11-05-2003 10:14									#1
	US Lineup In Iraqi Administration... Out with the old, in with the new Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

After only 3 weeks in Iraq, there has been a drastic change in the American administration...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2003May10.html

Personally, I think there's no better time than the present. After only 3 weeks, you knew the top tier wasn't producing--they did not appear to be effective managers. And when you don't produce, in America you (should) get the axe.

Yesterday, I was nearly brought to cursing about neocon policies and their inability to follow through on what they set out for themselves. Now let's see if the State Department guys can do a little better at following through on neocon policies.

Last edited by DanS on 11-05-2003 at 10:21

	11-05-2003 10:46									#2
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I guess some of the luster has gone from Rummy and his boys down at the pentagon.....GOOD.

Unfortunitelly DanS, that article is full of lies: I mean, as Ned pointed out, there was no looting in Iraq....

	11-05-2003 12:03									#3
	Remove this text

To be clear, Rummy is not a neocon. You could look at him as a neocon benefactor.

	11-05-2003 12:54									#4
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by GePap I guess some of the luster has gone from Rummy and his boys down at the pentagon.....GOOD.

I see no reason to conclude that.

	11-05-2003 12:59									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

" I was nearly brought to cursing about neocon policies and their inability to follow through on what they set out for themselves."

Don't tell me that surprised you.

	11-05-2003 13:02									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I'm glad to see that it's result or out mentality..

.. personally I like Do or Die even more, but I guess that's out of the question.

	11-05-2003 21:26									#7
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by DanS To be clear, Rummy is not a neocon. You could look at him as a neocon benefactor.

Which does nothing to change my point.

	11-05-2003 22:08									#8
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by GePap Unfortunitelly DanS, that article is full of lies: I mean, as Ned pointed out, there was no looting in Iraq....

Indeed, compare the WP spin with the AP report:

WP:

" Iraqis have become increasingly frustrated with Garner's operation, saying that his team has failed to fulfill promises to hand out emergency payments, restore basic public services, address a wave of criminal activity and involve resident Iraqis in the planning for a new government. In Baghdad, many neighborhoods still lack electricity and running water, heaps of garbage line the streets and most shops remain closed because merchants are afraid of looters."

AP:

"Some Iraqis have complained bitterly of the slow pace of the U.S. reconstruction efforts and say that such basic services as electricity and running water remain widely unrepaired a month after Saddam Hussein was overthrown."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86565,00.html

	11-05-2003 22:20									#9
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

But Ned, the Washington Post doesn't list AP as the source. It, seems to be, from their own reporters in Baghdad. I don't think that it's a spin then, unless I'm not correctly informed of the meaning of the term in todays situation.

	11-05-2003 22:21									#10
	Increase Your PM Length

BTW, I have been watching the news nearly every day, and I never heard of Bodine being Baghad's real mayor. I wonder why?

Also, how do Islamic peoples respond to a woman politician? Could this have been part of the problem?

	11-05-2003 22:22									#11
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The WP sure is a dangerous piece of leftist and anti-Bush thought

On-topic : I'm glad the state deprtment seems to be serious in attempting to rebuild Iraq. It seems the Yank diplomacy has been much better and more pragmatic since the end of the war.

	11-05-2003 22:32									#12
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Kropotkin But Ned, the Washington Post doesn't list AP as the source. It, seems to be, from their own reporters in Baghdad. I don't think that it's a spin then, unless I'm not correctly informed of the meaning of the term in todays situation.

The point I made in my other thread is that certain reporters in Iraq are spinning the news in an anti-Bush manner. Not all of them, some of them. I simply compared and contrasted the same story from two different reporters. I did not include a third report from CNN. That report was very sterile. It simply confined itself to the regime change from DOD to State.

We now know that Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Peter Slevin of the Washington Post are spinning the news in an anti-Bush manner.

	11-05-2003 22:37									#13
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

While this probably deserves a thread of its own, we now have discovered documents that show that Saddam had secret agents planted in Al Jazeera.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...ra_newspaper_dc

	11-05-2003 22:41									#14
	Tired of ads?

No, Ned. We are not knowing this. News like the two examples you gave can be considered to be estimates of a theoretical objective truth. We have two estimates but we can not from this directly say what estimate that is the best compared to the truth.

AP is often reporting news in short forms like the one quoted. If a newspaper, as the WS, has their own staff on location it's not suprising that their reports are longer and more detailed.

Also, the point is that your use of the term spin seems quite 'biased'.

	11-05-2003 22:46									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Kropotkin No, Ned. We are not knowing this. News like the two examples you gave can be considered to be estimates of a theoretical objective truth. We have two estimates but we can not from this directly say what estimate that is the best compared to the truth. AP is often reporting news in short forms like the one quoted. If a newspaper, as the WS, has their own staff on location it's not suprising that their reports are longer and more detailed. Also, the point is that your use of the term spin seems quite 'biased'.

Hah! BTW, I have this bridge I would like to sell. Called the Brooklyn Bridge. Are you interested?

	11-05-2003 22:47									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Is that the best you can come up with?

	11-05-2003 22:58									#17
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Kropotkin, As I said before, the spinning of certain reporters and networks has become a major issue here in the US since the CNN story broke. FOX and MSNBC are almost daily pointing our just how biased and unreliable the reporting has been.

It is not confined to Iraq. An NBC reporter spoke yesterday of an incident involving Peter Jennings. Apparently the reporter had visited Nicaragua and found out that the Sandanista's were communists. When the story went up to Jennings, he personally rewrote the story to de-emphasize the communism angle and instead to state that the Sandanista's were a popular resistance movement.

Last edited by Ned on 11-05-2003 at 23:10

	11-05-2003 23:09									#18
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Just because there's a major issue doesn't mean that you can find traces of it everywhere. Once up on a time a lot of people saw channels on Mars. Your argumentation is quite weak. We have two texts. The first one is longer, with more details and uses the phrase 'iraqis' instead of 'some iraqis'. From this you claim that the first one is biased. That the other one, with the word some, is some sort of understatment does not seem to cross your mind. Instead you're going for the point of view on the issue that suits you. Your posts often reminds me of the style of "The Watchtower". How you can be so sure that it's a spin (a word that seems as worn out as PC already) is beyond me. If the AP one (or Fox in case they've shortened AP's) had been longer, how do you know that they would not include a list of issues close to, or the same as, the WS?

	11-05-2003 23:10									#19
	Got spare money?

Ned:

quote: It is not confined to Iraq. An NBC report spoke yesterday of an incident involving Peter Jennings. Apparently the reporter had visited Nicaragua and found out that the Sandanista's were communists. When the story went up to Jennings, he personally rewrote the story to de-emphasize the communism angle and instead to state that the Sandanista's were a popular resistance movement.

Well Ned, Jennings did the right thing, since the Sandinistas WERE NOT communits. But of course, since YOU think they are, this reporter (what are his credentials? does he know the difference between communism and socialism? Did he know anything about Nicaraguan history?) who said "he discorvered they were" must be right and Jennings wrong.... That, in a nutshell, is your problem, Ned.

quote: WP: " Iraqis have become increasingly frustrated with Garner's operation, saying that his team has failed to fulfill promises to hand out emergency payments, restore basic public services, address a wave of criminal activity and involve resident Iraqis in the planning for a new government. In Baghdad, many neighborhoods still lack electricity and running water, heaps of garbage line the streets and most shops remain closed because merchants are afraid of looters." AP: "Some Iraqis have complained bitterly of the slow pace of the U.S. reconstruction efforts and say that such basic services as electricity and running water remain widely unrepaired a month after Saddam Hussein was overthrown."

Do you Ned have ANY reports, form anyone, that show that Iraqis are HAPPY with the pace of reconstruction? That they think the US has done a good job in bringin back basic services, improving the safety of the streets? Getting government people back to thier jobs of trying to run Iraq?

you say: look at this "spin"..well, unless you can find a different 'spin", Okkam's razor would lead me to think this "spin" is the mosta ccurtae out there, even if you don;t like it.

	11-05-2003 23:17									#20
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

GePap, I think the regime change from DOD to STATE has a lot to do with getting things up and running in Baghdad. This is what is common to both stories. The other part about looting is not in the AP story. The question is why?

Now, I suggest the WP reporter may be spinning. Others here suggest that the WP story simply is more inclusive. I don't have an answer to this precisely because I am not in Baghdad. However, the Jonathan Forman story suggested that reports of looting today are not true. That happened weeks ago, right after the fall of Baghdad when there were no police. According to Forman, those conditions no longer exist. But, even when they did exist, they were no as bad as painted by certain reporters.

	11-05-2003 23:22									#21
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Why not continue this discussion in the other thread?

	11-05-2003 23:28									#22
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Why do you listen simply to Forman? Becuase you like what he says? You claim embedded reporters are more trustworthy..why? Becuase they are embedded with the military? I mean, just the term causes issue. Were in Baghdad is Mr. froman? what kind of access does he have to the city?

This is the crux of the problem your argument has: you claim that others are spinning because ONE SINGLE SOURCE has told you so, even though, realistically, you can no more know what he is saying is true than what anyone else is saying is true form baghdad, not being there. Objectively, you can no more believe Forman than any other reporter, becuase your ability to check up on what he says is the same as your ability to check what anyone else says. And still you somehow want to claim that Forman must be telling the truth and the dozens of other lying, even , as I pointed out, you have no basis whatsoever to make the judgement.

