Associated Press now using "internet chatrooms" as a source to slam Clark!

[Democat]

"Internet chat rooms and several news stories speculate that Clark played a role in the tactical planning for the operation that ended with the deaths of about 80 followers of the Branch Davidian religious sect and its leader, David Koresh."

http://www.salon.com/politics/wire/2003/11/28/clark/index.html

It doesn't get any lower than this. The media are sourcing right wing internet chat rooms as a source in their articles slamming Clark.

Can the media get any lower or any more biased?

[politicat]

1. "If It's on the internet, it must be true?" Huh? NT....

[FrenchieCat]

5. Really?

That's not quite how I see it...

plus this is a dupe IMO:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=790029
-------------------------------------
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3441113,00.html
Clark's campaign flatly denies any planning role by Clark in Waco. And an investigation by a Justice Department special counsel, former U.S. Sen. John Danforth, R-Mo., bears out that assertion. Danforth found no improper actions by anyone in the U.S. military regarding Waco and concluded that the fiery end to the siege resulted from the Davidians setting fires inside the building compound where they were holed up.

Federal law restricts the role of the military in civilian law enforcement operations and ``we weren't involved in the planning or execution of the Waco operation in any way, shape, form or fashion,'' says retired Army Lt. Gen. Horace Grady ``Pete'' Taylor, who ran the Fort Hood military base 60 miles from the site of the Waco siege.

Waco ``was a civilian operation that the military provided some support to'' and ``any decisions about where the support came from were my decisions, not General Clark's,'' Taylor said this week.

and...........
-----------------------------------
http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/state/7369623.htm

Posted on Fri, Nov. 28, 2003

Commanding officer says Clark had no direct role in Waco siege
PETE YOST
Associated Press
--------
Internet chat rooms and several news stories speculate that Clark played a role in the tactical planning for the operation that ended with the deaths of about 80 followers of the Branch Davidian religious sect and its leader, David Koresh.
-------
Federal law restricts the role of the military in civilian law enforcement operations and "we weren't involved in the planning or execution of the Waco operation in any way, shape, form or fashion," says retired Army Lt. Gen. Horace Grady "Pete" Taylor, who ran the Fort Hood military base 60 miles from the site of the Waco siege.

Waco "was a civilian operation that the military provided some support to" and "any decisions about where the support came from were my decisions, not General Clark's," Taylor said this week.

"Clark's totally innocent in this regardless of what anybody thinks about him," says Taylor, Clark's former commander. "He played no direct role in this activity nor did any of us."


La France a dit NON a Bush......malheureusement pour les pauvre Americans, Bush est le pResident des Etats Unit. America's Media's Stinks like 12 year old French Camembert!

[Ediacara]

11. I think the post you're replying to is meant to be sarcastic

as obviously not everything on the net is true.... take a look at freerepublic for example :-)

[TexasPatriot]

2. ROFL

i've seen internet chatrooms as a source of speculation that Bush* personally created AIDS... next thing you know the AP will be running Batboy stories.

[IndianaGreen]

3. This is total crap

A perfect case of McCarthyism! Making "indirect and fleeting" sound like the equivalent of "fellow traveler."

[JNelson6563]

4. Wow! This IS a new low!

Second hand speculation. What a crisis our country is in! Fascist government and press bought and paid for. I suppose next we will hear about Dean's secret career as an abortionist who eats kittens and on it will go about any perceived frontrunner.

Shameful.

Julie

[Andyjunction]

14. yes!

They could even cite your post as a source! That's how it works, right? :wtf:

[carols]

17. Cat-eating closet abortionist?

They'd never make THAT one up - sounds too much like the life and times of Frist. People might be suspicious that they were behind the rumor :-)
Carol

[fujiyama]

24. That's my guess

after this article. Once the AP wires have such worthless hit pieces, nothing is beyond them.

It's obvious that even AP has realized that good journalism isn't very profitable and it's better to be on the side of those with money and power.

So, let's see...Dean eats babies (don't think reporting Dean eating human babies is beyond these bastards!), Clark kills them for sport like in Waco, Kerry is an evil NE liberal elitest commie...

The smearing has begun!

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

6. They will repeat right-wing lies and rumors

but they would never print scandals or stories about Republicans. It's so one sided since 2000 it's shocking.

[Cocoa]

7. maybe Pete Yost will pick up some of our stuff

we've got some stuff on Bush that is at least as good as that Clark crap. Think he'll call around and look into it for us?

[ShaneGR]

8. I have noticed the quality of material in Salon has fallen

It's really a shame, because when they first started it was a good operation.

