When Journalists Allow Themselves To Be Manipulated

Things have been going well in Iraq. We haven’t won, but everyone from the editorial board at the New York Times to the Democrats’ point man on defeatism John Murtha has been forced to admit that we’ve made progress there. While there’s still a good deal to be done on the political front, it’s clear that the terrorists are on the run.
So it’s in that context that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates visits Iraq, and is greeted by a series of bombings killing 22 people.
Now, a reasonable person would assume that these bombings are a desperate attempt by the terrorists to show that they’ve not yet been beaten, timed perfectly with a visit from a major American official for maximum media impact.
The problem? The media is more than happy to give the terrorists that impact:

image

There’s a problem when the media cannot report any news from Iraq without out first tinging it with negativity. Yes, car bombs went off in Iraq. But how is that related to Gates’ visit? Are they not two separate stories?
And at what point are these journalists going to realize that the car bombings are being staged almost entirely for their benefit? Al Qaeda is not going to bring the US military to its knees by setting off a few car bombs every week. But they can erode support for the war at home by making sure the media covers and sensationalizes those car bombings.
Iraq has been, from the start, a war waged both on the ground with weapons and in the media. And the sad part is that more often than not, whether the motives are driven by profits or politics, the media is on the terrorists’ side.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • http://Array Bat One

    Sigh!

    First, you swagger in here and accuse “this blog” of “suffering” from a serious paranoia. (Here’s a hint for the grammatically challenged: a “blog” is a thing, not a person, and thus cannot suffer in any sense of the word. Only those persons who write there can.)

    Next, you presumptuously attempt, badly as it happens, to explain the definition and significance of news reports, completely overlooking the very point of the post on which you offered commentary. Read it again, genius! Go slow. Focus on the words and their meanings, not the pictures!

    Then you offer a defense of Murtha, who by all rational accounts, wouldn’t know integrity or objectivity, or military strategy and tactics if any of them were to bite him on his self-serving, partisan ass.

    As for the resumes, at least we can agree that those hardly matter at all. Good! But then, why the hell did you bring them up in the first place?

    You are a perfect example of every conservative I have ever come across in the blogosphere.

    Inadvertent, no doubt, but a compliment nonetheless. Thank you!

    You swing your dick around and then when challenged you shy away and ride your high horse, all while attacking the only vulnerability you can find, grammar and literary skills.

    Excuse me! But I don’t recall shying away from anything. Certainly you haven’t offered anything remotely approaching a challenge. Fact is, you’ve yet to manage a minimal defense of your own contentions here, never mind the presumptuous insults and your modest intellectual efforts.

    Apparently, your reading comprehension is no better than your other cognitive skills. I haven’t attacked your only vulnerability… I’ve attacked all of them. And your pitiful defense has been a truly perfect match for those vulnerabilities.

  • pparets

    Hannity: My apologies. I assumed that my point was obvious. You have ranted at every contributor on this site. You have denied the possible validity of every single point raised by others. You have made unfounded assumptions about the mindset and motives of every writer. When all else failed, you attacked the character and/or motives of others. You make frequent references to ‘winning’, ‘victory’, “I”,
    “me”. You have praised yourself again and again for having special insights, superior knowledge, greater understanding and higher intelligence. You can hardly blame others for wondering about your state of mind.

  • Hannitized

    It’s your intelligence that’s in question.

    Got news for you chief, it’s not just mine thats in question. Hahaha.

    It may manifest itself in an inability to spell, problems with word meaning, etc.
    The jury is still out on you!

    And yours manifests itself in grammatical errors. Now where do we go from here?

  • Bat One

    Hannitized,

    Neither your resume, nor mine (a portion of which I have discussed before) has anything at all to do with the issues raised by the original post by Rob, or any of the subsequent comments… including your incoherent and linguistically artless drivel.

    If you have indeed served our country in the military, as you have implied, I would be the first one here to thank you for that service, even as I take a rhetorical katana to your prose, your grammar, your puerile and misguided ideology, and, of course, your bad manners.

    Clearly your martial experiences, whatever they might actually be, have not formed the basis for a mature and cogent view of world affairs, nor the foundation for any sort of minimally acceptable literary prowess.

    In short, I’m really not much interested in how big you SAY your dick is. I’m more than pleased with the size of my own.

  • Hannitized

    Hannity: My apologies. I assumed that my point was obvious.

    Put it behind you and move forward then. I really don’t care what you think of me. But for the sake of argument, please make one. It would be very easy for me to simply point you back to your first sentence to me. Please dont pretend your readers wouldnt have thrown the first stone anyway.

    Moving on.

    Here are the answers to your only arguments:

    pparets:You said that conservatives want propaganda, not news. I pointed out that propaganda, not news, is all we have gotten for year from the likes of the New Republic.

    You are moving the goal posts a bit. Number one, lets keep the conversation focused on this particular story. Later, we can expand upon what “other” media organizations have done on occasion. But for this argument, there is nothing about this story that is inappropriate. Is there?

    What this post suggests, is that our media should be giving us propaganda, filtered, so that we feel good about the progress that is now, finally being made. These are not two separate stories, they are intertwined and inseparable.

    You said Murtha was reliable. I simply pointed out that he is not.

    Again, you change the context. I said Murtha was more trustworthy than Dick Cheyney. And he is. You are suggesting because his military tactic, or position, to win the war in Iraq is not agreeable to you, he is therefore un-reliable. A strange conclusion.

    You say that people innacurately complain about the media. No. People complain about an innacurate, biased media. Thats the REAL threat to this country.

    OK, GREAT…..how is THIS article biased? If you can not, then I am correct that there is unnecessary paranoia over things that don’t deserve it.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    To pretend that our influence on the elected government is next to nothing is preposterous. Yes the Iraqis voted for the new government, but that factor is trivial in percentages to the influence we have had on the newly elected government being able to 1) have been there in the first place 2) been able to succeed.

