Media Bias? But then we knew that didn't we?

Published on February 12, 2005 By drmiler In Politics

Why our news media doesn't ever print these stories, is beyond me.

DID YOU KNOW THIS?

Did you know that 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq?

Did you know that the Iraqi government employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under
rehabilitation, 263 schools are now under construction and 38 new schools
have been built in Iraq?

Did you know that Iraq¹s higher educational structure consists of 20
Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in January
2004 for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5- 100-foot
patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a navel infantry regiment?

Did you know that Iraq¹s Air Force consists of three operation squadrons, 9
reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft which operate day and
night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 bell jet rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando
Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and
equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over
3500 new officers each 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq?
They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad
stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical
facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the
first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school
by mid October, 2004?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and
phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consist of 75 radio
stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a
recent televised debate recently?

OF COURSE WE DIDN¹T KNOW!

AND WHY DIDN¹T WE KNOW? OUR MEDIA WOULDN¹T TELL US!

Instead of
shouting these accomplishments from every rooftop, they would rather show
photo¹s of what a few perverted malcontent soldiers have done in prisons in
many cases never disclosing the circumstances surrounding the events.

Instead of showing our love for our country, we get photos of flag burning
incidents at Abu Ghraib and people throwing snowballs at presidential
motorcades.

The lack of accentuating the positive in Iraq serves only one purpose. It
undermines the world¹s perception of the United States and our soldiers.

This is verifiable on the Department of Defense website.

Comments

Rickdude

on Feb 12, 2005

I admit you make some valid points, but I disagree with you.

For example, remember that claim about WMDs? If the media was liberal, wouldn't they have pointed out that Bush claimed that this was our ORIGINAL porpuse to go to war. Or at least, that's what Bush said was the reason for war. While our intelligence may have said that they had weapons, then why didn't the media make a big deal about Bush giving out the highest civilian honor to someone who ran the CIA when they neglected to forsee 9/11 and caused this intelligent failure in the first place?

Not to mention that a study by the independent Pew Charitable Trusts show that the percentage of positive stories for Bush, 24%, was nearly TWICE as large as the percent of positive stories for Gore, 13%, in the 2000 election. (I do not have the numbers for the 2004 election)

And what about the way he handled the war on terror? I am reffering to the fact that he probably knew about the attacks BEFORE he went into that Florida photo-op. Skeptical? visit http://www.tbtmradio.com/geeklog/public_html/staticpages/index.php?page=20040606205339801
And on the terrorism subject, what about Bush escorting Saudi royales and members of the Bin Laden family out of the country following 9/11? Why didn't the media cover that?

But I don't think the media is politically motivated, only motivated by ratings. Which is why they obsess over war and sex scandals.
However, this is only my opinion, not proven fact. (obviously)

Dysmas

on Feb 12, 2005

Go American media!!

Dysmas

on Feb 12, 2005

For example, remember that claim about WMDs? If the media was liberal, wouldn't they have pointed out that Bush claimed that this was our ORIGINAL porpuse to go to war.

I thought that our main reason for going to war was that Saddam;
A. Flaunted and violated UN Security Sanctions.( time and again)
B. Hassled and hindered people from the IAEA.
C. Was not completly or willingly forthcoming about its NBC development.

Those are some of the main reasons I thought. The whole WMD issue has been gone over many times.
A. All credible Intel Agencies said Iraq had a viable NBC Weapons program.
B. In fact WMDs WERE found in Iraq, just not in the 'Headline catching quantities'
C. Most Intel Agencies STILL think that Saddam buried his stockpile ( in the records he provided saying that he dumped them out we checked the locations and found no evidence of WMD being disposed of there) and that he probably shipped them to Syria.

I dunno, but the focus should now be on what good things our Armed Forces are doing there and all the good develpoments that have occured.

drmiler

on Feb 13, 2005

I admit you make some valid points, but I disagree with you.

For example, remember that claim about WMDs? If the media was liberal, wouldn't they have pointed out that Bush claimed that this was our ORIGINAL porpuse to go to war. Or at least, that's what Bush said was the reason for war. While our intelligence may have said that they had weapons, then why didn't the media make a big deal about Bush giving out the highest civilian honor to someone who ran the CIA when they neglected to forsee 9/11 and caused this intelligent failure in the first place?

Not to mention that a study by the independent Pew Charitable Trusts show that the percentage of positive stories for Bush, 24%, was nearly TWICE as large as the percent of positive stories for Gore, 13%, in the 2000 election. (I do not have the numbers for the 2004 election)

And what about the way he handled the war on terror? I am reffering to the fact that he probably knew about the attacks BEFORE he went into that Florida photo-op. Skeptical? visit Link_html/staticpages/index.php?page=20040606205339801
And on the terrorism subject, what about Bush escorting Saudi royales and members of the Bin Laden family out of the country following 9/11? Why didn't the media cover that?

But I don't think the media is politically motivated, only motivated by ratings. Which is why they obsess over war and sex scandals.
However, this is only my opinion, not proven fact. (obviously)

You do realize that your link is to yet another blog site?

Rickdude

on Feb 13, 2005

For example, remember that claim about WMDs? If the media was liberal, wouldn't they have pointed out that Bush claimed that this was our ORIGINAL porpuse to go to war.

I thought that our main reason for going to war was that Saddam;
A. Flaunted and violated UN Security Sanctions.( time and again)
B. Hassled and hindered people from the IAEA.
C. Was not completly or willingly forthcoming about its NBC development.

Those are some of the main reasons I thought. The whole WMD issue has been gone over many times.
A. All credible Intel Agencies said Iraq had a viable NBC Weapons program.
B. In fact WMDs WERE found in Iraq, just not in the 'Headline catching quantities'
C. Most Intel Agencies STILL think that Saddam buried his stockpile ( in the records he provided saying that he dumped them out we checked the locations and found no evidence of WMD being disposed of there) and that he probably shipped them to Syria.

I dunno, but the focus should now be on what good things our Armed Forces are doing there and all the good develpoments that have occured.

While I agree we thoght that there were weapons but 1) your "weapons" were just materials that COULD be used for WMDs, unless you can show me otherwise. 2) While many Intel. agencies did think there were weapons, the U.N. did not find any which is why there were very few countries with millitaries in our "coalition of the willing". 3) There are many countries with Weapons of mass destruction/Nuclear Weapons (North Korea, almost every country in the Middle East) and that have violated international law(North Korea, almost all of Africa, Syria, probably most of the middle east) why Iraq?

You do realize that your link is to yet another blog site?

yes I do, but they at least reveal their sources. (In this case)

Also, what about Tenet and the Pew Charitable study? What do you have to say about that. (I will admit the Royals/Bin Laden info is false, I got it from an unreliabe source)

Rickdude

on Feb 13, 2005

You do realize that your link is to yet another blog site?

drmiler

on Feb 13, 2005

You do realize that your link is to yet another blog site?

yes I do, but they at least reveal their sources. (In this case)

Also, what about Tenet and the Pew Charitable study? What do you have to say about that. (I will admit the Royals/Bin Laden info is false, I got it from an unreliabe source)

I was unable to find anything on Tenet pertaining to what we're discussing. Can you provide a link?
At least with Pew I was able to find their site but unable to find the study you referenced. What I was able to see leads me to believe that they have *more* of a bias than most major news outlet.

Dysmas

on Feb 13, 2005

why Iraq?

*Shrug* I don't know all of the reasons. I was told to go, I went, and, thank God, im home now.
I don't really care about the reasons I am just happy that I could help those who really needed it.
But you have a good point. What about the other nations with WMDs? I guess we will have to look at them one at a time. Seems Iran is next on the hit list.

drmiler

on Feb 13, 2005

why Iraq?

*Shrug* I don't know all of the reasons. I was told to go, I went, and, thank God, im home now.
I don't really care about the reasons I am just happy that I could help those who really needed it.
But you have a good point. What about the other nations with WMDs? I guess we will have to look at them one at a time. Seems Iran is next on the hit list.

I think it's going to be a toss up between Iran and N Korea.

Dysmas

on Feb 13, 2005

Yup, the problem I see is that we need to decide which one is the biggest threat to international peace...that and, of course, OUR National Security.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!