Images of War-Torn Middle East

I don't normally watch the news ...or tv for that matter but I do have a bad habit of looking over the WSJ headlines regularly as I'm waiting for my tea at starbucks

Okay. Since when they did start allowing posting pictures of dead people in news media?

I know what you're thinking ... "Zabrina where have you been?" But I normally try to gloss over the crazy antics on the news

I'm talking about Close up shots of dead people's faces (and even one small baby ) who died in the claimed chemical attack in Syria. Who wants to start off their day with that? Why can't they put all that repetitive %$%% in the back and start off with something Fun?

It's always the same shit. Corruption and dead people

I understand the whole point of journalism is to evoke emotion but what about all the positive news? Not as news-worthy, attention grabbing, front page material?

On a further note, I was asked once, if I thought will there ever be peace in the middle east. and i said no

Not long as poverty coexists with lack of education. (And as we have seen educational centers and students get blown up, etc etc so much for that solution)

On a funny note: Here we are in educated fairly well to do America struggling with stress, weight, depression, committing suicide and over on the other side we have innocent bystanders being murdered by dim-witted morons and people killing themselves for a bigger 'cause'

What a strange world

Back in the 80s they published pictures of dead people including children. This people were in Africa and starving to death. It sold papers and air time. They were able to blame Reagan for the drought. In the 1990s they DID NOT show pictures of the dead Rwandans. Clinton happened to be the president. Now they have to straddle. Obama has come out against Assad and the media is amping up the hatred for Assad with the pictures. I am not completely convinced this was Assad. First, the world is watching him and it would stupid to do it with the world watching. Second, if he has to do it why wasn't the target a legitimate military target instead of civilians? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Third, radical muslims have a history of causing casulities among their own people for the press to blame on their enemies.

On TV sex, violence, and death sells.
They have to be able to pay for their liberal bias someway.

I don't normally watch the news ...or tv for that matter but I do have a bad habit of looking over the WSJ headlines regularly as I'm waiting for my tea at starbucks

Okay. Since when they did start allowing posting pictures of dead people in news media?

I know what you're thinking ... "Zabrina where have you been?" But I normally try to gloss over the crazy antics on the news

I'm talking about Close up shots of dead people's faces (and even one small baby ) who died in the claimed chemical attack in Syria. Who wants to start off their day with that? Why can't they put all that repetitive %$%% in the back and start off with something Fun?

It's always the same shit. Corruption and dead people

I understand the whole point of journalism is to evoke emotion but what about all the positive news? Not as news-worthy, attention grabbing, front page material?

On a further note, I was asked once, if I thought will there ever be peace in the middle east. and i said no

Not long as poverty coexists with lack of education. (And as we have seen educational centers and students get blown up, etc etc so much for that solution)

On a funny note: Here we are in educated fairly well to do America struggling with stress, weight, depression, committing suicide and over on the other side we have innocent bystanders being murdered by dim-witted morons and people killing themselves for a bigger 'cause'

What a strange world Originally Posted by Zabrina Sarafina

It is a strange world. But lovely ladies such as yourself make it a much nicer one!

On TV sex, violence, and death sells.
They have to be able to pay for their liberal bias someway. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Just curious how does the right pay for their bias? Same pics?

By their very nature the right has rules and limtis to what they will do. That means not running pictures, though provocative, don't help advance the story.
The left has no real limits on what they want to do. It seems to be the ends justify the means (see voter fraud).

You have been sipping the cool aid too long. completely indoctrinated.

You have been sipping the cool aid too long. completely indoctrinated. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

I prefer to see what I only wish to see. It is how I create my ideal world.

Would you care for a sip of this cool aid?

I stay away from drinks and restaurant(especially in houston)... I wonder could they sue the one asking

I prefer to see what I only wish to see. It is how I create my ideal world.

Would you care for a sip of this cool aid? Originally Posted by Zabrina Sarafina

he's to stupid to know what you're asking

"""On a further note, I was asked once, if I thought will there ever be peace in the middle east. and i said no"""

You are right!

Muslims have been hacking each other [Sunni vs Shite and others] for 1400 years
President Assad is the political head of his people the Alawites- he will not give in! The Alawites know what is in store for them if they surrender just as the Jews of Israel know what is in store for them too if they surrender.

Think of the Middle East as a 'Northern Ireland' but even more so. Protestant marries a Catholic, both have got to flee

Has anyone watched Al-Jezeera news.

Has anyone watched Al-Jezeera news. Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Is that what you and Hanoi COG are watching tonight while your relaxing on y'alls cozy little love seat?

Is that what you and Hanoi COG are watching tonight while your relaxing on y'alls couch? Originally Posted by bigtex

You will be TOSSING SALAD as soon your boyfriend Yobyssis Rider gets home... I hear Italian/Vaseline is your favorite dressing...LOL

I don't normally watch the news ...or tv for that matter but I do have a bad habit of looking over the WSJ headlines regularly as I'm waiting for my tea at starbucks

Okay. Since when they did start allowing posting pictures of dead people in news media? Originally Posted by Zabrina Sarafina

By their very nature the right has rules and limtis to what they will do. That means not running pictures, though provocative, don't help advance the story.
The left has no real limits on what they want to do. It seems to be the ends justify the means (see voter fraud). Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

isn't the WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch?