Rolling Stone:US Army Deploys Psy-Ops on US Senators

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

@ WC and Yoni:

This ain't no goddam courtroom, it's a goddam message board.

Please please study the difference. The Perry Mason schtick got old on Perry Mason, and there never was a worse premise than a lawyer who wins every time.

---

You forgot the blue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I would say we still have two probable possibilities

---

Here's a third

3. He's actually a Texas National Gaurd reservist who happens to own a company (SyzygyLogos) that is actively pursuing govt contracts outsourcing the work the PSYOP does. By alleging the military's misuse of PSYOPs, he is in effect promoting his own business.

:wow

Ok, it's a little out there but there are pieces to this puzzle conveniently absent from the Stone's article.

Interesting wrinkle.


(Would you be willing to share your link for that?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lazerelmo

Here's a third

3. He's actually a Texas National Gaurd reservist who happens to own a company (SyzygyLogos) that is actively pursuing govt contracts outsourcing the work the PSYOP does. By alleging the military's misuse of PSYOPs, he is in effect promoting his own business.

:wow

Ok, it's a little out there but there are pieces to this puzzle conveniently absent from the Stone's article.

---

There are often more possibilities than one thinks of. That's why I inserted the word "probable."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

To a legally provable certainty? No.

But I don't think the OP claims to either.

---

So, they're just stirring up shit because the military has nothing better to do than to swat these fucking flies all day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Interesting wrinkle.


(Would you be willing to share your link for that?)

---

Top secret stuff...
View at your own risk.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mike-holmes/27/b88/88

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Syzygy...11104692241458

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lazerelmo

Top secret stuff...
View at your own risk.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mike-holmes/27/b88/88

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Syzygy...11104692241458

---

That is interesting.

NG, probably kicked and screamed all the way to Afghanistan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

So, they're just stirring up shit because the military has nothing better to do than to swat these fucking flies all day.

---

Keep spinning. Asking US officers to brainwash US Senators is still way over the line

Spox denies Psy-Ops claims:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/wo...tary.html?_r=1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Spox denies Psy-Ops claims:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/wo...tary.html?_r=1

---

Isn't the jist of that article pretty much what I said?

Posted for balance, not finality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Posted for balance, not finality.

---

I figured as much, but you have to admit, I read the story as likely the same way they later explained.

I don't fall for the planted bias of the media.

Yet somehow you hit on Caldwell's exact riposte. Bald denial.

Thanks for the D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Yet somehow you hit on Caldwell's exact riposte. Bald denial.

Thanks for the D.

---

How many times were Rolling Stoner political articles any where near accurate?

Since when have your posts been accurate?

Your initial post in this thread was one big inaccuracy, so why should we take anything else you say seriously?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Your initial post in this thread was one big inaccuracy, so why should we take anything else you say seriously?

---

No it wasn't, unless you count research that anyone can do as part of his skills spoken about.

While there is something indeed to the contention that Holmes may have been misquoted, you said he was not quoted at all in the article. That was incorrect.

No disgrace in that, though. My point was that it can be risky to impugn the accuracy of others when one is careless oneself.

Plus, the practice of waving off all content from providers you have found to be biased is tedious and simple-minded, and often substantially wrong. Passing judgment on things you never even read in the first place is absurd and incredibly irritating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

While there is something indeed to the contention that Holmes may have been misquoted, you said he was not quoted at all in the article. That was incorrect.

---

I don't recall saying that.

Quote:

---

At no time is the colonel quoted as saying he was asked to use his skills on the congressmen.

to this:

At no time is the colonel quoted as saying the general asked to use his skills on the congressmen.

---

I specified congressmen.

my bad, wc. Jesus I'm on a roll today.

I misremembered.

(effed up)

Shown up by WC. It was bound to happen eventually.




Cheers, WC. :lol:toast