[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement:
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct:
Feedback:
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 10:03:19 03/31/03 Mon
Author: H_Bregeron
Author Host/IP: pcp02148573pcs.neave01.pa.comcast.net / 68.81.252.202
Subject: Submitted for your consideration....
From The Sun Newspaper online link
BBC's own man blasts
his bosses over 'bias'
By TREVOR KAVANAGH
Political Editor
THE BBC was last night sensationally condemned for one-sided war coverage
by its own front line defence correspondent.
Paul Adams attacks the Beeb for misreporting the Allied advance
in a blistering memo leaked to The Sun.
And he warned the BBCs credibility is at risk for suggesting British troops
are paying a high price for small victories.
On Monday, he wrote from US Central Command in Qatar:
I was gobsmacked to hear, in a set of headlines today,
that the coalition was suffering significant casualties.
This is simply NOT TRUE. Nor is it true to say as the same intro stated
that coalition forces are fighting guerrillas.
It may be guerrilla warfare, but they are not guerrillas.
Adams memo was fired off to TV news head Roger Mosey,
Radio news boss Stephen Mitchell and other Beeb chiefs.
It adds stunning weight to allegations that BBC coverage
on all its networks is biased against the war.
In one blast, he storms:
Who dreamed up the line that the coalition are achieving small victories at a very high price?
The truth is exactly the opposite.
The gains are huge and the costs still relatively low.
This is real warfare, however one-sided, and losses are to be expected.
The BBC has come under attack for describing the loss of two soldiers as
the worst possible news for the armed forces.
One listener asked:
How would the BBC have reported the Battle of the Somme
in World War I when 25,000 men died on the first day?
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Replies:
[>
The first casualty of war is the truth is evident. There are omissions, distortions, spins, claims, etc. I have not believed any of it. The trick is to pick on one source as a focus, then read what others have to say. I listen to what the press briefings contain and then see how various people report what I have already heard. In some cases, the opposite of what was said is reported. One quickly learns who has no integrity. How about that Peter Arnett, eh? -- SG, 10:13:48 03/31/03 Mon (pcp01422563pcs.lndsd201.pa.comcast.net/68.81.153.209)
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
You're right, one needs to check multiple sources. As soon as I saw this was the UK "Sun" I disbelieved it, but it was corroborate by the UK Guardian, its political opposite. The Sun achieved fame for being the first and only UK paper to feature a daily topless model on page 3. If you pay a visit to http://www.thesun.co.uk/ you will see that its readership enjoys pictures more than words, and doesn't worry about political correctness. -- Chris Henry, 02:33:22 04/01/03 Tue (cache10-2.ruh.isu.net.sa/212.138.47.29)
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[>
I am increasingly offended at the drivel that passes for "informed opinion" coming out of the mouths of liberals -- the Northwestern U prof who says the abuse inflicted on Vietnam vets when they returned was "urban myth," Chrissie Hines (sp?) saying she "hopes Iraq wins," and now the illustrious Columbia U. prof who said he wishes "a thousand Mogadishus" on the U.S. military. Words cannot express my contempt for these samples of our society and their ilk. What hateful words so frequently come from the mouths of "tolerant" people. (cont'd) -- Spock, 16:09:07 03/31/03 Mon (user-vc8fm1s.biz.mindspring.com/216.135.216.60)
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
That professor is now in hiding. Nothing like standing up for what you pretend to believe, eh? -- SG, 09:44:15 04/04/03 Fri (NoHost/68.81.153.209)
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[>
And what utter ignorance from those who claim to be "informed" and who tout themselves as America's elite. Quite obviously they have no idea what they are saying, nor the implications or ramifications of having their wishes fulfilled. May I never be so tolerant nor informed. With friends like this, who needs enemies? -- Spock, 16:11:25 03/31/03 Mon (user-vc8fm1s.biz.mindspring.com/216.135.216.60)
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]