SwiftVets.com Forum Index SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

D. Ashman of Fox on MSM Bias of WMD report Oct 13

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Rdtf
CNO


Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 2209
Location: BUSHville

PostPosted: Thu Oct 14, 2004 4:57 pm    Post subject: D. Ashman of Fox on MSM Bias of WMD report Oct 13 Reply with quote

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135191,00.html

Wishful Thinking?
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
By David Asman

Last week’s release of the Duelfer report (search) on weapons of mass destruction (search) in Iraq demonstrates how desperately the media try to bend a story to fit their own view.

The actual Duelfer report concludes that sanctions against Saddam were a massive failure. The report details how successful Saddam was at bypassing the sanctions through the corrupted oil for food program and was preparing to rebuild his WMD program: "[Saddam Hussein] wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction when sanctions were lifted."

The report goes on to say that: "By 2000-2001, Saddam had managed to mitigate many of the effects of sanctions and undermine their international support. Iraq was within striking distance of a de facto end to the sanctions regime, both in terms of oil exports and the trade embargo by the end of 1999."

The New York Times managed to flip this view, leading an editorial on the subject with the declarative sentence: "Sanctions worked."

The Washington Post put their editorial twist on the front page, with a banner headline that read: "U.S. 'Almost All Wrong' on Weapons." Never mind that neither the report nor Mr. Duelfer ever said that the U.S. was "Almost all wrong" on WMD. That quote actually came from inspector David Kay, at a Senate hearing in January.


While the Post’s editors were forced to make a correction of their headline, they never explained how an eight-month old quote ended up headlining an article about the findings of an entirely different investigator. Just call it "Wishful editing."

And that’s the Observer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Geedunk & Scuttlebutt All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group