"Deliberate and Calculated Lies"
"Deliberate and calculated lies" is how U.S. Army Ranger Pat Tilman's brother described what the Bush admistration said about the former football star's death in Afghanistan.
Also a former Army Ranger, Kevin Tilman told a House committee on Tuesday that the Pentagon version of his brother's death was "utter fiction" -- a crude attempt at jingoistic propaganda.
Appearing before the same committee, Army heroine Jessica Lynch described the official stories about her capture and release in Iraq as nothing short of "elaborate lies."Â As one report reads:
Speaking to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Ms Lynch told of waking up in hospital with terrible injuries, unaware that the Pentagon was circulating “the story of the little girl Rambo from the hills of West Virginia who went down fightingâ€.
“It was not true,†she said yesterday. “I’m still confused as to why they choose to lie and try to make me a legend.
“The bottom line is the American people are capable of determining their own ideals for heroes, and they don’t need to be told elaborate lies.â€
These two cases are among the most appalling episodes to come out of the Bush War On Terror. The Tilman case looks to be a direct cover-up of his death by friendly fire. Lynch's case comes right from the Pravda propaganda playbook, a primitive fictionalization and distortion of real events for purposes of furthering the interests of the state.
The Tilman-Lynch scandals should be held front and center this week as the cynical administration accuses war critics of wanting to betray the troops. But who could outdo the admin on that score? How do you sink any lower into the moral gutter than when you display a willingness to capitalize on the tragedies of these two young soldiers?
April 24th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Hard to argue with you on this matter, Marc. Where was the Congress? I know. Reciting Rove’s talking points.
Shameful.
At the very least that lap-dog Congress is gone.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:01 am
Ah yes, “those damn politicans.” Sorry, won’t wash, these are scandels of the Military Bureacracy, and the media’s odd willingness to play ball with them, across the board.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:25 am
K Nardy,
It’s odd, because I see things completely opposite…the mainstream media, outside of the Nation, some other prog. periodicals, some small blogs, and a remarkably on-target cover story in Sports Illustrated last year, have not analyzed Tillman’s death with any kind of depth that is befitting to an American soldier – let alone to one who gave up a lucrative career to serve in a bloodbath where you and I certainly aren’t going.
Even Marc’s blog entry – though necessary and with good intentions – ignores a couple of 800 pound gorillas. First of all, Pat Tillman – a Chomsky reader who wanted to meet with him after his service, which apparently opened his eyes – openly expressed his opinion in front of fellow troops in Iraq that the president’s war was a war crime, and illegal.
One more time, since you may not have picked this up in elementary school level civics: When a person is shot and killed – even when it appears to be accidental – you call the police to investigate. You don’t lie about it, you don’t cover it up, and you certainly don’t misrepresent that person’s life and political views after they have died.
Since time has lapsed, there was no interviews of witnesses…we dont even know if a battle was occurring, or if the “friendly fire” happened when someone was cleaning their gun. We don’t know what time it happened, no forensic evidence was collected…Nothing!
If your son was in that situation, would you be satisfied with some, “Oh well, your son was a hero anyway, so we didn’t bother to investigate his death.”
Just another example of the Bush administration circumventing due process (this time, at the Tillman family’s expense, who will probably never know if their son’s death was on purpose or accidental), and ultimately exploiting (and misrepresenting) the dead to advance their political agenda. Bush and the right have no shame.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:35 am
As for Jessica Lynch – I don’t know if the media sure has as, you say “a willingness to play ball with them” – whatever the &*#$ that means – but unlike the media’s “willingness” in 2003, we’ll see if she (or Pat Tillman’s brother) makes the covers of TIME and NEWSWEEK next week for her testimony. Anyone want to make some bets with me? Are you game Nardy? Huh? Didn’t think so.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:48 am
The San Francisco Chronicle, generally not notable for great journalism except for its columnists, has been out in front on this story. Robert Collier has done an excellent job of telling all aspects of the Tillman story.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:49 am
The premise and headlines that Tillman’s brother specifically accused “the Bush Administration” of deliberate lies is a deliberate lie itself by Sheldon Roberts and by Tim Reid in their articles. Tillman’ brother said the “Pentagon,” and there is absolutely no evidence that Bush even knew of the misinformation or that Tillman meant to carry that accusation up the chain of command. I had a guy from the IRS lie to me the other day, but I didn’t blame Bush or Rove for it. Compared to major media, the Bush Administration is as honest as they come.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:51 am
Thanks for that heads up; I have seen very few daily newspapers who have given this story justice (including the newspaper of record).
