FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O HAS CONDEMNED THIS WEEK'S ATTACK ON A MEDIA OUTLET IN FRANCE.
AFTER MAKING HIS STATEMENT, BARRY WAS HEARD INSISTING, "ONLY I CAN ATTACK MEDIA OUTLETS AND REPORTERS! I'M REALLY GOING AFTER JAMES RISEN NOW!"
A GLEEFUL MEDEA BENJAMIN CLAPPED HER HANDS WILDLY AS SHE PEED HER PANTS RIGHT ON THE SPOT AND SAID, "WE LOVE YOU BARRY! WE DO! WE REALLY REALLY DO!"
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Starting with a new survey that has a number of outlets in a tizzy. Of
Fairleigh Dickinson University's Public Mind Poll's Iraq section, the university notes
Overall, 42 percent of Americans believe that U.S. forces found active
weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq. Republicans are more likely
to hold this belief than Democrats: fifty-one percent of Republicans
think it’s “probably” or “definitely” true that an active program was
found after the 2003 invasion, with 14 percent saying that it was
definitely true. Still, large portions of other groups think that the
WMD program, a major part of the justification for the invasion, was
actually found, including 32 percent of Democrats.
I have questions regarding the sample as well as their margin of error
(which honestly looks rounded and not really accurate) but assuming the
results are correct, why is it a surprise?
February 5, 2003, Colin Powell didn't just go before the United Nations
and insist that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction, he lied.
He knowingly lied. He presented evidence he knew was false.
So since that time, Collie The Blot Powell
has been ridiculed by the media and treated with the disdain that a
known liar whose lies resulted in the deaths of millions will be
treated, right?
Wrong.
Colin Powell is still considered, by the media, to be a respected and trusted person.
He's far from alone. As Peter Hart (FAIR -- link is video) noted in June, "It's 2003 all over again, as Iraq 'experts' who promoted the 2003
invasion are back on TV screens offering expert analysis about what to
do next."
Justin Raaimondo (Antiwar.com) addressed the issue in March of 2013 noting:
Ten years after the invasion of Iraq, the war criminals are still at large. Saddam Hussein is dead and buried, but the cabal that lied us into war is still around – and not only that, they are mocking us from their podiums in the media, justifying and obscuring their crimes. Here is former Bush speechwriter David Frum declaring he was right all along – if only:
"If we’d found the WMD, it would have been different. If we’d kept better order in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam, it would have been different. If more Iraqis had welcomed the invasion as we expected, it would have been different. If the case for the war had been argued in a less contrived and predetermined way, it would have been different."
Ah, "but it wasn’t different," continues Frum: "Those of us who were involved – in whatever way – bear the responsibility." So what have been the consequences suffered by Frum – as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed and maimed, their lives and country destroyed? What price has Mr. "Axis of Evil" paid that is in any way comparable to that exacted from the 5,000 Americans killed and tens of thousands horribly wounded? Why none, of course. There he is, on CNN, in the Daily Beast, pontificating in his new role as a "moderate" Republican.
"If we’d found the WMD, it would have been different. If we’d kept better order in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam, it would have been different. If more Iraqis had welcomed the invasion as we expected, it would have been different. If the case for the war had been argued in a less contrived and predetermined way, it would have been different."
Ah, "but it wasn’t different," continues Frum: "Those of us who were involved – in whatever way – bear the responsibility." So what have been the consequences suffered by Frum – as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed and maimed, their lives and country destroyed? What price has Mr. "Axis of Evil" paid that is in any way comparable to that exacted from the 5,000 Americans killed and tens of thousands horribly wounded? Why none, of course. There he is, on CNN, in the Daily Beast, pontificating in his new role as a "moderate" Republican.
There is a difference between being wrong and lying.
Anyone who takes a position has a chance of being wrong.
Liars should be banned by the media. Colin Powell lied. That's
documented and don't believe his little fluffer Lawrence Wilkerson.
Powell was presented with false charges to make to the UN and he pushed
back on some but agreed to go with others. This has been documented
repeatedly, you can refer to FAIR or to the Los Angeles Times, for the
Times start with Greg Miller's July 15, 2004 report entitled "Flaws Cited in Powell's U.N. Speech on Iraq."
He lied.
The mainstream media should have rebuked him long ago instead of courting him and presenting him as an expert.
As for those wrong?
No one should be banned from the public discourse for being wrong.
Hopefully, they will at least admit they were wrong but even if they
don't we'll all be wrong at some point in our lives -- multiple times
(especially me).
But those wrong on big issues? They should be brought on far less by
Sunday chat shows and balanced out with voices who were right.
That's for the mainstream media -- the broadcast networks, CNN, most newspapers, etc.
For what's supposed to be the left media?
The periodicals like The Progressive, The Nation, In These Times, Mother Jones, various Pacifica Radio programs, etc?
They might, in the interest of a wide ranging debate, allow those who
were wrong to participate but as guests. You do not hire these people,
you do not give them a regular platform.
Mother Jones presents itself as left -- in its latest
incarnation, it has become nothing but a partisan organ for the
Democratic Party -- and as a voice of truth.
But when Mother Jones was looking for someone to hire to write bits and pieces for the mag's online site, it didn't go with Cindy Sheehan. Cindy was a national name and someone who stood for peace and stood against the Iraq War. Mother Jones didn't pursue her.
Or take Ann Wright. The former army colonel was serving in the State
Dept when Powell was lying. And her response? She resigned from the
diplomatic corps. Her resignation letter ended up all over the
internet.
Mother Jones didn't pursue her to write for them.
No, when they had a slot open, they went with Kevin Drum who supported and cheerleaded the illegal war.
When the media -- mainstream or in the case of Mother Jones alleged left
wing media -- refuses to hold liars and war mongers accountable, they
send the impression that this filth was correct, that those of us who
said no to war were wrong.
The filth should have been ostracized, publicly humiliated.
Instead, their opinions continue to be treated as important and worthwhile.
Over a million Iraqis are dead because of these liars and their opinions.
But there are no consequences.
And when even Mother Jones is too damn trashy to draw a line, what is America to believe?
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Why things are not getting better in Iraq"
"daniel"
"Ant-Man"
"Be thankful for Michael Douglas"
"Savannah Guthrie's an idiot"
"If ABC World News is going to report on the cartoon, they need to show the cartoon"
"Uh, welcome back?"
"Where is the report?"
"Amal Clooney is not even plain"
"'Activist' Fonda"
"About Russell Crowe"
"He never shuts up"
"THIS JUST IN! HE'S GOT AN OPINION ON EVERYTHING!"
