Media Failure

[demo909]

A LITTLE BEDTIME READING FOR YOU.....

It is reported that more than half of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein is responsible for the terrorist attacks of 9/11. This means that the U.S. media have utterly, spectacularly, shamefully and pathetically failed.

One of the most interesting aspects of this war has been the overall superiority of the Internet as a source of news. In many cases, of course, this actually means access to news reports from all the world's media except the United States. Do the majority of the world's citizens, who oppose the war, really just hate freedom or are they getting better information? At any rate, without the Internet we are truth-deprived.

In one sense, the U.S. mainstream media has proved their total irrelevancy as an accurate information source. Tragically, it is worse than that. They have proved that they have neither the professional journalistic integrity nor the individual ethical foundation to resist being enlisted to support a war that they of all people are aware is based on lies.

First off, all you war-drum beaters and troop supporters out there, REPLY with your outraged letters. All I ask is that you provide a shred of real evidence of "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq. Or tell the readers that the Bush cabal didn't lie about the forged documents purporting to prove Iraq had a nuclear program, or the plagiarized California grad students thesis that Colin Powell claimed came from unimpeachable sources, or the aluminum tubes that no one in the world considered evidence of nuclear weapons construc-tion, not even the Pentagon fundamentalists who cynically put forth this nonsense. I urge you to write, but spare me the sanctimonious, unpatriotic smearing and give me some facts.

And please, don't play the "support the troops" bait-and-switch game. The Carrboro Board of Alderman got snookered on that one, even going so far as to say they wanted the troops to have all the logistical support they needed to complete their jobs. Translation: Now that you are stuck fighting a war that we already understand to be illegal and unnecessary, we will stand by quietly while you kill thousands of Iraqis -- not only young men and boys in the Iraqi army, but more than a thousand innocent people. And wound many thousands more, including young children with their arms blown off or blinded by shrapnel. And we will stand by quietly while you die, get wounded, or psychologically warped.

Supporting the troops apparently does not include opposing the use of depleted uranium shells that ruined the lives of tens of thousands of Gulf War vets and will do the same this go-round, with barely a mention in the media, those so intent on supporting the war effort at the expense of authentic journalism. Not to mention the hellish experience of war itself. Veteran war correspondent Chris Hedges recently wrote in an essay decrying the censorship that has kept images of the true face of war's destruction out of American living rooms, "If we saw the deep psychological scars of slaughter, the way it maims and stunts those who participate in war for the rest of their lives, we would keep our children away."

Supporting the troops also apparently does not apply to the media that have glossed over or ignored the lies and bribery that laid the groundwork for this invasion. How absurd that the mother of a killed soldier was heard to say on the radio that her boy died to protect Salt Lake City where she lived.

What did he die for? Put "Project For a New American Century" in your search engine. The late '90s think tank membership reads like the Iraqi War chickenhawk roster: Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney, Abrams, Jeb Bush and more. It's a simple doctrine they crafted. Enlarge U.S. power and resource control by expanding the military, choosing a conflict that would result in a quick win and an impressive show of force to the rest of the world (Iraq was singled out by them as the preferred country), and then continue on to invade other countries (with Egypt and Saudi Arabia mentioned in order to gain control of the Mideast specifically).

Did we really think that the world's most incredible military machine would not inevitably attract the type of maniacal people that throughout human history have always been attracted to positions of enormous power? Do we think that these people -- even though they exhibit the same disrespect for truth, the same propensity for self-aggrandizement, the same contempt for democracy and freedom as petty power-grabbers through the ages -- are somehow more trustworthy because they are Americans?

Here's a quote from one of the most powerful people in the world today, Richard Perle, close adviser to Bush who is also known in Washington as the Prince of Darkness. "If we let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely, and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy but just wage total war, our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

[mrmatas2277]

Demo u know there is a "Current Events" board..right?? (to which i moderate)

[demo909]

Thank you, I will check out the current events board for sure. But I think that this will be better seen here for now.

[shroomy]

Craig,

Talk about one sided.....

Where is the mention of the estimated 2 million Iraqi's killed by Saddam and his regime?

Where is the mention of his ethnic cleansing and the use of nerve and mustard gas to kill whole villages of Kurds? who were almost entirely women and children because all the men were either conscripted or killed already. (BTW one village had more deaths than the coalition and civilian casualties of this entire war)

Where is the mention of the fear that all but the elite had to live under.

Where is the mention of the destabilization of the region caused by the US having to be in Saudi Arabia because of Saddam's aspirations of a unified Arab nation in the Middle East.

Where is the mention of the millions of children who had no chance of a future because they were born to the wrong religious group.

Where is the mention of the death squads and secret police who could summarily arrest or execute you, often in front of your family.

Where is the mention of his promises after the first gulf war when we spared him despite his plunder and rape (literally) of the entire country of Kuwait.

Where is the mention of the over 8000 Kuwaiti civilians who were rounded up during their occupation and have never been seen again.

Where is the mention of the terrorist training camp with the shell of an airliner to practice hijackings.

Where is the mention of the tens of thousands of Iraqi’s killed because of something their relatives did or said, sometimes as simple as applying for a visa to another country.

And the depleted uranium shells… please…. they are less radio active than a glow in the dark wrist watch (radium btw) and no where near the radon that is a natural by product of the decay of the non depleted uranium that naturally occurs in ALL soil across the world. BTW I have fired thousands and thousands of them, and while I am a little worried about what I breathed in, I wasn’t as worried as the mother who had her son taken away by the secret police.

BTW I wrote this off the top of my head, from mostly first hand knowledge and experience, I didn’t just copy it from somewhere and assume it was true or valid (not that I'm saying you did..)

Bottom line, did Saddam have any role in 9/11? Almost certainly not. Did he support other terrorists, almost certainly, but pretty limited compared to other countries. Do I care? No he still deserved to go for the above reasons.

Did he have a nuclear program, almost definitely, were they anywhere near a bomb, almost definitely not. Do I care? NO.

Did some people in the US Gov. have ulterior motives, of course. Do I care? No. I don’t care if someone runs into a burning building to save a child just because he was hoping for a reward, he still saved the child.

And as for the BS remarks about the Military attracting the maniacal people who are attracted to power. Total bullshit, look at the top of the military, look at Gen Franks, and former Gen Powell. They are the type of people who succeed in the military, the ones who love their country, and honestly have the highest morals of any group of people I have meet. Megalomaniacs do not make it in the military, they only make it as dictators or terrorist leaders, who ever wrote that is beyond ignorant.

Now of course the war is an atrocity, but a far greater atrocity would to have been to not do anything.

And I don’t want to hear this WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER crap unless you do have an answer.

All this nitpicky crap is like bitching at fire department who is putting our your house because one of the fire chiefs isn’t a nice guy, and they broke the traffic laws on the way there and then messed up your lawn.

[shroomy]

Originally posted by demo909

Thank you, I will check out the current events board for sure. But I think that this will be better seen here for now.

I would rather it be here to, so friends can discuss it. I know everyone has made up their mind by now, and would rather debate with the Miami crew than have it turn into a free for all.

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by shroomy

Now of course the war is an atrocity, but a far greater atrocity would to have been to not do anything.

[demo909]

Thanskl for the rebutal Shroomy. It'd very though out and brings up a lot of good points. BTW what i wrote was not copied from anywhere. It was a piece i did for yelleotimes.org which I'm hoping gets picked up.

My mission with this piece was to bring to light how one sided the media coverage has been leading up to and during the war. And how this has contributed to the majority of the US population being "brrainwashed" if you will about the facts. I'm all for people support or not supporting the war. There are many reasons for both. But what I hated to see is the gross misrepresentation of facts by the US media.

I'll try to answer some of your questions you as in the "Where is the mention of..." format

As for the destabilization of the region. The region now is more unstable than ever with the presence of our troops. Turkey is ready to invade the North to protect it's intrests and wipe out the kurds. Syria is now gearing for what looks to be a possible attack or US sanctions because we are now pointing the WMD finger at them too. Israel continues to go unchecked by the US and produce more and more WMD everyday because it feels a lone and threatend by it's neighbors.

What about the fact that for twelve years under harsh US and world sanctions, the US basically didn't care about the people of Iraq. It was reported by the redcross that for every year under those US led sanctions that up to 100,000 or more children starved to death. But did you ever hear about that in the news? we starved a nation of inoccent people just to try and shake one man. and now that this operation is called Iraqi freedom...all of a sudden we care so deeply for the opressed iraqi people...please!

I agree with you about the people of Iraq living under fear. No question about that. There is no question about the death squads either. Saddam used fear to maintain his power.....but does not castro do the samething? did he just not excute people this last week for trying to hijack a ferry to freedom?

Why do we let some nations and there leaders get away with murder and not others? why do we only hear about the otrocities half way around the world when they suddenly become relevant rather than hear about the ones practically in our own backyard?

As for the missing Kuwaities. I know that just as much if not more Iraqi people are missing from this war and the last. And judging from what Victoria Clarck said yesterday in the pentagon briefing...looks like all our latests captured Iraq POW's might disappear into thin air too. After the release of our 7 POW's safely. Is it not now our turn to turn over the estimated 40,000 POW's we now control, who's families, if they are still alive, are just as deparate to see them as our american families were to see there loved ones?

As for the terrorist tranning camps. There are many scattered in many Arabic nations that harbor fundamentalist terror groups. But of course we will hear more about these than any others right now because they are in fact located in Iraq.

The Uranium shells are against the Geneva convention by the way. But it's ok for the US to have and use them. It's just not ok for any other country to use them back on us.

I think we both make valid points shroomy, but so far I've yet to be convinced that this war was justified.....for any means. And that the fact the it was broadcast like a sunday NFL playoff game just goes to show that we as a people don't care what the hell we are watching...weather it's football or a war....just as long as it's fun to watch and our team wins.

Oh and the fact that we pulled out the inspectors and basically "invaded" with out probably cause doesn't sit well with me either and is also against the Geneva convention. where are those weapons they were thought to have which were the main meaning and justification for our attack.

These next few months should be very interesting to watch. How we will go about restructuring Iraq? Will we set up a government run and policeid by Iraqi people or will we have to remain indefinately as a police force in the region? Which US big business will be the first to monopolize on the Iraqi people? Where will we turn to next? N. Korea (I hope...they pose a very real threat to both us and the rest of the world) Syria, Cuba, Back to Afganastan or elsewhere? How long will the bush reghiem, in particular Mr. rumsfeld, spoonfeed the american public lies?....And how long will we buy if for?

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by demo909

Where will we turn to next? N. Korea (I hope...they pose a very real threat to both us and the rest of the world) Syria, Cuba, Back to Afganastan or elsewhere?

i can only dream about the US invading Cuba...as far as those sanctions being brought upon Iraq for 12 yrs...i am sure that one reason it was done was that Saddam would NEVER allow any goods or aid to go to his people...like Castro, all monies/aid goes into his wallet or bank account...considering that Iraq has a pretty good oil supply, Iraq's people suffer...and in my humble opinion, they suffered not b/c of the sanctions, but b/c Saddam was pocketing the money...

[demo909]

the world was not attemping to aid Iraq with money. US led sanctions cut off all supplies of food, medicine and all other tangible goods. No doubt Saddam was stealing and robbing his own people. But those sanctions did little or nothing to the man himself....they devestated an already under povershed country even more.

If anything this quick war and reason to attack may serve as a blueprint of what not to do in the future. we may be able to look at this and say years from now that "yes the war was a success, but maybe it was not necesary at the time. " Maybe we won't be so quick to point the war finger in the future and will truely exhaust all resources availible to us be fore we decide on war.

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by demo909

the world was not attemping to aid Iraq with money. US led sanctions cut off all supplies of food, medicine and all other tangible goods. No doubt Saddam was stealing and robbing his own people. But those sanctions did little or nothing to the man himself....they devestated an already under povershed country even more.

but what i am saying...this man diverts everything for himself...anything sent to the Iraqi people, would have been taken or used up by Saddam...so in the end, regardless of aid or not...it wouldnt have made it to the people who needed it...they would have died anyways...so if a leader isnt going to allow the goods to get to the people, then why even give that country aid?

[shroomy]

Crag,

What should we have done?

and he wasn't just stealing and robbing, he was killing, and repressing to the extent of denying them a life.

P.S. The sanctions specifically allowed food and medicine to be imported. And they are far from underpoverished, they were the second richest country in the middle east behind saudi arabia. He simply decided to allow the wealth to be controled by his elite to be used for palaces, arms and personal gain, instead of benifiting the people he supposedly lead.

and remember the iraqi information minister? he dictated what the people would see and hear in a country where people were killed if they were found with a satalite dish.

[demo909]

Originally posted by shroomy

Crag,

What should we have done?

and he wasn't just stealing and robbing, he was killing, and repressing to the extent of denying them a life.

