The BBC is deliberately distorting the News from the Georgia Region

The BBC is deliberately distorting the News from the Georgia Region

www.infowars.com

As usual, the BBC is twisting and distorting the news coming out of the Georgia region. We keep being told that around 1500 have been killed in Georgia, the inference being that this has resulted from Russian bombing.

Not so, the casualties are in Ossetia.

While the Ossetians claimed over 1000 dead the BBC neither reported this or any newsreel coming out of Ossetia showing the destruction caused by the Georgian shelling of the breakaway republic.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I'm sure no one is surprised by this, i'm sure we all also know that it's not only BBC but almost every msn news network doing the same.

All media outlets are making it seem like Russia started it.

www.infowars.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The BBC is just being neutral. Of course if that doesn't gel with your perception of the world, that will seem like a bias.

God, with a name like 'Chimes of Freedom' he must be an unbiased source.

The BBC doesn't pull numbers out of the air,

This is noise, noise with no proof that the BBC distorted anything. Different reports from correspondents in different places is commonplace, given that they are doing real reporting and getting information from sources.

Have they watched Russia Today lately? It's the broadcast equivalent of Pravda!

yes saying that Russia started the war is being neutral

hmmm. okay

Unlike the good folk at Infowars, the BBC is not Omnipotent and can therefore only report the news it has received from verifiable sources, or the film footage it actually has.

Of course, we know that as well as knowing everything, Infowars is not biased in any way whatsoever and whatever thay say is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So any news source that does not exactly agree with them is either lying or incompetent or both



(actually I had suspected some pro Georgia bias, but now Infowars says the BBC is biased I'm inclined to believe that the BBC are totally impartial after all)

[edit on 12-8-2008 by Essan]

reply to post by Nerdling


As Al Jazeera reported, RussiaToday is controlled from The Kremlin. The producers of RussiaToday were asked about government influences and they admitted the show is influenced.

You only have to watch the BBC Broadcasts to figure this one out.

They immediately stopped reporting on the shelling of Tshninvali that caused 1,400 deaths just as soon as it happened and kept focusing on the Russian air strikes and incursions and how Russia was "escalating" this conflict and what not.

They're trying to paint Russia as the big, bad, Communist aggressor looking to reestablish it's old Soviet sphere of influence when really their just looking out for their own people.
95% of S. Ossetia is Russian by law and 100% of them reject being part of Georgia any time in the near future.

Georgia provoked Russia into this conflict by downing their aircraft, they got their medicine and now everyone is blaming Russia actually defending themselves?

What would you rather they did? Sat there?

Hmmm I wonder what the BBC would say if Iran shot down 2 US Fighters and then America invaded them?

Having watched Newsnight last night I have to say that it is obvious to me that the BBC is towing the party line of "Innocent Georgia, Evil Russia". The interview with Dmitri Peskov starts on 17:00 minutes, and you can see very quickly the kind of questions being directed at him are aggressive, they ignore his points, and are very much trying to paint Russia as the bad guys.

If you continue watching, you'll also get to see the Georgians playing victim.

The news media is biased against Russia? Cry me a friggin' river. The same ones complaining about this 'bias' are probably the same ones who believed every anti-US story the media has published for the last five years. Go figure.

That's no defense of Georgia or the media, mind you. I think the former largely IS at fault here and that the latter certainly IS biased in their favor. I just think its funny that people are only now complaining about media bias when the shoe is on the other foot.

reply to post by vor78

the same ones who believed every anti-US story the media has published for the last five years. Go figure.

You mean every dissenting story....

Dissent does not equal "Anti-US" Opinion/Treason or whatever Bush would like you believe it does. You can hate your government and their actions but still love your country.

Don't get confused. Just because the media criticised America's Foreign Policy and actions abroad does not mean they hate America.
They are criticising the government.

How is that Anti-American? Are they criticising your culture, the individuals that make up your nation, the clothes on your back, the language you speak, how you live your life?

I hate the Bush Administration first and foremost, I don't hate your country or the American people because they were duped and had no influence upon Bush's decisions.

To speak out against your government does not make you any less of a citizen or a patriotic individual. The Government is supposed to be criticised and scrutinised to ensure they do their job effectively.
Pointing out their errors and mistakes ensures they LEARN.
That's whole idea of Democracy.

A government for the people, by the people. If the people don't agree with their leader they should be free to point they don't.

Make the distinction please... Dissent and Anti-American, two completely different perspectives.

And with less than 1/4 of the nation still supporting Bush you can't say their not justified in criticising him.

And the media is clearly biased in this case though, you don't believe me go watch what BBC, CNN or FOX have to say about the Georgian conflict and tell me how that is an "impartial" story.

You get a clear impression from them that Russia is evil/bad/in the wrong and Georgia is completely innocent, when Georgia started this mess to begin with.

[edit on 12/8/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]

reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira


Could we not call these 'dissenting' opinions or stories about the government of Russia? Again, the shoe is simply on the other foot here, regardless of how you try to justify it. In both cases, the media is showing the same bias against both.

And yes, when I say anti-US, I'm referring to their stance on the government itself. No argument there.

reply to post by vor78

Could we not call these 'dissenting' opinions or stories about the government of Russia?

To a degree, but remember American media didn't try to block out any support of Bush or any positive commentary regarding his presidency or actions.
They didn't paint Bush in one tone alone.

You got both sides of the picture. Support/Praise as well as Criticism/Backlash, from varying sides of the political spectrum
Both were equally represented.

Here your getting one, the Georgian side.
Russia is universally in the wrong and evil in the mass media's opinion and Georgia is universally regarded as innocent and free of blame.

And there is no mention of Georgia's war crimes, Georgian aggression which initiated the hostilities or unprovoked attacks anymore at all.
Everyone is claiming Russia initiated the conflict, escalated it and now apparently want to invade Georgia.

You getting a very one-dimensional view. See the difference?
No attempt is made to even empathise with Russia's situation here, instead the media is actively trying to make Russia appear as the one in the wrong here.

And yes, when I say anti-US, I'm referring to their stance on the government itself. No argument there.

Read my edited post above.
To hate the government is not to hate the country. They are two independent entities.

If I hate the shirt your mother made you wear, does that mean I hate you?
No I hate your clothing, I don't hate you as a person because you had no influence over what you wore, hence it's not your fault.



[edit on 12/8/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]