Denys,

> On Monday, January 5, 2004, at 09:13 PM, Denys Beauchemin wrote:
>
> > http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/30/sprj.irq.alqaeda.weapons/

I will assume that your interpretation of this article was without bias
(hehe), but the article itself presented a very nice skew.

Headline: "Al Qaeda videos found in Iraq weapons raid".  How would that read
if it said "Punk rock music CD found in apartment complex search"?  Wow!
There were AQ videos in the same building as a weapons cache.

Lead: "U.S. forces operating in the so-called Sunni Triangle -- the region
of Iraq most loyal to captured former dictator Saddam Hussein -- found a
significant weapons cache that included al Qaeda literature and videotapes,
the U.S. military said Tuesday"

Why is "weapons cache" preceded by the descriptor "significant", but no
mention of the quantity, age, type or relevance of the Al Qaeda literature
and video tapes?  Why is the region of Iraq (think "state" or "county")
noted as being the most loyal to Saddam?

Article: "In addition to the al Qaeda literature and videos, the troops
found nearly 8,000 rounds of ammunition; 160 mortar rounds and six mortar
tubes; 43 rocket-propelled grenade launchers and 79 rocket-propelled
grenades (RPGs); and 19 AK-47 assault rifles, as well as dozens of other
weapons."

The information presented to the press, or reported by the press, was
detailed enough to give us count and type for the weapons, but no
information on the Al Qaeda literature and videos.  We are lead to believe
that because the cache was located in a county that was loyal to Saddam,
that the persons who created the cache were as well, and worse, that the Al
Qaeda literature was somehow present BECAUSE they were so loyal to Saddam.
Well, that would just PROVE that anyone who was benefitting from the Hussein
regime was a believer in the AQ line of thought.

Let's try this one:

"FBI forces operating in Waco, Texas -- a state known for its loyalty to
President Bush -- found a significant cache of anti government propaganda
and literature, a spokesman said last Friday."  Did the participants in that
compound have a relationship with and get their orders from Bush, by virtue
of the fact they were in Texas?

The bias of the way the information in that article is presented, would make
us believe that with the cases of ammunition, there was a bank of video
dubbing machines madly cranking out propaganda tapes of Al Qaeda drivel; and
stacks of pamphlets poised for subversive distribution at the next open
market.

Get real.  You read what you wanted to read, and you posted it as a trump
card to say "See?  There WAS an official link between Al Qaeda and Saddam!
Told ya so!  Told ya so!"  Find better evidence.  Al Qaeda and Saddam are
not synonymous, and pushing the myth further is undermining what credibility
the "police action" in Iraq has.

Rs~

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *