Thread: forged Bush docs

> I mean, the fact that they actually show the other side of the argument should bother the

That's weird, I don't remember saying what I watched.

I don't give a crap that Fox has a conservative bias. Not at all. The fact is, they frequently lie, or at the very least, distort facts. The fact that far more Fox viewers than any other source believe that Saddam was directly involved in 9/11 and that we've found giant stockpiles of WMD in Iraq should tell you something.

I dont understand how anyone could think that Saddam has a direct link with 9/11.

The 9/11 commision stated the there was deffinately not any link between the attacks of 9/11 and Iraq.

I dont care what channel you watch, you shouldnt automatically believe anything just because a certain reporter said it.

But I was serious about The Daily Show Its the most unbiased news program out there.

> But I was serious about The Daily Show Its the most unbiased news program out there.

Jon Stewart has said several times that he's really scared that people like TDS as one of their main news sources. It's a hilarious show, but the audience is annoying as hell. I'm pretty damn liberal, but it'd be nice for him to be able to say something negative about someone on "the other side" without the audience cheering.

Originally Posted by Govtcheez

but it'd be nice for him to be able to say something negative about someone on "the other side" without the audience cheering.

I agree there.

Originally Posted by Govtcheez

> I mean, the fact that they actually show the other side of the argument should bother the

That's weird, I don't remember saying what I watched.

I don't give a crap that Fox has a conservative bias. Not at all. The fact is, they frequently lie, or at the very least, distort facts. The fact that far more Fox viewers than any other source believe that Saddam was directly involved in 9/11 and that we've found giant stockpiles of WMD in Iraq should tell you something.

I don't know anyone who thinks we found stockpiles. Do you?

By the way, nothing like this CBS thing can be tagged on Foxnews. If you disagree, that's one thing. But you accused them of being unethical.

I think Govtcheez was referring to Fox News being unethical in different ways. Just commenting on how you linked to Fox News, a network he considers unethical, to point out something unethical in someone else.

And I don't believe Fox News ever reported in it's news broadcasts that they had found stockpiles of WMDs in Iraq. If it's been said, it's been said on editorial talk shows.

edit: And I don't think Saddam was directly involved in Sept. 11th. I certainly think he was indirectly involved, whether the 9/11 comission says so or not. They don't have all the facts (though I do admit, neither do I). And even then, WMDs are not the only reason he went. Someone should've taken out that whole family a long time ago. A couple of weeks before the US started taking actions in Iraq, Udai walked into the middle of a wedding with other armed men, raped the wife, shot her in the head, then shot her husband in the head, and left.

> I don't know anyone who thinks we found stockpiles. Do you?

Unfortunately, I do. That, and people who think those couple of sarin shells we found a few months ago justified the invasion.

> And I don't believe Fox News ever reported in it's news broadcasts that they had found stockpiles of WMDs in Iraq. If it's been said, it's been said on editorial talk shows.

On all cable news channels, the line between real news and editorial crap is blurred to the point of nonexistance. There needs to be a way to hold them accountable.

> Now theres an understatement

First against the wall.

you're right. I do think Rather should be held accountable. Not jail time necessarily. But some sort of fine would suffice.

Originally Posted by FillYourBrain

you're right. I do think Rather should be held accountable. Not jail time necessarily. But some sort of fine would suffice.

Did Rather make them himself? Was he even the one that made them public? Just because he's the most obvious target doesn't make him the best. How about Bob Novak revealing a Democratic Congressman's wife as a CIA spy? That one would be jail time, under normal circumstances.

regardless of who made them, Rather is not stupid. He knows they're fake. Whatever else he knows remains to be seen, but his cover-up is illegal.

oh, and your right about the Novac case (except that the same democratic congressman was mouthing off about it before then). But certainly the media is a problem.

One fix could be elimination of "editorials". The opinion pieces are the biggest problem. I for one have never been able to figure out how it is ethical for a newspaper to endorse canditates. How can you be impartial if you have explicitly chosen sides?

no, no. freedom of speech is a great right. But perhaps you should lose the distinction of being considered a news source if you throw opinion in there. Opinion should probably be reserved for separate publications