"Buying the War"

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation building corps from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops.

Come on... how outdated....

We need a troops surge... send all the fuckers and their children who got America into this crap and are so staunch in their "support" of the war....like they fucking have a clue of what they have caused.... and in their minds.. hell those who volunteered knew what they were getting into( except fo the stop loss and extensions of tours of duty etc.. talk about changing the rules when it suits THEM) Its kind of like an actor accepting an award....by thanking all the "little people"....they really believe that THEY are the only ones worthy...their EGO's demand that. And they are TOOO important to actually serve themselves...or to have THEIR children serve... they are far better than that.... serving is for those who cant afford better.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Bill Moyer and Dan Rather getting all warm and cozy. The piece had many inaccuracies as pointed out by other news sources.

I'd be interested to see those pointed out. I thought he did a good job of showing how complicit the media was in the lead up to the war. No one (but Knight Ridder) was asking any of the obvious questions. They were just taking the talking points and repeating them. It wasn't reporting, it was reciting. The Washington Post publicly apologized for doing it and Colbert had a good time with it at the press dinner last year. Not that I expect much to change, but the first step to getting better is admitting that you have a problem.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I thought he did a good job of showing how complicit the media was in the lead up to the war. No one (but Knight Ridder) was asking any of the obvious questions. They were just taking the talking points and repeating them. It wasn't reporting, it was reciting.

Come on... do you REALLY expect more out of Neo-TASS or PRAVDA-FOX????

I would have hoped that some of the others would have done SOMETHING to bring some reality into the reporting.. but Post 9/11....if you was not in goose step with those who wanted war.... you were a terrorist sympathizer... Hell the right wingies right here voiced the same opinion right here in( at the time) Talkback....and they are still doing the Polly WANNA CRACKER tricks for their masters in the Administration.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Come on... do you REALLY expect more out of Neo-TASS or PRAVDA-FOX?

LOL

[Channman 2]

Quote

Quote

Bill Moyer and Dan Rather getting all warm and cozy. The piece had many inaccuracies as pointed out by other news sources.

I'd be interested to see those pointed out. I thought he did a good job of showing how complicit the media was in the lead up to the war. No one (but Knight Ridder) was asking any of the obvious questions. They were just taking the talking points and repeating them. It wasn't reporting, it was reciting. The Washington Post publicly apologized for doing it and Colbert had a good time with it at the press dinner last year. Not that I expect much to change, but the first step to getting better is admitting that you have a problem.

I was watching it while cleaning the pool, so I did'nt catch all of it. I do believe he referenced and was critical of the New York Times reporting leading up to war.

Bennard Goldberg, if I spelled his name correctly made several mentions of how several news clips used in Moyers piece were taken a piece here and a piece there to come to a conculsion that other news sources where labeling journalist as being un american with their reporting and thus pressuring them or sliming them as Dan Rathers put it to remain silent or otherwise jump on board if you don't want a target on your back.

In essence, though clever editing he was able to get sound bites that helped him present a picture that was not fare or accurate.

[Channman 2]

Quote

Quote

I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation building corps from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops.

Come on... how outdated....

We need a troops surge... send all the fuckers and their children who got America into this crap and are so staunch in their "support" of the war....like they fucking have a clue of what they have caused.... and in their minds.. hell those who volunteered knew what they were getting into( except fo the stop loss and extensions of tours of duty etc.. talk about changing the rules when it suits THEM) Its kind of like an actor accepting an award....by thanking all the "little people"....they really believe that THEY are the only ones worthy...their EGO's demand that. And they are TOOO important to actually serve themselves...or to have THEIR children serve... they are far better than that.... serving is for those who cant afford better.

I guess the $1,000.00 reward is no longer in play.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

In essence, though clever editing he was able to get sound bites that helped him present a picture that was not fare fair or accurate.

Ah, ok... so Michael Moore produced it for them, then?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Come on... do you REALLY expect more out of Neo-TASS or PRAVDA-FOX????

As a side bar, you might like this and I can't resist poking at them. Check it out, Shepard Smith from FOX gets caught up in a moment of Lib-like compassion....I mean weakness. He's damn near aiding the enemy if you ask me. And "treasonous" if you ask Tom DeLay

The were showing the coffin of the Blue Angel who crashed.
"This is a scene we are not accustomed to see during war times. They don’t allow us to see the victims — uh, heroes who died for us in Iraq. We don’t get to see their caskets come back. It’s a wonderful honor to be able to pay tribute to this man in this way. Wouldn’t it be nice if we were able to do this with the hundreds upon hundreds who have died for us in Iraq?"

[Amazon 7]

That was an offer that I made to Bill Von.. and thru him to HH... they did not accept the offer so its null and void...

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

That was an offer that I made to Bill Von.. and thru him to HH... they did not accept the offer so its null and void...

What about this one:

Quote

I will lay you odds, that there are those in the Administration who are hoping for a really devastating attack from the evil doers so they can declare martial law and get away with these pesky elections where the lower classes can make their feelings known.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Bennard Goldberg, if I spelled his name correctly made several mentions of how several news clips used in Moyers piece were taken a piece here and a piece there to come to a conculsion that other news sources where labeling journalist as being un american with their reporting and thus pressuring them or sliming them as Dan Rathers put it to remain silent or otherwise jump on board if you don't want a target on your back....

Well Goldberg is entitled to his opinion, but you don't have to do any editing to make that point. Quotes are sufficient:

BILL MOYERS: And as the administration organized to strike back at the terrorists, there was little tolerance for critical scrutiny from journalists.

WALTER ISAACSON: There was a patriotic fervor and the administration used it so that if you challenged anything you were made to feel that there was something wrong with that.

BILL MOYERS: Walter Isaacson was then Chairman and Chief Executive Officer OF CNN.

WALTER ISAACSON: And there was even almost a patriotism police which, you know, they'd be up there on the internet sort of picking anything a Christiane Amanpour, or somebody else would say as if it were disloyal….

BILL MOYERS: We interviewed a former reporter at CNN who had been there through that period. And this reporter said this quote, "Everybody on staff just sort of knew not to push too hard to do stories critical of the Bush Administration."

WALTER ISAACSON: Especially right after 9/11. Especially when the war in Afghanistan is going on. There was a real sense that you don't get that critical of a government that's leading us in war time.

SOLDIER: Move out!

BILL MOYERS: When American forces went after the terrorist bases in Afghanistan, network and cable news reported the civilian casualtiesÂ…the patriot police came knocking.

WALTER ISAACSON: We'd put it on the air and by nature of a 24 hour TV network, it was replaying over and over again. So, you would get phone calls. You would get advertisers. You would get the Administration.

BILL MOYERS: You said pressure from advertisers?

WALTER ISAACSON: Not direct pressure from advertisers, but big people in corporations were calling up and saying, 'You're being anti-American here.'

BILL MOYERS: So Isaacson sent his staff a memo, leaked to THE WASHINGTON POST: 'It seems perverse' he said, 'to focus too much on the casualties or hardship in Afghanistan,"

REPORTER: There's a body up here.

BILL MOYERS: And he ordered his reporters and anchors to balance the images of civilian devastation with reminders of September 11th.

WALTER ISAACSON: I felt if we put into context, we could alleviate the pressure of people saying, "Don't even show what's happening in Afghanistan."

BILL MOYERS: Newspapers were squeezed, too. This one in Florida told its editors: "Do not use photos on page 1a showing civilian casualtiesÂ…" our sister paper Â…has done so and received hundreds and hundreds of threatening e-mails

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

That was an offer that I made to Bill Von.. and thru him to HH... they did not accept the offer so its null and void...

What about this one:

Quote

I will lay you odds, that there are those in the Administration who are hoping for a really devastating attack from the evil doers so they can declare martial law and get away with these pesky elections where the lower classes can make their feelings known.

If you're looking for a thread to drift to, go here. You seem to have missed my last post.
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2756674;search_string=martial%20law%20;#2756674

[Channman 2]

> Q: A lot of people don't realize that documentaries are not meant to be balanced and neutral -- they always have a point of view. So what is the slant or agenda of "Islam vs. Islamists"?

Took this quote from another thread, is it possible that Moyer's documentary was meant to be bias toward his point of view.

Just kicking it around, thinking out loud so to speak.

[NCclimber 0]

Moyers was on the Tavis Smiley Show to talk about this program. His parting statement.

"Thank you, Tavis. And my guest on Friday night, by the way, will be Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" because I think he's one of the most significant analysts of the news and information of our time."

Classic.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

> Q: A lot of people don't realize that documentaries are not meant to be balanced and neutral -- they always have a point of view. So what is the slant or agenda of "Islam vs. Islamists"?

Took this quote from another thread, is it possible that Moyer's documentary was meant to be bias toward his point of view.

Just kicking it around, thinking out loud so to speak.

Certainly. Had he not had strong feelings about the war he probably would not have made it. However that does not make it inaccurate. He pretty much bashes everyone in the media for not doing a good job. He seems to back it up. Had he been biased in the other direction he probably simply would not have addressed the issue.
But looking up this piece in various blogs it seems that most people are simply attacking Moyers, but not the content of his work.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Moyers was on the Tavis Smiley Show to talk about this program. His parting statement.

"Thank you, Tavis. And my guest on Friday night, by the way, will be Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" because I think he's one of the most significant analysts of the news and information of our time."

Classic.

I read that interview. What's the problem with Stewart? Sure, he runs a "fake news" show but he's typically more on the ball than most of the "real" news folks. Case in point:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/19/jon-stewart-calls-out-bushs-rhetorical-bullt/
Now THAT's classic!

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

Quote

I think Moyers is full of shit.

We did win the war, absolutely no question about it.

And this has to do with the content of the post how?
Or is this just a knee jerk reaction by someone who has no idea what the program was about? It's pretty lame to slam the content when you don't even know what it is or what he's talking about.

It has to do with the content of the post because Moyers was complaining about the fact that the administration was claiming victory. I am making it clear that I think that is a correct claim. We didn't wait to see if the civilian population or remnants of the armies in Japan or Germany would keep fighting before we claimed victory, so why should we this time?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think Moyers is full of shit.

We did win the war, absolutely no question about it.

And this has to do with the content of the post how?
Or is this just a knee jerk reaction by someone who has no idea what the program was about? It's pretty lame to slam the content when you don't even know what it is or what he's talking about.

It has to do with the content of the post because Moyers was complaining about the fact that the administration was claiming victory. I am making it clear that I think that is a correct claim. We didn't wait to see if the civilian population or remnants of the armies in Japan or Germany would keep fighting before we claimed victory, so why should we this time?

I've got to go, lots of jumping to do this weekend (I hope) but I have to leave one parting thought.
So if we've claimed "victory" and have won, then why all the hub bub "winning" or "losing" the war these days?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I read that interview. What's the problem with Stewart? Sure, he runs a "fake news" show but he's typically more on the ball than most of the "real" news folks.

You mean people like Tim Russert? Robert MacNeil? Andrea Mitchell? Diane Sawyer? George Stephanopoulos? Cokie Roberts?

Yeah. They're a bunch of slackers.

Does Stewart ever appear on news programs, outside of his controlled environment, where he can't control the discussion or rely on his writers?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

but I have to leave one parting thought.
So if we've claimed "victory" and have won, then why all the hub bub "winning" or "losing" the war these days?

And three thousand american families have been impacted in a far more detrimental way than anyone in the administration will EVER be affected.

[algboy 0]

Quote

I think Moyers is full of shit.

We did win the war, absolutely no question about it.

"You know you never defeated us on the battlefield," said the American colonel.
The North Vietnamese colonel pondered this remark a moment. "That may be so," he replied, "but it is also irrelevant."

So we "won"--no doubt about it? Well ain't that a bitch to those poor SOBs we keep bringing home in boxes.

Moyers is full of shit? That's amusing -- compared to what? O'Really? Limbaugh? Hannity? Beck? Shit . . . I'd have to say that in the valley of the blind the one-eyed man is -- and shall alway remain -- king.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Does Stewart ever appear on news programs, outside of his controlled environment, where he can't control the discussion or rely on his writers?

Yes. (don't tell me you missed him on Crossfire)
So did you watch it Friday night? Great interview.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04272007/transcript1.html

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Does Stewart ever appear on news programs, outside of his controlled environment, where he can't control the discussion or rely on his writers?

Yes. (don't tell me you missed him on Crossfire)
So did you watch it Friday night? Great interview.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04272007/transcript1.html

Crossfire? You mean his trash talking with Tucker Carlson, two and a half years ago? Wow. What kind of insightful analysis did he offer?

Thanks for the Moyers transcript. I didn't read the whole thing, but it sure did seem like Moyers was only tossing up easy lobs. "Here you go, Jon. Let me blow a little sunshine up your ass. Then you can respond".

Perhaps Stewart can do something a little more hard hitting, like Larry King Live.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Crossfire? You mean his trash talking with Tucker Carlson, two and a half years ago? Wow. What kind of insightful analysis did he offer?

Well there was the "you're hurting America" and the "you're doing theater, when you should be doing debate........what you do is partisan hackery". Those were good but I thought that he was astoundingly concise and accurate when he said "You know what's interesting, though? You're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show."
But yea, you're right about the exchange. That show was just as bad as all the other Crossfires.

Thanks for the Moyers transcript. I didn't read the whole thing, but it sure did seem like Moyers was only tossing up easy lobs. "Here you go, Jon. Let me blow a little sunshine up your ass. Then you can respond".

Perhaps Stewart can do something a little more hard hitting, like Larry King Live.

I'm sure that he could, but he does a "fake" news program right now. And I think that was what Moyers was trying to point out, that Stewart and his "fake" news often does a better job of analyzing the day's stories. Sure, TDShow is basically an editorial program but their staff certainly does a more thorough job of news gathering than most "real" news programming. Maybe that stems from the fact that they don't have to deal with the 24 hr news cycle like the real news outlets do. It seems that it's more important to be first than accurate.

[NCclimber 0]

It's easy to say " their staff certainly does a more thorough job of news gathering than most "real" news programming", when they get to cherry pick the juicy morsels they make fun of. I'd like to see some straight up, serious analysis, without the schtick Would he measure up? Or would he fail as miserably as Rush did, when he tried to hold his own with the real McCoys?