Photo Fraud in Lebanon Aish.com's new movie.
http://www.aish.com/movies/JP/PhotoFraud.asp
|
IMRACYNTX wrote on Mon, 14
Aug 2006 11:35 PM on the subject of media bias on CNN and
sent this article:
Highly
unbalanced report mostly ignores plight of
Israeli civilians, portrays Israelis as soldiers
and The
anatomy of bias: A CNN International
in-depth report from Israel and Lebanon unveiled
the full extent of bias at work behind the
global news network's coverage Scant attention is paid to Israeli civilians, while a long report featuring images and interviews of Lebanese civilians followed. The report's startling lack of representation of the suffering experienced by so many Israeli civilians stood in stark contrast to the interviews and video footage taken of Lebanese children and scenes of wreckage shown from across Lebanon.
The report began
with an account of Haifa by a CNN female
correspondent. During the report, there is a
single, brief image of Israeli civilians,
sitting at a café in Haifa.
"Well some Arab Israelis were very upset when rockets struck their homes and three people died, and all of them were Arab Israelis, and they were complaining that they have hadn't been built bunkers like Israeli Jews in this city," said the journalist, answering a question about relations between Jews and Arabs in Haifa. She later said the answer depended on "who you asked." The report did not mention any Israeli casualties, and no interviews with Israeli civilians were conducted. Other than a momentary statistic appearing on the screen, there is no mention of the large number of Israelis who have become displaced from their homes in the north, and the journey home which awaits them to homes possible destroyed by Hizbullah rockets – although on the Lebanese side of the border, the report takes a long look at the return of Lebanese refugees to their homes in southern Lebanon. There were no interviews from Israeli hospitals, and no mention made of the million Israelis who had been living in bomb shelters for almost a month. Also glaringly absent were images of destroyed homes and buildings across northern Israel. A report then followed by CNN's Paul Hancocks, focusing exclusively on Israeli domestic politics. "The military battle for Israel's prime minister is over for the time being. The political battle has just begun. Critics claimed Olmert has gone to war hastily and ill prepared," said Hancocks, before film of Olmert's Knesset speech was shown. The report showed internal Knesset wrangling and the ejection of two Knesset members. By the time CNN's correspondents had completed their coverage from Israel, it became clear that CNN had little interest in placing individual faces and names to the suffering on the Israeli side, let alone mentioning the extent and scope of the war damage. Second half very different The second half of the report, by CNN's Ben Wiederman, was dramatically different. The report was saturated with images of Lebanese children playing in ruins, blood stains, destroyed buildings, and personal accounts of Lebanese families attempting to head back to south Lebanon. It was introduced by CNN's anchor, who said: "Nasrallah also acknowledged the deaths and the destruction of the Lebanese homes, but he said Hizbullah would be ready to help rebuild." "It was a morning like so many other recent mornings in Tyre. And then there was silence. The ceasefire went into effect at 8 AM local time. And with the prospect of calm, it didn't take long for many of Lebanon's refugees, estimated at more than a million, to pack their belongings, and head south towards home," Wiederman said. "Beirut's Sinara park has become a temporary refuge. But Monday morning some decided it was to go back. To what, they weren't sure," he added. Beginning one of a number of interviews with Lebanese civilians, the report continued: "'We're returning to our village but we're not sure if we'll be able to get there,' said this man from a village outside Tyre." Suggesting that Israel would target Lebanese civilians heading back to Lebanon, Wiederman said: "Last week Israel warned that it would target any car south of the Litani river. The warning remains in effect. But few seem to heed it. Rather they chose to savor the thought that Hizbullah has emerged from this war in their opinion victorious." "The 33 day conflict has left the Lebanese economy in ruins. Thousands of homes have been destroyed by Israeli land air and sea bombardment, and over a thousand Lebanese, mostly civilians, have been killed during the fighting," Wiederman continued, as images of Lebanese children and wrecked debris flashed across the screen.Wiederman's report was then followed by an item on the struggle aid workers to get into southern Lebanon. During earlier coverage on Sunday, CNN chose the word "resistance" to describe Hizbullah's actions in Lebanon – a term used by Hizbullah - as well as Hamas - to describe their own attacks - implicitly presuming that armed jihad organizations are 'resisting' and defending against aggression, rather than initiating it. A succession of images followed, showing a Lebanese woman alone among ruins, followed immediately by a photograph of smiling Israeli soldiers with guns raised in the air. No context or explanations of when and where the photos were taken are provided. (08.15.06, 00:23) SOURCE: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3291328,00.html
THIS is the
picture that damns
Hezbollah. It is one
of several, smuggled
from behind
Lebanon's battle
lines, showing that
Hezbollah is waging
war amid suburbia.
The images, obtained exclusively by the Sunday Herald Sun, show Hezbollah using high-density residential areas as launch pads for rockets and heavy-calibre weapons. Dressed in civilian clothing so they can quickly disappear, the militants carrying automatic assault rifles and ride in on trucks mounted with cannon. The photographs, from the Christian area of Wadi Chahrour in the east of Beirut, were taken by a visiting journalist and smuggled out by a friend. They emerged as: US President George Bush called for an international force to be sent to Lebanon. ISRAEL called up another 30,000 reserve troops. THE UN's humanitarian chief Jan Egeland called for a three-day truce to evacuate civilians and transport food and water into cut-off areas. US SECRETARY of State Condoleezza Rice returned to the Middle East to push a UN resolution aimed at ending the 18-day war, and: A PALESTINIAN militant group said it had kidnapped, killed and burned an Israeli settler in the West Bank. The images include one of a group of men and youths preparing to fire an anti-aircraft gun metres from an apartment block with sheets hanging out on a balcony to dry. Others show a militant with AK47 rifle guarding no-go zones after Israeli blitzes. Another depicts the remnants of a Hezbollah Katyusha rocket in the middle of a residential block blown up in an Israeli air attack. The Melbourne man who smuggled the shots out of Beirut and did not wish to be named said he was less than 400m from the block when it was obliterated. "Hezbollah came in to launch their rockets, then within minutes the area was blasted by Israeli jets," he said. "Until the Hezbollah fighters arrived, it had not been touched by the Israelis. Then it was totally devastated. "It was carnage. Two innocent people died in that incident, but it was so lucky it was not more." The release of the images comes as Hezbollah faces criticism for allegedly using innocent civilians as "human shields". Mr Egeland blasted Hezbollah as "cowards" for operating among civilians. "When I was in Lebanon, in the Hezbollah heartland, I said Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending in among women and children," he said. |
AlyssaBlack wrote on AOL:
The media aims its missiles (OR The BBC aims its missiles)
By Tom Gross
Large sections of the international media are not only misreporting
the current conflict in Lebanon. They are also actively fanning the
flames.
The BBC world service has a strong claim to be the number one
villain. It has increasingly come to sound like a virtual propaganda
tool for Hizbullah,
and as it desperately attempts to prove that
Israel is guilty of committing "war crimes" and "crimes against
humanity," it has introduced a new charge " one
which I have heard
several times on air in recent days.
The newscaster reads out carefully selected "audience comments," and
among these we are told that "Israel's attack on Lebanon" will serve
as "a huge
recruitment drive for al-Qaeda worldwide."
But if anything is going to win new recruits for bin Laden and his
like, it will not be Israel's defensive actions, which are far less
damaging than western
TV stations have been trying to convince us,
but the inflammatory and hopelessly one-sided way in which they are
being reported by those very same
news organizations.
While the slanted comments and interviews are bad enough, the degree
of pictorial distortion is even worse. The way many TV stations
worldwide are portraying it,
you would think that Beirut has begun
to look like Dresden and Hamburg in the aftermath of World War II
air raids. International television channels have used the
same
footage of Beirut over and over, showing the destruction of a few
individual buildings in a manner which suggests that half the city
has been razed.
A careful look at aerial satellite photos of the areas targeted by
Israel in Beirut shows that certain specific buildings housing
Hizbullah command centers in the
city's southern suburbs have been
singled out. Most of the rest of Beirut, apart from strategic sites
like airport runways used to ferry Hizbullah men and weapons
in and
out of Lebanon, has been left pretty much untouched.
From the distorted imagery, selective witness accounts, and almost
round-the-clock emphasis on casualties, you would be forgiven for
thinking that the level of
death and destruction in Lebanon is on a
par with that in Darfur, where Arab militias are slaughtering
hundreds of thousands of non-Arabs, or with the 2004
tsunami that
killed half a million in Southeast Asia. In fact Israel has taken
great care to avoid killing civilians " even though this has proven
extremely difficult and
often tragically impossible, since members
of Hizbullah, the self-styled "Party of God," have deliberately
ensconced themselves in civilian homes. Nevertheless the civilian
death toll has been mercifully low compared to other international
conflicts in recent years.
