Re: virus: News Bias and Sources

Date: Sat Aug 03 2002 - 14:38:36 MDT

On 3 Aug 2002 at 14:18, rhinoceros wrote:

> [Joe Dees]
> People here might benefit from perusing the site of the universally
> acknowledged 'King of the Bloggers", Andrew Sullivan. It is to be
> found at:
> [rhinoceros]
> Ha Ha! I always appreciated twisted humor Joe. Bias as a point of view
> is one thing but deliberately promoting lies is a bird of a different
> kind.
In fact, Andrew Sullivan is widely known for successfully calling other
news outlets on their ideology-driven lies and mischaracterizations.
> Well, in the first article I found there, after presenting an argument
> to the effect that N.Y. Times twist facts according to their own
> agenda, they urge for promoting a deliberate lie, i.e. that Iraq was
> responsible for 9/11, on the grounds that this is necessary in order
> to go to war against Iraq for other (security) reasons.
> <Quote from NYTimes:>
> "One argument for war often floated by officials ought to be disposed
> of quickly. Military action against Iraq may be justified, but not in
> response to the terrorism of Sept. 11 or Al Qaeda. To date there is no
> reliable evidence that Baghdad had any serious connection to either.
> The dangers posed by Iraq have more to do with protecting American
> interests in the Middle East than with warding off fresh terrorist
> attacks on American cities."
> <Quote from andrewsullivan:>
> "This is preposterous. The only reason invading Iraq is being
> discussed at all is because of September 11 and what it taught us. It
> taught us that we are extremely vulnerable to terrorist assault, that
> these murderous fanatics are capable of anything, that they would use
> weapons of mass destruction in a heartbeat if they could get them. It
> is no secret that Iraq is the prime potential source of such weapons,
> and it is headed by a despot who has used them himself, and would
> dearly love to deliver them to America. What more do we need to know?
> The far-left notion that this is a cynical war for "protecting
> American interests in the Middle East" is absurd. Such a war might
> indeed make the Middle East a safer place, but the war is about
> protecting America and the West, as well as liberating the Iraqi
> people from one of the most evil tyrants in history."
You cannot read very well. Andrew Sullivan stated that 9/11 had taught
us the lesson that we cannot wait for those who have publicly stated
that they intend to strike us, and are actively in preparations to gain
strike capacities, to do so. This lesson was learned from Al Quaeda,
but it applies precisely to Saddam Hussein.
> ----
> This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2002 board on
> Church of Virus BBS.
> <;action=display;thread
> id=25929>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:17 MDT