Letters to the Editor
Kitt
Published Letters: 3555
-
From Sysprogs's post
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]JOSH RUSHING: Jim Wilkinson is the Republican operative I was talking about [ . . . ] I don’t believe he’s a bad guy [ . . . ]
That quote from Rushing is the kind of commentary that turns my stomach. Rushing points out that Wilkinson played a big part in selling a deadly war and occupation based on lies.
He lied about Al Gore saying that he invented the internet. A lie which did a lot to undermine Gore's candidacy in 2000. So Wilkinson in that instance helped to undermine democracy by lying.
Wilkinson was complicit in and lied about the fake riot in Florida during the 2000 recount.
But, Rushing doesn't think that Jim Wilkinson "is a bad guy". No, he's just a liar of enormous proportion who would seemingly allow his own grandmother to die a lonely death after a street mugging, if that would serve his purposes and those of his masters.
-
The Canadian
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I have a feeling that "The Canadian" has written that same letter several times. Two words are changed from letter to letter.
This one in the heading:'Glenn'
And this one in the near conclusion:"Your voice is respected 'Glenn'"
-
Glenn's Precise Qoute;
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]These reports rely exclusively, or overwhelmingly, on the claims of military commanders selected by the Bush administration to communicate "information" to the media.
Is hardly a broad brush, "ignorant" or "insulting" slam to military leaders in general.
-
Another Anon
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]this week Cheney said he is above the law where is the outcry about this? That my friend is "going to mars".
--Anonymous
It would depend on what your definition of "outcry" is, but there has indeed been much written about on the blogs recently (and for a long time) about Cheney saying he is above the law.
So, how does your ' going to Mars' snark/comment relate to that?
-
@casual
[Read the article: FDL Book Salon]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]UT, by contrast, impresses me as being more distant, perhaps more abstract, and has an academic flavor to it.
-- casual_observer
The 'playfulness' at FDL is partly because if you don't just say something quickly (not at all necessarily irrelevant) you won't get a word in edge wise. Taking the time to put together an essay comment will get you in at about comment 160, and you'll be lucky if anyone comments back to your essay before the next Page Post arrives. The next Page Post sends everyone running to get a zed.
Which is odd considering that the FDL main page posters write some exceptional and sometimes highly specific, detailed posts. There are no better writers on the blogs than Christy and Jane and some of the others.
-
Che Pasa
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Occasionally, right here at Glenn's place. It is crucial that actual news, journalism, reporting, et cetera, be recognized and supported in the blogosphere.
Does it count that the blogs were absolutely all over CBS's Lara Logan's rebuttal to the insulting coverage of the real coverage of some msm journalists in Iraq?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I420_fPM2E
-
Che Pasa
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But here's the thing: the blogs were going to town over Logan's denunciations of the O'Reilly-ite nonsense. That's not really featuring her reporting is it?
Her report was aired on Howard Kurtz CNN program Reliable Sources. Her report was not only reporting in and of itself, but it was all about reporting. In that instance the blogs were, in multiple ways, bringing out that honest reporting by msm reporters was available out of Iraq.
I didn't give accolades to CBS beyond Logan being a fine reporter. So, no need for the mention of them in your post as not so generally commendable. I know that.
-
Tibe-warrior
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn states we are occupiers and he doesn't think we are in Iraq for legal reasons.
-- tiberius
And there is something incorrect about that statement?
-
@Pandy
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This notion that military commanders are idiots who regurgitate the administration line is just plain wrong. Read the articles being published by officers in Military Review or Parameters or the Armed Forces Journal. Read the quotations from mid-career officers in Thomas Rick’s Fiasco or on the pages of the Washington Post.
There is a large portion of the American military establishment who opposes the way this war has been conducted. They are not idiots who delude themselves into believing the admonishments of Dick Cheney. They are reflective individuals who are trying to do their duty in an impossible situation not of their choosing. To blast them as administration stooges, once again, is both ignorant and insulting.
-- Pandyora
Big on the 'words in mouth' tactic, aren't you?
-
Ondolet's Wishes
[Read the article: McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Because they have valuable information that can be used to construct a solution that might sustain a veto, number one. Because having the opinions of the soldiers behind you when you challenge a group who claims you don't is powerful, number two. And because when you are building the coalition of the unwilling, you can't afford to alienate anybody until you know you have the numbers
And then there is Colin Powell, who knew all of this, but chose to lie us into death anyway because...who knows?
And then there General Shinseki who chose to tell the administration, the Congress and the American public what he thought. It happened to be in contrast to what the administration had in mind.
Didn't work out well for either Shinseki or for us or for the Iraqi's or for the world.