Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   O'Reilly evidence
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 46 of 112 (197687)
04-08-2005 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by nator
04-08-2005 8:06 AM


The point is, though, that there was not at all the sort of link that Fox News listeners and Bush supporters thought there was.
Ok. However, what you're saying is that Fox News listeners and Bush supporters, for the most part, don't know this even today. I'm questioning whether that poll about the three misperceptions shows this.
The point is, there was no reason at all to invade Iraq in connection to 9/11, but Bush and Co. and Fox News succeeded in making a great many American people believe that there was a very close connection between Hussein, 9/11, and WMD.
What you're saying here is that Bush was motivated to attack Iraq by something other than Al-qaeda/Iraq connections. That seems obvious to me, too.
However, you're also saying that not only did they convince them of this before that, but to this day they're still convinced and being convinced. That's the question the poll is supposed to address, and it's what I'm questioning. However, I've now found the original poll, so we'll get back to this.
A sizeable percentage of the US public actually thinks that the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi, TL, not Saudi. Where do you think they got that idea?
I can't answer that, because I've never heard that before. (And amazingly enough, it dawns on me I have never thought about the specific nationality of the hijackers.)
I am willing to bet a good chunk of change that most Fox News watchers and Bush supporters haven't read the 9/11 commission report at all.
LOL. Now that's a hysterical thought. I hope I haven't suggested that. However, unless I'm mistaken, the issue with the poll we're discussing is whether FoxNews listeners and Bush supporters are getting any sort of accurate information about that report and similar intelligence findings, or whether they're getting misinformation.
Perusing original poll...
Ok, the original questions, asked about eighteen months ago:
#1 "Is it your impression that the US has or has not found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization?"
Fox - 67% "has" (11% more than CBS)
PBS - 16% "has" (lowest by 24%)
#2: "Since the war with Iraq ended, is it your impression that the US has or has not found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction?"
Fox - 33% "has" (10% more than CBS)
PBS - 11% "has" (lowest by 6%)
#3: "Thinking about how all the people in the world feel about the US having gone to war with Iraq: Do you think the majority of people favor the US having gone to war?" (This was one of several options)
Fox - 35% "yes" (7% more than CBS)
PBS - 5% "yes" (lowest by 12%)
I can't fault those questions at all. I guess I'll have to suspend my utter incredulity at #3 and admit those 35% of Fox listeners, which are one in every 16 people in the United States, believe the world supported our invasion of Iraq. Astounding.
Question #1 was actually even better phrased than it sounds, because of context, because they had also asked whether Iraq was directly involved in 9/11 and some other similar questions, so the responders should have had some idea of the level of involvement they were answering to. This was "clear evidence" of "close ties."
What's funny is that to some of those other questions CBS was actually worse than Fox. 9% MORE of CBS listeners were said Iraq was directly involved in 9/11. They were 2% ahead of Fox on the "less egregious, but still unproven" misperception that Iraq gave substantial support to al-Qaeda.
This, of course, proves what we have known all along, which is that Dan Rather is a puppet of the vast conservative news media.
Oh, wait. Uh, that's not what we've known all along, is it......
Heh, heh.
Okay, that original article you linked to, Schraf, may not have worried about being real clear, but apparently Fox was an easy target.
That 35% still throws me, especially with O'Reilly, who's apparently pretty popular on Fox, complaining regularly that Bush has never come out and explained the problems with the intelligence reports on the WMD's. Does O'Reilly complain about that on radio, but never mention it on TV?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 04-08-2005 8:06 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by nator, posted 04-08-2005 5:34 PM truthlover has replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 47 of 112 (197689)
04-08-2005 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by nator
04-08-2005 8:06 AM


