I've been listening to the BBC for the past few years. Excellent source of news, especially since they frequently discuss events not with so-called "experts" on the area, but instead interview actual native experts (sometimes in English, or through a translator).

It's pretty sad when the "land of the free" has to outsource it's freedom of the press.

are americans aware of what happened in Somalia today? I mean we invaded the country not too long ago, you would think we would care about it.

TH,

Post it. Seriously, I am so tired of partisan crap. Good or bad, post what happened in Somalia today.

The fact that there is a legitimate opportunity for a foriegn paper tells all you need to know about the legitimacy of the Mainstream media.

Downing Street memos? You weren't able to read about that in the NY Times. They were too busy letting Judith Miller vomit propaganda on their print.

For the longest time now, to get at the truth, I reverse whatever message the MSM is trying to send with their "Objective" coverage.
-Saddam is an urgent threat who can have Chem or bioweapons on a missile in minutes! (Opposite true)

-Iran is a wannabe evil empire who will have nukes soon if we don't stop them. (Complete LIE, In fact the head mullah has issued a fatwah against Iran having anything to do with nuke weapons) You won't read that one in the NY Times.

And so on, With most of their coverage just reverse whatever the intended message is and you will be close to the truth.

Works with Presidential statements too!!

Hmmm, I wonder why that has never even been mentioned anywhere is MSM coverage of IRAN ?

In Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is like a combo POPE/"Decider", his statements are not just political but religous and they are the Law in IRAN.

Cool.
A real liberal media.
About time.

yup a real liberal media, werent the BBC the ones who interviewed the wrong guy live?,,,yup a good liberal media..wrong news wrong story wrong expert,,,,they should fit right in

"are americans aware of what happened in Somalia today? I mean we invaded the country not too long ago, you would think we would care about it."

I think we tend to minimize, i.e. attempt to forget, our disasters. The asskicking we got in Vietnam, for example. So Black Hawk Down is a movie, not a part of our real memory. We'll hear about Somalia again in advance of the next Bush invasion. (And remember, it was George I who put us in there, and Clinton who took the political hit.)

So Islamists now have Mogadishu - so much for the argument that there isn't a very real threat out there from radical Islam. Can't let these guys keep the city and yet the world seems uninterested which I attribute to the one invasion that was nothing but a distraction and did more to impair the US ability to lead when it counts then anything else and that of course is Iraq.

Had we never invaded a country where Saddam had Islamists in check, we could now have internationalized a force to deal with Islamist militias that cannot be allowed to succeed anywhere especially in some capital city.
Alas, we cannot do anything in Somalia but depend on Warlords who can easily be bought by any side that pays the higher price ? That's pretty scary ..

the thing that really kills me is the utter lack of coverage this is getting.

One WOULD think that a taliban like government, islamist extremists and all taking over the capital of a country we invaded 15 years ago would garner some serious attention in this day of war on terror and all, but I guess since it aint getting discussed about Iraq some backwardd ass country where the population is black and has no oil will not get any coverage.

Truth: If the Islamacists promoted gay marriage, it'd be all over the papers as an aluminum tube shaped mushroom cloud.
With the elections coming up, the MSM won't be publishing anything that questions Bush's abilities. IE. Don't expect to see the Senlis Council report on the resurgence of the taliban quoted anywhere.
""One local man said, 'We tell the invaders what they want to hear, but afterward we will kill them,' " Mr. Reinert said.

None of Helmand's 13 districts are fully controlled by the government, the report concludes. Central authority prevails during the daylight hours in Laskhar Gah, the provincial capital, but control is uncertain in 10 districts as insurgents clash with government forces. Three northern districts are entirely controlled by insurgents."

You lefties ought to love the fact that AQ has a base in Somalia, its our fault they have to behead folks any way right.

"You lefties ought to love the fact that AQ has a base in Somalia, its our fault they have to behead folks any way right."

Durr, really? Then I guess you're formulating a plan to drive them out of Somalia and to capture their leaders by invading Libya. After all, Khadaffi caused us problems a few decades back so he has to be tied into this somehow, right?

hmmm Somalia no oil, Lybia oil, hmmmmmmmm

truthhurts
we did not invade somolia we were there to
on a humanitarian mission(Feedin the starvin) on un request the problem arose when mid mission we turned to nation buildin
jasman

you mean mission creep, say it aint so.

{{{{COUGH}}}}{{{{COUGH}}}}
{{{IRAQWMD}}}{{{COUGH}}}}
{{{{COUGH}}}}

truthhurts
it's what closet call the fiction of war
jasman

TH, Ahab, Jeff-

I'm not sure what newspapers you guys are reading, but there were full page articles about the Islamist takeover in Somalia in the LA Times Front Section yesterday and today, as in the Chicago Tribune and the NY Times. The AP, Reuters and DJNS websites also lead with articles about this.

Don't confuse coverage with outrage.

You lefties ought to love the fact that AQ has a base in Somalia, its our fault they have to behead folks any way right

( actually, they learned that from our bestest buddies, the saudistanis. Why do you think Bush holds their hands?)

Sad part is, they probably know we don't have a C-inC or Sect'y of Defense who can take them on. They're too busy helping create al queda training camps in Iraq.
Of course, if somebody heading the world's only hyper-power had maybe done something about al queda instead of investing all those resources in Iraq oil futures, things would be different.
But JMFJ, you can rest assured that there will be no gay marriages in Somolia, and, after all, that's more important than a war on terror.
Bush : Leaving no failure behind.

ahab- take a walk back in time and look at the political failure that was Clintons policy on Somalia. Then try, just try- to put the blame where it belongs! That COWARD sent our men to do a job and wasn't willing to let them do it right. Then when we were put in the situation where our brave men were alone in Hell because he wouldn't listen to his advisors on a good battle plan, he tucked tail and ran. Then for good measure he turned his back on 12 a million people in Rwanda and the world. Just because he got caught with his pecker in the wrong woman's oral cavity!!!
Take that hate mongering B.S. somewhere and study your history

Th- your hero clinton let the warlords take over. My question is when will you lefties point the finger to him? Never probably. But like my momma said, " When you point your finger at someone else, just know you got 3 more pointing right back at you."
But since Clintstoners failure is now Bush's problem, point away.

When you think of the attack in Mogadishu, you need to know we lost 19 brave soldiers. But we took out over a thousand militants. That was before Clintstoner stepped on and dragged us out with his tail between his legs. Who would you be blaming if Clintstoner moved on aq after they bombed the WTC on his watch? Nevermind that's a loaded question. He was too much of a coward to stand up to anyone. How many times were we attacked on His shift??? huh, huh, huh???

first of all clinton is not my hero.

second our policies in Somalia during the 90's were bad

thirdly shania you need a history lesson bush 1 put us in Somalia

4thly the state of Somalia is a result of Clinton and Bush 2's failures.

5thly Somalia IS a statement on Bush's war on "terror" and its basic failings.