In a message dated 7/1/05 11:35:17 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All this makes for great propoganda, but who is to say it is the
truth? I have read eyewitness reports from Iraqi civilians and
others painting quite a different story -- that the US Army has 
purposely targeted hospitals and killed doctors and patients, as
well as non-embedded journalists, and has been methodically and
randomly terrorizing and killing civilians. Is it true?

And again, as for democracy, let's begin at home, and open an
inquiry into why the 2004 exit polls showed Kerry winning by the
same percentage (or more) than that that was eventually given to
Bush (not to mention the non-election of 2000). Statistically this
has been shown to be virtually impossible. Exit-poll discrepancies
like these have always been taken as evidence of election fraud in
every other country, including most recently Ukraine. Why were
our "fair and balanced" media all over the Ukraine results, while
barely mentioning our own? Or is this whole thing just another story?

My point is, you seem to be wholeheartedly swallowing everything
that the traditional media are dishing out about "we-good; they-
bad." I am guessing that if a foreign country invaded the USA under
the same pretexts we gave against Iraq, most of us would now
be "rebels" and "insurgents," and not overly inclined to believe the
invader's words when they don't match the deeds. Had you heard that
only 5 people now own our major media? (IS this true?) To me it has
become pretty obvious that they are *all* feeding us pretty much the
same story, and that story has become excessively censored and
biassed (or maybe halfassed). Or maybe that has always been the
case. Or is this yet another story? I don't know :-)

You forgot to mention the guy on the grassy knoll.


To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'




YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to