If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Think Progress)   Remember how Fox News was claiming that Al Jazeera would be used to spread Islamic Propaganda in the US? It looks like Fox News decided to get the jump on them   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 38
    More: Dumbass, spread of Islam, Secretary of State John Kerry, propaganda, out in the street, chemical warfares, Syrian opposition  
•       •       •

6457 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Sep 2013 at 2:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-09-02 02:43:11 PM  
5 votes:

super_grass: Stopped reading


We know it's hard, but keep at it! We know you can do it. You'll soon be 'reading to learn' instead of 'learning to read'.
2013-09-02 05:01:56 PM  
4 votes:
I reiterate: we need to let the Russians and the UN deal with this. It's the Russians' backyard, and it's Turkey's neighbor where the refugees will head, so pretty much, they've got first dibs. The Russians and the British don't really want to go in, because Syria's military still has the receipts for their goodies, and no one wants to really discuss that.

The humanitarian interests are pressing, but there are no "good" sides in this conflict, just lesser degrees of worse. Regime change will plunge the country into further civil war, and will last a while. Assad is the favorite, because the trains run on time, and he lets the Russians park there. The EU wants the US to step in, because they want nothing to do with the ugliness that will result. The Russians just want things to settle down so that they can see a return on their investment in the region. The various players in the Middle East all see opportunities in the unrest to get factions of friends installed, and while folks keep pointing to the humanitarian angle, there are damn few folks with hands clean in this, and the only way to REALLY clean this mess up, is to go in hard, clamp down on EVERYONE and no one has the the stomach, or the resources to do that.

This IS a tragedy, and it's been brewing a long while, and folks have wrung their hands about it, and now that it's boiling over, folks want to capitalize on it, and make points here and abroad, and few want to really do much to actually do much, because without the Russians' support, there is nothing close to a happy ending, and the Russians have no intention of doing much. Yes, it sucks. If you're a civilian in Syria, or if you're in a rebel group, or a civil servant there as well.

All the saber rattling, all the rhetoric, it's empty, because this situation has been brewing for years, and we've sat and watched. Maybe if we sit this one out, we might learn a bit about the price paid for doing nothing. It's a lesson we need to learn.
2013-09-02 02:27:14 PM  
4 votes:

simplicimus: Princess Ryans Knickers: Well FOX News is owned by a Muslim soo....

Sunni or Shia?


Saudi prince, so Sunni.
2013-09-02 03:37:55 PM  
3 votes:

super_grass: Think Progress

Stopped reading right there.


So you support FOX News? The Muslim, Arab owned network? You must love terrorists! Why do you hate America?!
2013-09-02 03:09:40 PM  
3 votes:

super_grass: Think Progress

Stopped reading right there.


You must hate the way they accurately quote people.
2013-09-02 02:49:28 PM  
3 votes:

Aristocles: ThinkProgress is really stretching here. Wallace asked for a response to comments made by Syrian officials. There's nothing wrong with that and it's not his fault if the Syrian govt lies.

too bad I'm on a tablet and can't hover the link...
/never would have clicked if I'd known it was gsorosfundedThinkProgress


I can assume you are a moran not only because of you "gsorosfunded" stupidity but also because the source of the link is right under the headline for all to see.
2013-09-02 12:37:17 PM  
3 votes:
Syria has certainly led to some strange bedfellows lately.
2013-09-02 03:41:10 PM  
2 votes:

the_dude_abides: StopLurkListen: We know it's hard, but keep at it! We know you can do it. You'll soon be 'reading to learn' instead of 'learning to read'.

and yet when there's any right-wing news source, you idiots pull the same "stopped reading" card. then you pat each other on the back about it as if being ignorant is something to be proud of.


Um...no.  Think Progress typically quotes directly.  Usually they include video or audio of what they are covering so you can see/hear it yourself.  Wallace either did or did not say what they claim he said.

FOX et al spend most of their time mocking Obama for his choice of paperclips or asking Donald Trump what his opinion is (that is, in the rare event that the triumvirate of geniuses at FOX & Friends can't sufficiently derpsplain what unconstitutional outrage Obama will be using to destroy America that day).
2013-09-02 03:31:05 PM  
2 votes:

the_dude_abides: StopLurkListen: We know it's hard, but keep at it! We know you can do it. You'll soon be 'reading to learn' instead of 'learning to read'.

and yet when there's any right-wing news source, you idiots pull the same "stopped reading" card. then you pat each other on the back about it as if being ignorant is something to be proud of.


There aren't two sides to every issue, and behavior of the supposed 'liberal' media is quite different compared to Fox News.  Think Progress, MSNBC, Daily Kos, Mother Jones, etc, actually use real data and facts to back up their stories.  Yes, they tend to cover issues that are more liberal audience finds appealing, but when they report, they report the truth.

Fox has built an empire on manufacturing outrage, misquoting to get the desired effect, misdirecting the discussion on issues, and misrepresenting the facts.

Being on opposite sides of the political spectrum does not make them equal in terms of journalistic integrity and value.
2013-09-02 02:44:40 PM  
2 votes:

freak7: ManateeGag: How are they allowed to call themselves a News organization anymore.

Because MSNBC still exists.

[In erudite British accent]

Here we see the BSABSVR in his natural habitat. The BSABSVR prefers to live in an extremely even environment, equating all possible things in any given category from its surroundings... at every opportunity.
2013-09-02 02:43:06 PM  
2 votes:

super_grass: Think Progress

Stopped reading right there.


You must be very well infromed.
2013-09-02 02:31:03 PM  
2 votes:
Nice work there, Wallace. I'm sure your dad would be so proud of you right now.
2013-09-02 02:27:38 PM  
2 votes:

ManateeGag: How are they allowed to call themselves a News organization anymore.


Because both sides baddy bad or something.

CNN and FN massively suck and television would greatly improve if they were removed, just for different reasons.
2013-09-02 10:20:25 PM  
1 votes:

skullkrusher: Phil Moskowitz: Imagine how Mike Wallace feels about his sniveling coont of a son? I could handle gay, underachiever, alcoholic, but this human fecal vessel? I'd never speak to him.

go away, Phil.


nothing registers in your brain, does it? You're just this empty pissed off nothing.
2013-09-02 09:52:39 PM  
1 votes:

blackminded: Alphax: simplicimus: Princess Ryans Knickers: Well FOX News is owned by a Muslim soo....

Sunni or Shia?

Saudi prince, so Sunni Wahabbi.

FTFY.


Wahabbi is a subset of Sunni
2013-09-02 07:26:41 PM  
1 votes:
Conservatives: "If Obama strikes Syrian government targets, he'll be fighting on the side of Al-Qaeda... but if he asks Congress to give their blessing, he's being weak."

Lunatics.
2013-09-02 05:02:53 PM  
1 votes:

cchris_39: skullkrusher: The President getting authorization from Congress for military action is a great thing in the absence of a national security emergency. However, when the President says there will be "enormous consequences" if the "red line" of use of chemical weapons is crossed and then punts the responsibility to Congress rather than making the decision himself, I'm not sure how this is supposed to be viewed in any other way.

You're exactly right.

The President blinked and made us look weak and now our enemies are rejoicing.

The rest is the usual Obama apologists trying to put a better spin on it.


Again, you idiots biatched yourselves inside-out when Obama DIDN'T ask Congress in Libya. And you'd be doing the same if he didn't now.
2013-09-02 04:58:05 PM  
1 votes:
The sheer assholishness of Fox News and the teabaggers is just amazing. Berate the president for not asking congress (before anything is clear or decided). Then put down the president for looking weak by asking congress. They don't care what our country looks like on the international level, they don't care how they might even be emboldening the terrorists by calling the president weak. They only care about being pissy little biatches. Seriously, fark them.

I has a sad.
2013-09-02 04:52:46 PM  
1 votes:

simplicimus: And if you read the Constitution, having a standing peacetime army is unconstitutional, as is the existence Air Force.


Nonsense. To say that something is unmentioned in the Constitution is not at all the same thing as saying something violates the Constitution.
2013-09-02 04:48:40 PM  
1 votes:

buckler: BMulligan: buckler: Perhaps he trying to gain the same sort of false cred Bush Jr. got with the AUMF for Iraqi Boogaloo, which granted exactly zero authority under the Constitution, which demands a Declaration of War.

This would come as a huge shock to all those presidents over the years who employed military force without benefit of a declaration of war. Frankly, I can't think of more than a handful of presidents who have not done so. And some of those did were involved in the drafting of the Constitution.

Yup. Last one was WWII. I'd be interested to learn how that fell by the wayside.


That's just the point - undeclared wars are an American tradition going back to the very founding of the Republic. This is nothing new - declared wars have always been the exception rather than the rule. The vast majority of American military action from the very beginning of our history has been in undeclared wars.
2013-09-02 04:48:12 PM  
1 votes:

BMulligan: buckler: Perhaps he trying to gain the same sort of false cred Bush Jr. got with the AUMF for Iraqi Boogaloo, which granted exactly zero authority under the Constitution, which demands a Declaration of War.

This would come as a huge shock to all those presidents over the years who employed military force without benefit of a declaration of war. Frankly, I can't think of more than a handful of presidents who have not done so. And some of those did were involved in the drafting of the Constitution.


