Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
What is it that makes us pick and choose to believe what we're told?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2666469" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>I'll give this a try. First, most of us staked out early positions on both stories before the final act so to speak. These positions are based on our core beliefs as much as the actual facts. Since the Benghazi report came out, I've personally refrained form staking out a position on the report itself. It may be that the media interpretation of the report is the correct one. IIRC however, the report reinforces that the administration and the State Dept. screwed the pooch on Benghazi both before and after. So failure to do the wrong thing during the event is a minor mitigating factor at the most. Bengazi is about FAR more than whether there was or wasn't a stand down order given on rescue efforts.</p><p></p><p>Second, the administration initially lied to us. Only when the lie was exposed did we get the truth. That damaged their credibility. It probably did more to fuel conspiracy theories than the attack itself. Now add in a history of lies before breaking scandals (80% of guns before F&F, conservative targeting by the IRS was localized to one office, etc.), etc. They cooked their own credibility goose. </p><p></p><p>Now compare the Feguson situation. We have no documented history of the Ferguson PD lying to us. Compared to the highly regarded former SpecOps personnel giving us reports on Benghazi <u>from their prospective</u>, vs. Ferguson witnesses with dubous histories, a known crime issue and discovering that the alleged victim (good son heading for college soon) was on tape committing a strongarm robbery and had a history of criminal violence and gang ties, well, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see the difference.</p><p></p><p>Could both the federal government and the Ferguson government handled these situations more effectively? Absolutely. Comparing the two events however is like comparing apples to potatoes. </p><p></p><p>The Obama administration (most transparent in history) lost it. The "Our gentle giant was an angel and didn't do anything and was murdered in cold blood..." lost it. </p><p></p><p>If there's any confirmation bias here, it was in fact confirmed. Sadly, these events played out exactly as we predicted they would. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2666469, member: 1132"] I'll give this a try. First, most of us staked out early positions on both stories before the final act so to speak. These positions are based on our core beliefs as much as the actual facts. Since the Benghazi report came out, I've personally refrained form staking out a position on the report itself. It may be that the media interpretation of the report is the correct one. IIRC however, the report reinforces that the administration and the State Dept. screwed the pooch on Benghazi both before and after. So failure to do the wrong thing during the event is a minor mitigating factor at the most. Bengazi is about FAR more than whether there was or wasn't a stand down order given on rescue efforts. Second, the administration initially lied to us. Only when the lie was exposed did we get the truth. That damaged their credibility. It probably did more to fuel conspiracy theories than the attack itself. Now add in a history of lies before breaking scandals (80% of guns before F&F, conservative targeting by the IRS was localized to one office, etc.), etc. They cooked their own credibility goose. Now compare the Feguson situation. We have no documented history of the Ferguson PD lying to us. Compared to the highly regarded former SpecOps personnel giving us reports on Benghazi [U]from their prospective[/U], vs. Ferguson witnesses with dubous histories, a known crime issue and discovering that the alleged victim (good son heading for college soon) was on tape committing a strongarm robbery and had a history of criminal violence and gang ties, well, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see the difference. Could both the federal government and the Ferguson government handled these situations more effectively? Absolutely. Comparing the two events however is like comparing apples to potatoes. The Obama administration (most transparent in history) lost it. The "Our gentle giant was an angel and didn't do anything and was murdered in cold blood..." lost it. If there's any confirmation bias here, it was in fact confirmed. Sadly, these events played out exactly as we predicted they would. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
What is it that makes us pick and choose to believe what we're told?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom