National Post = National Disgrace.

KrustyKidd · May 23, 2006

The National Post posted a story without checking - completely incompetent, or purposeful omission? They know that repetition = truth, and even if half the people find out later its not true, half never will, and a perception of Iranians as hateful and backwards people will at least be gestated.

Tin foil hat time. Publicly traded company risks all shareholders cash to make political statement.

A retraction would be in order, if we had any respect for Iran or Iranians, but of course it will not be forthcoming. I hope I'm not alone in being able to distinguish the actions of clerics, which rule the country, and the sentiments of the younger people (they had a baby boom) who are mostly pro-West. The law, requiring Islamic dress, was passed in reaction to many of these younger people adopting American-style dress.

Ok, maybe not. You seem to hang ten with this one pretty good.

The clerics are deeply conservative, this is a backlash. What they need in Iran is not an intervention, its a revolution. The problem is the state is well-armed. I don't believe an attack is the most prudent action currently - if we waited, engaged in diplomacy, eventually social attitudes will soften. Trade makes money, which causes exchange of ideas. Iran will open up, and adopt some Western ideals..but these things take time.

Not a backlash but the way they have been all along and are losing big time. What I think you are driving at is an ivasion. That possibility is not on any table as it does nothing at all. You don't free people who are as you seem to understand very well, the actual basis of the governments problems in Iran. An ivasion would simply kill lots and lots of US soldiers and not gain one inch of holdable ground. That non reward, coupled with making any pro US people extremely anti US makes it unthinkable. Therefore, the unreality of that propostition leaves me wondering if that is what you meant in the first place.

Iran is jockying for their survival as a government, nothing more. Of course, that jockying affects a lot of natins in the region as they carry a lot of political and economic weight but it is jockying nonetheless. They can't fight their way out of a paper bag beyond their own borders, Iraq has settled their government the best they could do so not much else to do but play a nuclear bluff game without nukes. Anything that gets the great powers to come to their table to talk. Of course, the clandestine powers they have with hit squads and puppet terrorist groups is a weapon but nothing strategic that changes the course of the world. Hence, they are left with their problem and their solution - talk big, show off to the home crowd and scare the Euros into putting pressure on the US to talk more nicely.

scribblet · May 23, 2006

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=5799 see MB's post here....and note that Iran still has not denied it.

gerryhatrick · May 23, 2006

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=5799 see MB's post here....and note that Iran still has not denied it.

Iran has not denied....what?

Note that Amir blames others for turning his "opinion" into "news". What an idjit.

Naci Sey · May 23, 2006

Seems to me that:

those who want to believe in the NP story do;
those who don't want to believe in it don't;
those who want to await verification before deciding do, and once further evidence comes in judge that most of the story is false.

killjoy · May 23, 2006

This is the most insidious damage of blatant falsehoods or outright dis-information.

It is established this story is false, however that belies the fact that there are Iranian jews who have lived in the remote north for ages. They are barred from work unapproved by the Iranian government. They have, on occasion been unjustly labelled as spies and sentenced to death. And I believe (less sure about this one) they are disallowed form owning their own property.

So a jack-ass, non-factual, irresponsible story is made up and then exposed and suddenly people have no reason to believe the opposite, to believe what this whole scenario begs to suggest which is maybe the Iranian governments' view past or present towards jews or Israel is "not that bad really".

itza cryin' shame.

"Neither fire nor wind, birth nor death can erase our good deeds. "

--Buddha

BubberMiley · May 23, 2006

The NBC reporter, after Hurricane Katrina hit, sitting in a canoe, with an oar in one hand, reporting that the flooding was very high where she was....and then 2 people walked in front of her canoe and we saw that the water was ankle-deep. Actually, this one was pretty funny.

Though the "Rathergate" memos were fake and probably Rove-created, what they reported was true and never disputed.

The canoe clip you're thinking of wasn't even in New Orleans and had nothing to do with Katrina. It was in New Jersey.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1502454/posts

You twisting the the facts to make your point is what's really funny.

And "irregardless" isn't a word.

gerryhatrick · May 23, 2006

Seems to me that:
those who want to believe in the NP story do;

those who don't want to believe in it don't;

those who want to await verification before deciding do, and once further evidence comes in judge that most of the story is false.

I think there's a third group. Those who can't be bothered to get educated enough to realize the story has been wholly and completely discredited.

Here, check out the wiki entry on it. Look at the references & external links.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Iranian_...law_controversy

Anyone still prattling on about how this may still prove true is a dishonest warmonger, plain and simple.

BubberMiley · May 24, 2006

Cue the dishonest warmongers accusing you of supporting Iran.

sharkman · May 24, 2006

Whether or not this story proves false, the fact remains that the Iranian President is a nut bar who needs to be kept as far away from nuclear weapons as possible.

seabee · May 24, 2006

Whether or not this story proves false, the fact remains that the Iranian President is a nut bar who needs to be kept as far away from nuclear weapons as possible.

However, a case can be made that the president of the United States is also a nut bar, but he already has thousands of nuclear weapons and the missile capability to send them anywhere he wants.

The United States is the only country which has used nuclear weapons against another country.

Why wonder that other countries might want to try to neutralize a mass destruction attack on them by developing similar weapons.

KrustyKidd · May 24, 2006

However, a case can be made that the president of the United States is also a nut bar, but he already has thousands of nuclear weapons and the missile capability to send them anywhere he wants.

Only an idiot would attempt to make that case though. If he was a nutbar they would have flown the evening of 911.

The United States is the only country which has used nuclear weapons against another country.

Well after you can prove some logic that Japan or Germany or Russia or France or Belgium or Poland or Britain or Yugoslavia or ........... would not have used them had they had them during the first or second World War then you might have a point of some kind. As that satnds, it's crap.

Why wonder that other countries might want to try to neutralize a mass destruction attack on them by developing similar weapons.

Because they have less respect for human life than the US or Russia does.

BHS · May 24, 2006

Though the "Rathergate" memos were fake and probably Rove-created, what they reported was true and never disputed.

Hmmm. Fake but accurate. I guess we can put you down for believing the NP story then, regardless of how it might clash with reality. (And, by-the-by, the "facts" alluded to in the Rathergate story about Bush being a "deserter" have been disputed ad nauseum. But if you relied on CBS or Kos or MoveOn for your news you might have missed that.)

I think there's a third group. Those who can't be bothered to get educated enough to realize the story has been wholly and completely discredited.

I'm starting to see a theme here, where you project a lack of education onto people you disagree with. It's happened in a number of your posts. It leads me to believe you have an education you are proud of. Good for you. Educated people tend to have a better grasp of the big picture and the rhetorical tools to express themselves adroitly. Though it might look better if you tried starting a post without resorting to generalized and unwarranted ad hominem attacks in your first sentence. You know, as if you had something more relevant than hysterical gain-saying to add.

Montgomery Burns · May 24, 2006

BubberMiley:

Though the "Rathergate" memos were fake and probably Rove-created...

Tinfoil hat time

what they reported was true and never disputed.

Ahh...the old fake but accurate school of liberal journalism.

The canoe clip you're thinking of wasn't even in New Orleans and had nothing to do with Katrina. It was in New Jersey.

I stand corrected. It's a minor error and does not change the fact that it was funny and dishonest. I saw the clip. :lol:

You twisting the the facts to make your point is what's really funny.
And "irregardless" isn't a word.

Yes it is.

You lying to make your point is what's really funny.

KrustyKidd · May 24, 2006

Yes it is.
You lying to make your point is what's really funny.

:lol:

BubberMiley · May 24, 2006

BubberMiley:
Though the "Rathergate" memos were fake and probably Rove-created...

Tinfoil hat time

Uh-huh. Same old lame "tinfoil hat" refutation, despite the fact there is no logical reason anyone would try to create fake documents in Word unless they wanted the documents to be discovered as fake.

I stand corrected. It's a minor error and does not change the fact that it was funny and dishonest. I saw the clip.

No, it's a major error given the context that you were trying to make it seem like the MSM were out to get Bush with Katrina, and that Katrina was really just a small puddle. Sure it's funny and dishonest, but big deal: a local news reporter in New Jersey is dishonest. You were being more dishonest attributing it to Katrina.

And did you read the definition of "irregardless?" It basically said it's an invented word used by people who don't know better. Way to go.

BHS · May 24, 2006

For anyone who's interested in what a real media scandal looks like, read this article from National Review Online about Hurricane Katrina coverage, by Jonah Goldberg.

BHS · May 24, 2006

Uh-huh. Same old lame "tinfoil hat" refutation, despite the fact there is no logical reason anyone would try to create fake documents in Word unless they wanted the documents to be discovered as fake.

Oh, come on. Rove would have to have known ahead of time how stupidly Dan Rather et al would behave in this case. I have great respect for Rove as a political tactition, but in no way do I believe he's psychic.

It's a simple case - a raving anti-Bush looney concocted fake evidence using a methodology he was too stupid to realize was easily identifiable, and the CBS people bought it because it confirmed a "truth" they already believed in. This is entirely consistent with their defence that the memo was "fake but accurate".

KrustyKidd · May 24, 2006

And did you read the definition of "irregardless?" It basically said it's an invented word used by people who don't know better. Way to go.

Kiraly · May 24, 2006

And did you read the definition of "irregardless?" It basically said it's an invented word used by people who don't know better. Way to go.

Aahhh....

....so you admit its a word.

By the way, did you read the definition?

I'll repost it highlighting the relevant terms.

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing.

Obviously not a word to be used in a report to the Board of Directors, but on a message board me thinks it is a-ok.

scribblet · May 24, 2006

For anyone who's interested in what a real media scandal looks like, read this article from National Review Online about Hurricane Katrina coverage, by Jonah Goldberg.

Thats funny, I was just going to post it from here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...fect_storm.html

Think I'll start another thread.

gerryhatrick · May 25, 2006

Interesting to watch people try and change the subject.

The apology by the National Post and an appearance by (not sure who) their representative on CBC last night was even more revealing about them.

They apologized, yes. But not without blaming everyone else they could think of. On the CBC last night the Post rep made a desperate plea for people not to judge them as biased. Unprovoked.

BHS · May 25, 2006

Interesting to watch people try and change the subject.

So, this thread can only amount to providing a place for you to rant hysterically about how one story proves the NP is the worst paper in the history of the universe and it's continued existence is an insufferable humiliation to Canada. Is that what you're saying?

I think that an outside comparison to another news story carried by other news media is illuminating in this case, if only to prove that their are worse ways for a paper to screw up than wrongly accusing a tyrannical theocracy of religious persecution (persecution which, it has been pointed out, may yet occur). Which, being contradictory to your goal in this thread, is something you might want to jump on. Which you've now done. Thanks for proving my point.

Hollus · May 26, 2006

I agree with gerry's rant. I read the article and the one that followed the next day. My concern is not so much with the intellectual types who pay attention to world news; my concern is the effect it has on the majority of people. People who seen the giant sized picture of two Jews from the holocust wearing yellow stars underneath the headline reading that Iran is enforcing such a dresscode. People who might not of noticed the small side-bar article the next day that offered an officail Iranian refute. In this way the more eyecatching headlines can sway public opininion, much like the Bush admins. statments about Saddam Alqueda connections that left over 50% of americans believing it.

gerryhatrick · May 27, 2006

Interesting to watch people try and change the subject.

So, this thread can only amount to providing a place for you to rant hysterically about how one story proves the NP is the worst paper in the history of the universe and it's continued existence is an insufferable humiliation to Canada. Is that what you're saying?

First, where did I "rant hysterically"? What rightwing nitwittery.

Second, this topic provides a wide range of discusion. No need to change the subject.

I realize some aren't happy to see an Israeli-centric MSM outlet take a hit. Unfortunately when media adopts a national interest then they become vulnerable to this kind of breakdown.

BHS · May 27, 2006

First, where did I "rant hysterically"? What rightwing nitwittery.
Second, this topic provides a wide range of discusion. No need to change the subject.

I realize some aren't happy to see an Israeli-centric MSM outlet take a hit. Unfortunately when media adopts a national interest then they become vulnerable to this kind of breakdown.

Every post you've made in this thread has blown the importance of this story way out of proportion.

Now, you accuse me of changing the subject with one breath (without any regard for the explanation I provided for doing so) while changing the subject yourself in the next. Turning this into a Jewish conspiracy does kind of make sense, though. I get the feeling it might have been your underlying motivation all along.