April 25th, 2007 at 7:03 am
Stated Woody:
“the premise and headlines that Tillman’s brother specifically accused “the Bush Administration†of deliberate lies is a deliberate lie itself by Sheldon Roberts and by Tim Reid in their articles. Tillman’ brother said the “Pentagon,”…..
States the transcript of Mr. Tillman’s testimony yesterday, as reported by the AP and in the official congressional record:
“It’s a little disingenuous to think the administration didn’t know,” Kevin Tillman told the committee. “That’s kind of what we hoped you guys would get involved with and take a look.”
Is it just in the case of Woody, or is the right allergic to being honest with themselves (in much the same way that I am allergic to cats)?
April 25th, 2007 at 7:05 am
Also,
“Pat’s death at the hands of his comrades is a terrible tragedy, but the fact that the army, and what appears to be others, attempted to hijack his virtue and his legacy is simply horrific.â€
Who do you think that he meant by “others”, Woody? The American Idol judges?
April 25th, 2007 at 7:15 am
So Woody, if its a game of semantics, Kevin Tillman did indeed state the word “Administration” in relation to hiding the truth about hiding his brother’s death, as reported….but, you just might be right, he DID NOT mention “Bush Administration.” Surely he could have been referring to the “Eisenhower Administration”, or perhaps to the mayor of Munchkin Land.
April 25th, 2007 at 7:36 am
I agree with both reg (about the Chronicle) and David – (about hte missing details in Marc’s post)- Tillman was not just a Chomsky reader, he started to call himself a socialist and had corresponded with Chomsky and others about working with “the left”, as it were. Also, this is truly old news….I hope that Waxman and co. do something about it but I don’t see much of a chance of anything changing besides hemming and hawwing of those who knew better a long time ago.
Dave Zirin has been great on this and other sports related issues. Progressive sports fans should check out his work.
April 25th, 2007 at 8:00 am
David,
Is it rage or your patronizing tone that helps you miss my obvious point?
Who’s bidding is the media doing when they
published the inaccurate reports on these incidents? For that matter, who’s interest are they serving, when, almost across the board, they gave minimal coverage to rape/ Murder case of last year? Who did our “embedded” media take their orders from?
First and formost, that would be the Pentagon, an institution obviously compromised by far right to moderate Republican politics. Who’s take is Bush using to justify his failed war, just a day ago on PBS?
Newt? Tom Delay? Sorry, it doesn’t work like that. It was his latest handed picked General still sputtering out the nonsense he wants to hear.
I’m happy that you are able to see the terrible implications of Tillman’s death and it’s
cover up. But if you are going to issue the Military it’s customary pass; your rage is worthless.
April 25th, 2007 at 8:10 am
or perhaps to the mayor of Munchkin Land
I vote for the Lollipop Guild.
April 25th, 2007 at 9:33 am
Kevin Tillman made it quite clear that he was referring to the Bush Administration when he noted that his brother’s death by friendly fire would have been “another political disaster” for an Administration already surfeied in that department. Tillman’s death occured around the time of the discovery of those pix at Abu Gharib. The misdirection had the added benefit of changing the subject.
As to Jessica Lynch and her portrayal as the the “Female Rambo” it would have been easy for her to go along but I guess she was brought up right. As for the media, making stuff up has been an old and honorable tradition. Old Chicago newsman Ben Hecht got a great movie idea out of that when he wrote “Nothing Sacred” for Frederick March and Carole Lombard.
And can we forget Richard Harding Davis writing to William Randolph Hearst in 1898 that he found Cuba delightful but couldn’t find any way. Hearst’s reply is legendary:
“You provide the copy and I’ll provide the
War!”
Was it ever thus!
April 25th, 2007 at 10:37 am
K Nardy, I guess I am confused by your post so I dunno…maybe I misinterpreted, who knows. But yes, I am somewhat enraged that generations of my family members – dating back to World War 1, Vietnam, and the current conflict – have been used as political pawns by administrations and congresses that appreciated their service only so far as they could pick their bones clean for political gain. So yes, I take issue with anyone dumb enough to say that it doesn’t matter, that the media shouldn’t pay attention to any of it. But since I guess I never understood what you meant, the whole thing is moot I guess.
April 25th, 2007 at 10:42 am
I hear ya, Randy…Believe me, I’ll be singing a few rounds of “Ding Dong the Witch is Dead” myself come January of ‘09.
April 25th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
April 25th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Frankly, Nardy, I am glad that you and I are on the same page (I think?) regarding military abuses, to the extent that they happen. But to keep hiding politicians from the spotlight and continue to scapegoat “the military” or “faulty intelligence” or “tactical problems caused by the generals” is like beating a dead horse. Bush has carved that watermelon well enough already, siding against generals finding themselves in hot water, etc. etc….anything to take the focus off of him and his illegitimate presidency. Military leaders – especially those committing the cardinal sin of disagreeing with Dubya – have been quite expendable over the last few years, stars or no stars.
Long story short, nothing will change until the American people demand in a big enough voice that Bush and Cheney be impeached across bi-partisan lines. Otherwise, we are stuck for the next year and a half with more of the same.
April 25th, 2007 at 10:58 am
Yeah, curtain indeed. Which reminds me…which role would George W. Bush have been tailor made for….the one who needed a heart, a brain, or courage. Tough call.
April 25th, 2007 at 11:02 am
The NFL also played a role in the Tillman deal. Why? Tillman’s jersey is one of the top selling items. Disgusting.
April 25th, 2007 at 11:21 am
You’re right, David. That is a tough one. With his effervescent smirk, his willingness to dupe even his compassionate conservative followers, his inability to admit to any error no matter how small, his unwillingness to face the carnage occurring on all sides involved in Iraq, I vote the man has no soul. That wasn’t an option among the characters of the Wizard of Oz. The closest seems to be the Tin Man who needed a heart. Wikipedia offers a different line of symbolism in the Tin Man’s constant search for oil to insure he doesn’t rust from his tears.
April 25th, 2007 at 11:27 am
If no soul, maybe Bush could have been the can of oil itself. Or maybe one of the flying simians.
April 25th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Ya know, those flying simians absolutely frightened the be-jeezus out of me as a kid. They were far worse than the wicked witch.
April 25th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
You’d think pro-military types would be the first and loudest critics of the way the military handled the Lynch and Tillman cases.
The standard pro-military view is supposed to be that the war in Iraq is producing heroes by the dozen. The conservative mainstream media line is that the troops are always a subject of great reverence–great men doing great things greatly.
People who actually believed that would not be able to fathom why the military would need to fake heroics as they did in the Lynch and Tillman cases. With all those great tales of real heroism at hand, making fake ones up is an even more monstrous, self-defeating crime, the thinking should go.
But instead, we get Bush conservatives like Woody trying to play down the lies, making it clear they see little or nothing wrong with faked heroics.
This shows how little real esteem Bush conservatives have for the military. Underneath all the macho-insecurity reverence about great men doing great things, we can see ever more clearly that Bush conservatives’ expectations for honesty in the U.S. military are abysmally low, in fact, they expect the military to lie.
Woody and his ilk are anti-U.S. military in the most cynical, destructive way possible.
April 25th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
I listened to a discussion about this on the radio today by a reasonable liberal (rare) who said that there has been no accusation, implication, or evidence of the administration’s involvement in the misinformation, whatsoever.
The transcript quoted by David, if accurate, would dispel my claim in part. However, specific blame was not directed at the administration. He only asked the question and alluded to the possibility.
I don’t blame him for being angry and lashing out, but more reasonable heads would be a better source. Victims, whether it’s Tillman, Sheehan, or the 9-11 Liberal Widows are not experts and their testimony is all grandstanding.
I’m just looking for accuracy–not bias.
I don’t like the fabrications and cover-ups at all. This isn’t a right-left issue until you guys start making political statements from it.
Want to know who has a big hand in some of this mess? It’s the main stream media who was so anxious to jump all over the Jessica Lynch story and didn’t do their jobs correctly.
The Story of Jessica Lynch
April 25th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
That “Story of Jessica Lynch” that Woody proclaims as the truth comes from a little neocon house organ called THE WEEKLY STANDARD and was written by Rich Lowery. Was he an “Embedded Reporter” on the scene? Well, actually no. Lowery is based in Washington DC where you can see him in action fighting the “Battles” of CNN, MSNBC, and FOX. He did write a glowing work of (?) faction (that’s fiction mixed with fact) about the Marines. Alas, it didn’t get the attention that Packer’s book got or FIASCO – its those dang Soros Left-wingers!
Please go and read the article. Tell me what sources Lowery used for his screed. Damned if I could find any! But then Rick is a “Journalist” and Jessica is some hick PFC from the hills and hollers of West Virginia so what the hell does she know about her treatment in the hospital or the efforts of the Iraqis there to turn her over? And those dang MSM guys making her the heroine. Why, its a well known fact, universally acknowleged, that Rummy, Cheney, and Bush did everything they could to set the record straight. But those pesky lefties just wouldn’t listen!
Its a conspiracy I tell Ya!
April 25th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Hi,
Just as a clarification, since I have a slightly different perspective on this: the news that Jessica Lynch hadn’t fired a shot, and that there was at least one other member of that convoy who had died fighting, heroically (if we’re allowed to use that word in this context on this site), was widely spoken of, in Infantry units anyway, since shortly after her return to the States. The feeling was, and is, that her “heroism” was largely a media creation and that she was picked over other, more heroic soldiers primarily because she was a woman, and photogenic, and secondarily because most media and civilians are pig ignorant about the military. That unit was an object lesson in the importance of weapon maintenance. Anyone who cared could have asked any soldier about this a long time ago.
There was one other reason, I think, that she was a media hero: she was a victim. That is the indispensable condition for heroism in the rest of America today (but not in the military).
That last is a personal opinion, but the rest is what I have observed as pretty widespread opinions in the Army, in case anyone is interested in what (some) soldiers think about this.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Probably true Sebastian. BTW the real story did come out in the media. Only it wasn’t ours. It was the GUARDIAN of London and the BBC that set the record straight.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Woody, all due disrespect, you’re not fit to live in the same country as the 9-11 widows; when we consider how many mental migets sold out the 9-11 victims to protect the Bush White House, well, I guess we can understand why Bin Laden is still walking around.
David, the military and Pentagon are parts of the Goverment, they have the same potential for excellence or malfeasance as any other. What did you think of the whole concept of embedding when the war started? Did you imagine such a mindset would not end up abusing the truth? Would it be possible for Bush to prentend he’s letting the Generals call the shots if many of them were not willing, for the sake of thier careers, to play along?
April 25th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
John Gibson and Christopher Hitchens,
seperated at birth?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704250008
April 25th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
rlc, you can’t tell what is opinion and analysis? Do you think that the NY Times would be a source for media irresponsibility? Is your rebuttal that the author is a conservative? Similarly, if I may be as bold, don’t ever believe anything written by someone associated with “The Nation,” because he might have an ideological bias.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
“It would dispel my claim in part. However, specific blame was not directed at the administration. He only asked the question and alluded to the possibility.”
Oh my goodness, I was only joking when I suggested that you would try to weasel out of your earlier proclamation that proved to be false by engaging in a game of semantics….but it turned out that you did exactly that. You amaze me every day.
April 25th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Sebastian – correct me if I’m wrong, but it strikes me that the conclusion I’m supposed to draw from your clarification is that military honchos in charge of “message management” orchestrated the Lynch story the way they did because the media and civilians are so fucking ignorant of the military and have an Oprahesque need to elevate victims and women.
Well, excuse the fuck out of us !! This is obviously one of those conflicts in values between those reeking of integrity and lesser folks who can’t handle the truth. But more self-serving bullshit from the military please, because that’s all we pig ignorant civilians really deserve.
By the way, how’s that “surge” coming along ?
April 25th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
“The transcript quoted by David, if accurate”
Yeah, that’s the thing about the official transciptionists in the well of the congress…they have such a long history of inaccuracy and liberal bias….Not to mention the congressmen speaking just a few feet away…their lips have never matched the words coming out of them…the liberals.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Bunkerbuster is right on the money.
The Woody types do not really care about the “troops,†let alone the USA. Rather they are enamored by power. That is what the military represents to them. It is the glow of power that they submit to. The flag, the war, Bush, etc… They have a reverence for strong authority figures. They are the same lot that followed all of the great murders of the world over the plank.
Don’t look for intellectual or moral consistency from them. Just expect them to follow the party line.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
“Victims, whether it’s Tillman, Sheehan, or the 9-11 Liberal Widows are not experts and their testimony is all grandstanding.”
For the record, both Tillmans- Pat AND his brother Kevin – were each Army Rangers who served in the same unit in Iraq. If the man testifying to congress on behalf of his late brother is not an expert, then I’m Chevy Chase. Doesn’t it get boring being pantsed all of the time? Is there an obsession with being wrong all the time?
April 25th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
There’s has been a fair bit of chatter around recently on how to cope with the Bush-conservative garbage that spills throughout all levels of the media. I’m borrowing Bush-conservative from bunkerbuster to distinguish those conservatives who would rather be Bush loyal, than folks who would be loyal to a set of otherwise identifiable conservative principles. The question repeatedly asked is, how can ideologically honest conservatives repeat the sewage that they hear, or read, without out once doing their own fact checking through an array of sources which might reveal chinks in the spiel.
And, the follow-up question, is how to cope with it. The approach so far has to been to deconstruct and challenge every bit of nonsense that occurs, as it occurs. But the costs of this strategy are asymmetrical. The garbage generators have only to whip whatever the current screed, or list of talking points, that has been prepared for them, and repeat it ad nauseaum, until they convince themselves (and others) through sheer repetition, that it’s true. The costs of debunking this regurgitated swill are much higher. Fact checking, with the intent of discerning to what degree some statement is accurate, sifting among disparate sources to determine the degree of agreement, and then further checking out, and reconciling the differences, takes a great deal of time and energy.
The manipulation of language, in which the Bush-conservatives have become expert, further adds to the cost. Witness the back and forth observed above regarding whether Tillman’s brother said, the ‘Bush administration’ or ‘the Pentagon/military’ attempted to obscure the nature of his brother’s death. It serves no useful purpose to solving the overall, and original, problem of figuring out whether Tillman’s death was reported in any honest or accurate way. And, if not, why not. It only serves to increase the costs of the transaction.
I suppose that hiking the cost of something tends to thin out potential opposition. To create conditions where a dissenter must systematically, and methodically pick their way through a tsunami of verbal diarrhea does raise the price of participation. I’m astounded by the number of bright people, with better things to do, who are willing to pay it. I’m grateful to those who are.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
The False Claim:
“The premise and headlines that Tillman’s brother specifically accused “the Bush Administration†of deliberate lies is a deliberate lie itself by Sheldon Roberts and by Tim Reid in their articles.”
The Backtrack (with spin):
“The transcript quoted by David, if accurate, would dispel my claim in part.”
Translation:
“I don’t wanna admit I’m wrong. So shut up, dummies.”
April 26th, 2007 at 4:47 am
Reg, the surge is going great. Lindsey Graham says that Petraous is “Bush’s Grant.”
Man, Bill Moyer’s got the job done nicely last night, even reminding us that Oprah shouted down any pre invansion dissent on her show… She should be asked to apoligize sure as O’Reilly.
April 26th, 2007 at 6:47 am
I’d forgotten about that one – truly disgusting. But I’d have to say that her pushing Kenneth Pollack’s bullshit and treating that audience member like shit for asking questions is no more creepy and credulous than her current repugnant hawking of this crazy self-help book, “The Secret”, premised on the notion that “The only reason any person does not have enough money is because they are blocking money from coming to them with their thoughts.”
Oprah needs to fucking retire – take the bread and go build some more schools in Africa. She’s awful. I knew she’d gone pure megalomaniac when that stupid magazine came out with her goddam picture on the cover of every issue.
Moyers, on the other hand, was brilliant. No wonder Safire, Friedman, Miller, Roger Ailes, Krauthammer and Kristol refused to talk to him. Of that entire crew I would have most loved to see Moyers conversing with The Moustache of Understanding and father of the Friedman Units. Kristol or Krauthammer would have just sat there in their ideological shrink-wrap and re-asserted every lie imaginable.
April 26th, 2007 at 7:02 am
If you missed it, the Moyers “Buying the War” show is online, complete in four “chapters” -
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html
April 26th, 2007 at 7:35 am
Its hard to believe that Oprah has even a shred of credibility after her self-serving about face during the James Frey fiasco. The fact that she even liked that hilariously awful piece of writing in the first place speaks volumes.
April 26th, 2007 at 8:33 am
David, you didn’t provide a link and I don’t have time to go running down your references. I don’t know for sure that you quoted the transcript correctly or that the transcript is correct, because they change those things after the fact sometimes.
Let’s look at what was said:
Woody: The premise and headlines that Tillman’s brother specifically accused “the Bush Administration†of deliberate lies…
David: …as reported by the AP and in the official congressional record: “It’s a little disingenuous to think the administration didn’t know,†Kevin Tillman told the committee. …take a look.
Woody: The transcript quoted by David, if accurate, would dispel my claim in part. However, specific blame was not directed at the administration. He only asked the question and alluded to the possibility.
David: I was only joking when I suggested that you would try to weasel out of your earlier proclamation that proved to be false by engaging in a game of semantics…
Now, David, read that exchange carefully, with emphasis on Did Tillman’s brother “specifically accuse the Bush adminstration of deliberate lies” vs. a little disingenuous to think the administration didn’t know.
There is a big difference between accusing someone of a deliberate lie, as I said, and your version where the brother suggested that the administration might have known about it.
Lying? Knowing? / Specifically? Suggesting? Are these words different? Are the meanings of words important? Maybe not to people who question what the definition of “is” is. When I use a specific word, don’t subsitute another one with a different meaning as a rebuttal in an attempt to look smart.
I was generous to say that your quote dispelled my claim. It would also help if you took the substance of the testimony as a whole rather than one quote, which would distort the results of the hearing.
Who plays games with sematics? You and the media. Who was the most accurate in our own exchange? Answer: Me.
—–
Also, serving as a soldier in a war zone does not make that person an “expert.” There’s a big difference between being able to follow orders and having the military intelligence and officer training to assess a situation and give orders. If the Democrats and press use someone other than a real expert on a situation, then it is grandstanding.
=====
Josh & K Nardy, you two are so far off the mark about me that it’s pathetic.
April 26th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Is Moyers blaming Bush for media failures?
April 26th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Woody being a witness to one’s own condition makes that person an “Expert.” Jessica Lynch didn’t comment on the firefight – she was unconscious. But she knew how she was treated in the Iraqi Hospital. Similarly Kevin Tillman and O’Brian were in the same units and wer percipiant witnesses. That makes them “Experts” on the friendly fire incident.
Rick Lowery is not and I’m still waiting for the documentation.
Oh, and I’m willing to accept that the 507th Maintainence Co. had maintainence problems of its own. But I was under the impression that our troops had all they needed? And whose fault is it if they’re Eqt was substandard? That’s a leadership problem – i.e company and Bn officers and NCOs.
April 26th, 2007 at 10:44 am
There’s a serious problem with an “expert” who is not impartial and has a personal interest in the outcome–sort of like the global warming fanatics who get grants to study it. Also, just being in the field doesn’t make him any more of an expert than my being on a football field makes me a coach.
Unless Tillman has inside information, he has no way of knowing whether or not the Bush Adminisration “knew” of the false information about his brother. In fact, I heard a report by someone who did know the truth and who tried to get a message to Bush to stop using that information in his talks.
Grandstanding and lies from the left and the media…. Why don’t you just go back to quoting Cindy Sheeahn?
April 26th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Well somebody sure did and given the track record of this crew I think Tillman’s inference is a fair one.
April 26th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
“I don’t know for sure that you quoted the transcript correctly or that the transcript is correct, because they change those things after the fact sometimes.”
Yeah, I’m sure that the official record is changed all of the time…You yourself – and Ross Perot perhaps – are living proof of the lies documented at Roswell, NM in 1946; as the aliens now walk amongst us, apparently. Well, Woody, live this up because I have to side with Reg – I am going to ignore people who cannot engage in debate intelligently or with any honesty. I won’t argue with a man child.
April 26th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Suits me…no sweat off of my back. I’m right, but I know it’s in the DNA of Democrats to cut and run.
And, the Congressional Record, for instance, is altered everyday.
April 26th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Hello, everybody
Please take a look at the latest Nation Magazine special issue on Cuba. We made sure not to include anything by Marc Cooper because we didn’t want to embarrass ourselves.
Katrina
April 26th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Reg, thanks for the PBS link. I didn’t see Moyers’ documentary because I. Just. Don’t. Watch. Television. Anymore. Gave it up for lack of time in grad school and just didn’t miss it. I found a transcript of the show at http://tinyurl.com/2dck9k . It’s just as well I didn’t tune in. A quarter of the way through the transcript I was ready to shriek. I’ve bookmarked it so I can take it in pieces as my stomach allows.
April 26th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
After seeing Bill Moyers the other night I got real sorry for “Lil’ Russ”. Imagine. That poor “Blue Collar” guy from Buffalojust sitting around his 4.5 million house in Martha’s Vineyard (the one next to Jack Welch) just waiting for someone to call him with the truth about those pesky WMD’s. Why he’s more lonely than the Maytag Repairman!
April 26th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Katrina, you little minx! Do you still have an open door policy on Hitch?
Anyway, Woody, I don’t really have a mark on you. You’re just a somewhat adroit dittohead with a modestly original approach to intellectual dishonesty. It’s amazing how many conservatives who are actually paid to write are not a hell of a lot better; but the Republican Party is in the gutter, with eyes fixed on the sewer, and there is not much sign American Conservates will see anything better soon.
Right now the brave mission is to try and spin Bush’s catastrophe invasion into a Democratic failure, and the only thing that makes it a bit interesting is to see how far this blog will go in helping them along. I know it would LIKE to do better, but these days you’re just not giving him much to work with (two Republicans in the senate breaking with Bush’s born to fail surge); the peacenick still lies dormant in Lindsey Graham’s soul.
April 26th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
Woody – Prove me wrong.
Is it really possible for the Bushies, the military, any of the approved conservative power figures to be wrong? In your mind NO. That is the problem. I do know you.
You have the authoritarian personality. You would make a great brown shirt.
April 26th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
K Nardy, thanks. Maybe I should get some pay for this. If I’m different, it’s because I really don’t listen to Limbaugh and Hannity very much and make up my own mind on issues before others announce their positions.
=====
Josh, you really can’t imagine how wrong you are. You would have to see just how badly I fit into formalized organizations like big corporations and their power structures. If something’s stupid, I’ll let them know right away, and most don’t like that…sort of like people here.
I seem supportive of everything Bush simply because you only see my responses to the criticisms from this site of him, and I wouldn’t do that if the attacks were truthful and fair.
Take Marc’s first sentence that everyone has defended:
I said that sentence was inaccurate and David, who cut and ran from me, backed me up with this quote from “the official record”:
Very different. The media bias and intent to mislead is very apparent. Why can’t we get straightforward reporting without the slants?
Bush has enough real problems without someone having to stretch the truth or make something up.
April 26th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Woody, I have never been much of a drug person, but I would dearly LOVE to get a quarter bag of what you are smoking, and don’t think I’d ever experience pain again….
And just what mannor of “Media Bias”, would take a sad tale of (at best) Military malfeasance and try to pretty it up. You win the pretty lady with the clock in her stomach if you answered “RIGHT WING MILITARY BIAS”. And who would be likely as hell to be all over “micro-managing” such bias, that would be the Bush White House.
April 26th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Who here thinks FDR and Eisenhower et al, knowing the Japanese and Germans would be reading the news in the USA, did not change the circumstances of the death of soldiers. Do you really think for one second they would have not changed the circumstances of a well know soldier who had been shot by mistake by his own?
It would have been done not only to alieve some of the grief of the family from knowing their sons death was by other soldiers mistakes , but much more importantly withhold demoralizing news to the troops and withhold propaganda material from the enemy.
So what has changed since WWII? Because we no longer have FDR and Truman and JFK Democrats. We now have white flag waving Chamberlain Democrats looking 1 year into their poltical future rather than the next 50 years of the country’s future. We no longer have WWII Reporters. We now have 50 times more Jimmy Olsen Journalist lacking looking for controversial material of any kind to cover 24 hour news channels and looking 1 month into the future of ratings.
The only thing that makes the Tillman story a story is a common sensed and totally legitimate judgement, made for the same reasons it has always been made…..to win wars, has been made public by a press totally lacking any judgement or common sense followed up by congressional ‘hearings’ equally lacking any judgement or common sense……unless of course you really want america to lose a war in order real enemy can be defeated, the political one.
Pathetic doesn’t begin to explain it. We have become a country of midget minded self interested nervous nanny scared losers….and the barbarians know it
April 27th, 2007 at 7:02 am
Who here thinks FDR and Eisenhower et al, knowing the Japanese and Germans would be reading the news in the USA, did not change the circumstances of the death of soldiers. Do you really think for one second they would have not changed the circumstances of a well know soldier who had been shot by mistake by his own?
Proof?
April 28th, 2007 at 5:35 am
Jim R, if you are going to look down from the comand center of your Lay z boy and throw around that Chamberlain crap; please don’t wet your jammies when some equaly stupid nimrod of the left calls Bush the new Hitler.
The biggest thing that’s changed since WWII is that we are entagled in a foolish conflict and are fighting it with minimal resourses (in terms of manpower, anyway) because the idea was so bad The President could only get a minimal commitment from The People. Sorry, Jimmy boy, those young suburban republicans aren’t beating down the doors at the recrutment offices either.
Don’t worry, though. Your mission to blame this right wing disaster on liberals won’t be quite as big a faliure as Bush in Iraq. You always have Cummings.
April 28th, 2007 at 7:19 am
Actually Jim R is probably right that FDR or Truman would falsify wartime information. Wrong then, wrong now.
April 28th, 2007 at 8:54 am
If he makes thge claim, he should provide proof. If not, he’s just pulling stuff out of his ass.
April 28th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Yeah jcummings and FDR planned Pearl Harbor (just like Bush and the Mossad were behind 9/11).
How often do you have to change the tinfoil?
April 29th, 2007 at 7:18 am
Did I say that FDR planned Pearl Harbor? No. I recently saw “Flags of Our Fathers,” Clint Eastwood’s flick (not based on – but an actual – true story) about the people who did (not) raise the flag at Iwo Jima. It is very Jessica Lynch/Pat Tillman-esque.
April 29th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Jim R is selling America and Americans short again. His seems to believe that, without lies, Americans wont’ buy into war.
Sorry Jim R, but that kind of anti-Americanism just doesn’t square with reality. If a war is necessary, as WWII certainly became, Americans like me will be there ready to fight it–no phoney Tillman or Lynch tales or made up WMD threats are needed.
Lies and cheerleading reporters were not necessary to motivate Americans to respond to Pearl Harbor or to Nazi aggression, because it was clear that the war was primarily an act of self-defense.
Jim R’s suggestion that we needed to be fooled about what happened in WWII is a profound insult to the 100,000 plus Americans who died liberating Europe from the Nazis and the Pacific from the Japanese.
By advocating government subterfuge and patsy journalism, Jim R, Woody and their ilk show flaunt their low view of Americans, their cynicism about democratic government and their core belief that a war like the one in Iraq requires the government to lie.
April 29th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
While your countrymen are being killed in a war against foul barbarians thugs preying on and hiding amongst and terrorising innocent civilians on their way to work, to school and to church, you crazy fuckers make a major story out of your on country’s propaganda to win a war with one hand you’ve already tied behind them with other similar shit.
What more can possible be said about the stupidity, the ingnorance the insanity. You have cost many american lives and prolonged this war from the first day you assholes told the world we were tied down in a sandstorm. Tell me with idiots like you, what the fuck does the enemy need their own propaganda for.
April 29th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
Btw, the only one of your gang of eight that half way talked like they had a pair was a woman. All the males were trampling over each other running in that ‘different direction’. There isn’t a leader in the bunch. Poll driven mouth pieces all.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:04 am
Especially your ambulance chasing $400 dollar hair two americas fluffernutter, looking so totally foolish and phoney trying to pretend he lives in ours. It’s clear he’s taken for way more fo himself from people in ours than he has every given. It is equally clear he plans on useing yours and mine to give back what he took.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:04 am
Richard, good points about FDR. This whole business about presidents with wealth not having the public interest at heart is bogus.
Some of the most corrupt presidents we have had who allowed big business to run the white house during the Gilded Age (Grover Cleveland, William McKinley) came from humble beginnings…so too did Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, who both allowed corporations to run America. Myself, I would take a John Corzine, Ted Kennedy, or a John Edwards over a guy looking to exploit his or her office for the big financial windfall he or she has always been eyeing.
May 10th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
chapter 13 bancruptcy
May 10th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
priemier visa gold card t
May 10th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
doescover card services have credit cards for people with bad credit
May 10th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
guaranteed no co signer credit card approval
May 10th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
guaranteed line of credit
May 11th, 2007 at 1:03 am
fico score 528 unsecured credit card s
May 11th, 2007 at 2:31 am
credit cards with score of 600 *
May 11th, 2007 at 2:47 am
credit cards for rebuilding credit instant approval
May 11th, 2007 at 3:05 am
american express apply guarentee approval
May 11th, 2007 at 3:52 am
unsecured credit card with 612 fico score 5
May 11th, 2007 at 6:26 am
credit cards for 602 fico score
May 11th, 2007 at 6:39 am
no annual fee for bad credit cards i
May 11th, 2007 at 6:47 am
guaranted credit cards online decision bad credit rating high limit uk get your card fast
May 11th, 2007 at 7:01 am
centennial gold credit card review r