Benghazi attack - Terrorists or unruly crowd?

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

I guess I'd respond that Petraeus and Panetta were not on the same page. So, good for the CIA for sticking out there necks while Panetta and maybe Obama kept the military on the sidelines.

Right, the fact that the CIA can go in sub rosa whereas a detachment of marines in full battle dress would be hard to spot. Oh laddie, your bias is showing just a little.

Really, the children on this board seem to forget that while they can be seen they should not be heard.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Charles

Why are Breitbart, Drudge, & Fox non-starters?

Chas

Because it's too late in the season to need fertilizer for the garden?

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Right, the fact that the CIA can go in sub rosa whereas a detachment of marines in full battle dress would be hard to spot. Oh laddie, your bias is showing just a little.

Really, the children on this board seem to forget that while they can be seen they should not be heard.

Not at all. Patraeus said very clearly that they didn't refuse any requests for assistance that night. Panetta said that they decided not to send in troops without real time information. It's clear now that Panetta had that real time data. It's pretty likely Patraeus had the same data. They responded very differently that night, and made different decisions. My "bias" had nothing to do with the decisions that each man made.

[wgrr]

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy

I'd suggest if the rest of the media wants to avoid everyone in the damn country watching Fox, they should start doing some real reporting.

Fox News..real reporting...that is a laugh a minute. They actually went to court to earn the right to lie and misinform the public.

http://www.librarygrape.com/2009/06/...amendment.html

What do you expect from a news organization who's largest share holder, not related to Murdoch, is the Muslim Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal who is a huge investor and supporter of the Ground Zero Mosque.

Any true Conservative should boycott Fox News immediately. It is truly amazing how uninformed Fox News viewers are. They don't even know that a Saudi prince, who's family rules by Sharia law, can control what they hear and see on FNC.

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...leed_bin_Talal

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by wgrr

Fox News..real reporting...that is a laugh a minute. They actually went to court to earn the right to lie and misinform the public.

And to get a decision that said that firing an employee for refusing to lie was legitimate cause.

John

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Charles

Why are Breitbart, Drudge, & Fox non-starters?

Chas

Do you really have to ask? They don't report news, they fabricate it, distort it and manipulate it. They become part of the story.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Do you really have to ask? They don't report news, they fabricate it, distort it and manipulate it. They become part of the story.

Regards,

D-Ray

See? You really can't argue with a liberal! When you try they just respond with the truth! How can you argue with that?

John

[JJIII]

Re-read this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasillaguy View Post
I'd suggest if the rest of the media wants to avoid everyone in the damn country watching Fox, they should start doing some real reporting.

Nowhere does it say that FOX does "real reporting". It suggests that other outlets need to start doing so.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by JJIII

Re-read this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasillaguy View Post
I'd suggest if the rest of the media wants to avoid everyone in the damn country watching Fox, they should start doing some real reporting.

Nowhere does it say that FOX does "real reporting". It suggests that other outlets need to start doing so.

Okay, John, then tell me why "the rest of the media (not) doing some real reporting" causes people to watch Fox. The obvious implication is that people watch Fox because they think Fox does do real reporting.

John

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Okay, John, then tell me why "the rest of the media (not) doing some real reporting" causes people to watch Fox. The obvious implication is that people watch Fox because they think Fox does do real reporting.

John

You beat me to it. Context is everything. The intent of the original statement was to suggest that only Fox engages in real reporting. C'mon JJ - all you're showing there is that (for good reason) you are running away from the suggestion that Fox does real reporting.

Regards,

D-Ray