Do You Really Think The Attacks On Embassies Are Related To That Youtube Movie?

[Muushka]

Nevermind

 

[Saphire]

Yes, I have been paying attention. It is not going away. Has the potential of being a huge scandal. Time will tell.

 

[Buckalew11]

Yes, I have been paying attention. It is not going away. Has the potential of being a huge scandal. Time will tell.

After the election, of course.

 

[Robbi]

No, I don't think that the movie had diddly squat to do with Benghazi. Waiting for the November surprise.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

Erm, it might have something to do with the source. . .if an article or story comes from a particular outlet, I immediately discard the story as propaganda because they lean wayyyyyy too far in one direction. I also discard anything that comes from another particular news outlet as being propaganda from the other side.

If a more-or-less unbiased source reports on the topic, I'll be happy to read about it.

 

[4nana]

Nope, not a thing to do with tape.

One of the biggest cover ups in American history at the sad expense of Ambassador Stevens and 3 other brave Americans who gave their lives for our country. The truth shall be revealed when the tangled webs are unwoven.

 

[cabanafrau]

Erm, it might have something to do with the source. . .if an article or story comes from a particular outlet, I immediately discard the story as propaganda because they lean wayyyyyy too far in one direction. I also discard anything that comes from another particular news outlet as being propaganda from the other side.

If a more-or-less unbiased source reports on the topic, I'll be happy to read about it.

Which begs the question, are we sure we can trust that the perceived "unbiased" news sources are exactly that? Who's to say some of the wolves don't get their sheep's clothing from the designer with a much subtler sensibility?

The economic squeeze on traditional print media has been very costly to our country and done a lot of damage to our ability to access the facts. Freedom of the Press is a very, very important right. It's incredibly hard to take it seriously when it's chief function today seems to be propping up or shining a light on what's happening with the Kardashian breasts.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Why isn't this in the news?? It's outrageous.

News of Benghazi should be covered in the media! Americans were murdered. How many days has it been? 150? We need answers about before, during, and after the attack. There were serious issues in security. We need answers. Those serving America need to be protected. They need to know it won't happen again. Those that were killed deserve justice. It shouldn't have happened.

 

[Christopher Robin]

The father of the one dead SEAL said it best. 'Nuff said.

 

[JennaDeeDooDah]

The more I read about it, the more my heart breaks. Americans are dead. Someone ordered the "stand down". More than 30 American officials were evacuated from Benghazi and only 7 of them worked for the state department. Almost all of the others worked for the CIA under diplomatic cover. The deaths were watched in the situation room. Sadly, I don't think we will ever get the answers that we deserve.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

Which begs the question, are we sure we can trust that the perceived "unbiased" news sources are exactly that? Who's to say some of the wolves don't get their sheep's clothing from the designer with a much subtler sensibility?

The economic squeeze on traditional print media has been very costly to our country and done a lot of damage to our ability to access the facts. Freedom of the Press is a very, very important right. It's incredibly hard to take it seriously when it's chief function today seems to be propping up or shining a light on what's happening with the Kardashian breasts.

The best thing to do is NOT to read or rely on just one or two sources on a topic and THEN to do your own research. I listen to NPR in my car, but I also listen to the BBC World Service, World Voices (or whatever that channel is called. It's Sat 1 #4 on my car radio, LOL!), CNN and CNBC. I read about 6 news streams including Google. When it comes to just picking a newscast to watch, DH and I invariably pick the BBC - we've found they generally report both sides to a story. (This is our channel for 1st Tues in Nov. coverage.) If I really want to know what really happened, well, there are so many places to go to get first person accounts, why would I trust a news outlet/gatekeeper?

Just as, if I want to know about a bit of science, why read a generalized site? Why not go and pull all the abstracts and articles I want from peer-reviewed journals whose indices and articles are on Google? Why not just pull up a respected book ono the topic on Google as well?

OTOH, I self-exclude some news sources out of hand, because they are too biased for me. I won't even go on their websites because I don't want to help their traffic.

 

[holycow]

It's hard to listen to those news sources when they aren't saying ANYTHING about this!!!

Infuriating!

So I'll keep listening to the one source that is reporting. Good for them I say.


I really wish our news sources would go back to being just that. Sources for news and NOT for their own AGENDAS.

The sad state of affairs in our country right now.

 

[cabanafrau]

It's hard to listen to those news sources when they aren't saying ANYTHING about this!!!

Infuriating!

So I'll keep listening to the one source that is reporting. Good for them I say.


I really wish our news sources would go back to being just that. Sources for news and NOT for their own AGENDAS.

The sad state of affairs in our country right now.

The state of our media is shameful and very dangerous at this time. What's happening that most of us are completely unaware of while the media attention is on scandalous celebrity affairs, pregnancy speculation, blah, blah, ? How easily can a very large proportion of our citizens be manipulated to be for this, against this, screaming for action or convinced to vote for this candidate or ballot proposal, etc.

It's easier IMO to listen to what some outlets have to say when they wear their bias loud & proud -- there are examples on both extremes of the spectrum. Even if you identify strongly with one end or the other, it is kind of ridiculous to assume each & every bit of info disseminated from the "biased" outlet of the opposite view is invalid. I have a good idea where to keep my guard up when I'm listening to information from the "biased" outlets & listen accordingly. I am under no illusions that what comes out of "objective" sources is as advertised & try to be very watchful of how many objective facts they're reporting or I know about from personal experience, common sense or other sources to back up the reporting. It's the stealthy bias that really requires much more effort to sort out.

 

[Robbi]

The Benghazi topic came up on one of the mainstream news talk shows the other day. The guest was an older reired newscaster. He was asked the difference between the media now and back when Watergate broke. The answer was back then the media was less biased and really interested in getting to the truth. To me, that says it in a nutshell. There are no ore unibiased news sources. From NPR to mainstream media to cable news, all have their own agendas and the people of this country suffer from the lack of knowledge about the true facts. The media is not here to serve the people anymore.

 

[joviroxx]

The sad thing is this story isn't being covered by "both sides", its only being covered by one and basically ignored by the other , which begs the question WHY?

 

[Robbi]

The sad thing is this story isn't being covered by "both sides", its only being covered by one and basically ignored by the other , which begs the question WHY?

It is true that one side is having more coverage and that is a diservice.

 

[7165red]

Yes, I have been following the story and can't believe how the national media isn't covering it. I get my news from Fox news and the Drudge. My heart breakes for all the young men that were killed and didn't receive any help. I did see the Seal's father on tv and it was so sad. It also has been covered by several talk radio shows.

 

[cabanafrau]

It is true that one side is having more coverage and that is a diservice.

I said it before, I think early on in this thread even, this is not a political issue. This isn't even an American issue. Terrorism is something everyone around the world should be equally against.

 

[OceanAnnie]

To me, there is only one side. Americans. That's the truth.

We should ALL be concerned about what happened in Benghazi. The information that HAS come out from this is very disturbing. We should see this through one single lens, as Americans. What happened? Why? How can it be prevented in the future? Who is responsible?

 

[Robbi]

I said it before, I think early on in this thread even, this is not a political issue. This isn't even an American issue. Terrorism is something everyone around the world should be equally against.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant there are only a couple of news sources covering this in depth while most of the media is ignoring it.
godlikeproductions has a ton of information. I did not mean my post to bepolitical. Since we were discusiing media, I thought my meaning would be apparent.