Oh but the naked pile was far worse than this...

[Ninja Prime]

Anyone seen this story? (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C120597%2C00.html)

These Iraqi's had their hands cut off and X's tatooed into their heads simply because Saddam wanted some scapegoats to blame the bad economy on. Interestingly this happened at the exact same prison as the naked pile thing. Lets see, I had to dig just to find this, how long do you need to dig to find the naked pile story...?

Also, note how we evil americans paid for these men to be flown to the US and be given free prosthetic hands and free surgery with a cost somewhere in the area of $150,000 each. Since we are all so evil and bad and such.

So, next time something bad happens at a US prison, make sure it's either a head cut off or a hand cut off, it's obviously far less cruel and horrible as far as reporting goes than the naked pile.

I'm drowning in my own sarcasm here.

[Clay]

Yeah, anyone that exercises common sense and doesn't fall for national media melodrama shares in your sarcasm. I find solace in that it's an election year and the FUD we see on TV is going to fly. It's amusing actually. :) Our nation bends over backwards two or three times for others...that explains why we have such an enormously strong spine as a nation. :)

[-=Gib-McFragger=-]

I am not sure that is the point man, we all KNEW Saddam was a twisted fuq, but this naked pile bit just shows that the Americans who are supposed to be 'advanced far beyond that barbarianism' really aren't.

IMO, heh. (mag)

[Clay]

Heh, there are no absolutes when it comes to human nature. A few bad apples... :)

[-=Gib-McFragger=-]

Heh, there are no absolutes when it comes to human nature. A few bad apples... :)

LOL oh yea, I know that. But the same goes for Iraq. ;)

[saturnotaku]

But the same goes for Iraq. ;)

And Canada and France and well, we get the idea. :ORDER: :kill: :baaa::

[vampireuk]

The fact is though this is not a story you will see been broadcast everywhere, because it actually makes the iraqi situation look good, and we cant have that in the run up to a election! :eek:

[Rob_0126]

The fact is though this is not a story you will see been broadcast everywhere, because it actually makes the iraqi situation look good, and we cant have that in the run up to a election! :eek:

Because the majority of the media's in bed with the dem's(haven't they always been).

At least Cal Thomas gives out the facts.

[retsam]

I am not sure that is the point man, we all KNEW Saddam was a twisted fuq, but this naked pile bit just shows that the Americans who are supposed to be 'advanced far beyond that barbarianism' really aren't.



wow hmmmm lets see he killed,tortured and raped what hundreds of thousand of people..... and lets see we have what maybe a couple dozen incedents......hmmmmm ya that puts us on the same scale as sadam and his dirtbags ....if you hate america so much just say so ..... this one just a few bad apples not a way of life ....like it was for sadam .....

[Clay]

And when was the last time Americans tossed men and women into people-sized meat grinders?

[Saint Lucifer]

The fact is though this is not a story you will see been broadcast everywhere, because it actually makes the iraqi situation look good, and we cant have that in the run up to a election!Because the majority of the media's in bed with the dem's(haven't they always been).
I seem to recall a time not too long ago when the 'evil liberal media' was tearing into some president for a petty sex scandal...

I seem to recall watching CNN about a year ago while the 'evil liberal media' touted the supreme ability and grace of the Coalition...

My point is that it's nice and comforting to think there is some evil liberal media that does whatever it can to hold the benevolent conservatives down. The problem with such a pacifier is that it fails to take one thing into consideration: the media will focus on any topic that will get ratings regardless of political affiliation. They're in the business to make money - not to wave the Democratic banner.

[vampireuk]

no they are in the bussiness of reporting news, however they only seem to report news that makes the situation in Iraq bad. I mean how boring would it be to see most of the country living better lives than they have ever had under Saddam *yawn* :rolleyes:

[Riptide]

I wish these "journalists" would become reporters again and just give us the damn facts. I'm sick of all the spin and editorializing.

[Kamel]

two wrongs dont make a right

[Saint Lucifer]

A newspaper is, on the financial point of view, a bunch of advertisements with some articles in it. The articles are in the paper so that you'll buy it and hopefully see the advertisements. There's very little money in journalism until advertising is taken into consideration. Why else do you think the Sunday paper is the largest paper of the week, but has just about the same amount of articles as say the Wednesday or Thursday paper?

As for only reporting bad news, how often do they report 'happy' stories, anyhow? 'Fireman saves a cat from a tree!' isn't a good story, whereas 'Local mailman kills young children and keeps them locked up in his dungeon' is.

With that said, I really haven't seen news agencies (or at least reputable ones...) flat out say that Iraq was better under Saddam. The closest thing you could even point to are polls where they ask Iraqi civilians.

Now I know your point - "Why are Coalition members held to higher standards than everyone else?" The answer is simple: because we put ourselves there. We absolutely need to be on a higher ground than those whom we discredit. Even though it might not be a reality, you have to make it seem as so. So in my opinion, those Coalition soldiers who commit atrocities during a war need to be punished harshly. Not because I hate America, or because I hate soldiers - but because I respect America, and I respect our soldiers.

[vampireuk]

two wrongs dont make a right

I fail to see what relevance that has to this thread :eek2:

[stncttr908]

Sure, it's all PR, but it's good to see some of the positives being noticed instead of constant negativity.

[Clay]

I fail to see what relevance that has to this thread :eek2:
Don't you know Vamp? Cliches are the end-all be-all answer to all of life's problems. :D

[UDawg]

I seem to recall a time not too long ago when the 'evil liberal media' was tearing into some president for a petty sex scandal...

I seem to recall watching CNN about a year ago while the 'evil liberal media' touted the supreme ability and grace of the Coalition...

My point is that it's nice and comforting to think there is some evil liberal media that does whatever it can to hold the benevolent conservatives down. The problem with such a pacifier is that it fails to take one thing into consideration: the media will focus on any topic that will get ratings regardless of political affiliation. They're in the business to make money - not to wave the Democratic banner.


What are you talking about? The media held back the story for a long time. It was Drudge that broke the story because the rest of the media didn't want it to get that soon.

The media did everything it could to help Clinton out. They when after Gingrich and Hastert. They dug up dirt on them and gladly put it our there. They also started this BS comparison between Clinton and Jefferson and said "see everyone does it, what's the big deal?".

Give me a break LOL the media whent after Clinton. LMAO!!! Your a funny guy, do you also do stand up?

The liberal media has been all over this war and has tried to paint it as a failure and the worst event in human history. I submit the prison abuse scandle. They keep rehashing this story every day for the last 3 and a half weeks. This is not that big a story unless you want to use it as political ammunition. Mean while Nick Berg was a blip on the radar screen. :lame:

We all know most the media is liberal except for Fox News, talk radio, WSJ, Washinton Times and a couple of other print media but all of these in no way come close to the monoply the networks, CNN, MSNBC, and the more than double the circulation the NYT and LA Times have. All recient research and polls show the media heavily liberal or at least slanted to the left.

[Rob_0126]

And what even clarifies the medias bias even more, is the fact that most of the media giants are owned by liberals.

Chew on that for a while (mag)

[Saint Lucifer]

What are you talking about? The media held back the story for a long time. It was Drudge that broke the story because the rest of the media didn't want it to get that soon.

The media did everything it could to help Clinton out. They when after Gingrich and Hastert. They dug up dirt on them and gladly put it our there. They also started this BS comparison between Clinton and Jefferson and said "see everyone does it, what's the big deal?".
When the story was unleashed, it was everywhere. CNN had hour upon hour of coverage. They had 'experts' from both the liberal and conservative side just babbling about him getting off on Lewinsky. Then they started going to random people on the street and having polls about whether or not they cared. For months it was the same freaking thing. Don't even try and say they didn't give it due coverage.

And bluntly, I don't even care about what Clinton did. Before you say 'typical liberal blind-eye to the misdeeds of fellow liberals', I want to stress that I don't even care that George W. Bush has a DUI on his record, or that he possibly used cocaine. It's all truly inconsequential to me.

By the way, CNN never focused intently on George W. Bush's DUI... OMG!!!!1!1! RUPUBICAN BIAS!!!11

Give me a break LOL the media whent after Clinton. LMAO!!! Your a funny guy, do you also do stand up?Indeed. I'll be here all week, and be sure to try the lamb chops.

The liberal media has been all over this war and has tried to paint it as a failure and the worst event in human history. I submit the prison abuse scandle. They keep rehashing this story every day for the last 3 and a half weeks. This is not that big a story unless you want to use it as political ammunition. Mean while Nick Berg was a blip on the radar screen. :lame:It seems kind of macabre to focus on some guy getting decapitated, don't you think? Somehow, it seems more respectful to his family to not focus specifically on the poor guy. Then why focus on a bunch of guys getting sexually violated? It's simple - because they're not Americans and it's less likely to piss off the folks at home. Besides, they usually rehash every story...

As for how they portray the war, I haven't exactly seen them flat out say that it's a terrible event. Do they focus on horrific events? Certainly. Do they focus on triumphs? Indeed they do.
We all know most the media is liberal except for Fox News, talk radio, WSJ, Washinton Times and a couple of other print media but all of these in no way come close to the monoply the networks, CNN, MSNBC, and the more than double the circulation the NYT and LA Times have. All recient research and polls show the media heavily liberal or at least slanted to the left.
The day I hear Peter Jennings or Tom Brokaw say "Folks, don't vote for George W. Bush, because he likes to travel to dog kennels wrapped in steaks and slaps his ass with tartar sauce... and he picks his nose" I'll agree that the they're heavily biased towards liberals.

[Riptide]

As for how they portray the war, I haven't exactly seen them flat out say that it's a terrible event. Do they focus on horrific events? Certainly. Do they focus on triumphs? Indeed they do.
What media outlet have you been watching??? Focus on triumphs my ass. They "report" 1 thing positive for about 10 things negative.

[Saint Lucifer]

Well, Riptide, in order for them to report triumphs, there have to be some good ones...

For example, there was coverage on Iraq's new constitution.

[PsychoSy]

no they are in the bussiness of reporting news

WRONG -- Corporate-owned media is in the business of making money. They make money by keeping your clacker tuned in for the commercials AND keeping their shareholders happy! In fact, corporate-owned media organizations are required BY LAW to cater to their shareholders whims despite the fact that the airwaves they use are owned by the public. Corporate-owned media has absolutely no problem telling Joe Schmoe American right to his face, "We paid $XX Billion or this station or newspaper!! We'll decide what is or isn't news!!" Public interest is last on the list of the agenda of a corporate-owned media entity.

Now I know your point - "Why are Coalition members held to higher standards than everyone else?" The answer is simple: because we put ourselves there.

AMEN!! :D

If we're gonna prattle about how the USA is such a great country with morals, decency, great human rights track record, etc., etc., then we'd had better practice what we preach when we're under the gun. If we're gonna talk the talk ... we better walk the walk. And to hell with all this comparitive human relativism BS that people resort to (e.g. "We're better than Nation X at Issue Y!!") when placed under scrutiny. That's diffraction and spin and it only works to tickle the ears of the spin-minded. Bottom line is the world loves hypocracy about as much as misery loves company so ... we're either part of the problem or part of the solution.

[Clay]

we're either part of the problem or part of the solution.That's another one of my favorite cliches. :) Unfortunately, many of life's problems are not so easily nutshelled.