SilverNRed Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Not content with good old-fashioned sloppy reporting, Newsweek has begun actively working against the United States overseas.... LINK Of course, that whole Liberal Media thing is a myth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 So read Time or the Christian Science Monitor instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Not content with good old-fashioned sloppy reporting, Newsweek has begun actively working against the United States overseas.... LINK Of course, that whole Liberal Media thing is a myth. 342141[/snapback] I am outraged! I am not sure what is worse, this, or the Repulican party (with their "mandate"- check out the latest polls in the Wallstreet Journal- a real bastion of liberalism) stripping away our country, as we may have once perceived it, for financial gain...seems like whenever the Republicans make noise about the "liberal media", it always comes on the heals of some bad news for their crusade....notice how little coverage the Downing Street memo got...weapons of mass destraction indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 Nominee for reply of the year. Let's go line by line: I am outraged! I am not sure what is worse, this, or the Repulican party 342154[/snapback] which I am not a member of but merely tolerate because they are closer to conservative than the 'other' party in our wonderful two-party system (with their "mandate"- check out the latest polls in the Wallstreet Journal- a real bastion of liberalism)I love the 'latest polls' and Lord knows they're never wrong.... stripping away our country, Bye bye, country... as we may have once perceived it, ?? for financial gain...Cha-Ching! Godo thing we've identified which party is destroying the country to make a little extra cheese on the side. seems like whenever the Republicans make noise about the "liberal media", Good idea to put the scare quotes around "liberal media." Wouldn't want to acknowledge it exists despite the mountains of evidence at this point. it always comes on the heals of some bad news for their crusade....The crusade started? Damn, where's my sword? I heard Orlando Bloom was helping..... notice how little coverage the Downing Street memo got...weapons of mass destraction indeed!Thread hijacking attempt. Right on schedule... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Nominee for reply of the year. Let's go line by line: which I am not a member of but merely tolerate because they are closer to conservative than the 'other' party in our wonderful two-party system I love the 'latest polls' and Lord knows they're never wrong.... Bye bye, country... ?? Cha-Ching! Godo thing we've identified which party is destroying the country to make a little extra cheese on the side. Good idea to put the scare quotes around "liberal media." Wouldn't want to acknowledge it exists despite the mountains of evidence at this point. The crusade started? Damn, where's my sword? I heard Orlando Bloom was helping..... Thread hijacking attempt. Right on schedule... 342174[/snapback] Sorry Silver, I forgot the media works for the government...sorry to put it in quotes. Seems like the term "liberal media" is used by Republicans (or those who lean toward their ideas- didn't mean to offend you) the way they accuse the left of using terms like "Haliburton". As far as the "mountains of evidence" you refer to, I don't see it. The news is media, it has, unfortunately become nothing more than a wing of the entertainment conglomerates that own it's sources. You know, the whole Newsweek/koran burning thing is a perfect example of what is becoming ever more f**cked up about this country. It makes no difference to you, or anyone else who pisses and moans about the liberal media, that there is ample evidence that the story is true, only that it was reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Sorry Silver, I forgot the media works for the government...sorry to put it in quotes. Seems like the term "liberal media" is used by Republicans (or those who lean toward their ideas- didn't mean to offend you) the way they accuse the left of using terms like "Haliburton". As far as the "mountains of evidence" you refer to, I don't see it. The news is media, it has, unfortunately become nothing more than a wing of the entertainment conglomerates that own it's sources. You know, the whole Newsweek/koran burning thing is a perfect example of what is becoming ever more f**cked up about this country. It makes no difference to you, or anyone else who pisses and moans about the liberal media, that there is ample evidence that the story is true, only that it was reported. 342183[/snapback] Please provide ample evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 It makes no difference to you, or anyone else who pisses and moans about the liberal media, that there is ample evidence that the story is true, only that it was reported. 342183[/snapback] Even NEWSWEEK admitted the report was questionable and backed up by no evidence other than one statement by one anonymous source. If you have other evidence...you should share it with Newsweek. I'm sure they'd be happy to be vindicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reuben Gant Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Not content with good old-fashioned sloppy reporting, Newsweek has begun actively working against the United States overseas.... LINK Of course, that whole Liberal Media thing is a myth. 342141[/snapback] The article seems to have a four pronged focus: 1. The influence America had in the past generation is waning 2. American diplomacy has not been very effective. Rice has her hands tied. 3. Iraq didn't go down too well in the world 4. Bush is not very popular worldwide: seems not to care about world opinion BTW this would have hit Japanese kiosks on the week of the aniversary of their Constitution (written by MacArther) in which they have the annual debate about their relationship with the US. **revised, actually the holiday of the line of emperors, which was un-diefied by the post-war constitution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Even NEWSWEEK admitted the report was questionable and backed up by no evidence other than one statement by one anonymous source. If you have other evidence...you should share it with Newsweek. I'm sure they'd be happy to be vindicated. 