    I pretend nothing. Speaking of nothing…that’s what was in Iraq in the way of government after decades under a tyrannical dictator.
    Did we have an influence on the new government?
    Is this Captain Obvious asking? Yes, we did. Do you have a problem with that? Do you think a government would have formed in a vacuum?
    Wish you libs could make up your minds! Nation building was a good thing when Clinton tried to do a half assed job of it in Somalia. W does a better job of it and OMFG, we’re influencing them!

    Again, do you have a point other than the obvious?

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    National Review to simply admit that it’s man-in-Iraq reports have been outrageously bogus,

    Not National Review…they’re good guys! You mean The New Republic they’re the dishonest ones!
    Michelle Malkin

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    If we install a new government in Iraq, will America be safer? If so, for how long?

    Did shifting focus from Afghanistan to Iraq help us win the war

    Such lame and pointless questions it asks!

    lobotomized: a) we did not “install” a new government in Iraq. We took out the old busted one and let them choose their own new one!

    b) We did not “shift the focus” from Afghanistan, unless by “shifting focus” you meant, “won the war, helped establish a democracy and ran of of targets to shoot!”

    By some small coincidence, lobotomized, you seem to be full of shift!

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    With your juvenile style and lack of facts/logic

    All lobotomized had going for it was the ability to cut and paste DNC talking points.
    Actually ‘splaining what they meant was beyond it!

  • docdave

    Hanwhatever, you apparent know almost nothing about debating. In order for there to be a ‘real’ debate, all parties involved must agree and be forewarned about the subject being debated. Anyway blogs like this are for commentors not debaters, and of course anyone can comment on others comments. So it’s useless and a bit juvenile to take umbrage if someone disagrees with your position.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    So everyone knows the chronology here: Deep into the second week of November, W. Thomas Smith Jr. was contacted by Tom Edsall and an e-mail was forwarded from Edsall to me from our ad dept.

    I immediately had Smith go through the details of what he wrote and who his sources were, what he saw and what he was relying on others for.

    I then had one of our reporters retrace Smith’s Lebanon steps from New York, as I made some calls myself to experts in the area to feel them out.

    By the middle of the third week in November, I concluded Smith wasn’t skeptical enough, and that the posts in question were sloppy.

    Smith had immediately offered Edsall his number in an exchange that sounded like Edsall was ready to roll. So my first instinct was see Edsall’s story and go from there (see if it raised anything we missed). I also had a sense of collegial respect for Edsall, i.e. to let him tell his story.

    Thanksgiving week hit when I started thinking that this is taking ridiculously long, but I didn’t want to bury it in the holidays. The next week came, and looking back, I wish I had gone live on Monday, as people got back from vacations and before the YouTube debate. On Thursday evening Edsall contacted Smith with some of the same kind of criticisms, and so on Friday, after making sure there was nothing new raised in that exchange, we went ahead and presented the story as we knew it, and I e-mailed Edsall at a tnr.com e-mail address with what I knew.

    If I had it all to do over again I would have just gone live when we knew we had a handle on the posts in question and not waited another minute to apologize and let everyone know what was happening here.

    While I knew something was wrong before last week, I did not know about it six weeks ago, as some have reported, and while you can question all the calls I made, there was never any intention here to make excuses or hide anything.

    I wish this hadn’t happened. I still think Smith is a well-intentioned reporter. We post him on a submission-by-submission basis and will continue to do so unless we have reason to decide otherwise. (And we are currently doing a more thorough review of all his work.)

    [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

  • 2Hotel9

    What debate? The semantic content of every single thing you have posted is zero. You have toddled in and spewed a pile of tired, lame Leftarded talkingpoints and highschool debate club cliches. Period. And you have not even done that well. Just another teenybopper. Bye-bye.

  • Hannitized

    This blog appears to suffer from what most right-wing Americans are suffering from today. A serious paranoia about our media reports!

    What you fail to accurately point out is why the NEWS (definition: Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television.) should not be reporting “news” and instead find it more appropriate to take part in a propaganda war so pro-war people at home can feel good about our actions in Iraq.

    This begs the question; Do you even understand the reason for having a news organization? Are they not supposed to report when a plane crashes, or when a terrorist bomb goes off in LA because it might make the terrorists happy about what they actually accomplished?

    Additionally, you talk about Murtha as if he makes up his mind about the happenings in Iraq according to his position on the Iraq offensive. What you are obviously missing is that Murtha, rightly, has lost trust in the administration or the intelligence agencies to “accurately” report the situation in Iraq. Instead, what Murtha relies on is his own eyes after seeing the situation in Iraq.

    A person like myself, can rely more heavily in a guy like Murtha to give me an honest status on the situation in Iraq, than say a guy like “last throes” Cheyney.

    Your paranoia is a big problem for our country, because for some reason people like you are able to spread your paranoid talking points like wild fire. My personal belief is that because there is a lack of intelligence on the part of your party. Sorry if that is not politically correct to say, but lets get real here.

    People like you are making people like me come out of the woodwork. You are carrying your momentum too far.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    perhaps you will have learned that it was my spelling that needed some help

    It’s your intelligence that’s in question. It may manifest itself in an inability to spell, problems with word meaning, etc.
    The jury is still out on you!

  • 2Hotel9

    Wait for it! It will start throwing Ron Paul spam next. Just like it does in the other threads it toddles into.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Then who was running the show prior to their election?

    Lobotomized: You play with words, but not well. Do you want to talk about the duly elected government of Iraq, or talk about the transition from a dictatorship, or merely drool and repeat leftard maxims about American “empires” or dynasties”?

    Or do you merely wish to continue to confuse them semantically in order to prove some non existent point?

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    I agree. Anyone who would be so full of themselves should at least know the difference between grammar skills and spelling skills.

    Lobotomized: You cut and paste well!
    Word usage is a part of grammar as well as meaning.

