Oliver North: Back in Iraq

Foxfyre wrote:

People who post from "Solon" as a 'credible source' or defend it as a credible source then hold the "New York Post' in contempt? Sarcasm could indeed be called for here.

OK foxie...I've twice previously invited you to a disciplined and careful comparison of voices/publications from a 'conservative' source and a 'liberal' source. To this point, you've declined to engage.

I invite you again. Salon and NY Post.

For example, we could start with a survey of active/regular contributors, and assess inclusiveness of political viewpoint.

Salon features Andrew Sullivan and David Horowitz as regular contributors. How's the NY Post doing against this simple criterion?

0 Replies

Names
Any Iraqis that are resisting the Occupation are called terrorists, rebels, insurgents, anti-Iraqis.Getting reports from Oliver North, a Right Wing Zealot who pissed on the US Constitution, is real reasuring.

0 Replies

Just where did I provide a quote from Salon?

0 Replies

ps...for those who haven't yet had a heads up on the make-up of stratcom...

Quote:

Another statement last month cautioned, "The Reality is Nothing Like What You See on Television."...

Earlier in his career, after Hebrew University and Harvard Business School, Senor was with the Carlyle Group, an investment firm with Bush family ties and big defense industry holdings. Senor jogged in a Thanksgiving Day race here wearing a "Bush-Cheney 2004" T-shirt.

http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=6735&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

0 Replies

Pissed on the constitution? I surely didn't see him do that. Do you have proof of this action?

0 Replies

Slightly off-topic, but I feel you need me to find these nuggets for you;
this is worth reading, even for rabid blinkered right-wing nutcases, if you know any:

"By endorsing Ariel Sharon's plan George Bush has legitimised terrorism
What better recruiting sergeant could Bin Laden have than the President of the United States?"

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/story.jsp?story=511850

McTag

0 Replies

Drat, they have archived the article already. The capitalist bas-tards (only joking). I bought that newspaper today, too.

Here's an alternative thought, for those who don't want to buy the article:

The UN have made numerous resolutions requiring Israel leave the occupied lands (however you want to define them). GWB endorsing Mr Sharon's proposal yesterday disregards all that.

But, Iraq was invaded because Saddam Hussain flouted UN Resolutions. That was claimed to be the legal basis for it.

Can anyone explain that apparent contradiction to me?

0 Replies

Gosh, disappointment, I was hoping for some replies overnight to this.
Good morning.

0 Replies

Good morning, McTag.

Am reading the 13004 responses since my last visit, so it may be awhile before I comment.

Will enjoy the ones of others in the meantime.

0 Replies

foxfrye writes, "Again you make my point infowarrior, and I rest my case."

Case? Gee, I didn't realize this was court. I thought we were all having fun on a public message forum?

Who knew? Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

It's an idiom.

Who knew? Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

blatham writes:

Quote:

Salon features Andrew Sullivan and David Horowitz as regular contributors. How's the NY Post doing against this simple criterion?

Both Sullivan and Horowitz are distinguished and well known columnists and both are firmly in the realm of the left. When Salon regularly features an equal number of writers such as Thomas Sowell or John Leo, then I will give them credibility as balanced source that fairly present a perspective from both sides.

The New York Post is as firmly planted in the realm of the right though as a rule it does not feature nationally syndicated columnists. I have not attempted to present it as any other.

0 Replies

This week/weekend, about 4,000 British soldiers are returning to there garnison(s), which are only a couple of miles away from my home.

Heard some interviews on local and state radio today: all said, it's mess out there, but it's worse in the American 'sector'. And that they were lucky that about 80% of the Iraqians in there part of the country liked the British (English).

0 Replies

Did you get a sense of how they felt it was going overall Walter?

0 Replies

Geez, don't let Hobitbob find that out...

0 Replies

Did they say it was worse in the American sector because the Americans were mis-managing things? Or was it worse because the terrorists were targeting Americans?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Did you get a sense of how they felt it was going overall Walter?

I will bring you an article from the current Spectator (a weekly magazine, right-wing, published in London) to let you know how it is going.

The article is by Andrew Gilligan, for those who want to look for it themselves.

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
Did you get a sense of how they felt it was going overall Walter?

I will bring you an article from the current Spectator (a weekly magazine, right-wing, published in London) to let you know how it is going.

The article is by Andrew Gilligan, for those who want to look for it themselves.

Sorry, I should have excused myself for butting in.
I have breakfasted now, and returning to this task, I find that since I visited the electronic Spectator last, they have required membership.
This is free, but since I am not working from my home computer I cannot get in at the moment to bring you the article promised.

However, a few clicks will get you in if you are bothered to register. I promise you the Gilligan article, and the magazine's general content, are very worthwhile reading, if a bit right-wing at times to my taste.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/frontpage.php

Oliver North: Back in Iraq

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know