Charlie Daniels Sets The Record Straight (Taliban @ GITMO)

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
I'm sure this is a little biased on Charlie's part (some partisan bashing going on), but I believe what he says about how we're treating these fvcking low-lifes down at "GITMO". Liberal lawyers rule the land, I'm afraid. Fear of bogus lawsuits and news media whores is rampant down there, and rightly so.



No...I don't like Charlie Daniels' music. Nor am I a fan of treating all prisoners like crap. But I think most people got the wrong idea about what's going on down there.





BEGIN DANIELS COMMENTARY



Guantanamo Bay, Cuba



I've just returned from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Naval Air Station base where we did three shows for the troops and toured several locations around the post visiting with some of the finest military personnel on planet earth. The kids seemed to really enjoy the shows and especially liked "This Ain't No Rag, It's A Flag" and "In America". We had a great time with them.



We saw Camp X-Ray, where the Taliban detainees are being held, only from a distance, but I picked up a lot of what's going on there from talking with a lot of different people. The truth of the matter is that this operation is under a microscope. The Red Cross has an on site presence there and watches everything that goes on very closely.



The media is not telling you the whole truth about what's going on over there. The truth is that these scum bags are not only being treated humanely, but they are probably better off health wise and medically than they've ever been in their lives They are fed well, able to take showers and receive state of the art medical care. And have their own Moslem chaplain. I saw several of them in a field hospital ward where they were being treated in a state of the art medical facility.



Now let's talk about the way they treat our people. First of all, they have to be watched constantly. These people are committed and wanton

murderers who are willing to die just to kill someone else. One of the doctors told me that when they had Taliban in the hospital the staff had to really be careful with needles, pens and anything else which could possibly be used as a weapon.



They also throw their excrement and urine on the troops who are guarding them. And our guys and gals have shown great restraint in not retaliating. We are spending over a million dollars a day maintaining and guarding these nasty killers and anyone who wants to see them brought to the U.S.A. for trial is either out of their heads or a lawyer looking for money and notoriety. Or both.



I wish that the media and the Red Cross and all the rest of the people who are so worried about these criminals would realize that this is not a troop of errant Boy Scouts. These are killers of the worst kind. They don't need protection from us, we need protection from them.



If you don't get anything else out of this soapbox, please try to realize that when you see news coverage much of the time you're not getting the whole story, but an account filtered through a liberal mindset with an agenda. We have two fights on our hands, the war against terror and the one against the loudmouthed lawyers and left wing media who would sap the strength from the American public by making us believe that we're losing the war or doing something wrong in fighting it.



Remember these are the same people who told us that Saddam Hussein's Republican guard was going to be an all but invincible enemy and that our smart bombs and other weapons were not really as good as the military said that they were.



They also took up for Bill Clinton while he was cavorting around the Oval office with Monica Lewinsky while the terrorists were gaining strength and bombing our Embassies and dragging the bodies of dead American heroes around the dusty streets of Somalia. It's a shame that we can't have an unbiased media who would just report the truth and let us make up our own minds.



Here I must commend Fox News for presenting both sides much better than the other networks. They are leaving the other cable networks in the dust. People like being told the truth. Our military not only needs but deserves our support. Let's give it to them. The next time you read a media account about the bad treatment of the Taliban in Cuba, remember what I told you. Been there, done that.



Footnote: I got an e-mail from a rather irate cousin of mine the other day who has a daughter who's a lawyer and she seemed to think that I was painting all lawyers with the same brush.



Please understand that I'm not doing that at all. That would be like saying that all musicians were drug addicts. There are a lot of good and honest attorneys out there. I happen to have one of them. But it seems that they never get any airtime. It's always the radicals who get their opinions heard. Who fight the idea of the military tribunals and site The Constitution and the integrity of America as their source of justifying their opinions.



Well, first of all The Constitution says " We the people of the United States", it doesn't mention any other country. And secondly, as far as integrity is concerned, I don't think some o

these folks would know integrity if it bit them in the posterior. What do you think?



God Bless America Charlie Daniels



Copyright 2002 Charlie Daniels





END DANIELS COMMENTARY



To the best of my knowledge this has been forwarded around military email circles (that's how I got it). Interesting read. I'm not saying Charlie is the world's most astute political mind, but he made some good points about how the media is always looking to dig up dirt on any type of military operation.



