Does North American speaker in new ISIS terror video signal America as a new target?

September 22, 2014 by Kevin Fobbs

ISIS has become one of the most infamous terrorist organizations in the world and a large degree of their success has been attributed to their expert utilization of social media video and Twitter. According to CNN, the Islamic extremist group has stepped up its influence with the release of a chilling new video called ‘Flames of War.’

What is disturbing and has a variety of intelligence organizations in America focused on the propaganda video is how it is aimed directly at English speakers. The fact that one jihadist on the video who speaks perfect English with a North American accent is especially troubling. It appears clear that the new video is aimed at creating a new terrorist-front that ISIS intends to launch in Europe and America.

The video highlights its recent murderous victories and also warns America about getting in the way of the terrorists’ intentions to create an Islamic caliphate in Syria and Iraq, reported CNN. What appears on the video is meant as a statement of their determination to showcase their commitment to their ultimate goals.

In the video, who effortlessly switches between speaking Arabic and English gloats about the Syrian soldiers who were captured by ISIS and are, “digging their own graves in the very place where they were stationed,” says the hooded jihadist, according to CNN. After the men complete the graves, they are executed by the militants and fall lifelessly into the ditch.

What is starkly different from this video and the three videos that showed the beheading of two American journalist and one aid worker is the fact that the speaker is not British. According to CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank if this man is American or Canadian, then he would be the first North American jihadist to commit a war crime on camera, reported CNN.

The apparent goal of the most recent video is to convey a sense of toughness and to recruit others who agree with their extremist goals in North American to join them. Horrific actions are used to glamorize ISIS and with hundreds of Americans joining their jihadist call, it may be working all too well.

POLL: TRUST IN MASS MEDIA AT ALL-TIME LOW

Capture

Six-percentage-point drops in trust among Democrats and Republicans

Capture

Capture

by Justin McCarthy
WASHINGTON, D.C. — After registering slightly higher trust last year, Americans’ confidence in the media’s ability to report “the news fully, accurately, and fairly” has returned to its previous all-time low of 40%. Americans’ trust in mass media has generally been edging downward from higher levels in the late 1990s and the early 2000s.

Americans’ Trust in the Mass Media

Prior to 2004, Americans placed more trust in mass media than they do now, with slim majorities saying they had a “great deal” or “fair amount” of trust. But over the course of former President George W. Bush’s re-election season, the level of trust fell significantly, from 54% in 2003 to 44% in 2004. Although trust levels rebounded to 50% in 2005, they have failed to reach a full majority since.

Americans’ trust in the media in recent years has dropped slightly in election years, including 2008, 2010, 2012, and again this year — only to edge its way back up again in the following odd-numbered years. Although the differences between the drops and the recoveries are not large, they suggest that something about national elections triggers skepticism about the accuracy of the news media’s reporting.

Among Democrats, Trust in Media at a 14-Year Low

Trust among Democrats, who have traditionally expressed much higher levels of confidence in the media than Republicans have, dropped to a 14-year low of 54% in 2014. Republicans’ trust in the media is at 27%, one percentage point above their all-time low, while independents held steady at 38% — up one point from 37% in 2013.

Trust in Mass Media, by Party

Sharp Uptick in Americans Who Think News Media Are “Too Conservative”

As has been the case historically, Americans are most likely to feel the news media are “too liberal” (44%) rather than “too conservative,” though this perceived liberal bias is now on the lower side of the trend. One in three (34%) say the media are “just about right” in terms of their coverage — down slightly from 37% last year.

Nearly one in five Americans (19%) say the media are too conservative, which is still relatively low, but the highest such percentage since 2006. This is up six points from 2013 — the sharpest increase in the percentage of Americans who feel the news skews too far right since Gallup began asking the question in 2001.

Americans’ Perceptions of Media Bias

Conservatives (70%) are far more likely than liberals (15%) to perceive the media as too liberal. Moderates’ views are closer to liberals, with 35% calling the media too liberal. Likewise, relatively few moderates — similar to conservatives — think the media are too conservative.

Democrats — with a small majority of 52% — are most likely to think the media are just about right, while a mere 18% of Republicans feel this way about the news. More than seven in 10 Republicans say the media are too liberal.

Perceptions of Media Bias, by Party and Ideology

Bottom Line

Though a sizable percentage of Americans continue to have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media, Americans’ overall trust in the Fourth Estate continues to be significantly lower now than it was 10 to 15 years ago.

As the media expand into new domains of news reporting via social media networks and new mobile technology, Americans may be growing disenchanted with what they consider “mainstream” news as they seek out their own personal veins of getting information. At the same time, confidence is down across many institutions, and a general lack in trust overall could be at play.

Americans’ opinions about the media appear affected in election years, however. Americans’ trust in the media will likely recover slightly in 2015 with the absence of political campaigns. But the overarching pattern of the past decade has shown few signs of slowing the decline of faith in mass media as a whole.

Survey Methods
Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Sept. 4-7, 2014, with a random sample of 1,017 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, nonresponse, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cellphone only/landline only/both, and cellphone mostly). Demographic weighting targets are based on the most recent Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the most recent National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the most recent U.S. census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

View survey methodology, complete question responses, and trends.