    The study of structural relationships in language or in a language, sometimes including pronunciation, meaning, and linguistic history.

    dictionary.com
    Loser and looser are words with two different meanings. You, lobotomized, apparently don’t know the difference. It goes beyond spelling, moron, it goes to meaning. Cut and paste all you want. You have trouble knowing WTF you’re saying! Say goodnight, Gracie!

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    The government couldnt exist or have been elected to power without our intervention.

    Duh! Thank you Captain Obvious.
    If you have a point, now would be a good time to bring it out!

  • Hannitized

    John Murtha wants to win the war!? Now that’s a strange conclusion!

    I have never seen anyone show themselves for the complete fool they in single sentence.

    1) Win what war? The Global War On Terror or the War in Iraq?

    2) Does our offensive in Iraq mean we have won the Global War On Terror or made it worse, regardless if we have installed a new government?

    3) If we install a new government in Iraq, will America be safer? If so, for how long?

    4) Did shifting focus from Afghanistan to Iraq help us win the war (GWOT)?

    You are too simple minded to even know the repercussions of the words you use.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    The National Review’s W. Thomas Smith, a regular contributor and author of the magazine’s milblog The Tank, has been caught reporting fabrications…

    The difference, my factually challenged friend, is that The New Republic stonewalled for months! The Columbia Journalism Review article you cite:

    W. Thomas Smith, a regular contributor and author of the magazine’s milblog The Tank, has been caught reporting fabrications fed to him by sources during a trip to Lebanon this fall

    One made stuff up, Smith reported things that had not been verified. Big difference!
    The article was posted yesterday. Let’s see what National Review said online yesterday ?

    Matthew Yglesias says that NR doesn’t care about the accuracy of the articles it publishes. His evidence: the Smith affair, and a disputed assertion by David Freddoso about who is to blame for the failure to enact an AMT patch. Whoever is right on the AMT–and I think Freddoso has the better of that argument–his comment can’t simply be declared to be “inaccurate.” As for the Smith case, we’ve apologized for it. So he has zero examples of our indifference to accuracy.

    -Ramesh Ponnuru

    unreality based boob strikes out again! National Review…they’re good guys!

  • pparets

    Hannitized: “Victory!” Interesting and revealing comment about your state of mind. As I said earlier, “His sole purpose is to generate – for himself – feelings of satisfaction by thinking he put you down.” There is no point in continuing this dialogue… or lack thereof.

  • Hannitized

    Do you want to talk about the duly elected government of Iraq, or talk about the transition from a dictatorship, or merely drool and repeat leftard maxims about American “empires” or dynasties”?

    Um…where was the mention of empires and dynasties? Oh, thats right, youre one of those who debates with voices in his/her head.

    Think you can get by without debating another voice in your head? Shall we continue?

    And what about point #2. Do you concede Afghanistan is NOT won and is still in need of troops to win the war?

    Or do you merely wish to continue to confuse them semantically in order to prove some non existent point?

    The point in not non-existant. The government couldnt exist or have been elected to power without our intervention. Do you understand that?

  • Hannitized

    I rest my case.

    No, you’ve done nothing more than merely run from a strong challenge like all Conservatives do. Only in this format you cant cut the mic, cut the call or talk over them and end the show. Instead, you call them a troll, dismiss them and avoid answering any direct questions that reveal the faulty logic in your right-wing world.

    Victory!

  • Hannitized

    Duh! Thank you Captain Obvious.
    If you have a point, now would be a good time to bring it out!

    Ok, let me put it to you this way. If have a pot in your yard that has a Marijuana plant in it, you rip it out and ask your friends to drop some tomatoe seeds in the pot, did you plant the Tomatoes? Do the tomatoes grow if they are not watered or fertilized? If you are the person who ripped out the first plant and the only one watering and fertilizing the new plant you encouraged to be put in the pot until it produced fruit, how much responsibility do you own for the fruits of that plant? 10%, 50% 80%, what?

    To pretend that our influence on the elected government is next to nothing is preposterous. Yes the Iraqis voted for the new government, but that factor is trivial in percentages to the influence we have had on the newly elected government being able to 1) have been there in the first place 2) been able to succeed.

  • Hannitized

    Hanwhatever, you apparent know almost nothing about debating. In order for there to be a ‘real’ debate, all parties involved must agree and be forewarned about the subject being debated. – Dumbdav

    Hahaha. Really, can you show me where, in this list of definitions, it states “all parties involved must agree and be forewarned about the subject being debated?

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/debate

    de·bate noun, verb, -bat·ed, -bat·ing.
    –noun
    1.a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: a debate in the Senate on farm price supports.
    2.a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.
    3.deliberation; consideration.
    4.Archaic. strife; contention.
    –verb (used without object)
    5.to engage in argument or discussion, as in a legislative or public assembly: When we left, the men were still debating.
    6.to participate in a formal debate.
    7.to deliberate; consider: I debated with myself whether to tell them the truth or not.
    8.Obsolete. to fight; quarrel.
    –verb (used with object)
    9.to argue or discuss (a question, issue, or the like), as in a legislative or public assembly: They debated the matter of free will.
    10.to dispute or disagree about: The homeowners debated the value of a road on the island.
    11.to engage in formal argumentation or disputation with (another person, group, etc.): Jones will debate Smith. Harvard will debate Princeton.
    12.to deliberate upon; consider: He debated his decision in the matter.
    13.Archaic. to contend for or over.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    “Hannitized” – I have never seen anyone show themselves for the complete fool they in single sentence.

    Over the top hyperbole. Especially considering…

    1) Win what war? The Global War On Terror or the War in Iraq?

    Read what you have written and you’ll get your answer. After all, it was in response to something that you had said.

    2) Does our offensive in Iraq mean we have won the Global War On Terror or made it worse, regardless if we have installed a new government?

    3) If we install a new government in Iraq, will America be safer? If so, for how long?

    4) Did shifting focus from Afghanistan to Iraq help us win the war (GWOT)?

