David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
The murder of Neda Soltan, on the streets of Tehran.
Since the death of Micahel Jackson, American media has taught a great lesson to the world: a drug-addicted pervert, obsessed with his own body parts, is more important than the death of an innocent young woman who died for freedom.
Michael Jackson, sex entertainer.
This is media. This is American media. I don’t think it is the American people, but it is most obviously the American media. It does, however, in a significant way reflect the values of American people. At least, the media thinks the American people need to hear about Michael Jackson 24/7.
Iranian social change will continue, nevertheless. Iranian people will continue to pay the ultimate price in their quest for the ultimate human value. They will continue to rise up against the tyranny of their own Islamic government. They will continue to set the pace for the Islamic world. They will continue to cry for liberty.
America will probably continue to display incredibly immature and distorted values in media. American media will continue its agenda of feeding the people fast food feelings and duping them with high cholestoral thought. The media will continually create the universal image of American self-indulgent, pre-adolescent emotion and general psychopathology.
I can only pray that freedom doesn’t finally mean the lifestyle and “music” of Michael Jackson. I can only hope that the deepest American values do not include the idolizing of deformity and perversion. I can only hope that America doesn’t translate into the basic immorality glorified in the life of a stage freak and his videos.
I’m sorry that his death happened at such a time as this, when the real values of humanity and nationhood are weighing so critically in the balance in Iran. I am deeply disturbed that America’s media behavior could disgrace human dignity at such an hour with this perpetual parading of a juvenile monstrosity. I am inenarrably ashamed that the world could be so very touched by the sudden death of an entertainment abnormality when a nation of people is putting its life on the line for basic human rights. It is unthinkable that anyone could be saddened at the cessation of such a imblanced, miserable life as was Michal Jackson’s when an innocent, honest, noble young woman like Neda Soltan was shot to death in the street–by a tyrannical government.
Is the lesson clear enough? Outrageous enough? American media simply does not serve the cause of freedom, maturity, nobility, honor, or basic human values. World media, indeed, is a most untrustworthy phenomenon. The lesson here is for the world, indeed. Media is a manipulated mirror, reflecting only what its owners wish.
Can America be depended on to support freedom among the people who really need it and want it? We know the media cannot. But can the American people be counted on when the need arises? At this point, we’re not even effectively defending our own freedoms, as another pervert in the White House is working daily to take them away, and our ineffective, traitorous Congress is working with him.
The contrast is striking. The values are apparent. This is deeply disturbing. It should cause profound contemplation and concern in the minds of those who are not addicted to to the slavish excesses of fallen human nature and the social agonies arising therefrom. To anyone who knows, understand, and values true character, divine character, this is a most telling moment in human history. Michael Jackson and Neda Agha Soltan: who is worthy of our attention? Why?
Personally, I feel that Michael Jackson should have been ignored but for some brief announcement of this death. Every human being deserves that much. I realize he for some reason is an object of emotional high for millions of immature and unrefined people with little or no taste. I hope I am not bringing offense upon any Iranian people for discounting Jackson’s importance. Iranian people are not demanding homage. They are simply trying to obtain basic human rights and freedom. But this is not something Michael Jackson was involved in, on any level, for any reason. His concern was sex, drugs, sensationalism, and money.
So, ask yourself, what is more important, the end of an sexual entertainer, or the hope of freedom? The death of a icon who contributed nothing in the way of human dignity, or the death of a young woman who gave her life in a plea for liberty? What is more important, your own emotional entertainment, or the cause of human dignity and freedom?
Neda Agha Soltan, patriot.
20 responses so far ↓
1 David Yeagley // Jun 28, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Here’s an interesting piece from Breitbart:
A Monster of Our Own Making Is Dead
“Michael Jackson’s shtick was simply a more sophisticated, well financed variation on the molester with an ice cream truck. When after paying millions to his young accuser, Jordy Chandler, Jackson was later found to have gay porn producer Marc Schaffel, an un-indicted co-conspirator in Jackson’s 2005 child molestation trial, as his PERSONAL VIDEOGRAPHER and close pal on the very private grounds of Neverland Ranch.”
I think there is a sadness about Jackson, pity, and misery. Perhaps the same can be said for many an “sex” entertainer, like Britney Spears, etc.
Then there’s Ann Coulter’s blog headline, “Sorry, Neda, we have a pedophile to worship.” (However, she has the wrong article linked to it. But, the headline says it all.)
2 David Yeagley // Jun 28, 2009 at 8:40 pm
And there’s this:
Why Doesn’t Obama Care About Freedom?
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | June 26, 2009
“If you recognize that Obama failed to vigorously and immediately support the pro-freedom demonstrators in Iran, take a look at his attitude toward those suffering under the Castro dictatorship.”
3 David Yeagley // Jun 29, 2009 at 10:50 am
Heard some interesting statistics on the radio: Michael Jackson’s total record sales is around 60 million. Elvis, at the time of his death, sold 119 million. Beatles and groups have been way above that. In other words, Jackson has been seriously hyped. Just like Barry Soetoro.
It there a reason for this, these freakish type Negroes being pathalogically magnified? Could it be the same hyper agencies involved, behind media?
4 bops // Jun 29, 2009 at 11:30 am
Dr. Yeagley.
For a man with your credentials, you sure seem to be overlooking the obvious. You apparently think the American media itself, its management and owners have portrayed the United States in bad light by focusing more on the death of a seriously troubled and disturbed “American” pop star and less on the tragic death of a young lady Iran. Really? Why in the world would you expect otherwise? Denial?
Sir. In America, the economy works via a form of capitalism. Each and every major media outlet in this country is a “business”. It’s BIG business. Sadly, as it may seem, its primary purpose, regardless of what their commercials and trailers may say, is to make money. You and I may very well be stockholders in more than one media conglomerate through mutual funds and rejoice each time their profits elevate our investments. I certainly need not lecture you on this subject…
Where you confuse me is where you place blame. I believe your disgust should be with your fellow Americans. You can’t blame the media for portraying the great USA in a brilliant, blindingly truthful, yet ugly, glow. Well, it’s what it is! The media has a product to sell and we, The People, buy it up. Although the media reports initially on important world happenings, the American people decide what gets the spotlight and its garbage. More often than not, what is yearned by TV viewers and readers of print is absolute trash and it reflects PERFECTLY who…or what…we are. This country is a mess! I often lower my head in shame when I see these images of the USA staring back at me.
I see a great disgrace as well Dr. Yeagley, but not of the media, but with us, the American people. Drugs, crime, violence, illegal immigration, unemployeement, welfare, morality, greed, out-of-control government, war, etc, etc, etc… But, by God, we have reality television at our fingertips and the occasional “Lacy Peterson” or “OJ” to give us all self-worth… We are the disgrace…
The irony in all of this is truly a paradox … Let a presidential candidate’s wife make a statement similar to that I’ve just made, let her vocalize her lack of pride in what America has truly become and there will be a call for her head. Yet, as you’ve implied in several of your recent editorials, the Iranians, the beautiful and intelligent Persian people love us, the Americans, and want to be just like us… Now, what’s up with that?
5 David Yeagley // Jun 29, 2009 at 12:52 pm
The Persians only want what they see as the best in us!
bops: the American people decide what gets the spotlight and its garbage.
I have trouble making the connection. I have so sense of control over what is shown to me. I don’t know anyone who has such a sense. We’re fed addictive things. Of course they then say, we want those things.
Most children are not born addictive or homosexual. These things are initiated, taught, and nurtured. That’s what media does.
I am not responsible for what’s on TV! I deny that, completely. (However, my problem is, I do watch news and drama! I have seen many a commercial. I’m a frustrated, angry participant!)
6 David Yeagley // Jun 29, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Probably, miss Soltan liked to dance. She may even have liked Michael Jackson music. Who knows?
I’m only try to be morally objective here. I just have a sense that something is profoundly wrong with this picture.
7 bops // Jun 29, 2009 at 4:33 pm
It doesn’t matter whether Ms Soltan liked to dance or liked Jackson’s music. As you say, who knows and I’ll add, who really cares. That has nothing to do with your point or mine.
I understood you to say the media is at fault for lessening the message of the young lady’s cause by elevating the news of Jackson’s death above that of Ms. Soltan struggle and tragic death in pursuit of freedom and liberty…
“This is media. This is American media. I don’t think it is the American people, but it is most obviously the American media.”…sorry, you’re wrong.
My contention is that, it IS the American people. The American people ultimately decide what gets the most media attention. I don’t believe for a second that FOX News would continue broadcasting if the American people quit watching their programming entirely. If their ratings fall, FOX, CNN or whomever, will scramble all their efforts to identify programming or a spin that will draw in more viewers. Improve the bottom line. It is after all a business. It happens all the time…ratings fall, shows are canceled, new programming is introduced…here we go again. Instead of giving us just the news of an event, they bring on some “expert” who is to shed some sort of light on the topic or voice their opinion. It allows us lazy Americans to be dumbed-down…never giving anything any additional thought.
The “connection” I believe you’re missing is simple. You DO have control over what is shown to you, just as you have control over the government you have. You have a vote and you have a channel selector. Problem is, just as at the polling place, you, Dr. Yeagley, and I, (for the most part) are out numbered. Whether we like it or not, we have the media programming and government The People want.
The curious thing about most conservatives I know is they seem to be out of touch with America. I believe that’s evidenced by the most recent Presidential election. As I’m sure you know societies are dynamic. They change with time. Events cause change, foreign cultures influence change. We both lived through the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. That’s what shaped us. The spooky thing is America has morphed into something we find hardly recognizable.
Also, Sir, I couldn’t disagree with you more about addicts and homosexuals. The psychiatric world has determined that addition may very well be genetic. They’ve found that many individuals with addictive personalities most often have other addicts very nearby on the family tree. Prescription medication labels now often warn of these traits.
As far as homosexuals, it’s my belief that some people are tall, some people are short, most are heterosexual and some aren’t. Did you not know of young children in your childhood that were just a little different? Small boys who were a bit more girlish acting? Ever heard the term “Tom-boy”? I knew of several. Well, guess who normally (eventually) comes out of the closet. It’s not the jocks…
To say the media initiate, teaches and nurtures homosexuality is ludicrous. Hoe do you explain homosexuality in ancient times pre mass media? I’ll agree, however, the media does make it more acceptable to the mainstream. But guess what, if I turn on a TV program and it involves gays…click. Same for programs containing black men spouting mumbo-jumbo and firing weapons…click. The NFL lost me as a fan when they allowed the post-TD end zone antics…click. Is there still a NFL???
8 David Yeagley // Jun 29, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Okay, let me display my ignorance. How do they know who’s watching what? No one ever asks me what I’m watching. Do they have some magic connector to my TV, and they can know automatically what I’m watching?
I very much distrust these ratings. I have no basis to trust.
Media is advocacy. Nothing more, else, or other.
9 whitetrash // Jun 30, 2009 at 8:16 am
To some extent, I am with the Doc on this one. While it is true that The People can choose between available programs, at some choke point, a very small and like minded group seem to determine what those choices will be. The same is true of the political process. We choose between Liberals and Conservatives because those are the only viable options available to us. This is not an accident. This is control.
Bops makes a good point about the 60’s and 70’s, but lets take a step back down memory lane… the values, such that they are, that Bill Ayers and his ilk are installing in primary grade curriculum have nothing to do with the values of the vast majority of Americans of Ayers generation. Yet those values, the trust funder socialist values of Ayers are increasingly dominant and embraced by young Americans. A natural progression? I don’t think so.
Media is free wine and circuses for the most part. The real damage is done in the schools.
10 David Yeagley // Jun 30, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Yeah, Ayers is something else. Obama loves him, of course. Obama is as radical as any of them, but too cowardly to really do anything radical like they did.
Instead, he hides behind his skin and his office now. I’m sure he considers himself much smarter, and much more effective than his tutors. He may be right. But, they have the last laugh, since they made him. Even though he tries to act like he’s his own man, the most superficial glance at his life and associations show him to be a fraudulent front for others and their agenda.
Of course, if the media doesn’t promote the truth, we are made to feel silly and conspiratorial if we actually believe the truth. The media is alike a giant opinion, the opinion, by which all must measure themselves. A giant, manipulated mirror it is.
11 roc // Jun 30, 2009 at 12:56 pm
bops has it straight…. the content media provides exists because there is a demand. Walt Kelly, through his creation Pogo, had it right : “We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us”
just as we have the government we want, ’cause we voted for those folks in office, we have the media we want, ’cause we consume the products they create.
the media you decry, we created.
12 David Yeagley // Jun 30, 2009 at 2:59 pm
I’m in denial.
13 bops // Jun 30, 2009 at 3:20 pm
…and a bit deluded?
14 David Yeagley // Jun 30, 2009 at 3:27 pm
No. Just in denial. I feel no responsibility whatsoever for anything that is on TV or in the newspapers.
I find no pleasure in assuming guilt that is not mine. I find no exaltation of my ego in attributing to myself that for which I have nothing to do.
And I do not mean to sound Libertarian! I’m simply innocent on this one. I do not identify with “the people” whom the media feigns to give what they want. That’s some other people than they of whom I am part.
15 Layla // Jun 30, 2009 at 9:38 pm
And bops, let me just say…I know more than a few effeminate men and even more tom-boy women that are 100% hetrosexual, each of them would be roundly offended by your observations…but I have no doubt you would say they were faking it, to avoid all the evil homophobes lurking around every corner waiting to for a homo to beat up…
16 bops // Jul 2, 2009 at 10:01 am
Layla. Why in the world would your 100%ers be offended by my observations? My point remains; sexual orientation is not always a choice. As I said, “…some people are tall, some people are short, most are heterosexual and some aren’t”. I didn’t say all feminine acting males, nor all Tom-boys are homosexual… Are the 100%ers truly that sensitive?
My experience has been as stated. Those I know who’ve been non-heterosexual their entire lives find relations with the opposite sex just as uncomfortable as it would be for you (assuming you too are heterosexual) having relations with the same sex as you.
As I said, to say the media is responsible for homosexuality is ludicrous…
17 Ray // Jul 2, 2009 at 11:01 am
NO ONE could ever convince me the American people at large requested homosexual television programming, just as NO ONE could convince me the majority of American parents want their children taught a homosexual agenda in grammar school, or any school, for that matter.
Media is not only business. Media is business controlled by people with agendas. They test waters. They try things. And they seek to redefine American values. They are succeeding.
Michael Jackson was a freak by any definition of that word. The round the clock coverage of Michael Jackson is testimony to corporate media’s frenzy of the freakish. If they DID NOT provide round the clock coverage, Americans would not be protesting. They would not be calling television stations asking where the coverage is.
Americans by nature are very tolerant people. Their tolerance of something shoved at them should not be categorized as their acceptance of it.
As the minds of the young have been changed, on one school campus after another, the attitudes and morals of two generations have been changed.
18 bops // Jul 2, 2009 at 2:07 pm
So, I just want to make sure I’ve understood all correctly. What most of you are saying is there exists a small, elite group of people whose desire is to undermine our society. And, this elite group wields enough power and authority to manipulate the media in order to redefine American values with total disregard of the business aspect of broadcasting. Is that correct? Please say no…
I hope that each of you have, at least once, written to you elected legislative representative and expressed an opinion. I’d hope that Dr. Yeagley, the self-proclaimed advocate of the Native Americans, would have each of his legislators’ phone numbers, mailing addresses and email addresses, if not memorized, very close at hand and would have made hundreds of such expressions.
I’d recommend you Dr. Yeagley, Whitetrash, Ray…all of you, make handy the phone numbers, mailing addresses and email addresses of each news outlet and major broadcaster in your area as well. The next time you’re bombarded with a frenzy of round-the-clock corporate coverage of the freakish, try voicing your opinion to those who can make a difference. Americans might not call television stations “asking where the coverage is” but concerned individual certainly can call in protest of such programming.
We the people have the power. If you truly “feel no responsibility whatsoever for anything that is on TV or in the newspapers”, sorry my friend, you’ve succumbed.
19 Ray // Jul 5, 2009 at 9:51 am
I’ve succumbed to nothing. I hardly watch television. I don’t go to movies. Are you suggesting the same immoral agenda promoted by Hollywood (while making lots of money at business) can be stopped by Americans phoning Hollywood execs? How many movies with well defined liberal agendas as major components or themes have failed, while typical family productions have grossed lots of money from the public? And STILL, Hollywood is addicted to its own agenda, its own corruption and pumps out more and more movies that defy logic from a business stand point.
I agree with those who have opined that Liberalism is a disease, a mental illness, a collapse of logic and common sense, and complete self-absorption. Even Fox News has succumbed to it, despite the supposed conservative angle they pitch.
Anna Nicole showed the same determination to make news out of a story that should have died a week after it came out. Sure sensationalism sells. But yes, unequivocally I believe a small minority of corporate execs in media push their own personal agendas.
20 Ray // Jul 5, 2009 at 9:53 am
The coverage OF Anna Nicole, rather.
You must log in to post a comment.