Benghazi? No...Ben Dover

Truth Detector said:
Fox News has a TRUTH and FACT bias; nothing more. The other stations have shed any hint of objectivity and practice journalistic malfeasance.
Click to expand...

Like I said, even Ailes doesn't argue that.

It just makes you look like a hack. Fox is a conservative news network. It's absurd to try to argue otherwise.
 
NOVA said:
R's certainly ARE critizing Dempsy....but I see no reason to make him or any in the military scapegoats for Hillary and Obama....
.
Click to expand...

There's a very good reason *NOT* to make him a scapegoat; once out of the service he'd be free to talk.
 
Thing1 said:
Like I said, even Ailes doesn't argue that.

It just makes you look like a hack. Fox is a conservative news network. It's absurd to try to argue otherwise.
Click to expand...
Actually it's America's most trusted news network, for several years now.
 
NOVA said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
First off, it's hilarious to read your feigned outrage at an intelligence/military apparatus that you previously supported and praised to the hilt under the Shrub.
Click to expand...

Sorry sonny, what is total bullshit is your spin on the facts.....In Bush's case the intell. was wrong and that is the intell. we relied on to make the decisions....got that.

Oh grow the fuck up and stop parroting long disproved LIES!

http://www.alternet.org/story/16274/ten_appalling_lies_we_were_told_about_iraq

Secondly, you bitch about Zappas source, yet YOU CANNOT DISPROVE THE CONTENT OR REFERENCES OR SOURCES of that material....your opinion, supposition and conjecture are NOT a substitute for ALL THE FACTS and the logic derived from those facts.
Click to expand...
In the case of Benghazi, the intell. totally right and Obama and Hilliary made their decisions by ignoring the intell....ie...for several months the terrorists were attacking
westerns in Libya....our State Dept. KNEW that the security was inadequate and did nothing to fix that. And they made no effort to even have a minimum of military or any
sort of force on standby in the event of an attack they should have known was possible by virtue of several events just a few months before.....Then to top it off, they lied about the entire issue for weeks after the event in an effort to cover their asses for their incompetence...Totally different when you look at the facts.


All you've done is parrot the neocon/teabagger bull horn while OMITTING the information posted at the start of this thread. Then there's this:


Explainer: A Year Of Benghazi Myths

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/09/11/explainer-a-year-of-benghazi-myths/195821

And this:

Alan Grayson Debunks Conservative Lies During Benghazi Hearing

http://crooksandliars.com/heather/alan-grayson-debunks-conservative-lies-dur



I didn't try to disprove the facts presented by Zippy, just the spin.....The House substantially agreed with the Senate investigation....its correct that our military was in no
position to respond to the attack in time....THATS WHAT THE FUCK WAS WRONG....it should have been able to respond if Hilliary had heeded the intell. and obvious dangerous
situation to our people there...thats the fuckin' scandal in a nutshell....
The Republicans admitting we could not respond in time isn't a mark against them, its agreeing that our military and/or State Dept. fucked up royally....

Translation: Nova just IGNORES what doesn't fit the neocon/teabagger mantra and then just squawks that mantra in yet another form ad nauseum. Nova doesn't understand/rejects that supposition and conjecture are NOT substitutes for ALL the facts and the logic/conclusions derived from them.
Ask yourself this question, bunky......what exactly could F-16's have done? Drop bombs? Straif the area with machine gun fire? Remember, this was a CONSULATE in a CIVILIAN POPULATED AREA. The bombs and bullets don't differentiate from good & bad guys with that small concentration of area.
Click to expand...

Answered above...

Repetition of Nova's willful ignorance. He puts forth a premise and then displays intellectual cowardice when challenged.
But hey, guys like YOU don't think things through...you're just upset because (once again) FACTS and COLD LOGICAL ANALYSIS has disproven a neocon/teabagger talking point. Squawk on, parrot!
Click to expand...
Its obviously YOU that don't think things through.....and its YOU that is upset because FACTS and COLD LOGICAL ANALYSIS proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that
this administration screwed up...just as the Senate investigation and the House investigation concluded....."the attack was preventable" ...THAT is their finding, not mine.
Click to expand...

See my above responses.
 
Taft2016 said:
Ahhhhh, so it *WAS* all about "a disgusting YouTube video."

Well that's certainly a relief.
Click to expand...


Well I know you'd like to think that the information that gets collected in the minutes after a MAJOR attack will always BE 110% accurate, the simple truth is that sometimes the information gathered immediately after an attack like this is oftentimes spotty and filled with errors.

I understand that from the comfort of your living room, and with the added benefit of hindsight, how easy it is for you to second guess what people did and said in the hours right after the attack.

Sorry that you can't give an administration trying desperately to get answers out to the world in the first few hours after the attack a break for releasing what turned out to be faulty information.
 
Right said:
Actually it's America's most trusted news network, for several years now.
Click to expand...

Most and least-trusted, you mean.

"Among the least-trusted, Fox is tops at 33 percent — Democrats don’t like it — followed by MSNBC at 19 percent, with Comedy Central in third place at 14 percent. CNN was voted least-trusted by 11 percent.

Curiously, in the “least-trusted” category, the three major networks and PBS drew the lowest level of antipathy — just 5 percent for ABC, 4 percent for CBS, and 2 percent each for NBC and PBS."

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepo...trusted-least-trusted-news-organization-poll/
 
christiefan915 said:
Most and least-trusted, you mean.

"Among the least-trusted, Fox is tops at 33 percent — Democrats don’t like it — followed by MSNBC at 19 percent, with Comedy Central in third place at 14 percent. CNN was voted least-trusted by 11 percent.

Curiously, in the “least-trusted” category, the three major networks and PBS drew the lowest level of antipathy — just 5 percent for ABC, 4 percent for CBS, and 2 percent each for NBC and PBS."

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepo...trusted-least-trusted-news-organization-poll/
Click to expand...


Thirty-five percent of those polled trust Fox more than any other news outlet, with PBS in a distant second place at 14 percent and ABC News third at 11 percent.
 
Thing1 said:
Like I said, even Ailes doesn't argue that.

It just makes you look like a hack. Fox is a conservative news network. It's absurd to try to argue otherwise.
Click to expand...

So what if Fox is a Conservative news network; they still report the TRUTH and FACTS. Unlike the leftist journals no longer feigning objectivity and practicing journalistic malfeasance by favoring Liberal candidates and providing cover for them.
How amusing that you think defending the truth is being a “hack”. Dunce.
 
christiefan915 said:
Most and least-trusted, you mean.

"Among the least-trusted, Fox is tops at 33 percent — Democrats don’t like it — followed by MSNBC at 19 percent, with Comedy Central in third place at 14 percent. CNN was voted least-trusted by 11 percent.

Curiously, in the “least-trusted” category, the three major networks and PBS drew the lowest level of antipathy — just 5 percent for ABC, 4 percent for CBS, and 2 percent each for NBC and PBS."

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepo...trusted-least-trusted-news-organization-poll/
Click to expand...

LMAO
 
Truth Detector said:
So what if Fox is a Conservative news network; they still report the TRUTH and FACTS. Unlike the leftist journals no longer feigning objectivity and practicing journalistic malfeasance by favoring Liberal candidates and providing cover for them.
How amusing that you think defending the truth is being a “hack”. Dunce.
Click to expand...

You just contradicted yourself, and admitted that you know nothing about journalism.

Once you add bias to news, it ceases to become the "truth." It becomes a biased view of the truth.

Nice of you to finally admit that Fox is conservative, though. That took some time.
 
Thing1 said:
You just contradicted yourself, and admitted that you know nothing about journalism.

Once you add bias to news, it ceases to become the "truth." It becomes a biased view of the truth.

Nice of you to finally admit that Fox is conservative, though. That took some time.
Click to expand...

"So what if Fox is a Conservative news network"....that little word means something...

and don't confuse O'Reilly and Hannity or Rachael Maddow and Ed Schultz with news....

would you accuse HBO with being a liberal network because they carry Bill Maher ?
 
NOVA said:
"So what if Fox is a Conservative news network"....that little word means something...

and don't confuse O'Reilly and Hannity or Rachael Maddow and Ed Schultz with news....

would you accuse HBO with being a liberal network because they carry Bill Maher ?
Click to expand...

Why do you feel such a need to defend a bad cable network?

I'm not talking about Fox's opinion shows. I'm talking about their news coverage. It is biased.
 
Thing1 said:
Why do you feel such a need to defend a bad cable network?

I'm not talking about Fox's opinion shows. I'm talking about their news coverage. It is biased.
Click to expand...

Its a relative sonny.....a lot of people think NPR and PBS is biased too....but you're entitled to your opinion...
Personally I tend to watch my local stations for news and the others for entertainment....I marvel at Maddows ability
to spin the news and enjoy O'Reilly only because he ALWAYS has someone giving an alternate view, unlike MSNBC.

The most biased news network may not be who you think it is. Given Fox News’ various snarky comments during the recent Presidential election many viewers may believe its well-known conservative slant has made it the most biased network on television. However, when it comes to slanting the news Fox is not the network that truly delivers only what its viewers want to hear. According to a study conducted by the non-partisan Pew Research Centers Project for Excellence in Journalism, MSNBC (now NBCNews) receives that dubious distinction.

The Pew study analyzed stories surrounding President Obama and Mitt Romney and found that 71% of MSNBC’s stories showed a negative bias towards Romney, while only 46% of Fox’s stories about Obama had a negative bias. Journalism.org backs up the numbers...

http://www.inquisitr.com/404737/most-biased-news-network-revealed-in-new-study/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top