• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Good news from Iraq

Awww, I hoped that they had carved a happy face into the sand so we could see it from space. That would teach those damn insurgents, especially if it read "Have a nice day!" in arabic.
 
This is shameless propoganda that even Michael Moore would be proud of.
 
For the "What Iraqis are saying" part, they quote the same guy 3 times.
 
Mycroft said:
Is any of it untrue?
Click to expand...

Gee, excuse my cynicism. The GOP releases a ridiculously obvious "empahasize only the positive" newsletter and I'm supposed to take it seriously.
I take it with the same grain of salt I would if Michael Moore released his own "News in Iraq" newsletter.
Sometimes considering the source is enough to warrant no further investigation.
Kinda like if the CIA suddenly decided a country had WMDs.
 
What worries me about these replies is not that people are treating GOP election material with a grain of salt, as they should, but that there seems to be an automatic bias and dismissal of conservative sources but at the same time the likes of Al-Jazeera are taken seriously.
 
KelvinG said:
Gee, excuse my cynicism. The GOP releases a ridiculously obvious "empahasize only the positive" newsletter and I'm supposed to take it seriously.
Click to expand...

I dunno, the media seems to be working this "emphasize only the negative" angle and we take it seriously.

KelvinG said:
I take it with the same grain of salt I would if Michael Moore released his own "News in Iraq" newsletter.
Click to expand...

Okay. So that means we fact-check it like we do with Michael Moore?

KelvinG said:
Sometimes considering the source is enough to warrant no further investigation.
Kinda like if the CIA suddenly decided a country had WMDs.
Click to expand...

I agree that sometimes considering the source is enough to warrant no further investigation, but I don’t agree that information from a major political party or the CIA falls within that category. Certainly information from a major political party should be treated with skepticism and checked for accuracy, but I disagree that it should be dismissed out of hand.

VoloVersio said:
You could say that none of of what is written on this flier is entirely untrue, but the picture it's trying to paint definitely could be.
Click to expand...

Could be?

I agree. It warrants investigation, right?
 
KelvinG said:
Gee, excuse my cynicism. The GOP releases a ridiculously obvious "empahasize only the positive" newsletter and I'm supposed to take it seriously.
Click to expand...

Why not? Between this forum, and your own example, and the daily news from anywhere, what would be the point of them repeating what is printed elsewhere?

You can call it propaganda, and be right, but that is not the same as saying it is all lies.
 
Cylinder said:
The methodology presented is almost the antithesis of the skeptical method.
Click to expand...

What? Doubting the honesty of an organization that has consistently shown that it would rather lie than be honest about facts that would make it look bad? There is nothing unskeptical about that.
 
Skeptic said:
What worries me about these replies is not that people are treating GOP election material with a grain of salt, as they should, but that there seems to be an automatic bias and dismissal of conservative sources but at the same time the likes of Al-Jazeera are taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Yes, I couldn't help but notice how everyone here is taking Al-Jazeera seriously ...

Oh, wait ...

My mistake.

I took one of Skeptic's straw men for a human being.
 
Dr Adequate said:
Yes, I couldn't help but notice how everyone here is taking Al-Jazeera seriously ...

Oh, wait ...

My mistake.

I took one of Skeptic's straw men for a human being.
Click to expand...
And what did we tell you about that? WHAT, young man??!!!

No! *smack*
Bad Dr. A! Bad!

Now go to your room.
 
Skeptic said:
What worries me about these replies is not that people are treating GOP election material with a grain of salt, as they should, but that there seems to be an automatic bias and dismissal of conservative sources but at the same time the likes of Al-Jazeera are taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Which Al Jazeera do you mean? There is more than one, you know.

Do you mean aljazeera.com, that biased internet rag nobody here has ever taken seriously? Or do you mean Al Jazeera television, the Arabic language newschannel that has been accused of being a front for Western and Israeli intelligence agencies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom