oh military industrial complex. is there anything you can't do?

Internet Detectives ACTIVATE!

Are there possible FEC violations associated with this?

Man..Kos is propaganda machine.

GaryPDX: Man..Kos is propaganda machine.

If they had their own cable news channel they could call themselves "Fair and Balanced".

GaryPDX: Man..Kos is propaganda machine.

So are you suggesting that this is not true?

I find this much more disturbing though. ^{(^)}

This just links an employee of NG to the website, no actual link between NG and the site.

FAIL.

Hobodeluxe: oh military industrial complex. is there anything you can't do?

The military-industrial complex frowns on Obama's shennanigans.

bronyaur1: Are there possible FEC violations associated with this?

There's no proof (thus far) that the guy named in the article wasn't running the website on his own.

what_now: GaryPDX: Man..Kos is propaganda machine.

So are you suggesting that this is not true?

No. Just that they are a propaganda machine on anything and everything that might be critical/negative toward Obama. They're very biased.

i don't see any evidence that his employeer is involved in this, but the Zoroastrian angle is interesting. I wonder if the Zoroasters are part of the Iranian revolutionary underground pushing for the USA to invade.

dj_bigbird: This just links an employee of NG to the website, no actual link between NG and the site.

FAIL.

Not "just an employee" from what it sounds like; it appears that he also wrote an anti-Obama editorial (^) to his local paper

GaryPDX: Man..Kos is propaganda machine.



Because nothing in that diary is verifiable, right? You can't get the exact same WHOIS information yourself, right?

But never mind, keep attacking the source because you know this is indefensible.

disapproves.

If this is true, our republic is truly FUBAR.

Hobodeluxe: I find this much more disturbing though. (^)

RE: You're link.

Now that's something worth discussing, but I don't want to threadjack. Suffice it to say, the laws don't make a clear statement that seeks to restrict me from anally rape Yoo with a rusty machete, therefore I must construe that I'm allowed to.

dj_bigbird: This just links an employee of NG to the website, no actual link between NG and the site.

FAIL.

This.

An employee of a company creates an Anti Obama web site and it automatically means it backed by his employers?

Of course as is usual with Fark Headlines, the article makes no claim that the Northrop Grumman corporation is involved with this web site, only that it was created by and registered to an employee of Northrop Grumman.

So, if I worked at McDonald's and took it upon myself to create an anti McCain web site, would it mean that the McDonald's corporation is trying to discredit McCain?

mofroe: Not "just an employee" from what it sounds like; it appears that he also wrote an anti-Obama editorial (^) to his local paper

...and plugged his own site in that editorial as well

mofroe: Not "just an employee" from what it sounds like; it appears that he also wrote an anti-Obama editorial (^) to his local paper

So now his company is automatically attributed with "sponsoring" his anti-Obama website? Perhaps I miss the connection

mofroe: Not "just an employee" from what it sounds like; it appears that he also wrote an anti-Obama editorial (^) to his local paper

Now that's some top-notch Concern Trollery right there.

TheCid: GaryPDX: Man..Kos is propaganda machine.



Because nothing in that diary is verifiable, right? You can't get the exact same WHOIS information yourself, right?

But never mind, keep attacking the source because you know this is indefensible.

Go ahead, try to convince me Kos isn't a massive cheerleader for Obama.

GaryPDX: Go ahead, try to convince me Kos isn't a massive cheerleader for Obama.

Who cares? Argue the facts- which are verifiable in the post- not the messenger.

But of course, it's not something you can logically defend; which is why you resorted to ad hom in an attempt to discredit it.

Psychotropic: An employee of a company creates an Anti Obama web site and it automatically means it backed by his employers?

Of course as is usual with Fark Headlines, the article makes no claim that the Northrop Grumman corporation is involved with this web site, only that it was created by and registered to an employee of Northrop Grumman.

So, if I worked at McDonald's and took it upon myself to create an anti McCain web site, would it mean that the McDonald's corporation is trying to discredit McCain?

Even some of the nutball KOS commenters have picked up on this. There is absolutely no evidence of anything even remotely illegal, or even shady, at this point.

TheCid: GaryPDX: Go ahead, try to convince me Kos isn't a massive cheerleader for Obama.

Who cares? Argue the facts- which are verifiable in the post- not the messenger.

But of course, it's not something you can logically defend; which is why you resorted to ad hom in an attempt to discredit it.

I'm sorry, I've dismissed Kos's gibberish long before Obama come on the scene. They're a left wing spin shop.

bronyaur1: Are there possible FEC violations associated with this?

