Comments on: The Art of Lying by Omission http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/ Harangues that just make sense Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:44:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: actus http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/#comment-9566 actus Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:28:07 +0000 /?p=2747#comment-9566 "There are several organizations which would like to blow up a nuke in the US anonymously. " I'm talking about states that make poison gasses. They seem more trouble than they're worth. Or actually, they seem to be worth more in giving them up than in using them. “There are several organizations which would like to blow up a nuke in the US anonymously. ”

I’m talking about states that make poison gasses. They seem more trouble than they’re worth. Or actually, they seem to be worth more in giving them up than in using them.

]]> By: J. Peden http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/#comment-9560 J. Peden Tue, 15 Mar 2005 02:52:55 +0000 /?p=2747#comment-9560 Finally Kadafi tried real hard? Finally Kadafi tried real hard?

]]> By: Craig R. Harmon http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/#comment-9558 Craig R. Harmon Tue, 15 Mar 2005 02:02:52 +0000 /?p=2747#comment-9558 The main obstruction to standardizing this dudes name is that it is an Arabic name. It is very difficult to transliterate into English names from Arabic because 1. so many of Arabic's sounds have no equivalent in English, 2. grammarians have arrived at no agreement upon transliteration schemes (a genuine authority could probably be pointed to for each of the spellings that you list, er, except the last). For this reason one may find Usama/Osama bin Laden/bin Ladin in standard news sources. Only Saddam Hussein's name seems to have been standardized, even though the English spelling of lesser known persons, whose last names are spelled identically with Saddam's in Arabic, have been routinely spelled Husseyn. In short, don't hold your breath. The main obstruction to standardizing this dudes name is that it is an Arabic name. It is very difficult to transliterate into English names from Arabic because 1. so many of Arabic’s sounds have no equivalent in English, 2. grammarians have arrived at no agreement upon transliteration schemes (a genuine authority could probably be pointed to for each of the spellings that you list, er, except the last). For this reason one may find Usama/Osama bin Laden/bin Ladin in standard news sources. Only Saddam Hussein’s name seems to have been standardized, even though the English spelling of lesser known persons, whose last names are spelled identically with Saddam’s in Arabic, have been routinely spelled Husseyn. In short, don’t hold your breath.

]]> By: Rod Stanton http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/#comment-9557 Rod Stanton Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:30:57 +0000 /?p=2747#comment-9557 I know you will find this hard to believe but the LAT has been buring facts that do not support is "party line" ever since the Big O took over almost 45 years ago. Their editors are the most stingent censors outside of Cuba in the world. Nothing gets into the paper that contradicts their line unless it is burried on p25 with a 0.125 inch headline. And that happens once in a blue moon. I know you will find this hard to believe but the LAT has been buring facts that do not support is “party line” ever since the Big O took over almost 45 years ago. Their editors are the most stingent censors outside of Cuba in the world. Nothing gets into the paper that contradicts their line unless it is burried on p25 with a 0.125 inch headline. And that happens once in a blue moon.

]]> By: Ladainian http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/#comment-9556 Ladainian Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:32:33 +0000 /?p=2747#comment-9556 There are several organizations which would like to blow up a nuke in the US anonymously. With no one claiming credit, the US can't retaliate very well. Anyone else disturbed at this recent report about Israel "plans" to attack Iran's nuclear installations? These newspapers use this trick over and over again. They promote the simple task of documenting all possible military scenarios to the implication that some written "plan" is imminent, or an ongoing operation. <i> Horror, they are planning to attack!</i> In this case, LA Times uses the cover of London's Sunday Times having discovered the existance of a plan in Israel about attacking Iran. That's all they need to get them started. By reporting this fictitious Israel operation, LAT is basically telling Iran that they better use their nukes as soon as possible, before Israel swoops in and destroys them. If anything horrific happens, these cosmo-sipping LAT reporters will pat each other's backs telling us "We told you so, you should have listened to us about this Israel/Iran thing." Neat. Why doesn't the LAT report that the US is planning to attack Mexico, since the US certainly has a "plan" somewhere describing where tanks go if we were to do that. There are several organizations which would like to blow up a nuke in the US anonymously. With no one claiming credit, the US can’t retaliate very well.

Anyone else disturbed at this recent report about Israel “plans” to attack Iran’s nuclear installations? These newspapers use this trick over and over again. They promote the simple task of documenting all possible military scenarios to the implication that some written “plan” is imminent, or an ongoing operation. Horror, they are planning to attack!

In this case, LA Times uses the cover of London’s Sunday Times having discovered the existance of a plan in Israel about attacking Iran. That’s all they need to get them started.

By reporting this fictitious Israel operation, LAT is basically telling Iran that they better use their nukes as soon as possible, before Israel swoops in and destroys them. If anything horrific happens, these cosmo-sipping LAT reporters will pat each other’s backs telling us “We told you so, you should have listened to us about this Israel/Iran thing.” Neat.

Why doesn’t the LAT report that the US is planning to attack Mexico, since the US certainly has a “plan” somewhere describing where tanks go if we were to do that.

]]> By: actus http://patterico.com/2005/03/14/the-art-of-lying-by-omission/#comment-9555 actus Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:43:21 +0000 /?p=2747#comment-9555 What really is the benefit of one of these regimes having WMD's other than the benefit of giving them up. Its not like they ever are gonna get to use them. At least not against any white people. What really is the benefit of one of these regimes having WMD’s other than the benefit of giving them up. Its not like they ever are gonna get to use them. At least not against any white people.

]]>