When I read this:
"I have not seen her in three years, I don't know why they are doing this,"
I thought exactly the same thing as Pongo. If she hasn't seen her daughter in three years, its sure isn't the Armys fault. Most likely, the daughter doesnt give a damn about seeing her. The daughter gets at least a month leave a year, and can afford a plane ticket. If the Mother can afford to get herself to Iraq, she could have afforded a plane ticket to see her daughter whereever she was stationed in peacetime. I also can't help but wonder if those idiot parents don't realize they could easily be kidnapped since they are making such obvious targets of themselves, then held in some kind of extortion attempt or blackmail.
Why didnt the reporter find out why it had been 3 years since she saw her daughter? He could have asked the Army, but he decided instead to let it appear on the surface that because her daughter is under Army command, the daughter hasn't been able to see her for 3 years. Lets not provide balance here Mr. Reporter, lets not include all the facts to give a balanced and complete report.
Anyone else wonder about the dichotomy of a "Peace Activist" having a daugther in the Army and wonder if that might be the reason they have been apart 3 years? Do you wonder if the "Peace Activist" only showed up at the Army post in Iraq to make a "statement", to try and embarrass the Army? Did she go so far out of her way to visit the Daughter at her normal stateside posting? I doubt it. Do you wonder if the vast ideological differances between Mother and Daughter are behind the 3 year seperation? The reporter sure didnt bother to wonder about any of these things or report on them, nor did he bother to ask those questions. Cant make the Army/US Administration look bad if you provide balance.
Loved this one too:
When a group of U.S.-trained Iraqi policemen showed up, American soldiers loaded their weapons.
I guess we are too believe that troops guarding the military complex do so with unloaded weapons? More likely another reporter who had no clue what he was talking about and wanted his report to sound dramatic. I am pretty sure they had loaded weapons, though they might have chambered a round if they feared possible trouble.
When the US Army has to jump at the whim of every peace activist parent, we might as well disband the military. They should have just tossed some CS gas gernades at them hippies.
Liberal bias is everywhere in reporting. The funny thing about it is most liberals think that the way they think is normal, everything else is wrong, so they never detect liberal bias in reporting.
Small example of liberal bias:
Asked if protests were illegal in the new Iraq, he told reporters: "There are no human rights under the Americans. Nothing. It is all empty talk."
"We miss the days of Saddam," said Iraqi policeman Mohammed Shawki.
No counterpoint, no American officers or diplomats given a chance to respond, to explain the efforts being made to improve things. Why didnt he mention that the "Iraqi policeman" was one of those who should be protecting individual human rights?
Just report some rhetoric babbled by some fool, and let it stand to form peoples opinions. Why didn't the reporter discuss or compare the human rights of people under Saddams regime? You know, something like "Saddams human rights guarantee you have the right to be tortured by any vicious means we can think of, you have the right to be murdered enmass and be buried in unmarked mass graves, you have the right to be thrown into secret prisons for no reason for as long was Saddam feels like, you have the right to watch your children die because we won't provide medicine to the hospitals, you have the right to watch your daughters get raped and tortured for Udays amusement"
Are those the rights he missed under Saddam?Why didn't the reporter provide any balance to the Iraqi policemans comment? Oh, whats that? Because if he did it might help make people understand that our involvement in Iraq isn't all bad???? Thats not liberal bias, oh noooooo.
BSLets consider the title of the article"
Mom Vainly Tries to See U.S. Iraq Soldier Daughter
Would it have been incorrect or maybe more accurate to have a title like
" Mother shows up at an active Army Complex in a War Zone and makes demands the Army produce her Soldier Daughter"
Liberal bias is there, you just have to think about it some. I suggest anyone who has trouble seeing it to read Bernard Goldbergs book "Bias".
dago