Just as an interesting aside, while we're on the topic of Iraqi terrorists.
This potential Arab terrorist was stopped in late September of 2001 in Oklahoma City for driving down the road in the company of an Arab-looking woman of mixed Italian/Jewish descent. In fact, he was stopped twice in three miles, but the 2nd time the anti-terrorist police crew radioed ahead to warn his compadres not to keep stopping the big, blue van.
That driver's license picture (still on my license) was taken in April of 2001 when I was about 30 pounds heavier. I don't know that I look any less Arab today, but I hope I look less frightening!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 04-08-2005 8:06 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by jar, posted 04-08-2005 4:04 PM truthlover has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 48 of 112 (197690)
04-08-2005 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Rrhain
04-03-2005 4:49 AM


peabody 2
In fact, the entire statement was wrong. O'Reilly claimed two Peabodies, attaching himself to the award by insisting "We won Peabody Awards."
Well, no. Inside Edition won a Polk. One Polk. A year after O'Reilly left the show. He had nothing to do with it.
Does anybody else love the fact that Jon Stewart and The Daily Show just won it second Peabody Award? The same guy that O'Reilly has dismissed and insulted has now achieved what O'Reilly dishonestly claimed to achieve himself in order to make himself look better.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Rrhain, posted 04-03-2005 4:49 AM Rrhain has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 49 of 112 (197707)
04-08-2005 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by truthlover
04-08-2005 1:53 PM


I always suspected you...
... and you scare the hell outta me. Add in the Italian/Jewish/Arab connection and I'm surprised you're not vacationing in Cuba?
This message has been edited by jar, 04-08-2005 02:04 PM

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by truthlover, posted 04-08-2005 1:53 PM truthlover has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 50 of 112 (197725)
04-08-2005 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by truthlover
04-08-2005 1:27 PM


quote:
What's funny is that to some of those other questions CBS was actually worse than Fox. 9% MORE of CBS listeners were said Iraq was directly involved in 9/11. They were 2% ahead of Fox on the "less egregious, but still unproven" misperception that Iraq gave substantial support to al-Qaeda.
Yup. That's why I don't get my news from any mainstream US TV news. I listen to NPR a great deal and also the BBC plus some other sources.
You did notice that NPR listeners had the most accurate views?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by truthlover, posted 04-08-2005 1:27 PM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by truthlover, posted 04-11-2005 7:45 AM nator has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 51 of 112 (197954)
04-09-2005 7:38 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by truthlover
04-08-2005 7:30 AM


truthlover responds to me:
quote:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/
Didn't you read your own source? You even quoted it:
there is no evidence Iraq responded to this request.
Does this sound like a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq to you? What do you think "no evidence" means?
How interesting you only selectively quoted the report. Let's try looking at more of it, shall we?
There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported to have received a significant response. According to one report, Saddam Hussein’s efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.
Hmmm..."stay clear of Bin Ladin." I wonder what that could mean.
And, of course, this:
But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.
Hmmm...I wonder what that means. How about this one:
Although there have been suggestions of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda regarding chemical weapons and explosives training, the most detailed information alleging such ties came from an al Qaeda operative who recanted much of his original information. Intelligence report, interrogation of al Qaeda operative, Feb. 14, 2004. Two senior Bin Ladin associates have adamantly denied that any such ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. Intelligence reports, interrogations
of KSM and Zubaydah, 2003 (cited in CIA letter, response to Douglas Feith memorandum, Requested Modifications to ‘Summary of Body of Intelligence Reporting on Iraq—al Qaida Contacts (1990—2003),’ Dec. 10, 2003, p. 5).
Now, are you going to be disingenuous and claim that "no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda" means that not a single Iraqi in the government ever met with any agent of Al Qaeda?
quote:
I don't know why we need news when we have you.
Well, since you apparently don't actually pay attention to the news, somebody has to pass along the information you have missed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by truthlover, posted 04-08-2005 7:30 AM truthlover has not replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 52 of 112 (198242)
04-11-2005 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by nator
04-08-2005 5:34 PM


