For quoting right-wing craziness, of course. I’d go so far to say they are not only reputable in the genre, but one of the most respected sources.
Feel free to find a source that shows the quotes to be false, of course.
Regards,
Revtim
It actually showed up on my Google News front page for some reason.
Ah, thanks.
Shodan, any time you’d like to answer my question would be fine…
…although I should really know better than to EXPECT a follow-up visit after such an obvious drive-by.
It went beyond that too. Qutb in particular was particularly enraged not (just) by the religious views of America, but by America itself, in many ways.
Here’s a suggestion, use your brain for something other than JAQing Off about the Mossad and 9/11, and put the names Ibn gave you into a google search. There’s a difference between ignorant and *willful ignorance *.
What I intended it to be is exactly what I said - I wouldn’t take Newsmax’s characterization of Graham’s statement as gospel. You will note that Newsmax did not put the title of this OP into quotes.
If you think that’s how it works, good luck to you.
Regards,
Shodan
Nobody ever said NewsMax makes up quotes out of whole cloth, just that the quotes they print are decidedly right-wing. And, go figure, Franklin Graham is about as right a wing as you’re liable to run across.
I don’t understand this whine … I mean complaint.
Thank you for that, but, Point of order. EXACTLY what you said was:
Not very well-elaborated, and I, for one, found it somewhat cryptic. I suspect I was not alone in not interpreting it the way you intended.
Also: what exactly, in your view, was Newsmax’s “characterization” of Mr. Graham’s remarks? And I’ll be happy to show you mine first: That Franklin Graham believes that the world’s Christians are in grave danger (presumably because of the Muslim Brotherhood). Some people may care to point out that the headline expands some on Mr. Graham’s actual words, which can be interpreted to mean that he sees danger only for the Christians in “the Muslim world” (however that is to be defined).
I do not automatically buy Newsmax’s spin on things. Not even right-wing things.
I don’t think I can be any more clear than that. I do not know if this is true, false, or something else. “Newsmax said so” is not enough to base any conclusion on. It might be completely true, it might be complete fabrication. The fact that Newsmax published it is insufficient to conclude one way or the other.
Regards,
Shodan
Of course not. He’s expecting millions of Presbyterians around the world to put money into [del]his retirement account[/del] the Billy Graham Library Fund.
Certainly you can be more clear than that. You have straight up asserted that you will not take Newsmax’s characterization as gospel. This implies that you have a perception as to what that characterization IS.
Please share your perception as to what Newsmax’s characterization is.
P.S. Surely you’re not implying that you doubt Newsmax’s assertion that the words that they DID put in quotation marks were spoken by Mr. Graham to Newsmax correspondents?
There’s just plain unreliable, and then there’s selectively unreliable.
Newsmax isn’t viewed with suspicion because they’re sloppy, incompetent hacks (though that may be the case), but because they exist primarily to promote a specific right-wing agenda, and their articles reflect that. They ran this story not because they want to smear Franklin Graham, a conservative evangelical Christian, with statements he didn’t make, but because he’s a public figure making statements that fit in with a segment of their narrative: Muslims are scary and Obama is letting them take over.
Let’s pretend that NPR is a left-wing version of Newsmax and you consider NPR an unreliable source. (I know, it’s silly, but just play along.) One day you’re in your front yard polishing one of your flagpoles and overhear a portion of “All Things Considered” blaring from the speaker of a passing van filled with illegal aliens on their way to pick up food stamps. Choking back tears, Robert Siegel announces that Obama’s foreign birth certificate has been discovered and found genuine, and impeachment proceedings are already underway.
Now, based on the source, are you going to assume it’s bullshit until you can calmly walk inside and turn on Fox News? Maybe— or maybe you’re going to begin convulsing with joy because if NP-fuckin-***R *** said that about their precious Obama, it must really be happening!
No, it doesn’t. I don’t have to know what they say - the fact that it has not been verified by some reliable source means I don’t assume it’s true. I have no idea that it is true, I don’t know that it is false - the mere fact that Newsmax said it is not enough to move it out of the “Unproven” column.
Don’t make this harder than it is - “what Newsmax says” is not enough to form an opinion.
You wanna do the research to find verification from some credible source, knock yourself out. I don’t give much of a shit one way or the other.
I assume it’s bullshit.
I can’t believe the notion of “fact-checking even when it agrees with your prejudices” is so foreign to y’all. I thought you were a bunch of skeptics.
Regards,
Shodan
We aren’t journalists. At least I’m not, and I presume you aren’t. Of course it happens that stories are commented upon on this board that later turn out to be false, but that’s an unavoidable danger of the electronic age unless we stipulate that nobody can post about any current event until it’s no longer current. But this is hardly a case of “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” It sounds like something Graham would say, and it was reported by a news outlet historically friendly to his agenda.
Nonetheless, I respect your position and look forward to multiple-source, independently verified references accompanying all your future comments.
You are subject to intermittent spasms of boundless optimism, I see.
Just wondering, Shodan, since the newsmax.com article is an exclusive interview that Graham granted to that er, um…“news” source, what corroborating sources would you have to see before accepting this as an accurate accounting of Graham’s words?
You all realize the audio of the interview is in the link right? I guess its possible that Newsmax hired a voice actor to impersonate Franklin Graham, but I kinda doubt it.
Do you have to know what YOU think they say?
Here’s a news story from Mother Jones reporting the same thing about Franklin Graham:
Here’s one from the Democratic Underground:
These are distinctly liberal sources. And, as Simplicio points out, the Newsmax news story has a telephone interview with Graham right there on that website. Having listened to the interview, the only way in which the Newsmax news story has slightly slanted what Graham says is that they put the most outrageous of his claims at the top of the article and then give less and less strange parts of the interview as the article goes on. If you’ll listen to the interview though, you’ll see that Graham gets most of the way through the interview without making any really odd claims. It’s only right at the end that he makes the truly off-the-wall statements.
Ah, but then our good Mr. Shodan can reject those sources because of their liberal bias. Whether it’s his contrary nature, or he actually feels some kind of need to defend Franklin Graham, he has all his bases covered!
Read The Prophet and the Pharoh if you’re interested in learning about Qutb.
I’m not interested at all.
Digging stuff out from the dustbin of history and making a bogey man out of dead people is not something worth my while. It simply is not relevant.
How things are going in the propaganda department I would not be surprised if in fact Hitler himself was member of MB. Oh, he was? Nevermind.