ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
The Los Angeles Times reports that Gen. David Petraeus’ upcoming Sept. 15 report on Iraq will be authored by the White House:
Despite Bush’s repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.
And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report’s data.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Isn't he supposed to answer questions from congressmen? I thought he was going to speak under oath and field questions?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
The Los Angeles Times reports that Gen. David Petraeus’ upcoming Sept. 15 report on Iraq will be authored by the White House:
Despite Bush’s repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.
And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report’s data.
Oh, hello FraudCoverage......... popping in for a little disinformation I see. Just what we all need, some THINKPROGRESS links to save the day (or as I like to call it Incestuous Amplification central (yes, there is a name for it, and your site's even mentioned by name at abput :50, who knew???????).
Meanwhile, at a REAL NEWS agency (you know, one that has to actually worry about credibility) they are talking about content,. Imagine that. Hmmmmmm, that seems like a little different spin on the stuff that your preffered NEWS outlet has.
Of course you did tell us that you'd be using THINKPROGRESS exclusively for news so, it's not a big surprise.
Last edited by Patriot_in_NY; 08-15-2007 at 04:50 PM..
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY
Oh, hello FraudCoverage......... popping in for a little disinformation I see. Just what we all need, some THINKPROGRESS links to save the day (or as I like to call it Incestuous Amplification central (yes, there is a name for it, and your site's even mentioned by name at abput :50, who knew???????).
Meanwhile, at a REAL NEWS agency (you know, one that has to actually worry about credibility) they are talking about content,. Imagine that. Hmmmmmm, that seems like a little different spin on the stuff that your preffered NEWS outlet has.
Of course you did tell us that you'd be using THINKPROGRESS exclusively for news so, it's not a big surprise.
dear wing-flapping, personally instigating moron... if you actually read it, thinkprogress used the LA Times as their quoted source.... you know, the very source you got smarmy about... once again, from the LA Times, the exact same section you're complaining about:
And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report's data. ....
The senior administration official said the process had created "uncomfortable positions" for the White House because of debates over what constitutes "satisfactory progress."
During internal White House discussion of a July interim report, some officials urged the administration to claim progress in policy areas such as legislation to divvy up Iraq's oil revenue, even though no final agreement had been reached. Others argued that such assertions would be disingenuous.
"There were some in the drafting of the report that said, 'Well, we can claim progress,' " the administration official said. "There were others who said: 'Wait a second. Sure we can claim progress, but it's not credible to . . . just neglect the fact that it's had no effect on the ground.' "
further, tough guy.... here's more from THINK PROGRESS via another source.... you can complain about this fact also, if you wish... but oops, it comes straight from the White House:
President Bush had previously said he would “respect the command structure” and not intercede in the Petraeus report:
I will repeat, as the Commander-in-Chief of a great military who has supported this military and will continue to support this military, not only with my — with insisting that we get resources to them, but with — by respecting the command structure, I’m going to wait for David to come back — David Petraeus to come back and give us the report on what he sees.
anyhow, it's good to see you recognizing the LA Times as a real news agency.... i'll remember that the next time you cry and complain about an alleged "liberal MSM bias"... as for your comparison... no one ever said ThinkProgress was a "news agency", so spare us all the drama...
Last edited by PressCoverage; 08-15-2007 at 05:24 PM..
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by PressCoverage
dear wing-flapping, personally instigating moron... if you actually read it, thinkprogress used the LA Times as their quoted source.... you know, the very source you got smarmy about... once again, from the LA Times, the exact same section you're complaining about:
And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report's data. ....
The senior administration official said the process had created "uncomfortable positions" for the White House because of debates over what constitutes "satisfactory progress."
During internal White House discussion of a July interim report, some officials urged the administration to claim progress in policy areas such as legislation to divvy up Iraq's oil revenue, even though no final agreement had been reached. Others argued that such assertions would be disingenuous.
"There were some in the drafting of the report that said, 'Well, we can claim progress,' " the administration official said. "There were others who said: 'Wait a second. Sure we can claim progress, but it's not credible to . . . just neglect the fact that it's had no effect on the ground.' "
further, tough guy.... here's more from THINK PROGRESS via another source.... you can complain about this fact also, if you wish... but oops, it comes straight from the White House:
President Bush had previously said he would “respect the command structure” and not intercede in the Petraeus report:
I will repeat, as the Commander-in-Chief of a great military who has supported this military and will continue to support this military, not only with my — with insisting that we get resources to them, but with — by respecting the command structure, I’m going to wait for David to come back — David Petraeus to come back and give us the report on what he sees.
anyhow, it's good to see you recognizing the LA Times as a real news agency.... i'll remember that the next time you cry and complain about an alleged "liberal MSM bias"... as for your comparison... no one ever said ThinkProgress was a "news agency", so spare us all the drama...
Owwwww, don't be hurt that I call you OVER DEPENDENCE on thinkprogress, it's only natural. You'd do the same if I linked EVERYTHING to Michelle Malkin, AND YOU KNOW IT.
Oh yeah LAT, is real news. It leans pretty far left, but it it real news, so long as you know how to read it.
