| 0 |
Subject: Today's News & Views (9/13)
Posted by: Perm Dude
- Leader [28861216] Thu, Sep 13, 09:59
The other thread was getting way too long to load up!
pd |
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.] |
| 157 | Ender
ID: 13443221
Thu, Sep 13, 22:59
|
JKP, I understood completely what you were saying. I just know there are people out there who let the actions and words of these men color and affect their attitudes to any person who calls themself a Christian. These men may well be Christians, but they do not speak for all of them. And it is important to remember that they like all Chirstian carry the same baggage and tendencies as the rest of humanity. We are all frail and sinners by nature and are far from perfect.
|
| 158 | puckprophet
ID: 52712723
Thu, Sep 13, 23:07
|
am i missing something?? most of you seem to be refering to muslims , when it appears to be islamic fundamentalists responsible for this heinous act...
|
| 159 | KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 266182910
Thu, Sep 13, 23:10
|
azdbacker, I give you Genesis 4:3-15 3 At harvesttime Cain brought to the LORD a gift of his farm produce, 4 while Abel brought several choice lambs from the best of his flock. The LORD accepted Abel and his offering, 5 but he did not accept Cain and his offering. This made Cain very angry and dejected. 6 "Why are you so angry?" the LORD asked him. "Why do you look so dejected? 7 You will be accepted if you respond in the right way. But if you refuse to respond correctly, then watch out! Sin is waiting to attack and destroy you, and you must subdue it." 8 Later Cain suggested to his brother, Abel, "Let's go out into the fields." F13 And while they were there, Cain attacked and killed his brother. 9 Afterward the LORD asked Cain, "Where is your brother? Where is Abel?""I don't know!" Cain retorted. "Am I supposed to keep track of him wherever he goes?" 10 But the LORD said, "What have you done? Listen – your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground! 11 You are hereby banished from the ground you have defiled with your brother's blood. 12 No longer will it yield abundant crops for you, no matter how hard you work! From now on you will be a homeless fugitive on the earth, constantly wandering from place to place." 13 Cain replied to the LORD, "My punishment F14 is too great for me to bear! 14 You have banished me from my land and from your presence; you have made me a wandering fugitive. All who see me will try to kill me!" 15 The LORD replied, "They will not kill you, for I will give seven times your punishment to anyone who does." Then the LORD put a mark on Cain to warn anyone who might try to kill him. So the breakdown (layman's terms) is: Cain killed Abel, God banished him, Cain knew that others would kill him in retaliation for killing Abel, and God basically said, "That is not for them to do." Sounds pretty cut and dry to me. God says that he's the one with the final judgement about death.
|
| 160 | winmiller
Sustainer
ID: 107452613
Thu, Sep 13, 23:15
|
puckprophet,
A Muslim is someone who adheres to the Islamic faith. We are talking about the same thing.
|
| 161 | azdbacker
Donor
ID: 51392423
Thu, Sep 13, 23:19
|
KKB, if you wish for me to respond with biblical passages I will do so tomorrow, from the New Testament, that portion of the bible addressed to the people living after Jesus fulfilled the law. However, unless you know that the New Testament is directed at us, while the Old Testament is meant for our learning, you will always be confused.
Ender, right on in #151.
|
| 162 | Ender
ID: 13443221
Thu, Sep 13, 23:20
|
KKB, Romans Chapter 13 is extremely relevant to our situation. Please give it a look in its entirety for full context, but pay particular attention to verses 1 and 4.
|
| 163 | rockafellerskank
Donor
ID: 4911539
Thu, Sep 13, 23:21
|
anyone that things aren't going to change is mistaken.
here is an example of wht types of behavior is being spawned
I beleive that the terrorists have won. Our way of life IS changed. Retaliation cannot undo what has been done.
rfs
|
| 164 | azdbacker
Donor
ID: 51392423
Thu, Sep 13, 23:33
|
Ender, again, right on.
|
| 165 | puckprophet
ID: 52712723
Thu, Sep 13, 23:40
|
winmiller , thanks ...perhaps i should have read this
|
| 166 | Madman
ID: 218371323
Fri, Sep 14, 00:01
|
PD -- nope, no mixed metaphor. A "Road to Hoe" is a common term used to describe a difficult path. I bet it dates back (in America) to the frontier days when they had to clear trees and roots and things from roadways. Pure guess, however. To prove I have company in this idiocy:
Hoya article
The arbiter of the Enlish language, Sports Illustrated (check out the caption)
;)
|
| 167 | Sandlot
Donor
ID: 59832108
Fri, Sep 14, 00:03
|
Ender, azd - couldn't agree more with your recent posts.
On the subject of judging, which I as a believer in Christ constantly struggle with, I remember the words of Jesus himself. "How can you say to your brother, `Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." (Luke 6:41-43) Personally, I sometimes 'judge' the 'sins' of others to feel better about myself, forgetting about the sin I harbor in my own life. It is important for me to always remember that I've got plenty of sin to overcome in my life before I go around pointing out the faults of others.
Were Falwall's comments offensive, inappropriate and ill-timed. Perhaps so. Many people see some Christians as extreme and intolerant. They delight in pointing out the faults in their lives and call them hypocrites. Well yes, if my life is examined next to the model of Jesus Christ, then I am indeed a hypocrite. I fall well short of the example He left. But I can't hope to ever come close to living as He did. I still sin in many of the same ways a non-believer does. In fact, I constantly struggle with sinful actions and thoughts. What's the difference? I've accepted God's forgiveness: His grace, freely given, my sin-debt fully paid on the cross by His Son Jesus Christ. Forgiven, but not perfect - not even close.
Another perspective on judging comes from Matthew 7:1 - "Do not judge, or you too will be judged," Jesus said. However, scrutinizing the actions of others doesn't absolve them from paying a price for their misdeeds. I remember counseling at a junior high Christian camp several years back. Our guest speaker was Jerry Huson, the baseball coach at Biola University (Christian college in SoCal). The one phrase that was burned into my mind from that week was this - you can choose your sin, but you can't choose your consequences. I can choose to murder someone, I can choose to steal, or whatever. I can repent of those actions and be forgiven for them. That doesn't mean I won't still be held accountable for those actions by the world.
In the same way, these terrorists have IMO sinned against man and against God. They will not be honored by Allah for their atrocities. As has been pointed out, even the Islamic faith doesn't condone murder or suicide. We have the right to punish them for their actions, but the ultimate judging belongs to One alone.
Man, I could go on and on regarding so many of the subjects brought up tonight, but it would be too much reading and I might ramble too much!
Regardless of the difference of beliefs and opinins among us, it has been informative and healing reading and posting with all of you. Thank you all for sharing with each other. Thank you very much.
|
| 168 | azdbacker
Donor
ID: 51392423
Fri, Sep 14, 00:27
|
Sandlot, I am pleased to see that there are more believers who truly understand the Bible than I thought. Judging from here, it appears to be almost 5 percent. With God's guidance, we will someday see a majority of knowledgeable believers, who truly know the power and peace of mind that comes with actual understanding of God's Word. God bless you and protect you - as we know he does.
|
| 169 | Doug
ID: 0737311
Fri, Sep 14, 02:39
|
To our 11th President - I 100% concur, things like what Falwell said have such a visceral effect, espeically coming from someone so high-profile who in no way represents the majority of Christians in this country. For me, the same goes for so-called-Christian fundamentalists, yet they are notoriously the most quoted and visible element, which is partially the fault of the media, and partially that of the more moderate masses. They don't typically make as much of a concerted effort to draw attention to themselves as fundamentalists do, and because they aren't as confrontational, it doesn't make for good entertainment... errr... news.
"I believe non-Christians see things like this, and it only reinforces their assumptions about religion in general." Exactly... in fact, many of my friends feel precisely this way, and sometimes tease me about the fact that I am a Christian. I always have to explain that I reject fundamentalism... be it Christian, Islamic, or any other religion. They're different religions, but often the same basic small-mindedness and intolerance of free thought pervades... and often the world and the complicated issues within it are simplified to a matter of black v. white, us v. them, good v. evil, etc. My friends are usually suprised the first time I explain to them that fundamentalism is not the same as Christianity for many people, as their perceptions are that ALL Christians think that way. I can see why they would think that. And then when they realize I'm reasonable about my faith, they have a hard time poking fun anymore. A couple have even started to more fully explore their own spirituality (good for them!), which I like to think is at least in small part thanks to our relationship.
But you know, I'm getting off the topic of this off-topic post, so I think I'll let it go now.
|
| 170 | Doug
ID: 0737311
Fri, Sep 14, 02:41
|
To our 11th President - I 100% concur, things like what Falwell said have such a visceral effect, espeically coming from someone so high-profile who in no way represents the majority of Christians in this country. For me, the same goes for so-called-Christian fundamentalists, yet they are notoriously the most quoted and visible element, which is partially the fault of the media, and partially that of the more moderate masses. They don't typically make as much of a concerted effort to draw attention to themselves as fundamentalists do, and because they aren't as confrontational, it doesn't make for good entertainment... errr... news.
"I believe non-Christians see things like this, and it only reinforces their assumptions about religion in general." Exactly... in fact, many of my friends feel precisely this way, and sometimes tease me about the fact that I am a Christian. I always have to explain that I reject fundamentalism... be it Christian, Islamic, or any other religion. They're different religions, but often the same basic small-mindedness and intolerance of free thought pervades... and often the world and the complicated issues within it are simplified to a matter of black v. white, us v. them, good v. evil, etc. My friends are usually suprised the first time I explain to them that fundamentalism is not the same as Christianity for many people, as their perceptions are that ALL Christians think that way. I can see why they would think that. And then when they realize I'm reasonable about my faith, they have a hard time poking fun anymore. A couple have even started to more fully explore their own spirituality (good for them!), which I like to think is at least in small part thanks to our relationship.
But you know, I'm getting off the topic of this off-topic post, so I think I'll let it go now.
|
| 171 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Fri, Sep 14, 05:37
|
JAMES K POLK (post 152)
Re the talking head shows, I did not equate those with "news" but they are indeed "news media" types. However, as I stated, I have NOT been watching them anyway.
If you want to blast me for taking the NEWS media to task for spreading rumor as fact and speculation as hype this week, then take me to task for observing the following reported "facts" on the major networks this week (ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX). These are some that I recall; they were on the major networks; they were reported as FACT; and they were all bs:
a car bomb blew up outside the State Dept on Tuesday
a highjacked plane crashed into Camp David Tuesday
two planes crashed into the Pentagon Tuesday
Bin Laden is under "house arrest" in Afghanistan
the Old Exec Office Building had to be evacuated (this one was breathlessly being reported on one major channel 30 minutes AFTER Ari Fleischer had specifically stated in a press briefing that it did not happen)
There were quite a few more that I saw: these are the ones I can recall off the top of my head.
Some of these were even inserted into the scrolling list of "facts" at the bottom of the screens, to keep viewers up-to-date with the latest "news".
As I said, the news people have gotten the BASIC story out. But it has been accompanied this week by a pile of incorrect "facts". It has APPEARED to be "throw anything out there that MIGHT be true, and we will erase it if it turns out to be false." If that offends you, don't get mad at me - instead, get mad at the news people that are doing it.
|
| 172 | sarge33rd
ID: 25818711
Fri, Sep 14, 06:37
|
ref post 136: THAT is exactly what I have been saying from the onset. Politicians choose words very carefully and deliberately. With the Pres, Colin Powell, W Bennett et al, stressing 'WAR'... trust me, there will be little or no juris-prudence involved here. This is not and will not be treated as a crime. Rather, it will be treated as a declaration of war and the response will befit such a declaration. Hence the invoking of Chapt 5 of the Washington Treaty by NATO.
(had to reply since someone finally woke-up and realized that Washington is saying the same thing I've been calling for, over the past 3 days.)
|
| 173 | David
ID: 424281210
Fri, Sep 14, 06:54
|
Ender,
You missed my point entirely. I specifically did not state who should do this but it should be done. And I speak from experience as my Father was in the NSA, and I had numerous interactions with the intelligence community while in the military. Intelligence agencies IMO often hide behind their cloak of secrecy. This is fine as long as they achieve results. Fialure to do so will result in others in the government getting involved in how they run their organizations. Checks and balnces exist in the government for a reason.
|
| 174 | KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 266182910
Fri, Sep 14, 06:58
|
Ender & azdbacker, I will never claim to know everything, nor even a majority and barely "a little bit" about the Bible, so please indulge me a bit. Most of what I know is from Sunday sermons, etc. and those haven't been long enough in my life for me to have the extent of knowledge that others have on the subject. Again, I ask that you just bear with me as I just try to learn. Ender, I read the passage you pointed to and it does seem to put the Goverments in charge of judgement and punishment, but it says nothing with regard to us "common folk". Forgive me as I use the "New Translation" for it's a bit easier for me to read and understand (obviously): 1 Obey the government, for God is the one who put it there. All governments have been placed in power by God. 2 So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow. 3 For the authorities do not frighten people who are doing right, but they frighten those who do wrong. So do what they say, and you will get along well. 4 The authorities are sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for you will be punished. The authorities are established by God for that very purpose, to punish those who do wrong. So this obviously leaves us following our leaders in condemning the terrorists and, presumably, going after them. It's just such a gray area to me where God says (just verses later) "9 For the commandments against adultery and murder and stealing and coveting – and any other commandment – are all summed up in this one commandment: "Love your neighbor as yourself." F81 10 Love does no wrong to anyone, so love satisfies all of God's requirements." and yet we can still follow our leaders (God's workers) and be able to kill others. Don't get me wrong. I still have a very strong feeling that those who did this need to pay for what they did. I just don't know where we, as people, come into play and when it becomes "ok". I imagine the breakdown is something like this: It's not ok for you, as a soul individual, to be judge and executioner, however if that is what your government, people whom God has put in place to do his deeds, has determined needs your help, then you are to provide it. Partially on the right track?
|
| 175 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Fri, Sep 14, 08:19
|
KKB
You did not address me, but I have studied the Bible in depth (and apparently have much the same frame-of-view as azdbacker and others in regards to what it says, it seems.)
Yes, you have it correct. Governments are indeed one of God's chosen means of dispensing judgment and justice - even though they are composed of humans. The rule of law is a provision of God, though it is imperfect at times because humans and their flaws are part of it.
Additionally, as INDIVIDUALS we are commanded (!) to love others, even our enemies. Not only are we told "not to hate" but we are told to love those who do evil toward us. (Yes, an "impossible" standard, but indeed that is the God-like standard: God loved and gave his only Son as a brutal sacrifice to pay for the sins of a world that hates God - including the sins committed in slaying Jesus himself. That is impossible love.) They are still to be held to account for their actions, but that is the role of governments to even the humanly scales as much as is possible.
In regards to the passage you earlier cited in Genesis, understand that this was early early early in human history, and God was the only overriding authority at that point. There were no nations, no governments to determine and dispense justice in any form. God has the ability to dispense the PERFECT amount of justice that is tempered with LOVE and includes forgiveness. He KNEW without any possibility of deception what was in Cain's heart - human governments are only capable of determining justice based on WHAT THE GUILTY PERSON DID.
|
| 176 | Ender
ID: 52438315
Fri, Sep 14, 08:22
|
KKB, let me start by saying that I hold no degree in theology. I have never attended seminary. AND do not read the Bible as much as I should. I know what I know from much the same sources as you. I do attend church on a regular basis and have even begun attending every week this summer (prior to that I attended regularly, but didn't go every single week). I have participated in Bible studies during college and sincerely wish to be part of them again.
Because of all the above, I attempt to have the utmost patience with those who read the Bible occasionally, and are often motivated to do so at times like these. Bearing all that in mind, I confess that as I read through Chapter 14 last night I struggled with it as well.
I do know that our government is placed in power by God. I do know that if I am Faithful to God, I will follow not only His Will, but the laws of my country. He has given the authority to punish and even kill (the word (forgive me for not knowing whether it is the original Greek or Hebrew text) which is translated to "sword" in the NIV translation literally meant the sword of decapitation, which shows that Paul was referring to Capitol Punishment).
I do not mean to imply that governments operate on a different set of laws than we do as individuals. However the truth of the matter is when we are talking about nations and principalities, there are larger issues. When another country, or in this case, entity attacks and takes innocent lives, there is no choice but to fight back lest more innocent lives be lost. I don't claim to know everything about Old Testament warfare, but God did authorize the use of force.
I firmly believe that I am to love my neighbor as myself. I am to turn the other cheek. I am to do unto others as I would have them to unto me. This is all at the individual level. It is not up to me to decide whether another man should live or die. God has not authorized me to do so, but according to Romans 13, he has authorized governments to punish evildoers. I think the persons responsible for this attack certainly fit that description.
Let me qualify all this by saying I am human. I base my Faith on my relationship with Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. I still have flaws. I still make mistakes (even big ones). My beliefs and understanding of the Bible are open to error. If their is a Biblical scholar who has a better grasp of these things, I will defer to their expertise. I can only speak from my own perspective, but I do base that perspective on the Bible and on the things God has shown me.
|
| 177 | KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 266182910
Fri, Sep 14, 08:23
|
F Gump, thanks, that helps me understand it a bit better.
|
| 178 | Ender
ID: 52438315
Fri, Sep 14, 08:47
|
F Gump, that was well stated.
|
| 179 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Fri, Sep 14, 09:02
|
KKB
Thanks, I am more than glad to help. I rarely wade into the Biblical or theological discussions on these boards, but I have been blessed with much opportunity in the past to study and learn the Bible in depth. I am glad for the opportunity to share.
ENDER
Thanks for the kind words.
The New Testament was written in Greek. The original word used there is "machairan" (that is as close as I can transliterate, root word is "machaira"). Though the context does indeed seem to support the idea of the sword being used as a tool of justice in this context, and thus capital punishment, it is not a "technical term" for a "decapitating sword" that is used here but rather the general word for a sword that is used frequently throughout the New Testament - at least 28 other times by my count. (I am not sure if there even IS a technical term for such a sword, frankly.) The Bible quite clearly supports such a "right" for governments, though, no question about it, and the contextual reading of the term as used in the passage here could easily be a reference to that legitimate right/responsibility.
|
| 180 | Ender
ID: 52438315
Fri, Sep 14, 09:14
|
F Gump, thanks for the clarification. You are just the type of scholar I was deferring to in my post. I thought the NT was Greek as it was the language of the Gentiles that Paul was writing to. I heard a pastor on Moody radio yesterday describe the sword as such and thought I would share.
|
| 181 | Judge Mental
ID: 5688147
Fri, Sep 14, 09:20
|
Wow, I'm suprised to see that this thread has also evolved (no pun intended) into a discussion of religion and I am impressed with the knowledge of religion displyed here. I think we all know so much more about each other than ever before.
Whether it's baseball or politics, the opinions put forth here are (for the most part) intelligent, compassionate and insightful, and I am thankful for the perspectives of all the gurupies.
As with the world, this message board has been changed forever.
|
| 182 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Fri, Sep 14, 09:23
|
ENDER
Thanks for sharing. There is much for all of us to learn, and I certainly don't know it all or even most of it: I am blessed to have been given great opportunity in my life. God desires his words to man to be understood, and the more we study and are open to the truth the more we are "rewarded" with that understanding. Re Moody radio, I am a preacher's kid (yeah, one of them! *LOL*) and my parents are both grads of Moody - Moody is a great disseminator of Biblical study to many.
|
| 183 | Sandlot
Donor
ID: 59832108
Fri, Sep 14, 10:05
|
F Gump - I think before I begin writing last night I was wanting to explain things the way you did. Very good job - coherent and easy to follow. Thanks
|
| 184 | 6-9 With The Afro
ID: 97969
Fri, Sep 14, 10:14
|
Interesting follow-up on Leo Pheonix, LOTS of people reported him:
Xinoehpoel follow-up
|
| 185 | 6-9 With The Afro
ID: 97969
Fri, Sep 14, 10:17
|
PS: Just sharing a tidbit I've found and thought might be of interest. Please consider the source of the follow up before taking this as hard proof or before attacking me - thanks!
|
| 186 | Ender
ID: 52438315
Fri, Sep 14, 10:21
|
I have a hard time trusting anything I read from a website titled "Bootysmack.com"
|
| 187 | biliruben
Sustainer
ID: 3502218
Fri, Sep 14, 10:22
|
This is what I call unamerican:
In Denton, Tex., the police are investigating a firebomb attack that damaged the Islamic Society of Denton's mosque early yesterday. In suburban Cleveland, Sukhwant Singh, a Sikh priest who lives at the Guru Gobind Sikh temple, awakened early Wednesday to find bottles filled with gasoline hurled in the temple's windows and flames pouring out. No arrests have been made.
In Louisiana, schools in Jefferson Parish were closed on Wednesday after officials reported that students of Middle Eastern origin were being taunted and harassed.
On Long Island, a market in Smithtown owned by a native of Pakistan was the target of what the police considered a probable arson attack Wednesday morning. In Ronkonkoma, a man was arrested on suspicion of waving a pellet gun and shouting obscenities at a South Asian gas station worker. And in South Huntington on Wednesday night, a man was arrested after the police said he tried to run down a Pakistani woman. The police said he screamed that he was "doing this for my country."
Early Wednesday in Manhattan, a Sikh man said he was pounced on by three white men yelling "terrorist" at Broadway and 52nd Street. Later in the morning, three Sikh men waiting at Grand Central Terminal for a Connecticut-bound train were stopped and had their bags searched by the police.
On Wednesday night, more than 100 people, including many teenagers, held a march near a mosque in Bridgeview, Ill., near Chicago. Some waved American flags and shouted, "U.S.A.!"
Shame.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/national/14ISLA.html
|
| 188 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Fri, Sep 14, 10:22
|
SANDLOT
The subject of "justice" and how it should be administered, from a Biblical perspective, is not an easy one. I don't know all the answers either - we are all just sharing the bits of understanding we have been fortunate enough to learn so far in our best way possible. I have found that the best "answers" come from personally going back and examining what the Bible itself actually says, though.
Thank you for the kind words. Do not downplay your own words on how we should act on a person-to-person basis (in 167), however; they contained much much wisdom and were very insightful.
|
| 189 | 6-9 With The Afro
ID: 97969
Fri, Sep 14, 10:43
|
bili-
Sadly a disaster like this leaves people wanting to react and a situation like this where terrorists live amongst us in cells makes it hard to rule out anybody. I've heard these cells become so ingrained in a comunnity that they're even on PTA boards. That's sick. A friend of mine says there's a family that lives near him that has a framed picture of Bin Laden hanging on their wall. That may be their right, but I can't say I'd blame anyone who fire bombed them. People are scared and sadly profiling people like this is the only thing most people have to go on. It is indeed sad but also understandable in this time of fear.
|
| 190 | Doug
ID: 19850280
Fri, Sep 14, 14:19
|
You can't say you'd blame them? I certainly can blame people for such ignorant acts. Taking violent action because of displaced anger is inexcusable. Yes, I can understand how those feelings might exist amongst someone who doesn't want to take the time to fully understand the complexities of what's going on, or that OMB might represent something other than a terrorist to some people. Furthermore, have they checked if these people continue to display his photo? And asked what it means to them? I had a friend in college who had a photo of Hussein on his wall, not because he supported him, but because the photo made him laugh (it reminded him of the custodian at his High School). Anyway, to feel hatred is understandable if that's your trip, but to act on those ungrounded feelings is entirely unpermissable. Period.
|
| 191 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Fri, Sep 14, 14:28
|
6-9, Doug said all that is needed, but I would add that by your reasoning, you "can't blame" and should "understand" and the hijackers/suicide bombers.
There is no excuse for attacking the innocent, be it following religious orders or enacting revenge.
|
| 192 | azdbacker
Donor
ID: 51392423
Fri, Sep 14, 15:08
|
Great comments by Ender and F Gump. Also KKB for giving me a little perspective. When these threads started Tuesday, I was called a voice of reason for a moment. Unfortunately, I sometimes get a little out of control with the expression of my deep beliefs, and I have been a somewhat guilty of that in the last couple days. I have learned a lot that has helped me tremendously in my life, and am eager to pass that on. Sadly, I often don't have the patience necessary to speak God's Word with LOVE, instead I sometimes become confrontational - but I'm working on it.
God Bless.
|
| 193 | James K Polk
ID: 19351290
Fri, Sep 14, 19:59
|
F Gump 171 -- not angry at you for your opinion, just happen to think it's an ill-informed one. You seem to not be able to see the forest for the trees.
As an experiment, wander over to washingtonpost.com, MSNBC.com, abcnews.com, chicagotribune.com, bostonglobe.com, etc. etc., and take a look at the coverage they've provided. Then tell me which stories are merely blather and speculation, and which stories are important, compelling, fascinating, groundbreaking and so on. You know, the kind of stories that many people, yourself included, have been linking to in these threads.
I have not only been watching dozens of hours of television coverage during and after this event, but I've been working 12-hour days (starting less than an hour after the first crash) and reading literally hundreds of stories. I can honestly say that the coverage of this event -- in all its depth and breadth -- has been unprecedented. I'm proud to have been a part of it, because I believe it's important, and a noble way to help the American people understand and be able to not only grieve for what happened, but also get through it.
So of course I'm disturbed when someone chooses to focus on the minute fraction of the coverage that has been in error. Some of those things aren't that hard to understand, frankly -- they came out of initial chaos, like the State Dept. car bomb report, then were immediately corrected. If it's a matter of having the attacks reported instantly and running the risk that you correct a small part of the report, I think most people will gladly take it. In fact, if the media hadn't been on the air so fast, based on the stories I've read of people escaping the WTC and the apparent heroes that tried to retake the flight near Pittsburgh, there may have been even more casualties.
Another widely reported story that was later retracted involved the apparent rescue of five firefighters from the WTC rubble. This one was a source problem -- NYC officials gave this exact story to the press, and one reporter was even standing next to a firefighter as he was relating details of the rescue over a cell phone.
So those two stories were widely reported, and then quickly corrected. Absolutely no lasting damage, and perfectly understandble. So be it.
The other reports you criticize were NOT widely reported, and a couple were likely simple human error or misspoken words -- the report of two planes hitting the Pentagon rather than the WTC, and the plane hitting Camp David rather than Camp David being a possible target. Like I said, I've been immersed in this from the beginning, and I've seen neither of these reports. So I know they weren't out there widely at all.
As for bin Laden's house arrest, something tells me you need to pay more attention to the way things are reported. First of all, very few Western media outlets even mentioned this. I happened to be handling all the bin Laden coverage for my paper last night, and not one of the stories filed, and I read dozens of then, reported it as fact. Several specifically refuted the rumor, in fact. The reason the rumor was out there in the first place was because an online Arabic newspaper reported it -- and that source has been cited in every instance of the "house arrest" story I've seen.
All that said, the news people have gotten FAR more than the basic story out. The media has reported on, in random order and off the top of my head: how people can help, through blood donations, donating to Red Cross or local fund-raisers; local Muslim community reaction; measures taken to protect Arab-American communities; background on Osama bin Laden, including links to CIA; information on his training camps in Afghanistan; information on specific terrorists in his network, as well as the historic spread of the network; background on bin Laden's previous attacks, and those that were foiled; U.S. relations with Mideast states; security upgrades at airports nationwide; how a National Guard call-up would affect specific communities; what the National Guardsmen would be doing; individual stories of survival from the WTC and the Pentagon; stories of relatives looking for the missing at the same buildings; reaction of world leaders after the attacks; reaction of religious leaders; specifics on the structural strengths and weaknesses of the WTC and Pentagon; the reaction of workers who still work in skyscrapers; the stories of rescue efforts; street scenes in lower Manhattan; increased fear of flying among Americans; the renewed consideration of trading freedoms for safety in the U.S.; security measures taken by other countries to fight terrorism; the economic impact of the attacks, on the airlines, on NYC and on the nation; details on companies with WTC offices trying to find employees; breakdowns of how many countries had victims involved; detail on the investigation process and how officials tracked down suspects; detail on the effort to identify bodies at WTC and Pentagon; the effects of the attacks on American sports and entertainment industries ...
I'm going to quit now, not because I can't think of more, but because I'm tired of typing them in. And remember, for each of these subjects, there were many stories by many outlets. No, I think it's safe to say the media has done far better than cover just the basics.
Like I said before, I'm not upset. And for the record, I don't simply disagree with whatever you say -- in fact I have great respect for all your other posts in this thread, and in other threads as well.
But I will always take you to task for inane, generalizing statements about the news media. And in that vein, I actually feel sorry for you, because it appears your opinion of the media has blinded you to the incredible effort that is going into the coverage of this event. If you choose to focus on the rare, quickly corrected errors that in most cases weren't even widespread in the first place, there's nothing I can do about it. If you choose to believe that a handful of human errors somehow outweighs, or even compromises more than a tiny bit, the enormous ongoing media effort, again, nothing I can do.
But your simple statement that, other than reporting the bare facts, the media has been a worthless pile of blather and speculation, is simply untrue. Demonstrably untrue, in fact. And absurd and offensive to anyone who has been working his or her butt off to make sure you and everyone else gets not only those basic facts, but all the stories I mentioned before, and more.
If you miss the forest for the trees, don't blame the news media, blame yourself.
|
| 194 | Roo
ID: 665497
Fri, Sep 14, 20:15
|
Competition: How many examples of ignorance can you find in the New York Times article mentioned by biliruben?
Despite W's inspirational "We should not hold one who is a Muslim responsible for an act of terror", there have been numerous "reports of arson (and) personal attacks".
"In Denton, Tex., the police are investigating a firebomb attack that damaged the Islamic Society of Denton's mosque early yesterday."
"In Louisiana, schools in Jefferson Parish were closed on Wednesday after officials reported that students of Middle Eastern origin were being taunted and harassed."
"On Long Island, a market in Smithtown owned by a native of Pakistan was the target of what the police considered a probable arson attack Wednesday morning. And in South Huntington on Wednesday night, a man was arrested after the police said he tried to run down a Pakistani woman. The police said he screamed that he was "doing this for my country.""
"On Wednesday night, more than 100 people, including many teenagers, held a march near a mosque in Bridgeview, Ill., near Chicago. Some waved American flags and shouted, "U.S.A.!"
Non-Muslims have also been subject to harrassment.
"In suburban Cleveland, Sukhwant Singh, a Sikh priest who lives at the Guru Gobind Sikh temple"
"Early Wednesday in Manhattan, a Sikh man said he was pounced on by three white men yelling "terrorist" at Broadway and 52nd Street. Later in the morning, three Sikh men waiting at Grand Central Terminal for a Connecticut-bound train were stopped and had their bags searched by the police."
"When an Amtrak train from Boston was stopped in Providence, R.I., on Wednesday, about 10 people were removed, held by the police and questioned for an hour and 40 minutes while the train idled in the station, the police and passengers said"
"Sher J. B. Singh, a telecommunications consultant, was one of three Sikh men escorted from the train at gunpoint, handcuffed and questioned about whether he had anything to do with the terrorism."
"Col. Richard T. Sullivan, chief of police in Providence, said his department had received a call from police and federal officials in Boston to search for men meeting a specific description. He said those detained included a Hispanic and an African- American. "They broadcast four Arabic males, so four Arabic males is what we are looking for," Colonel Sullivan said. "It's not ethnic on our part(?)"."
Singh = Sikh,
Sikh priest = Sikh,
Guru Gobind Sikh Temple = Sikh
Sikhism is a totally different religion to Islam, but to many "patriotic" Americans, including New York and Providence Police, a Sikh wearing a turban is Middle Eastern / Arabic / Islamic / terrorist suspect.
Mr. Singh was arrested for "possession of a concealed weapon." "He wore under his shirt a three-inch-long sheathed knife called a kirpan, which is traditionally carried by devout Sikh men."
As he said "I didn't anticipate that as a country we would become blind and just look at somebody suspiciously who looks or dresses in a certain way. I thought that if that would be the case, it wouldn't be the authorities, it would be the people, and the authorities would be there to support you."
And, probably not finally:
"Hours after the two airliners slammed into the World Trade Center, the phone at the mission (of Afghanistan to the United Nations) began ringing with death threats."
"Mr. Amin said many Americans do not understand that his mission does not represent the Taliban government in Kabul, but the embattled Islamic State of Afghanistan."
|
| 195 | BoSoxFan9
ID: 33518295
Fri, Sep 14, 21:27
|
Now that religion has come up, does anyone know of a reference book which compares the protestant faiths?
Also, isn't strange that just a couple of weeks ago the major focus was on a 14-year-old playing baseball against 12-year-olds? It was trivial then and completely forgotten about now.
|
| 196 | Sandlot
Donor
ID: 5343219
Fri, Sep 14, 21:52
|
there was a 14-year-old playing against 12-year-olds??? Here??
Sorry, bad attempt at ill-timed humor
|
| 197 | KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 266182910
Fri, Sep 14, 22:21
|
My fiancee made the comment earlier tonight, "Do you think Gary Condit is happy about the terrorist attacks?" Doubtful he's happy about it, but you get the idea.
|
| 198 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Fri, Sep 14, 23:48
|
JAMES K POLK
You choose to see the media's role as "getting most of it right" when they report so-called facts, with the task of cleaning it up later when the facts turn out to be untrue. As long as they have a good percentage, you don't mind.
I just happen to disagree. I think that when they have "unconfirmed reports" or "unsubstantiated rumor", they should say so. Some do, but some don't, and in so doing assert "facts" that never were. I think that is wrong.
All the items I cited were indeed false reports of facts. NONE were "misstatements" (such as a confusion of "Pentagon" for "WTC") as you try to explain away - they were just flat out wrong. But reported as "fact." And though you say you did not notice any of these errors, they were all reported on one or more of the major TV networks: FOX, CBS, ABC, or NBC. Because of their widespread reach, I would consider any of those to fit the definition of "widely reported": maybe you do not.
You said "As for bin Laden's house arrest, something tells me you need to pay more attention to the way things are reported. First of all, very few Western media outlets even mentioned this." JKP, I am paying attention: this was a scrolling "fact" on EVERY major TV network all morning. Don't take ME to task for that, and don't accuse me of somehow being confused or inattentive!!!
So I am forced, then, if I want "news", to take every report of fact and regard it as possibly error-filled, until EVENTUALLY the junk is sifted and removed. From the standpoint of a recipient of such "fcts", however, if what is reported as fact keeps being unreliable, then it leads me to be forced to mistrust it all.
Another example of crappy reporting, that I have seen and that further makes me leery: this report, which is typical of this story being disseminated, from CNN.com ...
PHOENIX, Arizona (AP) -- Three Northwest Airlines employees intentionally breached a security checkpoint at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix as flights resumed Thursday.
Two ground crew employees cleared the checkpoint with a pocketknife and a corkscrew while a pilot passed without proper identification, airport spokeswoman Suzanne Luber said.
"Once they did that, they turned around and said, 'Hey, look what we did,"' she said. Their point: to show that security gaps still exist days after terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, she said.
However, the report that they did this intentionally is blatantly false. My basis: I saw an interview with one of the 3 with Diane Sawyer this morning. In it, he said it was unintentional, it just happened, they noticed and went back. She tried to make it sound as if he and the other 2 had cooked up a scheme to "test" security, and he said "no it was an accidental thing" several times. But it is very widely reported that they somehow made a determination to "test" the security.
Having seen that interview, as well as an interview with the airport spokewoman cited by CNN, I can see where someone could LEAP to that idea. But obviously they did not check it out, and it was and continues to be false.
Is that a minor distinction? Maybe. But at this point, it is actually a lie: it just is not true, yet it is being reported as such. If I had not seen the interview myself, I would be led to believe that airline employees don't trust the security and are attempting to prove it is flawed: in this case, that is far from the truth.
Now, how can ANY news outlet say the words "intentional"? You can't even leap to that if you don't know, unless you are willing to "make it up" to get a good flavor to your story. Only a "minor" lie? Maybe. But why not just tell it as it is. Or say "we don't know if it was intentional or not"?
Anyhow, you seem to think that I should be willing to accept the concept that "most of it, when we say 'these are facts', will eventually turn out to be true". I don't, cause then I am left wondering which is the false part that has crept in. I have no way of knowing.
|
| 199 | James K Polk
ID: 19351290
Sat, Sep 15, 01:12
|
Problem: the report isn't necessarily blatantly false. There is a source discrepancy, because I saw this story last night with information on this being a planned security breach. Either this guy has changed his story from what he said at first, or this guy is a different member of the three and is saying something different, or ... well, I don't know. But anyhow, one guy talking to Diane Sawyer doesn't necessarily instantly refute all the other reporting that's been done. Messy, I know.
|
| 200 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Sat, Sep 15, 01:49
|
JAMES K POLK
I agree that it was (and is) REPORTED as intentional. I trust that the "source" is that airport security lady cited in CNN.com, who actually is NOT saying it was intentional, though her quoted words can be twisted or misconstrued to say as much. Do you have a different source that has EVER been cited? Or are you just making the asumption that there is a "source" who says it was intentional? If you want me to believe that this is not sloppy and/or false news reporting, convince me.
You say "one guy talking to Diane Sawyer doesn't necessarily instantly refute all the other reporting that's been done." WHAT OTHER REPORTING? You are a media insider: convince me with facts that you know there is ANY true "reporting" that was done in using the word "intentional." I see NOTHING-NADA-ZERO-ZIP-ZILCH to support your view.
|
| 201 | James K Polk
ID: 19351290
Sat, Sep 15, 02:06
|
I have spent quite a little time going back through the wire here, but unfortunately we've been cycling through about 1,000 stories a day right now and the stuff that I was reading last night just isn't there anymore. I've given it my best effort, but I cannot provide a link to a source.
All I can do is say that I was not making any assumptions -- I read last night a story that clearly laid out that this was a planned thing. You can choose whether or not you believe me; it doesn't matter to me. Just remember that you have cited more than a few TV reports that you couldn't provide any links to either. That's just the way it goes sometimes.
Now, the story I read last night might of course be changing. It's entirely possible that these guys were simply in a tither over what they'd just done, and talked it up to the reporter. Or that the security people misunderstood whether these three intentionally did what they did.
However, it is also entirely possible that this guy told Diane Sawyer that it was accidental because he's at risk of losing his job if he really did intentionally try to break security. That wouldn't surprise me at all.
And of course, there's no way to really know.
|
| 202 | James K Polk
ID: 19351290
Sat, Sep 15, 02:54
|
As for your first point in 198 --
No, I don't see the media's role as "getting most of it right," and mistakes being OK as long as we're right a high percentage of the time.
Of course we strive to be 100% accurate. What I'm trying to say is that I can understand that in covering such a chaotic, devastating, unprecedented event, perfection isn't going to happen. Especially in the intial hours, when speed actually was of the essence.
As for bin Laden's house arrest, I just don't buy that this was a "scrolling item" on every major network all morning. The rumors were already being denied Thursday night, I watched three networks Friday morning and never saw it. But if you saw it at all, and it did not include the word "reportedly" or some other note like that, of course that would be wrong.
I agree with you that when media outlets have unconfirmed reports, they should say so. And what I'm telling you is that, in the vast amount of coverage I've taken in during the past few days, I have seen great pains taken to do just that. Over and over. Is it possible that some reports have failed to do this? Of course it is. You seem to have seen some, and it's not like I've never it seen it myself.
Which brings me to this: I do not expect anyone, you included, to simply overlook media errors; they make me cringe as much as anyone. And I am not trying to say that in this event, or in any event for that matter, media coverage is perfect. That will never happen. We are human.
But what I have been trying to point out is that posts like 86 are just absurd generalizations. You are talking about an ocean of facts that have been reported. You are talking about an incredible depth of coverage, including the themes I listed in a previous post, and more. You are talking about the round-the-clock efforts that have given you every bit of information you know about this incident.
You have cited a handful of items that have been incorrectly reported. All of them, of course, for only a small amount of time -- ranging from a couple minutes to a couple hours -- until they were corrected. But still, you say that other than the bare facts, the media has been a worthless pile of speculation, and that the vast pile of it has just been plain false.
I can't stress this enough -- you are talking about such a minute fraction of the facts involved in the coverage of this event. And if you somehow feel that this means you must question everything, then you are ignoring the overwhelming amount of fantastic work that the media has done. The vital work that, in no hyperbole at all, has saved people's lives and helped the country come together.
So spend as much time being as skeptical as you want. But be careful about making such sweeping generalizations about the media, because your own extensive knowledge about this whole event belies your offensive, ill-informed opinion about the messengers.
-----------------------------
I have no idea what you do for a living, if you face high-pressure deadlines, if you have people who know little about what you do yet sit in judgment of everything you do. I have no idea if you consider what you do to be important, if you're proud of what you do, or if you know beyond doubt that people need what you provide. I have no idea if you believe your job is important enough that you'd work at it past midnight, every night, if that's when it had to be done, or if you'd take far less pay than you could make elsewhere. If any of these things are true about your job, however, I'm sure you'd get a little defensive about it too.
|
| 203 | F Gump
ID: 53837117
Sat, Sep 15, 03:34
|
JAMES K POLK
Your points are accepted and well-taken.
Only two minor points:
(1) I am certain that I saw the Bin Laden "house arrest" as a continuous scroll this morning, and not last night. The reason: I turned off the TV early last night (before 5) and did not turn it on again til about 7 this morning. It was indeed a scroll item at the bottom (where they update you on current "facts"), it was on at least 2 and maybe more of the major networks, and it lasted AT LEAST past the Ari Fleischer press conference (at whatever time that was).
(2) Regarding the airport security incident, the reports still are claiming it was "intentional." I see no corrections thus far. So, if there is a claim that it was "intentional", the source of such a "fact" should still be available for those who have access, I would think. The only first-hand source I have EVER seen says it is "hooey", though.
One further note about that, by the way: I watched the interview. It was not hard-hitting, or anything like that, just a friendly chat. The guy recited his story of what happened: we walked through, realized they missed what they should have caught, and went back to point it out. Sawyer was TRYING to make a point about how ingenious/insightful or somesuch the 3 were to PLAN something like that, and the guy was like "hey, it just happened". (That is the boiled down version, of course.) Very offhanded, actually "deflecting" what was an attempt to praise. If you had seen it, you would know exactly what I mean. I saw no defensiveness, only Sawyer trying to get him to make a point that was contrary to what happened - and then I see that the cnn.com site is calling it "intentional." That sort of combo is what makes me leery.
|
| 204 | sarge33rd
ID: 25818711
Sat, Sep 15, 07:46
|
Guys, if I might? The press has a job that is almost as difficult as that of an Intel Analyst. I've been trying to come up with an analogy that would accurately ( for the most part anyway) reflect just how tough it is. Best I can do is this....assume I take a dz or so, 5000 piece jigsaw puzzles which you've never seen. Then I dump all 60,000 pieces into a big bag, shake it up real good, and then let you pull out 500 pieces. Then, you have to tell me what all 12 completed puzzles look like. The press has to do this daily, Intel Analysts have to do this in order to make informed 'guesses' as to who plans on doing what, where and when.
If we want the press to report, facts...and only absolutely verified facts..fine. We can then read all about this event, in 2003 or so. In the meantime, lets allow them to do their jobs.
|
| 205 | Voodoo Child
ID: 57842922
Mon, Sep 17, 18:06
|
Re: Mentors/Post 67
This was forwarded to me by a friend today and I immediately thought of this thread..
|
| 206 | tomegun
ID: 3589611
Mon, Sep 17, 18:14
|
we have that picture posted at work. cool
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|