[fujiyama]

9. This isn't a Salon story

It from the Associated Press, the supposed paragon of fair and trustworthy news.

Well, I suppose at this point nothing is trustworthy -- not the Washington Post, the NYTimes, CNN, MSNBC, etc.

[KittyWampus]

10. General Boykin Was Involved In Waco Not Clark

Please spread the word.



snip

The Justice Department and the FBI requested Schoomaker and William Boykin "by name to meet with the
attorney general," states one internal Army document created before the meeting. "These soldiers have
extensive special operations experience and have worked with the FBI on previous occasions. Schoomaker
"told my watch NCO ... that the FBI plans to pick him up at Fort Hood and fly him first to Waco to assess the
situation, and then on to Washington D.C.," states the internal Army document. Schoomaker, currently the
Army Chief of Staff, has a background in Army Special Forces. Boykin, who has similar experience, is the
Army general whose controversial church speeches cast the war on terrorism in religious terms, prompting
recent calls from some in Congress for him to step down.

At the meeting with Reno, Schoomaker and Boykin refused an invitation to assess the plan to inject tear
gas into the buildings, a move designed to force the Davidians to flee the compound, an internal Army
document states.

"We can't grade your paper," one of the two Special Forces officers was quoted as telling the Justice
Department and the FBI. The comment referred to the legal restrictions prohibiting direct participation in
civilian law enforcement operations.

[Jerseycoa]

12. Good one

:7

[IndianaGreen]

13. This is an attempt to keep people in line who would otherwise

may be inclined to voting for Clark. How else can one explain resurrecting Waco, and trying to smear Clark for it?

[maggrwaggr]

15. Clark healed my blindness. And turned water into wine.

Just in case anyone's paying attention.

Hello, AP?

:)

[maggrwaggr]

16. Wow. Send them a press release. I just did:

Sent to:

[e-mail]


For Immediate Release

November 28, 2003

Associated Press Sinks to New Low

Associated Press writer Peter Yost sinks to a new low today, using information he's found in "internet chat rooms" to smear a leading Democratic Presidental candidate.

Writes Yost: "Internet chat rooms and several news stories speculate that Clark played a role in the tactical planning for the operation that ended with the deaths of about 80 followers of the Branch Davidian religious sect and its leader, David Koresh. "

The world can only speculate why Yost would stoop to such a low, seeing as how internet chat rooms have absolutely no credibility as news sources.

Yost was unavailable for comment, but is probably too embarrassed to show his face and is perhaps hiding under a rock.

This serves as yet another example of how the so-called "free press" in America has become a whoring operation for Republican and Corporate interests.

The biggest news story of the day is that most Americans believe, according to polls, that the news media is still "free" and that they are receiving something close to the truth in their news.

You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

This is no joke.

Here's a story for you. A nice piece of investigative journalism: When did the AP resort to being a scummy cheeringleading propaganda-spouting arm of the right wing?

Maybe someone can write a book and win an award. Oh, but that would be "journalism". You're not in that business.

May you all drown in rivers of your own boiling shit.

[maggrwaggr]

18. At the bottom of the page you can contact Salon. Do it.

I just did. Told them exactly what I thought, in no uncertain terms.

Fuckers.

[FrenchieCat]

20. Great letter...

I will in turn do my part. Thanks for yours.

There is a f*cking conspiracy not to allow Clark to win this nomination....and it is becoming painfully obvious to the eyes of even those that do not support Clark.

Whether you watch CNN, MSnbc, Fox or read any of the major papers.....they are scared sh*tless for one reason or another..... They are all shamelessly promoting Howard Dean......Matthews said that Dean could win...didn't say why or how.....this is all so suspect....that right wing media whores all of the sudden have found their messiah.....and not matter what poll Clark is winning or is tied in, he gets absolutely no play.

I wonder what the White House is holding over the assholes' heads?

Then again, these are the same news organization that were all for the war.....

Maybe they just don't want to see the war profits from covering such to go away.....

After all is'nt that why this economy is "recovering"? All that goddamn money that we gave Halliburton, etal.....I understand that war is usually a boon to an economy. All that manufacturing of all that sh*t to be sent over to Iraq.......

Maybe Bush needed a war to better the economy??? needed 160 Billion injected into it like pronto!

THEY ARE ALL WHORES, I TELL YOU ....AND THIS IS BORDERING ON TREASON!

[Cleita]

19. So they're not blaming Janet Reno and by default Clinton

anymore? Cheesh, I can't keep up with this 'pin the tail on donkey' game anymore.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Who was the

Governor of Texas when WACO occurred anyway? Was it Bush?

[AmericanDem]

22. soon to come Glory piece on Dean

all part of the Rove machine at work. Expect a Glory spread on Dean to appear soon. Damn is Rove worried about Clark!!!:puke:

[FrenchieCat]

25. and WTF is Dean doing

in this article on the PNAC site?????

http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20031117.htm

Howard Dean is no George McGovern. He opposed the Iraq war, he says, because it was "the wrong war at the wrong time," not because it was emblematic of a fundamentally misguided American foreign policy. Dean has not, in fact, challenged the reigning foreign policy paradigms of the post-9/11 era: the war on terrorism and the nexus between terrorism and rogue states with weapons of mass destruction. "I support the president's war on terrorism," he told Tim Russert this summer. He supported the war in Afghanistan. He even supported Israel's strike against a terrorist camp in Syria because Israel, like the United States, has the "right" to defend itself. (European Deanophiles take note.) Dean does not call for a reduction in American military power but talks about using the "iron fist" of our "superb military." He talks tough about North Korea and at times appears to be criticizing the Bush administration for not addressing that "imminent" threat more seriously. And he especially enjoys lacerating Bush for not taking the fight more effectively to al Qaeda, a bit like John F. Kennedy criticizing Eisenhower in 1960 for not being tough enough on communism.

Of course, all this tough talk could be hot air. Maybe Dean is doing a great job controlling and hiding his inner peacenik. If so, that in itself tells you something about the current state of the foreign policy debate. Even Mr. Speak-My-Mind thinks he has to talk tough. George McGovern didn't.

Another possibility is that Dean's opposition to the Iraq war has been over-interpreted by his supporters on the Democratic left. They think he rejects the overall course of American foreign policy, just as they do. But maybe he doesn't. They think he's one of them, but his views may not be all that different from those of today's Democratic centrist establishment. When Dean criticizes Bush's foreign policy "unilateralism," he sounds like a policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, not a radical. "There are two groups of people who support me because of the war," Dean told Mara Liasson a few months ago. "One are the people who always oppose every war, and in the end I think I probably won't get all of those people." The other group, Dean figures, simply "appreciates the fact" that he "stood up early" and spoke his mind and opposed Bush while other Democrats were cowed. Dean may not be offering a stark alternative to Bush's foreign policy, therefore, so much as he is simply offering Democrats a compelling and combative alternative to Bush himself. The Iraq war provided the occasion to prove his mettle.

[AmericanDem]

26. I find this striking!

I have never read this. Why this would be on the PNAC site is beyond me. I think you should share this with other Dean supporters here. To me he comes across as a sneak. Just my $.02

[KittyWampus]

29. All That Piece Consists Of Are Out Of Context Snippets

from Dean.

Who the heck knows why its there/

[The Backlash Cometh]

23. OMIGOD! They're reusing the Janet Reno strategy!

Isn't it about time that people tell the truth about David Koresch? He was a Jim Jones waiting to happen. Even though I believe the FBI's information was at fault in the decision-making, the truth is, the media would have mounted pressure on the newly appointed Reno to do exactly what eventually happened.

[Cocoa]

27. Yost used to work for the Washington Times

the Daily Howler writes about a Clinton / Kathleen Willey story he wrote.

http://www.google.com/custom?q=yost&sa=Google+Search&cof=AH%3Acenter%3BAWFID%3Ac32a032061318778%3B&domains=dailyhowler.com&sitesearch=dailyhowler.com

Looks like they're going with Waco against Clark, or thinking about it. Look for this to pop up all over the place.

[fujiyama]

28. I'm not too sure if Salon...

had anything to do with this. It's an AP wire feed. They simply post all AP wire feeds on the side.

So, if you're going to spend time sending emails, send 'em to the Associated Press.

[TexasPatriot]

32. yup, just the AP wire

here it is at ABC

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20031128_1208.html

though, after the Novak-Plame fiasco you'd think editors would pay more attention to the stories they run on their sites.

A while back I speculated that the right, in it's ever expanding search for some skeleton in Clark's closet, would make the assertion that because of his knighthood, and the controversy of the 'lost 13th amendment' to the constitution, Clark lost his right to be president. I'm still waiting on that one.

Oh and when the AP runs the story... here's the relevant refutation link:

http://www.civil-liberties.com/13/page0.html

ps Another scoop for the AP - Anyone ever notice how Batboy (http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/batboy/index.cfm) looks an awful lot like Barbara Bush? Methinks Neil is not the only Bush brother the family doth disown.

[Donna Zen]

30. Bending minds in all the reich places

Can the media get any lower or any more biased?


Common on, you know that they can and they will.

It doesn't get any lower than this. The media are sourcing right wing internet chat rooms as a source in their articles slamming Clark.

They could use DU posts any day of the week. Sorry if that offended anyone, I just can get over the Clark=king of the oil oligarchy post, that was fought with such bravery. I went to work on two hours of sleep satisfied that if any poster was willing to plow through 300+ posts, they would come away at least questioning the false assertion.

At the time, I was neither for or against Clark, I knew enough to know that the statements were lies. I want to thank all of the Clark bashers who forced me into doing extentive research. It was that struggle that convinced me that Clark was one of the finest and best qualified candidates to run for the presidency in my life time.

What this tells me and should alert others to is:

1) The GOP internal polling on bush vs Clark must be worse for junior than we think. They are both trying to keep Clark off of the ticket and at the very least bring up his negatives. I think they are more concerned about the west and the heartland than the South. Will Pitt's dad said Clark cannot carry Arkansas, from what I've heard I politely disagree.

2) They absolutely want to pick our candidate for us. It is the oldest trick in deck, and the first card played. Denying this is pure bunk when it is everywhere you look.

3) They are recycling this bullshit. One week it is Pristina, then Shelton, then Kosovo and Milosovic, and now Waco. They not only put it out in the press, they use that jumping point to move the crap out onto the web. Haven't you had a liberal friend email this junk? Milosovic turned up on NPR last week, although this time Eric Westervelt didn't do the honors.

Each party has friends in the press, the difference IMHO is the willingness on the part of those journalist to out right lie. I'm thinking Novak, but there are many we do not suspect outright.

I will not quit fighting, but I admit to feeling pretty low about this. Almost as low as they are willing to go.

[FrenchieCat]

33. It is pretty disgusting, uh?

and the worst thing is that Democrats are falling for it, again! They forgot to hang on to the GOP playbook and get a clue!

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/010603a.html
A Future Guide

If the past is any guide, Democrats should expect that:

-- The attacks will be personal, not issue-based. Personality quirks or flaws will be used to "define" the Democrats so these traits can be easily transformed into laugh lines for the pundit programs and the late-night comedy shows.

-- The attacks will be thematic, rather than specific. For instance, the Democratic challenger will be described as "Clintonian" -- or in Edwards's case an "ambulance chasing trial lawyer" -- rather than someone who supported or opposed a specific policy initiative.

-- The attack machine will be relentless. Every utterance by the eventual Democratic nominee will be examined to see if it fits one of the thematic patterns that have been chosen as effective attack lines.

-- Statements or issues that fit a "theme" will be repeated again and again in every media venue, from Web sites to radio to TV pundit shows to newspaper columns. Every right-wing pundit – and many mainstream commentators – will use nearly identical language until the "theme" becomes "conventional wisdom."

-- The mainstream press will incorporate the attack lines into regular news stories by using the objective-sounding criticism that the Democrat has failed to counter the attack and committed the political sin of letting his enemy define him.

-- Most importantly, it will not matter who the Democratic nominee is. No one is immune. The attack machine will find a thematic pattern for each potential nominee and will pound the Democratic candidate into the ground with it.

Oblivious Democrats

Yet, amazingly, despite experiencing this Republican strategy at least since 1988 and despite suffering devastating losses in the 2002 midterm elections, national Democratic leaders remain unwilling or unable to address the fundamental messaging and media disadvantages they face.

While there have been some public statements in recent months by party leaders about the importance of developing a counterbalance to the right-wing attack machine, including from Bill Clinton and Al Gore, so far nothing of substance has been created.

Instead, Democratic leaders are signaling their intent to continue working within the existing national media framework. A key indication that the Democrats remain oblivious to the impending political disaster is the advice that Democratic pollsters have continued to deliver both before and after the midterm elections.

[FrenchieCat]

31. This is a popular theme here just like over at the Freepers!

from earlier today - Amazed on how much an ap article from none other than an alledged deranged writer can generate....More Peter Yost slime First he slimes Clinton about Kathleen Willey. He was writing for the Moonie Times back then. Then he moves to AP and defends Bush about Harken insider trading. God bless the searchable Daily Howler. from a cleander source Guys, we are in the big leagues: we get Boyers, Yost, Mattai - the guys they used to smear Clinton and Gore. Me thinks Clark be noticed?

Here's background on Peter Yost:
http://www.drudgereport.com/Weiss/082000.htm
with this quote "Mr. Yost is obviously a resourceful fellow. But honor, it seems, is a motive he is not equipped to understand."

here's more on the same ol' same ol'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=790029

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=792117#792252