What I have found to be so disheartening is the news media's continued assaults on the truth, by repeating things that they know to be false, or perhaps worse, that they
should know to be untrue.
The latest occured today, whilst I was listening to The World from the BBC, carried on my local public radio station. It was the lead into a story about the dangers for reporters in Iraq, and whether or not the real story was getting out of the country. While I understand that it is incredibly dangerous for any westerner - let alone native Iraqi's - to travel around, I was alarmed at how the story began, with an audio report of the taking down of the statue of Saddam Hussein immediately after US troops had reached Baghdad.
The irony was so obvious. Here, the reporters interviewed by the BBC are talking about how they think the real story on the ground is getting out, and yet I am left thinking about the statue, and event totally staged by the US occupiers, with but a hundred Iraqi's there by invitation (including Chalabi himself), the square ringed by US tanks with their guns pointed
outward, in order to keep out any folks that may over react to the overthrow of Hussein.
That these photos have been well known for over two years, that totally dispute the version profered by the US occupiers, as well as the SCLM, seem to be unknown to the BBC. The reporter that you can here on their story must have known the truth, and yet he reports as if he was in Kiev or La Paz, with thousands of protestors around him.
Why does the media continue to report falsehoods as if they were facts? How many listeners that never knew the truth, have now had the myth reinforced because an editor, a reporter, any number of people that should know did not?