We last declared was in 1941. I think there have been a few kerfuffles since then. Anyway, the President's actions without a Declaration are covered by the WPR, which was passed by Congress in 1973. And if you read the Constitution, having a standing peacetime army is unconstitutional, as is the existence Air Force. Having a Navy is constitutional, and so by extension I'd guess the Marine Corps.
2013-09-02 04:47:49 PM  
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
2013-09-02 04:21:16 PM  
1 votes:

skullkrusher: The President getting authorization from Congress for military action is a great thing in the absence of a national security emergency. However, when the President says there will be "enormous consequences" if the "red line" of use of chemical weapons is crossed and then punts the responsibility to Congress rather than making the decision himself, I'm not sure how this is supposed to be viewed in any other way.


you do realize that it is illegal for the president to declare war?
that only congress can declare war?

so explain why this is ANYTHING other than congresses job? unless they are punting yet another of their responsibilities?
2013-09-02 04:20:33 PM  
1 votes:

skullkrusher: The President getting authorization from Congress for military action is a great thing in the absence of a national security emergency. However, when the President says there will be "enormous consequences" if the "red line" of use of chemical weapons is crossed and then punts the responsibility to Congress rather than making the decision himself, I'm not sure how this is supposed to be viewed in any other way.


See, the legal problem here is that the Chemicals Weapons Treaty that the majority of countries signed, including Syria, says nothing about a government's use of CWs inside their own borders, only against other countries. So technically, Syria is not violating International Law.
2013-09-02 04:13:54 PM  
1 votes:
The President getting authorization from Congress for military action is a great thing in the absence of a national security emergency. However, when the President says there will be "enormous consequences" if the "red line" of use of chemical weapons is crossed and then punts the responsibility to Congress rather than making the decision himself, I'm not sure how this is supposed to be viewed in any other way.
2013-09-02 03:51:18 PM  
1 votes:

ongbok: ManateeGag: How are they allowed to call themselves a News organization anymore.

According to their lawyers Fox news isn't a news organization, they are an entertainment organization.


Shouldn't they have to call themselves something slightly different then? You know, like peanut spread instead of peanut butter or orange drink instead of orange juice. How about, "Fox News Substitute,  Now with 10% Real News!"?
2013-09-02 03:36:35 PM  
1 votes:

rohar: Not related to Fox News, but :

KERRY: I don't believe so at all and that is in the hands of the Congress of the U.S. The president has made his decision. The president wants to stand up and make certain that we uphold the international norm.... I think the Assad regime needs to recognize that they have refocused the energy of the American people on him, on his regime.

That phrase is really getting on my damned nerves.  The international norm is to stand by the treaties we've already signed.  Striking Syria would be a direct violation of our treaties with the UN.


I don't want to sound rude or anything, but if it came down to it, I'm afraid most people are going to trust the interpretation of the United States Secretary of State over that of rohar of Fark.com
2013-09-02 03:35:33 PM  
1 votes:
The Syrian government is secular, so it would have been Syrian propaganda, but not Islamic.

Don't expect either Fox or submittard to know that though.
2013-09-02 03:22:46 PM  
1 votes:

StopLurkListen: We know it's hard, but keep at it! We know you can do it. You'll soon be 'reading to learn' instead of 'learning to read'.


and yet when there's any right-wing news source, you idiots pull the same "stopped reading" card. then you pat each other on the back about it as if being ignorant is something to be proud of.
2013-09-02 02:56:57 PM  
1 votes:

2wolves: Alphax: simplicimus: Princess Ryans Knickers: Well FOX News is owned by a Muslim soo....

Sunni or Shia?

Saudi prince, so Sunni.

Could be Wahabi,


And thus Al Qaeda. Now Fox News makes sense.
2013-09-02 02:50:28 PM  
1 votes:

super_grass: Think Progress

Stopped reading right there.


Oh, I thought you were just a pro-Chavez troll.  Nice to see you've moved on to being a general issue troll account.
2013-09-02 02:45:04 PM  
1 votes:
Just as an aside, AJ America is doing a great job of covering all kinds of stuff that you don't see on CNN or just about anywhere else.

I'd highly recommend that if you have a chance, sit down and watch it every now and again.  It reminds me of what news used to be like, say, 20 years ago.
2013-09-02 02:40:29 PM  
1 votes:
2013-09-02 02:30:57 PM  
1 votes:

Alphax: simplicimus: Princess Ryans Knickers: Well FOX News is owned by a Muslim soo....

Sunni or Shia?

Saudi prince, so Sunni.


Well, I guess Fox will support the revolution and be against the Government.
2013-09-02 02:26:49 PM  
1 votes:
ThinkProgress is really stretching here. Wallace asked for a response to comments made by Syrian officials. There's nothing wrong with that and it's not his fault if the Syrian govt lies.

too bad I'm on a tablet and can't hover the link...
/never would have clicked if I'd known it was gsorosfundedThinkProgress
2013-09-02 02:26:40 PM  
1 votes:

Princess Ryans Knickers: Well FOX News is owned by a Muslim soo....


Sunni or Shia?
2013-09-02 02:24:11 PM  
1 votes:
Well FOX News is owned by a Muslim soo....
2013-09-02 01:49:10 PM  
1 votes:
How are they allowed to call themselves a News organization anymore.
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report