No Easy Day

Status
Not open for further replies.
soulchill said:
Perhaps the leaking of the name was from someone within the DoD/military as a form of retribution, similar to accusations about Valerie Plame being outed as CIA operative in retaliation for article by her husband? No facts to base either on.
Click to expand...
Retribution for what?

Even if that were true, no one forced FOX to announce his name. That was their decision.
 
Foxrac said:
There is no mainstream media in my book and you are just silly about label as mainstream media.

No, it is wrongful and unacceptable for Fox News to release the real name, without their consent. It looks like you don't understand Jiro's post at all and you need serious help. I found that you are just wrong and very unrelated.
Click to expand...

See, Foxrac, I'm not attacking you for expressing your opinion that "it is wrong and unacceptable." However, where I give my IMO I'm being attacked. That is not debate and,IMO, totally unacceptable. You are entitle to your opinion without any attack and so am I.

I totally DO understand Jiro's post and that is why I have posted IMOs. If you or Jiro or whomever don't agree, keep it to yourself and shut it because I'm certainly going to attack back for my IMO. Those who attack a member for a IMO are the ones needing serious help, consider getting some.
 
rolling7 said:
See, Foxrac, I'm not attacking you for expressing your opinion that "it is wrong and unacceptable." However, where I give my IMO I'm being attacked. That is not debate and,IMO, totally unacceptable. You are entitle to your opinion without any attack and so am I.

I totally DO understand Jiro's post and that is why I have posted IMOs. If you or Jiro or whomever don't agree, keep it to yourself and shut it because I'm certainly going to attack back for my IMO. Those who attack a member for aIMO are the ones needing serious help, consider getting some.
Click to expand...

attacked?

and will you ever going to answer my question in my Post #23?
 
rolling7 said:
See, Foxrac, I'm not attacking you for expressing your opinion that "it is wrong and unacceptable." However, where I give my IMO I'm being attacked. That is not debate and,IMO, totally unacceptable. You are entitle to your opinion without any attack and so am I.

I totally DO understand Jiro's post and that is why I have posted IMOs. If you or Jiro or whomever don't agree, keep it to yourself and shut it because I'm certainly going to attack back for my IMO. Those who attack a member for a IMO are the ones needing serious help, consider getting some.
Click to expand...

Come on, you attacked me in past when you disagree with me, especially political discussion, even I saw you attacked other members as well. That why you aren't getting my respect until you break the bad habitat.

I'm free to disagree whatever I want but that's different if you make thread to be unrelated or off topic so you will get unexpectedly backfire from other members. I don't see Jiro is attacking you but he said that your post is mostly off point, it means you aren't discuss about what exactly he wants, that related to topic.

Good luck with your behavior and I hope that you understand that you have to pay a consequence if something goes wrong.
 
rolling7 said:
See
Post #22
Click to expand...
see Post #23 which was a question to your Post #22.

rolling7 said:
Attacked.......see post #12
Click to expand...
you call that an attack? how about Post #7? #33? #36?

I think it's very important that you should get all the facts first before you formulate an opinion. There are 2 kinds of opinions - ill-informed opinion and well-informed opinion. Reba is a Navy veteran whose opinion carries with weight and yet.... you disagree with her and you believe what Fox News did was right and patriotic..... hence me telling you that you need to get your facts straight before you speak. That's not an attack. That's a prudent advice which you are free to ignore.

Like I said again - report me to mods if you feel that I am bullying you otherwise you are just slandering me which is a bannable offense. and I have to remind you again that you have been banned a few times for bullying and trolling so do not confuse yourself.

so... how about answering my question in Post #23?
 
Jiro said:
aware of what? and why not attack the validity of the story instead of releasing his name? was it necessary to expose him? CNN and bunch of people were calling Fox News to get to bottom of it and Fox News declined to answer any of the questions nor explain their action.
Click to expand...

? #1) aware of everything going on in the world today. As I said, the NYTimes book review is not news reporting.

? #2) that is what FOX News did, name the author. As I said, there were those who wondered who was writing books that turn out to be Stephen King. People have to be wondering, after the book comes on the market, how this guy knew such details of the operation. And if the name does not match anyone connected to the operation on a "need to know" basic, then just who is this guy. By this guy using a pseudonym it shows the intent of a need to hide something. Well, FOX and A.P. revealed just what was trying to be hidden...........no clearance from DoD.

? #3) IMO, yes it was necessary. Military personnel need to be held accountable to a code of conduct. This is made known to all serving in all branches of DoD.
As I said, not all he told the publisher will get into print but he did tell them. And because this is unauthorized it is a "no-no"

Don't you dare ask me the stupid question of how I know what he revealed and what will be printed. We all know how the publishing world works, especially when using a pseudonym.
 
One thing I forgot to add. FOX News has in the past requested other members of MM (sorry Foxrac) to explain their action(s) and these members have decline to do so.
Payback is a bitch ain't she.
 
rolling7 said:
? #1) aware of everything going on in the world today. As I said, the NYTimes book review is not news reporting.
Click to expand...
why would a book review be a news reporting? its book review is telling us what the book will be about and it strongly stated that it contained no classified information.

rolling7 said:
? #2) that is what FOX News did, name the author. As I said, there were those who wondered who was writing books that turn out to be Stephen King. People have to be wondering, after the book comes on the market, how this guy knew such details of the operation. And if the name does not match anyone connected to the operation on a "need to know" basic, then just who is this guy. By this guy using a pseudonym it shows the intent of a need to hide something. Well, FOX and A.P. revealed just what was trying to be hidden...........no clearance from DoD.
Click to expand...
but many books about military operations were written with pseudonym.

rolling7 said:
? #3) IMO, yes it was necessary. Military personnel need to be held accountable to a code of conduct. This is made known to all serving in all branches of DoD.
As I said, not all he told the publisher will get into print but he did tell them. And because this is unauthorized it is a "no-no"

Don't you dare ask me the stupid question of how I know what he revealed and what will be printed. We all know how the publishing world works, especially when using a pseudonym.
Click to expand...
so you have read the book?
 
rolling7 said:
One thing I forgot to add. FOX News has in the past requested other members of MM (sorry Foxrac) to explain their action(s) and these members have decline to do so.
Payback is a bitch ain't she.
Click to expand...

this is related to this thread...... how?
 
rolling7 said:
One thing I forgot to add. FOX News has in the past requested other members of MM (sorry Foxrac) to explain their action(s) and these members have decline to do so.
Payback is a bitch ain't she.
Click to expand...
Because no media outlet needs to explain their actions, since the bottom line (profits) is at play here. You must have cringed when Fox released the name of this soldier: "How can I spin THIS and protect the almighty Fox name?"

By the way, interesting last line. That is exactly what the Jihadists are probably chanting as they gather more info for a retaliatory response. You really don't get it. I am sad for the rest of the group that now has an increased fear level due to this SEAL writing a book, then having Fox publish his name. If you were in this SEAL squad, how would you feel tonight? Should all of their names be made public? Does MM have a duty to uncover the rest of the names? After all, they could then enjoy the parades and honors for a few weeks/months before their locations are discovered...:rifle:
 
Jiro said:
this is related to this thread...... how?
Click to expand...

Why not ask yourself! You are the one that brought it up in post #23 and then ask for answers.

for your other question............which is a real stupid question....no, I've nor read the book and you know fully well it is not on the market yet.....so don't be asking questions you know the answer to
 
rolling7 said:
Why not ask yourself! You are the one that brought it up in post #23 and then ask for answers.
Click to expand...
huh? that's not related to my question in Post #23. Looks like you're avoiding it as usual. You are still not telling me EXACTLY what is it that Fox News is keeping public aware of. Aware of WHAT??????

rolling7 said:
for your other question............which is a real stupid question....no, I've nor read the book and you know fully well it is not on the market yet.....so don't be asking questions you know the answer to
Click to expand...
there you go. then you do not know exactly what the book will reveal... therefore how can you already conclude that Mark Owen is a traitor and unpatriotic by revealing classified information?
 
I guess since the first attempt to make the author out to be a traitor failed, it is only a natural inclination to make FOX out to be.

If an author releases a high profile book and still expects to live anonymously .... Well .... There you have it folks.

Sounds like a PR campaign to me.
 
Steinhauer said:
I guess since the first attempt to make the author out to be a traitor failed, it is only a natural inclination to make FOX out to be.

If an author releases a high profile book and still expects to live anonymously .... Well .... There you have it folks.

Sounds like a PR campaign to me.
Click to expand...

Agreed...:wave:
 
Steinhauer said:
I guess since the first attempt to make the author out to be a traitor failed, it is only a natural inclination to make FOX out to be.

If an author releases a high profile book and still expects to live anonymously .... Well .... There you have it folks.

Sounds like a PR campaign to me.
Click to expand...

Steinhauer - just to make sure you understand....

You do understand that only rolling7 is the one who is attempting to make the author as a traitor, not me. You do understand that, right?

You do understand that I am treating Fox News as a traitor for releasing author's real name to public, not the author. You do understand that, right?
 
Steinhauer said:
I guess since the first attempt to make the author out to be a traitor failed, it is only a natural inclination to make FOX out to be.

If an author releases a high profile book and still expects to live anonymously .... Well .... There you have it folks.

Sounds like a PR campaign to me.
Click to expand...

You mean, like Deep Throat? He didn't actually write the book, but he was the main informant. He remained anonymous for 31 years. He wasn't facing murderous religious zealots if his identity became known.

In case this was before your time, here is a Wiki refresher course...
Deep Throat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that I do not care what the book was about, and I am not bringing that story into play. I am only suggesting that times have changed. FoxNews didn't exist back in 1972. Oh the humanity!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top