NO MEDIA BIAS???? Pleeeeeeeeeeeease

[LuvRPgrl]

Ok, OK, Im a dork, I use aol. Its easy and cheap. so :

So, I turn my aol on, and they always have news headlines.

Headline : More US troop casualties.

The story went on to tell about the US soldiers killed by insurgents (TERRORISTS) I think it was about 4

Then it told of Iraqi soldiers killed, I think about 9

Then it told of civilians killed by terrorists, I think about 16.

Is it news these days that people are being murdered in the middle east? Hasnt that been happening since Cain and Abel? Or cave man vs. cave man for the atheists here.

Now, the last three paragraphs went on to describe an event that should be absolutely earth shaking news for the middle east. An UPRECEDENTED EVENT is occuring and the media wont even cover it, (knowing full well that 80% of readers dont get past the third paragraph, hence reducing their last paragraphs to "needle point illustrated" on cable tv status)

Women leaders in Iraq are insuring that the new Constitution guarantee equal rights to all, regardless of gender, religion, race or creed.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY UNHEARD OF IN THE MIDDLE EAST. I challenge one freaking liberal to show me those words of law in any middle east muslim country. Cmon LIBS, thats a direct challenge, step up to the plate and hit my fastball.

The fact that they relegated this to the end of the story is absolutelly pathetic, and the reason I dont get any of my news from main stream media anymore. No papers, no tv, cable is limited to fox.

As for any of you anti Bush, anti war, anti troop liberals, I will pesonally put the hot rod up your asses when the day of judgement comes if Im allowed to for all the pain and suffering your obnoxious myoptic assholes have created.

 

[dilloduck]

Ok, OK, Im a dork, I use aol. Its easy and cheap. so :

So, I turn my aol on, and they always have news headlines.

Headline : More US troop casualties.

The story went on to tell about the US soldiers killed by insurgents (TERRORISTS) I think it was about 4

Then it told of Iraqi soldiers killed, I think about 9

Then it told of civilians killed by terrorists, I think about 16.

Is it news these days that people are being murdered in the middle east? Hasnt that been happening since Cain and Abel? Or cave man vs. cave man for the atheists here.

Now, the last three paragraphs went on to describe an event that should be absolutely earth shaking news for the middle east. An UPRECEDENTED EVENT is occuring and the media wont even cover it, (knowing full well that 80% of readers dont get past the third paragraph, hence reducing their last paragraphs to "needle point illustrated" on cable tv status)

Women leaders in Iraq are insuring that the new Constitution guarantee equal rights to all, regardless of gender, religion, race or creed.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY UNHEARD OF IN THE MIDDLE EAST. I challenge one freaking liberal to show me those words of law in any middle east muslim country. Cmon LIBS, thats a direct challenge, step up to the plate and hit my fastball.

The fact that they relegated this to the end of the story is absolutelly pathetic, and the reason I dont get any of my news from main stream media anymore. No papers, no tv, cable is limited to fox.

As for any of you anti Bush, anti war, anti troop liberals, I will pesonally put the hot rod up your asses when the day of judgement comes if Im allowed to for all the pain and suffering your obnoxious myoptic assholes have created.

Spiritual ---very spiritual. I'm sure that's what Jesus would say.

 

[Nuc]

Is it news these days that people are being murdered in the middle east? Hasnt that been happening since Cain and Abel? Or cave man vs. cave man for the atheists here.

Yes that is an uninterrupted fact of life in the region. That's one of the reasons it's ill advised to think that we can change anything over there. It's their lifestyle. They want to have constant violence. Why does anybody think they want peace, prosperity and human rights?

 

[Said1]

Yes that is an uninterrupted fact of life in the region. That's one of the reasons it's ill advised to think that we can change anything over there. It's their lifestyle. They want to have constant violence. Why does anybody think they want peace, prosperity and human rights?

Duh.

 

[dilloduck]

To think that something must remain the same because it has been that way for a long time is irrational.

 

[Gunny]

To think that something must remain the same because it has been that way for a long time is irrational.

To think someone who has no real concept of your Judeo-Christian ethic is going to stop doing what they are doing because YOU think it is right is unrealistic.

By our standards, we are not dealing with rational people.

 

[Nuc]

To think that something must remain the same because it has been that way for a long time is irrational.

Really? Take Russia for example. Everyone thought the fall of communism would bring peace and love to them, but they are still miserable. That's because misery is their national emotion. It's always been this way. I agree with you just because something is hopeless doesn't mean you shouldn't try anyway. There is nobility in futile gestures.