    Where do these questions come from? It was remarked that Murtha wanting to win the war is a strange conclusion. In return, you come back with the question of which war (the quote back gives the answer) and a bunch of unrelated nonsense.

    You are too simple minded to even know the repercussions of the words you use.

    You speak of yourself.

    I would posit that the “simple minded” is the one who has a hard time following a conversation. He who needs his own words repeated back to him.

    I’m not going to be that person who repeats back your own words to you so that we can move on. If you insist on insulting those of us here, you’ll likely find yourself with an ever and ever smaller group of people who will be able to discuss anything with you. This might in fact be your point, but the question arises of what point it is to do such a thing at a blog.

    Whatever. Suit yourself.

  • robert108

    Seriously dude, you are a dipshit. Im done with you.

    With your juvenile style and lack of facts/logic, you never started with me.

  • Hannitized

    2Hotel9:Lik, this leftard reads very familiar, is it perhaps one of our regular leftards in sockpuppet form?

    That is probably because all intelligent people that speak a language you cant understand (reason) look the same to you.

    MAKE A POINT, If you can.

  • 2Hotel9

    Several more postings of DNC talkingpoints. Why am I not surprised. You know the bestest part, DD? It thinks it is confounding us and soaking up our time, when in fact I spend about 2 minutes laughing at it, and 1 minute heaping derision upon it. It would appear that Murtha is not the only one with Alzhiemers, this particular idiot is clearly in the advanced stages. Or just another meth-head. Braindead, in either case.

    Now I got to finish doing the morning news read and get some things sent along to my pimp.

  • Hannitized

    Proofessorbootya) we did not “install” a new government in Iraq. We took out the old busted one and let them choose their own new one!

    Oh really? Then who was running the show prior to their election? How much control do those newly elected leaders exhibit?

    http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/bringthetroops.htm

    see: Despite the June 2004 so-called “transfer of authority” to the Iraqi interim government, the U.S. military occupation and political representatives remain in control of Iraq’s people, economy, social and political systems.

    b) We did not “shift the focus” from Afghanistan, unless by “shifting focus” you meant, “won the war, helped establish a democracy and ran of of targets to shoot!”

    That is sad if you really are that ignorant of the history and current situation in Afghanistan. The country has destabilized to such a state that it is now more dangerous than before we attacked the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

    http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom2/Misc/Afghanistan.aspx

    http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom2/Lists/Press%20Releases/Current%20Releases.aspx

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,2100983,00.html

    It’s clear that you don’t know what you are talking about. But now I am curious. Do you think democracy has a chance in Iraq?

  • robert108

    I am here to be as bold and as arrogant as Hannity, now let’s see if you can make a point.

    Sean Hannity boldly tells the truth, and you arrogantly lie.
    Big difference.

  • Hannitized

    Word usage is a part of grammar as well as meaning.

    OK, very well. Please click on this link and show me where SPELLING is a lesson in learning about GRAMMAR and then SPELLINGS relation to word usage and meaning!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise/words/grammar/

    Now, perhaps you will have learned that it was my spelling that needed some help and not my “grammar”. Yes? Ready to move on?

  • robert108

    Proof: Yes, he was just running around in his little hamster wheel of tired leftie talking points.
    I like how he admitted, after pronouncing about Murtha’s “trustworthiness”(a vague, emotional concept at best), he admits he knows nothing about the Haditha matter. Unbelievable!

  • Hannitized

    Grow up! Either debate the issues on the facts in an intelligent, civil and reasonable manner or shut your cake hole!

    Who are you talking to? It’s 2Hotel9 that thinks he/shes is above debating, not me. But I have a feeling you wont push him/her to rise to the challenge.

  • Bat One

    Get to the point. If you have a point, make it.

    I just love the smell of irony in the evening.

  • Hannitized

    Oh, and since we are winning in Iraq, Cheney was right, as well. Another zero for you.

    Um seriously dude, you need to walk away from the computer.

    At the time………Cheney…….said the insurgency was in it’s last throes……he was wrong. Now, the tide is turning. Do you have any concept of how time relates to the context of reality?

    Seriously dude, you are a dipshit. Im done with you.

  • docdave

    From Wikipedia “Debate rules”,

    Debate and argumentation theory
    All forms of debate, whether consciously or not, make certain assumptions about argumentation theory. The core concept of argumentation theory is the notion of advocacy. In most cases, at least one side in a debate needs to maintain the truth of some proposition or advocate some sort of personal or political change or action. A debate could also potentially be between two or more competing propositions or actions. Or debate could also be a purely performative exercise of charisma and emotion with no assumption of fixed advocacy, but it would possibly lose much of its coherence.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    “Hannitized” kids, You are suggesting because his [Murtha] military tactic, or position, to win the war in Iraq is not agreeable to you, he is therefore un-reliable. A strange conclusion.

    John Murtha wants to win the war!? Now that’s a strange conclusion!

  • Neiman

    Hannitized:

    2Hotel9: We have run from nothing. We’re right here. Laughing at your teenybopper ass.

    I have demonstrated clearly the ability to answer your questions without insult.

    Grow up! Either debate the issues on the facts in an intelligent, civil and reasonable manner or shut your cake hole!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    2Hotel9 – is it perhaps one of our regular leftards in sockpuppet form?

    You’re usually right about these.

    I already checked to see if he was a sloppy sockpuppeteer. He’s not.

    We should give him the benefit of the doubt until he shows otherwise. Besides, there are millions of voices just like his. He’s arrogant over those of us who think it is a good idea that to militarily take dictators out. That’s his beef with us.

    Consider the source.

  • Hannitized

    First, you swagger in here and accuse “this blog” of “suffering” from a serious paranoia.

    Yes. And? It is a challenge that I will gladly stand by. Unlike you, I don’t make a challenge and then run away when I feel I am overwhelmed. My handle is Hannitized (a person not a thing…heh) and I chose that name because it is about time you get back what you have been giving. I am here to be as bold and as arrogant as Hannity, now let’s see if you can make a point.