A CNN MAN LETS SLIP
The BBC, which courtesy of the British tax payer is the world's
biggest and most lavishly funded news organization, would of course
never reveal how
selective their reports are, since this might spoil
their campaign to demonize Israel and those who support her. But one
senior British journalist, working for another company, last week
let slip how the news media allows its Mideast coverage to be
distorted.
"CNN Senior international correspondent" Nic Robertson admitted that
his anti-Israel report from Beirut on July 18 about civilian
casualties in Lebanon,
was stage-managed from start to finish by Hizbullah. He revealed that his story was heavily influenced by
Hizbullah's "press officer" and that Hizbullah have
"very, very
sophisticated and slick media operations."
When pressed a few days later about his reporting on the CNN program
"Reliable Sources," Robertson acknowledged that Hizbullah militants
had instructed
the CNN camera team where and what to film. Hizbullah
"had control of the situation," Robertson said. "They designated the
places that we went to, and
we certainly didn't have time to go into
the houses or lift up the rubble to see what was underneath."
Robertson added that Hizbullah has "very, very good control over its
areas in the south of Beirut. They deny journalists access into
those areas. You don't
get in there without their permission. We
didn't have enough time to see if perhaps there was somebody there
who was, you know, a taxi driver by day, and
a Hizbullah fighter by
night."
Yet "Reliable Sources," presented by Washington Post writer Howard
Kurtz, is broadcast only on the American version of CNN. So CNN
International
viewers around the world will not have had the
opportunity to learn from CNN's 'senior international correspondent"
that the pictures they saw from Beirut
were carefully selected for
them by Hizbullah.
Another journalist let the cat out of the bag last week. Writing on
his blog while reporting from southern Lebanon, Time magazine
contributor Christopher
Allbritton, casually mentioned in the middle
of a posting: "To the south, along the curve of the coast, Hezbollah
is launching Katyushas, but I'm loathe to
say too much about them.
The Party of God has a copy of every journalist's passport, and
they've already hassled a number of us and threatened one."
Robertson is not the only foreign journalist to have misled viewers
with selected footage from Beirut. NBC's Richard Engel, CBS's
Elizabeth Palmer,
and a host of European and other networks, were
also taken around the damaged areas by Hizbullah minders. Palmer
commented on her report that
"Hizbullah is also determined that
outsiders will only see what it wants them to see."
Palmer's honesty is helpful. But it doesn't prevent the damage being
done by organizations like the BBC. First the BBC gave the
impression that
Israel had flattened the greater part of Beirut.
Then to follow up its lop-sided coverage, its website helpfully
carried full details of the assembly points
for an anti-Israel march
due to take place in London, but did not give any detail for a rally
in support of Israel also held in London a short time later.
IN AZERI AND UZBEK, PASHTO AND PERSIAN
The coverage of the present war by the BBC has been quite
extraordinary, and even staunch BBC supporters in London seem rather
embarrassed "
in conversation, not on the air, unfortunately.
If the BBC were just a British problem that would be one thing, but
it is not. No other station broadcasts so extensively in dozens of
languages, on
TV, radio and online.
Its radio service alone attracts over 163 million listeners. It
pours forth its worldview in almost every language of the Middle
East: Pashto, Persian, Arabic
and Turkish. Needless to say it
declines to broadcast in Hebrew, even though it does broadcast in
the languages of other small nations: Macedonian and
Albanian, Azeri
and Uzbek, Kinyarwanda and Kyrgyz, and so on. (It doesn't broadcast
in Kurdish either; but then the BBC doesn't concern itself with
Kurdish
rights or aspirations since they are persecuted by
Moslem-majority states like Syria and Iran. We didn't hear much on
the BBC, for example, when dozens of
Syrian Kurds were killed and
injured in March 2004 by President Assad's regime.)
It is not just that the supposed crimes of Israel are completely
overplayed, but the fact that this is a two-sided war (started, of
course, by Hizbullah) is all but
obscured. As a result, in spite of
hundreds of hours of broadcast by dozens of BBC reporters and studio
anchors, you wouldn't really know that hundreds of
thousands of
Israelis have been living in bomb shelters for weeks now, tired,
afraid, but resilient; that a grandmother and her seven-year old
grandson were
killed by a Katyusha during a Friday night Sabbath
dinner; that several other Israeli children have died.
You wouldn't have any real understanding of what it is like to have
over 2000 Iranian and Syrian rockets rain down indiscriminately on
towns, villages and
farms across one third of your country, aimed at
killing civilians.
You wouldn't really appreciate that Hizbullah, far from being some
rag-tag militia, is in effect a division in the Iranian
revolutionary guards, with relatively
advanced weapons (UAVs that
have flown over northern Israel, extended-range artillery rockets,
anti-ship cruise missiles), and that it has a global terror reach,
having already killed 114 people in Argentina.
The BBC and others have carried report after report on the damaged
Lebanese tourist industry, but none on the damaged Israeli one, even
though at least one
hotel in
Tiberias on the Sea of Galilee, was hit by a Hizbullah rocket. There
are reports on Lebanese children who don't know where they will be
going to school, but
none on Israeli ones.
ET TU, TELEGRAPH?
The relentless broadcast attacks on Israel have led to some in the
print media indulging in explicit anti-Semitism.
Many have grown accustomed to left-wing papers like the Guardian
allowing their Mideast coverage to spill over into something akin to
anti-Semitism.
For example, last month a cartoon by the Guardian's
Martin Rowson depicted Stars of David being used as knuckle dusters
on a bloody fist.
Now the Conservative-leaning Daily Telegraph, Britain's best-selling
quality daily, and previously one of the only papers in Europe to
give Israel a fair hearing,
has got in on the act. The cartoon at
the top of the Telegraph comment page last Saturday showed two
identical scenes of devastation, exactly the same in
every detail.
One was labeled: "Warsaw 1943"; the other: "Tyre, 2006."
A politician had already given the cue for this horrendous libel.
Conservative MP Sir Peter Tapsell told the House of Commons that
British Prime Minister Tony
Blair was "colluding" with U.S.
President George W. Bush in giving Israel the okay to wage a war
crime "gravely reminiscent of the Nazi atrocity on the
Jewish
quarter of Warsaw."
Of course, there was no "Jewish quarter" of Warsaw. In case anyone
need reminding (Sir Peter obviously does) the ghetto in the Polish
capital, established in
October 1940, constituted less than three
square miles. Over 400,000 Jews were then crammed into it, about 30%
of the population of Warsaw. 254,000
were sent to Treblinka where
they were exterminated. Most of the rest were murdered in other
ways. The ghetto was completely cleared of Jews by the end
of May
1943.
ECHOING SCHINDLER'S LIST
The picture isn't entirely bleak. Some British and European
politicians, on both left and right, have been supportive of Israel.
So have some magazines,
such as the Spectator. So have a number of
individual newspaper commentators.
But meanwhile anti-Semitic coverage and cartoons are spreading
across the globe. Norway's third largest paper, the Oslo daily
Dagbladet, ran a cartoon
comparing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert to the infamous Nazi commander SS Major Amon Goeth who
indiscriminately murdered Jews by firing at them
from his balcony
and was depicted by Ralph Fiennes in Steven Spielberg's film
Schindler's List. (A month earlier Dagbladet published an article,
"The Third Tower," which questioned whether Muslims were really
responsible for the September 11 attacks.)
Antonio Neri Licon of Mexico's El Economista drew what appeared to
be a Nazi soldier with " incredibly " stars of David on his uniform.
The 'soldier" was
surrounded by eyes that he had apparently gouged
out.
A cartoon in the South African Sunday Times depicted Ehud Olmert
with a butchers knife covered in blood. In the leading Australian
daily The Age, a cartoon
showed a wine glass full of blood being
drunk in a scene reminiscent of a medieval blood libel. In New
Zealand, veteran cartoonist Tom Stott came up with a
drawing which
equated Israel with Al-Qaeda.
At least one leading European politician has also vented his
prejudice through visual symbolism. Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis
Rodriguez Zapatero
wore an Arab scarf during an event at which he
condemned Israel, but not Hizbullah, who he presumably thinks should
not be stopped from killing Israelis.
THE ASHES OF AUSCHWITZ
It's entirely predictable that all this violent media distortion
should lead to Jews being attacked and even murdered, as happened at
a Seattle Jewish center
last week. __
When live Jews can't be found, dead ones are targeted. In Belgium
last week, the urn that contained ashes from Auschwitz was
desecrated at the Brussels
memorial to the 25,411 Belgian Jews
deported to Nazi death camps. It was smashed and excrement smeared
over it. The silence from Belgian leaders following
this desecration
was deafening.
Others Jews continued to be killed in Israel itself without it being
mentioned in the media abroad. Last Thursday, for example,
60-year-old Dr. Daniel Ya"akovi was
murdered by the Aqsa Martyrs"
Brigade, the terrorist group within Fatah that Yasser Arafat set up
five years ago using European Union aid money.
But this is far from being an exclusively Jewish issue. Some
international journalists seem to find it amusing or exciting to
bait the Jews. They don't understand
yet that Hizbullah is part of a
worldwide radical Islamist movement that has plans, and not pleasant
ones, for all those " Moslem, Christian, Hindu and Jews who
don't
abide by its wishes.
(Tom Gross is a former Jerusalem correspondent for the Sunday
Telegraph.
www.tomgrossmedia.com)
AOL BIAS seen in the first week of August 2006
Shotokan1968 wrote: My
post "koran joke ensues" was deleted immediately tho i got
no notification, this is the 4th time one of my posts having
to deal with
the middle east has been bounced, all of them
poked fun at islam, but in a non threatening or crude way.
i post on a ton of issues but only the ones where i make
fun
of islam get bounced ,.. hmmm pretty obvious to me an
islamic guy must be on shift,.. my humor posts on topics
such as Bush, republicans, democrats,
ms jackson, etc never
have a problem . then again Saudi's do own a large share of
aol, shrug,.. personaly i think the guy should be fired when
they find him.
Editors Note:
You don't get notified when the AOL monitor deletes your
post. You do not get told why. I suppose a joke about a
religious matter could be
considered a violation of Terms of
Service although I have seen jokes
about Jesus Christ, Christianity, Judaism, Jews and
Christians that do not get deleted.
It would appear the
AOL zealous monitors have different views than normal people
about what kind of religious jokes are offensive.
Hcarole839 wrote: OH
YES THEY (AOL) DO (Delete Messages)!!!! I HAVE NEVER CUSSED AT
SOME OF THE STUPID COMMENTS, JUST
TOLD THEM WHAT I THOUGHT WITH CLASS AND I RECEIVED A MESSAGE
TELLING ME I VIOLATED THE GUIDE
LINES. FROM THAT DAY ON I HAVE NOT HAD A COMMENT POSTED!! I
IN TURN SENT AOL, COMMENTS FROM
THIS SUBJECT WHERE (LEBANON) IDIOTS USED WORDS I CAN'T
REPEAT. DISGUSTING AND EVEN HAD A LINK
TO VIEW AND YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE WHAT IT WAS. E-MAIL ME AND
I'LL SEND IT TO YOU, BUT BE WARNED!!
THEY, AOL, HAVE A MENTAL PROBLEM. THIS WILL NOT MAKE IT!
PAUL
Editors Note: I agree. They do delete posts and they
"claim" deletions are done because of terms of service (TOS)
violations, even when they're not.
We have a group of people
fighting AOL bias. Let me know if you would like to join.
Douglasmhurst wrote:
If you're using DSL/Cable/FIOS, go to keyword "CHANGE PLAN"
and shift to free. Also, promise you WILL NOT go to any AOL
advertising link buttons.
If you see something you want,
find the URL via MSIE outside AOL.
Maybe if AOL sees their revenue dip low enough, they'll
start presenting a fair a balanced account of the news.
Editors Note:
Good suggestion. I have already gotten free
service. AOL is not advertising this on its own AOL services, but it
was announced in newspapers.
NurseReh wrote on August 8, 2006 that AOL was:
DELETING MY MESSAGES....BECAUSE
OF THEIR SCREW-UPS !!!!!!!!!! SEE THE WAR WITH IRAN
AND THE DRAFT....!!!!! this is what it took????? AOL
Editors Note:
Thanks for sharing your information. We have a group
addressing the AOL monitors deleting posts. If you want to
join, send me an email message at
ramann2996@aol.com Do you have a copy of the posts they
deleted? I'd like you to send that to me also. What do you
mean when you say mention their "screw-ups?
Hijodegarbo wrote: I heard aol lost something like close to
a million subscribers. pretty soon it will be a
million and one, because I'm currently shopping for a
less expensive and less
bias server.
Editors Note:
Let me know if you want to know about
getting AOL service for free, and if yo would like to
join our AOL BIAS group to fight AOL bias.
Send me email
at
ramann2996@aol.com and put IMPORTANT into the
subject heading.
running029 wrote in AOL CHARGES 3 TIMES WHAT ITS
WORTH:
AFTER 5 YEARS (on AOL) IM GOING
SOMEWHERE ELSE
Editors Note:
Let me know if you want to know about
getting AOL service for free, and if you would like to
join our AOL BIAS group to fight AOL bias.
Send me email
at
ramann2996@aol.com and put IMPORTANT into the
subject heading.
Ramann2996 wrote: This is a cease fire proposal to AOL.
I will stop posting messages about AOL's extremist
anti-Israel bias on this message board after midnight,
August 8, 2006, if this boards monitors stop deleting
posts that do not violate TOS. You have until 9:00 AM
Wednesday, August 9 to respond. If you do not respond,
or if
you delete this message, the offer is null and
void. If you accept this offer, but then delete
postings that do not violate TOS, further action will be
taken to protect the
free exchange of ideas on AOL's
community message boards.
WilliamB1026 wrote:
I think the AOL monitors switch: one
day they are pro-Israel; the next day, con-Israel.
Editors Note:
Your suggestion makes sense if the
deletions are done by individual AOL monitors acting
to slant message baords to reflect there own
thinking.
Most of what I have seen on this message biard - CRISIS IN THE MIDDLE EAST - has been anti
Israeli for about 7 days. Do you have any examples
Ramann2996 wrote: When the fanatics want to control
free speech, the weak will give up and surrender.
The strong -- who believe
in free speech and open discussion -- will stand and fight the fanatics
wherever they are -- which, now, -- is right here
on AOL's message boards. The AOL monitors on the CRISIS IN THE
MIDDLE EAST message board deleted this message.
VnyeSS writes:
Even if I got the (AOL) service "free" I wouldn't stay with AOL.
The deleting of posts is not the only reason I'm quitting AOL. I
strongly object to
having AOL continuously pop up their ads which
interfere with my on-line pleasure. Particularly since some of them are
very distracting with flashing lights, birds
moving along to pick up
worms and cars moving across. And, some are large enough it's necessary
to knock them off to continue what I signed on for. When I sign
on or
off I always have at least two ads I have to eliminate.
I've e-mailed them complaining about the ads, and it seemed they threw
more on my screen just for
revenge. But when I inquired about the exact
date my subscription expired the numbers were reduced a little, but not
eliminated.
I pay for my service and I don't
think I should be forced to look at
their ads.
You know, almost 900,000 subscribers have left AOL in the past year.
So, we're not the only ones who are dissatisfied
with the service.
Editors Note: Thanks for the information. It is the vast loss
of subscribers that has forced AOL to try and go to an advertising supported
site.
As you suggest, its hard to imagine how they could get even more ads.
Lorilu1113 wrote in AOL KEEPS DELETING..... FOR
NO REASON: (This regular pattern of deletion is)
SOMETHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT
Editors Note:
Aleph1960 writes:
i said "go live in an arab country you jew haters and see
how nice you will be treated" It posted for three seconds and it
was off.. and look
at all the hateful stuff on and this was
deleted.. wow the night person is on.. aol should check who is
manning board at night
Editors Note:
No one can accuse the monitors of behaving in an unbiased way,
although your post might have been deleted as being offensive to Jew
Haters
Ramann2996 wrote the following
post that was deleted by AOL in about 30 minutes: A Saudi
Prince's company does own a substantial chunk of Time Warner,
AOL's
parent company.
Saudi Arabia's Kingdom Holding Co., chaired by Saudi Prince Alwaleed
bin Tulal, wants America to know it owns a substantial chunk of such
companies as
Procter & Gamble Co., PepsiCo, Citigroup and Time
Warner. Not all the honored companies are exactly eager to tout the
ties-but they're not making any criticisms either.
SOURCE:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go1545/is_200405/ai_n6411199
ShootDaMoon69 writes: Last night, I replied
to several posts regarding the pair of AZ murder suspects. I
returned today after work to check any response
to my thoughts. Though the original posts
were still there, all but one of my responses were expunged. At the risk of
sounding paranoid, I feel I have an enemy
since I recently accused a certain
message board monitor of total bias. I went so far as to call him an
atheist and a communist sympathizer after the erasure of
the Madalyn Murray
O'Hair expose posted on the board regarding the demolition of the 27' cross
in San Diego last month. This was the genesis of the rant
I placed in the
ear of the AOL rep. I spoke of in my post you used as an example of bias on
the net.
Also, I wrote a lengthy treatise titled, "Why Is It We Never Learn?" and it
was posted on the The War In Iraq message board on July 1. It, too, was
expunged
after a short stint in the limelight. I believe it was erased due
to the light shed on the Arabic word Istilahl which is a Muslim who twists
the Holy Scripture of the
Koran to fit his needs. The ending paragraph was
this:
By mixing Islamic truth and twisted ideas of self-government, Islamic
fundamentalists are hoping to use the U.S. as the witting fall guy. By
the ultimate
withdrawal of U.S. forces from the battle theater, it would be just
a matter of time before the mediocre forces left to finish the job we
started would throw up
their hands and deliver the reins of power to a
government no better than the Taliban; unbelievably, a group of thuggish
zealots who expect the populace
to honor them as heroes even after they
indiscriminately car-bombed them into submission.
In short, I put the finger on what these people are actually attempting
to achieve though most people can't see the forest for the trees.
Evidently,
the monitor did not sympathize with my thinking!
Editors Note:
The biased AOL monitors will
often delete a message they find to be too intelligently written to allow
others to see.
DryanPsyMA wrote: (AOL) Deleted 5 posts.....including my reply about
"being safer during Clinton" Why did AOL delete the other posts in this
thread
(about) REMEMBER WHEN REPUKES THOUGHT CLINTON ...."
Editor's Note: Thanks for sending this information, Could you tell me
what AOL message board this was on. Most of the original people in our group
were
from CRISIS IN THE MIDDLE EAST and WAR IN IRAQ, where people leaning to
the right (and/or supportive of Israel) saw bias. If you see the bias on a
different message board it lends credence to the theory that it is
INDIVIDUAL AOL monitors who are doing the bias for their own political
agenda. I will put this
into the big list about AOL bias.
Sullie1926 wrote: AOL isn't only one that is biased - Have you read
NY Times , Washington Post , Boston News and watched ABC, CBS, CNN - But
biggest
thing I would like to know -" Who is the editor in red here?" --- In
all aol chat rooms -they have to abide by Tos rules - I thought this board
has to do like wise -
When some think their post has been deleted - all that
need do is go to end of board and find word SEARCH on right hand corner and
type In their screen name
and click what board its on and click on search
and all their post will come up-if you click on all boards - Some if their
post arent poasted right away - they get
their panties in a knot =another
thing Why do people type so small and some type in light green or yellow --
how are some of us suppose to read it - bright
yellow or light green - Give
me a break -some so big it will knock your eyes out and takes up so much of
board - and if one cant take e-main -why fight it out
on board =-People
going to see it all - I say If you do not like way AOL board is run complain
to TosReports - who in the world knows the editor ??????
Yea Go hang out and
chill
Editor's Note: Join our group acting to minimize the bias seen on AOL.
We have not gotten around to taking on all of the media yet.
Colindavison189 wrote: Why did Aol start a campaign to return Nicky
when she was evicted?
Why did Aol not start campaigns for other evictees?
Why is Aol posting that 80% of Aol users have voted to return Nicky to Big
Brother?
Very flawed survey.
Nicky's Aol campaign has been going for weeks.
Nicky's votes where only to either return her, or not to return her.
The Nicky campaign did not give a choice to return any other evictee.
It is misleading to say 80% of Aol users have voted to let Nicky return to
Big Brother, as it only 80% of Aol users who could be bothered to vote.
As this vote was free many people could voted many times.
The Big Brother Vote is not free.
The Aol Predictor can be wrong.
I this Aol Nicky campaign has gave her an unfair advantage over the other
evictees and housemates, as it suggests 80% of users want her to win.
Aol is giving her free publicity.
Editor's Note: You ask some good questions about AOL's bias, but won't get
too many answers. We have a group that is examining AOL bias and
taking
actions to minimize it. I'll send you an invitation to join.
GeoGolfX wrote: Interesting alllllll the cartoon spoofs of Bush out
there----- AOL Never once looked into who made them/ Gee wonder why.
Editor's Note: You are not alone in seeing AOL bias. Send me email and I'll
send you an invitation to join our group acting to minimize AOL bias.
GeorgeWBushfan1 wrote: What Media Bias? Part 56 I'd like to say this is
shocking, but it isn't: A Reuters photograph of smoke rising from buildings
in
Beirut has been withdrawn after coming under attack by American web logs.
The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke
and damage. The photograph showed two very heavy plumes of black smoke
billowing from buildings in Beirut after an Air Force attack on the Lebanese
capital.
Reuters has since withdrawn the photograph from its website, along
a message admitting that the image was distorted, and an apology to editors.
In the message,
Reuters said that "photo editing software was improperly
used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this
advisory. We are sorry for any
inconvenience"
How many times have we seen the news manufactured by the news media? Just
off hand I can think of "we had to destroy the village in order to save it",
ALAR,
exploding truck gas tanks, Jason Blair, Rigoberta Menchu, Texas Air
National Guard...I'm sure there's a dozen that are escaping me at the
moment. What I wonder
is when everyone will finally admit there is a media
bias, and in service of this bias the MSM is not too scrupulous about what
they pass on as truth. One thing we've
never seen: an internal investigation
by a news organization proving itself to have been guilty of fraud. The only
time we see this sort of thing is when outsiders bring
it to everyone's
attention. Of course, for years now I've been advising that the least
reliable source of news is photographic evidence - it is just too easily
doctored,
especially since computers came along to make fakery something you
can do right at your desk with no additional tools required. But over and
above that, all news
media has to be suspect - the most important tool any
of us have to pierce the fog of lies and half truths is our own good sense.
Think about it - does the story really seem all that plausible? Start doing
that with each story, and you'll be less and less taken in by the MSM.
Editor's Note:
We have a group that is taking action on trying to improve
the bias seen in AOL news sourcing and structuring, as well as the AOL post
deletion
policies which seem to encourage monitors to work their own
particular agendas. If you would like to be part of this group, just send me
email. While we do
NOT address the issue of all media bias, you will get
updates about bias here on AOL.
BillBarabino wrote: Boycott this Service. This is headlines? A maybe video
Spoof? They are so anti -republican they display anything with a anti-bush
bias. Read between the lines. I thinking of starting a website about it.
Join Me?
Editor's Note: One way to fight media bias is to stop paying for it. I have
not paid for a NY Times in well over a decade. But, there are other things
you can do, like contacting AOL management or alerting other media about the
AOL bias.
CristPhoto wrote: It's OK to bash the President who's trying to protect us
from terrorists, but let someone poke a jab at Al Gore and AOL has a hissy
fit.
The bias is becoming more blatant every day. Once my commitment to AOL
is up it's goodbye.
Editor's Note:
You are not alone in seeing the AOL bias.
JoeTheOctopus wrote: The Associated Press article stated: "Sen. Hillary
Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld
to
resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called
"failed policy" in Iraq."
The Marian Webster Dictionary defines excoriating as:
Main Entry: excoriate
Function: verb
Text: to criticize harshly and usually publicly, "the mayor had hardly been
in office for a month before she was excoriated for problems of very long
standing"
I certainly believe that Rumsfield has had plenty of time and opportunities
that he has flubbed. I also hate the way journalist use bombastic prose in
describing
Senator Clinton's actions.
She is too far to the right to get my vote, but I still wanted to put my two
cents in about media bias that is subtle.
It is said that back in 1755, Benjamin Franklin said, 'Those who would give
up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither
iberty nor Safety.' My sentiments exactly.
Editor's Note:
There is clearly lots of media bias. There is also lots of
bias on the AOL message boards and in the news sources used by AOL.
DryanPsyMA wrote: Another Post Down the Tubes. AOL has a BIAS toward
Bush.... Because, after all, the Muslim workers for AOL want him to stay in
office.
They would hate the idea of having a REAL president who might kick
their BUTTS, instead of this piecemeal war going on. Oh, and if this is
deleted, it will be sent to
AOL management for review.
Editor's Note: Perhaps the AOL monitor(s) on the board did not want people
to know that it is possible to complain to AOL management, as well as
external media.
Bopes148 wrote: Hello.............I see you have already done a lot of work
and research concerning the issues of bias on AOL and I commend you for what
you
are tying to do. I have been a member of AOL for nearly 20 years and
have always been active on the boards and put a great deal of postings on
them also.
The nonsense issues I do not get involved with. I have had many
posts pulled for no reason other then which the moderator of that particular
board would disagree
with what I have to say. I have never been vulgar but I
will get to the point in a civil manner. ... don't get your hopes up in
solving this problem. It's been around a very
long time. ... the Big Wigs
don't really give a damn as to what is going on mainly due to the fact that
AOL is the largest provider of on-line services and the
majority of
moderators are not paid. They get compensated by getting the service free
which incidentally is going to be undergoing changes beginning in
September
which will only make things worse.
Editor's Note: I sent you an invitation to join our group addrssing the
actions we can take to minimize AOL bias.
ERMP wrote: I am really disgusted with the headlines that AOL has chosen to
post against the Israel and the Jews. The headline Israel targets Christians
in
Lebanon is totally false. They are trying to destroy Hezbalah...a
terrorist organization...they are not targeting Christians!
Editor's Note: If this concerns you, send me email and I will add you to our
members list of people taking action to minimize the AOL bias. Please put
"IMPORTANT" in the subject heading.
TRAINCITY2003 wrote: AOL..WHEN IN THE HELL IS YOUR YELLOW LIBERAL BACKED
SITE GOING TO START TO REPORT THE NEWS ACCURATELY..
YOU ARE ABETTING THE ENEMY
AGAIN..
Editor's Note: The bias is not just limited to this message board.
Yes901251 wrote: Even the AOL News is Biased. It only shows the violence
suffered by the Lebanon population, especially the woman and children.
Editor's Note: If this bias concerns you, send me email and I will add you
to our members list of people taking action to minimize the AOL bias.
Please
put "IMPORTANT" in the subject heading.
RipIsSmoking wrote about a post of his being hijacked: I replied to a post
asking for further information and when I checked back, my reply wasn't
there,
but I was now directing people to a Pro Islamic site and the same for
the person I was replying to. Check your posts, make sure that they are
yours.
Don't worry, I took precautions, went off-line and am still scanning. Don't
want to wake up in the morning and find my computer is an Islamic terrorist
Editor's Note: Was the direction to an Islamic Site in a message header that
made it look like you wrote it? This is the type of message hijacking I was
subjected to several months ago.
MrsEDiamond wrote: I HEARD RECENTLY THAT AN ARAB CONSORTIUM HAS BOUGHT INTO
CNN AND TIME WARNER....WOULDNT THAT
NECESSITATE A CHANGE O F USEAGE OF AOL ?
ARE THE VIRULENT POSTS THAT APPEAR HERE COMING FROM OTHER ARABS? TERROR
HAS
MANY FORMS... INFLMATORY POSTS ARE ONE OF THEM.... HOWEVER THE RHETORIC OF
NASRALLAH AND OTHER MUSLIM PREACHERS
RELECT THE STUDPITY OF THEIR
FOLLOWERS...RELIGION SHOULD BE A PEACEFUL PROCESS...A CURE ALL FOR ONES
TROUBLES ..AND A
WAY TO PLAN FOR A PEACEFUL WORLD...SOMETHING IS WRONG ...
ALLAH MUST BE SLEEPING IN SOME CONVENT WITH THE VIRGINS
WHO LIVE THERE. AND
HE SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN HIS FOLLOWERS........SO SAD......
Editor's Note: I would be very interested in hearing more about your sources
of information. We have a group of people who are trying to understand the
cause for the AOL bias, and how to get it fixed. Let me know if you would
like to join the group.
ShootDaMoon69 writes: Recently, I had a post deleted from the message board
regarding the history of the Atheist movement beginning with the onslaught
of Baltimore atheist, Madalyn Murray O'Hair. When it, too, was deleted along
with the positive feedback it received, I was perturbed to no end. I called
AOL
and complained bitterly. The representative told me that AOL does not
set the standards for any of the boards; they are hosted and monitored by
members
such as ourselves. And, she said, that these monitors can and will
delete anything that does not meet their idea of what is conducive to their
points-of-view.
Editor's Note:
This seems to be a good example that may prove it is
individual message board monitors that are slanting boards to reflect their
own agenda
as several of our members have suggested.
Person asking to be confidential wrote:
I noticed this on a thread that was non-political and related to parenting
and family violence issues, subjects I have written about and continue to
write about. I
thought these boards would give me a "feel" for the national
tendency or viewpoint and perhaps help me in my writing of future books on
the matter.
But it seemed as if vulgar posts were more welcomed than thoughtful and/or
properly written or intellectually provocative ones. What burned me up is
that
the posts I was particularly interested in (half the time those I
disagreed with) were erased. How can one gage the public's mind that way?
I certainly don't try to use these message boards as a plug for my books (I
don't often post and never use my name, etc). Obviously if someone's
interest is
piqued by one of my statements, they can view my profile and/or
contact me directly.
As I said, this is all useless if all viewpoints (except the puerile ones
meant to upset folks) are not accurately portrayed and posted.
Keep up the good work.
Editor's Note: I agree with you. The message boards are useless -- or, even
worse, dangerous -- if the monitors of the board can skew the posts to favor
their
own agendas.
ONE09flat04 wrote: SHOCKING TOTAL BIAS AGAINST THE ISRAELI ATTEMPT TO
PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM TERRORISTS!
Surely you must have all noticed it in the media and in the postings herein!
It is non-stop reverse PR dramatizing and repeating the horror of a missile
gone astray and killing Hezbollahan refugees, children and supporters!
That is all you see and hear!
What about the thousands of missiles randomly fired on Israel by Hezbollah
for twenty years since the United Nations resolution ordered Hezbollah to
disarm and
cease terrorist attacks?
The Israeli government has apologized for an errant missile
that killed many of Hezbollah followers!
Have you ever heard of Hezbollah, Hamas or al Qeda apologize for killing
innocent men. women and children?
They never do!
Isn't it time the march toward condemnation of Israel became more even
handed?
Bias is bad! Bias in the public print is shameful and unjust!
Roland C. Woodaka
Editor's Note:
Many of our members have been motivated by the specific bias
you suggest. But, the bias of message boards on AOL seems to be universal
or
-- at least - in many other boards besides the MIDDLE EAST CRISIS.
CharmayB wrote: I posted PRAY FOR PEACE and it got deleted..Someone else
wrote the president is a FAG. It stayed. Go Figure.
Editor's Note: I imagine AOL may have adopted the anti-religious bias of
many American politicians. The AOL censors probably felt they had to protect
others
from being influenced by a religious message. You are not alone. Send
me email and I will add you to our members list of people discussing what to
do about
the AOL bias.
Para1947 wrote: Well, I posted a very mild reply to some ranting maniac
today and of course they removed my post. I guess I was lucky to not get TOS'd. I was
TOS'd last night for sending an IM message (I should not have
done that) to some maniac. It's amazing how easy it is to get right back on
after you've been
TOS'd. What's the point? All I had to do was change my
password?? Sheesh. Guess I'll just bite my tongue from now on.
Editor's Note: If you are wondering about AOL showing responsibility as a
corporation, or if you think they are not being a good corporate citizen,
try sending
email to Time Warner (AOL's parent) Lisa Quiroz, Senior Vice
President, Corporate Responsibility or Michele Sacconaghi, Vice President,
Corporate Citizenship
they are both at email address corporate.responsibility@timewarner.com
rscaciopoli1 wrote: i have already cancelled my aol subscription. i am
looking for a more unbiased forum to discuss issues
Editor's Note:
AOL announced today that it was moving towards a Google and
Yahoo model (free service, paid ads.) To start they are going to allow free
access IF
you have your own Broadband service that connects you to AOL. If
you're interested, the phone number to call is 888-265-8008. WARNING: It
took me about 15 minutes
to get this job done, mostly waiting time. I
believe this means we might have success by complaining to advertisers about
the AOL bias.
ACROPMARBL wrote: Why does AOL do this? Is it necessary to show the blood
spatter on walls? this is crazy!!!! why do you allow this crap to be shown?
Editor's Note: Send me email and I will add you to our members list of
people discussing what to do about the AOL bias. It is rampant and even
disgusting at times.
CtilliSCV wrote: Every one of my posts of today has been deleted!!!! All of
them!
Editor's Note: WOW! What did you post? Give us an idea so we can all get
deleted and build up more ammunition for our AOL battle.
EAC525 wrote SIGN ME UP. (for the group fighting AOL bias) I WAS "TOSSED' and had several message posts
deleted in seconds.took an hour on the phone to
get my password reinstated.plus their news and pictures must be confronted.
Editor's Note: You represent a mixture of the posters who are getting
together to try and fix AOL. Some want them to change their deletion policy.
Some want to see less
biased news. Some, like you, are upset with bioth
censorship and news coverage.
ReallyMongoose wrote: You are correct. This is (AOL, media) propaganda. You
saw straight through it. Good job! You have to remember that AOL is owned by
a
Saudi prince. Do you really think he is going to allow the truth to be
told when he has already invested billions in propaganda against the Jewish
State of Israel?
Of course he won't. Why do you think Mayor Rudi Gulliani
gave back the 10 million dollar check he offered New York after 9/11?
Because of a statement he made
supporting the terrorists of the Middle East!
... Things are not the way they look. The Lebonese people hate the Jews.
THAT is why Hezbollah is getting the thumbs up.
The majority of the country
could be defined as Islamofascist. Christians are persecuted severely in
Lebanon. You just haven't heard about it.
Editor's Note: What's your source for the information about the Saudi Prince
owning AOL?
DADS6969 wrote: This is the second attempt to tell the truth about AOL!
Since The AOL censors insist on deleting every post that tells the truth
about their Left wing bias
in their reporting I will simply flood their
message boards with the truth!
As I wrote in a new thread that disappeared immedaitly upon posting;
AOL has listed fifteen pictures of the events between Israel and Hezbolla
the last of which is nothing but an advertisement for AOL News. That leaves
fourteen.
These fourteen pictures ahow the pain and suffering in Lebanon on
one side and the Israeli troops preparing for ur undertaking operations.
There are no pictures of the
destruction taking place in Israel due to the
thousands of rockets fired by Hezbolla.
