Two Books the Anti-Bush Left Aren't Going to Like...

[Kodiak]

The Connection by Stephen F. Hayes


Inside The Asylum by Jed Babbin

Will the Anti-Bushies read either of these, or will these books only end up preaching to the choir?

 

[Hutch]

Welll....

Given the section quoted from "The Connection" says that "The name was not spelled exactly as Carney had seen it before" (which it then excuses by saying well, of course the records aren't always that perfect) and then goes on to create a chain of dubious connections (he "acted like he had been trained by the Iraqi Secret Service?") and old quote's we have heard before--and nothing regarding the 9-11's conclusions--I must doubt that there is much new there.

And as for "Inside the Asylum", when a blurb for a book begins with a wowser of an ad hominem:

Democrats believe that America's national security and foreign policy should be made subservient to the United Nations and Old Europe

and are then followed up by these reasoned statements:

Tears the cover off.......

...he demostrates beyond all doubt.....

...only America is unwilling to kowtow to tryanny and terrorism....

well, perhaps I am biased, but my BS meter goes way into the red when I see that type of horse-fecal matter used for advertising someone's work--of any political persuasion.

You'll have to do better than that, old Ursus conservatis..

 

[Cain]

The Connection by Stephen F. Hayes

This guy was interviewed by Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show". I don't think a guest has ever come so close to crying. I felt sorry for the guy, getting flayed on television and all.

But it doesn't matter, right? We went in to liberate the Iraqi people.

 

[Kodiak]

Welll....

Given the section quoted from "The Connection" says that "The name was not spelled exactly as Carney had seen it before" (which it then excuses by saying well, of course the records aren't always that perfect) and then goes on to create a chain of dubious connections (he "acted like he had been trained by the Iraqi Secret Service?") and old quote's we have heard before--and nothing regarding the 9-11's conclusions--I must doubt that there is much new there.

And as for "Inside the Asylum", when a blurb for a book begins with a wowser of an ad hominem:


and are then followed up by these reasoned statements:


well, perhaps I am biased, but my BS meter goes way into the red when I see that type of horse-fecal matter used for advertising someone's work--of any political persuasion.

You'll have to do better than that, old Ursus conservatis..

I make no excuses for the webcites I linked. They are both trying to sell the book. I only presented these sites as a point of reference. I have as yet read neither book, though I plan on reading both. The only parts I found interesting were the parts taken directly from the books themselves.

I am just curious to know if people opposed to Bush, his policies, and the wars on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq will either ignore or automatically "poo-poo" these books, or read them (with some skepticism sure) without prejudgement - in effect whether or not they are willing to challenge their beliefs, something this forum, and even all of JREF, value very highly.

 

[Jocko]

I wonder how many people who pooh-pooh any and all Michael Moore ciritcism from those who haven't seen F9/11 yet will be willing to hold their peace until they've read these two books.

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Re: Two Books the Anti-Bush Left Aren't Going to Like...

This guy was interviewed by Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show". I don't think a guest has ever come so close to crying. I felt sorry for the guy, getting flayed on television and all.

But it doesn't matter, right? We went in to liberate the Iraqi people.

No! You're absolutely right, Cain! It doesn't matter!

The author was "flayed" on TV by a comedian! OF COURSE THAT MAKES EVERYTHING IN HIS BOOK COMPLETELY WRONG!!


Thanks Cain, for proving a very important point...

 

[Kodiak]

I wonder how many people who pooh-pooh any and all Michael Moore ciritcism from those who haven't seen F9/11 yet will be willing to hold their peace until they've read these two books.

They had better. While my past experience with Moore and his films, as well as the myraid negative criticisms by critics and pundits make me very skeptical, I'll reserve judgememt until I've seen the film myself.

 

[BillyTK]

Inside The Asylum by Jed Babbin

Will the Anti-Bushies read either of these, or will these books only end up preaching to the choir?

No and yes respectively:

• The UN Security Council: how this grouping -- supposedly the world's strongest force for peace -- is interested only in tying down the U.S. and making any American action taken without UN permission illegitimate in the eyes of the world
  [...]
• The Security Council's willful blindness to feverish efforts by Iran and other rogue states to develop nuclear weapons
  [...]
• The principal weakness of the EU -- and why the United States should expect no friendship or help from this Frankenstein-like conglomeration of states

Despite their pretensions to superiority, says Babbin, the United Nations and the European Union are morally bankrupt - and increasingly determined in their opposition to the true leader of the free world, the United States.

That's four reasons I won't be diverting my whisky money towards this book...

 

[varwoche]

I for one have little doubt these books are lies, slander, and propoganda. I haven't read them, don't intend to, nor did I follow the dumbass link.

(Don't want to dispel any of these pre-conceived notions afterall.)

 

[Kodiak]

I for one have little doubt these books are lies, slander, and propoganda. I haven't read them, don't intend to, nor did I follow the dumbass link.

(Don't want to dispel any of these pre-conceived notions afterall.)

They aren't pre-conceived, as evidenced by your continued behavior and tactics on this forum of which your post above is only a single example...

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Re: Two Books the Anti-Bush Left Aren't Going to Like...

No and yes respectively:

That's four reasons I won't be diverting my whisky money towards this book...

Fair enough. Thanks for the response. So being in disagreement with a few sentences or a single phrase is enough for you to disregard the entire book before its been read?

 

[glee]

I am just curious to know if people opposed to Bush, his policies, and the wars on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq we either ignore or automatically "poo-poo" these books, or read them (with some skepticism sure) without prejudgement - in effect whether or not they are willing to challenge their beliefs, something this forum, and even all of JREF, value very highly.

Who are these people 'opposed to Bush and the wars on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq'?

There was real international support for the military action in Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden was believed to be hiding there, and there was plenty of evidence that Al-Qaeda camps were there too.
It is sad that the Taliban are now making a comeback there, but there was no problem with the US seeking the terrorists responsible for 9/11.

By contrast, before invasion, Iraq was already under heavy investigation for weapons of mass destruction. Remember that was the only reason presented to the UN for the US to invade. Not a word about Saddam being a violent dictator, nor establishing democracy, nor any connection to 9/11.
Meanwhile, before agreeing to military action, the UK Parliament was assured by Tony Blair that:

- Saddam had an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
- Saddam had mass destruction missiles aimed at UK bases in Cyprus
- Saddam was developing a nuclear weapon with uranium from Africa

And so the Iraq invasion took place without UN approval. No weapons of mass destruction have ever been found, the missiles didn't exist and the uranium connection was a forgery.
Tony Blair has never apologised for his war speech and instead exhorts us to 'move on and not keep looking back'.

The depressing events in US-run Iraqi prisons bring shame upon a great country, as does the continuing blatant disregard for human rights in Guantanamo Bay.

Next the so-called 'war on terror'.
Is this like the 'war on drugs'?
Is the US winning?
Who is the enemy, and how do we know when we win?
Is detention without trial, and torture, going to last till we 'win'?

Finally I despise Saddam and all his works. I wish the US had not installed him in the first place, and that Rumsfeld had not sold him the weapons of mass destruction Saddam used to kill vast numbers in the Iran-Iraq war.
Having said that, look at the way Saddam is being tried.
The US invades Iraq, and sets up an un-elected Governing Council. This body passes a law solely aimed at prosecuting Saddam, then disbands. What sort of justice is this?
Why won't Saddam be tried under internationally-agreed war crimes legislation? Presumably because the US won't sign up to it.

Have I made any mistakes in the above?
Do these books address any of the issues above?

Just to summarise - I think Bush is a terrible President who is making allies of the US feel ashamed.

 

[DavidJames]

Will the Anti-Bushies read either of these, or will these books only end up preaching to the choir?

Check out the Moore the Fool thread if you want to locate people who prefer to criticize something w/o seeing it. Looks like you've got your directions backwords

 

[rikzilla]

I wonder how many people who pooh-pooh any and all Michael Moore ciritcism from those who haven't seen F9/11 yet will be willing to hold their peace until they've read these two books.

Well, when they offer the argument that their whiskey money is too precious to them to see in the pockets of a possible right wing polemicist, we can tell them to go straight to their public library and check it out.

If I had the option to do such a thing where F911 is concerned I'd have already done it. But, there is no option NOT to enrich Mr. Moore as one investigates his "art". Therefore I feel no need, no curiosity, and no ambiguously burning desire to see this film. The very thought brings on early, yet unmistakable pangs of boredom.

-z

 

[Mel]

How is it possible for Americans OR the int'l community to still trust the Bush administration when they have repeatedly shown they are willing to manipulate the truth & even the law when it serves their purposes?

How can any book restore our faith in this wretched administration?

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

As neither author was a quantity I was aware of , so I looked up same

Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer for The American Spectator, a right wing bird cage liner owned by Mr.Fair and Balanced himself Rupert Murdoch

Jed Babbin was a deputy undersecretary of defense in the first Bush Administration and now often appears as a talking warhead on MSNBC. He is a contributing writer to The American Spectator
A slightly more erudite right wing publication.

Neither of these facts alone make what they write incorrect, but on the bullsiht scale it's like asking James Carville for an analysis of the Bush administration or Yasser Arafat about the finer points of rabbinical law.

 

[Kodiak]

Neither of these facts alone make what they write incorrect

No, what you should have said was "Neither of these facts affect the accuracy or veracity of either book in any way, and can only serve as a fallacious means of discrediting what is written without actually refuting any of the data, claims, premises, or conclusions made by either of the authors."

 

[Kodiak]

Check out the Moore the Fool thread if you want to locate people who prefer to criticize something w/o seeing it. Looks like you've got your directions backwords

Not I. While I've criticized Moore and all of his previous works, I'm skeptical of F9/11, but have withheld judgement until I see the film for myself.

 

[wjousts]

Re: Re: Two Books the Anti-Bush Left Aren't Going to Like...

This guy was interviewed by Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show". I don't think a guest has ever come so close to crying. I felt sorry for the guy, getting flayed on television and all.

I saw that too. I'd never seen Stewart rip into someone like that before. He's usually very fair to right wing guests.

 

[Cain]

Re: Re: Re: Two Books the Anti-Bush Left Aren't Going to Like...

No! You're absolutely right, Cain! It doesn't matter!

The author was "flayed" on TV by a comedian! OF COURSE THAT MAKES EVERYTHING IN HIS BOOK COMPLETELY WRONG!!

Thanks Cain, for proving a very important point...

Jesus Christ, calm down. I saw the author on television, he was asked difficult questions, and didn't do a convincing job of defending his point of view. In fact he did a miserable job. It felt very uncomfortable. I never came close to saying or implying that this encounter "MAKES EVERYTHING IN HIS BOOK COMPLETELY WRONG!!"

and...

Oh my God, Stewart is a comedian! That's certainly not a charge one could level at (oh, say) Bill O'Reilly's Peabody award winning work.