Lies? On MY Fox? It's more likely than you might think

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Melissia**

Frazzled wrote:In Stalinist Russia, 120% counts YOU!

Oh, but they do!

What did the party in power get there, 140% of the vote or something?

I think Fox is taking lessons from the ex-communists.

**sebster**

frgsinwntr wrote:Thats a skill they've mastered... getting peolple to believe lies without saying them

The classic trick is to have one of the pundits comes out and makes some wild claim, like that climate change scientists have been engaged in trickery. It doesn't have to be true, it doesn't even have to be the kind of thing that can be true or false, it's just opinion. Then the news service picks it up, reporting that there have been lots of talk about trickery in the media, maybe even using the clip from the pundit. The pundit uses the report on the news to back up his claim, it was on real actual news so it must be have some basis in reality. Then the next the news reports on a survey that says lots of people believe it (even if its just a FOX news poll). Then the pundit reports on that to back up his claim, and soon enough you've got an invented factoid out there in the real world.

It'd be a comically stupid two card trick, except that other news carriers will often pick up on the nonsense, happy to cover anything that's contraversial, even if its silly. This allows FOX to avoid looking like they're just reporting on themselves, as they can use select pieces from other media to break up the information loop.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

frgsinwntr wrote:
Frazzled wrote:In Stalinist Russia, 120% counts YOU!

Don't tell the 99%ers

I went to college, came out and couldn't get a job. I work 93 hours week, and get paid $17. I juggle my bills every month to avoid being evicted, or having my utilities cut off. I am the 109%.

**Kilkrazy**

http://flowingdata.com/2011/12/12/fox-news-still-makes-awesome-charts/

**olympia**

Kilkrazy wrote:http://flowingdata.com/2011/12/12/fox-news-still-makes-awesome-charts/

You can't make this gak up. Fox has become a parody.

**Monster Rain**

A Fox News thread?

Has it been a week already since the last one? How the time does fly.

**Frazzled**

Monster Rain wrote:A Fox News thread?

Has it been a week already since the last one? How the time does fly.

No its the same thread.

**Monster Rain**

You'd think so.

**Jihadin**

still waiting for the malmedy one to pop up

**Frazzled**

Que?

**Jihadin**

Que? I'm not french...whats "Que"?

actually Fox lies bit on O'Rielly bolo on Malmedy issue with the generals

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:Que? I'm not french...whats "Que"?

actually Fox lies bit on O'Rielly bolo on Malmedy issue with the generals

Spanish actually as in "what?"

**Jihadin**

I'm not spanish either or latino...not native amercan...not a drop of hispanic blood in me...and if you think I'm mexican then I will tell you I'm from a town outside Madrid, Spain 20 klicks away name El'Narnia

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:I'm not spanish either or latino...not native amercan...not a drop of hispanic blood in me...and if you think I'm mexican then I will tell you I'm from a town outside Madrid, Spain 20 klicks away name El'Narnia

Thats great. I'm from Texas. Que is as natural dos tequilas!

**Jihadin**

Yepper and thats a picture of me...as my Stryker being loaded into a AN124. Whats left of my Stryker

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:Yepper and thats a picture of me...as my Stryker being loaded into a AN124. Whats left of my Stryker

AS the Wife would say "aw he's just a little baby, you're so cute, yes you ah!"

**Jihadin**

41 actually but enougth sun, sand blasting and lack of real food will make you slim and trim and 20 yrs younger looking

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:41 actually but enougth sun, sand blasting and lack of real food will make you slim and trim and 20 yrs younger looking

Er..she'd still call you a youngin...

**Jihadin**

no silver/gray hair...all my original teeth minus wisdom....I'm 21 then...any younger I can't go out drinking...eventually I go out...just right now I profile people

**WARORK93**

.