AOL has lost a million subscribers in the last year, is there any wonder
why?
US Army SFC/Ret
Democracy=Government by mob rule.
http://www.swcp.com/~nmrep/demevil1.htm
Republic=A republic can be correctly defined as a 'representative
democracy', plain old 'democracy' is NOT just another word for republic..
Editor's Note: I saw one of your posts deleted while I was reading it. It is
saved below.
dogswhisp1 wrote: Listen up low wage earning Indian censor. This is America.
We have this thing called the "First Amendment." It makes us very angry when
foreign workers who stole American jobs in the first place start cutting
into our Constitutional rights as well! You want AOL to lose another
6,000,000 customers? Cut it out. Go worship Ganeesh of something and BUTT
OUT!
Editor's Note: The continued censorship of posts for non TOS reasons are
infuriating many. Some of us are getting together (out of AOL's sight) to
take appropriate action.
DADS6969 wrote: Yeah they just deleted mine again. AOL can't stand the
truth!
US Army SFC/Ret
Democracy=Government by mob rule.
http://www.swcp.com/~nmrep/demevil1.htm
Republic=A republic can be correctly defined as a 'representative
democracy', plain old 'democracy' is NOT just another word for republic.
Editor's Note: The AOL choice of AP as its news provider suggests AOL does
not want the truth. While many AP stories do have truth in them, it is
sometimes hard to separate the facts from the AP bias.
Oddmanout30 wrote: AOL IS SLANTED TO THE LEFT LIKE A CLIFF
Editor's Note: Interesting analogy. Some of us are getting together (out of
AOL's sight) to take appropriate action.
Ddlreilley wrote: CAN IT REALLY BE TRUE THAT ALL THE PICTURES OF SOLDIERS
ARE ISRAEL???? CAN IT REALLY BE TRUE ALL PICTURES OF FAMILIES AND VICTIMS
AND BOMBEDBUILDINGS ARE LEBANON??? COME ON AOL YOU'RE NOT BEING FAIR!!!!
Editor's Note: The AOL monitors doing the censoring are not getting paid to
be fair. Neither are the AOL folks who write the news headlines and create
the "opinion polls." AOL is dedicated to helping us accept the politically
correct views of left wing extremists..
Ctilli SCV wrote: Yep, I posted this morning that one of my best friends is
Lebonese/Brazilian (Catholic) and I'm Jewish and we just talked this morning
about her new job and getting together this weekend. She doesn't give one
thought to any of this, she doesn't obsess over this, and that was my post.
Guess what? It got deleted. I think because some hater did not want others
to read something good and decent about a Jewish and Lebonese friendship.
Editor's Note: It's stories like yours that make me feel AOL is working a
political agenda. I do not see how a person could take offense at your
message unless the person was working on a political agenda.
rscaciopoli1 wrote: exactly! i agree 100%! i too noticed that this thread
was deleted 4 times by the anti-american AOL censors. it's as if they seek
to quash all dissent from dems disgusted with the hate coming from far-left
wings hate-mongers
Editor's Note: It's sad, but you either tow the leftist extremist line or
you get any intelligent post deleted. This does not mean we must surrender.
We need to fight the extreme leftist censors now, before they get guns..
Judym191 wrote: Yesterday, they were deleting all pro israeli and anti
muslim stuff .. at this hour (about 7PM USA) maybe americans are looking at
posts (but) wait till the evening when the muslims and pakis work for aol..
the worst hateful vile anti jewish stuff comes on and anyone that is pro us
pro israel anti muslim gets deleted it was amazing and true
i tried to save some of the posts and they were all deleted... the most
dirty mean spirited ugly words were left on but when someone was trying to
make an intelligent point it was deleted..
i was tempted to call aol headquarters and ask them not to be so one sided
and cruel
it was blatantly pro arab and pro muslim and anti jewish and anti christian
with a few christian hate stuff added in.
Editor's Note: You make an interesting point. I have found that the AOL
monitors come on very strong in what is nightime for us. One of the most
incredible things I see on these boards is the extreme leftists who accuse
folks like you and me as being paranoid.. I think you should call AOL. I
have been collecting posts like yours and I plan to contact AOL, as well as
the media (willing to listen) about the AOL bias. I know how hard it is to
collect some of the posts that deviate from the extreme leftists line. They
get deleted quickly. Let's see how long our non vile posts last.
DryanPsyMA wrote: AOL IS A "POST BUSTER" AGAIN. We notice that many of the
posts have been deleted. Now, what's it going to take for you to realize
that we PAY to be here.
Editor's Note: The AOL terrorists not only chopped off my last few posts,
they also chopped off my access to these boards. I will make sure I express
your concerns when I write to AOL's Board of Directors.
ARIZMAN2 wrote: Does anyone notice that, in the 17photos AOL posts up in this
coverage, they show:
1. Photos of "Lebanese " "civilian" casualties,
2. Photos of "Lebanese walking alongside a rubble-free road in the gravel
next to it and
call the gravel "rubble" (geze, seems I have an awful lot of "rubble" on my
street here in
Arizona too).
3. Photos of Israeli military positions and soldiers (lobbing artillery
shells etc etc).
Does anyone wonder why AOL DOES NOT SHOW photos of Hezbo's shooting rockets
into Israel or Hezbo terrorists firing automatic weapons or setting up
incursions into Israel to kidnap and kill or Israeli "civilian" casualities
or Israeli buildings damaged by Hezbo rockets?
Editor response: ARIZMAN: A few other posters have also noticed how the
choice of these photographs was made to further a political agenda AOL and
AP are following.
DBLR IN They (AOL workers) only do what they are paid (by whom?) To do, sway
the lefts party line and make us look bad. They also beleive that the UN
will be the knight in shining armor and free the world from democracy.
Editor response: I have heard three suggestions to explain the obvious
Middle East biases shown by AOL. One suggests that the AOL work is now
outsourced to foreign countries, where the AOL censors have an anti USA and
anti Israel political agenda. Another is that AOL supports USA's liberal
political extremist. The last is that AOL is controlled by big money from
Arab countries.
SIMPLYSERVICE wrote: Utter bullcrap! (AOL does not) show Israelis blown out
of their homes by Muslim missiles supplied by Syria & Iran! Get your facts
straight!
Editor response: It's hard for them to get their facts straight when they do
not even fully read the AP stories AOL supplies.. AOL's bias is blatant. The
AP News Servise is a little less blatant. AP does "distort" the news by its
choice of words and emphasis on different facts, but if you read the entire
AP story you can usually find the true facts.
Playa2theKing wrote: (AOL is) blatantly anti Israel and inflammatory. What lies!
Editor response: I think you're too easy on AOL. AOL is also a supporter of
those who hate the USA and extremists liberal democrat politicians.
Sgrnthumb1 wrote: I'm so disgusted with AOL I plan on getting rid of it! First off
Israel did not start the "lull" in the bombing. It was Hezbollah! Look at
how the simpering aol screws the news ( outright lies) to favor Hezbollah
who plant their missile firing equipment directly behind or near apt.
complex's where they know women and children are seeking refuge! All part of
Hezbollah's plan to gain world sympathy with what they consider a perfect
photo op. Dead babies and small children. .AOL I hold you responsible for
your irresponsible reporting which is how organization's such as terrorist
Hezbollah are able to exist! And why was it all day yesterday I was not able
to post? Did you know one top Lebanese American woman whose husband held a
high govt. position in the past and who was seen whining on cspan on how
"ruthless" Israel is, happens to be some top computer technologist. Probably
works for AOL!
Editor response: I think that hitting AOL in the pocket book may help.
First, send a letter to AOL telling them why you plan to get rid of AOL. It
could help.
DenimDarlin0215 AOL likes to delete some of these posts (like one my sister
did). See if you can find it. Her screen name is Packin357Mama.
Editor response: AOL has been deleting my posts for over a year.
Susan2848 I agree also. The (AOL) headline is misleading ... it doesn't say
that the Israeli stricks were in response to being bombed by the terrorists
... if AOL does remove these posts, I will remove my membership.
Editor response: I think that hitting AOL in the pocket book may help.
First, send a letter to AOL telling them why you plan to get rid of AOL. It
could help.
Ruchy888 I agree, i find AOL to not be the best source for news as it
appears to be very pro-hezbollah. Are you pro Al-quida as well or does mel
own a large chunk of your shares?
Editor response: I think you know AOL will not respond. But keep on
challenging them.
Carlover10 IN THE 17 PICTURES YOU (AOL) HAVE IN THE CURRENT ARTICLE ABOUT
THE WAR, EACH ONE IS EITHER AN ISRAELI SOLDIER SHOOTING LEBANON, OR LEBANESE
PEOPLE CRYING AND SEARCHING FOR PEOPLE. YOU HAVE ZERO PICTURES OF HEZBOLLAH
FIGHTERS WHOS ONLY AIM IS TO KILL AS MANY INNOCENT PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, AND
USE THEIR OWN PEOPLE AS HUMAN SHIELD WHILE DOING SO. HOW ABOUT YOU PRESENT
BOTH SIDES OF THE WAR, INSTEAD OF MAKING THE LEBANESE AND HEZBOLLAH LOOK
LIKE (ANGELS)
Editor response: I think you have done a service to other AOL posters by
showing how this set of pictures was clearly chosen to reflect a political
Agenda on the part of AOL and AP.
