"Are you kidding me?" / Facepalm Thread (pt 2)

[printcraft]

I saw this several places yesterday. C'mon. There's plenty of reasons to complain about the NYT. This isn't one.

Some airplanes did something.

 

[2A_Tom]

I saw this several places yesterday. C'mon. There's plenty of reasons to complain about the NYT. This isn't one.

I will say anyone can make a mistake. The paper of record just made a little mistake. That is all, Nothing wrong the airplane took aim the AR-15 took aim.

Move along, nothing to see here.

 

[sharkey]

I will say anyone can make a mistake. The paper of record just made a little mistake. That is all, Nothing wrong the airplane took aim the AR-15 took aim.

Move along, nothing to see here.

 

[Dead Duck]

Um.... No!

'51-star American flags line Pennsylvania Avenue as Washington, D.C. seeks statehood'



https://www.foxnews.com/us/washington-dc-state-hood-51-star-american-flags

 

[HoughMade]

I will say anyone can make a mistake. The paper of record just made a little mistake. That is all, Nothing wrong the airplane took aim the AR-15 took aim.

Move along, nothing to see here.

Do you seriously think that they are trying convince people the airplanes went rogue?

Someone worded the tweet poorly: "airplanes targeted" vs. "airplanes were targeted".

Petty.

Now, if we want to raise holy hell about the Kavanaugh thing, that makes sense.

 

[Phase2]

Do you seriously think that they are trying convince people the airplanes went rogue?

Isn't that precisely the language they are using with guns? Why is that hard to believe?

Someone worded the tweet poorly: "airplanes targeted" vs. "airplanes were targeted".

Do you have any evidence at all that is was worded any way except what they intended? It is consistent with how they have minimized Muslim terrorism for well over a decade now. It was exactly what they wanted to say. They wanted to avoid saying "Muslim terrorists targeted".

Petty.

Hardly. It is pointing out a pattern of political spin and lack of truth telling by a major American newspaper. Shame on your counselor.

 

[2A_Tom]

Now, if we want to raise holy hell about the Kavanaugh thing, that makes sense.

Start off.

 

[BugI02]

Do you seriously think that they are trying convince people the airplanes went rogue?

Someone worded the tweet poorly: "airplanes targeted" vs. "airplanes were targeted".

Petty.

Now, if we want to raise holy hell about the Kavanaugh thing, that makes sense.

You're still splitting hairs, councilor. What difference 'airplanes targeted ...' or 'airplanes were targeted ...' when they should be saying 'fundamentalist Islamic religious zealots hijacked airplanes and used them to target ...'

It removes important context that is information rightfully part of 'Never Forget'

It is like saying 'Atomic bombs targeted Hiroshima and Nagasaki' or 'Airplanes carrying atomic bombs targeted Hiroshima and Nagasaki' - it fails to acknowledge that events are driven by people and the decisions they make, for reasons both good and bad

Considering the source; I have no doubt it was deliberate, in an attempt to keep the onus off the real culprits, according to the preferred leftist narrative that we deserved it because we wouldn't let them determine our foreign policy

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The line was "airplanes took aim", not "targeted"

 

[BugI02]

The line was "airplanes took aim", not "targeted"

A distinction w/o a difference. Note the use of single quotation marks

 

[ArcadiaGP]

A distinction w/o a difference. Note the use of single quotation marks

I think given Hough's example, it does have a slightly different meaning. "Targeted" leaves room to reference the hijackers. "Took aim" does really focus on the planes. At least, in my head.

Especially when specifically worded "airplanes took aim"

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I think given Hough's example, it does have a slightly different meaning. "Targeted" leaves room to reference the hijackers. "Took aim" does really focus on the planes. At least, in my head.

Especially when specifically worded "airplanes took aim"

It seems a lot like "guns killed 10,000 people in 2018", as if the guns acted on their own.

 

[Dead Duck]

Ultimately the way it was "phrased" was to completely overlook the fact that the planes were piloted by terrorists.... who coincidentally had extremist ideologies developed while hanging around a bunch of Islamic believing muslims....allegedly.

This we all know (except the conspiracy theorists) and this the mainstream media and "some people not doing anything constructive" in DC will do everything in their power to deny, shift blame and cover up.



I think the way it was worded is that the poor terrorists were along for the ride just like the other passengers.

 

[2A_Tom]

An AR 15 walked into Walfart and took aim.

 

[HoughMade]

Isn't that precisely the language they are using with guns? Why is that hard to believe?

No. They know that people fire guns and likely report that every day in the newspaper.

They are trying to take guns away because people use them to kill others. Period.

They are not trying to take guns away because guns decide to go kill people. They do not believe that or expect anyone else to.

They do not believe in the right of people to arm themselves. They want the arms to be taken away.

It is true that if no one has guns, no one will be shot. While true, that is a deep as they go and they ignore the impossibility of that "solution" and the fact that it violates basic human rights.

They believe that guns make it easier to kill more people faster. They are right. That is why I choose them for self-defense.

Make no mistake. They hate you and your rights, not guns. They think that the "right" people SHOULD have guns, but not you.

 

[2A_Tom]

They are not afraid of us because they know that we are by far the most law abiding people.

They are afraid of Islam!

 

[BugI02]

I think given Hough's example, it does have a slightly different meaning. "Targeted" leaves room to reference the hijackers. "Took aim" does really focus on the planes. At least, in my head.

Especially when specifically worded "airplanes took aim"

So you are not solely referencing the correctness of the quote but pointing out the different shading of the meaning? I withdraw the objection and apologize for thinking your motivation could be petty

 

[jamil]

Do you seriously think that they are trying convince people the airplanes went rogue?

Someone worded the tweet poorly: "airplanes targeted" vs. "airplanes were targeted".

Petty.

Now, if we want to raise holy hell about the Kavanaugh thing, that makes sense.

Read the article. It wasn't that they were trying to convince people the airplanes went rogue. It was that in their uber wokeness they worded things so that they could avoid saying who did it. They might as well have just said some people did some things. While I think it's unfair and not accurate to say that all Muslims are terrorists, it's imprecise to talk about remembrance of 9/11 without talking about who did it and why.

 

[jamil]

They are not afraid of us because they know that we are by far the most law abiding people.

They are afraid of Islam!

No, I don't think this is why they refused to call out radical Islam. It's because of wokeness. It's politically incorrect to say it.

 

[rhino]

No, I don't think this is why they refused to call out radical Islam. It's because of wokeness. It's politically incorrect to say it.

I maintain that choosing to adopt "wokeness" is fear (and weakness) based. Most people who do it are doing it because they fear judgement from others, not because they recognize an inherent merit. They're desperately trying to be part of a group at almost any cost.