Doesn't matter since the FEC doesn't have enough staff to actually investigate anything. Truth is very 90s, yknow.

Yanks_RSJ: Even some of the nutball KOS commenters have picked up on this. There is absolutely no evidence of anything even remotely illegal, or even shady, at this point.

Well, not quite. It's shady as hell that the guy doesn't just outright say that he works for a defense contractor on his site. He's deliberately hiding the fact that he has something to gain.

The only thing that we don't have evidence for is to say whether or not it's directly connected to the company itself. Hence the poster's request for more investigation.

So he works for Northrup Grumman. That doesn't mean he forfeits his 1st amendment rights.

He is a turd though. I looked at his site and it features a picture of Obama with a photoshopped cigarette in his mouth, and claims he must be a secret Muslim because his middle name is "Hussein". And his name is Navid Keshavarz-Nia -- kinda terrorist sounding, if you ask me!

He seems to be a rather poor writer, too, judging by his letter to the editor.

GaryPDX: I'm sorry, I've dismissed Kos's gibberish long before Obama come on the scene. They're a left wing spin shop.

Less ad hom, more discussion about the actual content. Kos is deliberately upfront about their support for the Democratic party, which puts them several pegs above this guy who won't even declare who he works for on his own site.

Psychotropic: An employee of a company creates an Anti Obama web site and it automatically means it backed by his employers?

Of course as is usual with Fark Headlines, the article makes no claim that the Northrop Grumman corporation is involved with this web site, only that it was created by and registered to an employee of Northrop Grumman.

So, if I worked at McDonald's and took it upon myself to create an anti McCain web site, would it mean that the McDonald's corporation is trying to discredit McCain?

Mayebe so. I hear they don't want a McPresident.

Nestea Plunge: GaryPDX:
Go ahead, try to convince me Kos isn't a massive cheerleader for Obama.

In your world, everybody is a massive cheerleader for Obama.

You certainly are...hahaha.

KaponoFor3: mofroe: Not "just an employee" from what it sounds like; it appears that he also wrote an anti-Obama editorial (^) to his local paper

So now his company is automatically attributed with "sponsoring" his anti-Obama website? Perhaps I miss the connection

I did not state that NG does or does not approve of the site, but he is not some low level schlub there either. The link I provided appears to be written to his local paper, and plugs his own site. Judge that on it's own merits if you want to discuss what I posted.

TheCid: GaryPDX: I'm sorry, I've dismissed Kos's gibberish long before Obama come on the scene. They're a left wing spin shop.

Less ad hom, more discussion about the actual content. Kos is deliberately upfront about their support for the Democratic party, which puts them several pegs above this guy who won't even declare who he works for on his own site.

Okay, I'll tell you what, when other main street media picks this up, I'll take a closer look at it. I'll probably be offended too if there is any proof of anything nefarious. How's that?

GaryPDX: main street media

I think you mean mainstream media.

Psychotropic: An employee of a company creates an Anti Obama web site and it automatically means it backed by his employers?

Of course as is usual with Fark Headlines, the article makes no claim that the Northrop Grumman corporation is involved with this web site, only that it was created by and registered to an employee of Northrop Grumman.

So, if I worked at McDonald's and took it upon myself to create an anti McCain web site, would it mean that the McDonald's corporation is trying to discredit McCain?

I'm an Obama supporter and even I have to second this.

Fail.

GaryPDX: Okay, I'll tell you what, when other main street media picks this up, I'll take a closer look at it. I'll probably be offended too if there is any proof of anything nefarious. How's that?

Why not go to his site in the first place?

And here's the relevant WHOIS information for those of you who don't know how to use a command line:
http://www.whois.net/whois_new.cgi?d=obamaunveiled&tld=com

Oh, and here's the info from GoDaddy, owners of the site:
http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIs.aspx?domain=obamaunveiled.com&prog_id=godaddy

And of course, the site itself, which has a copyright notice on the bottom but no name- because the guy is trying to hide who he is:
http://www.obamaunveiled.com/

Of course, you don't actually care about any of this information, do you GaryPDX? You just want to discredit the truth.

TheCid: But never mind, keep attacking the source because you know this is indefensible.

You know, when the villagers dismissed the little boy who cried "wolf", that was no less an ad hominem, but they still didn't run out to investigate fanciful sounding claims after he'd made a bunch of them. Just saying.

GaryPDX: TheCid: GaryPDX: Go ahead, try to convince me Kos isn't a massive cheerleader for Obama.