You did notice that NPR listeners had the most accurate views?
Hey, let's not push this too far. Those are the bad guys, you know.
Actually, of my co-villagers who get news on a regular basis, most of them get it from NPR on the radio(actually, PRM, which is Mississippi's branch of it).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by nator, posted 04-08-2005 5:34 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Phat, posted 04-11-2005 6:31 PM truthlover has replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 53 of 112 (198380)
04-11-2005 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by truthlover
04-11-2005 7:45 AM


A smaller world than O'Reilly
How do you and your villagers get along? Do you all know each others business?(Like a small town Mayberry?) Do you feel like more of a family than a community? As such, if you DO feel that way, do you ever get tired of the limited environment or does it allow you to thrive?
Finally, to stay on topic, would you ever invite Bill O'Reilly to do a show out of your village?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by truthlover, posted 04-11-2005 7:45 AM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by truthlover, posted 04-12-2005 8:37 AM Phat has not replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 54 of 112 (198514)
04-12-2005 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Phat
04-11-2005 6:31 PM


Re: A smaller world than O'Reilly
Finally, to stay on topic, would you ever invite Bill O'Reilly to do a show out of your village?
No, not even before this topic came up. I have never liked the way he treats his co-hosts (Lis (sp?} Wheel and that other lady; what are they even doing on there?), and that kind of thing matters very much to us. Overall, that sort of involvement in politics would not suit us at all, though we have had local and state political candidates come out to our festivals and meet with us at our cafe.
How do you and your villagers get along? Do you all know each others business?(Like a small town Mayberry?) Do you feel like more of a family than a community? As such, if you DO feel that way, do you ever get tired of the limited environment or does it allow you to thrive?
We feel more like a family than a community, and we know each other's business pretty thoroughly. I don't think we get tired of it. In fact, it's pretty great. People have been living in villages/tribes for tens of thousands of years, and it's the most normal way for us to live, I think. Of course, there's a unity and joy here that comes from the Spirit of God and is beyond the Mayberry experience, but I can't imagine anyone's going to believe that without seeing it.
As far as the limited environment, I think we've managed to avoid that. I personally have been to California on business, Utah on a Tae Kwon Do team, and Dallas with 35 young people that make up our Celtic band and dance troupe so far this year. I got passport photos taken last night, because we received an invitation to come visit a fellowship in India. In addition to all that, we're busy right now doing public events with several churches, the majority of them black churches, in an effort to shatter long held patterns of disunity among churches in general and white and black churches in particular.
This is still off topic, but this short story is worth telling, off topic or not. The last couple months, our house (two families with fifteen children total) has had a household meeting once a week to let the children recite poems, sing, or whatever. One week, my 11-year-old son read Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech. It totally captivated me. I'd never heard the whole thing before.
The best part was "I have a dream that even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering in the heat of injustice and oppression, shall become an oasis of freedom and justice." Two days after that household meeting, at which I'd had no idea my son intended to read that speech, I went to a breakfast in Corinth, MS, with pastors and members of four or five black churches, where "the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave-owners sat down at a table of brotherhood."
We have a young lady in our village who is a terrific photographer, and has been asked to take photographs for Selmer's little weekly paper. She puts up a "photo of the week" each week in our cafe. This week, it's the picture of a "little black boy and a little white boy" hugging, with one of them holding a ball.
If you're from the North of the US, it may seem sad that such efforts are even still needed. It is sad, but it's true. Business in our cafe has dropped about 30% (thirty!) since our picnic in the park, though we can't prove the picnic is the source of the dropoff. Last week, a customer did ask one of our waitresses whether we were worried about blacks "taking over," and then proceeded into a defense of his prejudice.
So, no, we're not getting tired of the limited environment. One of our favorite sayings, at least around my house, is "I try to take one day at a time, but sometimes they all gang up on me at once."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Phat, posted 04-11-2005 6:31 PM Phat has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 55 of 112 (199629)
04-15-2005 5:15 PM


I just wanted to chime in, now that I've been picking up O'Reilly's radio show. I think something TL was hinting at seems to be very much the case - his radio show is a lot less fire-breathing than his TV show. I was shocked. Earlier today he took the extraordinarily reasonable position that there's no real connection between pornography viewing and violent behavior.
This, from the Culture Warrior? I was truly surprised. He really does do a good impression of a reasonable person on his radio show, especially compared to guys like Michael Savage and those other clowns on the local Repub radio station.

