Bloggers Up in Arms Over Linda Foley's Comments - Page 3

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own

Article comments

Subscribe to comment RSS

• 1 - RJ

  May 20, 2005 at 10:06 pm

  We need an Amazon link...

• 2 - Matt

  May 20, 2005 at 10:08 pm

  Wow. Bloggers up in arms? Call a fucking congressional committee, then. This is big stuff. We can't have political bloggers up in arms.
  
  John Cole wants evidence? Holy shit! Big news!
  
  Mr. Preston and Junkyard Blog thinks Foley should step down? Earth shattering!
  
  There has never been a greater divide than there is between how important political bloggers think they are, and how important they actually are.
  
  I hope this one hits Google's front page. Its big news for sure.

• 3 - Matt

  May 20, 2005 at 10:10 pm

  RJ--forgive Myopic Zeal for his/her haste in getting this up, sans Amazon link. Sometimes hard news needs to get to the masses, and quick.

• 4 - RJ

  May 20, 2005 at 10:10 pm

  BTW, good article...

• 5 - RJ

  May 20, 2005 at 10:11 pm

  Matt...
  
  Can't you admit that bloggers have some power now, and that their efforts might very well end Ms. Foley's career?

• 6 - Matt

  May 20, 2005 at 10:15 pm

  Umm...no, not really...
  
  Frankly, I don't give a shit either way. Never heard of Foley, don't give a fuck if she loses her job over making a dumb comment.
  
  What I do love is watching self-important people give themselves a lot more credit than they are due.

• 7 - Matt

  May 20, 2005 at 10:23 pm

  If you missed it, check out this blogger's review of traffic changes since the last year. Sites like blogcritics are flourishing, while political blogs are losing steam. Big time.
  
  

  8 - Matt

  May 20, 2005 at 10:24 pm

  Let's try that link again

• 9 - Comment

  May 21, 2005 at 12:57 am

  Its OK to bomb afghanistan WITHOUT evidence.
  
  It is OK to torture people in x-ray and abu gharaib WITHOUT evidence
  
  It is OK to invade Iraq and destroy the country and kill oh 100,000 MORE people WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE
  
  but it NOT OK to say the obvious as Ms Foley has said :( ...

• 10 - FPF/HR

  May 21, 2005 at 11:30 am

  
  Conc.: Foley's rightful remarks - see Url. - may I say there's nothing new under the sun?
  
  She and we journalistst and correspondents are damn right:
  
  PENTAGON THREATENED EARLIER TO KILL REPORTERS IN IRAQ - Url.:
  http://tinyurl.com/7gnsu
  
  "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be . . . The People cannot be safe without information.
  
  When the press is free, and every man is able to read, all is safe."
  
  Thomas Jefferson
  
  HR
  
  

• 11 - Dave Nalle

  May 21, 2005 at 12:48 pm

  PPF/HR - if this is the level of intellectual accuity which you and other journalists display then I now fully understand the disreputable state of modern journalism.
  
  I followed the link. The Pentagon did NOT say it was targetting journalists. It warned journalists that if they used devices which issue similar signals to those being used to trigger terrorists bombs then the devices generating the signals might be targeted. In this case some cell phones, pagers and radio phones.
  
  Warning journalists that something they do might put them in danger is NOT threatening them, it's an effort to help keep them safe. Targeting cell phones and pagers is NOT targeting journalists just because they happen to have them.
  
  Twisting the Pentagon's warning this way is really despicable and shows such a blatant bias that if you really are a journalist you ought to be banned from any respectable news outlet.
  
  Dave

• 12 - Henk Ruyssenaars

  Mar 25, 2010 at 9:35 am

  Dave:
  
  You must work for the Pentagon!
  
  If you think the BBC's Kathe Adie is wrong, why not tell her?
  
  
  Henk R.
  
  

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.

Name:

URL:

Remember name and url?

Comment:

Please preview your comment.