Olbermann vs. Rupert Murdoch

[D_Raay]

http://www.nypost.com/gossip/pagesix/powder_puff_spooks_keith_pagesix_.htm

MSNBC loudmouth Keith Olbermann flipped out when he opened his home mail yesterday. The acerbic host of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" was terrified when he opened a suspicious-looking letter with a California postmark and a batch of white powder poured out. A note inside warned Olbermann, who's a frequent critic of President Bush's policies, that it was payback for some of his on-air shtick. The caustic commentator panicked and frantically called 911 at about 12:30 a.m., sources told The Post's Philip Messing. An NYPD HazMat unit rushed to Olbermann's pad on Central Park South, but preliminary tests indicated the substance was harmless soap powder. However, that wasn't enough to satisfy Olbermann, who insisted on a checkup. He asked to be taken to St. Luke's Hospital, where doctors looked him over and sent him home. Whether they gave him a lollipop on the way out isn't known. Olbermann had no comment.

-----
And as for what actually happened...

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/28/olbermann-the-ny-post-may-have-interfered-with-a-federal-investigation/

[sam i am]

Interesting....

Isn't this the same guy y'all were lionizing not long ago for his long-winded take on Bush and the Iraq situation recently?

Hmmm.....

[bilbo]

The Post is a tabloid rag.
Olbermann rules.

Who would Jesus waterboard?

[kaiser soze]

Interesting....

Isn't this the same guy y'all were lionizing not long ago for his long-winded take on Bush and the Iraq situation recently?

Hmmm.....

and you champion a guy who's base like to terrorize people

terror suspects beware....

unless your a bush fan then go about your day, ho hum it's just frat boy fun

[DroppinScience]

Interesting....

Isn't this the same guy y'all were lionizing not long ago for his long-winded take on Bush and the Iraq situation recently?

Hmmm.....

You didn't send the letter now, did you? :eek:

[Bob]

Interesting....

Isn't this the same guy y'all were lionizing not long ago for his long-winded take on Bush and the Iraq situation recently?

Hmmm.....

i'm sorry, what's changed?

[sam i am]

Just a quick note on "torture:"

The Geneva Convention is clear on the distinction between armed forces of another country in uniform (subject to all the rules and regulations of the Convention), enemy civilians (subject to many, but not all of the rules and regulations), and enemy combatants NOT in uniforms (subject to NONE of the rules and regulations of the Geneva Convention).

Clarity sucks for demagogues.

[sam i am]

i'm sorry, what's changed?

Nothing. He's still the lame idiot he was before, unless his ravings agree with the majority of posters on this board who are so anti-Bush we often wonder if they're pathological here on the other side. :D :p

[sam i am]

The Post is a tabloid rag.
Olbermann rules.

Who would Jesus waterboard?

waterboarding ain't all that bad. Try electrodes to sensitive body parts, live decapitations, improvised explosive devices that kill women and children, etc. et al.

Yep, waterboarding looks HORRIBLE compared to what the other side has done, is doing, and will do to further their agenda :rolleyes:

[STANKY808]

Just a quick note on "torture:"

The Geneva Convention is clear on the distinction between armed forces of another country in uniform (subject to all the rules and regulations of the Convention), enemy civilians (subject to many, but not all of the rules and regulations), and enemy combatants NOT in uniforms (subject to NONE of the rules and regulations of the Geneva Convention).

Clarity sucks for demagogues.

But I thought your Supreme Court ruled the conventions do apply?

This is, without question, the single most significant Supreme Court ruling to date dealing with the war on terror. The ruling's most substantial point is that all non-citizen prisoners are protected by the Geneva Conventions. This essentially renders illegal the Bush administration's program of indefinite detention, mild torture, and extraordinary rendition, calling on the administration to treat all detainees in a manner consistent with international human rights standards.

http://civilliberty.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=civilliberty&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourtus.gov%2Fopinions% 2F05pdf%2F05-184.pdf

[sam i am]

But I thought your Supreme Court ruled the conventions do apply?

This is, without question, the single most significant Supreme Court ruling to date dealing with the war on terror. The ruling's most substantial point is that all non-citizen prisoners are protected by the Geneva Conventions. This essentially renders illegal the Bush administration's program of indefinite detention, mild torture, and extraordinary rendition, calling on the administration to treat all detainees in a manner consistent with international human rights standards.

http://civilliberty.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=civilliberty&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourtus.gov%2Fopinions% 2F05pdf%2F05-184.pdf

Ok, this opinion is specific to this particular detainee, not to ALL detainees.

Plus, it doesn't necessarily set a precedent whereby all detainees can assert nor receive the same rights.

[YoungRemy]

Just a quick note on "torture:"

The Geneva Convention is clear on the distinction between armed forces of another country in uniform (subject to all the rules and regulations of the Convention), enemy civilians (subject to many, but not all of the rules and regulations), and enemy combatants NOT in uniforms (subject to NONE of the rules and regulations of the Geneva Convention).

Clarity sucks for demagogues.


what does this have to do with the impedement of an FBI investigation and the NY Post's subsequent failure to properly report the information?

this story is about a news anchor who received a threatening letter in a post 9/11 society and Rupert Murdoch running a false story/smear campaign...


I'm just curious, did you bother to read the Post blurb or watch Keiths response?

I really dont understand where you are going with your argument, is all...

[STANKY808]

Ok, this opinion is specific to this particular detainee, not to ALL detainees.

Plus, it doesn't necessarily set a precedent whereby all detainees can assert nor receive the same rights.


Funny that the summary I included seems to be of the mind that the decision applies to all detainees. Do you have a link to a different take on the same decision.

And my understanding as to the legal process is that such a decision would be precedent for other cases.

[Echewta]

I'm sure the current bill being passed in the house and senate will allow the "battlefield" to include every country at anytime since the "war" on terror will never cease.

[Bob]

Nothing. He's still the lame idiot he was before, unless his ravings agree with the majority of posters on this board who are so anti-Bush we often wonder if they're pathological here on the other side. :D :p

i don't understand then, why'd you say

Isn't this the same guy y'all were lionizing not long ago for his long-winded take on Bush and the Iraq situation recently?

as though to imply that we (well not me, i really haven't listened to him) no longer like him?

[King PSYZ]

I wonder how Rupert would react if he got the same letter?

Hey all, according to the NY Post this is all fine and dandy, so lets all send Rupert some letters with Borax!

[bilbo]

The fact that anyone(whether it be a moron like our friend here, or any other sane person) is arguing the merits of torture in this country is ludicrous.

Sheeple are amusing to watch.

[sam i am]

The fact that anyone(whether it be a moron like our friend here, or any other sane person) is arguing the merits of torture in this country is ludicrous.

Sheeple are amusing to watch.

You say po-ta-TO - I say po-TA-to.

There's "torture" : waterboarding, slapping, sleep deprivation, cold rooms.

Then there's "TORTURE" : live beheadings on T.V., improvised explosive devices that kill, maim, and disfigure innocent women and children, acid thrown on women who refuse to wear burqas or show too much ankle, genital mutilation, beatings with objects, closed fist punching, killing.

Ask any of the thousands of victims of the current Sunni-Shiite tortures or Daniel Pearl or Sadaam's chemical warfare victims if they got the rights of the Geneva Convention. Ask them if they had a trial with a judge, jury, and defense lawyer. Ask them if they were given Bibles or Korans and clean food, water, and bathrooms prior to their torturing or killing.

When the "other side" plays by the same rules as civilized nations, then they are entitled to the same rights and defenses.

As it stands, we give them WAAAAAAYYY more rights and defenses then we can ever expect if we fall into their hands.

Ask the civilians in the World Trade Centers if they had the chance to defend themselves from the "torture" of burning alive or jumping from 80 stories up. Ask the civilians on the trains in Madrid or the subways in London. Ask the Bali bombing victims, or the embassies in Africa.

When you get the answers, come back and bleat about the "poor" savages who perpetrate, plan, and execute these crimes.

So sorry we "tortured" you by denying you sleep or putting you in a cold room or slapped your stupid-ass face for planning to kill, maim, and dismember civilians.....here's your attorney and great housing and food and clothing and "rights" you don't freaking deserve....

Go ahead, bilbo, align yourself with THEM....you only show your true colors.

[King PSYZ]

and what does all of that have to do with someone sending a prank letter to Olbermann and Murdoch's paper calling him out?

[sam i am]

and what does all of that have to do with someone sending a prank letter to Olbermann and Murdoch's paper calling him out?

Oh, brother.

Be a BIT dynamic in your conversation, please.

[YoungRemy]

Oh, brother.

Be a BIT dynamic in your conversation, please.


seemed like an honest question that I asked a few days ago and you are still ignoring...

bottom line, if you want to define torture in a thread about a smear campaign by Rupert Murdoch, people are going to ask you what your point is...

you dont seem to get it, do you?

its not "what" you are arguing, its "why"?

[sam i am]

seemed like an honest question that I asked a few days ago and you are still ignoring...

bottom line, if you want to define torture in a thread about a smear campaign by Rupert Murdoch, people are going to ask you what your point is...

you dont seem to get it, do you?

its not "what" you are arguing, its "why"?

I was answering, and expanding upon, points made above by bilbo and kaiser soze.

Read the whole thread and you'll get the context.

Or, don't.

I don't really care.

[YoungRemy]

I was answering, and expanding upon, points made above by bilbo and kaiser soze.

Read the whole thread and you'll get the context.

Or, don't.

I don't really care.

if you actually had anything to contribute I could put it into context

lets analyze the whole thread as you suggest

Interesting....

Isn't this the same guy y'all were lionizing not long ago for his long-winded take on Bush and the Iraq situation recently?

Hmmm.....

it sure is... what does that have to do with anything? he was the victim of a terror scare and a subsequent smear campaign...


we all agree this is, indeed, the same guy.. well done on your observation...

then you provided us with a definition of torture out of the blue...

okay, we arent talking about the Geneva convention, we're not talking about torture. you wanna talk context? then contribute something about the topic next time...

do you want to talk about The NY Post and it's response to the Olbermann threat or do you want to whine about the definition of torture?

[sam i am]

^^^^

I'm so sorry that I took the conversation in a dynamic direction based on the comments of a few above.

I apologize with all heartfel sincerity for my inexplicable lack of conformity to your ideas of how the thread should go.

Have a nice day! :)

[STANKY808]

You say po-ta-TO - I say po-TA-to.

There's "torture" : waterboarding, slapping, sleep deprivation, cold rooms.

Then there's "TORTURE" : live beheadings on T.V., improvised explosive devices that kill, maim, and disfigure innocent women and children, acid thrown on women who refuse to wear burqas or show too much ankle, genital mutilation, beatings with objects, closed fist punching, killing.

Ask any of the thousands of victims of the current Sunni-Shiite tortures or Daniel Pearl or Sadaam's chemical warfare victims if they got the rights of the Geneva Convention. Ask them if they had a trial with a judge, jury, and defense lawyer. Ask them if they were given Bibles or Korans and clean food, water, and bathrooms prior to their torturing or killing.

When the "other side" plays by the same rules as civilized nations, then they are entitled to the same rights and defenses.

As it stands, we give them WAAAAAAYYY more rights and defenses then we can ever expect if we fall into their hands.

Ask the civilians in the World Trade Centers if they had the chance to defend themselves from the "torture" of burning alive or jumping from 80 stories up. Ask the civilians on the trains in Madrid or the subways in London. Ask the Bali bombing victims, or the embassies in Africa.

When you get the answers, come back and bleat about the "poor" savages who perpetrate, plan, and execute these crimes.

So sorry we "tortured" you by denying you sleep or putting you in a cold room or slapped your stupid-ass face for planning to kill, maim, and dismember civilians.....here's your attorney and great housing and food and clothing and "rights" you don't freaking deserve....

Go ahead, bilbo, align yourself with THEM....you only show your true colors.

Right. And everyone subjected to this treatment is guilty of something? Oh right, you're not sure til you torture them. Nice circle you have there.

And what to think of those members of the American Armed Forces that ask this kind of torture not be countenanced as it leaves them open to more abuses on the battlefield?

And I don't even know where to start with the whole "they do worse things than us" line of reasoning.

[Bob]

^^^^

I'm so sorry that I took the conversation in a dynamic direction based on the comments of a few above.

I apologize with all heartfel sincerity for my inexplicable lack of conformity to your ideas of how the thread should go.

Have a nice day! :)

so you don't have anything else to say about it or...

i honestly am confused about what you meant, and you're avoiding the question, come back to us sam