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by truthlover, posted 04-16-2005 5:34 PM crashfrog has replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 56 of 112 (199778)
04-16-2005 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by crashfrog
04-15-2005 5:15 PM


This isn't really an answer to you, Frog. It's just general.
Hey, as long as we're chiming in here, I had a thought that I have to follow up on. Maybe someone can find the answer faster than me.
The "misperception" survey that is referenced earlier is kind of a one-sided thing. Someone who is against the war on Iraq would be much more likely to say that the world was against Bush, that Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 or al Qaeda, and whatever that 3rd thing was. So, that survey, while proving that Fox listeners are moved by bias and believing things aren't true, really doesn't prove that NPR listener's don't have a liberal bias. A liberal bias would make them almost immune to such misperceptions.
We have to find a survey where something the conservatives like is the accurate scenario and see whether NPR listeners are just as aware in that area.
It's hard to imagine there's such an other-sided survey available, but I haven't had a chance to look yet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by crashfrog, posted 04-15-2005 5:15 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-16-2005 5:46 PM truthlover has replied
 Message 61 by nator, posted 04-17-2005 9:45 AM truthlover has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 57 of 112 (199780)
04-16-2005 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by truthlover
04-16-2005 5:34 PM


We have to find a survey where something the conservatives like is the accurate scenario and see whether NPR listeners are just as aware in that area.
That would be interesting. Of course, you presume that conservatives and liberals are equally likely to bouy their position with propaganda and falsehood, and I don't see why that would be the case. I mean, it's much more likely to be the case that conservatives simply lie more.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by truthlover, posted 04-16-2005 5:34 PM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by truthlover, posted 04-16-2005 11:49 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 60 by nator, posted 04-17-2005 9:36 AM crashfrog has not replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 58 of 112 (199817)
04-16-2005 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
04-16-2005 5:46 PM


Of course, you presume that conservatives and liberals are equally likely to bouy their position with propaganda and falsehood
I don't think I'm making that presumption. I think that's exactly the question I'm asking.
I mean, it's much more likely to be the case that conservatives simply lie more.
Perhaps. I think it unlikely, however, that Diogenes' limited his search to the politically conservative.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-16-2005 5:46 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by crashfrog, posted 04-17-2005 12:19 AM truthlover has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 59 of 112 (199819)
04-17-2005 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by truthlover
04-16-2005 11:49 PM


I think it unlikely, however, that Diogenes' limited his search to the politically conservative.
Wasn't his search limited to the inside of his barrel?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by truthlover, posted 04-16-2005 11:49 PM truthlover has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 60 of 112 (199866)
04-17-2005 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
04-16-2005 5:46 PM


quote:
Of course, you presume that conservatives and liberals are equally likely to bouy their position with propaganda and falsehood, and I don't see why that would be the case.
That's very true.
In my own experience with relatives and other people who are Republicans, they tend to defend and cheerlead for "the team", with all of the rationalization and post hoc reasoning and making excuses that such team mentality entails. They are "defending the faith", as it were. Bush and Co. are right, the Republicans in Congress are right, in everything any of them do, and the follower's job is to defend and justify to themselves and others the actions, even if that means being willfully ignorant.
By contrast, while I definitely lean left politically, I was not Clinton's greatest fan, I was disappointed that the Democrats chose Kerry (although I understood why), and I think I do a pretty good job of thinking through my position on the issues.
I don't think a lot of the Republicans I know have actually thought through their positions themselves, considering many different alternatives and the pros and cons of each.
They are just a member of the faithful throngs who follow because it feels good to them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-16-2005 5:46 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by truthlover, posted 04-17-2005 10:45 PM nator has not replied
 Message 66 by Monk, posted 04-18-2005 11:30 AM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024