• 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.

Philip Zelikow, impartial?

SezMe said:
[/derail]
That's not how it works around here, Garb. If every thread ended when it lost its original meaning, all the fora together would fit in your back pocket. In many (most?) cases, the fun really begins when we get far afield. Or, as in this case, when we beat a dead horse for pages and pages. :)
Click to expand...

I agree. From small acorns great oaks grow
 
alexg said:
If I were an investigative journalist and I discovered Zelikow was an expert in 'public myths' I would regard this as a starting point, as of possible interest, and then begin investigating. I suggest you do the same. See if he has done anything with his knowledge. Look into his political life. Dig. All you have at this point is step one in a many step process.
Click to expand...

I am not a jounalist so whats your point?
 
Docker said:
I am not a jounalist so whats your point?
Click to expand...

That is my point.

Seriously, are you a propagandist or seriously interested in learning about Zelikow? If you want to learn then do so and come back and tell us if he is biased or not.

ETA Lacking that I don't think I would go about asserting he was biased or implying he was or even suggesting he might be or whatever it was you were doing or 'not doing' here.
 
Last edited:
alexg said:
That is my point.

Seriously, are you a propagandist or seriously interested in learning about Zelikow? If you want to learn then do so and come back and tell us if he is biased or not.
Click to expand...

You explicitly stated that that would require invetigative journalist skills I do not possess
 
Docker said:
yes but being partial is not a criticism of the commission, it's a criticism of those who chose them.
Click to expand...
Here is how the selection process worked:
SEC. 603. <> COMPOSITION OF COMMISSION. Members.--The Commission shall be composed of 10 members, of whom--

(1) 1 member shall be appointed by the President, who shall serve as chairman of the Commission;

(2) 1 member shall be appointed by the leader of the Senate (majority or minority leader, as the case may be) of the Democratic Party, in consultation with the leader of the House of Representatives (majority or minority leader, as the case may be) of the Democratic Party, who shall serve as vice chairman of the Commission;

(3) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the Senate leadership of the Democratic Party;

(4) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the leadership of the House of Representatives of the Republican Party;

(5) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the Senate leadership of the Republican Party; and

(6) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the leadership of the House of Representatives of the Democratic Party.

Qualifications; Initial Meeting.--

(1) Political party affiliation.--Not more than 5 members of the Commission shall be from the same political party.

(2) Nongovernmental appointees.--An individual appointed to the Commission may not be an officer or employee of the Federal Government or any State or local government.

(3) Other qualifications.--It is the sense of Congress that individuals appointed to the Commission should be prominent United States citizens, with national recognition and significant depth of experience in such professions as governmental service, law enforcement, the armed services, law, public administration, intelligence gathering, commerce (including aviation matters), and foreign affairs.

(4) Deadline for appointment.--All members of the Commission shall be appointed on or before December 15, 2002.

(5) Initial meeting.--The Commission shall meet and begin the operations of the Commission as soon as practicable.
Click to expand...
 
Docker said:
You explicitly stated that that would require invetigative journalist skills I do not possess
Click to expand...

Then stand down.

Or you could emulate your apparent hero. But there wouldn't be much point of doing that here.
 
Your avatar, apparently. I'll admit I assumed too much. But you gotta admit using him as your avatar suggests something along those lines. Or is that you?
 
Docker said:
Who's my hero?
Click to expand...
He's probably referring to Alex Jones. You know, the guy who accuses the FDNY of abandoning their fallen brothers in order to participate in a real estate crime.

That guy.
 
alexg said:
Your avatar, apparently. I'll admit I assumed too much. But you gotta admit using him as your avatar suggests something along those lines. Or is that you?
Click to expand...

I'll tell you why I use Jones as my avatar. In my first thread here, on the ISI,
I was immediately accused of being an alex jones follower, despite never mentioning him. So I thought he would be the ideal choice.
 
Must be an old picture. He's much fatter these days. But still a complete and utter lunatic.
 
Docker, I repect your POV, I understand it's tough to go one on ten or whatever the odds are here. I meant what I said about Zelikow. You could have something there but it definitely needs more research. Hell, as an accomplished Googleist, which I assume you are like the rest of us, you might not need to be an investigative journalist. That he is an expert in public myths and that he wrote a book with a prominent member of the current admin. is worth looking into. But no more than that at this point. ETA I honestly think that's where you stand with this.
 
alexg said:
Docker, I repect your POV, I understand it's tough to go one on ten or whatever the odds are here. I meant what I said about Zelikow. You could have something there but it definitely needs more research. Hell, as an accomplished Googleist, which I assume you are like the rest of us, you might not need to be an investigative journalist. That he is an expert in public myths and that he wrote a book with a prominent member of the current admin. is worth looking into. But no more than that at this point. ETA I honestly think that's where you stand with this.
Click to expand...

But googlists can only go so far. Proper investigations need interviews, travelling etc

I admitted I have no solid evidence, I'm just amazed that lots of things aren't being looked at.

Take the Mahmood claims, he should be questioned and looked at.
 
Docker said:
But googlists can only go so far. Proper investigations need interviews, travelling etc

I admitted I have no solid evidence, I'm just amazed that lots of things aren't being looked at.

Take the Mahmood claims, he should be questioned and looked at.
Click to expand...

You could put together what you find and send it to Jones. If he doesn't have time to deal with it he prolly has minions who would.

ETA Not that he would be the best choice, but still . .
 
Docker said:
And his weight matters how?
Click to expand...

Who said it does? You seem to have a hard time comprehending more than half a sentence at a time, and you seem to have a hard time picking out the important parts of a given post.

Edit to remove the rest of my post which explained what Docker failed to comprehend since Docker seems to be incapable of taking in more than one sentence at a time, so I'll do this in stages, as required rather than confuse him further.
 
Last edited:
alexg said:
You could put together what you find and send it to Jones. If he doesn't have time to deal with it he prolly has minions who would.

ETA Not that he would be the best choice, but still . .
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Jones would be the best. I told you why hes my avatar. A friend of Jones would be a very good choice though, Greg Palast. He's a respected BBC journalist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom