Oliver Willis

8 Responses to “Know Your Propaganda”

1. 1 Realist
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 2:24 pm

   Classic Oliver.

   Don’t debate or refute the facts in the story, just dismiss the messenger as a right wing shill.

   Granted, it’s much less taxing and has the added bonus of giving you more time for posts on far more important subjects like Jessica Alba, Superman and weiner dogs.

2. 2 Rheinhard
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 2:43 pm

   Um excuse me… can you point out where the “facts” were in that WaPo piece? As far as I can tell, there was only one actual “fact” anywhere in it (which we must take on faith since there is no corroboration other than his personal account), namely Hegseth’s recounting of one anecdote about a particular town where his unit was. Said “fact” certainly doesn’t seem to mitigate for expanding the war, as most cons seem to want. And it seems to me to argue against what we’re doing the most of right now, arming both sides and hoping whoever comes out on top will like us.

   Other than this 1 paragraph, the entire rest of the article is speculation. He dislikes Carl Levin’s article because “the chaos that would surely result” would be bad. Surely? Where did you get your crystal ball sir? This is another of those lines from the neocons that have been telling us for 4 years now of all the things that would “surely” happen in Iraq if only we did what they said, and they haven’t gotten one goddam thing right yet! The entire rest of the screed is like this, warning us poor ignorant clods at home of all the stuff that will “surely happen” and which “everyone knows”, etc. etc.

   It used to be that “everyone knew” Saddam had WMDs, “everyone knew” that Shia and Sunni would join hands and sing Kumbayah once Saddam was gone, and “everyone knew” that the Sun went around the Earth. One wonders what “everyone” will know tomorrow?

3. 3 Realist
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 4:20 pm

   Rheinhard:

   Everything in your post is a fair criticism of the story linked. Too bad Oliver couldn’t bother to expend the energy to make a similar attempt. All he could manage was that the author is “yet another product of far-right think tanks that do nothing but lie”.

   Now THAT’S what I call a critical analysis!

   I guess he’s counting on his commentors to do all the heavy lifting for him.

   Stick with those “Hot Chicks That I’d Love To Have But They Would Never In A Million Years Have Anything To Do With Me” postings, Oliver!

4. 4 frameone
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 4:52 pm

   That’s great, Realist. When the “facts’ of the article are directly referenced and refuted, keep attacking Oliver.

   I’m sure the fact that Samarra, the city referenced by the author as a shining example of what we can accomplish in Iraq is still an
   unfolding disaster means nothing to you:

   The Iraqi commander of the operation in Diyala conceded that, despite efforts to encircle leaders from the militant group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, they had been able to flee. “Elements and leaders of Al Qaeda fled to Tikrit, Samarra and Buhruz,” said Abdel-Kareem al-Rubaie, the commander. But over all, Iraqi officials were pleased that the insurgent leaders were no longer in the provincial capital.

   In Samarra, a roadside bomb exploded Sunday, killing four Interior Ministry commandos, wounding two and destroying their truck. The commandos recently arrived in Samarra to secure the town after the bombing of the Askariya shrine. A bomb also exploded near an American convoy in the town. There were no reports of casualties.

5. 5 Realist
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 5:12 pm

   That’s great, Realist. When the “facts’ of the article are directly referenced and refuted, keep attacking Oliver.

   Yes, but the “referenced and refuted” was done by Rheinhard, not Oliver. My criticism of Oliver is that he’s apparently gotten too lazy to actually do that work himself and is instead outsourcing it to his commentors.

   I’m sorry, is that too complicated for you to figure out?

   Also, “some American commanders expressed doubts about the ability of Iraqi troops to hold the gains made” = “unfolding disaster”?

   Hyperbole much?

6. 6 Nimrod Gently
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 5:21 pm

   I believe the phrase “attacking the messenger” came up earlier, Sir Realist.

7. 7 DrPidgro
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 5:49 pm

   Why call them war truthers? Can we go back to denialists?

8. 8 Quaker in a Basement
   Jun 25th, 2007 at 6:29 pm

   Realist, the WaPo did an inadequate job of informing its readers of the known positions and interests of an op-ed contributor. It is not “attacking the messenger” to correctly identify the writer’s biases.

Leave a Reply