I'm just really sick of the contempt the media shows for conservatives, Christians, and anyone else who doesn't fit into their haughty regime of elitism. It's not about a government-driven press. I'm completely against that.
1
Oh come on...I'm sure Gannon sucked a few dicks and made it all good...
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 17, 2005 10:21 PM (WfZ6a)
2
The arrogance of the US media is astonishing.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 17, 2005 10:42 PM (xauGB)
3
The arrogance of this administration is astonishing as well! They're all a pack of lying bastards...Bushies and the media.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 17, 2005 11:12 PM (WfZ6a)
4
I like how Myers said the rioting wasn't because of the report.
Also, I think we should defer to the white house on the subject of causing serious damage to the image of the US abroad.
Posted by: actus at May 17, 2005 11:36 PM (QPrcU)
5
If Bush was everything the Left say he is, Elisabeth would wake up with a horse's head tommorow.
Posted by: Carlos at May 18, 2005 12:47 AM (8e/V4)
6
Smart ass comments like actus' and osama's ass above don't change the reality of the incompetence and bias of Newsweek. Nor do they change the arrogance of the questioners at the White House press briefing.
Snarkiness about the Bush administration is all cute but the Bush administration is trying to run the federal government and our foreign policy. The press corps has to figure out how to write english sentences and can't do that very well. Their arrogance is inappropriate.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 18, 2005 12:57 AM (xauGB)
7
To actus and all the other "damn the facts, ad hominem speed" liberals:
Do you really, truly believe that would be all flowers and ass-kissing had we elected Kerry or Gore? Hell, Clinton, the most lovable, cuddly American since, well, Benedict Arnold, sent our fighters in to help Serbian Muslims, and they still attacked the USS Cole.
If you and Michael Isakoff hate it so much here, why don't y'all move to some enlightened country like France. Or better yet, since the liberals haven't met an Arab or Muslim they didn't love since the Shah was deposed, why don't y'all move to Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
In any case, just f*ck off.
Posted by: kbiel at May 18, 2005 01:06 AM (R/ofL)
8
You should vote a sociali st president. We've had three in a row, and they seem to be really good at selecting smart, economically and politically skilled governments that have both sociali sts and centralists in them. Sociali st presidents seem to work best when there is a huge, over 190cm+90kg sociali st/centralist prime minister leading the government, so it looks good to people. (Make sure the sociali st isn't too far on the left, more like a leftie centralist (socialdemocrat))
(In case you have only democratics and republicans and your president is your prime minister as well, then vote a democrat president, and make him pick a quarter-democ, eight-liber, eight-greenparty, half-repub government with no ex-generals or other army leaders)
Posted by: A Finn at May 18, 2005 02:42 AM (cWMi4)
9
Was the story actually retracted?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7857407/site/newsweek/page/2/
Newsweek explains in response to Pentagon queries:
"On Saturday, Isikoff spoke to his original source, the senior government official, who said that he clearly recalled reading investigative reports about mishandling the Qur'an, including a toilet incident. But the official, still speaking anonymously, could no longer be sure that these concerns had surfaced in the SouthCom report."
~~~
So, Newsweek's source isn't actually denying the event happened or that it was fabricated. The senior government offical is merely saying he read about the incident in an investigative report but couldn't be sure which report he saw it in.
Doesn't really sound like a retraction to me.
Either way, is it really that hard to believe interrogators in Gitmo flushed a Quran? One just as to look at the documented abuse, totured and murder by US hands in Abu Ghraib for an example of prior behavior.
As for the arrogance displayed in the exchange between the questioner and Mr. McClellan... I guess it really depends on whether you believe the White House pressured Newsweek or not. If the White House applied pressure or even appeared to have applied pressured, then the media has to take the White House to task to "save face". Its not really news, just a distraction from the looming energy crisis and the ongoing (illegal?)Iraqi War.
Posted by: puzzled at May 18, 2005 04:47 AM (moq9v)
10
Thank you, A Finn, for dictating what you think is best for Americans. We'll take your advice with a grain of salt if you don't mind.
The White House corresponent in question here can be none other than the abrasive, accusatory, disrespectful and extremely biased Elisabeth Bumiller of the NY Times. This is par for her usual tactics when "interrogating" a White House spokesman. She nearly always precedes her question with an accusation or derogatory comment. If she were in my house, I'd teach her some manners.
