The "Baghdad Bobs" of the 1st Cav ought to re-visit that portion of their oath about "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", before they start being asked hostile questions which originate from the E-Ring of Ft. Fumble.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Some Things Never Change; Stars & Stripes Edition, Pt. 2
The MSM is beginning to pay attention. The thrust is clear, the sin of the reporter was that he refused to write the stories that the duty liarspublic affairs officers wanted him to run.
The "Baghdad Bobs" of the 1st Cav ought to re-visit that portion of their oath about "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", before they start being asked hostile questions which originate from the E-Ring of Ft. Fumble.
The "Baghdad Bobs" of the 1st Cav ought to re-visit that portion of their oath about "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", before they start being asked hostile questions which originate from the E-Ring of Ft. Fumble.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I wouldn't want a biased reporter in there either. They didn't have a problem with what he wrote, it is what he refused to write that was at isssue. He basically wrote all about the people who wanted the US Military out, but didn't write anything about the people that want them to stay. His lack of objectivity along with his breaking of other rules (communications during blackout!) warrants the actions taken. He violated the mandate of objective reporting.
No, what he violated was that he wouldn't report what the 1st Cav PAOs wanted him to report. What we wouldn't do, in essence, was take 1st Cav's point of view and print it as fact.
1st Cav wanted a propagandist, not a reporter.
Post a Comment