[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 57
    Fox News is a conservative news channel. They do not present both sides of the story as equal when they parade the channel as actually having a politcal slant!
  • Reply 2 of 57
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    I'm not aware of Fox advertising or "parading" their political slant. If I recall, their slogan or tagline is something like "we report, you decide".



    Another one they use is "fair and balanced".



    I've said this about 11 times on these boards over the past few years: I don't think Fox News is as far right as it is simply NOT far left. I mean, anything toward the center, going away from other sources is suddenly seen as "hardcore, right wing!".



    :confused:



    It kills me how Rupert Murdoch and Fox are CONSTANTLY bashed for (gasp) a "conservative slant" (or worse).



    MEANWHILE, no one seems to get bent out of shape at an equally powerful person who owns HIS own news outlet and, by all accounts, seems to have rather "interesting" ideas, politics, behaviors, etc. How come Ted Turner isn't looked at with the same critical eye that Murdoch and Fox is?



    I've been watching CNN, in some form or another, since I was in junior high. That's almost 20 years ago. Over that time, I've seen countless instances of what you might call "bias" or "slant" to reports, or simple on air comments or reactions. I've seen Judy Woodruff, Bernie Shaw, Jeff Green, Larry King (ugh...) and many other anchors and reporters seem to go out of their way to cut off or act smarmy to anyone who might be viewed as a conservative. But I've seen them bend over backwards and act EXTREMELY chummy and "hey, GREAT to see you!!!" with people like Stephanopolis, Begalla, Carville, Norman Lear, Susan Sarandon, etc. In other words, anyone who seems to share their mindset or particular beliefs. I've been completely flabbergasted at the rudeness shown to Newt Gingrich or William Bennett by people like King, Shaw and Woodruff. I've sat there and said to myself "what a jerk! Why doesn't Newt call them on it, OR simply take his mike off and walk off the set?!?".



    Here's what it really gets down to: if you do indeed think Fox News is "rabidly right wing" and "can't be trusted", there's a very simple solution: it's called a "remote control" and it has buttons on it that let you change the channel, OR - get this - turn the TV off entirely!



    :eek:







    As usual, I hate the whole double-standard thing. How one group or organization seems to get all this grief. But its mirror group/organization seems to skate through, no questions asked.



    I promise you that I've seen and heard Ted Turner do and and say more stupid, outrageous things than Murdoch. Personally, I think Turner has 4 or 5 screws completely loose. But that makes him a "maverick", doesn't it? A "outside the box" innovator!







    Please. It makes him a tactless, graceless idiot with a big mouth.
  • Reply 3 of 57
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Allow me to slip into my flame-retardant flight suit, helmet and goggles...



  • Reply 4 of 57
    finboyfinboy Posts: 383member
    [quote]Originally posted by pscates:

    <strong>



    I've said this about 11 times on these boards over the past few years: I don't think Fox News is as far right as it is simply NOT far left. I mean, anything toward the center, going away from other sources is suddenly seen as "hardcore, right wing!".



    :confused:



    It kills me how Rupert Murdoch and Fox are CONSTANTLY bashed for (gasp) a "conservative slant" (or worse).



    MEANWHILE, no one seems to get bent out of shape at an equally powerful person who owns HIS own news outlet and, by all accounts, seems to have rather "interesting" ideas, politics, behaviors, etc. How come Ted Turner isn't looked at with the same critical eye that Murdoch and Fox is?



    I've been watching CNN, in some form or another, since I was in junior high. That's almost 20 years ago. Over that time, I've seen countless instances of what you might call "bias" or "slant" to reports, or simple on air comments or reactions. I've seen Judy Woodruff, Bernie Shaw, Jeff Green, Larry King (ugh...) and many other anchors and reporters seem to go out of their way to cut off or act smarmy to anyone who might be viewed as a conservative. But I've seen them bend over backwards and act EXTREMELY chummy and "hey, GREAT to see you!!!" with people like Stephanopolis, Begalla, Carville, Norman Lear, Susan Sarandon, etc. In other words, anyone who seems to share their mindset or particular beliefs. I've been completely flabbergasted at the rudeness shown to Newt Gingrich or William Bennett by people like King, Shaw and Woodruff. I've sat there and said to myself "what a jerk! Why doesn't Newt call them on it, OR simply take his mike off and walk off the set?!?".



