CNN: Baathists working hand in hand with US troops

CNN via You Tube ^ | June 9 2007

[sgtyork]

You simply are not reading enough. The bias of CNN is quite well documented on a daily basis.

http://newsbusters.org/

Bias by Bernie Goldberg

http://www.conservativebookservice.com/products/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=C5866

[Polybius]

Sorry, but I don’t buy this paranoid crap some people have about CNN. They are reporting the war better this year because the war is going much better, they reported the war negatively last year because it was going quite badly by anyones measure.

Thank you for explaining that to us.

If you had not pointed out that CNN reports only the truth, some of us might have remained under the impression that CNN reports what CNN believes is best for the CNN agenda.

CNN's Iraqi Cover-Up ...... CNN admits that knowledge of murder, torture, and planned assassinations were suppressed in order to maintain CNN's Baghdad bureau........... In a shocking New York Times opinion piece, CNN's chief news executive Eason Jordan has admitted that for the past decade the network has systematically covered up stories of Iraqi atrocities. Reports of murder, torture, and planned assassinations were suppressed in order to maintain CNN's Baghdad bureau. ......... Some of the most damning evidence against CNN comes from a Washington Times op-ed by Peter Collins ("Corruption at CNN - April 15, 2003......Collins briefly worked for the network in Baghdad and sat in on talks involving executives Eason Jordan and Tom Johnson, who were trying to negotiate an exclusive interview with Saddam Hussein: ..... "The day after one such meeting, I was on the roof of the Ministry of Information, preparing for my first 'live shot' on CNN. A producer came up and handed me a sheet of paper with handwritten notes. 'Tom Johnson wants you to read this on camera,' he said. I glanced at the paper. It was an item-by-item summary of points made by Information Minister Latif Jassim in an interview that morning with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan. ..... "The list was so long that there was no time during the live shot to provide context. I read the information minister's points verbatim. Moments later, I was downstairs in the newsroom on the first floor of the Information Ministry. Mr. Johnson approached, having seen my performance on a TV monitor. 'You were a bit flat there, Peter,' he said. Again, I was astonished. The president of CNN was telling me I seemed less-than-enthusiastic reading Saddam Hussein's propaganda."

[ASC2006]

I never said CNN reports the ‘truth’. The truth when it comes to Iraq is quote subjective.

I seem to recall CNN reporting the administations claims on Iraq fairly uncritically in the run up to war and I am not just talking about when it comes to WMDs.

[Polybius]

“They are biased from the get go.”.... DWC

Of course they have an agenda, that doesn’t change the fact CNN’s reporting of Iraq has been far better then most news networks like NBC or CBS. .... ASC2006

You mean CNN is now "better" as in: CNN is no longer telling it's Baghdad correpondents to read Saddam Hussein's talking points verbatim on live CNN coverage in order to be rewarded with favors from Saddam Hussein's regime?

Some of the most damning evidence against CNN comes from a Washington Times op-ed by Peter Collins ("Corruption at CNN - April 15, 2003 - http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030415-91009640.htm). Collins briefly worked for the network in Baghdad and sat in on talks involving executives Eason Jordan and Tom Johnson, who were trying to negotiate an exclusive interview with Saddam Hussein: ..... "The day after one such meeting, I was on the roof of the Ministry of Information, preparing for my first 'live shot' on CNN. A producer came up and handed me a sheet of paper with handwritten notes. 'Tom Johnson wants you to read this on camera,' he said. I glanced at the paper. It was an item-by-item summary of points made by Information Minister Latif Jassim in an interview that morning with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan. ..... "The list was so long that there was no time during the live shot to provide context. I read the information minister's points verbatim. Moments later, I was downstairs in the newsroom on the first floor of the Information Ministry. Mr. Johnson approached, having seen my performance on a TV monitor. 'You were a bit flat there, Peter,' he said. Again, I was astonished. The president of CNN was telling me I seemed less-than-enthusiastic reading Saddam Hussein's propaganda."

Maybe the U.S. Government has learned that CNN is and always has been for sale like a cheap whore and is now paying the whore like Saddam Hussein once paid the whore.

Maybe NBC or CBS have an anti-American political agenda that is not for sale.

So which is "better"?

The traitors or the whore?

[ASC2006]

Avoiding talking about some things you see in Iraq that would get your news network kicked out so they will never get to see anything else is not reporting Saddam’s talking points verbatium.

Unlike you I remember all too clearly their early coverage of this Iraq War as well as the 1998 bombing of Iraq and both times it was very anti Saddam and pro-American.

[razzle]

Excellent post.

[petercooper]

bttt

[Polybius]

I seem to recall CNN reporting the administations claims on Iraq fairly uncritically in the run up to war and I am not just talking about when it comes to WMDs.

Yep.

CNN knew that the whore house was going to be under new management pretty soon.

If al Qaeda takes over Iraq, CNN will be having its correspondents reading Osama bin Ladin's talking points live from the roof of the Information Ministry in order to maintain its Baghdad Bureau rights.

[sgtyork]

Your memory is faulty.

CNN’s Eason Jordan admitted that they did not tell the truth about Iraq while Saddam was in power.

...awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff. ...

....I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely. ....

http://essaysfromexodus.scripting.com/stories/storyReader$1991

They softpedaled the evil nature of Iraq and were clearly not anti-Sadam. If you don’t care about getting the truth in your news, why don’t you read and post somewhere else?

[ASC2006]

[corlorde]

CNN knew that the whore house was going to be under new management pretty soon.

That must be why Rupert Murdoch is throwing his weight behind Hillary. All US media is entertainment driven. Having said that, there are inbed (reporters) who I've worked with and have met, from all networks, who do a fair job. And do you know why that is? Because they get to know the military, and the people who actually carry the rifles and equipment.

[Polybius]

Avoiding talking about some things you see in Iraq that would get your news network kicked out so they will never get to see anything else is not reporting Saddam’s talking points verbatium.

Do you have an attention deficit disorder?

Read what I linked.

Read what CNN correspondent Peter Collins said:

Collins briefly worked for the network in Baghdad and sat in on talks involving executives Eason Jordan and Tom Johnson, who were trying to negotiate an exclusive interview with Saddam Hussein: ....... "The day after one such meeting, I was on the roof of the Ministry of Information, preparing for my first 'live shot' on CNN. A producer came up and handed me a sheet of paper with handwritten notes. 'Tom Johnson wants you to read this on camera,' he said. I glanced at the paper. It was an item-by-item summary of points made by Information Minister Latif Jassim in an interview that morning with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan. ..... "The list was so long that there was no time during the live shot to provide context. I read the information minister's points VERBATIM."

Did it register with you this time?

"'Tom Johnson wants you to read this on camera,' he said."

"It was an item-by-item summary of points made by Information Minister Latif Jassim in an interview that morning with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Jordan."

"I read the information minister's points VERBATIM."

Unlike you I remember all too clearly their early coverage of this Iraq War as well as the 1998 bombing of Iraq and both times it was very anti Saddam and pro-American.

You are bragging about "remembering" when you cannot even recall reading 5 minutes ago that CNN Baghdad correspondent Peter Collins said that he was asked to read Information Minister Latif Jassim's talking points by a CNN producer and he read them VERBATIM?

So, what is your job at CNN?

[ASC2006]

Any I have to ask you why the do you bash CNN for their war reporting when it is far better then that of CBS, MSNBC, or NBC?

CNN has been on the ball this year above even Fox with their coverage of the major changing events in Iraq, first and foremost the changes inside the Sunni community against al-Qaeda.

[Polybius]

Any I have to ask you why the do you bash CNN for their war reporting when it is far better then that of CBS, MSNBC, or NBC?

Ummmm ..... For the same reason that I bash Fidel Castro who is far better than Joseph Stalin or for the same reason I would hate to get a fractured femur even though it is far better than an osteosarcoma of the femur?

If A is worse than B, it does not follow that B is not despicable or is not worthy of scorn.

But, then again, "far better" is subjective when it comes to CNN.

Operation Tailwind - Letter to CNN President

When Saddam Hussein needed help in Kuwait, CNN was there, with U.S. traitor Peter Arnett, its chief Baghdad correspondent, who obtained unprecedented access, since Hussein knew CNN was sympathetic towards him per its agreement to keep silent about his torture chambers, prisons and rape rooms. At the start of Operation Iraq Freedom in March 2003, Arnett even went on state-controlled Iraqi TV to call for the U.S.’s defeat. It was only after CNN took a major hit in the cable ratings that it decided to fire Arnett. .......... This was the same Peter Arnett who pushed a bogus story that falsely accused U.S. and allied forces of purposely bombing a baby milk factory, which actually turned out to be a biological weapons plant. In the end, CNN’s sole purpose for “reporting” on the Gulf War was to embarrass and undermine then-President George H.W. Bush. In 1998, Arnett also falsely accused U.S. soldiers of launching sarin gas attacks on Laotian civilians in 1970. Hollywood later romanticized CNN by making a movie version (“Live From Baghdad”) of the anti-U.S. cable network’s so-called adventures in “reporting” on the war, which not surprisingly starred fellow terrorist sympathizer, Janeane Garofalo.

CNN has been on the ball this year above even Fox with their coverage of the major changing events in Iraq, first and foremost the changes inside the Sunni community against al-Qaeda.

So, before the war and in the aftermath of the war, CNN was the mouthpiece for the Sunnis Baathists and now that the Sunnis have found al Qaeda to be bad bedfellows, CNN is still the mouthpiece for the Sunni Baathist.

Lucky for us that U.S. interests and Sunni Baathists interests are now coinciding so that the CNN Bureau Chief is not actively calling for a U.S. defeat as was the case in March 2003.

So, are your retirement benefits at CNN better or worse after the Time Warner/AOL merger?

[Valin]

Bump

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks for the ping on the youtube link.

[campg]

Don't forget, Eason Jordan told the whole world at the World Economic Forum in Davos that US forces targeted Journalists, too. It was absolutely a lie. I will never forgive CNN for that because Europeans and others perpetuated that lie and still believe it. CNN fired Jordan, but the damage can never be undone. Sorry about jumping in here, but we have 2 sons who have been serving in Iraq since Mar. O6 and they want to come home really badly and CNN has put all of our forces in greater danger and made their jobs harder.

[elhombrelibre]

Sure, these pings are a good way to make sure we don’t miss an important story.

[Marine_Uncle]

Roger that.

[txhurl]

So am I reading this right? CNN realizes we’re about to win the situation in Iraq, and sends out shills to tell us CNN-haters that we should start luvin’ CNN now that they’re on ‘our’ side?