Does the media lie to us?

[CLAYBROOK]

Somebody sent this to me today. I found it interesting so I thought I would post it.
Here are some rather eye-opening facts: Since the start of the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, the sacrifice has been enormous. In the time period from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 through now, we have lost over 3000 military personnel to enemy action and accidents. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics:


The annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006:


1980 ......... 2,392

1981 ..........2,380

1984 ..........1,999

1988 ..........1,819

1989 ..........1,636

1990 ..........1,508

1991 ..........1,787

1992 ..........1,293

----------------------------------------------------

1993 .......... 1,213

1994 ...........1,075

1995 ...........2,465

1996 ...........2,318 8 Clinton years @13,417 deaths

1997 .............817

1998 ...........2,252

1999 ...........1,984

-------------------------------------------------

2000 ..........1,983

2001..............890

2002 ...........1,007 7 BUSH years @ 9,016 deaths

2003 ...........1,410

2004 ...........1,887

2005 ..............919

2006...............920

------------------------------------------------------------



If you are confused when you look at these figures...so was I.



Do these figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton's presidency; when America wasn't even involved in a war?

And, I was even more confused; when I read that in 1980, during the reign of President (Nobel Peace Prize) Jimmy Carter, there were 2,392 US military fatalities.



These figures indicate that many of our media and politicians will pick and choose. They present only those 'facts' which support their agenda-driven reporting. Why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist the truth? Where do so many of them get their marching orders for their agendas?



Our mainstream print and TV media, and many politicians like to slant; that these brave men and women, who are losing their lives in Iraq, are mostly minorities. Wrong AGAIN --- just one more media lie. The latest census of Americans shows the following distribution of American citizens, by race:



European descent (White) .... 69.12%

Hispanic ............................ .12.5%

Black...................................12.3%

Asian ................................... 3.7%

Native American .....................1.0%

Other .................................... 2.6%



Now here are the fatalities by race over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:



European descent (white) ... .. 74.31%

Hispanic .............................. 10.74%

Black .................................... 9.67%

Asian .................................... 1.81 %

Native American ..................... 1.09%

Other ..................................... .33%



These statistics are published by Congressional Research Service, and they may be confirmed by anyone at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf.



Now ask yourself this question:



'Why does the mainstream print and TV media never provide statistics like these?' You do the math. These figures don't lie but media does sway public opinion.

[Austin]

Do not panic citizen

Move along, nothing to see here

[ronwill]

I don't understand why it's not understood that when you fight a "war" there will be casualties. Don't forget the thousands that died in Viet Nam. The question to ask here - is the war making our country safer?

[HK4U]

Originally Posted by ronwill

I don't understand why it's not understood that when you fight a "war" there will be casualties. Don't forget the thousands that died in Viet Nam. The question to ask here - is the war making our country safer?

Well we are told it is making us safer. I do not feel any safer. When we spend billions over there and nothing to secure our border, you be the judge.

[toreskha]

Democracy is a great thing, but it's only going to work out if it's a direct product of the effort of Iraqis themselves. Our participation in the process necessarily invalidates it as a product of Iraqis, and does nothing whatsoever towards getting them towards the point of having a stable government.

Putting together an effective, accountable government and robust civil society is not like building a house. It can't be sped or or slowed down. It necessarily takes a long time. Justifications for getting it done in a hurry are irrelevant - "Because if we don't, the terrorists will win" or "The Moon will crash into the Earth" are immaterial. It's like baking a cake. If you want it in a hurry, then you'll just have to wait until it's done.

If we want the Iraqis to develop a democratic government, the best strategy would be to leave them alone so that they can finally get started on it. Everything that we have done up to this point has been a very expensive distraction.

[MufDady]

Media Lie? would they do that? Only media person that tells it like it is > Glen Beck......... thats my openion

[Red Hat]

Great post CLAYBROOK. I've been looking for a breakdown like that. The only thing I could find was that the Iraqi war was the second lowest loss of life in a conflict we've fought. The lowest being the Spanish American war.

[kwo51]

Sounds like a war made by the number crunchers. Today 1 lat tus 1 white wed black thur woman. Just to clean. Sure making some people a lot money.

[Scarecrow]

you mean the media doesn't tell the truth 100% of the time?

[HK4U]

Cost of war to top 2 trillion. You think we could put up a pretty good fence on our border and man it for this much money

http://www.boston.com/news/world/art...op_2_trillion/