PDA

View Full Version : For Mabus...



Clove
05-06-2009, 07:37 PM
Media Ignores Obama Error on Torture

Maureen Dowd's NYT column yesterday confirmed what I had suspected: The mainstream media is either oblivious to the fact that President Barack Obama was wrong about a major point he made during last Wednesday's press conference -- or they are simply refusing to report it.

Either way, it is worth noting.

Regarding President Obama's comments on torture, Dowd wrote,

As Mr. Obama said in his news conference, it is in moments of crisis that a country must cleave to its principles. Asserting that "waterboarding violates our ideals," he said he had been struck by an article describing how Churchill would not torture prisoners even when "London was being bombed to smithereens."
"And the reason was that Churchill understood, you start taking shortcuts and over time, that corrodes what's best in a people," he said. "It corrodes the character of a country."


This line, of course, was one of Obama's strongest moments ... The trouble is, as several blogs noted days ago, it was totally false. Regardless of what Prime Minister Churchill might have said, Britain did, in fact, torture ... that is, if you believe the The Guardian.

This, of course, is not to say that waterboarding is torture, or that torture effective or ineffective. It is, instead, to say that Barack Obama was apparently wrong about a historical fact (it turns out, he apparently got his info from reading an Andrew Sullivan blog).

... Perhaps even more interesting than Obama's mistake is that, judging by Dowd's column, the MSM has failed to report on it -- and is, in fact -- perpetuating the myth.

Keep in mind The Guardian column is now three years old -- and the blogs on the topic were published almost immediately after Obama's comments. One of the blogs reporting was TIME's The Swampland (yes -- technically they are the MSM) -- so it's not as if these were obscure blogs. And it's also worth noting that Obama's comments on this topic were among his most poignant. They were also meant to be used as a way to criticize the Bush Administration.

To me, it comes down to this; Either the mainstream media has failed to investigate whether or not Obama's claim during a nationally-televised press conference was accurate -- or they know he was wrong and are simply failing to set the record straight.

I can't decide which is worse ...http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/05/04/obamas-torture-mistake-ignored-by-media/

Discuss.

Mabus
05-06-2009, 09:45 PM
If you are trying to prove to me that he is just another politician that lies you are a bit late.

But thank you, anyway.

Clove
05-07-2009, 12:55 PM
If you are trying to prove to me that he is just another politician that lies you are a bit late.

But thank you, anyway.You think it was a deliberate rewriting of history on his part? Lolz.

The blogger was disappointed that the media didn't actually point out the error (thereby perpetuating it).

Mabus
05-07-2009, 02:50 PM
You think it was a deliberate rewriting of history on his part? Lolz.

The blogger was disappointed that the media didn't actually point out the error (thereby perpetuating it).
I would not want to speculate on what to expect from the president, as looking at base political pragmatism is an exercise in tedium.

We could point out lots of "errors" the media do not report on.

* Take the "no taxes, of any kind, on anyone making less then $250,000 a year". Not only has this been broken (SCHIP reauthorization) but now it is on couples making $250k (and at times as little as $200k).

* We could look to the "new openness" in all bills being posted to the internet website within 5 days. Out of 14 bills passed only 1 was posted within the 5 day period.

* We could look at the illegal immigrant (Zeituni Onyango) being given a second chance at asylum, who vacationed in Cleveland during the campaign while maintaining their tax payer paid for public housing in Boston. Who was this person? Obama's aunt. He did have her at his inauguration before she went back to squalor, poverty and law breaking.

The list could go on and on.

Clove
05-07-2009, 03:33 PM
Your examples aren't apples to apples comparisons. The grandfather at Auschwitz would have been a better one.

Obama stated history falsely. It could have been an error, or it could have been deliberate deception. Without proof I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it was a careless error. What's really unfortunate is that the press (unlike the Auschwitz blunder) hasn't bothered to expose the error and so allows an incorrect "history" to stand.

Mabus
05-07-2009, 06:35 PM
Your examples aren't apples to apples comparisons. The grandfather at Auschwitz would have been a better one.

Obama stated history falsely. It could have been an error, or it could have been deliberate deception. Without proof I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it was a careless error. What's really unfortunate is that the press (unlike the Auschwitz blunder) hasn't bothered to expose the error and so allows an incorrect "history" to stand.
There are not many countries that do not use torture during times of war or extreme national distress. I do not agree with its usage, but I am not naive enough to believe otherwise.

I do not know the history of "usage of torture" (especially water boarding) by the English during WWII well enough to speak to whether Churchill approved of its use, or even knew of its use. As someone that has read a lot of historical works about the era I cannot say that I remember ever reading about water boarding during that war.

There were a lot of dastardly things in WWII that are not often brought up. We did beat prisoners. We did (at times) refuse to take any prisoners, and slaughtered every enemy soldier (this happened on both sides). Of these, as well as many other heinous war crimes, I have read accounts.

While I would like to fault Obama for this incident in the quoted piece in the OP, I do not know enough about the subject to call shenanigans.

RichardCranium
05-07-2009, 06:38 PM
Mabus what's up with your avatar? We kill people who kill people because it's God's will.

Tisket
05-07-2009, 06:40 PM
Says the man with the hitler baby as an avatar.

Mabus
05-07-2009, 06:56 PM
Mabus what's up with your avatar? We kill people who kill people because it's God's will.
Which god?

Zeus?

He is pretty tough, with those lightning bolts and all...

I have been against the death penalty all of my life.

RichardCranium
05-07-2009, 06:58 PM
That's cool. I'm for it, but only because I don't want to pay to imprison them for the rest of their lives.

Tisket
05-07-2009, 07:00 PM
That's cool. I'm for it, but only because I don't want to pay to imprison them for the rest of their lives.

Too bad it's more expensive to execute them then...

RichardCranium
05-07-2009, 07:02 PM
Too bad it's more expensive to execute them then...


How is it more expensive to kill someone than to feed and clothe them for 30, 40 or 50 years?

Tisket
05-07-2009, 07:04 PM
It's dramatically more expensive. Besides, teh typical "life" sentence is something like a dozen years now?

Clove
05-07-2009, 09:02 PM
Not inherently more expensive, just our "style" is. If we wanted to we COULD make it cheaper than incarceration *evil grin*

Latrinsorm
05-07-2009, 10:03 PM
A guy who endorsed morale bombing (which Churchill definitely did) is probably a guy who endorsed at least some forms of torture. I liked Sawyer's quote about Churchill during the blitz better anyway.