CNN Now Worried Ferguson Shooting Audio Is Hoax

http://launch.newsinc.com/share.html?trackingGroup=91074&siteSection=breitbartprivate&videoId=26555840

Screen Shot 2014-08-23 at 4.23.55 PM

by John Nolte 27 Aug 2014 2070

When CNN first broadcast the unverified audio of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO, it was with all the sturm and drang of breathless breaking news. The audio led almost every hour and was the biggest story of the day.

What a difference a day makes. The language coming from “New Day” anchor Michaela Pereira Wednesday morning is much more cautious. “Do you think it’s authentic?” she squeaked to two law enforcement experts, both of whom believe it is a hoax:

Even if the audio ends up being authentic, the fact that CNN is now concerned over its authenticity and laying the groundwork to claim they were always skeptical, tells you how irresponsible the network is. The prejudicial audio never should have been aired prior to authentication. But this is exactly the kind of incendiary behavior we have come to expect from the news network that disgraced itself more than any other during the George Zimmerman affair.

CNN’s timing of the release made perfect sense. The leftwing network dropped the audio the day after treating the funeral of Michael Brown as though he was a head of state. With the death porn concluded and the Ferguson streets quiet, CNN needed to fill the race-baiting vacuum with something.

This is the second time CNN has been unforgivably irresponsible with audio. Using unintelligible audio of George Zimmerman’s 911 call, CNN falsely claimed Zimmerman had described Trayvon Martin as a “fucking coon” before fatally shooting the teenager. CNN not only fabricated this evidence against Zimmerman, after it was proven Zimmerman didn’t use the racial slur, CNN continued to lie to its audience and claim he had.

PUNKED? Watch & Wonder: Has CNN Fallen For A Horrible Hoax Re The Ferguson Shooting Investigat​ion?

Norvell Rose — August 27, 2014

It was THE story Tuesday on CNN and, online, one of the most widely discussed developments regarding the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO. “It” was the explosive audio recording provided to CNN by a man who claimed to have captured the sound of live gunfire — multiple shots that supposedly left Brown dead in the street.

Has CNN “jumped the gun”…as well as jumping the shark?

Now, the breathless gusto with which the cable news network first reported the “exclusive” audio has given way to a much less enthusiastic approach, marked by questions about its authenticity. In fact, it would appear that CNN may well be setting the stage to distance itself from what it must certainly have thought would be a sure-fire ratings booster.

Via breitbart.com:

Even if the audio ends up being authentic, the fact that CNN is now concerned over its authenticity and laying the groundwork to claim they were always skeptical, tells you how irresponsible the network is. The prejudicial audio never should have been aired prior to authentication. But this is exactly the kind of incendiary behavior we have come to expect from the news network that disgraced itself more than any other during the George Zimmerman affair.

CNN’s timing of the release made perfect sense. The leftwing network dropped the audio the day after treating the funeral of Michael Brown as though he was a head of state. With the death porn concluded and the Ferguson streets quiet, CNN needed to fill the race-baiting vacuum with something.

Watch the video segment (above) of the Wednesday morning report on the audio…the day after CNN news anchor Don Lemon first ran with the story. And then ask yourself, “Could this be another big nail in the credibility coffin of ‘The Most Trusted Name in News’?”

Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/punked-watch-wonder-has-cnn-fallen-for-a-horrible-hoax-re-the-ferguson-shooting-investigation/#G5JOMbVt7CymoSWm.99
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/punked-watch-wonder-has-cnn-fallen-for-a-horrible-hoax-re-the-ferguson-shooting-investigation/#G5JOMbVt7CymoSWm.99

Hey Dopes at CNN, Stop Calling This Man An American

Screen Shot 2014-08-26 at 8.08.44 PM

By admin
August 26, 2014
Okay fine so you were born in this country and that makes you an American. But the moment you fight for the enemy, you are a traitor to the country and should no longer be called an American. My parents immigrated to this country because of the freedoms we have here. The fact that so many people take this freedom for granted upsets and enrages me.

Douglas McCain went off to Syria to fight for ISIS (or one of the other jihadi groups). CNN calls him an American. I call the folks at CNN a bunch of trash. Follow us here at Downtrend.com because we’re not going to sugar coat the news.

From CNN:

An American named Douglas McCain was killed last weekend in Syria, where he was fighting for ISIS, two U.S. officials told CNN.

The man’s uncle, Ken McCain, said that his nephew had gone to fight as a jihadi and that the U.S. State Department told the family Monday about the death.

Douglas McCain died in a battle between rival extremist groups in the suburbs of Aleppo, Syria’s once-bustling commercial capital and largest city, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a British-based group that monitors the conflict.

Like the U.S. officials, the group described McCain as an ISIS fighter and said he died battling al-Nusra Front, an al Qaeda-linked organization that the U.S. government has blacklisted as a foreign terror organization.

McCain is not the first American to fight alongside militants in Syria, nor is he the first killed — even if he may be the first with ISIS. Attorney General Eric Holder estimated this summer that there are 7,000 foreign fighters in the war-ravaged Middle Eastern nation, many from places like Europe and the United States.