    Next, you presumptuously attempt, badly as it happens, to explain the definition and significance of news reports, completely overlooking the very point of the post on which you offered commentary.

    That is your opinion. For what ever reason, you want your news filtered. If planes were falling out of the sky regularly for over 4 years, we would realize its a serious issue. If a official came to make a statement to Americans that they are finally getting a handle on preventing planes falling from the sky, while planes were falling from the sky, they should be reported, together. Because you want the bad news filtered out from the good news does not mean the two stories are separable.

    Then you offer a defense of Murtha, who by all rational accounts, wouldn’t know integrity or objectivity, or military strategy and tactics if any of them were to bite him on his self-serving, partisan ass.

    And? What does that have to do with anything? Even one of the belt-way boys defended Murtha’s change on the situation in Iraq. What is your point? Do you have one? Oh yes, you don’t like Murtha. And that matters, how?

    Excuse me! But I don’t recall shying away from anything.

    Except calling me a child when it comes to talking about the issues of international military war efforts. I merely asked if you want to compare resumes if you feel you are the adult (experienced) and I am the child (adolescent and inexperienced) on these matters. A resume serves to correct that score. I challenged you and you ran from it. And you were smart to do so.

    Certainly you haven’t offered anything remotely approaching a challenge. Fact is, you’ve yet to manage a minimal defense of your own contentions here, never mind the presumptuous insults and your modest intellectual efforts.

    Well it’s good to see you living so comfortably in your little world of denial.

  • robert108

    Last throes Cheney was selling propaganda. Idiot.

    In fact, our President and VP have been right about everything, despite the best efforts of the Dems/MSM TO fabricate defeat at the hands of the terrorists. Murtha lied about Haditha; he said our troops were guilty of “cold-blooded murder”. He was flat wrong. He was also wrong about us losing the war, as I have already said. You don’t comprehend well, apparently.

  • robert108

    You have ranted at every contributor on this site.

    In addition, “Hannitized” has been wrong about everything so far. He has not “scored” a single point. He is wrong about Cheney, wrong about Murtha, wrong about the war and wrong about Sean Hannity. That’s a big zero in this debate.

  • Hannitized

    Since we vindicated the Haditha Marines, Murtha was proven wrong.

    What in THE HECK, does that have to do with HOW MURTHA relayed the progress, or lack there of in Iraq to the American people? Don’t change the subject. Further, I didnt even follow the Haditha story, but something tells me youre probably wrong on those facts as well.

    Since Iraq has a freely-elected govt, President Bush was right.

    Right about WMDs? Right about Mission Accomplished? Right about what? Puhlease, this is not even a debate. You are a delusion whack-job. What does that have to do with anything we have discussed? I am not playing any more of your straw man games.

    Since Sean Hannity tells the truth, you are wrong.

    DUDE….Youre a whack-job!

  • 2Hotel9

    “No, you’ve done nothing more than merely run from a strong challenge”

    We have run from nothing. We’re right here. Laughing at your teenybopper ass.

  • Hannitized

    Why is it that all the leftards who show up here are so full of themselves, but have all the grammar skills of a third grader?

    I agree. Anyone who would be so full of themselves should at least know the difference between grammar skills and spelling skills.

    Grammar is the study of the rules governing the use of a given natural language, and, as such, is a field of linguistics. Traditionally, grammar included morphology and syntax; in modern linguistics these subfields are complemented by phonetics, phonology, orthography, semantics, and pragmatics.

    The same term is also applied to any set of such rules; thus, each language can be said to have its own distinct grammar. Thus “English grammar” (uncountable) refers to the rules of the English language itself, while “an English grammar” (countable) refers to a specific study or analysis of these rules. A fully explicit grammar exhaustively describing the grammatical constructions of a language is called a prescriptive grammar, or, in theoretical linguistics, a generative grammar. Specific types of grammars, or approaches to constructing them, are known as grammatical frameworks. The standard framework of generative grammar is the transformational grammar model developed by Noam Chomsky in the 1950s to 1980s.

  • Hannitized

    I just love the smell of irony in the evening.

    That’s your armpits! Now get back to the debate.

  • Hannitized

    “Victory!” Interesting and revealing comment about your state of mind.

    What is interesting about that. Have you ever participated in debate class? Is there not a victor? Is there not a victor measured in each Presidential debate? Hahaha.

    People like you, who sit high in your imagined horse, like to look down on those they don’t have the ability or courage to debate. YOU’VE GOT NOTHING. And you know it.

    As I said earlier, “His sole purpose is to generate – for himself – feelings of satisfaction by thinking he put you down.” There is no point in continuing this dialogue… or lack thereof.

    I have demonstrated clearly the ability to answer your questions without insult. You failed to respond, because I poked too many holes in your faulty logic. You don’t have the ability to keep up.

    I have demonstrated clearly the ability to answer your questions without insult. You failed to respond, because I poked too many holes in your faulty logic. You don’t have the ability to keep up.

    You like your opponents nice and polite, so you can be the sarcastic prick. Sorry, I am not going to give you the opportunity to walk over me. You can either fight for yourself or loose. I see you have opted for being the looser. Fitting.

  • robert108

    1) Win what war? The Global War On Terror or the War in Iraq? Both, although Murtha doesn’t want to win either one. Or maybe, like Edwards, he believes the GWOT is “just a bumper sticker”.

    2) Does our offensive in Iraq mean we have won the Global War On Terror or made it worse, Before, murdering, terrrist-supporting dictator who was our enemy and had ambitions to be the Hitler of the ME; After, an ally with a popularly-elected govt. The answer is obvious to anyone with a brain. Of course, if you want the US to be destroyed, like most lefties… regardless if we have installed a new government? The Iraqis voted three times, and will continue to do so; no “installing” necessary. Duh.

  • robert108

    Oh, and since we are winning in Iraq, Cheney was right, as well. Another zero for you.

  • Hannitized

    It appears that HANNITIZED has a hard-on for conservatives in general and Shawn Hannity in praticular, as though a radio/tv entertainer speaks for our views.

    I haven’t seen anything on this blog that would indicate you differ on any view Sean Hannity has. I would be happy to learn of your differences. Where are they?

  • pparets

    Hahaha! Nice try, Hannitized. I rest my case.

  • Hannitized

    Where do these questions come from? It was remarked that Murtha wanting to win the war is a strange conclusion. In return, you come back with the question of which war (the quote back gives the answer) and a bunch of unrelated nonsense.

    It’s only a strange conclusion if you don’t have any idea HOW Murtha want’s/wanted to win the war. Some believe simply going into Iraq was a loosing proposition on the GWOT, despite the trillion dollar outcome of our efforts to create regime change.

    The questions arise because you don’t have the faintest idea, apparently, what war Murtha wants to win or how he would have chose to win it. Same goes for Wesley Clark.

    Most people who visualize a win in Iraq can’t distinguish between preventing a major foreign policy disaster of raising an Al Qaeda influenced terrorist nation where it never stood a chance of existing prior to our involvement and successfully installing an unstable and fragile democracy in a country that has been divided for thousands of years. What is victory in Iraq to you?

    I am keeping my fingers crossed, but you have to be realistic and understand that if and after we leave a secure Iraq in the hands of a new elected government, it could end up going right to a civil war that inevitably ends up with a government that is hostile to US interests.

  • Hannitized

    If you have indeed served our country in the military, as you have implied, I would be the first one here to thank you for that service, even as I take a rhetorical katana to your prose, your grammar, your puerile and misguided ideology, and, of course, your bad manners.

    I didn’t imply I served in the military, but I serve the Armed Forces, federal government, Executive Offices of the President (EOP), Department of Homeland Security among others. You don’t have to be enlisted to have the ability to do these things.

    Regardless, you are correct, it matters not. So I will kindly ask you to stop using language that implies I am “tiny” in the realm of understanding our Military prowess. If you do not want to compare resume’s then don’t insult and challenge those you know nothing about.

    Clearly your martial experiences, whatever they might actually be, have not formed the basis for a mature and cogent view of world affairs, nor the foundation for any sort of minimally acceptable literary prowess.

    There is nothing clear about your summation of my experiences or views of world affairs, at all! You are a perfect example of every conservative I have ever come across in the blogosphere. You swing your dick around and then when challenged you shy away and ride your high horse, all while attacking the only vulnerability you can find, grammar and literary skills.

    You must be very impressed with yourself.

  • Hannitized

    DD, its got to figure out what a position is first. Just parroting the same tired assed crap ain’t getting it anywhere.

    Brilliant!!

  • pparets

    Hannitized: “I have”, “I poked”, “I have”, “I poked”, “I am”, “I see” Interesting that you managed to use the ego-centric “I” six times in three sentences. Yet another interesting and revealing commentary on your state of mind. Genuine debaters rarely dwell so intently on their own egos and their need for “Victory!”

  • pparets

    Hannitized: Lets try this again. You said that conservatives want propaganda, not news. I pointed out that propaganda, not news, is all we have gotten for year from the likes of the New Republic. [see above] You said Murtha was reliable. I simply pointed out that he is not. [see above] You say that people innacurately complain about the media. No. People complain about an innacurate, biased media. Thats the REAL threat to this country. [see above]

  • Hannitized

    2Hotel9: We have run from nothing. We’re right here. Laughing at your teenybopper ass.

    Thats about all you can do, because you don’t have the ability to articulate an intelligent position. Youve got nothing.

  • 2Hotel9

    Lik, this leftard reads very familiar, is it perhaps one of our regular leftards in sockpuppet form?

  • 2Hotel9

    You made my point for me. You are a mentally handicapped Democrat, and don’t point out the redundancy of that.

    Lets us take these in order.
    1. Yes
    2. No
    3. Yes. For as long as it stands against your socialist horseshit.
    4. Yes

    Glad to ‘splain that to you, quest.

  • Hannitized

    Yet another interesting and revealing commentary on your state of mind. Genuine debaters rarely dwell so intently on their own egos and their need for “Victory!”

    Genuine debaters rarely dwell so intently on their ability to psychoanalyze other debaters.

    Get to the point. If you have a point, make it.

  • robert108

    I am keeping my fingers crossed, but you have to be realistic and understand that if and after we leave a secure Iraq in the hands of a new elected government, it could end up going right to a civil war that
    inevitably ends up with a government that is hostile to US interests.

    Every self-important pessimist considers himself “a realist”. You simply illustrate the fact that what’s good for America is bad for you lefties. You pray for our defeat, because you can’t deal with being wrong on everything. Our victory in Iraq blows all your leftie talking points out of the water.

  • Hannitized

    Do yourself, and those of us blessed with cognitive abilities unfettered by adolescence, a huge favor, kid. Go back to your room. Let the adults talk among ourselves in peace.

    Would you like to compare resume’s about what YOU have done for the department of homeland security, federal government, DOD and armed forces division to what I have done to help protect our country and our war fighters?

    Please, go there.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    Hannitized – You mean like you bringing up John Murtha in a subject that has to do with Media manipulation?

    Huh?

    You’re going on and on about paranoia that only you can see, and you’re also going on about things that I haven’t said.

    Sounds like a personal problem.

  • Hannitized

    Maybe the current and ongoing effort to get National Review to simply admit that it’s man-in-Iraq reports have been outrageously bogus, and the incredibly reluctant footdragging by that organization in doing so, would be a good place for you to start.

    What are you talking about? What does that have to do with this report? Why dont you enlighten me?

    And you could finish by reminding yourself that Murtha’s only mantra in the last 12 months is that the war is ‘unwinnable’.

    And I completely disagreed with him on that. Smart people usually make up their own minds after informing themselves. In fact, I was for a draft so that some poor war-fighters didnt have to do the job over and over, despite their courage and nature to not complain while doing so. And dont even go there…WWII was won with the draft.

    One gets the impression that YOU, more than anything, WANT to believe the anti-war, anti-Bush leftist propaganda which passes itself off as objective news in this country.

    Why? What gives you that impression? How could you possibly leap to that false conclusion? Is it instinct to be so misguided? I’m just tired of people inaccurately complaining about the media. It’s harmful to our country.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    What you fail to accurately point out is why the NEWS (definition: Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television.) should not be reporting “news” and instead find it more appropriate to take part in a propaganda war so pro-war people at home can feel good about our actions in Iraq.

    Dude, you’re an idiot. The point you missed was that these news reports often tie in two totally unrelated stories. This point was even explicitly stated up above.

    How did you miss it?

    Don’t answer – we already know. To acknowledge that point would have invalidated your entire nonsensical rant.

  • robert108

    It’s “lose” and “loser”. Inability to spell is an indication of low intelligence, and your defensiveness about it is the clincher.

  • pparets

    It appears that HANNITIZED has a hard-on for conservatives in general and Shawn Hannity in praticular, as though a radio/tv entertainer speaks for our views. You aren’t able to reason with him, because he doesn’t want to be reasoned with. His sole purpose is to generate – for himself – feelings of satisfaction by thinking he put you down.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    I see you have opted for being the looser.(sic)

    Why is it that all the leftards who show up here are so full of themselves, but have all the grammar skills of a third grader?

    Maybe you could declare “victory” again? That would be entertaining! /sarcasm

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob
  • pparets

    Hannitized: Your overlong, misguided statement on the definition of ‘news’ is so fundamentally flawed, that one hardly knows where to start in responding to your absurd assertions. Maybe the current and ongoing effort to get National Review to simply admit that it’s man-in-Iraq reports have been outrageously bogus, and the incredibly reluctant footdragging by that organization in doing so, would be a good place for you to start. And you could finish by reminding yourself that Murtha’s only mantra in the last 12 months is that the war is ‘unwinnable’. Last time I looked, the good congressman from Pennsylvania was no seer and certainly not an objective, reliable news source. One gets the impression that YOU, more than anything, WANT to believe the anti-war, anti-Bush leftist propaganda which passes itself off as objective news in this country.

  • robert108

    “The war is…lost.” – Harry Reid

    Now that’s propaganda!

  • Hannitized

    The point you missed was that these news reports often tie in two totally unrelated stories.

    You mean like you bringing up John Murtha in a subject that has to do with Media manipulation? Or, did you mean it was a “totally unrelated” story to talk about how bombs are going off in the green zone when a major American official is talking about how the stability is within reach?

    Gee, I now understand how bias the media could be if we ever experience a series of passenger jets falling out of the sky over a period of 4 years, and why it would be stupid to report how (3) jets fell out of the sky the same day an airline official is talking about how were turning the corner on jets falling out of the sky.

    Yeah, got it. Thanks for straightening me out.

  • Bat One

    Just what I didn’t need today… a lecture to by a liberal Lilliputian about the military prowess and partisan objectivity of a tired old sleaze and corrupt hack like Jack Murtha.

    Do yourself, and those of us blessed with cognitive abilities unfettered by adolescence, a huge favor, kid. Go back to your room. Let the adults talk among ourselves in peace. The Barney tapes are in the drawer under your TV.

  • Hannitized

    You simply illustrate the fact that what’s good for America is bad for you lefties.

    How do I do that? Please elaborate. Please!

    You pray for our defeat, because you can’t deal with being wrong on everything.

    Now you are a mind reader who knows what I “pray for”. Further, you claim I am wrong on everything, all while ignoring every point where I have proved your statements false. In response, you merely create more straw men to be knocked down and then you claim your victory. You have got a lot to learn.

    Our victory in Iraq blows all your leftie talking points out of the water.

    Our victory? So when I said I didnt agree with pulling troops and instead I called for a draft, how exactly does a troop surge become YOUR victory? Is it possible to hold the position that I wan’t to “win” in Iraq but feel it was a mistake to go in, in the first place? Yes. Is it that too hard for your brain to comprehend? Yes.

    And what is victory in Iraq to you? How does it blow my “talking points” out of the water? Are you debating ME or an imagined version of me? You are on drugs buddy.

  • Hannitized

    pparets:You said that conservatives want propaganda, not news. I pointed out that propaganda, not news, is all we have gotten for year from the likes of the New Republic.

    You are moving the goal posts a bit. Number one, lets keep the conversation focused on this particular story. Later, we can expand upon what “other” media organizations have done on occasion. But for this argument, there is nothing about this story that is inappropriate. Is there?

    What this post suggests, is that our media should be giving us propaganda, filtered, so that we feel good about the progress that is now, finally being made. These are not two separate stories, they are intertwined and inseparable.

    You said Murtha was reliable. I simply pointed out that he is not.

    Again, you change the context. I said Murtha was more trustworthy than Dick Cheyney. And he is. You are suggesting because his military tactic, or position, to win the war in Iraq is not agreeable to you, he is therefore un-reliable. A strange conclusion.

    You say that people innacurately complain about the media. No. People complain about an innacurate, biased media. Thats the REAL threat to this country.

    OK, GREAT…..how is THIS article biased? If you can not, then I am correct that there is unnecessary paranoia over things that don’t deserve it.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    Bush likes the propaganda.

    “See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.”

    Trebucheter in Chief
    May 24, 2005

  • Hannitized

    By what measure? What’s your argument for this assertion?

    That Murtha has given a more accurate assessments on the current status in Iraq, than Cheney. And he has. It was a very simple statement, how did you miss it?

    Murtha lied about our troops in Haditha, and was flat wrong on our losing the war.

    What did he lie about on the Haditha matter? And you are confusing issues. Being wrong on a tactic to win or loose the war (Bush and Cheney have been wrong as well) isn’t the same as giving the public bad information about the current situation in Iraq. He has always been more accurate than Cheney.

    Cheney has done neither of those two things, so you have something to prove here.

    You’re crazy? Are we talking about “LAST THROES Cheney”??. Also, Cheney had been wrong on the Iraq Zarqawi connection, wrong on the Iraqi threat to obtain nuclear weapons and wrong on WMDs.

    He had the position of losing he war, not winning in any way. The fact that Murtha referred to retreat as “redeployment” just makes him another untrustworthy propagandist for the left.

    That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. Par for the course on this site I am sure.

    Being wrong on a tactic, like Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and all the others have been doesn’t make you a propagandist, or untrustworthy on reporting back the facts on the current situation in Iraq. Moron.

    Last throes Cheney was selling propaganda. Idiot.

  • robert108

    I said Murtha was more trustworthy than Dick
    Cheyney. And he is. By what measure? What’s your argument for this assertion? Murtha lied about our troops in Haditha, and was flat wrong on our losing the war. Cheney has done neither of those two things, so you have something to prove here. You are suggesting because his military tactic, or position, to win the war in Iraq He had the position of losing he war, not winning in any way. The fact that Murtha referred to retreat as “redeployment” just makes him another untrustworthy propagandist for the left. is not agreeable to you, he is therefore un-reliable. A strange conclusion.

  • robert108

    Provide a valid argument against my statements or shut your pie hole.

    I see you haven’t improved your “debating skills”, H. You have to make an argument first, and all you do is to make unsupported generalizations and follow them with personal attack. Weak.

    Since we vindicated the Haditha Marines, Murtha was proven wrong. Since Iraq has a freely-elected govt, President Bush was right. Since Sean Hannity tells the truth, you are wrong. I repeat: you haven’t gotten even one thing right. All you do is bluster about debating, but you don’t seem to know how to do that, either. Good luck.

  • Hannitized

    Did we have an influence on the new government? Is this Captain Obvious asking? Yes, we did.

    Well, you said we didn’t install a new government. Your basically playing with semantics.

    Do you have a problem with that? Do you think a government would have formed in a vacuum?

    I think there was a time and a place to remove Saddam Hussein, I was not positive 2002 was the time. We should have finished the job in Afghanistan and we could have seen where we were after that.

    As to the latter question, rephrase your question please, your grammar was a bit poor and deriving a valid question from that sentence was a bit difficult.

  • robert108

    8.Obsolete. to fight; quarrel.

    This definition seems to fit you exactly, H.

  • 2Hotel9

    DD, its got to figure out what a position is first. Just parroting the same tired assed crap ain’t getting it anywhere.

  • Hannitized

    In addition, “Hannitized” has been wrong about everything so far. He has not “scored” a single point. He is wrong about Cheney,..blah, blah, blah. – Robert

    How was I wrong about “last throes” Cheney? Do you even have the capacity to debate the issue? I don’t tolerate conservatards who are deep in denial very well. Provide a valid argument against my statements or shut your pie hole.

  • Bat One

    Please excuse the absence. I had a class and a quick dinner afterwards.

    I see the “discussions” have continued on while I was gone, and are no further into any substantive issues than when I left 3 hours ago. Hardly surprising.

    “Hannitized”,

    Its more than a bit difficult to take your comments, or your “challenges” seriously. What you’ve offered thus far is presumptuous insults (starting with your first sentence of your first comment on this thread), a number of bald-faced conclusions with no supporting documentation or evidence, and a penchant for flitting from one subject to another like a hummingbird on crank.

    Its just a suggestion, of course, but you might get a more reasoned response from the regulars here if you made an effort to drop the attitude and the invective, and focused on a particular issue. Your current approach has won you no respect for your positions on anything, however grudging, and certainly no converts.

    As for me, I need a shower. Trading insults with you is not only boring, it also makes me feel just a bit guilty… kinda like ignoring the panhandler sitting in the gutter.

  • docdave

    Yeh, 2H, ‘it’ doesn’t seem to have put much thought into its garbled essays.

  • Hannitized

    Its more than a bit difficult to take your comments, or your “challenges” seriously.

    Why? Because I have as much confidence in your lack of clarity as you do mine? I think if you just took the time to stick to the debate and stopped trying to pin me for who you think I am, this could have gone a lot farther.

    If you want to debate, the choice is yours. I am here.

    What you’ve offered thus far is presumptuous insults (starting with your first sentence of your first comment on this thread), a number of bald-faced conclusions with no supporting documentation or evidence,

    The post itself is evidence and documentation. Do you listen to right-wing radio? Do you watch Fox News? You want me to produce documentation and evidence that your side is paranoid? You only need to merely scroll down to find other examples. It’s simple. Debate this issue or continue with your personal attacks. I can do either or both. I prefer to debate.

    Its just a suggestion, of course, but you might get a more reasoned response from the regulars here if you made an effort to drop the attitude and the invective, and focused on a particular issue. Your current approach has won you no respect for your positions on anything, however grudging, and certainly no converts.

    I have not directed the conversation in other directions. If you read back, its the regulars who have shifted topic. I am merely responding. I will stop taking their bait and remind them to stick to the debate, which I have done with you.

    and a penchant for flitting from one subject to another like a hummingbird on crank.

    This is your show bat. I am merely a guest.

    Truthfully, I really dont care what they think of me. When the rubber meets the road they know what answers they ran from and they have to live with it.

    My first comment was clear.

    Why do you want the media to separate the two topics that are intertwined? It’s like trying to separate a speech given by a Fire Marshall about getting the California fires under control, while (3) new fires broke out during his speech. The two are inseparable and intertwined. Are they not.

    If they are not, then you must realize that asking for your news to be filtered for the sake of making the public feel good about the Iraq war, turns them into propagandists.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development