Sunday, April 29, 2007

More MMFA dishonesty

Examples of MMFA's dishonesty:

The above post talks about Bill O'Reilly claiming that he used "facts and facts alone" in support of the Iraq War. Below are 2 examples of MMFA being dishonest when trying to attack O'Reilly's support of the war.

MMFA Distortion #1: "Prior to the invasion, O'Reilly frequently repeated the Bush administration's claim that Jordanian-born terrorist Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was evidence of a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "

Really?? Funny how I don't see a single quote/transcript/video of Bill O'Reilly citing Zarqawi-Al Qaeda-Iraq connection. All the links provided are from 2004 and 2005 AFTER the invasion. Yes, O'Reilly cited these claims after the invasion and after the credibility of them had been undermined (according to MMFA). But MMFA does not provide any transcripts showing O'Reilly using these claims pre-invasion.

MMFA Distortion #2: to O'Reilly, "they've lost billions of dollars in France according to 'The Paris Business Review.' " As Media Matters noted, a Media Matters search found no evidence of a publication called the Paris Business Review at the time.

The publication is not called "Paris Business Review" It was called the Movement of French Enterprises. CNN article which cites the exact point O'Reilly was making "Meanwhile, the Movement of French Enterprises (Medef) said some French businesses are suffering because of France's position on Iraq. " O'Reilly got the name wrong, but his point was not incorrect.


Blogger Emily Ericann said...

Will you hold Mr. O'Reilly to the same standards of honesty and journalistic excellence that you seem to be holding up for MMFA?

With all my love,
Aunty Em

4:43 PM  
Blogger Emily Ericann said...

I doubt you'll approve my comment.

With all my love,
Aunty Em

4:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You say that Media Matters was wrong, but they were not. There is no such thing as the Paris Business Review. They didn't say that there was no French publication that ever said what O'Reilly claimed was covered in the Paris Business Review. If they had said that, you'd be right. They didn't, so it is YOU who is wrong, not Media Matters!

And about Bill O'Reilly and the Zarqawi comments....
For instance, during the February 4, 2003, edition of the Factor, he asserted: "If this guy Zarqawi got injured in Afghanistan, had his leg treated in Baghdad, that's an Al Qaeda link right there."
O'Reilly praised Powell's mention of Zarqawi, stating: "You know, look, I mean if the guy's getting his leg amputated in Baghdad, you know, Saddam Hussein is going to know about it. He's an Al Qaeda big shot coming off the battlefield of Afghanistan. Yes, maybe he made a stop in Tehran, but who -- does that surprise anybody?"

Both of those items were mentioned in Media Matters story. How could you have missed them? Both of those comments were before the war began, so why would you suggest that Media Matters said that he did exactly that, but they didn't provide evidence that he did that? Are you really that ignorant, or is it that you are that biased against the truth?

11:37 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home