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY
Owwwww, don't be hurt that I call you OVER DEPENDENCE on thinkprogress, it's only natural. You'd do the same if I linked EVERYTHING to Michelle Malkin, AND YOU KNOW IT.
Oh yeah LAT, is real news. It leans pretty far left, but it it real news, so long as you know how to read it.
translation: "i didn't read the LA Times story, nor the Progress essay, you're right... or else i would have known Progress sourced the LA Times... "
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by PressCoverage
translation: "i didn't read the LA Times story, nor the Progress essay, you're right... or else i would have known Progress sourced the LA Times... "
Actual Translation: I rarely take ANYTHING you post serious, because you only (by your own admission) use ONE primary source for your info. It also happens to be a renowned leftist smear OPINION blog that ONLY posts information that fits it NARROW world view. That makes you one-dimentional.
Just because you pretend to be an intellectual here, and possibly have some people fooled, it doesn't mean that you have fooled actual intellectuals. Trust me, broaden you horizon, use a few different sources, perhaps a few of your own thoughts and musings and then you'll possible garner some of the credibility you seek.
Until then, I will continue to call you out for the SINGLE-SOURCED fraud that you are. Hey, on the bright side, I actually DO think your are quite intelligent, I'm just waiting for you to prove it to me.
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY
Actual Translation: I rarely take ANYTHING you post serious, because you only (by your own admission) use ONE primary source for your info. It also happens to be a renowned leftist smear OPINION blog that ONLY posts information that fits it NARROW world view. That makes you one-dimentional.
Just because you pretend to be an intellectual here, and possibly have some people fooled, it doesn't mean that you have fooled actual intellectuals. Trust me, broaden you horizon, use a few different sources, perhaps a few of your own thoughts and musings and then you'll possible garner some of the credibility you seek.
Until then, I will continue to call you out for the SINGLE-SOURCED fraud that you are. Hey, on the bright side, I actually DO think your are quite intelligent, I'm just waiting for you to prove it to me.
you can keep flailing your arms all you like... ThinkProgress isn't necessarily a source in and of itself... It is a news and political monitor that conveniently links to other mainstream media sources... If you have a beef with what the LA Times, C-Span, the NYT, Washington Post, BBC, CBC, Boston Globe, SF Chronicle, Chicago Sun, London Times uses to catch your heroes in lie after lie, etc., that is one thing... and hopefully you'll chime in about it with specific repudiations ... But sitting here squawking and suggesting ThinkProgress is your opponent's "only source" is really a bit pretentious and strawman of you...
Fact is, you got caught b!tching about a story's source, then used the exact source to portray it as a "real news agency", all while having never read the story in the first place... You got dumbed over twice in one blogging gaffe, and now you're attacking me for trying to "fool intellectuals"... LOL...
you're the fraud here... "Patriot"
Last edited by PressCoverage; 08-15-2007 at 07:42 PM..
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY
Oh, hello FraudCoverage......... popping in for a little disinformation I see. Just what we all need, some THINKPROGRESS links to save the day (or as I like to call it Incestuous Amplification central (yes, there is a name for it, and your site's even mentioned by name at abput :50, who knew???????).
Meanwhile, at a REAL NEWS agency (you know, one that has to actually worry about credibility) they are talking about content,. Imagine that. Hmmmmmm, that seems like a little different spin on the stuff that your preffered NEWS outlet has.
Of course you did tell us that you'd be using THINKPROGRESS exclusively for news so, it's not a big surprise.
I know you love it when I do this (quote myself and all). Read this over and try to follow along, particularly the last line. I had no problem with the LA TIMES base source. However, your THINKPROGRESS spun the article out of context to hype a secondary issue (that fit their own view), and repackaged the article to it make it appear the issue they discussed was integral to what the initial source was sating. THAT"S SPIN and it's not exactly unbiased or correct, plus YOU LET THEM make your point for you. That's what makes you a FRAUD.
In fact, you let think progress make all your point for you.
Last edited by Patriot_in_NY; 08-15-2007 at 09:45 PM..
Re: Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY
I know you love it when I do this (quote myself and all). Read this over and try to follow along, particularly the last line. I had no problem with the LA TIMES base source. However, your THINKPROGRESS spun the article out of context to hype a secondary issue (that fit their own view), and repackaged the article to it make it appear the issue they discussed was integral to what the initial source was sating. THAT"S SPIN and it's not exactly unbiased or correct, plus YOU LET THEM make your point for you. That's what makes you a FRAUD.
In fact, you let think progress make all your point for you.
ACTUALLY, hypocrite... once again you're wrong... don't you ever get tired of being a charicature of the very thing you accuse your opponent of being? Fraud?
here are several examples, just in the past month, of letting various other real news sources make my point for me...
Now then, would you like me to continue with a few more, or will you just keep parroting the tired old assertion of yours that I only rely on ThinkProgress to make my points?...
Regardless, i've yet to see you prove a single thing wrong that I've presented from Progress.... That's because you have nothing... Just your boring squawking about some mysterious "liberal media bias" that really only exists in the mind of the pro-Crusading Bunkerite....
Biggest shock ever: White House will write Petraeus' report
(yes, there is a name for it, and your site's even mentioned by name at abput :50, who knew???????).
Linear Mode
