|
Thyestean feast in Iraq? | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 07:23:48 |
|
How DARE we ignore all this by | by hadji | 2007-07-10 07:33:05 |
|
Don't get the news much? (n/t) | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 07:34:48 |
|
Don't clarify your points much? (n/t) | by hadji | 2007-07-10 07:36:30 |
|
Nevermind, it's not worth it. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 07:43:01 |
|
I figured you at least skimmed headlines | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 08:25:01 |
|
That post is useless. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 08:36:21 |
|
Am thinking the "absolute silence..." | by esbita | 2007-07-10 09:33:08 |
|
The article says | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-10 09:52:05 |
|
Not that hadji would've known. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 10:02:57 |
|
Yes he could, DR66 quoted that part here..... (n/t) | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-10 10:05:00 |
|
Quoted what, where? (n/t) | by esbita | 2007-07-10 10:09:01 |
|
In the TLP | by hadji | 2007-07-10 10:21:18 |
|
Nice cherry-picking. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 10:32:52 |
| There are times when cherry-picking is valid. |
by hadji |
2007-07-10 11:33:42 |
I could have reposted the entire TLP, but since you already read it, that would not have answered your question. I cherry picked to show you the elements that make his statement a general one rather than a specific one.
If such sweeping rhetoric is to be expected, then it is subject to sweeping scrutiny. So I'm scrutinizing. If he had indeed limited himself to saying that the silence of the west applied to a single incident, then I would not be debating. But as the rhetoric was sweeping, then that opens it up to sweeping criticism, and whether or not I've read the article about the one incident is irrelevant.
In regards to what's mentioned on the evening news, the evening news is mostly useless anyway. You know that as well as I do. It is not the sum total of the voice of the west, nor is the silence of the evening news limited to any one incident, nor is the silence of the evening news a new phenomenon. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Did you apply your skills of scrutiny | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:23:37 |
|
My agenda is to argue the following points. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 12:39:17 |
|
So, you are after DR66, and not after the article | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:43:40 |
|
To be more precise, I'm after the TLP. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 12:50:08 |
|
You didn't even read the article you criticize. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:56:48 |
|
I've read both, and I've replied accordingly. (n/t | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:10:25 |
|
Hardly. Without reading the context... | by esbita | 2007-07-10 12:26:21 |
|
Evening news has a duty to gather ratings. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 12:31:42 |
|
Will you read the article? | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:35:00 |
|
If a scrap of rhetorical license | by esbita | 2007-07-10 12:41:59 |
|
Chalk it up as you please. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 12:46:41 |
|
And what, pray tell, are you teaching here? | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:51:54 |
|
I've read the articles, and I've seen nothing | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:04:26 |
|
Oh, and I'm constantly hearing that | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:09:32 |
|
To put it as politely as I can: | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 15:04:06 |
|
Ecellent. Thank you. (n/t) | by hadji | 2007-07-10 15:05:31 |
|
*ahem* So now, I've read the article. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:43:21 |
|
Others targeted that already. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 14:01:08 |
|
I never saw a valid argument against me. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:09:27 |
|
See here. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 14:17:09 |
|
Your concession is accepted. (n/t) | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:25:11 |
|
Concession? | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 14:40:50 |
|
See here. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:44:06 |
|
Ah, the latter part. (n/t) | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 14:58:09 |
|
And have I mentioned that the scrap of | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:22:11 |
|
Is there reason to believe that possibly | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 13:01:15 |
|
If you look back a few days | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 13:09:32 |
|
And in the article states that someone | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 13:15:02 |
|
More the general | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 13:25:45 |
|
I hear quite a bit about the atrocities | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:32:24 |
|
Where from | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 13:38:22 |
|
Various sources, but primarily NPR. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:58:29 |
|
You make a perfect counter example | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 14:17:07 |
|
I would not dispute the claim of | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:23:29 |
|
It is also no new revelation that mainstream | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:32:56 |
|
It's also not a new one that | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 14:50:51 |
|
"While there may not be 'Absolute Silence' . . ." | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:54:46 |
|
You seem to have an unhealthy fascination | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 13:54:32 |
|
Having seen what extremists can do up close and | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 14:03:33 |
|
Now, that's actually the sorta response I'm lookin | by esbita | 2007-07-10 13:22:49 |
|
What you seem to be missing is that the summary | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:29:50 |
|
You couldn't have "known" that at the time | by esbita | 2007-07-10 13:41:06 |
|
It was a reasonable guess. And it was right. (n/t | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:47:51 |
|
But you might not have been right! and arguing | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-10 14:01:35 |
|
Kinda like Bush invading Iraq in the first place, | by hadji | 2007-07-10 14:06:24 |