SaphViress To all the Uninformed (and Misinformed):
AOL constructs a suggestive headline and you all fall like maggots, taking
in all the rotting hints and insinuations and then spreading your infested
thoughts and conclusions all over the board as if YOU already have all the
facts and have found yourself righteous to condemn others for something you
haven't even begun to grasp, a true understanding and knowledge of what is
really going on.
Editor response: I agree with you. However, in AOL's defense, its selction
of AP as its news provider makes it easier for AOL to slant the headlines.
Most of the AP stories from the Middle East are already biased.
Smittt36 What is it with AOL (America on Line??? ) Is this a foreign (maybe
Saudi, Iraqi or Iranian) owned company. They need to change their name from
AOL to STCOL (Support Terrorist Countries on Line). From AOL's view, it
seems like the Lebanese terrorist are the poor innocent victims of the war.
These people are the birth of terrorism
DownSouth
Editor response: I think you may have hit the nail on the head.
Jstov48 No one should be getting their "News" from AOL, thats for sure. You
are exactly right.
Fox News will give you the straight poop
Editor response: I have come to discover that some people do not think Fox
News is fair and balanced. These folks tend to also think the NY Times is
still a great newspaper and that AOL does not slant its news headings or
choice of news stories.
Mai1127 They (AOL) are seeming to forget what started this , and isreal is
fighting against terrorists . Why arent they reporting that the Arabs are
shooting missiles at them ? People in Israel are being kicked out of their
homes and some not surviving. Why are you all being so blind? If American
could have stopped the September 11th murdered it would have.
Editor response: I have
a problem with AOL's news source, AP. But, as bad as AP can be, it is
AOL people who choose which news stories and which pictures to show.
It's also AOL people who decide which posts to delete.
Gghwe437 It certainly was starting to look like these AOL boards were being
run by Muslims the way they were deleting anti-terrorist and/or pro-Israel
very poignant posts.
Editor response: I have
seen the bias of which you speak quite often, as have others.
CoolSugarDaddy
Why do you delete my posts? Can't you people deal with the truth or are you
all Muslims employed by AOHELL?
Mo Jo Risen
Editor response: I have been told by one poster that 75% of AOL's monitors
are Muslims. Others have said they were foreigners, working in the Middle
East and having typical Middle East biases.
Shredinator I DONT EXPECT MY ISP TO BE POLITICALLY UNBIASED BUT I DO EXPECT
THEM TO REPORT ALL THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE ON STORIES WHICH THEY REPORT.
LIKE THE VIDEO THAT IS BEING PLAYED ON ALL THE CABLE NEWS CHANNELS SHOWING
HEZBOLLAH ROCKETS BEING FIRED AT ISRAEL FROM THE SITE THAT WAS BOMBED WHERE
THE HUMAN SHEILDS WERE KILLED.
IF AOL WOULD JUST TELL THE COMPLETE TRUTH THEN PEOPLE COULD MAKE BETTER
CONCLUSIONS AS TO JUST WHO IS THE DESPICABLE ONE WETHER ITS THE NATION THAT
ATTACKS THEIR ENEMIES ROCKET LAUNCHERS OR THE NATION THAT LAUNCHES UNGUIDED
ROCKETS FROM CIVILLIAN LOCATIONS FULL WELL KNOWING THAT THEIR TARGETEES WILL
TARGET SAID ROCKETS
SOME PREFER AOL'S PERCEPTION, BUT I'M NOT ONE OF THEM.
Editor response: AOL has no interest in truth. They admit they want to help
format your views in a proper way.
Jparcheryshop03 FuXX AOL, (AOL bias is) why I canceled my subscription last
year. I was sick of the BS (editor note - foul word omitted to avoid
allowing AOL to have an excuse to remove this post)
AMERICA.... LAND OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE
Editor response: Foul words give AOL's censors the ability to delete your
post as a breech of TOS.
Vettmann99 OK It seems like I am taking sides B-U-T are not these fools
doing the same thing to each other...rockets-vs. -bombs??? Or did I miss
something here (at AOL)?
Guy's keep up the good work killing each other...maybe this will lead to a
world wide JIHAD!!! Neat...more killing for everybody.
Editor response:
You are certainly taking the WRONG side on the AOL message baord about the
Middle East Crisis. In fact, your posts may get deleted.
Aleph1960 Yes and the posts that are allowed (by AOL) are 99 percent Jew
hating posts. Kind of one sided no???
Editor response: One sided seems to be what AOL news coverage and message
board management like. We can fight it.
Danci123 AOL didn't forget (Hezbollah started this war), but it is
...........purposely showing dead children (in Lebanon), nothing about
Hezbollah firing from that area, so to lead us to believe Israel is 100% at
fault. TELL THE WHOLE STORY AOL!
Even the moon couldn't go on shining if it paid any attention to the dogs
that keep barking at it!
Editor response: It's hard to find the whole story in AOL's news stories
from AP, or even on the message board addressing the Middle East Crisis.
Splinter eg Well I paid my cable bill and did see the video of the long
range rockets launched by hezbolla from that very site, its proof that they
are indeed using human shields.
Editor response: Don't expect to get any response to your post (from AOL)
but it's true that the more media sources you use the less likely you will
be fooled by the bias.
Coolwater1EM AOL seems to definitely side with the underdog, which at this
time is Hezbollah...The fact that Hezbollah has launched humongous amounts
of rockets with the intent of doing what the Israeli's have occasionally
managed to succeed seems to escape aol news. It is very sad that innocents
are dying, on both sides. But this is war, Hezbollah has no qualms about
putting innocents in harms way because they know they can generate sympathy
by getting pictures of dead children on line and on the networks.. They are
a terrorist network that fights dirty, and I am very sorry for the Lebonese
people that are suffering from the actions of the Hezbollah.. They could end
this anytime, but instead keep blabbing inflammatory rhetoric over the air
waves.
Editor response: I think the biased Middle East coverage by AOL was probably
the biggest thing that motivated the original members of our group,
IM RACYNTX AOL is just as bad as every other slanted media.
Notice the pictures they put on the opening page. A Lebanese man holding a
dead baby.
Then, if you click through the other pictures, you will see that every
picture of Israel is a picture of guns, tanks, soldiers and bombing.
Every picture that is of Lebanon is people crying, dead people, rubble. Why
didn't they get out? The Israeli army warned them to leave to avoid bombs.
Hey AOL, where are the pictures of the Israeli dead? Where are the pictures
of crying Israeli children? Where are the pictures of the bombed out Israeli
homes?
Liberal media is not only distorted, but inflammatory.
The Lebanese started this war, now they are paying the consequences. War is
not pretty and people end up dead. They knew this when they launched their
rockets.
The Israeli army has shown great restraint. They could wipe all the Arab
countries off the face of the earth if they wanted.|
Editor response: AOL has given us a lesson in media bias we will all
remember
CoolSugarDaddy wrote: Why do you (AOL) delete my posts? Can't you people deal with
the truth or are you all Muslims employed by AOHELL?
Mo Jo Risen
Editor response: I think AOL deletes your posts because they do not think
they are politically correct.
dogswhisp1 wrote: Listen up low
wage earning Indian censor. This is America. We have this thing
called the "First Amendment." It makes us very angry when foreign
workers who stole American jobs in the first place start cutting
into our Constitutional rights as well! You want AOL to lose another
6,000,000 customers? Cut it out. Go worship Ganeesh of something and
BUTT OUT!
Editor's Note: The continued
censorship of posts for non TOS reasons are infuriating many. Some
of us are getting together (out of AOL's sight) to take appropriate
action.
DADS6969 wrote: Yeah they
just deleted mine again. AOL can't stand the truth!
US Army SFC/Ret
Democracy=Government by mob
rule.
http://www.swcp.com/~nmrep/demevil1.htm
Republic=A republic can be
correctly defined as a
'representative democracy',
plain old 'democracy' is NOT
just another word for
republic.
Editor's
Note: The AOL choice of AP
as its news provider suggests AOL
does not want the truth. While many
AP stories do have truth in them, it
is sometimes hard to separate the
facts from the AP bias.
Oddmanout30 wrote: AOL
IS SLANTED TO THE LEFT LIKE A
CLIFF
Editor's Note: Interesting
analogy. Some of us are getting
together (out of AOL's sight) to
take appropriate action.
Ddlreilley wrote:
CAN IT REALLY BE TRUE THAT ALL THE
PICTURES OF SOLDIERS ARE ISRAEL????
CAN IT REALLY BE TRUE ALL PICTURES
OF FAMILIES AND VICTIMS AND
BOMBEDBUILDINGS ARE LEBANON???
COME ON AOL YOU'RE NOT BEING
FAIR!!!!
Editor's Note: The AOL
monitors doing the censoring are not
getting paid to be fair. Neither
are the AOL folks who write the news
headlines and create the "opinion
polls." AOL is dedicated to helping
us accept the politically correct
views of left wing extremists..
Ctilli SCV wrote:
Yep, I posted this morning that one
of my best friends is Lebonese/Brazilian
(Catholic) and I'm Jewish and we
just talked this morning about her
new job and getting together this
weekend. She doesn't give one
thought to any of this, she doesn't
obsess over this, and that was my
post. Guess what? It got deleted. I
think because some hater did not
want others to read something good
and decent about a Jewish and
Lebonese friendship.
Editor's Note:
It's stories
like yours that make me feel AOL is
working a political agenda. I do
not see how a person could take
offense at your message unless the
person was working on a political
agenda.
rscaciopoli1 wrote:
exactly! i
agree 100%! i too noticed that
this thread was deleted 4 times
by the anti-american AOL
censors. it's as if they seek to
quash all dissent from dems
disgusted with the hate coming
from far-left wings
hate-mongers
Editor's Note:
It's sad,
but you either tow the leftist
extremist line or you get any
intelligent post deleted. This
does not mean we must
surrender. We need to fight the
extreme leftist censors now,
before they get guns..
Judym191 wrote:
Yesterday, they were deleting
all pro israeli and anti muslim
stuff .. at this hour (about 7PM
USA) maybe americans are looking
at posts (but) wait till the
evening when the muslims and
pakis work for aol.. the worst
hateful vile anti jewish stuff
comes on and anyone that is pro
us pro israel anti muslim gets
deleted it was amazing and true
i tried to save some of the
posts and they were all
deleted... the most dirty mean
spirited ugly words were left on
but when someone was trying to
make an intelligent point it was
deleted..
i was tempted to call aol
headquarters and ask them not to
be so one sided and cruel
it was blatantly pro arab and
pro muslim and anti jewish and
anti christian with a few
christian hate stuff added in.
Editor's Note:
You make
an interesting point. I have
found that the AOL monitors come
on very strong in what is
nightime for us. One of the
most incredible things I see on
these boards is the extreme
leftists who accuse folks like
you and me as being paranoid..
I think you should call AOL. I
have been collecting posts like
yours and I plan to contact AOL,
as well as the media (willing to
listen) about the AOL bias. I
know how hard it is to collect
some of the posts that deviate
from the extreme leftists line.
They get deleted quickly. Let's
see how long our non vile posts
last.
DryanPsyMA wrote:
AOL IS A "POST BUSTER"
AGAIN. We notice that many of
the posts have been deleted.
Now, what's it going to take for
you to realize that we PAY to be
here.
Editor's
Note:
The AOL
terrorists
not only
chopped off
my last few
posts, they
also chopped
off my
access to
these
boards. I
will make
sure I
express your
concerns
when I write
to AOL's
Board of
Directors.
ARIZMAN2 Does
anyone
notice that,
in
the 17photos
AOL posts up
in this
coverage,
they show:
1.
Photos
of
"Lebanese
"
"civilian"
casualties,
2. Photos of "Lebanese walking alongside a rubble-free road in the gravel next to it and call the gravel "rubble" (geze, seems I have an awful lot of "rubble" on my street here in Arizona too).
3. Photos of Israeli military positions and soldiers (lobbing artillery shells etc etc).
Does anyone wonder why AOL DOES NOT SHOW photos of Hezbo's shooting rockets into Israel or Hezbo terrorists firing automatic weapons or setting up incursions into Israel to kidnap and kill or Israeli "civilian" casualities or Israeli buildings damaged by Hezbo rockets?
Editor response: ARIZMAN: A few other posters have also noticed how the choice of these photographs was made to further a political agenda AOL and AP are following.
DBLR IN They (AOL workers) only do what they are paid (by whom?) To do, sway the lefts party line and make us look bad. They also beleive that the UN will be the knight in shining armor and free the world from democracy.
Editor response: I have heard three suggestions to explain the obvious Middle East biases shown by AOL. One suggests that the AOL work is now outsourced to foreign countries, where the AOL censors have an anti USA and anti Israel political agenda. Another is that AOL supports USA's liberal political extremist. The last is that AOL is controlled by big money from Aran countries.
SIMPLYSERVICE
wrote: Utter
bullcrap! (AOL
does not) show
Israelis blown
out of their
homes by Muslim
missiles
supplied by
Syria & Iran!
Get your facts
straight!
Editor
response:
It's hard
for them to
get their
facts
straight
when they do
not even
fully read
the AP
stories AOL
supplies..
AOL's bias
is blatant.
The AP News
Servise is a
little less
blatant. AP
does
"distort"
the news by
its choice
of words and
emphasis on
different
facts, but
if you read
the entire
AP story you
can usually
find the
true facts.
Playa2theKing
(AOL is)
blatantly
anti
Israel
and
inflammatory.
What
lies!
Editor
response:
I think
you're
too easy
on AOL.
AOL is
also a
supporter
of those
who hate
the USA
and
extremists
liberal
democrat
politicians.
Sgrnthumb1
I'm so
disgusted
with AOL
I plan
on
getting
rid of
it!
First
off
Israel
did not
start
the
"lull"
in the
bombing.
It was
Hezbollah!
Look at
how the
simpering
aol
screws
the news
(
outright
lies) to
favor
Hezbollah
who
plant
their
missile
firing
equipment
directly
behind
or near
apt.
complex's
where
they
know
women
and
children
are
seeking
refuge!
All part
of
Hezbollah's
plan to
gain
world
sympathy
with
what
they
consider
a
perfect
photo
op. Dead
babies
and
small
children.
.AOL I
hold you
responsible
for your
irresponsible
reporting
which is
how
organization's
such as
terrorist
Hezbollah
are able
to
exist!
And why
was it
all day
yesterday
I was
not able
to post?
Did you
know one
top
Lebanese
American
woman
whose
husband
held a
high
govt.
position
in the
past and
who was
seen
whining
on cspan
on how
"ruthless"
Israel
is,
happens
to be
some top
computer
technologist.
Probably
works
for AOL!
Editor
response:
I
think
that
hitting
AOL
in
the
pocket
book
may
help.
First,
send
a
letter
to
AOL
telling
them
why
you
plan
to
get
rid
of
AOL.
It
could
help.
DenimDarlin0215
AOL
likes
to
delete
some
of
these
posts
(like
one
my
sister
did).
See
if
you
can
find
it.
Her
screen
name
is
Packin357Mama.
Editor response: AOL has been deleting my posts for over a year.
Susan2848 I agree also. The (AOL) headline is misleading ... it doesn't say that the Israeli stricks were in response to being bombed by the terrorists ... if AOL does remove these posts, I will remove my membership.
Editor response: I think that hitting AOL in the pocket book may help. First, send a letter to AOL telling them why you plan to get rid of AOL. It could help.
Ruchy888
I agree,
i find
AOL to
not be
the best
source
for news
as it
appears
to be
very
pro-hezbollah.
Are you
pro
Al-quida
as well
or does
mel own
a large
chunk of
your
shares?
Editor
response:
I think
you know
AOL will
not
respond.
But keep
on
challenging
them.
Who is
"mel"?
Carlover10
IN
THE
17
PICTURES
YOU
(AOL)
HAVE
IN
THE
CURRENT
ARTICLE
ABOUT
THE
WAR,
EACH
ONE
IS
EITHER
AN
ISRAELI
SOLDIER
SHOOTING
LEBANON,
OR
LEBANESE
PEOPLE
CRYING
AND
SEARCHING
FOR
PEOPLE.
YOU
HAVE
ZERO
PICTURES
OF
HEZBOLLAH
FIGHTERS
WHOS
ONLY
AIM
IS
TO
KILL
AS
MANY
INNOCENT
PEOPLE
AS
POSSIBLE,
AND
USE
THEIR
OWN
PEOPLE
AS
HUMAN
SHIELD
WHILE
DOING
SO.
HOW
ABOUT
YOU
PRESENT
BOTH
SIDES
OF
THE
WAR,
INSTEAD
OF
MAKING
THE
LEBANESE
AND
HEZBOLLAH
LOOK
LIKE
(ANGELS)
Editor response: I think you have done a service to other AOL posters by showing how this set of pictures was clearly chosen to reflect a political Agenda on the part of AOL and AP.
SaphViress To all the Uninformed (and Misinformed):
AOL constructs a suggestive headline and you all fall like maggots, taking in all the rotting hints and insinuations and then spreading your infested thoughts and conclusions all over the board as if YOU already have all the facts and have found yourself righteous to condemn others for something you haven't even begun to grasp, a true understanding and knowledge of what is really going on.