Discussion for article #223659
Sensible talk on Fox News? I don’t believe it.
17 Likes
When Richard Mourdock explains how the swap for Bergdahl makes America like NazI Germany because [insert mistaken historical event here], then the circle will be squared.
In the meantime: really, Mr. Williams? And what, after all this time, did you expect?
12 Likes
Juan Williams, over the past couple of years, has given evidence that he realizes just what a Devil’s bargain he made. Question now is–does he have the guts to walk away from the Fox money-teat?
5 Likes
A number of conservatives have criticized others on this issue, including Krauthammer and Brooks. More will probably follow as they realize how alarming it is to administer a litmus test to the politics of freeing P.O.W.s.
21 Likes
Anyone who says they changed their mind about Bergdahl because they didn’t have all the facts, remind them that they still don’t have all the facts.
31 Likes
I would like to commend Mr. Williams for his comments.
I suspect that he has gotten fed up with being the “token black right leaning pawn” and has decided that maybe the money isn’t enough to completely still his conscience.
I’m a bit surprised that it took this long, but can appreciate the courage it took to speak out so forthrightly.
12 Likes
I looked at his bio and what Williams has done in the past including work on NPR and NYT, WaPo, Atlantic Monthly and writings about Thurgood Marshall and the civil rights movement does not square with what he’s doing currently for his Fox masters, so it must be an enormous, constantly refilling teat and brings new meaning to the cliche of losing one’s moral compass.
5 Likes
Just another example of right wing political contrarianism.
If Obama is for “it”, then they will be against “it”, no matter what “it” may be … even if “it” is a legislative proposal or policy stance that they once championed.
14 Likes
Yes Mr.Juan Williams, some have flip-flopped. That doesn’t detract from the fact that the President of the United States, Mr. Obama, has flaunted the law for personal political gains. It doesn’t detract from the fact that the Obama Administration has tried to portray the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl as the liberation of a hero, something worth the release of 5 terrorists that this administration has failed to try in a court of law for the past 6 years.
It doesn’t detract from the fact that several of this man unit team members have nothing nice to say about Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, and regard him as a traitor who shed his weapons and left his guard post. They should decide if this man should get a parade or not. It doesn’t detract from the fact that 4 people lost their lives looking for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and their families should decide if this man gets a parade or not. But you fail to recognize all of this and for that shame on you, Mr. Juan Williams.
Juan. Juan. You should know by now that in order for comments like that to have an impact, the people you are speaking to must be capable of logical thought and shame.
6 Likes
One two-part question for you: (a) did you serve in the US armed forces and (b) do you have a comprehensive knowledge of the Uniform Code of Military Justice?
3 Likes
You don’t what you’re talking about, Skippy. Prisoners of war can’t be tried as criminals.
Bergdahl’s platoon mates are understandably pissed off but that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for every death that occurred in Paktika Province after he went missing.
16 Likes
Craven is a good word.
1 Like
5 Likes
Yeah Juan, Don’t you know that republicraps have not a single thing, not one accomplishment to run on on 2014. And you want to take away another FAKE SCANDAL. How dare you. Don’t you know the nutjobs like our LIBS thrive on the lies and distortion that is the FOX machine, Yes, SHAME on you for breaking the mold of being a “good” repug and toting the line for MR. AILES. How dare you sir. And for LIBS. GFY.
4 Likes
Libs, I applaud the ambition in your desire to argue with smart, well-informed people. You’re the underdog, and everyone wants to root for the underdog. But you’re really, really going to have to learn the difference between facts on the one hand and assertions and assumptions, half-truths and misinformation on the other. It would also be helpful to learn the difference between “flaunted” and “flouted.” There’s plenty more you should learn but that’s enough homework for today.
11 Likes
Libs:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/DA-PAM-27-9-1.pdf
If you’re trying to prove Doremus_Jessup’s assertion (“You don’t what you’re talking about, Skippy”), you’re doing a great job.
The Nurmenberg trials were for “war crimes”. Not every German soldier, even those that killed many Americans, were tried.
An enemy combatant is not a terrorist and is not a war criminal. Killing American soldiers is not a war crime. It’s just war.
10 Likes
Craven is as craven does.
Point goes to Juan Williams.