**alarmingrick**

Jihadin wrote:still waiting for the malmedy one to pop up

Not sure what you mean by this? Clearly you're referring to me since i brought it up before.
Are you saying a standing lie shouldn't be exposed, or we didn't cover it enough? I certainly
stand behind my charge about American heros being defamed and slandered. the proof is there.
Don't be shy if you're trying to say something.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

WARORK93 wrote:This is becoming ridiculous, I watch CNN and people tell me "dont watch that, its not real news" Then I watch FOX and they same the same thing...

Where the feth am I supposed to get news from?

Well, it's never a good sign for someone to say "tell me what to believe".
You'll have to decide for yourself who/what is the best source for you. facts
are easy enough to check. if you keep finding one source is inaccurate, i'd change.

**Kilkrazy**

WARORK93 wrote:This is becoming ridiculous, I watch CNN and people tell me "dont watch that, its not real news" Then I watch FOX and they same the same thing...

Where the feth am I supposed to get news from?

BBC Radio 4.

More seriously, you can watch a variety of sources and compare the differences between them.

Al Jazeera is worth a look, for example, as an alternative to native US channels.

You can also do your own research using resources such as the WHO, CIA Factbook and so on.

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:
WARORK93 wrote:This is becoming ridiculous, I watch CNN and people tell me "dont watch that, its not real news" Then I watch FOX and they same the same thing...

Where the feth am I supposed to get news from?

BBC Radio 4.

Of course not. Pravda, its the only way to be sure.

**WARORK93**

.

**Kilkrazy**

Some people think Al Jazeera or CNN are rubbish.

**olympia**

I prefer Le Monde diplomatique

**Mannahnin**

BBC, Le Monde, NPR, Deutsche Welle. Most of the American news channels have a perspective/some degree of bias, but if you read/listen to the same story from more than one of them, you can usually balance it out and cancel most of the spin. News organizations with the kind of organized and deliberately political and deceitful agenda that Fox News has are thankfully rare.

**Frazzled**

Mannahnin wrote:BBC, Le Monde, NPR, Deutsche Welle. Most of the American news channels have a perspective/some degree of bias, but if you read/listen to the same story from more than one of them, you can usually balance it out and cancel most of the spin. News organizations with the kind of organized and deliberately political and deceitful agenda that Fox News has are thankfully rare.

This except layer in CNN. Disocunt MSNBC altogether. Add in the Wall Street Journal and Financial Times.

**Melissia**

I would add in the economist, as sure they're biased (towards free trade and other libertarian ideals), but they're not so extremely so as some other mags.

Though the economist was originally british, wasn't it?

**Jihadin**

NCOPD class was on professionalism and self control in a conflict. So when this was brought up imagine our suprise.

Besides I refered to it twice and also mention O'Rielly should have brushed up on it some more

On December 17, 1944, during the Battle of the Bulge, German Waffen-SS troops murdered American prisoners in the Malmedy massacre. Word of this spread rapidly among American forces[1], and caused great anger. One American unit issued orders that, "No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoners but will be shot on sight."[2] In this atmosphere there are claims that American forces murdered German prisoners as retribution.

Author Martin Sorge writes, "It was in the wake of the Malmedy incident at Chegnogne that on New Year's Day 1945 some 60 German POWs were shot in cold blood by their American guards. The guilty went unpunished. It was felt that the basis for their action was orders that no prisoners were to be taken."[3][4] An eyewitness account by John Fague of B Company, 21st Armored Infantry Battalion (of the 11th Armored Division), of battle near Chenogne describes the killing of German prisoners by American soldiers. "Some of the boys had some prisoners line up. I knew they were going to shoot them, and I hated this business.... They marched the prisoners back up the hill to murder them with the rest of the prisoners we had secured that morning.... As we were going up the hill out of town, I know some of our boys were lining up German prisoners in the fields on both sides of the road. There must have been 25 or 30 German boys in each group. Machine guns were being set up. These boys were to be machine gunned and murdered. We were committing the same crimes we were now accusing the Japs and Germans of doing."[5]

Another witness, Burnett Miller, expressed doubt that the number killed reached 60. Miller writes: "I am not clear on the exact number of victims of this crime. It seems to me that twenty five seems reasonable and I do not recall as many as forty...On the day that the prisoners were shot, some were taken for interrogation as I remember several days later quite a few were turned over to intelligence who were desperate for information."[6] Joseph Cummins also relates the account by Fague regarding the killing of roughly 60 prisoners, but also notes that before the execution of the POWs took place, several Germans including medics waving red-cross flags, were machine-gunned when trying to surrender.[7] Cummins further connects the massacre with the entry made by General Patton in his diary for January 4, 1945: "The Eleventh Armored is very green and took unnecessary losses to no effect. There were also some unfortunate incidents in the shooting of prisoners. I hope we can conceal this."[7]

On the other hand, an official history published by the United States government states that while "it is probable that Germans who attempted to surrender in the days immediately after the 17th ran a greater risk" of being killed than earlier in the year, even so, "there is no evidence... that American troops took advantage of orders, implicit or explicit, to kill their SS prisoners."[2] However, according to George Henry Bennett and referring to the above statement; "The caveat is a little disingenuous", and he proceeds to note that it is likely that the orders to commit murder (given to the 328th Infantry regiment) were carried out, and that other US regiments were likely also given similar orders.[8]

**alarmingrick**

Jihadin wrote:NCOPD class was on professionalism and self control in a conflict. So when this was brought up imagine our suprise.

Besides I refered to it twice and also mention O'Rielly should have brushed up on it some more

On December 17, 1944, during the Battle of the Bulge, German Waffen-SS troops murdered American prisoners in the Malmedy massacre. Word of this spread rapidly among American forces[1], and caused great anger. One American unit issued orders that, "No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoners but will be shot on sight."[2] In this atmosphere there are claims that American forces murdered German prisoners as retribution.

Author Martin Sorge writes, "It was in the wake of the Malmedy incident at Chegnogne that on New Year's Day 1945 some 60 German POWs were shot in cold blood by their American guards. The guilty went unpunished. It was felt that the basis for their action was orders that no prisoners were to be taken."[3][4] An eyewitness account by John Fague of B Company, 21st Armored Infantry Battalion (of the 11th Armored Division), of battle near Chenogne describes the killing of German prisoners by American soldiers. "Some of the boys had some prisoners line up. I knew they were going to shoot them, and I hated this business.... They marched the prisoners back up the hill to murder them with the rest of the prisoners we had secured that morning.... As we were going up the hill out of town, I know some of our boys were lining up German prisoners in the fields on both sides of the road. There must have been 25 or 30 German boys in each group. Machine guns were being set up. These boys were to be machine gunned and murdered. We were committing the same crimes we were now accusing the Japs and Germans of doing."[5]

Another witness, Burnett Miller, expressed doubt that the number killed reached 60. Miller writes: "I am not clear on the exact number of victims of this crime. It seems to me that twenty five seems reasonable and I do not recall as many as forty...On the day that the prisoners were shot, some were taken for interrogation as I remember several days later quite a few were turned over to intelligence who were desperate for information."[6] Joseph Cummins also relates the account by Fague regarding the killing of roughly 60 prisoners, but also notes that before the execution of the POWs took place, several Germans including medics waving red-cross flags, were machine-gunned when trying to surrender.[7] Cummins further connects the massacre with the entry made by General Patton in his diary for January 4, 1945: "The Eleventh Armored is very green and took unnecessary losses to no effect. There were also some unfortunate incidents in the shooting of prisoners. I hope we can conceal this."[7]

On the other hand, an official history published by the United States government states that while "it is probable that Germans who attempted to surrender in the days immediately after the 17th ran a greater risk" of being killed than earlier in the year, even so, "there is no evidence... that American troops took advantage of orders, implicit or explicit, to kill their SS prisoners."[2] However, according to George Henry Bennett and referring to the above statement; "The caveat is a little disingenuous", and he proceeds to note that it is likely that the orders to commit murder (given to the 328th Infantry regiment) were carried out, and that other US regiments were likely also given similar orders.[8]

Cool story Bro. Still doesn't change the Fox lie though.