Posted by: Oyster at May 18, 2005 06:29 AM (YudAC)
11
Finn, leftist policies are destroying Western Europe's economies, and whenever we've had a democrat president, we've almost always had an economic recession to follow immediately thereafter. The only exception was Clinton, and that was because he didn't have enough support in Congress to do what he wanted- in his first term. By the end of his second term, the economy was crapped. To be fair, the tech bubble was largely responsible, but the non-tech sectors of the market were hurting as well. It seems that democrats are bad for business.
What is Finnland's unemployment rate again? Somewhere around 9% I think isn't it? Ours is about 5%.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 18, 2005 07:10 AM (0yYS2)
12
It seems we have a new troll on the blog. Don't these idiots realize it takes no effort to ignore them? Of course, when you have the mentality of a 6 year old throwing a tantrum, the world looks a bit different than to an adult.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 18, 2005 07:13 AM (0yYS2)
13
Desecration of Koran Had Been Reported Before
“Newsweek magazine's now-retracted story that a military guard at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, flushed a copy of the Koran down a toilet has sparked angry denunciations by the White House and the Pentagon, which have linked the article to Muslim riots and deaths abroad.
But American and international media have widely reported similar allegations from detainees and others of desecration of the Muslim holy book for more than two years.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/17/AR2005051701315.html
Quit your belly aching, the American soldiers do desecrate the Koran.
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 08:46 AM (/+dAV)
14
Well, Greg, I'm sure that 4 or 5 of us can make allegations that you chow down on dogshit every evening for dinner. In your world, that would make it true.
Posted by: Mark Flacy at May 18, 2005 09:00 AM (8aYgm)
15
Mark,
What's your source on that?
Do you REALLY believe with all your heart that American soldiers haven't desecrated the Koran on numerous occasions?
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 09:09 AM (/+dAV)
16
"If you and Michael Isakoff hate it so much here, why don't y'all move to some enlightened country like France. "
If Isikoff lived in france, he couldn't have made a name for himself attacking clinton. As for me, I don't speak french, and think america is the best country in the world.
"Do you really, truly believe that would be all flowers and ass-kissing had we elected Kerry or Gore?"
No.
Posted by: actus at May 18, 2005 09:28 AM (Ygl+x)
17
When whoever that fool was who asked "Are we supposed to write about how great the American military is.." I really wish McClellan had loudly snapped back with "Yes, and it would be about goddam time!". The elite media's hatred of the Bush Administration raw and visible to everyone. I'd like to see Bush ditch these idiots and give interviews to Fox and to the blogs.
Posted by: Scott in CA at May 18, 2005 09:39 AM (iNqkc)
18
KARIMOV BOILS PEOPLE ALIVE!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3943.htm
WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC
Are we using Uzbekistan for extraordinary renditions? Probably.
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 10:09 AM (/+dAV)
19
Greg
Do you really think soldiers desecrating the Quran is such a big deal?
I for one DONT SFW comes to mind.
We have more things to worry about more things to do. Bottom line is its not imortant and it doesnt merit even being printed. Look at the trouble its caused.
Dont you think that followers of the Koran have desecrated the Bible .
Oops forgot I as a Christian am not allowed to get offended by anything Muslims do. my bad Ill just go lie in a corner with my head covered so's not to offend anyone, stupid woman that i am
Come on Greg even you have got to admit that sometimes these things are taken too far. A Muslim Burning the Bible, huh, you wouldnt get any news media in Britain printing that story wouldnt be allowed, might upset a muslim.Would show their RELIGION in a bad light and we're only allowed to show Christians (and American Solidiers) in a bad light./ off
Posted by: sparky at May 18, 2005 01:50 PM (F1nba)
20
Come on children...stop your whining. The Bush administration will just use our tax money to hire some 'reporters' or pay off some more radio dj's to make things right! YEEEEEhaaaaaaw! Nothin' like some engineered news!
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 18, 2005 01:56 PM (WfZ6a)
21
"Do you really think soldiers desecrating the Quran is such a big deal?"-Sparky
It's a big deal because it frames the war as a religious war. Bush use of the word Crusade on Sept. 19, 2001 aggravated the situation. He has since backed away from that description. It's a big deal because it evokes such a response from the Muslim community and supposedly we're not at war with Islam. It's easy for you to say that burning a Holy Book is no big deal. I know plenty of Christians who are deeply disturbed when the Bible is desecrated. Would Christians protest in response? I think so. Remember, it was the protestors who were shot dead, they didn't do the killling as some people seem to think.
Your question suggests a realization on your part that the Koran has likely been desecrated. It seems this desecration is methodically employed for use on prisoners.
"Dont you think that followers of the Koran have desecrated the Bible ."-Sparky
It's quite possible. There are bad apples on both sides.
"Oops forgot I as a Christian am not allowed to get offended by anything Muslims do."-Sparky
Of course you''re allowed to be offended.
"Would show their RELIGION in a bad light and we're only allowed to show Christians (and American Solidiers) in a bad light./ off"
I don't know about Britain, but here in America Islam is constantly being painted in a bad light because of Islamic extemists who are a minority. Just like American Christians, 90% of muslims are peace loving people. The 2 groups of 90% should clear the way for a reconciliation between Christians and Muslims.
Sparky, you're full of hate when you should be full of sugar and spice. Cast it away. You'll feel better.
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 02:19 PM (/+dAV)
22
Yeah, I saw that 'Rove engineered this' horseshit being spouted about this story. It's crap, and if you feel otherwise, osamabeenthere, prove it.
greg, it doesn't matter one bit what I believe or don't believe, it matters only if the "news" reports can be substantiated with facts. Not that a journalist would recognize a fact these days, mere innuendo and speculation seem to be the rule of the day.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 18, 2005 02:20 PM (jPCiN)
23
No osamabeenthere, the Bush adminstration will use our tax money
to "GIVE" (NOT AWARD, AS IN FAIR COMPENTITION) more contracts to Halliburton, so Bush and Cheney can get their kick backs. Let them
eat cake. Bush = Louis XVI.
Posted by: Butch at May 18, 2005 02:26 PM (Gqhi9)
24
Butch
You out yourself as clueless regarding Halliburton. The type of contracts and their ability to secure them, were granted under the Clinton administration. Nice try though.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 18, 2005 03:01 PM (jPCiN)
25
"The type of contracts and their ability to secure them, were granted under the Clinton administration."-Defense Guy
That's Pure Bovine Excrement!
nice try though
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 03:15 PM (/+dAV)
26
Back it up with facts if you can greg. The type of no bid contract that Halliburton currently has, was granted by Clinton.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 18, 2005 03:35 PM (jPCiN)
27
You back it up, it's your claim.
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 03:43 PM (/+dAV)
28
Bill clinton gave halliburton iraq reconstruction contracts?
Posted by: actus at May 18, 2005 03:48 PM (Ygl+x)
29
Fine. Halliburton got the contract again in 2001 after already having it under Clinton. It falls under the LOGCAP program. Here is a link to a good summary of the situation.
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york070903.asp
You need to stay away from some of those propoganda sites greg. They cannot be helping your mind.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 18, 2005 03:49 PM (jPCiN)
30
actus
What exactly is an 'iraq reconstruction contracts'? Does such a beast exist, or are you just talking out of your ass again.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 18, 2005 03:59 PM (jPCiN)
31
"What exactly is an 'iraq reconstruction contracts'?"
There's a country in the middle east. We've invaded it. And now we're reconstructing it. Which takes a sizeable military and government force. This force uses private contractors, in what sometimes are referred to as iraq reconstruction contracts.
Posted by: actus at May 18, 2005 04:04 PM (Ygl+x)
32
Hey Defense Guy, What about the RIO? No Bid. And since you gave
me an interesting site to read, I thought I would repay the favor.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/121004A.shtml
Enjoy you cake.
Posted by: Butch at May 18, 2005 04:07 PM (Gqhi9)
33
"Fine. Halliburton got the contract again in 2001"-Defense Guy
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Chimp was President in 2001.
Posted by: greg at May 18, 2005 04:10 PM (/+dAV)
34
I take it you guys were pissed when these same companies were getting no bid contracts after GW 1 and Kosovo.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 18, 2005 04:12 PM (jPCiN)
35
Defense Guy,
I have never been a fan of the GW's. The only good thing
about GW becoming President was that Texas was able to get rid of him
as Gov.
Posted by: Butch at May 18, 2005 04:30 PM (Gqhi9)
36
C'mon, when the Hell are you Bible thumpin ,conservative ASS-HOLES gonna get off the liberal media bullshit ?? If
they were even one iota liberal you clowns wouldn't be in office
They may appear liberal because of their (deliberate?)in-eptnes in reporting the news,but only a typically stupid conservative would buy into that bullshit ! But I can't believe you're all really THAT stupid. Of course , I could be wrong.
Posted by: Peter at May 18, 2005 04:51 PM (oGlYR)
37
hahahaha! Greg, actus, Butch, Peter - you can all put your winkies back in your pants now. No one wants to play with you.
Posted by: Oyster at May 18, 2005 05:21 PM (YudAC)
38
If you want to know who was awarded contracts for rebuilding Iraq,
take a look here. So next time you open yer yaps, you'll know what you're talking about. The only no-bid part of any contract awards was for Halliburton to take repair the oil wells. yes, they ended up with more than the other companies, but is there really another company in the world on a par with Halliburton? You can't possibly imagine all the things they do.
No one is complaining about Bechtel, who has a shady repertoire and contributed more generously to democrats, no, hell no. Everyone's got their panties in a wad because Cheney used to work for Halliburton.
I'm leaving now. I'll send someone back to change your diapers.
Posted by: Oyster at May 18, 2005 06:10 PM (YudAC)
39
Greg
I am not full of hate at all. Surely youve read more of my posts. I dont hate muslims in fact i have refuted this a number of times i believe in live and let live, I just get so fed up listening to people going on that we shouldnt offend muslims. what about Christians or any other religion for that matter just seems to me, over here in the UK anyway, that everyone has to be tolerant of muslim ways or the Koran. I certainly am. I certainly do not believe anyone should die because of religion and i dont think this is a religious war.
Hey I would be the first person to stand up for anyone being persecuted no matter what their religion or colour. My philosphy in life is "Do unto others what you wish for yourself"
I dont dismiss that the Koran has been desecreted do i think its right? No, but people have died because of this and the media do have a responsibility. Printing this sort of stuff makes matters worse.
I also agree that the actions of the terrorists colour the lines of this war and that all muslims are not terrorists. I have no problem with muslims but i do have a problems with terrorists that mask their actions in the name of Religion.
Today I am probably a little more Spice than sugar.
You should know me better by now
Tempremental we women are, or maybe just mental
Posted by: sparky at May 18, 2005 07:38 PM (F1nba)
40
"What is Finnland's unemployment rate again? Somewhere around 9% I think isn't it? Ours is about 5%."
Improbe:
It's 9% because of the sexual friggin' equality laws, that demanded unemploymentsupport paychecks for housewives (women who stay at home taking care of their kids and/or house), and we have a lot of those.
Posted by: A Finn at May 19, 2005 02:18 AM (cWMi4)
41
I dont dismiss that the Koran has been desecreted do i think its right? No, but people have died because of this and the media do have a responsibility. Printing this sort of stuff makes matters worse. --Sparky
The problem is that it happened in the first place, not that it got reported.
Posted by: puzzled at May 19, 2005 02:58 AM (moq9v)
42
Puzzled,
Of course that's a problem. But should the world be told about it over and over? To what end? To constantly re-iterate how eeeevil Americans are? Look at the Netherlands and Hirsi Ali with her film about Islam. Is that not a more overt slap in the face for the Muslim community? What's happening about it? Theo VanGogh got killed over it, more people have been threatened over it, fa twahs have been issued and the media reported on it briefly and immediately got over it. No riots, no "recycling" the news over it, nothing. And where's Hollywood on this one? Not a peep out of Theo VanGoghs colleagues. Now she's doing Part II. Do you think the media cares? Hell no. It's not the eeevil Americans. You know, it's unAmerican if you're not unAmerican over here anymore. We're just sick of the double standards.
And A Finn,
So we need a sociali st President so we can pay higher unemployment taxes to pay homemakers who want to stay home? Right.
Posted by: Oyster at May 19, 2005 05:43 AM (YudAC)
43
"Printing this sort of stuff makes matters worse."-Sparky
Sparky, the day we quit printing these sorts of things is the day our democracy is totally dead.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 08:47 AM (/+dAV)
44
Oyster:
No, that crappy arrangement wasn't a byproduct of mild sociali sm, it's because of too many fanatic feminists in bilingual areas around the coast generally.
Posted by: A Finn at May 19, 2005 10:11 AM (lGolT)
45
As I posted at http://www.bigpicweblog.com/exp/index.php/weblog/comments/on_freedom_of_speech/:
* A call for laws restricting the press from interviewing supporters of terrorists, is a postition which is dangerous to freedom of speech.
* A call for the press, on its own initiative, to stop promoting terrorists -- in Pipes' words, "On their own initiative, [to] exclude the enemy's apologists and advocates" -- is not a danger to freedom of speech -- it is a use of freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech is not guaranteed only to MSM, but to all Americans.
Posted by: Vik at August 19, 2005 11:53 AM (E4aK3)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