Who cares? Argue the facts- which are verifiable in the post- not the messenger.

But of course, it's not something you can logically defend; which is why you resorted to ad hom in an attempt to discredit it.

I'm sorry, I've dismissed Kos's gibberish long before Obama come on the scene. They're a left wing spin shop.

Ok, so what part of this issue is spin (and therefore untrue)? Please be as specific as you can.

My Liver Hurts: I'm an Obama supporter and even I have to second this.

Having RTFA, it's potentially troubling and deserves further investigation but should never have gone to press (so to speak) in this early stage. It's worthless conjecture and speculation at this point. And of course now that it's out there, if there is any shady dealings going on, they'll be covered up quickly.

F'ing blogs. Such a rush to get the news out there first that they don't care if it's right and potentially destroy whatever investigation could have been done.

EatHam: You know, when the villagers dismissed the little boy who cried "wolf", that was no less an ad hominem, but they still didn't run out to investigate fanciful sounding claims after he'd made a bunch of them. Just saying.

No, actually, it wasn't an ad hominem. It was an argument based on past experience, which is often confused with an ad hominem.

Saying "Charles Manson should not be released from jail because he has killed many people and I believe he will kill again" is not an ad hominem.

Saying "The bush administration's explanations of world events and situations should not be trusted since they have been shown to wildly manipulate the truth, outright lie, and engage in hyperbole" is not an ad hominem either.

An ad hominem is an attack on the person that does not directly relate to the argument, like "Don't listen to EatHam because he's a conservative".

dj_bigbird: This just links an employee of NG to the website, no actual link between NG and the site.

FAIL.

I totally agree that this doesn't link NG as an entity to this page, but the guy is the Program Director for Homeland Security and Intelligence. He's not some guy doing data entry or tightening bolts.

Obviously one guy doesn't speak for a company of over 100,000 employees, but I think that the Program Director for HS at a huge defense contractor putting up anti-Obama sites is sort of interesting. Not surprising, but interesting. I wouldn't put up a website bashing a guy that might end up being the head of my largest client. Seems bad for business.

EatHam: TheCid: But never mind, keep attacking the source because you know this is indefensible.

You know, when the villagers dismissed the little boy who cried "wolf", that was no less an ad hominem, but they still didn't run out to investigate fanciful sounding claims after he'd made a bunch of them. Just saying.

Kos is hardly one source. It's not really that much different from Fark. Anything that's not on the frontpage should be treated as an individual diary, not something endorsed by the site itself.
I took a quick look, and I don't see this on the frontpage, but it is on the "recommended diaries" sidebar.
So it's not yet endorsed by the people who actually run DKos; but has been recommended by... hrm. Anyone here know how Kos's recommendation system works? How many people does it take to rec something up?

TheCid: Anything that's not on the frontpage or posted by one of the people who run the site should be treated as an individual diary, not something endorsed by the site itself.

FTFM.

Obdicut: Saying "Charles Manson should not be released from jail because he has killed many people and I believe he will kill again" is not an ad hominem.

No, it's just a lie. Technically.

TheCid: Of course, you don't actually care about any of this information, do you GaryPDX? You just want to discredit the truth.

Okay, I looked at your urls, it's a personal registration with a personal email address on a cable network. I have 12 domains registered at godaddy under various different information.

So the guy works for Grumman..so? I'm not seeing the problem. Show me a site like this that has Grumman's Admin/Owner information.

Oh, and for the record, I think this is a tempest in a teacup and was just one NG employee venting his own stupidity. I doubt NG would use their own employees to do something like this, even if they would consider doing something like this. They have lobbying groups with pretty direct power.

mediaho: No, it's just a lie. Technically.

fark, you're right. Bad example. Anyway, y'all get my gist. My gist: you get it.

Obdicut: No, actually, it wasn't an ad hominem. It was an argument based on past experience, which is often confused with an ad hominem.

Thus, why I said it was "no less" an ad hominem. Saying that the daily kos is a circle jerk for the mentally disabled would be an ad hominem. Saying that they're a left-wing spin site that can rarely be taken seriously is an argument based on past experience.

This is an extremely weak argument.

Not that I expect much more from Daily KOS.

EatHam: You know, when the villagers dismissed the little boy who cried "wolf", that was no less an ad hominem, but they still didn't run out to investigate fanciful sounding claims after he'd made a bunch of them. Just saying.

Yeah, and look where that got them -- they probably went months with no sheep products!