• 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.

CNN fires terrorist supporter.

Newtons Bit said:
Or today. Any journalist who supports or admires a person who personally plans or encourages others to attack innocents is worthless as an objective and impassioned observer of facts. And as journalism requires a certain level of trust between the consumer and the reporter that is built upon at least a perception of objectivity, a journalist without trust becomes useless.
Click to expand...

I realize they weren't reporters, but how do you feel about Ronald Reagan and Oliver North and the level of trust they had between the politician/soldier and the general public? Is the same principle involved or is that different because they actually had the power to do things in the name of the American people?
 
Upchurch said:
I realize they weren't reporters, but how do you feel about Ronald Reagan and Oliver North and the level of trust they had between the politician/soldier and the general public? Is the same principle involved or is that different because they actually had the power to do things in the name of the American people?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that they can be compared: the public wants their representatives to be biased. The politicians that are elected are usually the ones that share the same bias as the majority. A belief that the leader is doing something arguably terrorist in nature (Hiroshima, for example) is easily forgiven by a population who believes that said leader is acting in the best interest of the people he represents.
 
I would suggest Hiroshima was not akin to terrorism -- terrorism is a military weak side taking pot-shots at the other side's population.

Hiroshima was war technology reaching the level that one side could say to the other, ala the big robot in Robocop, "You now have 30 seconds to drop your weapons." It's no longer a war, it's an arrest procedure. The war stops...now.
 
Last edited:
Newtons Bit said:
I'm not sure that they can be compared: the public wants their representatives to be biased. The politicians that are elected are usually the ones that share the same bias as the majority. A belief that the leader is doing something arguably terrorist in nature (Hiroshima, for example) is easily forgiven by a population who believes that said leader is acting in the best interest of the people he represents.
Click to expand...

I agree with Beerina about Hiroshima, but regardless, Iran-Contra was not popular and the population wasn't very forgiving, outside of a few fervent supporters.

However, it is not at all a stretch to argue that Reagan and Co. were supporters of terrorists and terrorism. Oliver North was fired from his job for supporting and aiding terrorism. Can Reagan and North be admired? Should they be?
 
Virus said:
You can't outdo these people. I've seen lefties admire the good works of Saddam Hussein.
Click to expand...


Don't forget Bush I with Cheney and Rumsfield admiring the good works of Saddam Hussein. Can't forget that picture of a smiling Rummy shaking hands with Saddam.
 
I'll take here at her word that she was expressing admiration for a position that the cleric advocated. Is that a fireable offense? In this case I would say no. The cleric was a somewhat liberal cleric in the middle east and we badly need those voices influencing the populace of that region. Part of the problem in the Middle East is a lack of modernization of ideas. I'd rather have this guy in a position of power than another Iranian hardline mullah type. Of course I would prefer someone who likes America but those sorts are in real short supply in the region.
 
Lurker said:
Can't forget that picture of a smiling Rummy shaking hands with Saddam.
Click to expand...

If you couldn't forget that, surely you couldn't forget these:

CarterArafat.jpg


CarterCastro.jpg


CarterShahofIran.jpg


CarterCeausescu.gif


CarterOrtrega.jpg


CarterMarshallTito.jpg


CarterHafezal-Assad.jpg


CarterKimIISung.jpg
 
Upchurch said:
You're missing the point, Cicero. Should Carter, Reagan and/or North be admired despite their support of terrorists and terrorism?
Click to expand...

Who admires North? Subtract Carter's affinity for terrorists, what is left to admire about that POTUS?
 
Upchurch said:
You're missing the point, Cicero. Should Carter, Reagan and/or North be admired despite their support of terrorists and terrorism?
Click to expand...

I don't think a journalist should publicly state personal admiration for any political figure. That compromises their integrity.
 
Upchurch said:
Maybe not while they are still active, but posthumously? It happens all the time and seems fairly benign to me.
Click to expand...

Not when either the terrorist or the "journalist" is still active. Benign? Of course it is. What is the worst that can happen? You get fired?
 
Upchurch said:
Maybe not while they are still active, but posthumously? It happens all the time and seems fairly benign to me.
Click to expand...

It exposes a bias. That's a problem for journalists who need to at least maintain an appearance of impartiality as part of their business.

Political commentators, such as Hannity or Olbermann, sell their bias as their business model. It's a bit different.
 
Lurker said:
I have had many a debate with conservatives and most of thsoe I talked to think North is a real American hero.
Click to expand...

I guess that means that those conservatives who did not consider him a "real American hero" were actually informed about LT. Colonel Oliver North.

I'm sure your apocryphal recollections are fascinating, however, we can document many liberals reactions to Castro that have actually met the dictator.


"Viva Fidel! Viva Che! Castro is the most honest and courageous politician I've ever met." Jesse Jackson


"Meeting Fidel Castro were the eight most important hours of my life." Steven Spielberg.

"Cuba's Elvis." Dan Rather


"Very selfless and moral. One of the world's wisest men." Oliver Stone


"A Dream come true." Naomi Campbell


"Socialism works. I think Cuba can prove that." Chevy Chase

"He doesn't have to worry about going to school and being shot at, where drugs are not a big problem, where he has access to free medical care and where the literacy rate I believe is higher than this country's"? Newsweek's Eleanor Clift argues that Elian Gonzalez should be returned to Cuba.

Diane Sawyer greets Castro by kissing him.

Barbara Walters helps Castro host a dinner party for a group of executives from Time, Newsweek, ABC, NPR, The Washington Post.

"Barbara Walters bristles at Madeleine Albright's Castro joke"
 
Last edited:
Good ol' Cicero. Why answer a question when you can reply with a series of unsourced, out-of-context, and completely off-topic tu quoque quotes?

You don't happen to remember what the topic is, do you?
 
Upchurch said:
Good ol' Cicero. Why answer a question when you can reply with a series of unsourced, out-of-context, and completely off-topic tu quoque quotes?

You don't happen to remember what the topic is, do you?
Click to expand...

According to you, it is about Reagan, Bush 41, and Oliver North. How could these libs comments on Castro be any more off-topic than the above? What do you mean unsourced? The quotes are identified.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom