RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered

RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 9:18:02 PM)
I suppose I could list all the articles they wrote which caused the reopening of investigations into something that had been put on the back burner by investigative agencies and mainstream news sources. But you already stated you reject them out of hand, so whats the point. It doesnt really interest me how you justify your avoidance of truth or factual information. If it works for you, I say go with it. As I have mentioned previously, I am always astonished that life can exist in a mind that small and myopic. I dont really know why you are so antithetical to Hunter S. Thompson. The man was a freaking genius who changed journalism in ways nobody else ever had, whether or not you agree with him. A similar force was Tom Wolfe. I personally dont mind reading things I dont agree with, I go through life thinking I might learn something new or at least may have missed something in my research. But as you stated, you are perfectly happy only reading and comprehending things that agree with what you already believe. Enjoy your evening. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 9:58:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I dont really know why you are so antithetical to Hunter S. Thompson. The man was a freaking genius who changed journalism in ways nobody else ever had, LOL. I love HST's stuff I've actually pirated a bit of artwork from one of his books as a tattoo. A side-effect of having the journalist who reinvented the rules on your masthead though, is you get a lot more reporters not following the rules, who aren't anywhere near as good or put the agenda ahead of the story. Perhaps that doesn't matter to you since they seem to share your predjudices, but I gave up on them long ago as anything but entertainment. The last issue I bought had Beavis and Butt-Head on the cover (go ahead, I can sense that you are grasping). So, what causes you to dismiss Yon so casually, when you claim to seek out alternative views?

uwinceismile -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 10:12:48 PM)
some folks wouldnt believe thier own eyes, if it went against thier own beliefs, :(

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:02:36 AM)
Quite true, Wince, and more will fake it in the name of their perceived 'greater good.' I did a brief search on the AP reporter Yon mentioned. I didn't find a bio, but he gets enough by-lines to generate some hits. Let's hope he is one of the better variety.

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 1:18:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic So, what causes you to dismiss Yon so casually, when you claim to seek out alternative views? Mostly the use of definitive statements. "Al Qaeda did this" "Al Qaeda was here" The proof he provides is basically because the Iraqis told him so, and he believes it. As I pointed out, see this all the time with zealots and fundamentalists. I want to know why he believes it was Al Qaeda, not a serial killer, some Blackwater people fired after Abu Graibh, not some opportunistic religious cult, not angry neighbors, not the guy saying it was Al Qaeda, etc. Your first response was because the US military went there, it stands to reason that Al Qaeda must have been involved. I dont know if you have bothered to notice, but this administration has spent years trying to find any evidence, no matter how shady or unbelievable, to prove what they feel needs to be proven. They lie repeatedly. They repeatedly insist they never made certain statements. These are then shown by people like John Stewart or Al Franken who go back, find where they said it, get the transcript or video, and show them both saying something and then later denying they ever said it. The problem I have with people who are proven to tell lies (or, at least, never bothering to remember what they have previously said) is it makes me dubious about any other statements they make. Apparently, you have no problem believing what these people are telling you, and a very limited memory of what things you actually read or heard them tell you. Perhaps you dont actually bother to read or listen to them lie to you. Whichever it is, if you feel it works for you then keep it up. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 1:29:25 PM)
So you dismiss Yon because he says things you don't want to hear, rather than because of any negative impression of his journalistic practices. Ain't freedom grand?

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 1:35:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic So you dismiss Yon because he says things you don't want to hear, rather than because of any negative impression of his journalistic practices. That was what you took away from my post about his use of infinitive statements used without being backed by any sort of proof, and the fact that the current administration lies repeatedly (without bothering to provide any proof) about Al Qaeda, so they become hard for me to believe? That certainly explains your knee-jerk need to believe the story. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 2:00:24 PM)
Yon is not the administration, Sinergy. As for his use of definitive statements, they are attributed to the sources. Standard journalistic practice. I don't especially care for his style. I think really telling a story such as this requires experience and resources he doesn't have. But just because the first reporter on the story isn't a Pulitzer winner doesn't mean the story isn't worth checking out. He addresses the assertion that Al Qaeda was there in the most recent dispatch (quote in itallics, link is above), here is a snip. No unnamed Iraqi stringer claimed that al Qaeda had taken over Baqubah. Al Qaeda said this through the press.

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 6:19:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic No unnamed Iraqi stringer claimed that al Qaeda had taken over Baqubah. Al Qaeda said this through the press. Which press? Are they sure it was Al Qaeda and not some obnoxious teenagers playing a prank? Did the supposed member of Al Qaeda call from Washington D.C. with a Texas accent? I stand by my statement that with the Iraq war and the current administration, the way for an Iraqi to get a boatload of money, ample military to kill anybody one needs killed, and complete safety to conduct operations, is to play the Al Qaeda Boogey Man card. I dont know Yon. I dont know his journalistic credentials. Just me, etc. Sinergy

Level -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 6:59:03 PM)
Wikipedia entry on Michael Yon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Yon

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:22:38 PM)
Thanks, Level. You don't have to read a whole lot of his work to know he never did those damn inverted pyramid drills.

Level -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:32:36 PM)
You're welcome, Rich. Yon seems like an interesting guy, I'm curious to how his time and work over there will play out.

domiguy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:35:47 PM)
I googled Yon...Knew he had served...This is the problem...All administrations want their shit spun in a positive light....If you don't write nice shit...No ride on Air Force One.....Why is the military allowing Yon to tag along?...If you read his articles they (the military and the soldiers) help him. they assist him and show concern when he "is tired." There is no free ride..they know what they are going to get from Yon...I think not to question his motivation and bias would be absurd at this point. Why should the military let him travel with them...he is a liability. I think there is every probability that Yon shares an opinion similar to those who allow his presence...It only makes sense...Therefore it would only be wise to show a healthy skepticism when it comes to his reporting style.

Level -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:38:25 PM)
But it's not like Yon is the only person imbedded over there, DG.

domiguy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:52:49 PM)
Actually he is one of the few, if the are any others, that is traveling rather continuously in the "front lines" with the troops....He has special access...Which obviously must be allowed....If he wasn't going to put a positive spin on ALL of his reports he would be gone....It's that simple.....Find a report from Yon heavily criticizing any aspect of us participating in this war orof any of our troops conduct...just one...Like Sgt Anderson's feet smell...I think he is bought and paid for...It sucks ..Explain how else he is allowed to be there? God it really blows to believe so little of what you read and hear...But it has paid dividends in the long run.....Who struck the deal that allows Yon to be able to capture all of these images? I wouldn't consider it to be far reaching to determine that there might be a possibility that Yon is in their pocket. I think it simply requires one to look at a situation and be able to question all off the information that you have available...And then simply ask yourself..."Why is this guy allowed to do what he does?"

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 7:57:49 PM)
Level is right, DG. The military babysits all kinds of reporters over there. That ABC anchor who damn near got his head blown off for one, the camera guy who sent out the footage of Marines killing an insurgent who was playing dead (I think we had a thread on that one some time back). Let's not forget that one of the high-profile journalists who got his ass booted out of the embed program for violating operational security was from Fox.

domiguy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 8:53:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Level is right, DG. The military babysits all kinds of reporters over there. That ABC anchor who damn near got his head blown off for one, the camera guy who sent out the footage of Marines killing an insurgent who was playing dead (I think we had a thread on that one some time back). Let's not forget that one of the high-profile journalists who got his ass booted out of the embed program for violating operational security was from Fox. I agree with you to a point....The military babysits the majority of these guys...They try to protect them...They are not usually walking for months on end with the troops...They are usually shuffled back in some "semi protected area" ....Obviously even while being somewhat protected you might still get your head blown off. It seems that Yon has a different "type" of access....He walks with the troops on the front line ...As stated from his site.... http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ Telling soldiers' stories from the front lines is dangerous work that few do as well as Michael Yon. Risking combat injury, intense heat, sand and dust storms, and jarring explosions: the cost is crushing. Most major news organizations can't afford to keep a footprint here, yet Michael Yon does it without corporate sponsors or advertisers. He receives no funding or financial support from Fox News, or any movie, book or television deal. He is entirely reader supported. Michael says: "Interest in the war is waning back home, I'm told, which may explain the thinning ranks of reporters over here. Ironically, with fewer reporters here every day, it's even more critical to keep the few sources of news on the ground working. Please continue to spread the word about my work and please support this site by clicking here." "Interest in the war is waning back home." So is support...I'm not going to criticize the soldiers who fight...They are doing a remarkable job...Which I believe has no long term pay off....Anywhoooo..He serves a purpose...Tell me that the story about al qaeda decapitating children does not in some way embolden our position...It is a way to justify our presence there....Look at the poor Iraqi children suffering at the hands of al qaeda.....People on the whole don't dig it when children are murdered....It only has teeth if al qaeda is responsible. We are not their to protect the Iraqis from themselves...this was never part of the deal. Michael Yon manages to walk amongst the soldiers without corporate sponsors or advertisers....that does not mean he is not being assisted in some manner by the people that his "reports" benefit.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 9:30:11 PM)
You've hit the nail squarely on the head DG. What I've grabbed (below) is exactly the conversation I think is going on now that the suits are back at work. IF even a fraction of the horrors reported so far are accurate and gain wide exposure, there would be a powerful impact. Which do you think they'll decide is more important, the story, or the minds the story might change? Shit, people might start thinking we aren't the bad guys... quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Tell me that the story about al qaeda decapitating children does not in some way embolden our position..

domiguy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 9:35:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic You've hit the nail squarely on the head DG. What I've grabbed (below) is exactly the conversation I think is going on now that the suits are back at work. IF even a fraction of the horrors reported so far are accurate and gain wide exposure, there would be a powerful impact. Which do you think they'll decide is more important, the story, or the minds the story might change? Shit, people might start thinking we aren't the bad guys... quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Tell me that the story about al qaeda decapitating children does not in some way embolden our position.. Exactly. which should lead all to question the validity of such reporting....It might be true...However, there is an equal...And I do mean "equal" chance that he is being used , willingly or not, to promote the need for this war to continue.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/10/2007 10:00:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Exactly. which should lead all to question the validity of such reporting....It might be true...However, there is an equal...And I do mean "equal" chance that he is being used , willingly or not, to promote the need for this war to continue. Whoa! I hope I misunderstood you, DG. I understand your point about the military using him as a conduit for information, but are you suggesting we should automatically reject anything that comes from them? More importantly, are you saying that news which might confuse 'the herd' should be censored or regarded as invalid? (I dunno. The last time we got into news that didn't make The News, it got ugly [8D] )

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125