 

[dilloduck]

Really? Take Russia for example. Everyone thought the fall of communism would bring peace and love to them, but they are still miserable. That's because misery is their national emotion. It's always been this way. I agree with you just because something is hopeless doesn't mean you shouldn't try anyway. There is nobility in futile gestures.

Anyone that thought that the collapse of communism in Russia would bring peace and love was a fool.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Spiritual ---very spiritual. I'm sure that's what Jesus would say.

Well, Jesus did say basically that. He proclaimed that it would be a terrible, terrible day for the scribes and the pharisees, tax collectors, money changers and the sinful, the day of judgement.

 

[Annie]

Really? Take Russia for example. Everyone thought the fall of communism would bring peace and love to them, but they are still miserable. That's because misery is their national emotion. It's always been this way. I agree with you just because something is hopeless doesn't mean you shouldn't try anyway. There is nobility in futile gestures.

It depends who you're talking to. I have a very close Ukrainian friend, she desperately wanted to move her family here, but couldn't get a green card, though did get 5 year visa. Today, since she still hasn't been able to get the green card, she thinks she will not chance coming over for 5 years, as it could mean having to return. She thinks with the improvements already underway since the revolution/election, things are looking up. I'd say that's very good news.

 

[nakedemperor]

"Draft Iraqi Constitution Elevates Role of Islam; Proposal may erode women's rights in marriage, divorce, inheritance."

Rollback for women's rights?
Most worrying for women's groups has been the section on civil rights, which some believe would significantly roll back women's rights under a 1959 civil law enacted by a secular regime.

In the copy obtained by the AP on Monday, Article 19 of the second chapter says "the followers of any religion or sect are free to choose their civil status according to their religious or sectarian beliefs."

Shiite Muslim leaders have pushed for a stronger role for Islam in civil law but women's groups argue that could base legal interpretations on stricter religious lines that are less favorable to women.

Committee members said they had taken account of women's concerns but were not planning to make changes, since the National Assembly will have final say on the wording.

Committee member Khudayer al-Khuzai said Muslims would be free to choose which Islamic sect they want to be judged by under the proposed civil law.

“We will not force anyone to adopt any sect at all. People are free to choose the sect they see as better or more legitimate. This is implemented in marriage, inheritance and all civil rights,” he said.

Not all Shiite laws are disadvantageous for women. Many Sunni Muslims who have only daughters prefer to follow Shiite religious law when it comes to inheritance, since daughters inherit everything their parents leave. Under Sunni rules, daughters have to share their inheritance with uncles, aunts and grandparents.

((That's MSNBC reporting, in the title of the article, the fact that women's rights in Iraq may in fact be rolled back by the constitution))

Also, your question "is it news that people are getting murdered in the middle east" is bizarre. Would YOU like it if your son or daughter's noble and heroic death wr relegated to some byline or page A26 article?

 

[LuvRPgrl]

"Draft Iraqi Constitution Elevates Role of Islam; Proposal may erode women's rights in marriage, divorce, inheritance."

Rollback for women's rights?
Most worrying for women's groups has been the section on civil rights, which some believe would significantly roll back women's rights under a 1959 civil law enacted by a secular regime.

In the copy obtained by the AP on Monday, Article 19 of the second chapter says "the followers of any religion or sect are free to choose their civil status according to their religious or sectarian beliefs."

Shiite Muslim leaders have pushed for a stronger role for Islam in civil law but women's groups argue that could base legal interpretations on stricter religious lines that are less favorable to women.

Committee members said they had taken account of women's concerns but were not planning to make changes, since the National Assembly will have final say on the wording.

Committee member Khudayer al-Khuzai said Muslims would be free to choose which Islamic sect they want to be judged by under the proposed civil law.

“We will not force anyone to adopt any sect at all. People are free to choose the sect they see as better or more legitimate. This is implemented in marriage, inheritance and all civil rights,” he said.

Not all Shiite laws are disadvantageous for women. Many Sunni Muslims who have only daughters prefer to follow Shiite religious law when it comes to inheritance, since daughters inherit everything their parents leave. Under Sunni rules, daughters have to share their inheritance with uncles, aunts and grandparents.

((That's MSNBC reporting, in the title of the article, the fact that women's rights in Iraq may in fact be rolled back by the constitution))

Also, your question "is it news that people are getting murdered in the middle east" is bizarre. Would YOU like it if your son or daughter's noble and heroic death wr relegated to some byline or page A26 article?

Did I say it should be some byline?

 

[nakedemperor]

Did I say it should be some byline?

What else does 'Is it news that people are being murdered in the Middle East these days' mean? I took it to mean you were reacting to KIA's as the headline and improved women's rights for Iraqis (which was a dubious claim at best) as the byline. Were you not?

 

[Said1]

"Draft Iraqi Constitution Elevates Role of Islam; Proposal may erode women's rights in marriage, divorce, inheritance."

Rollback for women's rights?
Most worrying for women's groups has been the section on civil rights, which some believe would significantly roll back women's rights under a 1959 civil law enacted by a secular regime.

In the copy obtained by the AP on Monday, Article 19 of the second chapter says "the followers of any religion or sect are free to choose their civil status according to their religious or sectarian beliefs."

Shiite Muslim leaders have pushed for a stronger role for Islam in civil law but women's groups argue that could base legal interpretations on stricter religious lines that are less favorable to women.

Committee members said they had taken account of women's concerns but were not planning to make changes, since the National Assembly will have final say on the wording.

Committee member Khudayer al-Khuzai said Muslims would be free to choose which Islamic sect they want to be judged by under the proposed civil law.

“We will not force anyone to adopt any sect at all. People are free to choose the sect they see as better or more legitimate. This is implemented in marriage, inheritance and all civil rights,” he said.

Not all Shiite laws are disadvantageous for women. Many Sunni Muslims who have only daughters prefer to follow Shiite religious law when it comes to inheritance, since daughters inherit everything their parents leave. Under Sunni rules, daughters have to share their inheritance with uncles, aunts and grandparents.

((That's MSNBC reporting, in the title of the article, the fact that women's rights in Iraq may in fact be rolled back by the constitution))

Also, your question "is it news that people are getting murdered in the middle east" is bizarre. Would YOU like it if your son or daughter's noble and heroic death wr relegated to some byline or page A26 article?

I posted this awhile back, kind of falls in line with the article above. http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23630

 

[nakedemperor]

Said, stop pointing out that I simply regurgitate your material in different threads. Its tacky to point out plagiarism.

 

[Said1]

Said, stop pointing out that I simply regurgitate your material in different threads. Its tacky to point out plagiarism.

When I said "this", I meant the link, not what you posted. I thought you might want to read it. Guess not.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

What else does 'Is it news that people are being murdered in the Middle East these days' mean? I took it to mean you were reacting to KIA's as the headline and improved women's rights for Iraqis (which was a dubious claim at best) as the byline. Were you not?

No.
And the womens rights thing isnt dubious. Its gonna be in their Constitution.

What I said, plain as english, is the order of importance they put the news events in the article were backwards, and that the MOST newsworthy (meaning the other topics ARE newsworthy also, just not as much so) item was the womens rights issue. NEWS is "new", murders in the middle east isnt so new, womens rights is extremely new and important. But the liberal media doesnt want the public to perceive Bush's plan is working.

 

[manu1959]

Really? Take Russia for example. Everyone thought the fall of communism would bring peace and love to them, but they are still miserable. That's because misery is their national emotion. It's always been this way. I agree with you just because something is hopeless doesn't mean you shouldn't try anyway. There is nobility in futile gestures.

have you been to st petersburg or kiev....misery is far from their national emotion

 

[nakedemperor]

When I said "this", I meant the link, not what you posted. I thought you might want to read it. Guess not.

No, I did,and I did...I was joking =)

 

[nakedemperor]

No.
And the womens rights thing isnt dubious. Its gonna be in their Constitution.

What I said, plain as english, is the order of importance they put the news events in the article were backwards, and that the MOST newsworthy (meaning the other topics ARE newsworthy also, just not as much so) item was the womens rights issue. NEWS is "new", murders in the middle east isnt so new, womens rights is extremely new and important. But the liberal media doesnt want the public to perceive Bush's plan is working.

Uh, when I said 'I took it to mean you were reacting to women's rights and the constitution as the byline' I was talking about the sequencing of event in the story; that is, you were unhappy that soldiers dying came first. I wrote this in plain English, especially considering the first response I posted had to do with not wanting a mother's son's heroic death relegated to the byline (in favor of the, yes, dubious claim of improved women's rights).

If you read the language of the constitution, it favors applying ISLAMIC LAW to legal disputes; under most Islamic sects, this would be an EROSION of the women's rights granted by the 1959 secular Iraqi regime.