If you reply post may be deleted.
Last edited:
