You want high numbers? Google Antietam.

Stop killing GI's

...and there was much rejoicing in Leftist circles. It's 3000 death day! Break out the placards and the paper mache heads!

/

I have been getting emails from the antiwar groups about what they plan for the 3000 benchmark.
What a bunch of ghouls. They were literally drooling waiting for the number to hit. Then they also ask for donations in order to profit from war and encouraging our enemies which will lead to more deaths.

The fact that the soldier was from Texas warranted mention in the first line of the story. The AP takes pleasure in writing this.

Why aren't we bringing down the hammers of hell over there and quit F-ing around? Didn't Viet Nam teach us anything?

It's AP - who cares?

Crying about AP's slant = buying into it.

obscured by clouds

Look at what they have printed just waiting for the number to hit.
Leftie Plans for the Next Benchmark

I grimaced as I read the headlines today. Truly this is a grim milestone, especially coming on the last day of the year, as I prepare to make my annual pilgrimage to a New Year's Eve party.

Somewhere, Ed Grimley is weeping.

May that soldier's family have whatever peace is possible in this new year.

Just minutes before it ws 2, 999.

[Link: news.google.com...]

Among the tools used by the mainstream media to try to convince America that we should submit to Islamofascism, there is the tool of Ghoulish Numerology, also known as the Grim Milestone method.

Bunch of ghouls!

On another disturbing note, Danny Bonaduce's family is being harassed because of the "interview" he had with 9/11 conspiracy wacko John Conner.

[Link: www.thereligionofpeace.com...]

Another grim milestone - at least 7077 victims of the Jihadis.

Funny how this one doesn't get much press, isn't it.

4 armymarinemom

I have been getting emails from the antiwar groups about what they plan for the 3000 benchmark

We might have something planned for them too.

At the risk of a flurry of criticism, I'll ask an honest question here: Why does this particular story bother you guys?

If it's because the AP and its counterparts find a reason to make just about every U.S. death a "grim milestone," therefore constantly reminding America of the price it's paying, I'll buy that. That annoys me too. It's the spirit of the thing.

But why this particular story? I'd say reaching 3000 dead is probably worth a notice on the wire. To me that's 3000 heroes; maybe that's my interpretation of the fact, but then again facts are nice that way.

And from the Government of North Kores, this bizzare film.

[Link: www.robpongi.com...]

Hey Charles - I just noticed your changes on the front page - looks like that little green feetball is gonna score a perfect shot right into the glass! LOL!

Happy, Healthy and Prosperous New Year to Charles and all my lizard friends!

Sorry, dumb-ass me.

That was 7077 attacks.

16,708 Iraqi Civilian victims of the Jihad THIS YEAR.

Total victims in the last five years is Awful Damned Many.

Preview only helps if your brain is working.

#16 Cognito:

At the risk of a flurry of criticism, I'll ask an honest question here: Why does this particular story bother you guys?

If it's because the AP and its counterparts find a reason to make just about every U.S. death a "grim milestone," therefore constantly reminding America of the price it's paying, I'll buy that. That annoys me too. It's the spirit of the thing.

I don't speak for everyone here, but the reason this irritates me is the constant use of the "grim milestone" phrase. Is it horrible that 3,000 American servicement and women have been killed? Absolutely. Is it newsworthy? Of course. But how many "grim milestones" have the media trotted out over the past several years? It's way past time to give that tired, worn-out cliche a rest.

nosbumission

We might have something planned for them too.

I hope so. Families would like a say about our feelings concerning folks who use our Military for protests.

mr. pot, meet mr. kettle.

why speak of it if it irks you so?

# 13 Protagonist

Bunch of ghouls!

On another disturbing note, Danny Bonaduce's family is being harassed because of the "interview" he had with 9/11 conspiracy wacko John Conner.

The self-styled "truthers" are nothing more than willing servants of our enemies.

I could go on, but that would require the suggestion of violence.

# 16 Cognito

That deserves an honest answer. It's because those who push this stuff don't look at this as "3000 heros." They look at it as another opportunity to trot out the "grim milestone" headline in pursuit of an agenda that negates everything that soldier died for. Is that a satisfactory answer ?

The really big tally of the dead is the one we need to try to avoid: the one that will come from nuclear jihad.

That threat, today, comes from Iran. But if Iran gets the bomb, there will come hyper-proliferation, as the Arab countries react to a Persian nuclear capability by seeking their own nuclear weapons. That toll of the dead from nuclear jihad could be of unimaginable numbers, far far far higher than the "Grim Milestones" that the mainstream media are forever parading.

21 rabidsquirrel,

Haha -- you'll get no argument from me on that. I can't stand a cliché either. I'm not sure that most of the world would recognize "grim milestone" as a cliché, since they probably don't see the AP reports gathered into one place like this, but yeah -- better writing is always better.

#25 Mike C. - Hey Mike - don't know if he'll find it a satisfactory answer, but it is clearly THE answer.

Talk about FREEDOM FIGHTERS!

All 3000 were volunteers to help win freedom for an oppressed country run by a murderous tyrant.

Freedom - for people who hate us.

Maybe, we should start noting more prominently MSM "grim milestones"? You know, like when their stock loses another 25% in value?

25 Mike C.,

I'd say that answer makes sense. It sounds like my description of why this story is irritating, when set against the larger backdrop of a general media bias. Which is an interpretation by the reader, I suppose; the simple fact, taken for what it is -- 3000 dead -- remains open for readers to judge.

How's with you, realwest ?

jooly

We should keep track of the number of lies and false stories they've posted. What are we up to, 10,000?

Or should we just reset it at the beginning of each year?

28 realwest,

Hey. I'm right here. If you've got a point to make, I'm all ears. It's just conversation.

Here's a "grim milestone" for the press: Since the MSM is in all respects fifth columnists and have done everything to encourage our enemies to kill our soldiers, the MSM is responsible for X number of deaths in Iraq.

22 armymarinemom 12/31/2006 12:57PM PST

I hope so. Families would like a say about our feelings concerning folks who use our Military for protests.

We gave Lynne Stewart a nice warm welcome...

#16 Cognito 12/31/2006

But why this particular story? I'd say reaching 3000 dead is probably worth a notice on the wire. To me that's 3000 heroes; maybe that's my interpretation of the fact, but then again facts are nice that way.

Here's an assignment for you: Go find any newspaper clips from WWII about the various "grim milestones". When you can show me some of those, I'll believe that maybe this is an appropriate way to celebrate heroism.

Here's the stats I needed: The MSM aided in the deaths of at least 111 U.S. service members in December.

# 31 Cognito

When I graduated high school, it was roughly 250-300 American dead every freaking week.

37 E2M,

What are you saying? That there were no accounts of the death toll in World War II?

Okay. Well. Pursuing that logic... would it have been wise to proceed into a war without knowing the number of casualties?

Bear in mind: Like I said in my first post, I too find it annoying when people find every reason under the sun to talk up the bad aspects of the Iraq war.

#39 Mike C.

When I graduated high school, it was roughly 250-300 American dead every freaking week.

And the nightly news always reported summaries. Like a sports score. The MSM was seditious then, too.

The mainstream media likes to remind the public of the accumulated number of dead, because that is a way of making the public feel pain in order to submit to the war against islamofascism. But how can they constantly give the accumulated number, and pretend that they are offering "news"? The answer is the Grim Milestone method. Every time the accumulated number of dead reaches a number for which the Ghoulish Numerology Machine can find some match with something, that is an opportunity for the Grim Milestone "news" to be published.

We are in for a long war with islamofascism. Political Islam has been on the march, with some quiet periods, since its creation some 14 centuries ago. In the first century of its existence, the Arabs streamed out of Arabia with book and sword and conquered a large chunk of the world. It cannot stop, under political Islam's mandate to rule the world, until that goal is accomplished, or until the islamofascists give up on that goal so we have to take the long view and understand that we are in for an indefinitely long war. But we have no choice but to defend ourselves for the long term, and to not neglect the offensive side of the war.

For comparison, here is an article on the casualties of World War II, which involved the world's reaction to different supremacists threats.
[Link: www.answers.com...]

#32 Mike C. - Hey Mikey - how is going today? Got any hot parties lined up to go to or give?
We're staying in cause even with all my @#%$#^^@ pain meds I'm still hurting cause the damn cancer meds. OTOH the damn cancer meds have me with the best reading I've ever had and the oncologist almost said I'm in remission, but he really couldn' say that and cover his butt, ya know!

4 nosubmission. I love it. Most of the time I have to travel to help out.

OT, drive-by-post:
Palestinian doctor in Sweden refuses to treat American woman.

An American woman has been refused treatment by a doctor in Blekinge in southern Sweden because of her nationality. The woman's husband has now reported the incident to the Medical Responsibility Board.

At least the AP is consistent...

Consistently biased
Consistently anti-American
Consistently pro-terrorist

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

39 Mike C,

Sure. I'm not making a judgment on the numbers. I'm not saying they're high or low or good (of course) or bad. They just are. You can look at that number and wring your hands and say "Oh, we'd better get out!" or you can look at them, as I do, and say, "That's terrible. Three thousand dead soldiers. But worth it, if it helps sink a stake of democracy in that part of the Middle East."

Now we must all await the next grim milestone of 3,023 deaths. It's significant because...uhhh...because...because it has a "3" at the beginning AND the end!

re #42

World War II was the single deadliest conflict the world has ever seen, causing many tens of millions of deaths. The tables below provide a detailed country-by-country count of death by side.

Combined total

The total estimated human loss of life caused by World War II, irrespective of political alignment, was roughly 62 million people. The civilian toll was around 37 million, the military toll about 25 million. The Allies lost around 51 million people, and the Axis lost 11 million. (Note that some Axis countries switched sides and reentered the war on the side of the Allies; those nations are included in the Allied count, regardless of when the deaths occurred.) There was a disproportionate loss of life and property; some nations had a higher casualty rate than others, due to a number of factors including military tactics, crimes against humanity, economic preparedness and the level of technology.

I woukd like to congratulate the American military for conducting the war with the least number of deaths per soldier/day of probably any war in history.

Not to undermine the service of our military but these statistics should be broken down in terms of: accidental, natural causes, combat, rescue...

Just to give some people (need I say it - LLL's)some perspective. Or is that even possible?

#40 Cognito

Pursuing that logic... would it have been wise to proceed into a war without knowing the number of casualties?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Are you telling me that Roosevelt knew on December 7, 1941 how many casualties the war was going to have? And he came out and told the American people and Congress that there were going to be exactly 291,557 battle deaths and 113,842 noncombat deaths?

You're daffy.

44 armymarinemom

4 nosubmission. I love it. Most of the time I have to travel to help out.

You are always there in spirit.
Have a Happy New Year!

#34 Cognito - didn't intentionally ignore you and I'm sorry if you feel slighted. But Mike C and I have been friends out here for a long mofo time and I occassionally like to give him some fire support to head off any foolhardy head long assaults. Since Mike's answer did seem to satisfy you, let's let it go, shall we?

When I was in the infantry we used to lose a couple of hunderd men a week; 3,000 would have been an especially bad week, but certainly not a "milestone". Today's MSM started out anti-US, anti-war; in Vientmam it wasn't that way until after Tet, where, ironically, the media got the facts all screwed up and thereafter reported any bad new that they could.
As I said, I meant no insult to you over what you said, it's just that I get a tad sensitive when I think about US casualties.
Have a Happy New Year.

52 E2M,

No. Calm down. I said, "proceed," not enter. That's ridiculous.

Obviously I didn't mean Roosevelt should have predicted the number of deaths. But if you think he had no idea how many troops he had until the dust settled after the war, then you need to reconsider who here, exactly, is daffy.

Everything is grim for the media. They love death, the Democrats love death, the Islamists love death. Now wonder they're all on the same side.

54 real west,

Hey, happy New Year to you, too.

Geez, they even work the grim milestone into this story.

#55 Cognito

I said, "proceed," not enter.

That depends on what "is" is, I think...

armymarinemom, I'm with you on that. I have had Code PInk and the fans of Ehren Watada call me and harrass me since I dare to criticize that turkey in a letter to the editor and I hang a Blue Star in my window. These idiots make me absolutely sick. They could give a rats ass about the Military as most of them think they're all too stupid to think for themselves. What a bunch of asshats. Pardon my language but this crap really makes my blood boil. When we reach 3K murders this coming year, or 3K deaths by drunks or illegal aliens, I certainly hope the AP reports it with as much glee as they do this.

WTF is the point of even pointing it out except to push an agenda?

I passed a grim milestone once.

Oh wait,that was a kidney stone.

Zombie

Just got your email and the very egggsalent job on your response to HWR on the "Fake missile stike on the Hezbo-ulance"

Glad to make a "small contribution" if it helped.

and the welcome mat is always out at Rancho-Costa-Plenty or more accurately Rancho-Cost-A-Plenty in LaMOrinda, should your Jihadi admirer's ever close in.

Neighbors just got ANOTHER Doberman, she's a big mean bitch too. She & I are in the "Let's be friends" stage, me throwing beef bones over the fence, she woofs 'em down in in two bites.
Psycho & Trixie prefer leftover steaks.

59 E2M,

Cute. But wrong.

Let me ask you point blank: Are you saying you genuinely misunderstood my post 40, especially in light of your post 37?

#63 Cognito

I didn't misunderstand anything. If you were trying to say something defferent, you failed to communicate. I have no idea what your point is, only that the explaination is nonsense.

#62 Havoc

I have already added your email to a new "Emails from readers" section at the bottom of my HRW page:

Havoc's email at the bottom (credited to "H").

I "cleaned up" your email a bit, to fix your charming eccentricities of capitalization and punctuation!

Every single dead or wounded serviceman is one too much.

They will always be remembered, not as grim milestones but as very special men and women who did more than their duty to protect the Free World.

I salute everyone of them who is now on guard in the desert, in the streets of Baghdad or in the Afghan mountains.

I salute the unknown soldier recovering in the hospital of Landstuhl.

I salute those who support your mission, may it be with arms or a keyboard.

64 E2M,

If I failed to communicate, it's only because you misunderstood.

To proceed is not to begin. It is to carry on.

A major problem of making comparisons of the war against Islamism and WWII is the refusal of those against the former to even acknowledge that there exists a war today.
Every time the subject comes up, my mother says "Well, the whole world was at war back then."
However, I get little or no response when I mention the murders by the Islamists from Thailand to Madrid to New York and points in betweeen.

#67 Cognito

You said "proceed into". That means enter. Nice try.

#51 Maui Girl

But that would detract from The Grim Milestone meme.

You know how we always hear about the Grim Milestone in pedestrian crosswalk deaths, or the Grim Milestone of death during sex or somesuch.

#60 Terri G

Totally with you. Each and every military death is a great loss but everything needs to be put in perspective and you can be assured that the MSM will NOT report loss of life by any other means as gleefully as they do the IRAQ war.

Aloha

lying sacks of shit

Freedom for Shalit - and Terrorists - Anticipated Yet Again

[Link: www.israelnationalnews.com...]

he's dead, they are just using this to extend ceasefire and release terrorists

so glad Ehud called their bluff, the families have to move on

69 E2M,

If you're going to question my argument, I suggest -- for sport -- that you not do it on word usage. Here's why:

To "proceed," is to carry on. Particularly after an assessment or stoppage. It does not mean to "enter."

So now that we both understand that, let's plug it into my statement:

"... would it have been wise to [continue on, after stoppage or assessment] into a war without knowing the number of casualties?

Bear in mind: Like I said in my first post, I too find it annoying when people find every reason under the sun to talk up the bad aspects of the Iraq war.

I'd rather talk about actual acts, here, instead of word choice.

#67 Cognito

To proceed is not to begin.

Check your post again. You said "proceed into," which I take to mean as "begin."

You're getting squishy, and I say this as someone who admires the points you raise.

Or at least admires that you raise arguments.

I don't always agree with them.

74 Noam,

Holy, moly, man. Which makes more sense? E2M asked whether I could find reports of 'grim milestones' during WWII. That is, death tolls.

Does it make more sense for me to raise a bizarre point about Roosevelt magically predicting deaths? Or does it make more sense for me to address death tolls during WWII?

I just did a quick Lexis-Nexis check- 99 mentions of "grim milestone" in the last 2 years, for whatever it's worth.

And in the spirit of Cognito, I'm just curious--is there a way in which US casualties could be reported that is not provocative to someone?

#60 terrig
This is their job and they work overtime. The media in your area could care less so we have to work around them. That is a crying shame. Bless your heart for your editorials and all of the hard work that you do.

The left found a new cause to celebrate.

75 Noam,

Thanks -- I really should say that I probably come off much more argumentative that I mean to; I tend not to chime in on posts when I agree. I tend to act too noisy when I don't.

#74 Noam Sayin' - Hey Noam! How are ya? Finally catch up on a post with you and now I gotta go help mom make dinner! Hope you and yours are find and that you have a great evening!

iamkacau 12/31/2006 01:38PM PST

I just did a quick Lexis-Nexis check- 99 mentions of "grim milestone" in the last 2 years, for whatever it's worth.

And in the spirit of Cognito, I'm just curious--is there a way in which US casualties could be reported that is not provocative to someone?

can you compare it to other wars? please

Give it up Cognito.

I thought you were a journalist.

Don't you know the difference between "proceed into" and "proceed with?"

When you "proceed into" a room, or an intersection, you are "entering" them, not "carrying on."

REALWEST!

Happy New Years, brotha!

You're the first I've said that to.

#73 Cognito

To "proceed," is to carry on. Particularly after an assessment or stoppage. It does not mean to "enter."

Your original quote, complete, and in context:

Okay. Well. Pursuing that logic... would it have been wise to proceed into a war without knowing the number of casualties?

How can you "proceed into" a war, if you're already there? That phrase means exactly the same as enter.

But let's suppose that it doesn't. Are you suggesting that there would have been a point at which Roosevelt would have or should have cut and run?

82 akak,

I see your point about that, but searching for the term 'grim milestone' probably won't give an accurate picture of the media's general stance on this war versus others. Language is too fluid. "Grim milestone" is a cliché that may have had another equivalent during wars past.

realwest, Mike C., lizards all- Happy New Year! Celebrate responsibly, please.
Pat 70

Grim Milestone of death during sex

LOL!

Akak--do you mean you want me to check the number of mentions from other wars, or the language the reports are couched in?

God bless our troops and the rest of y'all lizards!

Happy New Year!

If the MSM in WWII had done the "grim milestone" thing, think of the headlines after Dunkirk, for example. Thousands of Brits died, and they were in full retreat and trapped. Instead of emphasising that, the Brits saved some 330,000 men - they definitely got lemons and made lemonade.

I think the persistent negativity of the MSM has a lot to do with why the average American is pessimistic about the country as a whole but is optimistic about his/her own situation.

I see the new troll has wandered by again.

For Grim Milestones, what about the Somme?

#86 Cognito 12/31/2006 01:43PM PST

82 akak,

I see your point about that, but searching for the term 'grim milestone' probably won't give an accurate picture of the media's general stance on this war versus others. Language is too fluid. "Grim milestone" is a cliché that may have had another equivalent during wars past.

/yeah see whaat you mean, as the media wasn't as purchased as it is now

# 43 realwest

I figure there's about 5000 state and local cops out there looking for somebody exactly like me. Or, in fact, me in particular. Nope - Mikey don't do New Years parties.

Goodness, guys. You're getting so hung up on the semantics here -- and I maintain I'm right about the definition of proceed -- that you're entirely forgetting the context of the argument.

We're talking about death tolls. Not some weird clairvoyence by Roosevelt.

E2M:

But let's suppose that it doesn't. Are you suggesting that there would have been a point at which Roosevelt would have or should have cut and run?

You raised the point, not me. You asked whether there were 'grim milestones' -- death tolls -- reported during WWII, then you mentioned Roosevelt. So the burden is on you. I say Roosevelt knew full well how many soldiers he had lost, updated regularly, if not as accurately as today due to technology. Do you say otherwise?

iamkacau 12/31/2006 01:44PM PST

Akak--do you mean you want me to check the number of mentions from other wars, or the language the reports are couched in?

stats,

verbiage is trite sloganism

86 Cognito

Bullshit.

Example:

Dunkirk Defence Defies
300,00 Saved
Four-Fifths of BFF Saved

#95 Cognito

Goodness, guys. You're getting so hung up on the semantics here

"Words mean what I say they mean"
- Humpty Dumpty

# 76 Cognito

Holy, moly, man. Which makes more sense? E2M asked whether I could find reports of 'grim milestones' during WWII. That is, death tolls.

Does it make more sense for me to raise a bizarre point about Roosevelt magically predicting deaths? Or does it make more sense for me to address death tolls during WWII?

I believe E2M asked you to go track down reports of death tolls in the media during WWII in order to compare and contrast the way the media treats the reports today with cliches like "grim milestone."

Instead, you came back with:

Okay. Well. Pursuing that logic... would it have been wise to proceed into a war without knowing the number of casualties?

... changing the argument to whether or not Roosevelt should have started a war or proceeded to wage war. That's where E2M was going with the "definition of is, is" stuff. You acted like he was trying to change the what you wrote, "proceed into" to mean "begin" which is exactly what any reasonable person would construe.

Okay, where were we?

97 Cattt,

Bullshit.

What are you talking about?

The entirety of my post was:

I see your point about that, but searching for the term 'grim milestone' probably won't give an accurate picture of the media's general stance on this war versus others. Language is too fluid. "Grim milestone" is a cliché that may have had another equivalent during wars past.

Which aspect of that is bull? It's just a statistical point, nothing more. During Vietnam, another phrase may have been in vogue. What's your beef with that?

Cog - Just a suggestion -

Your ass is squarely in your hands. Go off, and find some superglue, and reattach it. Then come back a little older and wiser. But be prepared to have it removed and handed to you again.

95 Cognito

Goodness, guys. You're getting so hung up on the semantics here -- and I maintain I'm right about the definition of proceed -- that you're entirely forgetting the context of the argument.

No problem. But please say what you mean, and don't deny it later.

BTW I agree with you that there are times some of us are over-sensitive to the MSM, even when they are just doing their jobs.

Harping on "grim milestones" is NOT "just doing their jobs." The MSM has really become infatuated with sensationalism.

98 E2M,

Convenient how did that. Journalists call it "shaving" a quote, and the good ones don't do that.

95 Cognito 12/31/2006 01:47PM PST

Goodness, guys. You're getting so hung up on the semantics here

Gee - maybe that's because blogs use words, not bananas.

Gee, this has deteriorated.

What condescending rubbish from Earth2Moonbat.

Yet more evidence that some lizards are decidedly thin-skinned.

Please E2M - get a grip.

Kansans of the Year: The Patriot Guard

All right guys.

I'll cede the point about "proceed." However, in your leisure, as a favor, I'll ask you to find it in a dictionary, just so you know I'm not being dishonest here.

To clear it up: My point was not that Roosevelt should have predicted the future.

We were talking about death tolls. E2M mentioned WWII, as though death tolls -- "grim milestones" -- were not reported then. I contend they certainly were reported, although I'm not sure how regularly or accurately. My point was: Don't you think Roosevelt, since you mentioned him, would have known the death toll on his troops?

#106 imam number

Please E2M - get a grip.

Grip on what? I'm not the one with my ass in my hands.

Imam,

Thanks for the defense, but I'm fine. It's just friendly banter.

E2M,

Don't bother with the "ass in hands" stuff. Stick with the discussion if you don't mind.

#108 Cognito

My point was: Don't you think Roosevelt, since you mentioned him, would have known the death toll on his troops?

Of course. And I'm sure that there were periodic, dispassionate reports in the newspapers. But you didn't get this kind of agenda-laden propaganda:

The grim milestone was crossed on the final day of 2006 and at the end of the deadliest month for the American military in Iraq in the past 12 months. At least 111 U.S. service members were reported to have died in December.

That's not neutral reporting, that's sensationalism.

104 Cattt,

You did it too. You "shaved" a quote to portray my point as something other than what it was.

You guys are doing the very thing that you accuse the evil journalists of doing.

#96
I'm afraid I can't agree with you there. During the Vietnam war the number of war dead was broadcast every evening without any uproar. It seems as though the crux of the matter is the terminology the MSM uses in reporting casualties, which takes me back to my original question--how can any news outlet report on war dead without someone or other crying foul? And is the alternative simply not reporting it at all?

#106 imam number 12

Hey troll, your reputation proceeds you.

/heard you made a lot of new friends in the chat room the other day

OT

Signs of the Apocalypse Department:

Detroit Lions defeat Dallas Cowboys

39-31

Time to stock up on batteries,freeze dried food and ammo.

108 Cognito

My point was: Don't you think Roosevelt, since you mentioned him, would have known the death toll on his troops?

If that was your entire point, so be it. The usefulness of casualty stats is undebatable.

What Charles and we are addressing in this thread is the gratuitous use of descriptors like "grim milestones" over and over again.

How do you think Roosevelt would have reacted to the press constantly pointing out casualties as opposed to gains?

(First and foremost, thank them for their sacrifices, and may they rest in peace).

Let's see that works out to how many per hour over four years...
Nope, the Islamonuts are still way ahead of us, adjusted for time.

#114 Killian Bundy

/heard you made a lot of new friends in the chat room the other day

It's there now, fyi.

#114 Killian Bundy

Hey troll, your reputation proceeds you.

I want to see this; a reputation entering a troll...

#65 Zombie

actually I meant the location of the DIME and Spike blast test photo's.

"Clearly this damage is from the new Israeli supersecret Rust Inducing/Double-Aught/Redneck Bomb (RIDAR), which they have been illegally testing on Palestinian ambulances." Correction, that should be "Hezbo Ambulances" or "Hezbo-ulance" for short.

111 E2M,

You didn't ask about passionate or dispassionate reporting. I wouldn't have argued with you on that point. The media during the war years was much, much, MUCH less biased than it is now.

Since you say that dispassionate reports of the facts about a war's death toll are understandable and acceptable, I'm curious -- and this is not argument, but a genuine question for my own understanding of what readers look for -- what is it about that quoted text that strikes you as agenda-laden?

The grim milestone was crossed on the final day of 2006 and at the end of the deadliest month for the American military in Iraq in the past 12 months. At least 111 U.S. service members were reported to have died in December.

We can leave out "grim milestone" as an awful cliché, as the phrase itself doesn't really say much. "Giddy" milestone would be notable. I don't think anyone could argue 3000 dead isn't grim. Otherwise, what is the agenda? Again: I'm not saying you're wrong. If you as a reader feel there's a problem here, then sure as heck there's a problem. But I am curious, for my own understanding.

I can't figure out what the argument here with Cognito is all about, but here's my two cents, of which I am extremely confident:

The Left seeks to undermine the United States as a world power, since the US promotes capitalism as an economic system. One way to acheive this is to try to humiliate the US on the world stage, in this instance by encouraging the perception of America as "losing" a war. The way to bring about this perception is to get the US to withdraw its troops. And the best way to do that, according to what I believe is an erroreous assessment of national psychology, is to constantly remind everyone how many people have died in the war, especially US troops. The theory is that the general public will "lose its taste for war" if they become aware of the fact that soldiers are killed. This is why the Left is endlessly harping on about "grim milestones" and whining that there are no pictures of coffins arriving back at Dover Air Force Base, and so on. Because, in their belief, the more that the ignorant masses see dead soldiers, the less they will want war.

The entire "grim milestone" thing is agenda-driven, and that agenda is anti-Americanism.

HOWEVER, as Cattt's excellent link in comment #97 shows, no such anti-Americanism existed in WWII, and there was no agenda. So, when the Allies suffered a major loss at Dunkirk, where MANY men died, the headlines read "300,00 Saved." A positive spin.

You can find plenty of similar examples from back then as well.

I know from personal observation as well as published polls: at LEAST 93% of "journalists" in the US classify themselves as "liberal." And the bias in the newsroom is almost universal and endemic.

#114, kb,

Imam number twelve? Hey, shouldn't he be out there with Ahmadimwit, restoring the Caliphate?
Dude! ...this is no time to be hanging in a chat room full of infidels.

I call shenanigans.

100 Cognito

What part is bull? All of it. In the past, loss in war was expected and reported, with victory expected, but at a price.

The whole essense of your comment is that the modern MSM's negative "this is hopeless" routine may (I see you are guessing) be business as usual for the media. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I'm NOT guessing. Nothing could be further from the truth in regard to the wya the MSM handled such reports in prior wars (pre Vietnam).

At the time of the Battle of Britain, the Brits fought like hell and kept their chins up, but they were outnumbered - the Germans were stronger. As we know, that did not stop the Brits from doing everything in their power to fight. The Brits sent much smaller cadres of planes up to harass the Germans, as they were outnumbered and out gunned - the Brits suffered huge losses, but they did what they had to do. During this time, the MSM did NOT post "Oh no - we are so weak!" headlines - they posted "we will fight them on the beaches" speeches. The MSM of that day did everything in their power to increase morale and the true grit of the people of Britain, while they prayed for the day (sooner better than later) when the Americans would come help them.

The newsies of old reported losses, but they reported "deaths, dammit - and here's what our guys are doing to win - and here's what YOU can do to win." They did not post "Oh no, more deaths - we suck - this is hopeless" during war. They did not do everything in their power to DECREASE morale. They did not see everything as a fight for left-wing politics versus right-wing. They focused on the common enemy instead of playing Ivory Tower politics.

#119 E2M

LMAO!

#119 Earth2moonbat

I want to see this; a reputation entering a troll...

My bad.

/precedes

reporting casualties

enuf said, do they do both sides-no, sorry cogs

youre a fucking slimeball

#121 Cognito

What Zombie (The Great) said.

TotallySirius 12/31/2006 02:01PM PST

OT

Signs of the Apocalypse Department:

Detroit Lions defeat Dallas Cowboys

39-31

Time to stock up on batteries,freeze dried food and ammo.

ribs are his true love

122 zombie

Excellent post. In fact, I'm going to bookmark it for future use.

Hey bundy,

All is well in the chatroom. Tolerance is prevailing. See you in there some time. :)

124 Cattt,

Um... no. I had none of that in mind when I made the post.

Here it is again:

I see your point about that, but searching for the term 'grim milestone' probably won't give an accurate picture of the media's general stance on this war versus others. Language is too fluid. "Grim milestone" is a cliché that may have had another equivalent during wars past.

My point went nowhere beyond a literal search term. "Grim milestone" probably wasn't used during Vietnam, as I said. But the sentiment was.

If I had a point to make about the media's stance, I would have made it plainly. Like this:

The media during the World Wars reported from a much more American view. That's because the seduction of 'objectivity' over patriotism had not yet infiltrated the media's ranks. Durin Vietnam all that changed, for many, many reasons that are to complex to lay out here, and I suspect you can guess them. Further, much of the media's power structure that's in place now cut its teeth during Vietnam. So they still apply the Vietnam template, when it simply doesn't fit today's war against radical Islam.

That's how I would have said it.

#120 Havoc
#65 Zombie

I just thought of a good use for Saddam's carcass. Go get a Vanagon, put the carcass in it, hit it with a DIME, and see if the leg comes cleanly off...

107 windybon

Kansans of the Year: The Patriot Guard

God Bless the Patriot Guard! These guys are fantastic.

Tolerance is not prevailing here alas...

108 Cognito
E2M mentioned WWII, as though death tolls -- "grim milestones" -- were not reported then. I contend they certainly were reported, although I'm not sure how regularly or accurately.

You've got to look at the intent. Contemporary "grim milestone" reports are made for the sole purpose of turning the public against the war. This is freely admitted by the Left. But in WWII, if meaningless "symbolic" death tolls were reported (and you have provided no evidence that they were), then they were not done to sway public opinion, but were merely done so on a strictly factual basis.

If there were any death tolls reported in WWII, I'm sure it was specific battle totals; "2,000 troops lost on Iwo Jima" or whatever. I dare to you find a headline from 1943 along the lines of "Grim Milestone: 100,000 Americans die in fruitless attempt to extend our occupation of Europe."

Killian Bundy 12/31/2006 02:01PM PST

#106 imam number 12
Hey troll, your reputation proceeds you.

/heard you made a lot of new friends in the chat room the other day

oh shit someone didn't pay their country club fees?

Will somebody please call a Psychiatrist for George Galloway

Saddam Hussein execution: When will all the guilty pay?
The stupidity of the Baghdad puppets beggars belief. First, they commission a kangaroo court which refuses to consider charges relating to the invasion of Iran in 1980, or the gassing of the Kurds or any other event in which the Western powers were complicit.
The farcical trial itself allowed Saddam, in the eyes of the mass of people in the Middle East, to replace the humiliating image of his capture with him as the confident accuser from the dock. The perfunctory dismissal of the appeal and the dossier of complaints from international jurists only added to the perception of "victor’s justice".
Then they film Saddam Hussein’s last moments. The newsreaders seemed perplexed at his composure. Did they want him to rant and rave or collapse in a blubbering heap or in some other way play the allotted role of pantomime villain?
It's all of a piece with the infantilised fable which public opinion has been fed on for a decade and a half.
In truth, just about no one imagines this tawdry execution will diminish the violence in Iraq. On the contrary, it will increase manifold. Ominously, the latest communique from the Iraqi resistance said the execution would be be met with swift and terrible vengeance, exacted "everywhere".
The Bush/Blair blunder in Iraq becomes more extreme by the day. They have already succeeded in strenthening Iran in southern Iraq and throughout the region - which Saddam’s US-backed invasion was meant to forever forstall. Now in the eyes of tens of millions of Arabs they are turning Saddam into something he strove but failed to be - a hero.

122 Zombie and everybody else,

I agree wholeheartedly. If you care enough to search my posts (and I'm not saying you should) you'll see I've always said the media is generally flooded with a leftist mindset.

... geez, these idiots just don't know when to quit, do they ...

#132 Cognito

The media during the World Wars reported from a much more American view. That's because the seduction of 'objectivity' over patriotism had not yet infiltrated the media's ranks.

You can't be serious. Are you trying to say, with a straight face, that reporting now is "objective"?

136 zombie,

Nobody seems to remember such things, but I said something very similar way back in post 16:

If it's because the AP and its counterparts find a reason to make just about every U.S. death a "grim milestone," therefore constantly reminding America of the price it's paying, I'll buy that. That annoys me too. It's the spirit of the thing.

Another home run from Thomas Sowell.

#132 Cognito

Well put.

But even in the Viet Nam era, casualties on both sides were reported. Sort of like a "grim" football game.

You rarely see reports in the MSM these days about how many murderous insurgents are killed each day or week.

141 E2M,

Um, no. I'm saying the opposite of that.

#120 Havoc

OK, I fixed "Hezbulance" back to "Hezbo-ulance." (Though I still prefer "Hezbulance"!)

Are there any other changes you want me to make?

127 akak,

youre a fucking slimeball

Excellent! Good point.

Imam: Bah.

Casualties Of War:

Revolutionary War
(1775-1783) 4,435

War of 1812
(1812-1815) 2,260

Mexican War
(1846-1848) 13,283

Civil War
(1861-1865) 623,026

Spanish-American War
(1898) 2,446

World War I
(1917-1918) 116,708

World War II
(1941-1945) 407,316

Korean War
(1950-1953) 36,914

Vietnam War
(1964-1973) 58,169

Persian Gulf War
(1991) 269

Afghanistan
(2002-2006) 350+

Operation: Iraqi Freedom
(2003-2006) 3,000+

144 rust,

#132 Cognito

Well put.

But even in the Viet Nam era, casualties on both sides were reported. Sort of like a "grim" football game.

That goes, again, to my point about this war being a new model. In Vietnam we fought a new 'soft' style enemy, but it's carried to new heights in the Middle East. We don't hear how many casualties are on the other side because we can't even figure out who exactly the other side IS. It's a dirty war, carried out by dirty opponents.

akak - there's only one tfk.

/LGF's Boomhower

Cognito 12/31/2006 02:21PM PST

127 akak,

youre a fucking slimeball
Excellent! Good point.

no conscience? dang I hate spelling big words like that around media types dadgummit

#144 rustinpuppets

You rarely never see reports in the MSM these days about how many murderous insurgents are killed each day or week.

rust--fixed it for ya. Leftards would shit their pants if the military reported the numbers of insurgent deaths. You would hear "disproportionate response" way more than "grim milestone" if they did.

#150 Cognito

We don't hear how many casualties are on the other side because we can't even figure out who exactly the other side IS

Baloney. The pentagon estimated VC casualties in Vietnam, and the media reported them. I'm sure the pentagon has casualty estimates (and all any of these numbers ever were were estimates) for the various militias, but the media won't report them as enemy casualties because they don't consider them to be enemy.

As for the reporting in Vietnam:

It was a transition time for the MSM. The old guard, of unbiased and/or pro-American journalism, was still in place, but was in the process of giving way to the new liberal anti-capitalism Gramscian crew. So you will find both kinds of reported existing back then, side by side.

Walter Cronkite was famously opposed to the Vietnam war, and that's why he reported "grim milestones" back then. In fact, it was the success of Cronkite's approach in Vietnam that drives the same reportage today.

ahh Desert now they have #'s for Jan 1 column, shoulda waited till 2 min before presstime

Get all US troops out of Iraq now, stop all immigration/visitation rights of all muslims from every mid-east country as well as muslim dominate countries and deport all illegal muslims presently in the USA under the GET OUT OF MY FUCKING COUNTRY PATRIOT ACT.

THERE... simple enough.

And one more thing... one more 9/11 , or one more devastating attack on the US and your country will be turned into a heap of dust and radiation. Period.

No need for any further message.

And another thing, I think it's time US troops also came home from Germany, S. Korea & Japan...

154 E2M,

I'm willing to listen. If you can find me a clean statistic on insurgent deaths that hasn't been reported in the media, let me know. I'll pass it along, fo' sho.

155 zombie,

Yep.

Cognito
on another thread:

Associated Press Spins in Two Directions at Once

It’s the same poll, but the AP’s two stories couldn’t be more different. On December 30: AP poll: Americans optimistic for 2007.

And on December 31, after the editors apparently decided their first take was too positive: Poll: Americans see gloom, doom in 2007.

These folks ain't just giving the news. They're giving you their views on the news

Cognito 12/31/2006 02:24PM PST

144 rust,

#132 Cognito

Well put.

But even in the Viet Nam era, casualties on both sides were reported. Sort of like a "grim" football game.

That goes, again, to my point about this war being a new model. In Vietnam we fought a new 'soft' style enemy, but it's carried to new heights in the Middle East. We don't hear how many casualties are on the other side because we can't even figure out who exactly the other side IS. It's a dirty war, carried out by dirty opponents

exactly mirror?

132 Cognito 12/31/2006 02:14PM PST

Um... no. I had none of that in mind when I made the post.

Here it is again:

I see your point about that, but searching for the term 'grim milestone' probably won't give an accurate picture of the media's general stance on this war versus others. Language is too fluid. "Grim milestone" is a cliché that may have had another equivalent during wars past.

Now, I am normally a polite person. However, in your case, I'm making an exception, because you are full of shit.

You SAID "another equivalent during WARS past."

I said no.

So now you say - oh - I expressed myself badly - and you come up with a whole new opinion. You say in effect "oh, I meant that before Vietnam, the MSM was biased in favor of their own country's survival." (What a horrible thought in time of war! - to want one's country to survive - sarc)

Then you added your take on post-Vietnam MSM. You use very cold words, like "template," to describe the MSM's behavior, as if they are a piece of software. They're not - and they are not trying to be objective - that is a blind. They are leftist; they are radicalized; and everything they do has a deeply felt agenda based in that radicalism. They actually work hand-in-glove with Islamists, whether by accident or design, to act as the propaganda wing of the enemy, right in our midst. Who needs Goebbels when you have a nice fifth column?

They are not objective - they are subversive, at heart. No liberal in his right mind should support Islamists, so they can't do that. Instead, they work to knock any loose pegs out from under their own country's military, they rarely, if ever, support the military, and they use every opportunity, in a hatefully passive-aggressive fashion, to promote a radical agenda.

You write badly, so I may be wrong, but it sounds like you think the MSM are wrong to attack everything with their post-Vietnam hat on. That I certainly agree with.

Isn't it a policy of the military not to give specific numbers of enemy KIA?

3000 Brave Men that were volunteers that went to fight aggresion against this great Country, as I did twice in 'Nam, we should Honor these Brave Soldiers, they are not a grim milestone by no means cognito!

# 155 zombie

...new liberal anti-capitalism Gramscian crew.

Do me a giant personal favor - please don't use that word.

162 Cattt,

With all due respect, you're putting a whole lot of words in my mouth, there.

I'll give my post in it's entirety, one more time:

I see your point about that, but searching for the term 'grim milestone' probably won't give an accurate picture of the media's general stance on this war versus others. Language is too fluid. "Grim milestone" is a cliché that may have had another equivalent during wars past.

Meaning simply that death tolls were called other things before. Meaning that you might find zero instances of "grim milestone" during WWII or ten thousand during Vietnam. Or vice versa. All I was addressing was a search parameter. That's it.

I've made my view of the media's shift clear, here:

The media during the World Wars reported from a much more American view. That's because the seduction of 'objectivity' over patriotism had not yet infiltrated the media's ranks. Durin Vietnam all that changed, for many, many reasons that are to complex to lay out here, and I suspect you can guess them. Further, much of the media's power structure that's in place now cut its teeth during Vietnam. So they still apply the Vietnam template, when it simply doesn't fit today's war against radical Islam.

Yet you attributed this to me:

You say in effect "oh, I meant that before Vietnam, the MSM was biased in favor of their own country's survival." (What a horrible thought in time of war! - to want one's country to survive - sarc)

I never said any of that. I put "objectivity" in quotes for a reason. Yet you worked hard to find a way to make me say something against America. ("What a horrible thought...") It's just not there.

Lastly, you said,

Then you added your take on post-Vietnam MSM. You use very cold words, like "template," to describe the MSM's behavior, as if they are a piece of software. They're not - and they are not trying to be objective - that is a blind. They are leftist; they are radicalized; and everything they do has a deeply felt agenda based in that radicalism.

Sorry if my words felt 'cold.' They're only accurate.

#165 Mike C.

What's your problem with it? Don't like BabbaZee?

164 Nam,

3000 Brave Men that were volunteers that went to fight aggresion against this great Country, as I did twice in 'Nam, we should Honor these Brave Soldiers, they are not a grim milestone by no means cognito!

That's why I said back in post 16,

I'd say reaching 3000 dead is probably worth a notice on the wire. To me that's 3000 heroes; maybe that's my interpretation of the fact, but then again facts are nice that way.

162 Cattt,

You write badly, so I may be wrong, but it sounds like you think the MSM are wrong to attack everything with their post-Vietnam hat on. That I certainly agree with.

This made me smile, for a couple of reasons.

E2m

It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether I like BZ or not. I'm just sick to effing death of the newsest, coolest "in" word. I see the damned thing slapped around here scores, if not hudreds, of times a day. It adds bloody nothing to the conversation. It's just "cool." Feh.

The mainstream media publshes casualty statistics as a way of defeating our will to fight. Publishing current casualty statistics, whether today's, this week's, or this month's, is not enough for their purposes, so they publish cumulative casualty figures, which serves their purposes better.

But in order to call it news, they need a peg on which to hang the cumulative casualty figures. That peg is what they call the Grim Milestone. If they can find something, anything, to provide a match of some kind or some kind of significance, or just a round number, or anything at all, then that provides a "news" peg on which to hang their report of the cumulative number of casualties.

"Grim Milestone" news is not news at all in the usual sense of being something out of the ordinary; it is just a news peg that they use to be able to report, again and again, the cumulative casualty numbers.

166 Cognito

I can't decide whether you write badly because of poor skills or to give yourself the ability to follow up with more bad writing when you say "oh, that's not what I meant" ad nauseum.

Where are all the smart trolls?

Feh.

Obviously a Gramscian view of the world.

170 Mike C.

I see your point - you're tired of that word. However, I'd never heard it before, and so I read the wiki-condensed version. Now I know what it means, and it's a rather handy word. Would you rather that people impose a paragraph or two when one word will suffice? Do you have a better word to suggest?

172 Cattt,

I can't decide whether you write badly because of poor skills or to give yourself the ability to follow up with more bad writing when you say "oh, that's not what I meant" ad nauseum.

Look up "ad hominem."

BTW y'all I hope you have a Happy New Year, and I hope the new one will bring many favors for everyone and their families, and Happy New Year to you as well Charles. ;-)

God Bless our Brave Troops and may he watch over them and their Families this coming year.

Although the loss of any of our soldiers in action is a tragedy for them and their families and a loss that the rest of us should mourn, it is essential to keep the figures in perspective (something that the MSM are too ignorant and stupid to do). If anyone had told the WW2 generation that the losses on their side would 'only' be 3000 over the coming three-and-a-half years of conflict, there would have been street parties thrown throughout the whole of Britain and the USA.