342308[/snapback] If you read Newsweeks retraction, they do not deny the story, only admitt that they should have perhaps, checked their sources. All weekend, ex miltary officers, and military police officials were all over the television and radio saying that this type of thing is fairly common, and that our own soldiers, as part of their training, are told to be prepaired for the desecration of the bible...are you people naive enough to think that this was made up? There was even one who claimed that the story was read by a military official, before the story ran, and no objection was made at that time. Newsweek merely crumbled to the thugs that currently run the White House. It amazes me that the majority on this wing of the board, all priding yourselves as being free-thinking, individualists, are bowing before an administration that is setting new lows for dealing in dirty politics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 If you read Newsweeks retraction, they do not deny the story, only admitt that they should have perhaps, checked their sources. All weekend, ex miltary officers, and military police officials were all over the television and radio saying that this type of thing is fairly common, and that our own soldiers, as part of their training, are told to be prepaired for the desecration of the bible...are you people naive enough to think that this was made up? There was even one who claimed that the story was read by a military official, before the story ran, and no objection was made at that time. Newsweek merely crumbled to the thugs that currently run the White House. It amazes me that the majority on this wing of the board, all priding yourselves as being free-thinking, individualists, are bowing before an administration that is setting new lows for dealing in dirty politics... 342490[/snapback] Again, written, concrete proof please... rather than innuendo and allegations. You said you had rock-solid proof. Let's see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Again, written, concrete proof please... rather than innuendo and allegations. You said you had rock-solid proof. Let's see it. 342494[/snapback] Stop bowing down to the administration. You don't need any actual concrete proof when it comes to these types of things. Innuendo is enough. Friggin Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Again, written, concrete proof please... rather than innuendo and allegations. You said you had rock-solid proof. Let's see it. 342494[/snapback] I never said I had "rock-solid proof". Just watching the news, listening to radio coverage of this whole story, nobody in the know (ie: military people, not Bush appointees, or political figures) went out out of their way to deny that something like this could/would happen, and in fact, most acted as though it was fairly common. I used the term "ample evidence" as a counter to SilverNRed's argument that there was "mountains of evidence" that the story was not true. The only thing anyone is cititng as proof that the story was false, is Newsweeks retraction. They only admitt that it may have been irresponsible to print, but nowhwere to they deny the content of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 I never said I had "rock-solid proof". Just watching the news, listening to radio coverage of this whole story, nobody in the know (ie: military people, not Bush appointees, or political figures) went out out of their way to deny that something like this could/would happen, and in fact, most acted as though it was fairly common. I used the term "ample evidence" as a counter to SilverNRed's argument that there was "mountains of evidence" that the story was not true. The only thing anyone is cititng as proof that the story was false, is Newsweeks retraction. They only admitt that it may have been irresponsible to print, but nowhwere to they deny the content of the story. 342502[/snapback] Of course not. That would mean taking responsibility - which is a microcosm of what is wrong with our society. Much adieu about nothing, as usual. Now back to your regularly scheduled program of getting screwed over by the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Of course not. That would mean taking responsibility - which is a microcosm of what is wrong with our society. Much adieu about nothing, as usual. Now back to your regularly scheduled program of getting screwed over by the government. 342513[/snapback] ado, my friend. ado. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 If you read Newsweeks retraction, they do not deny the story, only admitt that they should have perhaps, checked their sources. 342490[/snapback] But actually... Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker said he thought the magazine had already "retracted what we think we may have gotten wrong" in an editor's note published Sunday and in media interviews. "We've called it an error," he said. "We've called it a mistake." So again, NEWSWEEK calls the story (not the publishing of the story, but the story itself) an "error" and a "mistake", but you have "ample evidence" that it's true? Too bad Newsweek doesn't have your sources... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 But actually...So again, NEWSWEEK calls the story (not the publishing of the story, but the story itself) an "error" and a "mistake", but you have "ample evidence" that it's true? Too bad Newsweek doesn't have your sources... 342586[/snapback] The administration and the military did not deny it, so therefore it is true. What proof do you need? Isn't the lack of denial enough for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 The administration and the military did not deny it, so therefore it is true. What proof do you need? Isn't the lack of denial enough for you? 342595[/snapback] They also haven't denied the existence of bigfoot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 The administration and the military did not deny it, so therefore it is true. What proof do you need? Isn't the lack of denial enough for you? 342595[/snapback] When DID you stop beating your wife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 They also haven't denied the existence of bigfoot... 342596[/snapback] So the solution is that every time a terrorist claims anything, our government has to go out of their way to specifically respond to it or else we'll have people jotting it down as the truth. Great. Has the Bush administration denied the existance of Hobbits? Which way to Middle Earth? Are Wookies real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 They also haven't denied the existence of bigfoot... 342596[/snapback] That is because Bigfoot exists. It was reported in all the papers. The National Enquirer had a big story on it. I think the Weekly World News also had a multi-part piece on it. Seriously, Tom. You really need to start reading more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts