PDA

View Full Version : FOX takes Prez to task for 90% claim


Rivers
04-17-2009, 2:34 PM
FINALLY! Just heard on Fox News. Fox actually takes on the Obama admin, including BO, Hillary and Diane, and openly disputes the "90% USA weapons in Mexico." Fox calls that number "misleading" and clearly states that the Obama administration is not being truthful by using that highly inflated 90% number!

Warhawk014
04-17-2009, 2:41 PM
good for them, im glad a major media outlet is challenging these BS numbers being touted around by politicians

fairfaxjim
04-17-2009, 2:42 PM
FINALLY! Just heard on Fox News. Fox actually takes on the Obama admin, including BO, Hillary and Diane, and openly disputes the "90% USA weapons in Mexico." Fox calls that number "misleading" and clearly states that the Obama administration is not being truthful by using that highly inflated 90% number!

What's actually more amazing is how many news networks have chosen to go with the 90% lie to purposely spread the FUD! If you repeat it often enough, it must be true!!

SKSer
04-17-2009, 2:50 PM
good for them, im glad a major media outlet is challenging these BS numbers being touted around by politicians

Amen to that, I think Fox is about the only major media outlet that reports un-biased news anymore.

junker87
04-17-2009, 3:06 PM
Linky?

Who was it?

I was so disappointed in Greta, she repeated the liberals' 90% claim without doing her own research.

natedogg1777
04-17-2009, 3:10 PM
Linky?

Who was it?

I was so disappointed in Greta, she repeated the liberals' 90% claim without doing her own research.

Same here...although I'm not a big fan of Greta most of the time anyways. You could tell she had zero knowledge regarding this FUD, and was clueless as to what questions to ask.

flameboy
04-17-2009, 3:24 PM
Amen to that, I think Fox is about the only major media outlet that reports un-biased news anymore.

Let's not kid ourselves... Fox is owned by the Republicans and NBC is owned by the Dems. There is no "un-biased new source", it's all just political posturing. :ack2:

jdberger
04-17-2009, 3:27 PM
No one wants to do their own research. When asked where they get that number, they all reply "Mexican officials and DHS".

Hmmm...Think it might be in the interest of the Mexican government to blame someone else for their endemic corruption? Nah...

And DHS is using ATF's numbers which apply to serial numbered guns where traces were requested. Those numbers, being a small subset of what Mexican authorities have seized and recovered come to something like 17%. (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=173867) That's a far cry from 90%, ain't it?

Reporters don't work anymore. It's too hard. They just regurgitate press releases.

jdberger
04-17-2009, 3:29 PM
Let's not kid ourselves... Fox is owned by the Republicans and NBC is owned by the Dems. There is no "un-biased new source", it's all just political posturing. :ack2:

Not Fox's written division. If anything, they slant a bit left.

Do some reading. You decide. :D

(FYI - Fox is owned by an Australian. He's neither Dem or Republican.)

yellowfin
04-17-2009, 3:39 PM
Here's an easy question: which side of the 2A debate spends time and effort cultivating journalism students?

flameboy
04-17-2009, 3:49 PM
Not Fox's written division. If anything, they slant a bit left.

Do some reading. You decide. :D

(FYI - Fox is owned by an Australian. He's neither Dem or Republican.)

Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch, he was born in Australia but he transcends all nations as he is a global mega billionaire.

He has personally admitted "trying" to shape opinion about the war in Iraq. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF9HpuZm6-g#t=0m44s) If "trying" to publicly "shape opinion" is not bias, what is?

Now I am not saying that I disagree with Fox viewpoints, but I think it would be harmful to mistakenly believe they are "unbiased". We need to acknowledge that Fox is pushing a conservative agenda just as NBC is pushing a liberal agenda. This happened as a byproduct of advertiser-driven media because people want their views reinforced and advertisers need ratings.

