Quote:
Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric:
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.
|
*sigh*
I'd love to see proof supporting your claim that the BBC was "anti-American" in their reports concerning Iraq, as that's quite an extreme claim to make, even in a "non-mouth-frothing" manner.
I suppose the term "anti-American" has been over-, mis- and abused so often lately, that it has simply lost its actual meaning. Being against the Iraqi war is not anti-American. Disagreeing with Bush's policies is not anti-American. Being left of center in reports concerning the war isn't anti-American. Countering blatant war propaganda (Jessica Lynch, anyone?) with a taste of its own medicine is not anti-American, just war rhetorics.
The only "frothing at the mouth" that occurs at the moment concerns itself with criticising Lord Hutton's report, which is regarded by a majority of the British as a shameless "whitewash" attempt; especially considering the fact that a large part of the evidence to support the BBC's case wasnt even taken into account.
If you look beyond Gibson's childish and petty name-calling, it's not necessarily
lying that he's doing, it's
omitting a large part of the main picture that's the most reprehensible. Gibson's narrow-minded black and white perspective gave me the strong feeling that he hadn't even done the slightest background research... Good thing the British themselves are a lot better at it:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/hutto...027691,00.html
But I somehow doubt anyone working at FOX News would seriously consider any of the criticism on Lord Hutton's report to be relevant enough to report in a neutral manner, without accompanying it with their usual self-indulgent flaming and twisting of the facts.
[ 02-10-2004, 04:17 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]