The common arguement against the war in Iraq is that there are no WMDs. Well, as it turns out, there are, but strangely enough the media has not reported it AT ALL! Is this proof that the media is liberal in its choosing to report certain stories over others?
2006-07-01 01:16:43 · 12 answers · asked by Mehrunes Dagon 2 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
Yes, the media downplayed the find of loads of emptied missle containers filled with deadly mustard gas. I forget his name, but there is a senator from Pennsylvania that has all the information about the find from CIA/FBI documents on his website.
2006-07-01 01:21:21 · answer #1 · answered by thunder2sys 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well people that do not think that they had Weapons of Mass destruction , are people who live in caves. People who take what the bias media has to say for facts are just as slanted. If people would just look back to time when Bill Clinton was in the white house , the same bias media reported lots of WMD in Iraq. But with George Bush in the white house , well the media is more democrat then republican , so they had to turn as many of the simple minder American TV watchers against the Bush. They have done a good job at it . But some of them have been exposed like dan rather , who created a news story that just was not true. but rather got the boot (fired) , because of the backlash of the TRUTH. Some thing the bias media does not want you to know . WAKE UP AMERICA..........
2006-07-01 08:27:55 · answer #2 · answered by Scott c 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They did not find any yet. What they are reporting now is that they found some outdated chemical weapons canisters, ones that dont really work and arent that effective in the first place. I dont remember if there even were chemicals in them anyway.
The thing is though, they reported this a year ago. It seems that someone "reminded" the media of this in an attempt to sort of justify the war. However, just like a year ago, nobody really cares about these things. Nobody would want to go to war over some relics from the 80's that dont even work.
2006-07-01 08:23:11 · answer #3 · answered by owlron 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is really quite amazing.
Administarion detractors holler, "The President is a Liar!"
Their proof? No WMD had been found.
There is now a new legal principle in America. Lack of evidence is evidence.
Any day now, we will hear some lawyer say,
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it is true my client fought with is wife. It is true he was the beneficiary of her million dollar policy. It is true he threatened her life. It is true she was found with a 45 caliber hole through her head. It is true my client once registered a 45 caliber handgun."
But, ladies and gentlemen, no gun was ever found; therefore no gun ever existed and the Police have lied about my client"
Based on our new legal principle, the jury would have to acquit.
In fact, if you look back to the months before the Iraq war, the world knew for several months that the administration planned to invade Iraq. Saddam knew it. If you were Saddam and you knew that invasion was imminent, and you had several months to do something about it, and you had WMD, what would you do?
Unless you're a complete idiot, you'd hide them where they would never be found. You might work a deal for Syria to take them. But then, lack of evidence is now evidence of lack.
2006-07-01 10:01:02 · answer #4 · answered by ALLEN F 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look up "liberal" in the dictionary. You'll find out that, if there were weapons of mass destruction, a "liberal media" would report on the findings. Unfortunately even the Bush administration hasn't said they found weapons of mass destruction. You see, the minimal amounts of old mustard gas that was found (which was actually reported by the BBC) isn't considered a weapon of mass destruction. Now, finding out you have cancer with no medical insurance should be considered a weapon of mass destruction. Maybe Canada should invade us, eh?
2006-07-01 08:37:32 · answer #5 · answered by Vex 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fox News did report it. Of course, they aren't left wing media. The others won't report it because it hurts their case against Bush.
2006-07-01 16:01:11 · answer #6 · answered by proud_usmc_wife04 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
nothing new here, the left wing, liberal media has selectively reported stories favorable to them for 50 years!
2006-07-01 08:22:08 · answer #7 · answered by Pobept 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only way to find out about things like this is to watch Fox News.
2006-07-01 08:23:06 · answer #8 · answered by mamadixie 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The media IS liberal and they suck. I say bomb Iraq and the rest of the middle east to hell.
2006-07-01 08:20:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Then let the administration present it to all of us, not through some senator in a "hastily convened conference"
2006-07-01 10:31:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