Clearly, Fox News is the network that is protecting our 2A rights and they deserve credit for that. But let's not be ambiguous: media has been polarized politically and that's the reality of it. :(

1859sharps
04-17-2009, 3:52 PM
Amen to that, I think Fox is about the only major media outlet that reports un-biased news anymore.

Don't kid your self about fox being un-biased. They are just biased in the opposite direction as the CNN, msnbc, nbc, abc, cbs, and so on.

Which in it's self is ok, so long as you understand the bias. providing a counter view point, even a biased one is better then the other news companies being the only voice.

jdberger
04-17-2009, 4:01 PM
Again - don't confuse the Fox you see on TV with the FOX you see in print.

MudCamper
04-17-2009, 4:24 PM
Amen to that, I think Fox is about the only major media outlet that reports un-biased news anymore.

That's funny. Fox is the MOST bias news on TV IMO. It's just that they happen to agree with us on gun rights. FOX is way further to the right then the other stations are to the left.

Hoop
04-17-2009, 4:30 PM
Which in it's self is ok, so long as you understand the bias. providing a counter view point, even a biased one is better then the other news companies being the only voice.

Exactly - that's also the "old" reporters whined about how there was "too much media" awhile back. They lost their monopoly.

Hoop
04-17-2009, 4:31 PM
That's funny. Fox is the MOST bias news on TV IMO. It's just that they happen to agree with us on gun rights. FOX is way further to the right then the other stations are to the left.

That's highly debatable. From where I sit, Fox is center-right while CNN is center-left and MSNBC is pretty far left.

hoffman259
04-17-2009, 4:41 PM
That's funny. Fox is the MOST bias news on TV IMO. It's just that they happen to agree with us on gun rights. FOX is way further to the right then the other stations are to the left.

I disagree. While Fox does lean to the right especially Fox News Channel, MSNBC is by far the worst. The one thing that comes to mind is the election coverage. While I do watch Fox if I do watch the TV for news, all of the major media outlets need to start researching and giving facts on their stories before they make a story.

Nanook
04-17-2009, 5:15 PM
This takes away 10% of the sting of them canceling Firefly.

SKSer
04-17-2009, 5:23 PM
That's highly debatable. From where I sit, Fox is center-right while CNN is center-left and MSNBC is pretty far left.

I agree, I think they lean just a little right not too bad though.

Dark Paladin
04-17-2009, 5:29 PM
This takes away 10% of the sting of them canceling Firefly.

I disagree. And they still have yet to make up for Space Above and Beyond. :mad:

Rivers
04-17-2009, 9:18 PM
Sorry for the delay in posting this after starting the thread. I had some lanes reserved at the range where I introduced TWO new shooters! They had a great time, we killed a lot of paper and not a single hanger, and I can actually shoot decently left-handed. This was a great day! Anyway:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517026,00.html

Hoop
04-17-2009, 9:31 PM
This takes away 10% of the sting of them canceling Firefly.

1.5%

wildhawker
04-17-2009, 10:15 PM
That's funny. Fox is the MOST bias news on TV IMO. It's just that they happen to agree with us on gun rights. FOX is way further to the right then the other stations are to the left.

Boy, I sure was sick to my stomach listening to all those Fox reporters call us '*********s'... :rolleyes:

N6ATF
04-17-2009, 10:25 PM
:dupe: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=2260050

TheBundo
04-17-2009, 11:46 PM
Here are the facts, as I understand them. The 90% is the number of TRACEABLE weapons that come from the USA. The 90% also is only about 17% of the TOTAL weapons seized. Hence, 100% of the TRACEABLE weapons is only about 19% of the total. The other 81% aren't traceable to ANYWHERE, but may come from further south, Africa, Cuba, Venezula, North Korea, who knows where. Basically anywhere that wants to destabalize North America, and hence the USA. They are getting a lot of help from the Skinny Guy

highpowermatch
04-18-2009, 6:28 AM
Hello TheBundo, I have read this before and cant find it for reference. Have many ultra libs in my life who keep spewing the 90% as fact and I need to have some backing. Can you post you're source? Thanks!

Can'thavenuthingood
04-18-2009, 6:41 AM
Hello TheBundo, I have read this before and cant find it for reference. Have many ultra libs in my life who keep spewing the 90% as fact and I need to have some backing. Can you post you're source? Thanks!


In the news article at the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA), a non government organization (NGO) they are using a paper by the Brady bunch to put forth the 90% argument as official.
http://www.iansa.org/

The paper is here dtd March 2009
Exporting Gun Violence
http://www.bradycenter.org/xshare/pd...n-violence.pdf (http://www.bradycenter.org/xshare/pdf/reports/exporting-gun-violence.pdf)

The papers references siting the 90%
2 Dane Schiller & Dudley Althaus, Guns sold here kill in Mexico, HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Nov. 30, 2008
(90%);

U.S. DEPT. OF STATE, BUREAU FOR INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AFFAIRS,
International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Vol. 1, Drug and Chemical Control 414 (Mar. 2009)
(95%);

John Asbury, Guns move south via Inland gangs, THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE, Sept. 28, 2008 (95%)

Manuel Roig-Franzia, U.S. guns behind cartel killings in Mexico, WASHINGTON POST, Oct. 29, 2007, at A1
(100%).

By the way the article says "It is estimated that around 2000 weapons per day are flowing from the US into Mexico".

So any news you read utilizing IANSA as a reference is highly suspect, to use kind words. These are the types of outfits that the media uses as source's for their stories. Its quick access and easy to reference if need be. Add in they are taught this at the schools of journalism, my suspician not based on fact, and its a built in bias.

How is IANSA funded? (Cut & pasted from IANSA's site) (http://www.iansa.org/about.htm)

IANSA’s work has been supported by funders including the Governments of UK, Belgium, Sweden and Norway, as well as the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Compton Foundation, Ploughshares Fund, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Open Society Institute, Samuel Rubin Foundation and Christian Aid.


http://www.iansa.org/un/index.htm
http://www.iansa.org/images/front-page/un-gun-sculpture-IANSA.jpg
Outside the UN Secretariat in New York © Laura Cheeseman


Vick

B Strong
04-18-2009, 6:42 AM
You want to know why so many people buy the 90% lie?

Most people have no understanding or knowledge of commerce, they have no knowledge of political reality outside the US (and little understanding of what goes on here) and they know absolutely -zero- about the international arms trade.

Trying to explain to one of these types that outside of America, military weapons are cheap and easily available cash and carry makes their eyes roll up in their head.

Can'thavenuthingood
04-18-2009, 6:52 AM
FOX news did the digging, this is followup by Townhall.com

http://townhall.com/news/religion/2009/04/03/first-person_mexico,_us_guns_and_the_medias_90_percent_m yth












FIRST-PERSON: Mexico, U.S. guns and the media's 90 percent myth
Baptist Press
Friday, April 03, 2009
ALEXANDRIA, La. (BP)--"When all you have is a hammer," so goes an old saying, "everything looks like a nail." Likewise, when you are committed to a bias you try every way possible to support it.A recent statement by William Hoover, assistant director for field operations at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, is being used by those who seemingly have a bias against guns and gun ownership.
Hoover testified in the House of Representatives that "there is more than enough evidence to indicate that over 90 percent of the firearms that have either been recovered in, or interdicted in transport to Mexico, originated from various sources within the United States.
Even though the statement is misleading, media outlets and some politicians seized on Hoover's claim and began to shout it from sea to shining sea.
"U.S. Guns Arming Mexican Drug Gangs; Second Amendment to Blame?" is how ABCnews.com heralded the news.
The New York Times was a bit bolder declaring in a headline, "U.S. Is Arms Bazaar for Mexican Cartels."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton followed the media's lead and repeated the 90 percent figure to reporters on a flight to Mexico City.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California parroted the figure at a Senate hearing, saying: "It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico ... come from the United States."

