[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout: That disturbs me - its not a case of him being biased in that link he's just actually lying. It got to the stage where I was no longer even counting the lies he told, ironically enough in a piece about lying. I swear I will later on get round to replying to the other thread, but I just wanted to say that I'm absolutely disgusted with that link and the lies told in it.

I'm interested in something here, Barry, and I wonder if you would help me out. You say that you finally reached the point where you quit counting the lies in the report - would you be willing to take the time to look over the transcript Grojlach provided and list the lies told in the article?

I don't agree with the manner in which the story was presented, but as Timber pointed out, the story itself does contain a lot of facts.

The BBC was "anti-American" and especially "anti-Bush" in it's stories, at least to the best of my memory. I'll agree they weren't "frothing at the mouth" about it, but all of their articles were consistent in being "anti-war". They also were caught exaggerating (or even falsifying) certain facts in their articles.

I'm not slamming the BBC, because they certainly weren't the ONLY media outlet guilty of such infractions. CNN even got caught "creating" an interview with some British soldiers in which they spoke of the utter incompetence of American soldiers. It was later discovered that the "British soldiers" were actually paid actors and the entire interview was nothing but a fraudelent production made by CNN.

Anyway, the point I'm making is that - if you can ignore the "spin" put on by Fox - the story itself does contain several facts. Since you said it also contained several lies, I would be interested to know which parts of it were falsified. Thanks.