You want real bias? How about the fact that the mainstream media plays along with the lie that we are attacked because of our freedoms and not because of what we do?
HERE is a real example of chopping a sentence in half (in order to avoid stating the motives): Tenet refers to the February 1998 fatwa and chops off the part of the sentence that mentions the MOTIVES.
Tim Russert is another one that has the audacity to hide the motives. On "Meet the Press", Russert claims that simply stating the motives is "quite controversial" and he has the balls to ask Pat Buchanan, "Are you suggesting that our alliance with Israel is one of the reasons that we were attacked on September 11?"
"Is he suggesting"!?!?!? It is the main motive, it is a fact! The 9/11 Commission just recently confirmed that for God Sakes!
Nearly all of the media suppressed that fact, here is a RARE exception:
U.S. policy on Israel key motive "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, said the final report of the Sept. 11 commission."
A note about this: When Terry McDermott's Jul 23, 2004 article was published in the LA Times, it didn't have the headline "U.S. policy on Israel key motive". Seems only the Lexington Herald-Leader dared go with a headline that reflected the main point: the motive for the crime. The headline in the LA Times was instead, "New Plot Details Emerge; Khalid Shaikh Mohammed lacked the resources, so he took his plan to Bin Laden." This is a case of burying the lede. The lede from the LA Times article (the first paragraph) was: "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, according to the final report of the Sept. 11 commission." Tharwa Net-Watch
You want to talk about bias, how about the media's game of trying to deceive the American people about why their lives are in harms' way? Why not talk about that bias?
This blogger noticed Russert's game too. "Tim was aghast at Pat’s clear, concise and, god forbid, factual assessment. ... Well, you can’t argue facts, can you? Oh, if you’re a pundit, you can. Russert turned to the aptly-named Newt Gingrich to comment on this “THEORY.”" It Takes A Hurricane…
Here is the key part of "NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS." Transcript for September 5:
MR. RUSSERT: Pat Buchanan, let me just jump in here, because you...
MR. BUCHANAN: Sure.
MR. RUSSERT: ...have written something in your book that I think is going to be quite controversial and I want to put it on the screen and share it...
MR. BUCHANAN: Sure.
MR. RUSSERT: ...with you and our viewers and give a chance for our group to respond to it. "U.S. dominance of the Middle East is not the corrective to terror. It is a cause of terror. Were were not over there, the 9/11 terrorists would not have been over here. And while their acts were murderous and despicable, behind their atrocities lay a political motive. We were attacked because of our imperial presence on the sacred soil of the land of Mecca and Medina, because of our enemies' perception that we were strangling the Iraqi people with sanctions and preparing to attack a second time, and because of our uncritical support of the Likud regime of Ariel Sharon" in Israel.
Are you suggesting that our alliance with Israel is one of the reasons that we were attacked on September 11?
MR. BUCHANAN: Sure. That's one of the reasons given by Osama bin Laden. In his fatwa of 1998, he wrote that there are three causes of the problems and three causes for a declaration of war by all Arabs and good Muslims against the United States. One, America's imperial presence on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia. Secondly, the sanctions policy against Iraq which was persecuting and basically starving, he said, the Iraqi people, and we were planning another invasion. Third is the United States' uncritical support of the Ariel Sharon regime in Israel, which he argued is persecuting the Palestinian people.
In my judgment, Chris, this one-sided support for Sharon, the refusal to condemn that wall snaking through the West Bank, the agreement to support Sharon's claim to virtually half of the West Bank, this has caused enormous hostility and animosity and hatred for this country in that part of the world, not just among the Palestinians. And if we want to drain off some of this hatred, this venom against us, we have got to adopt a more evenhanded policy here. We have got to stand up for the same rights for the Palestinian people, a homeland, a nation, a state of their own, a viable one, on the land their forefathers farmed for a thousand years, because those are first our principles and secondly, that is in the national interest of the United States of America. I don't care what Ariel Sharon believes.
MR. RUSSERT: They are not attacking us because they hate us and hate our culture?
MR. BUCHANAN: This is the fundamental point. Are they attacking us because of who we are and what they believe or are they attacking us because of what we do? I believe it is our policies, not our principles that are causing these attacks. Osama bin Laden wasn't sitting in some cave in Afghanistan and stumble on the Bill of Rights and go bananas. It is because of what we are doing. Most fundamentally, it wasn't Israel number one. Number one, Saudi Arabia, female soldiers, American soldiers sitting there on the land of Mecca and Medina.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Graham, you buy that theory?
SEN. GRAHAM: I think that our policies have been the key to the terrorist motivation. In the book, you'll see several discussions with leaders in Egypt and Syria and Lebanon, and they all point to the urgency of the United States being fully engaged with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to try to bring it to a resolution and a concern that President Bush has not been significantly committed to achieving that goal.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Speaker, what do you think of the theory?
Damn it Russert! The cat is out of the bag and you are still holding water for certain special interests. How dare this asshole act like these facts are shocking, how dare he act so surprised. "Theory"? Listen Russert, others have already stuck their necks out by telling the truth about the 9/11 motives, how about acting like a man? Terry McDermott of the LOS ANGELES TIMES stuck his neck out and published the facts. The facts have been known for quit some time, why the **** is Russert acting like this is so increadible?
See the posts from June 22, 2005: We were attacked by Al-Qaeda because of specific US Foreign Polices and The man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel
See the suppression: The Gorilla in the Room is US Support for Israel.
See: "If you ask anybody," Murad said later, "even if you ask children, they will tell you that the U.S. is supporting Israel and Israel is killing our Muslim brothers in Palestine."