U.S. troops on a mission to save sick iraqi baby

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/conditions/12/28/iraq.spinabifida/index.html
thats one of the top stories on cnn, wonder why?
babies born with spina bofida in america are generally ignored by the government along with everyone else who isnt wealthy and powerful.


not a single article on the front page concerning the iraqi election scandal.

and funny how theres no articles on the babies that the troops have been shooting. one freaking baby gets the top story? ahaha... go fuck yourselves, america.

 

But then if it didn't you'd be bitching about that..

 

?

 

In other words, no matter what the US does you'll find something wrong with it to bitch about.

 

I was about to post the article as an example of a GOOD thing our soldiers are doing over there. I am glad that it made the news. They are hopefully going to save this baby, a baby that would have died without them. This story touched my heart.

 

Oh for crying out loud. Don't be a fool. The US has enough money to pay for the surgeries of all the babies on the planet with spina bifida. And feed all the starving children. And dig wells in countries where children are getting systemic worms. Instead? We fly around the planet slaughtering tens of thousands of people.

If it makes you feel better that this good act happened, knock yourself out, but don't be fooled into thinking that this makes up for one iota of the misery the US government is causing with its twisted military and economic policies all over the world.

 

Yeh right..Bush and company really care about babys

 

Did you do that Pic' yourself ?... shucks that kinda erm ??? missing the point.

I think this thread is about what a group of SOLDIERS decieded to do.. not what BUSH and CO decieded to do.

Not at that particular moment.. but if you click on the 'special report' then on the HEADLINES you will find
Iraqi protests continue in Kirkuk

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/29/iraq.protest/index.html there is a story there now..plus this has been internet 'headline' news for quite some time [relatively speaking]. http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050725fa_fact
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/KAR350618.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-12-20-iraq_x.htm

even

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180067,00.html

I appreciate some are post your erm post soulrebel51..but even so i think it was not missed by the media [you just never looked hard enough ].

Not something along the lines 'Bush runs the media''.. he must have not been in full control recently then.. i'll write a stern letter too CNN and Fox news

 

Hmmm...so now we have to click on special reports to get relevant news huh?..sorry, in the future we'll look a little harder for THE TRUTH ABOUT BUSHES WAR CRIMES..our mistake. (yeh right, Bush didn't buy the media) they just hid the headines in "special reports by accident.
Oh seeings how you like my pic so much..here's another one you might relate to.

 

so you think everybody should be quiet?

i really dont see why it matters... one baby saved by the troops compared to the hundreds of thousands killed by the troops.... they deserve to be spit on, have poo chucked at them, and have their houses burnt down upon their return.

i was looking at cnn... at the time, they had this baby as the 2nd most important story while there were no other stories that dealt with anything going on in iraq.

exactly.

 

Yes sometimes ... just like soulrebel51 had too.

It was not headline news that day.. or that hour.. Headlines change .

At : 9:31 a.m. EST (14:31 GMT), December 30, 2005

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

Poll: First lady embraced, president not

Nearly three-quarters have a favorable opinion of Laura Bush


happened to be 1

On the main homepage:

Fireworks, weather fears for blaze-hit states


happened to be the headline news..
Soulrebel51 had to actively look into the HEALTH section on CNN... so yeah [again] you do have to 'look hard' but not that hard.

How long did it take you find that 'special report' it took me about 30 seconds..

I am not trying to be sarcastic or a ''Bush/Blair loving'' *whatever you wish to add*.. just that:

The notion [well one of them] of this thread is:

''thats one of the top stories on cnn, wonder why?''

erm well obviously not the reasons that is being implied [and you seem to share] ... don't you/can't you aknowledge that [at least] ?.

nice pic' the one where he looks like a monkey would have been better..[now that WAS sarcasm] apologies..

 

They could have let that baby die, but chose to help it instead. It is a touching story, and I said so. Doesn't mean I'm jumping around going "yay, our soldiers are in Iraq!" but I am happy to see that a group of soldiers have chosen to do a little humanitarian work.

Is murder and mayhem all you guys want to see in the news? Is it gonna kill us to read something a little uplifting once in a while?

 

You had to look in the HEALTH section.. If you looked within other parts of the site..you could have been overwhelmed with info on iraq. You can claim CNN don't have headlines/storys about iraq.. This is not true though.. Like i said you just have to look. It can't have everything you wish as front page headline news at every moment you wish..and to ignore the fact they have the storys you wish ..is a bit odd.

Coincidently as i type this is the HEADLINE on the MAIN homepage..

CNN international has something else on the front page [some more good news: about the freed English hostages] http://edition.cnn.com/#asplode .. No doubt something else when you read it... on that site the baby story is 'hidden' .

It is just some good news...what is wrong with that ?.

Next time i notice a headline i don't like.. i will make a song and dance about it also..claiming a cabalistic conspiracy with George galloway and Cindy sheehan as it's figure heads..but thats ridiculous you may say.. you bet it is. .

Oh and my name is Matthew not Michael.. i only just noticed..

 

no i didnt. it was the 1st story to the right of the main headline at the time.

at the time, the only article that was remotely related to iraq on the front page was the baby story.

there was NOTHING about iraq on the front page at the time. NOTHING. there may be now... i decided to check after reading a thread in here, "have you noticed the lack of news coverage lately?" or something like that. i went to go look for myself and that thread couldnt have been anymore right on.

that is all the troops ever get, good news. like they deserve it

sorry

 

apart from the few troops at abu-grahib, troops have received nothing but good publicity in the mainstream media. whatever good deeds they do should go unrecognized... people are just pussies and too concerned about PC nowadays.

 

i think a lot of the post was directed at biased news reporting

 

Fair enough

I dunno about when you look but everytime i look their is something about Iraq , maybe not on the headlines [but so what]... their IS always news

Just LOOK it won't ALWAYS be on the front page.. but it has a whole section http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/archive/ for crying out load
How many storys do you want ????

What a load of bollocks.. pardon me.. but that is... a load of bollocks.

It's alright Skip..

 

The lack of news about iraq i reckon..wich imho he is wrong.
The possibility that Bush has a hand in CNN not having Iraq as it's No. 1 headline all day everyday.. well if you go to the right section.. thats what you can get.


I guess biased reporting as well... but i think thats a matter of perspective.

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/archive/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180282,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2002/conflict_with_iraq/default.stm


nope no news about Iraq

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180282,00.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/31/international/middleeast/31iraq.html?hp&ex=1136005200&en=9a7b677d1476eda5&ei=5094&partner=homepage

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/30/AR2005123001307.html

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L2913729.htm