P.S. The sanctions specifically allowed food and medicine to be imported. And they are far from underpoverished, they were the second richest country in the middle east behind saudi arabia. He simply decided to allow the wealth to be controled by his elite to be used for palaces, arms and personal gain, instead of benifiting the people he supposedly lead.

and remember the iraqi information minister? he dictated what the people would see and hear in a country where people were killed if they were found with a satalite dish.

we should have had undisputed proof before we acted. I.E. the WMD. Or, instead of blowing samoke up our asses like the Bush reghiem did, they should have told us the real reasons for invasion. What made Iraq priority #1 and not N. Korea? Iraq posed no real threat to it's neighbors after years of sanctions and restricted military capabilities thanks to the bombings and the no-fly zones imposed over the years. it did not threaten the world with anything except talk of cutting off the world from it's oil supplies. N. Korea has enough WMD to wipe out all it neighbors and a good portion of Asia for that matter. It now has the fourth largest army in the world and a leader who has threatend to unleash the dogs of war if he has to. Back in 1991 when saddam had the 4th largest army and rattaled his saber the world reacted. Why are we not doing that now with N. Korea? Instead we chose to beat up on a country that basicaly could not fight back with anything more that some machine guns and RPG's. We went in there with all our might and layed waste to an already wasted country just to keep those wells pumping and our "intrests" protected.

Of course he was murdering his people I'm not denying that.

what good is being the second richest nation in the middle east if only the top 5% of the population make up the richest people. Iraq had no real infrastructure at all and the majority of the people did not benifit from that wealth.

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by demo909

Why are we not doing that now with N. Korea?

b/c now N. Korea is changing their tune....

[demo909]

Originally posted by mrmatas2277

b/c now N. Korea is changing their tune....

how so?

last thing I watched yesterday on BBC was there leader touring an airbase in his country and telling his people that his proud airmen were ready to raise to the ocassion and beat back the americans if need be. And that N. Korea will not let the world dictate what it's country does. this guy is a fanatic and rules his country like a cult leader. He was the support of 90% of the people in his country and is not trying to hide the fact the he is basically saying..."if you want us come and get us" but if we decide to do that as quickly as we did with Iraq the loss of life would have been far greater for american troops and personel

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by demo909

how so?

last thing I watched yesterday on BBC was there leader touring an airbase in his country and telling his people that his proud airmen were ready to raise to the ocassion and beat back the americans if need be. And that N. Korea will not let the world dictate what it's country does. this guy is a fanatic and rules his country like a cult leader. He was the support of 90% of the people in his country and is not trying to hide the fact the he is basically saying..."if you want us come and get us"

thats all fine and dandy...same thing we are doing to Syria...talking tough...but they NOW are open to multi-lateral talks (like the US wanted), instead of that one on one garbage...N. Korea is taking a step in the right direction...lets hope it continues (but i am sure it will)

[demo909]

I hope so too. Cause if we do have to go in there and fight it's going to be like WW III.

Thanks for debating with me guys. I gotta run now and actually do work. I'm sure i'll have some more stuff to stir up some people intrests real soon.

PS. why is it that only two people from this board chose to respond.....sad

see ya guys:cool:

[mrjoebudious]

we can talk pro and con all day long.

The reality of the situation is simple.

It is so beyond you and me. Think about the players here.

Weapons, oil, Huge RE-builders, Engineering companies.

Its bad, its good

IT JUST IS!!

In my humble opinion

Peace is the goal

The reality of the world says otherwise.

The US are the big boys

The UN is supposed to be (we all know it is not)

To stay on top in you eliminate or intimidate

Saddam was a huge player of the game

He got away with whatever he wanted

US got hit hard and had to show its might

Why? That is how power works

If you are weak, someone stronger will illiminate you and take over so,

US attacks Saddam for main reason, to show the world who has the power (we were hit hard folks on 9/11) and to know that we will come after you if you act up as well(enter syria, N korea, Iran)

I'm not a war monger in any way but this isn't about dead children, or corporate owned media

Its about power

how to keep it, show it or take it away.

75 billion dollars so far to destroy

we will make alot more rebuilding (at least "President" Cheney will)

And oil? who needs it, during this conflict our fearless leaders alowed the drilling in alaska to start. Nice diversion!

In closing, power means alot of bad things so you can have good things. Rome fell and some day, America, as long as it keeps doing what it is doing, will fall someday as well

God bless the cheseburger, Corporations and the S.U.V.!!!

[demo909]

Originally posted by mrjoebudious

we can talk pro and con all day long.

The reality of the situation is simple.

It is so beyond you and me. Think about the players here.

Weapons, oil, Huge RE-builders, Engineering companies.

Its bad, its good

IT JUST IS!!

In my humble opinion

Peace is the goal

The reality of the world says otherwise.

The US are the big boys

The UN is supposed to be (we all know it is not)

To stay on top in you eliminate or intimidate

Saddam was a huge player of the game

He got away with whatever he wanted

US got hit hard and had to show its might

Why? That is how power works

If you are weak, someone stronger will illiminate you and take over so,

US attacks Saddam for main reason, to show the world who has the power (we were hit hard folks on 9/11) and to know that we will come after you if you act up as well(enter syria, N korea, Iran)

I'm not a war monger in any way but this isn't about dead children, or corporate owned media

Its about power

how to keep it, show it or take it away.

75 billion dollars so far to destroy

we will make alot more rebuilding (at least "President" Cheney will)

And oil? who needs it, during this conflict our fearless leaders alowed the drilling in alaska to start. Nice diversion!

In closing, power means alot of bad things so you can have good things. Rome fell and some day, America, as long as it keeps doing what it is doing, will fall someday as well

God bless the cheseburger, Corporations and the S.U.V.!!!

amen brother!

Not many people heard about that Alaska project. And lets not forget the huge tax cut passed during the war that benifits the top 5% of wealthy americans over 50.....cause you know they need all the help they can get

[digital7]

Originally posted by demo909

PS. why is it that only two people from this board chose to respond.....sad

Im really tired with debating about war .. the last thing I want to do is come on to this board and talk about it some more

[funketeer]

Originally posted by digital7

Im really tired with debating about war .. the last thing I want to do is come on to this board and talk about it some more

Let us know what you want us to write about and we'll get to work right away Mr. President.

[ogmiami]

"amen brother!

Not many people heard about that Alaska project. And lets not forget the huge tax cut passed during the war that benifits the top 5% of wealthy americans over 50.....cause you know they need all the help they can get"

Craig,

After reading this whole thread it seems to me that you are a victim of the press "brainwashing" that you write against. You've bought the left side of this and every arguement that has come up here hook, line and sinker. The truth is that the tax cut will benefit each taxpayer based on the tax that they pay. It's the same tax cut for everyone but because some pay more taxes than others, they will get back more. There are two, or more, sides to every story. You choose the anti-government, liberal side every time...why? Because their brainwashing appeals to you more than the other side's.

As for Iraq...

No doubt that Sadaam was a very bad man.

The world is full of bad men in power.

History is full of revolution by the opressed to get rid of bad men in power.

Why do we get to decide who gets to be the bad man in power?

Was the war about protecting us or freeing them? I don't know anymore.

WMD will be found in Iraq.

Why do we get to decide who gets to have WMD?

[demo909]

I hate to label myself as a left or right person, but yes, if you have to slap a label on me I guess it would be left thinking and more of a liberal. I am be no means brainwashed. I gave up watching US news stations a long time ago. I get most of my news from non bias sources such as reuters, NPR,CDC or BBC. you are right there are always two sides to every story, but then again there is also right and wrong in every story, facts and no facts. I prefer getting news from a source which doesn't spin every story in a way that the general public will eat it up everytime.

lately yes, I have been feeling anti US government. I'm independant, I don't agree with conservative republicans or liberal democrats. I guess I'm caught in the middle right now when it comes to supporting our government. But I do however get to speak up and try and change things for the better of everyone....I'm not saying that my views are 100% right in any means. I feel that right now common sense is not being used, and that most people are not voicing there opinion and there right to speak up. We take for granted how this country was founded and what we as a people went through to become this great nation we are today. Especially in this Bannana republic called Miami....no body really seems to care either way what happens. Just as long as they are not involved and what ever desicion is made it's over quickly

[tranzwhore]

All I've Got to Say is Next Victim Please!

Who Else Wants Some?

Bring It!

[obby]

Shroomy

GREAT ATTITUDE!!!!!!!!!!!AND!!!!!!!!!!WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!

Food for thought

The Iraq's have been "protesting" in these days whether the US should be in charge of reforming their Government or not (which they will need help in). This is big news in my eyes considering that this is the first time that Iraq's have an opportunity to express themselves AND NOT GET SHOT OR GASSED OR RAPPED OR TORTURED.

Sure signs of FREEDOM

Keep an eye out on all the protesting because that is huge sign of FREEDOM. After all, we have our daily protesters in front of our White House protesting about this and that and this and that. The Iraq's now have that same FREEDOM to do the same thanks to the US and it's Coalitions.

[sobeton]

so much for staying quiet. sorry Danny !

U.S. Diplomatic and Commercial Relationships with Iraq

1998 George W. Bush Statement Regarding Iraq

This is a statement from George Bush, Sr. and National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft's co-authored book, A World Transformed, written in 1998 (chapter 19, page 489). Former President Bush and Scowcroft reflect on why the United States did not try to remove Saddam Hussein from power at the end of the Gulf War:

"Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have...incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different and perhaps barren outcome."