US troops may use enemy fighters to clean up amusement park

So what you're saying is that because what the "bad guys" do is worse, our own wrongs should be overlooked?

Just as all Americans wouldn't abuse prisoners, all Arabs don't go around cutting people's heads off. It's like the old race debate in other topics. Frequently the ethnicity of a person is irrelevant. However, just as you generalize about "them," you shouldn't be surprised if most of the rest of the world generalizes about "us."

All the more reason that "us and them" gets us nowhere in terms of ethnicities, nationalities and even political parties.

I've NEVER said our wrongs should be overlooked! Why would you make this statement when I’ve never even remotely replied such? To the contrary, I think the acts are terrible. I'm also proud that our country is presently doing something about it and have already sent one man to jail. I do not see the same behavior from our enemies.

I just find it shocking that you would only judge our actions while refusing to even comment about the acts of our enemies. You flamed your own country while not offering similar disgust for those countries that have done worse acts themselves. Why do you do this?

This disagreement is silly at this point Jeff. You’ve admitted you wrote a flaming statement and expected a response. Glad I could provide it for you. You are a smart man. You know it is ridiculous to denounce porno pictures/abuses while flatly refusing to comment about beheadings.

I could guess at your reasons for continuing to debate, but I’m not a mind reader. The whole thing is ridiculous at this point in time as I think I have agreed with most of your numerous premises throughout the post. I agree with thee Jeff on all the following:

1. Prisoner abuse is horrible
2. Fox shows the flag too much and is right leaning
3. You should never blindly trust the government
4. You should get as much information as possible and . THEN form your opinion
5. We should consider helping in Sudan
6. Garbage, KMFDM and Lords of Acid are great bands . indeed
7. Coaster riding is a fun hobby

I disagree with Jeff on

1. Only showing our America’s negatives while ignoring . our enemy’s negatives
2. ABC is a left leaning network
3. “Fatty” equals hate speech

We’re not as far apart as you might think Jeff! Anyhow, thanks for some good debate. Nobody will ever agree on everything. I think we’ve beat this horse enough and assume we are the only 2 guys left reading this thread!

---

I just find it shocking that you would only judge our actions while refusing to even comment about the acts of our enemies. You flamed your own country while not offering similar disgust for those countries that have done worse acts themselves. Why do you do this?

---

Because I wasn't writing a dissertation on the entire war, I was responding to this single news item.

That led to this other discussion. Honestly, all of this 9/11 investigation nonsense pisses me off, because everyone is more concerned about how people crashed planes into buildings instead of why. They're asking the wrong questions. Frankly, we're now having the same problem with this issue about the beheading. Yes, it's terrible, and no one will debate that, but someone has to ask what would cause people to commit that crime and come up with a better answer than "they hate freedom" or some other B.S. rhetoric.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/story.jsp?story=524674

Has anybody even heard about this story? We heard so much about the American wrongs in the prison scandal. I wonder why the UN actions are not talked about? I though the UN was good and we were bad? At least that is the impression I get from the likes of ABC!

OK, because a UK publication does a story about something we're not involved with and ABC instead concentrates on stories that involve the prisoner abuse, that means ABC thinks the UN troops exploiting refugees is OK and the prisoner abuse is bad. Do you realize how absurd you sound?

Maybe, just maybe, in the span of a 23 minute newscast there were other, more newsworthy stories to cover, not the least of which included Bush's latest speech, flooding and the gay marriage thing. Leftist liberal wackos!

You make up things I don't say and call me absurd. You should be better than this Jeff. At least try to be an honest man and set your hatred aside. No need to continue the discussion if your just going to get mean because the objective information does not back your argument. I make every attempt to be civil because I assumed I was dealing with a civil man. Am I?

P.S. Not nearly as absurd as a man who thinks abuse of people who were trying to kill our soldiers is worse than beheadings and charred bodies. Hmmmm!

*** This post was edited by Jeffrey R Smith 5/25/2004 11:30:39 PM ***

I have no hatred, friend. Don't even go there. It's a weak come back when you don't have an argument. I'm not getting "mean," I'm sticking to the debate.

You said:

---

I wonder why the UN actions are not talked about? I though the UN was good and we were bad?

---

I said:

---

OK, because a UK publication does a story about something we're not involved with and ABC instead concentrates on stories that involve the prisoner abuse, that means ABC thinks the UN troops exploiting refugees is OK and the prisoner abuse is bad.

---

Which part of that am I reading into?

I didn't say anything about what's worse than whatever. Thems your words buddy, not mine. You're the one making this silly connection that because I understand the way a news organization works that I think it's perfectly OK. Whatever dude... you're going to think what you want to think.