In reality, to take one example at random, the Royal Air Force lost around 800 men on one single night in February 1944 (as a result of the ill-fated bombing raid on Nuremberg). Nobody back then suggested they should just throw in the towel and come home.

The merits of the conflict in Iraq, and the question of whether it serves any great purpose in the struggle against the creeping islamification of the West, is not the main issue in this particular news story. The real news is the way that our printed and broadcast media are so willing to boost the enemy by screaming for withdrawal (i.e. surrender) at the first sign of any bloodshed. It only confirms their belief that we are self-indulgent weaklings and cowards who are there for the taking.

Apologies if anyone has made any of these points above, but I haven't read all of the thread yet.

#170 Mike C.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether I like BZ or not. I'm just sick to effing death of the newsest, coolest "in" word. I see the damned thing slapped around here scores, if not hudreds, of times a day. It adds bloody nothing to the conversation. It's just "cool." Feh.

You don't like "paradigm" either, do you?

It's a useful term, because if you understand who Gramsci was, and what his methodology was, things that we observe make more sense. And it's not a conspiracy theory, any more than it's a conspiracy theory to note that the media are slanted to the left. More like the Borg. Once you become part of that culture, you just naturally become subversive.

But there's no question that there's a "change the world"/"think globally, act locally", etc. mindset that is having an effect, and a very negative one. And all of this, if not masterminded by Gramsci, at least goes by that name. So it's a useful term, as a label.

Which is not to say it isn't abused by some. But that's the nature of the paradigm...

Nam Grunt

Happy New Year man.

I will be going to England in the Summer for a sons wedding; Afterward we hope to visit my Uncles gravesite as his only relative who ever has, and lay a wreath. He was killed on the last day of active battle in the Battle of the Bulge at the Seigfried line.

Happy New Year to you and your boys.

Your neighborhood dog & leg biter,

Havoc

178 E2M,

I can't speak for Mike, but I agree with him because "Gramscian" -- just like "grim milestone" -- starts to lose all meaning when used so often and so readily.

BBC News is complaining about poor Saddam was shouted at and insulted just moments before his death. Ah...poor Saddam.

"An extraorindary death for an extraordinary man."

Puking---

Now into "grim" news of 3000th soldier.

Okay, extreme hyperbole on my part. Not counting my own use just up thread, 17 instance of "Gramscian" in the last week. It still is giving me a headache and causing me to wince every time i see it, and I'm not apologizing for that.

Yo, 'Nam.

Apparently, the US began citing enemy KIA in 2003, giving a daily count rather than a cumulative total. This was a reversal of the policy began after the war in Vietnam when critics accused the military of inflating the numbers of enemy casualties.

154 Earth2Moonbat

You are wrong. We have not released body counts for enemy casualties *as a matter of policy*.

I know your cute little cartoon link referenced an aversion to reasoning but come on, get a grip on *reality* please.

E2M,

I'm still curious to hear your thoughts about post 121. Again, I don't ask the question to be argumentative, but for my own understanding; to that end, please feel free to respond by email if you'd rather.

#177 mayweed

Nobody back then suggested they should just throw in the towel and come home.

Which is exactly what the MSM and leftist dipshits suggest we do now. Their argument is basically that "it is not our fight". Bullshit, they haven't read "Because They Hate" by Brigitte Gabriel (which I just got done reading by the way and recommend for all, especially those with moonbat friends--force them to read it!).

The "grim milestones" casualty statistics are all about propaganda. I knew there was going to be some problems with this one, because we had just reached the "grim milestone" of 2970 a couple of weeks ago, the same amount of deaths as 911. The media can get by with claiming that these stats are all in the public interest, "that the public has a right to know". All that is correct, however there are lots of death stats that do not recieve near the attention of the media, and are just as important. Around 50,000 Americans are killed every year in automobile accidents. But are we treated to the stats every day like the Iraqi war dead stats? Hell no! If the media was so concerned over our welfare then headlines would be screaming. "138 dead in daily traffic accidents, aggressive drivers are the most at risk" or "4000 slaughtered last month by militant drivers in the US". You don't see these headlines because the media doesn't care. They don't care about our troops either but they do care about stopping Bush and the war on terror. Screw the media and the shetland pony they rode in on.

Now BBC is complaining about how the Islamists who brought "order and stability" have been driven out.

BBC is the enemy.

#180 Cognito

Like all words, it's not very useful when people use it incorrectly. So I agree.

This post is a grim Gramsican milestone.

That's the Islamists in Mogadishu---

#188 Judith

BBC is the enemy.

Oh, crap. You dunnit now. Now you have to stay here and foodfight with Cogno...

The ghost of Saddam spotted throughout Baghdad...

[Link: www.indiadaily.com...]

BBC is definitely being run by the same folks that run Al Jazeera, the bad guys.

# 187 LoFlyer

Shetland pony. Nice touch.

Sorry the world changed so fast it left old thinking in its dust, Mike. I had to read Gramsci several times in college. I realized that the Marxists were dumping their discredited economic ideas to attack our culture from within. A quick Internet search will bear that out. Just use the term you hate so much.

Now, if Gramsci was correct that the ruling class maintained its domination by the consent of the mass of the people and only used its coercive apparatuses, the forces of law and order, as a last resort, what were the consequences for Marxists who wished to see the overthrow of that same ruling class? If the hegemony of the ruling capitalist class resulted from an ideological bond between the rulers and the ruled, what strategy needed to be employed? The answer to those questions was that those who wished to break that ideological bond had to build up a ‘counter hegemony’ to that of the ruling class. They had to see structural change and ideological change as part of the same struggle. The labour process was at the core of the class struggle but it was the ideological struggle that had to be addressed if the mass of the people were to come to a consciousness that allowed them to question their political and economic masters right to rule. It was popular consensus in civil society that had to be challenged and in this we can see a role for informal education.

Like most Marxist BS they don't tell you that anyone who owns private property is viewed as a "master" due for the wall or forced labor if they don't feel like giving up what they own.

Unless you really believe enough people understand the way academe has become a Gramscian tool of Arab money, I don't think you have a leg to stand on.

The omnipresent irony is Gramsci being used to implement Seventh Century theocratic norms. Like any Marxist fantasy, its execution is usually literal.

185 cognito

Instead of "Gramscian", we could use:

Mephistophelian,
accursed,
atrocious,
bad,
brutish,
cloven-footed,
cursed,
damnable,
demoniac,
demonic,
detestable,
diabolic,
diabolical,
evil,
execrable,
fiendish,
hellborn,
hellish,
infernal,
iniquitous,
nefarious,
satanic,
serpentine,
unhallowed or
villainous

All these work as well when it comes to the Left.

#165 Mike C.

# 155 zombie
...new liberal anti-capitalism Gramscian crew.

Do me a giant personal favor - please don't use that word.

#170 Mike C.
I'm just sick to effing death of the newsest, coolest "in" word. I see the damned thing slapped around here scores, if not hudreds, of times a day. It adds bloody nothing to the conversation. It's just "cool." Feh.

I didn't know it was being overused. I know that Babbazee uses it frequently, and without much context, but aside from that I haven't seen it much.

Besides -- and this is a key point -- it was me who began using it in the first place, and started the "trend" if there is such a trend. It's like asking the Sex Pistols to stop playing punk because so many others bands had started emulating them and playing punk too.

The long-term project envisaged by Gramsci of surreptitiously infiltrating and then taking over the media and educational system for the purposes of fomenting a socialist revolution is an extremely important story, and one that gets almost totally ignored. It's important because it happened, and now we are living with the consequences.

Sorry if I overuse it, but we can't have a ban on certain words just because certain people use it too much. (Especially since I rarely see it used at all!)

#14 Merovign 12/31/2006 12:51PM PST

Another grim milestone - at least 7077 victims of the Jihadis.

Funny how this one doesn't get much press, isn't it.

strike that 7077 victims...it is 7077 ATTACKS by our wonderful playmates from across the sea!

This is the explanation offered by [Link: www.thereligionofpeace.com...] 's website about the 'list' of attacks.

About the List of Terrorist Attacks


This list, of over 6,000 (now 7077 documented) terrorist attacks committed by Muslims since 9/11/01 (a rate of about three or four a day), is incomplete because only a small percentage of attacks were picked up by international news sources, even those involving multiple loss of life.

These are not incidents involving nominal Muslims killing for money or personal pride. We include attacks committed by Muslims out of religious duty - as interpreted by the perpetrator - that can be reasonably determined.

Wed usually list only attacks that involve loss of life (with a handful of exceptions where there were a very large number of injuries). In several cases, the victims are undercounted because deaths from trauma caused by the Islamists may occur in later days, despite the best efforts of medical personnel to keep the victims alive.

We usually don't include incidents related to combat, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, unless it involves particularly heinous terrorist tactics. Unprovoked sniper, drive-by or roadside bombing attacks on military personnel serving normal police duties are sometimes included depending on the circumstances.

Unfortunately, this list of Muslim terrorist attacks barely scratches the surface of atrocities committed in the name of Islam that occur world-wide each day. For that reason, we don't tally up the dead and dismembered.

As an example, most news articles on the violence in southern Thailand note that about 900 people were killed in 2005. We estimate that 150 of these deaths are of the Islamic militants themselves, which means they killed some 750 people that year. But TROP has only recorded the deaths of 314. We underreported more than half in a country with a decent news infrastructure. Imagine what we don't catch in the Sudan where the toll runs into the tens of thousands!
The ridiculous level of violence that Islam serves up to the world makes it impossible to compile a complete list.

Dear Allah, P.B.U.H.,
Please save me from your followers!
In the name of Kofi Anan, Amen.

Re BBC feeling so sorry for Saddam. I personally have a very hard time feeling sorry because poor Saddam got insulted before his death. He is the man who liked to rape the wives of his prisoners and then throw acid in the women's faces for fun.

I predicted at the Guardian Comment is Free that the jihadis would hit 7,000 fatal attacks since 9/11 before the first of the year. Perhaps I should go over there and gloat a bit?

175 Cognito

/There he/she goes again.

I know what that means. It doesn't apply to you - because you DO write badly. Or perhaps I missed your point again, since you write so badly.

From now on, you're being gazed. I'm wasting pixels on you.

#193 DesertSage
Booo!

#199 zombie

it was me who began using it in the first place

Ahem, I've hated that sumbitch since the early 1980's.

#188 judith:

Yes, I noticed that one, too. What a shame Herr Hitler isn't around now for the BBC to idolise. After all, he did a pretty neat job bringing 'order and stability' to another chaotic and volatile country some years back, if memory serves.

So now BBC is at the Hajj talking to people to find out they are as upset about Saddam's execution as BBC is. Fortunately, the sheer ooverwelmning spirituality of the Hajj prevents all these Muslims from being too traumatized by the horrible news of Saddam being taunted before his death and how his body was taken by an evil American helicopter to his home town. (Apparentlly not all Muslims are complete idiots.)

#194 Judith
I've been sat here seething over the exact same crap. I'm sure we're not alone.

Mike:

In the last week, "Gramscian" has been used only 23 times in all LGF comments combined, and of those 23:

8 were on this thread, discussing how we overuse "Gramscian."

7 were by Babbazee

And only 8 were by other people.

So, basically, 8 instances in "Gramscian" in a week. That's just about once per day.

Over 100,000 LGF visitor/day, and over 2,000 comments per day, and only one use of "Gramscian" daily. That hardly seems like overuse!

Another Gramscian Milestone

in a headline might just cause Wiki to crash.

#188 Judith
It isn't only the BBC in Europe that is taking the pro-jihadist position in the Somalia jihad. Europe seems to have taken the pro-jihad position in the Somalia jihad. Caroline Glick points this out, which provides the lesson that Europe's position against Israel's defending itself against jihad is not due entirely to anti-semitism, but it is due to a pro-jihad stance in general. When the pro-jihad position covers battles having nothing to do with Israel, it reveals that it is not just anti-semitism that drives European positions, but a general pro-jihad stance that is independent of the location of the jihad (except at home, of course).
[Link: www.jpost.com...]

Havoc,

You just be careful, and friendship to your folks, my boys are doing fine and spoiled me for Christmas. ;-)

203 Catt

Honestly, some of you are as tolerant as your average head-chopping islamist, and about as rational.

For shame.

#199 zombie

Pat Buchanan used the term "Gramsci" on O'Reilly's show a couple months ago.

Not defending you Cog, just making a general observation.

George Bush is my hero

By ED KOCH

The following is the first JPost.com blog post by Ed Koch, former legendary Jewish mayor of New York City.

President George W. Bush, vilified by many, supported by some, is a hero to me.

Why do I say that? It's not because I agree with the President's domestic agenda. It's not because I think he's done a perfect job in the White House.

George Bush is a hero to me because he has courage. The President does what he believes to be in the best interest of the United States. He sticks with his beliefs, no matter how intense the criticism and invective that are directed against him every day.

The enormous defeat President Bush suffered with the loss of both Houses of Congress has not caused him to retreat from his position that the US alone now stands between a radical Islamic takeover of many of the world's governments in the next 30 or more years. If that takeover occurs, we will suffer an enslavement that will threaten our personal freedoms and take much of the world back into the Dark Ages.

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

Bwep I'm drinking something leftover from our channukah party called mike's hard lemonade that has 7% vodka. Not even the BBC is getting to me today. NOrmally my TV is in danger from me throwing things when BBC is on.

J-school ethics 101:

"Grim milestone"? OK.

"Extremist"? Too judgmental.

The MSM are the enemy.

#209 zombie

Over 100,000 LGF visitor/day, and over 2,000 comments per day, and only one use of "Gramscian" daily. That hardly seems like overuse!

pw3ned!

#204 Killgore Trout

Booo!

Booo, who?

Good link EE but it is just a stupid Zionist after all. No one takes us Zionists seriously. We just control the world. We don't care about details.

# 196 Beagle

I'm familiar with the term and it's definition, thank you very much. My objections stand.

#146 Zombie,

Nope looks great,

About those pavement holes ...

Z-U23 anti-aircraft bullets, shot by Hezbollah
What goes up must come down.

There seems to have disappeared from wikipedia tho still in google archive in thumbnail the photos of Hezbo shooting these anti-aircraft guns from built up cities. Likely Tyre had lots of 'em as you can mount them on small trucks tho they were orginally set up to be towed by cars or small trucks

Syria gave the Hezbo's their obsolete 1960's Russian Z-U23 cannons, might work on low flying hellicopters if they could shoot straight and survive a hellfire or Spike ... NOT.

More typical Spray and pray shooting of juiced up jihadi's I imagine.

Civilians (and Pavement in streets) are VERY vulnerable to the bullets and shells as they come back to earth.

If you toured the area and inspected pavement and roofs, you would find those kind of holes everywhere.

Here's one, you better copy it fast as they are mysteriously disappearing. It's all that densely populated background they don't want you to see.

Again, this is nothing new, What goes up must come down and the size of the 23mm rounds is just about right for the pavement holes.

Incidentally Here's the Iranian copy -- Hezbo's chief sponsor and armorer.

Also Incidentally, HezboPaleofascists "Brother's in arms" the Islamic Courts in Somalia, have mounted these anti-aircraft guns on trucks and turned them on civilians & opposing militia.

203 Cattt,

I know what that means. It doesn't apply to you - because you DO write badly. Or perhaps I missed your point again, since you write so badly.

Just so we're clear, "ad hominem" means, in context, attacking the person instead of the argument. Which is exactly what you're doing.

I'm not a bad writer, despite what you say. Or, alternatively, I'd be interested to see you back that up with particular passages that are so bad. Bear in mind, as you select a choice, that I've ceded the 'proceed' point. That is, I've proceeded.

Thai RoP rings in the new year with a bang...
More bombs explode in Bangkok

More bomb attacks have shaken central Bangkok after a series of coordinated bombings earlier yesterday, bringing the total of attacks to eight.

The latest attacks happened just before the stroke of midnight.

At least two people were killed in the first six explosions and at least 30 were injured, eight of them foreigners.

#213 imam number 12

Honestly, some of you are as tolerant as your average head-chopping islamist, and about as rational.

Aw, fercryingbloodyoutloud! Put the damn peace pipe down and get real. Tolerance isn't the natural state of humans.

Folks here need to drink more. Or less. Or something.

We're on the same team!

#205 Beagle
Ahem, I've hated that sumbitch since the early 1980's.

No, I don't mean that I invented the term! Far from it. You and many others have been using it since the '80s and before.

What I meant was that within the context of LGF, starting about a year ago, I started dropping the term around here when previously it was rarely ever used. For some reason, I guess it caught on.

Babbazee is a dear, but the repeated use of the G-word has kind of spoiled it a bit.

#213 imam number 12

Why don't you go perform a sexual act upon yourself? I have a pair of tweezers you could use but, don't bother to return them.

#221 Judith
Just wanted to quote Ms Glick's information regarding the EU's efforts to aid the jihadists

Unfortunately, in today's world, apparently nothing breeds condemnation and hatred more than military victories against jihadists.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference has called daily for an Ethiopian pullout from Somalia. So too, the Arab League demands that Ethiopia retreat. With their people on the ground retreating with the ICU, as has been their consistent policy towards Israel, so in Somalia the Arabs and Muslims wish to win at the negotiating table what they cannot achieve on the battlefield.

In this pursuit, they enjoy support from a familiar quarter. Five days before Ethiopia invaded Somalia, the EU attempted to mediate the conflict in a manner that would prolong and legitimize the ICU's control of Somalia.

#213 imam number 12

Honestly, some of you are as tolerant as your average head-chopping islamist, and about as rational.

Do you contribute anything to LGF?

/I mean, besides bitching about other commenters

#226 Earth2moonbat

Tolerance isn't the natural state of humans.

Would a pretty picture help?
After all, it is News Years Eve...:')

#220 DesertSage

Booo, who?

Don't let Saddam's ghost make you cry.
/old joke

Oh for christ sake Cognito, shut the fuck up. I got a brother that's the same way, just keeps talking long after everyone has quit listening to him, drives me nuts.

#223 Havoc

Noted.

229 mandymanners

Why don't you learn how to reason with people?

Bit of a stretch for you perhaps, but go for it sweetie.

#227 Pro-Bush Canuck

We're on the same team!

Look around a little more.

I've typed my 2 or 3 posts for the day on LGF, I'm out y'all. ;-) HAVE A HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Execution leaves Iraq wary

Effect falls short of expectations

December 31, 2006

BY AAMER MADHANI and TOM HUNDLEY

CHICAGO TRIBUNE

Sorry to go off thread but I saw this headline at the supermarket a little while ago and it epitomizes to me the agenda driven bias of the MSM.

The effect of Saddam's execution was death. I don't know what anyone else expects but death is pretty much my standard expectation from an execution.

The left wants to disparage Bush and America so badly that they get bizarre with their presentation of the news.

What effect were they looking for? The end of violence, the appearance of fountains that dispense an elixir that brings eternal youth?
Instant peace between age old sectarian rivalries?

Part of the disease of liberalism is an institutionalization of open-ended expectations which becomes the burden of big government to satisfy.

Why don't they just print everyday in banner headlines: "We hate Bush and America"
They'd save themselves the effort of pretending to gather and report news.

But then, maybe it's just me interpreting every event with the Gramscian paradigm in mind.

And some more, Judith, from Ms Glick's column, to show clearly which side the EU is on:

On December 20, EU mediator Louis Michel shuttled between Baidoa and Mogadishu. Later that day he triumphantly announced, "There is a strong, good will by both parties to resolve this conflict with political dialogue."

When word of the Ethiopian invasion got out, Michel - like his associates in the EU Secretariat - moved immediately to condemn Ethiopia. Sunday he said, "I condemn in the strongest terms the escalation of the conflict in Somalia into an all-out war and appeal for all Somali sides to cease immediately all hostilities. I express my deepest concern on the reported involvement of foreign forces in Somalia and urge all external players to refrain immediately from intervening militarily in Somali affairs and provoke further violence."

Last week, as he engaged in his shuttle diplomacy, Michel pointedly did not take a public stand regarding the ICU's declaration of jihad against Ethiopia or its announcement that it would target any UN-peacekeepers that entered the country.

Israelis routinely assume that Europe's pro-jihadist policy towards the Palestinians is a result of anti-Semitism or anger over Israel's military victory in 1967. But the EU's treatment of Ethiopia and the TFG indicates that Brussels' hostility towards the Jewish state is part of a much further-reaching policy. Europe's pro-jihad position toward the war in Somalia indicates that its support for jihad is over-arching rather than limited to specific battlegrounds.

And just look, we have another one in 234.

You don't want to reason, so you insult.

Fair enough, I guess.

Happy New Year All. Hopefully, 2007 will be the year our political leadership decides to name the enemy and start fighting the war in earnest.

With regards to the MSM, who really cares what they say? They are completely exposed. Those that care to can access any number of information outlets and get all viewpoints on an issue. The MSM just happens to represent the far left view. Everyone knows it, except apparantly, the MSM. That's what makes them so sad.

Cognito,
I too value your attempt to discuss issues. Too often these threads become "chat" rooms. I thought that's what the Lounge is for. Half the time I will post something provacative just to "stir the pot" between all the {}'s. I have been accused of being a troll and the truth is that I am probably the biggest hawk in the room (well besides Iron Fist). I have spent over half my life, at sea, in the USN, USCG and USMM. I only want what is best for my country and my countrymen. So I don't hold back and neither should you. If I wanted to be in an echo chamber I would go to Kos.

234 lowandslow,

That sure does sound snazzy, but I'm only responding -- responding -- to other people's posts.

And I'll remind you that, ah, there's nothing here to do but have conversations. Or should we dance?

:)

#213 imam number 12

I'm usually very tolerant. I just don't like Cognito. He reminds me of a mouse. :)

ö

You remind me of a chipmunk.

Someone better nuke that well. Here comes Imam12...
Iran website heralding 'Mahdi' by springtime
State media: Shiite messiah to kill archenemy in Jerusalem, may arrive during next equinox

An official state media website in Iran has posted a message heralding the coming of the Shiite messianic figure, Imam Mahdi, noting he could arrive by the spring equinox.

"Imam Mahdi (may God hasten his reappearance) will appear all of a sudden on the world scene with a voice from the skies announcing his reappearance at the holy Ka'ba in Mecca," the message says.

227 Pro-Bush Canuck

We most certainly are.

Alas some of us are remarkably inflexible and intollerant.

Use of the term "Gramscian" in comments on LGF..

2002 2
2003 9
2004 4
2005 26
2006 612

I rest my case.

#241 imam number 12

And just look, we have another one in 234.

You don't want to reason, so you insult.

Fair enough, I guess.

It was a question.

/you don't reason, you whine about others, that's all you do on LGF

242 sailordude,

truth is that I am probably the biggest hawk in the room

Haha -- me too, actually. Nobody ever asks about that, but yep, I'm a dyed-in-the-wool hawk.

244 Cattt

You don't remind me of anything at all. You are either naturally abusive of simply intellectually lazy in that you cannot approach any viewpoint you find objectionable in a rational manner.

Do you want to insult or argue? There is a difference. The dictionary is your friend here.

As PB-Canuck said, we are on the same 'side'. One wonders why it's handbags at dawn with a few here.

#201,
Some of the victims killed by Saddam in the incident that he was specifically on trial for were shot, some were hanged, but some were put into the equivalent of large meat grinders.

Hard to think he got off any way but lightly.

245 Killgore Trout

Oh, that reminds me of a song. How did it go? Hmmm-

Springtime for Madhi and Persia!
Iran is happy and gay!

No, that's not it. :)

250 imam number 12

With most people, I prefer to discuss. You, I think of as a tasty snack.

253 Cattt

I am laughing at you - and not in a nice way. :x

#211 EE
#188 Judith
It's an anti american stance at the bottom of it all.

#242 sailordude

With regards to the MSM, who really cares what they say?

My guess is that at least half the people in the US. And the point-of-view as expressed by the MSM is held by those folks who give us the likes of Pelosi, Kennedy, Murtha, ...

'BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. military death toll in Iraq has reached 2,974, one more than the number of deaths in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, according to an Associated Press count on Tuesday.'
// AP Dec. 24, 2006

'BAGHDAD, Iraq - The death of a Texas soldier, announced Sunday by the Pentagon, raised the number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq to at least 3,000 since the war began, according to an Associated Press count.'
// AP Dec 31, 2006

. 'BAGHDAD, Iraq - The announcement today by the Associated Press of it's second 'grim milestone' within a week marked a troubling new low for the widely reviled news agency, accused by some critics of actively supporting Islamic terrorists in Iraq.'
// DP Dec. 31, 2006 [Disassociated Press]

Use of the term "Gramscian" in comments on LGF..

2002 2
2003 9
2004 4
2005 26
2006 612

I rest my case.

I do notice a trend.

247 Mike C.

OK, now I'm tired of it too.

Let's talk about Henri de Toulouse-Lactrec instead. (Same issues with stunted growth and medical stuff, much more fun.)

254 imam number 12

Chipmunks are so moody. :)

#198 Pro-Bush Canuck

fiendish,

nefarious,

unhallowed

Those all work well for me.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!

2007

The true nature of a troll -- continued fighting even after it has been defeated several times over. It would be a nice touch for the new year to have an ignore button that feeds a killfilter specific for each account.

#245 Killgore Trout 12/31/2006 03:43PM PST

Someone better nuke that well. Here comes Imam12...
Iran website heralding 'Mahdi' by springtime

Thats going to be right up there with the "experts " that predicted a June 2005 invasion of Iran...er June 2006 invasion...er October 2006 invasion of Iran.

Well, I doubt this article will make the MSM and certainly anybody in Iran who throws that story back inat them in summer,2007, I would bet they feel the heat. LOL

222 Mike C -

I agree with you. The term has come to signal "scroll-on by" whenever I see it. Know what it means, don't need to read it again.

#242 sailordude:

"Hopefully, 2007 will be the year our political leadership decides to name the enemy and start fighting the war in earnest"

You've been drinking, haven't you?

The MSM finally gets another round milestone. As a former soldier, it is their contempt that ticks me off. They are worse than aloof of those of us who served or are serving. Most of them genuinely despise the military. They simply want to take a poke at the President.

AP et al: Bite me.

#1 otis
That's Sharpsburg, Suhr!

HEY!

Walked in on an argument...who's winning?

I wanna be like the French...pick the the side that's winning, wait till it looks like it's over...

Then proclaim VICTORY! Thanks to my intervention.

GO ETHIOPIA!

Send more food people.

262 inrussetshadows,

The true nature of a troll -- continued fighting even after it has been defeated several times over.

Since it was me you argued with earlier, Russet, I can only assume you're referring to me here. Why don't you sum up for me, in succint fashion, just how I was 'defeated.'

Here we go:

Random Word generator - instant obscure adjectives.

Sample:
unretributory
postcartilaginous