Main > Everything Else
"Propagannon" confirmed : Fake reporter in WH press conferences.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 13, 2005, 02:22:47 am ---
--- Quote ---Talon is no more a "fake" news service than Salon.... How many stories does it take to make a journalist?
--- End quote ---
Apparently exactly nine, in the eyes of the White House. Because that is all "Talon News" had published in the five days before they gave them credentials.
--- End quote ---
So nine, then, is the answer? I'd have figured the number to be smaller, but as long as you've nailed it down to nine, ok. ;D
--- Quote ---As far as him being a legitimate journalist, he has no degree
--- End quote ---
So in order to be a "legitimate journalist", you must have a degree. Interesting. Is that due to hiring practices, or that you must have been "properly schooled" in order to be able to use the title of journalist? I ask, because if that's the case, I think the "proper schooling" is letting down the American public, and the world (as to assume this is simply an American problem alone is delusional at best) by teaching that injecting personal bias into stories in reporting, or failing to report, the stories that will be viewed by others. I'm not saying they have to, or don't have to, but the news used to be given to us by people called "reporters", and "journalism" seems to have become synonymous with reporting, when in fact it's simply a perversion of news reporting.
--- Quote ---BTW, as far as the CBS memo scandal goes, you're ideological bias is showing when you accuse me of ignoring it. I've spoken out numerous times regarding my disappointment over the lack of verification re: the memos authenticity.
--- End quote ---
When the subject was brought up, http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,24829.0.html, if that's your idea of "speaking out", you have no concept of the phrase. You continually avoided saying ANYTHING about Dan Rather, and instead couched your "disappointment" in how Bush is/was/forever-will-be wrong "even if this story didn't exist". Before you tell us how "outraged" you are about something and point to "what you've done", try to make sure your words actually match up with what you want us to believe. Your words are anything BUT genuine on this point.
--- Quote ---I also find it extremely ironic that you'd disparage the investigation into "Gannon" simply because it's initially being done by a left-leaning blog ("Some left wing hack web site?"), yet you'd banner-wave a story (TANG memos) by a completely fringe, hate-filled right-wing site (freerepublic)...I prefer to let the content of the story speak for itself.
--- End quote ---
Yet, while "letting the content of the story speak for itself", you can't resist the urge to "bash" a website for being "fringe, hate-filled & right-wing". Nevermind the fact that the website's story was proven to be true, if YOU don't bash the people who show the bias of the major news outlets, who will? Trying to equate what you do with "holding this administration accountable" is laughable, and you MIGHT be able to fool some folks into believing it, if you weren't so transparent and your very own words didn't tell a far different story than you wish to paint about yourself.
You seem to think ALL that was at issue with Clinton was a blow job. It's probably why folks have a hard time not choking when you offer platitudes such as "investigate the story yourself", "let the story speak for itself", or "it's my duty to hold him accountable". You'd probably garner a lot more respectability if you'd simply follow your own advice.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: ChadTower on February 13, 2005, 09:20:30 am ---
Keep in mind that EVERYONE, even the French and Germans, were in full agreement that he must possess those weapons.
--- End quote ---
That fact will NEVER be accepted. It is vital that the opponents of this war NEVER admit or accept this fact, because to do so means they lose the "Bush lied" card, which means they lose the "he tricked the American people" card, which means they lose the "he ordered the killing of men (sorry, not men, we must focus on the idea that he's only killing the other groups) women and children" card, blah blah blah.
Chad, it STARTS there, and it's like it's the middle card in the entire house of cards their argument is based on. While you, me, and a fencepost are able to see that fact you posted, it will NEVER EVER be accepted as fact, and you only need to read several posts in these political threads to see that I'm right, and to see the contortions people are willing to go through in order to get away from that fact in order to avoid admitting Bush ever did ANYTHING right, outside of "being born into the right family"
Crazy Cooter:
--- Quote from: DrewKaree on February 13, 2005, 10:16:35 am ---
--- Quote from: ChadTower on February 13, 2005, 09:20:30 am ---
Keep in mind that EVERYONE, even the French and Germans, were in full agreement that he must possess those weapons.
--- End quote ---
That fact will NEVER be accepted. It is vital that the opponents of this war NEVER admit or accept this fact, because to do so means they lose the "Bush lied" card, which means they lose the "he tricked the American people" card, which means they lose the "he ordered the killing of men (sorry, not men, we must focus on the idea that he's only killing the other groups) women and children" card, blah blah blah.
Chad, it STARTS there, and it's like it's the middle card in the entire house of cards their argument is based on. While you, me, and a fencepost are able to see that fact you posted, it will NEVER EVER be accepted as fact, and you only need to read several posts in these political threads to see that I'm right, and to see the contortions people are willing to go through in order to get away from that fact in order to avoid admitting Bush ever did ANYTHING right, outside of "being born into the right family"
--- End quote ---
Did they believe the information available warranted military action?
That is the point. They did not, Bush did. He asked for help ("Coalition"), they said no. Were they 100% sure or 99%? Who cares? It was bogus info. And Drew, we should focus on the women and kids killed. How many of the 100,000+ civilians killed over there have been women and children? That's an important fact that shouldn't be swept under the table.
Anyhow, back to the topic:
In order to be a legitimate journalist, you should have SOMETHING. If not a degree, several years of experience in the field. These people should be seasoned professionals, (and even they can be stupid and not check facts). We depend on these ---meecrobs--- to give as an accurate picture of what is heppening so we can come here and argue facts, that's why we argue over the legitimacy of the site's we all reference. If this dude was just reporting on what was being said, nobody would care. BUT the fact is that he was granted access without proper credentials (I call that "planted"), and then used that position to further the administrations agenda by "steering" the direction of the news conferences away from important topics. THAT's where I object.
ChadTower:
--- Quote from: Crazy Cooter on February 13, 2005, 11:44:46 am ---Did they believe the information available warranted military action?
That is the point.
--- End quote ---
fredster:
--- Quote ---Who cares? It was bogus info
--- End quote ---
It wasn't "bogus" until we verifed it was it? Kerry voted for it, and he was on the intel committee. Part of the branch that the CIA reports to along with the President.
--- Quote ---How many of the 100,000+ civilians killed over there have been women and children? That's an important fact that shouldn't be swept under the table.
--- End quote ---
Exactly where are you getting this "fact" of "100,000" Plus CIVILIANS? Where?
--- Quote ---The UN itself should have formed a coalition to go after Hussein personally for ordering the Kurd gassings.
--- End quote ---
But they didn't did they? Have they done Anything to stop killing of innocents in the last 20 years?
We should disban the UN NOW.