Which leads me to believe that the only reason that you believe Forman and not anyone else is that you like what he is saying, that it backs up your ideas, and thus it must be true, while those reports that challenge your preset notions of what is going on in Iraq must be false. Unless you can show me a reason why Forman is more believable than the WP reporters, you have NO CASE.

	11-05-2003 23:30									#23
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by DanS Why not continue this discussion in the other thread?

Ok..moved my previous post to that thread.

	11-05-2003 23:35									#24
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

GePap, the Sandanista's are not communists? This is an outrageous statement.

Here is a link to an apologist for the Sandanistas. There is no word that can descibe them but communism. Also, remember, they were flooded with Fidel's people after the revolution. Next you will tell me that Fidel Castro is not a communist.

Finally, I suggest that you will tell us that you yourself are not a communist.

http://www.spaef.com/IJED_PUB/v2n2/v2n2_politic.pdf

	11-05-2003 23:41									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Finally, I suggest that you will tell us that you yourself are not a communist.

	12-05-2003 04:25									#26
	Put an end to popups!

FYI, Bodine was the person who heavily interfered with the FBI's invesitgation of the Cole bombing. The FBI's best antiterrorism expert was trying to run the investigation (and was supposed to be) but Bodine got involved and fouled things up, eventually getting the guy sent back to the US where he ended up getting killed in the WTC collapse.

I'm glad to see her going down, but it's too bad the people of Baghdad have to pay for her failure.

	12-05-2003 04:29									#27
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor quote: Finally, I suggest that you will tell us that you yourself are not a communist.

Spiffor, perhaps you can tell me what the differences between Communism today and socialism if even Communists believe in democracy? In another discussion, for example we found that so-called "rational" Communists no longer believe in "from each according to his ability and to each according to his need." It just seems to me that communism and socialism or constantly redefining themselves. It is hard to keep up.

But when I see a "socialist" like Ortega allowing is country to be overrun with Cuban Communists, including turning Nicaragua's educational system over to Castro's teachers, how in the world am I to believe that Ortega is not a Communist?

	12-05-2003 04:37									#28
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The big problem with communism is that there is a different definition for each communist. While I personally don't believe in the strict appliucation of the "to each according to his needs" (even though I favor a strong social safety net that gives a decent standards of living to everybody who cannot afford it on his own), some people continue to believe in it.

Cuba is a socialist country, like every red country has been until now. More precisely, it is a state-socialist country, i.e the economic power belongs to the state and not the workers within their enterprises.
I have no idea of what the Sandinistas wanted for an economic system, if they wanted a tame capitalism with a humane wealth repartition (social-democracy like in Sweden), or if they wanted to overthrow capitalism as a whole (socialism).
The fact that they embraced Castro's help, in the form of teachers too, certainly shows they were clearly left-wing, and clearly used by the East bloc to weaken the US influence in the area. But they might have accepted Castro's help because no other help was available too (this is the first reason why Castro became part of the East bloc rather than simply being an Antiyanqui ruler in the first place).

And I laughed because you seem to assume GePap is a communist. Such a statement was hilarious IMHO

	12-05-2003 04:47									#29
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ned Spiffor, perhaps you can tell me what the differences between Communism today and socialism if even Communists believe in democracy? In another discussion, for example we found that so-called "rational" Communists no longer believe in "from each according to his ability and to each according to his need." It just seems to me that communism and socialism or constantly redefining themselves. It is hard to keep up. But when I see a "socialist" like Ortega allowing is country to be overrun with Cuban Communists, including turning Nicaragua's educational system over to Castro's teachers, how in the world am I to believe that Ortega is not a Communist?

Communism is a totalitarian utopian notion: it believs that the basic and most important distinction within mankind is class, which is created by the economic realities of the time. Economics is the basis for politics, and as the economic system progresses, politics change. Communists also believe that, using scientific analysis, you can chart were hisotry has come from, and where t is going In the end, the capitalist free market systems creates the situation making its destruction possible (the Hegelian notion of thesis, antithesis, synthesis) and at this point, the working class can become the only class, ending thus the disctinctions between man, ending politics and bringing true equality to mankind.

Socialism need not have any of these beliefs. for example, communism is utterly aetheistic, but you can have christian socialists. A socialist believes (a muddle explination) that society had obligations to care for its individual members, and that individual members should not be allowed to porfit at the expense of others. They view a situation in which a few are very rich and some very poor as wrong simply becuase then society has failed to meet is obligation (or so they see) to ensure, if ti has the ability to, that all members have a basic level of comfort. The ntion that "my money" should not be sued to feed the poor, cloathe the poor, or give them medical care is a terible one for them.

As for the Sandinistas: who else would they turn for help? The US? US allies in the region, or states tat would be punished by the US is they gave them help?

	12-05-2003 06:04									#30
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

When do we get the "Liberal lineup in US Administration...Out with the old, in with the new" thread?