Breaking news: CNN does research...

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by fleinn, May 1, 2008.

  1. fleinn

    fleinn 101010

    ...for their blog- posts:
    Anderson Cooper 360: Blog Archive - The full story behind Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s 9/11 sermon « - Blogs from CNN.com

    See? All is well now! :lol: It's not like there's been a week of Wright and wrongs, is there? I mean - CNN is really going far in the pursuit of truth here! I mean - who could've possibly suggested /that/ particular story as a target for research? Really - it's just journlistic integrity and curiousity at it's very best.

    Next, they're going to pull up a week of analysis about their complicity in disseminating government propaganda through "trusted intelligence analysts" as well -... on their blog.:rolleyes:

    Indeedy. Don't miss it, or your head will turn into mush.
    ------
    ....
    ..
    I don't mean to be harsh, or anything - but what the fuck is the matter with you people? The highest officials in the land are caught red- handed ordering torture. As well as briefing and paying retired generals to go on the TV to tell about how justifiable the war was. It's been no more than a few months since an american citizen was imprisoned without charge, euphemistically and enhancedly interrogated, and then sentenced in a relatively open american court, with classified evidence not seen by the defense as the main reason the scales tipped in favour of the government.

    Daily, people go on the news to bloviate about how torture might should've perhaps not be illegal, as such. And that therefore the government is perfectly in the right. Even as McCain can pose as "man of integrity", because he once opposed torture, sorta, when he helped delegate the legislative responsibilities on this matter as well directly to the president's office (or it's derivatives).

    And what's the fucking response?

    ..Don't you care about what's going on?
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2008

  2. Doc

    Doc Trust me, I'm The Doctor. V.I.P.

    We care. Who doesn't care?

    We know our government is screwed up and it just gets boring and stupid to keep hearing how much they've put America in the shitter in the past eight years.
     
  3. Van

    Van Heavy Weapons Guy V.I.P.

    No offense but you seem like someone who has read the constitution so you should know this. This may be off topic, but the right of habeas corpus may be suspended during times of war. It says so in our constitution. Don't get mad at that. Get mad at the war if you want.


    As far as Obama goes, well, let's just say I don't like him. How is that?

    So when does this article/analysis come out on CNN?
     
  4. fleinn

    fleinn 101010

    It is a pretty boring show, isn't it. No consistent plot, no believable characters, and the same laughing box all the time. Too bad you can't actually switch it off or change the channel.
    So.. where's the declaration of war? Where's the specially appointed tribunals, as per Congress' specification? Where is the formal declaration of martial law? What are the circumstances in which that extraordinary situation will be rescinded, and the constitution restored? Where are the President's counsel who argue the US is, in fact, in a temporary state of martial law?

    Somehow, they're all missing. How come?
    Oh, smack!
    On the zombie- box? Never. But if you read the article, it's at once a valiant rebuff of severe criticism lately that the mass- media spends time covering petty, manufactured personality- oriented stories, while also a sharp answer to the allegation that they function as uncritical amplifiers of government propaganda.

    Which CNN demonstrates is a set of completely unhinged accusations, by having someone sit down and watch a few of the Wright sermons they've been airing sound- bites from for the last couple of weeks, and concluding, on their blog, that maybe Wright is merely out of touch, but not insane, as such. Even if "some of what he said" was terrible. Just terrible. Which CNN should be lauded for, since they seek "the whole truth, and not just parts of it", to quote the blog- post.
     
  5. Van

    Van Heavy Weapons Guy V.I.P.

    Well, Congress voted for the war, if that's not a formal declaration of war, then I'm not sure what is...

    Yeah, I just wish the media and the candidates would focus on the issues. Immigration, the economy, the war, etc.
     
  6. fleinn

    fleinn 101010

    Well.. a formal declaration of war looks like:
    "...and we hereby withdraw all our diplomatic staff in preparation for hostilities.

    Hugs and Kisses, the President".


    What's been declared since ww2 (the last officially declared one) - Panama and Grenada, and so on - is "an emergency". Which the president can declare, and then use to commit forces. After Vietnam, Congress passed the War powers Act.. in 74-75?.. which gives the president 90 days before having to come back to Congress and receive a formal go ahead in the form of a use of force- resolution. Typically then bundled with a note from the UN, saying: "Article 51 - feel free to shoot back".

    Lately, none of that has formally been the case. "Voting for the war", until the irate morons voted through the second and third "emergency" supplemental war- spending - which incidentally falls outside ordinary DOD and GAO oversight protocols - consisted of voting for a resolution that made it a goal to pursue regime change in Bagdad. Nowhere in that, did it say use force. And nowhere in the res. 1441 debacle that the Bush - administration sent back to Congress did it ever say "war" - which gave everyone a nice excuse to vote for it. Even though of course everyone knew war was what it was. And nowhere in the use of force declaration for Afghanistan did it ever say that the president had an open- ended mandate.

    But of course you're right - they voted for it in full knowledge of what it meant, every one of them, and then some struck back as if they were tricked. Too late to do anything about it, but fully in time to take the credit for "standing up to the president".

    But technically, no war has been declared, and no constititution has been set aside. Nor have tribunals been appointed and specified by Congress. Which, of course, isn't necessary - when you're reading the constitution as if it says the president shall have total control over all things he deems will fall under "national security".

    ....Nixon had a good one with that, too. Of course - when he was president, FISA didn't exist, and the war- powers act wasn't written yet. Strange thing.

    Oh, yeah.. Now I remember.. - it was /because/ of him and the administrations throughout the vietnam era that those two bills were written. Funny how that turned out.
     

Share This Page