Show me where I've said ABC thinks the UN actions are OK! Or for that matter, where I said Sudan was ok. You like to infer stuff that is simply not there, which distorts the argument. I figure you could take a little of your own medicine and I have inferred that you think pictures are worst than beheadings. I ask that you at least stick to what it said and not put words in my mouth. This seems fair. Back to the discussion at hand…

You said earlier that you like to get information from, more than one source and then form an opinion. I'll take you at your word. Go check out Bias by Bernard Goldberg. The extreme left has castrated this man, but if you are interested in checking his politics prior to the book you would have to honestly assess that this man was at least center (I'm being nice here) and probably to the left.

Read that book to see about how media works and how they decide which stories are and are not written/reported. I don't think there is any purposeful leftist conspiracy. I just think that the majority of staffs are to the left so decisions are filtered through that perspective because the people making the decisions think their views are in the center. The same thing happens at Fox from the right. I’ve got no problem with it because I’m educated enough to decipher what perspective a news organization is giving me.

I've looked at the news form all sides and follow politics regularly. I've made my opinion based upon my own observations and other sources. What are your opinions based on? Is it just a feeling or is there some objective data I'm missing that could change what seems obvious?

You don't have to believe. If your stance is firm, that is great. However, I prefer to keep an open mind. I used to be a strong leftist in college, but the more I educated myself the further I've drifted to the right. I don't claim to be right. I just believe what I believe and try to point to objective data to back my beliefs when possible.

I'm interested if you have some books/research/data that would indicate the media is not to the left. Every ounce of evidence I've seen from my own eyes and other sources indicate differently.

Research? I've worked in "the media" my entire professional life. I don't need research, I'm telling you how it is. There is no agenda. Professional news organizations report what happens based on newsworthiness (or in the case of many local orgs, whatever will help you dominate sweeps). That's all there is to it. Editorials in these organizations are marked as such.

The "academic" nonsense you're reading is hell-bent on classifying people into neat little categories for the purpose of finding a scape goat to society's woes. The funny thing is, the very same kind of "research" was everywhere in the Clinton years, alleging exactly the opposite. Nothing has changed except the party in office.

Didn't say there was an agenda from the national media. I don't think ABC or Fox has an agenda. I believe that they think like you Jeff. However, just like your posts and mine, our biases affect our takes. I don’t think it is purposeful and believe that they are trying (trying is the key word) to be objective in most cases.

Doesn’t it alarm you that people working in mainstream national and local media outlets identify themselves as “liberal” at a much higher rate than the general population? Wouldn’t it be better if our major news sources actually reflected the population they served? This is the classic argument liberals like to use for programs like affirmative action (which I’m not necessarily against). Why should the newsrooms across America not be more like the general population they serve?

I’m sure that none of the decision makers though the UN raping 13 year olds was newsworthy in America. I can even concede that this may not be newsworthy. I have a harder time seeing how the oil for food fiasco, which involves Kofi Annan’s son, does not get more play. Seems like a huge story that the very people and countries that opposed the war may have had the most to profit should US stay out of Iraq. How can this UN story not get front page billing? And I definitely do not see how the UN got so much play when they opposed Iraq IF they cannot get any play now. This just does not seemed balanced to me. Seems like a very interesting way of deciding what the American public does and does not hear. At the very least, the wise man should be very discerning about what the press does and does not report knowing the disproportionate amount of people in the business that call themselves liberal (see the Pew link above). I’m not even saying it is wrong to have liberal beliefs (or conservative). I’m just saying that a person’s beliefs affect their reporting and decisions about which stories to report. I have trouble believing that you or anybody could disagree with this.

I ask this with all honesty and no ill will whatsoever Jeff. Do you believe that the way you post on CB is balanced? Do you not think that you political views have an affect on what you have to say? Do you not think that the way you see the world affects which words/posts you decide to lock or delete? Be honest here Jeff! You’re not doing anything wrong; you are just acting like a normal human being. I know CB posts have a different standard than evening news, but I'm just trying to get a sense of where you are coming from. If you do not think your biases and beliefs show up in what you say and how you have to say it, then I know you can never understand my take.

I know my beliefs affect my words. The reason I used the term “fatty” that offended you is that I work day after day with children and adults in the physical therapy business with so many people that are just plain overweight and lazy. In my 5-7 years of being a therapist (I'm too tired to count right now) I have yet to have a client that did not lose weight through healthy dieting and exercise. I have however, ran into a bunch of clients who NEVER got better because they did not have the will power or put in the effort that their peers who succeeded did. My life experiences have certainly affected my beliefs and certainly drips into what I have to say. I say this in all honesty. I always try to concede to other views and accept that not everybody agrees with me. I’m sure this happens in newsrooms too. Unfortunately, everybody’s view affects his or her commentary and decision-making.

This is all I am saying. I don’t think anything is purposeful in terms of the mainstream media most of the time! I just think that their is a larger portion of liberals and moderates represented in the newsrooms which affects the stories that are reported and how these stories are reported. I've seen no data on the subject, but I can guess that Fox has more staff members who identify themselves as conservatives than the general population. It shows in how they report and what the report and more importantly choose not to report.

---

Doesn’t it alarm you that people working in mainstream national and local media outlets identify themselves as “liberal” at a much higher rate than the general population?

---

Nope. Doesn't bother me at all. I worked with card-carrying Democrats and Republicans and they did their job the way it should be done.

---

Do you believe that the way you post on CB is balanced?

---

Nope. Not only am I not reporting news (by post I assume you mean in the forums), but I could care less if people agree with me on anything.

---

How can this UN story not get front page billing?

---

I already answered that... floods, Bush speech, war in Iraq, gas prices, gay marriage, etc. As a news director, you don't sit there and say, "Well, we're reporting bad things about this, so to be balanced we should report bad things about something else." You look at all that you've got, hope you haven't been scooped by your competition, and rank them in order of newsworthiness. The first 23 minutes make the newscast. In a time that isn't heavily crisis oriented, you have even less time than that as you divide up the time among world and domestic news, health, money, and sometimes, entertainment.

That's the way it really goes. It's not as simple as you think.

People will allow their personal views and political beliefs to affect their reporting and decisions of what stories to run. In a fair and ideal world, the news would be reported without hints of bias. We don't live in a world you describe.

This is my opinion, many share it! Many believe like you do. I can deduct from your posts that you are left of center on most issues. I assume the news is reported in a way you believe is "normal" and "fair" becuase those reporting the news tend to have the same beliefs and desires as you. That is great if you are to the left.

People on the right may take issue with what those on the left decide to report and NOT report.

We'll never agree though.

I'm staring at my bookcase right now and I've got stuff from the left and stuff from the right. From Jim Hightower and Alan Colmes to William Bennett and Michael Savage. I love listening to views from all sides. I'm interested in how people at the extremes think. Unfortunately, there are not a lot of books and views by moderates. There are too many great people of history that changed things through moderate views.

I disagree with you on this. It is obvious neither of us will convince the other. Take care and nice discussion. I look forward to disagreeing (and the occasional agreement) with you in the future! :-)

You spend more time trying to convince me that you see all sides than anything else. I don't care what you think journalists do or whether or not they're fair, because it's not what you do, so you can't know.

What I find hilarous about Mr. Smith is he can't even see that the media is dominated by one thing and one thing only RATINGS. Hasn't the media's obession with sex and celebrity trials tought him ANYTHING. I find very little difference between CNN and Court TV.

When it comes to the prisoner abuse story we have a story about WOMEN dragging around male Iraqis. We have a story about A$$ pyramids. A news organization would be CRAZY NOT to run this story.

Notice that the Conservatives wanted us to believe it was a few bad apples. We now learn that this might be a system-wide problem.

But you've convinced me though. Jeff the coaster guy says his friends in media are not biased. It must be true. Sorry I ever disagreed.

Could I have some of that stuff that Smitthy guy is smoking?
To get back on track:
A park in Iraq: good idea. As I always said, give the Iraqis a good time. I, personally, would give them Mickey D's and strip clubs. If they got that, these crazies wouldn't want to blow themselves up.
Seriously, it's a noble undertaking and I hope both sides will follow through.

Now, as one who works in media communications:
The news is news. Period. Yeah, Fox does it's flag-waving and leans conservative and MSNBC leans to left. But that's the news SHOWS! Not the news, it's the shows!! The commentary is the slant. Fox’s Sean Hannity might as well be G. Dub's right hand man. MSNBC's Chris Matthews wrote speeches for Jimmy Carter. Those are personalities, they offer COMMENTARY on the NEWS. Don't get it twisted.

As a military veteran who served in the Gulf War:
1. You people must understand one thing: This is the Middle East, not the Midwest. It's whole different set of rules over there. It is impossible to have a worthy opinion unless you, AT LEAST, explore that region's perspective on everything.

2. This is a war zone. When I was in that region (and it wasn't nearly as bad then) I wasn't the person I am now. I was someone else. You have to have a different state of mind. I don't approve of the prison abuses, but here is the deal. Imagine you're a solider who's been in Iraq for about 5 1/2 months. Your six-month deployment is almost over, then all of sudden, Central Command brings the word you're staying in the country for 3 more months. How would you feel? Stressed would be an understatement.
These soliders at Abu Ghraib, like it or not, probably aren't BAD people. Mentally weak, maybe. This is the situation they were put in and I bet as they are looking back on this in a different light, they are just as sickened as we are to look at themselves in those photos.

I'll stop there, I can go on forever.