Fox News' attack on the honor and integrity of our war generals »
Posted by: Aidenag 11 months, 1 week ago203 Comments Report this Story
As we learned from both our Senate and House last week, in the United States we must never "attack the honor and integrity of members of the US Armed Forces." All good patriots from both parties agree on this. That is why I was so shocked and outraged, and more than a little upset, when I went to FoxNews.com this morning and saw this:
Read Full Story at salon.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 203
-
0%
deathray11 months, 1 week ago
Oh, yes. Col. Hunt, who, using his title as a military officer, says that "The generals are BETRAYING our troops" in this Fox News article. Didn't both the House AND the Senate just vote on the John Cornyn Amendment to "condemn personal attacks...on all members of the United States Armed Forces"?
http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseA...
This is the ultimate hypocrisy and two faced nature of the GOP; we should urge the Senate and the House to strongly condemn both Col. Hunt for undermining the morale of the troops and Fox News for carrying this.
Col. Hunt is not a Fox News employee. I wonder what they paid him for this hit job on the troops.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298203,00.html
Accusing officers of treason is shameful, regardless of party affiliation.
Reply-
-
0%
capecoralM11 months, 1 week ago
Deathray "Didn't both the House AND the Senate just vote on the John Cornyn Amendment to "condemn personal attacks...on all members of the United States Armed Forces"?
So I take it DR has had a change of heart about the leaders of the Democrat(ic) party and now feels the same way about most of the leadership in the house and Senate for their shameless remarks about the troops and the military command? I would say if DR were and condem Murtha, Reid, Polosi, Durban, Kennedy, and the rest of the gang DR's remarks might carry some weight. But since I have been on this forum I have seen you support their remarks on many occasion. At this point the outrage seems a bit contrived.
Deathray Wrote: Is this report the unalloyed work of General Petraeus? Of course, given his statements ever since his 2004 Washingtion Post op ed about our imminent victory, I tend to view his pronouncements with some suspicion.
You Call Petraeus a liar on 8/31/07 and today you are outraged?
Reply
-
-
0%
browntiger11 months, 1 week ago
Nothing like "fair and balanced" slime-ball from the faux news.
They slogan should be - we make news, one lie at a time.
Reply-
0%
ConquerorWyrm11 months, 1 week ago
you really deserve a secondchance at attempting sarcasm. What you put here was pretty pathetic.
Oh sure, I see what you were trying to do and how you were trying to do it, but goodness son, really, please try tapping into a little talent 'ere you go spinning around like that...it really does help. If you haven't that store of talent, then just leave it to simple comments.
Sarcasm in the hands of amateurs is a pathetic thing, truly.
Reply -
0%
Mr-opinion11 months, 1 week ago
The cogresses vote prevented fair and ballanced - FOXappears to be the only one, icluding you guys that understand the meaning of fair and ballance - preventing commentary, discussion, opposition is an absolute requirement to 'fair and balanced'
"Sieg Heil" shall not be allowed to work again
Reply -
0%
marlenebomer11 months, 1 week ago
Just remember, Faux News actually went to court to justify the right to tell LIES on the air!!
Reply
-
0%
Goppy11 months, 1 week ago
As a Christian Conservative, I hate when you submit storeis, dr. You appeal to reason in folk in an time when we Conservatives is trying to create a new frontier based on demagoguery.
We got a whole industry whose sole purpose is creatin a lexicon of demagoguery that feeds on prejudice and fear.
Liek foer instance, just yestiday, we Conservatives wuz runnin in circles, twistin logik and reality ever which a way to explain away Rush Limbaugh referin to American Soldiers as 'phoney soldiers'.
And we got lots of mileage outa Goerge W referin to those who disagreed with him as bein 'Cut n Runners'.
Look, whut we Conservatives is tryin to do is make ourselfs completely untouchable to criticism by tyin that criticism to treason!
Now I ask you, is that so Wrong?
The kicker fer us is that while we is workin at makin ourselfs unimpeachable in all things about war and the military - we are denyin you libs any voice at all in these matters.
Evil? Yes
Effective? Yes
Reply-
0%
hdthehn11 months, 1 week ago
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/200...
FAIR AND BALANCED and perfectly aligned with the honor and integrity of the conservative right republitraitors.
Nixon cut and ran from Vietnam and Reagan cut and ran from Lebanon. God bless the GOP - nobody else will!!! Looking forward to the nuklear option in Nov 2008.
Reply -
0%
AntiNeoCon11 months, 1 week ago
I just love it when Propeller posts my comments twice....NOT!!!
Reply -
0%
AntiNeoCon11 months, 1 week ago
Goopy, tell me it isn't true....folks sayin your New Jersey accent sounds southern!! Maybe South Bronx...
Reply
-
0%
StarLord11 months, 1 week ago
Correction: accusing offers of treason WITHOUT PROOF is shameful. No position should be automatically above suspicion based on evidence. That said, I have yet to see any evidence that Petraeus, or any other officer, is guilty of treason. Therefore, I condemn attacks on the integrity of serving officers.
Reply -
0%
Locky1211 months, 1 week ago
Did you even read the article?
General Petreus made a testimony before Congress and was condemned for what he said by moveon.org
The other generals are MAKING TROOPS SECOND-GUESS THEMSELVES IN THE FIELD. In the heat of battle they're making the troops think if they could go to jail for this instead of doing what we want them to do which is WIN!
Sorry to offend the libs on this board who wish we'd lose.
But that's all we got on this board. DUMB IGNORANT LIBERALS that HATE THIS COUNTRY.
Reply-
0%
PapaWolf11 months, 1 week ago
>>Sorry to offend the libs on this board who wish we'd lose.
This extremely ludicrous, & entirely over-used statement has just rendered any & all of your comments completely devoid of any validity, voracity or even consideration. To even intimate that we want our own fathers & mothers, husbands & wives, sons & daughters, uncles & aunts, friends & relations to fail is just disgusting.
The military did its job. It went in there, defeated Saddam's forces, captured Saddam, killed his sons, & overthrew the government. What it's trying to do now is play referee for a sectarian civil war that's been inflamed by the political giants (Bremmer, etc) that insisted on sectarianizing & disenfranchising a major portion of the population.
>>But that's all we got on this board. DUMB IGNORANT LIBERALS that HATE THIS COUNTRY.
Very intelligent response.
Reply -
0%
PapaWolf11 months, 1 week ago
Don't take this the wrong way, but your dumb butt doesn't even know what "victory in Iraq" is. Answer this if you have the guts - no one else has. I've asked numerous of you "patriotic" Americans exactly what you would consider "victory" in Iraq. Naturally, not 1 has responded.
You basically have 3 options:
1) Support the Shi'ia-dominated gov't that we put into place, the PRO-IRANIAN govt - you know, our enemy.
2) Support the Sunni militias which are currently our enemy & responsible for sectarian cleansings & attacks on our troops. And, btw, which we disenfranchised & forced into unemployment w/no option but to pick up weapons & fight for their land. And, btw, are pro-Saudi - our ally.
3) Support the Shi-ia militias which WE (namely under Petraeus) armed & trained as "police" but which turned into other sectarian cleansing forces responsible for untold deaths & injuries of both US soldiers & Iraqis.
Reply -
0%
cowboygrandpa11 months, 1 week ago
Locky 12: Take a deep breath and let it out slowly. I don't hate my country there Locky12. Have a few scars to prove it. Never did cotton to people hating before they are sure what they are talking about. So slow down there partner. There are a lot of us on here who risked it all. Think we have a right to say what we think any dam* time we please. Don't know if you served if you did thank you. If you didn't that's O.K. too. Just don't go Rush Limbaughing it on us. Don't take to kindly to that. Troops don't second guess themselves in the field junior. If they do they don't come home. You shoot and kill take your chances. Why do you think there are so many friendly fire deaths? If those generals are doing that they will answer for it. I find the whole story kind of strange.
Reply
-
-
0%
dunkirk11 months, 1 week ago
lol, we now have Fox and Rush two stalwarts of the GOP slandering the troops. And we have AG (aka LuvM_Prez) ad the rest of our "patriotic" right wingers supporting them. Yeah I can see us instilling fear into the hearts of the insurgents as the right wing slanders and demeans the guys doping the fighting.
Reply -
0%
obiefrommuskogee11 months, 1 week ago
I am not offended by any type of free speech. Political or otherwise. Why do I have to use someone else's standard of what is offending. I guess I am the only true patriot here. LONG LIVE FREE SPEECH!
I WAS offended by that ridiculous vote in Congress AGAINST AN AD!! Don't these people have better things to do!
Reply -
0%
Mr-opinion11 months, 1 week ago
I disagreed with you for one simple reason - ---
The vote in itself needs to be repealed - unless you allow questioning - you give a carte blanch to all possible miss conduct, which was the purpose behind it (voted by a Bush supportive Senate), to prevent factual information from impeeding with the self empowerd 'quasi-dic... of Bush Jr.
Reply
-
-
0%
cowboygrandpa11 months, 1 week ago
Yes that is true. Is what he is saying true as well? If so we have some serious problems going on. I'm beginning to wonder who is behind this crap? Besides Fox. Something strange is going on here. Is this being released right now because of the Limbaugh controversy. Trying to pull attention away from Limbaugh and on to this stuff. The timing on this seems really odd. We might have to condemn Hunt for just more than this smoke screen. I don't know but my gut is saying something else is going on here. What do you think deathray?
Reply -
0%
Bkumm11 months, 1 week ago
How about this? Criticize whomever you want as long as you don't slander or defame them. Just because a person is a firefighter, police officer, soldier, sailor, Marine, doctor or whatever doesn't make them any more heroic or worthy of honor than the fry cook at McCool's.
This is the United States of America. Does anybody remember that? Equality before the law. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
What a person does for a living isn't what makes a person worthy of honor. It's what a person does that makes them worthy of honor. Somewhere along the line we forgot that.
Reply-
0%
dandt161211 months, 1 week ago
Bkumm, Good comment!!
Why anybody continues to watch and believe anything from this bag of horse S*@& news? channel is beyond me.
Reply -
-
0%
BravoSierra11 months, 1 week ago
And the Christians need to remember that bit about God not being a respector of ranks and titles....
Yes, it is what a person does, what they decide at that moment life throws the moral dillema at them that makes them worthy of honor.
You get asked a straight-forward question and weasel around it...you just slipped to the side of dishonor.
Reply -
0%
Searchbeam11 months, 1 week ago
Well said, bkumm, my friend!
I think Fox should be classified as a tabloid!
That is what Rupert has done all his life: cheap, trashy tabloids!
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Lurch11 months, 1 week ago
I do not know if Petreaus is a good soldier or not, but I do know he is an ambitious fellow.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/m...
Petraeus admits to rise in Iraq violence
(in case above does not work:) http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/093007Z.shtml
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/ar...
President Petraeus? Iraqi official recalls the day US general revealed ambition
Reply
-
-
0%
BravoSierra11 months, 1 week ago
A General Officer should not be worried about his job. He has a much higher moral duty to his men and to the Constitution. If Petraeus was "being careful" then he deserves the attacks. My nine-year-old recognizes and can take a clear moral stand better without waffling. We seem to have forgotten what it means not only to be a General in this country but what it means to be a man.
Reply
-
-
0%
PsychoHosebeast11 months, 1 week ago
Never? Ever? Bullsh!t, I'll say what I want any time I feel like it. What idiot decided a good patriot never criticizes members of the armed forces? Clearly a person who has never lived through a military junta or under martial law, but wants to.
Reply -
0%
leatherneck11 months, 1 week ago
That is the republican way, if you verbally attack members of the military you are a traitor. That philosophy is that of a dictatorship. Last time I looked we live in a democracy or do we anymore.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions11 months, 1 week ago
No. Apparently the Republican law is that if anyone but Cons attack the military, they are a traitor.
2000. Bush phone banks in South Carolina defeat John McCain by telling primary voters that McCain is lying about being a war hero and had a secret baby with a black woman.
2002. the RNC defeats Max Cleland, a decorated vet who lost 3 limbs serving in Vietnam, by running ads linking him with Osama bin Laden.
2004. the Bush wins with the Swift Boating of John Kerry.
2006. Bush goes utterly ballistic over a Kerry botched joke. For weeks, he uses the bully pulpit to keep the focus off his botched occupation of Iraq and on one botched joke. This time, it doesn't work.
2007, Rush calls all vets who disagree with him "Phony Soldiers". The Cons swing into immediate action denying he said that and trying to turn the condemnation of his statement away with straw-man lists of people who actually turned out to have claimed to be vets and were not.
Reply
-