The message so far has been clear: Guns are too easy to obtain in the United States and the Second Amendment is to blame. As a result, the gun violence in Mexico is made worse. There is one problem, though: The 90 percent figure is bogus. Fox News was suspicious of the 90 percent claim and did some digging. What the news network found is that only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been actually traced to the U.S.
There is quite a discrepancy between 17 percent and 90 percent. So which is actually correct?
An ATF spokesperson clarified the 90 percent statistic that was used by Hoover. She told FoxNews.com "that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S."

The key to understanding the "90 percent" figure is the word "traced." The vast majority of guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because, Fox News reported, "it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S."
ATF Special Agent William Newell told FoxNews.com that in between 2007 and 2008 Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Of that number, 6,000 were successfully traced and of those, approximately 90 percent -- 5,114 to be exact -- were found to have come from the United States.
However, according to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered from crime scenes during 2007 and 2008, FoxNews.com reported.
Let's try to put things in perspective, something the aforementioned media outlets and politicians have yet to do: Of the 29,000 guns recovered at Mexican crime scenes in 2007-2008, only 5,114 -- about 17 percent -- have been traced to the United States. Approximately 18,000 were never submitted for tracing because it was obvious they were not from the United States.

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told FoxNews.com.
While it is true that 90 percent of the traced guns recovered from Mexican crime scenes are found to have come from the U.S., the actual number of guns that have been traced to the United States is only 17 percent.
Where do the guns being used in Mexico come from? According to FoxNews.com, they come from a variety of sources. Among them are Russia, South America, Asia, Guatemala and even the Mexican Army.

Will the media and left-leaning politicians correct themselves and acknowledge that the gun violence along the US-Mexican border is mostly due to guns coming from places other than America? I doubt it. When you're trying to support your bias, "17 percent" is not very persuasive.
Kelly Boggs is a weekly columnist for Baptist Press and editor of the Baptist Message (www.baptistmessage.com (http://www.baptistmessage.com)), newsjournal of the Louisiana Baptist Convention.
Copyright (c) 2009 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press www.BPNews.net (http://www.bpnews.net/)

Copyright © 2009 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

PatriotnMore
04-18-2009, 7:09 AM
I don't know if any of you have seen the movie "State of Play" yet? No spoilers, but there is a scene where Helen M.(Chief Editor) is wanting to go to press, but is being talked out of it.

Anyways, she comes back with something to the effect, the story should be run, even if its incomplete, because that sells one story, then when something new comes up, thats a new story to run, because it keeps a constant source of readable news to the public, which sells the paper.

I thought to myself how true this probably is in our countries news rooms, just get a story out, we can change the information 180 if needed, but it keeps selling papers, or advertising dollars.

My point is, it gives me a clearer understanding of the mentality in the news business. The truth may come out, but if that is 3,4 weeks, or 3, 4 months, they keep the story going, and the money flowing in.

jdberger
04-18-2009, 7:51 AM
The 90% number is even older than that. I think it's from a 2002 report that I can't find online.

These stories all claim that 90% (sometimes more) of the guns in Mexico have been purchased in the US. The source for this stat is murky at best. Most cite Gary Wintermute (an anti-gun researcher from UC Davis) as the source, but he lifted it from Graduate Institute of International Studies. Small arms survey 2002: counting the human cost. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2002. This article isn't readily available online.

dixieD
04-18-2009, 8:04 AM
I agree that all networks have bias. But to be honest I think FOX does deserve credit because they actually do bring on people with opposing view points. Sure, they are definitely on the hot seat, BUT the alternative point of view is given a voice on FOX. I routinely flip between the cable networks to get a sampling, and CNN, and MSNBC do not have guest on with opposing points of view nearly as often if at all.

otteray
04-18-2009, 10:54 AM
I saw Bill O talking about the 90% crap and he was quickly corrected as Rove explained it clearly to him.