    Here's what it really gets down to: if you do indeed think Fox News is "rabidly right wing" and "can't be trusted", there's a very simple solution: it's called a "remote control" and it has buttons on it that let you change the channel, OR - get this - turn the TV off entirely!



    :eek:







    As usual, I hate the whole double-standard thing. How one group or organization seems to get all this grief. But its mirror group/organization seems to skate through, no questions asked.



    I promise you that I've seen and heard Ted Turner do and and say more stupid, outrageous things than Murdoch. Personally, I think Turner has 4 or 5 screws completely loose. But that makes him a "maverick", doesn't it? A "outside the box" innovator!







    Please. It makes him a tactless, graceless idiot with a big mouth.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Being NOT far left qualifies them for being Far Right Radicals, P.



    As always, though, if folks can't SEE the bias for themselves, then they may be lost forever to it. I remember when I started recognizing the bias in NPR (PRI). I had been listening for YEARS. I worked as a volunteer for the local station, and I knew many of the local news people personally. But I started to realize that there was an agenda at the national level, and then that there was a "leaning" at the local level. Businesspeople were evil, conservatives were evil, government was right and good, socialist governments and countries were SO MUCH better than ours (this was pre-USSR breakup). I went from passive listener to shocked with outrage in about a week.



    Charlie is right about the media. Bless his heart. He may not be the smartest man on earth (he doesn't claim to be) but some things are just plain obvious. Or they aren't -- that's the problem.
  • Reply 5 of 57
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    Hey, you've got Charlie Daniels, we've got Barbara Streisand!
  • Reply 6 of 57
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member




    "The Devil Went Down to Malibu"
  • Reply 7 of 57
    [quote]Originally posted by pscates:

    <strong>I'm not aware of Fox advertising or "parading" their political slant. If I recall, their slogan or tagline is something like "we report, you decide".

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    They are conservative nonetheless. It's really a niche news channel, catering to those of conservative taste. It is specifically designed to be a conservative news channel as well.



    [quote]Originally posted by pscates:

    <strong>

    I've said this about 11 times on these boards over the past few years: I don't think Fox News is as far right as it is simply NOT far left. I mean, anything toward the center, going away from other sources is suddenly seen as "hardcore, right wing!".



    :confused:



    It kills me how Rupert Murdoch and Fox are CONSTANTLY bashed for (gasp) a "conservative slant" (or worse).

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Well, while other newschannels attempt to be fair and equal while still allowing a certain slant for each newscaster, FOX simply concedes and says "We're conservative, DEAL WITH IT." It's fine as long as FOX is recognized as a niche newschannel.



    [quote]Originally posted by pscates:

    <strong>

    MEANWHILE, no one seems to get bent out of shape at an equally powerful person who owns HIS own news outlet and, by all accounts, seems to have rather "interesting" ideas, politics, behaviors, etc. How come Ted Turner isn't looked at with the same critical eye that Murdoch and Fox is?



    I've been watching CNN, in some form or another, since I was in junior high. That's almost 20 years ago. Over that time, I've seen countless instances of what you might call "bias" or "slant" to reports, or simple on air comments or reactions. I've seen Judy Woodruff, Bernie Shaw, Jeff Green, Larry King (ugh...) and many other anchors and reporters seem to go out of their way to cut off or act smarmy to anyone who might be viewed as a conservative. But I've seen them bend over backwards and act EXTREMELY chummy and "hey, GREAT to see you!!!" with people like Stephanopolis, Begalla, Carville, Norman Lear, Susan Sarandon, etc. In other words, anyone who seems to share their mindset or particular beliefs. I've been completely flabbergasted at the rudeness shown to Newt Gingrich or William Bennett by people like King, Shaw and Woodruff. I've sat there and said to myself "what a jerk! Why doesn't Newt call them on it, OR simply take his mike off and walk off the set?!?".



    Here's what it really gets down to: if you do indeed think Fox News is "rabidly right wing" and "can't be trusted", there's a very simple solution: it's called a "remote control" and it has buttons on it that let you change the channel, OR - get this - turn the TV off entirely!



    :eek:







    As usual, I hate the whole double-standard thing. How one group or organization seems to get all this grief. But its mirror group/organization seems to skate through, no questions asked.



    I promise you that I've seen and heard Ted Turner do and and say more stupid, outrageous things than Murdoch. Personally, I think Turner has 4 or 5 screws completely loose. But that makes him a "maverick", doesn't it? A "outside the box" innovator!







    Please. It makes him a tactless, graceless idiot with a big mouth.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Ted Turner doesn't control his company anymore. While you speak of the known CNN democratic leaning anchors, you fail to leave out the equally ubiquitous republican leaning anchors. They include Lou Dobbs (who is an ******* to Apple Computer), Bill Schnieder, Tucker Carlson, Bob Novak, and others.
  • Reply 8 of 57
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Tucker Carlson, Bob Novak, Cal Thomas, Pat Buchanan, Oliver North and any other conservative who appears, or may appear, on CNN does so in the role as a commentator or representing "the right" on a show like Crossfire.



    They aren't "anchors", and aren't there to read the news.



    I'm not arguing, or turning this into a "big thing", but I honestly have never seen Fox take the attitude of "we're conservative...DEAL with it!".



    BUT, even if they are: if people KNOW this and make their viewing choices - yea or nay - based on this, that's alright.



    I happen to like Fox News because a) I don't feel patronized or spoon fed when I watch it, b) their on-air personalities (with the exception of Shepherd Smith...what a clown) don't come off as smarmy and "we know better...", c) I like Bill O'Reilly, d) I don't get the sense that it's got an elitist, Ivy League vibe to it and they don't seem to be anti-military or anti-whatever-it-is-that-you-think-made-America-what-it-is.



    But, again, I'm looking at it through MY personal prism and beliefs, so...







    I've just never liked CNN. Comes across as smarmy, know-it-all yuppies and left-leaning academics and anti-tradition/conservative.



    I don't get mad when I watch Fox News, and I can actually pay attention to the story or debate going on. When I watch CNN, I feel the need to analyze the anchors and on-air people too much.



  • Reply 9 of 57
    What's so bad about Ivy-League elitism?
  • Reply 10 of 57
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Nothing, if that's your bag. Just isn't my background or way of looking at things. All the Tennessee redneck in me hasn't been COMPLETELY exorcised by this San Diego salt air, try as it might!







    Ask groverat, he'll tell you: I tend to see things through a bit of an old-fashioned, "black and white/right or wrong", apple pie and hot dog prism. Perhaps to a fault?



  • Reply 11 of 57
    [quote]Tucker Carlson, Bob Novak, Cal Thomas, Pat Buchanan, Oliver North and any other conservative who appears, or may appear, on CNN does so in the role as a commentator or representing "the right" on a show like Crossfire.<hr></blockquote>



    Oliver North as a news commentator! I thought we were supposed be fighting a war AGAINST terrorism, not paying them $$$$$ to appear on network TV.







    News content is brought to you by big business, 95% of it by 6 huge transnational conglomerates, and if they do not want to run a story because it is deemed not newsworthy or will not be approved by advertisers, then that story will be ignored. News content is determined by the political, ideological and philosophical leanings of the major advertisers on the big networks and news organizations, and the boardmembers of the big media corporations themselves. The content policy buck stops right there, and by and large, those people are conservative in all respects, Ted Turner or no Ted Turner.



    Talking about the 'liberal media' is as redundant as snow clearance in the Bermuda. The political leaning of the media should be defined not by what they *do* print but what they refuse to print, or run. What you read in the papers, see on TV and Internet news sites is a fraction of what is going on in the world, and all the horror stories detailing horrendous practises by big business are routinely censored. You don't rat on your buddies!



    For an example of what the media finds newsworthy, or not, just look at Enron, for example, the biggest fraud and finanial scandal in US history which as a news item, it's all but melted into obscurity. On the other hand, the Lewinsky story is still going on! I switched on CNN yesterday, and 3 days ago, and there she is yet again and again, with yet more hordes of photographers flashing away and mauling her for more (porno)graphic tales involving Bill Clinton's penis. Meanwhile, so much real news is being ignored.



    And I bet that the Enron affair will follow the same (predictable) course as the Lincoln S&L Scandal in which most of the perpetrators got no more than a "slapped wrist". Ken Lay et. al. probably won't even see a courtroom:they are far too well placed for such an eventuality. Mark my words. If I am wrong on that, I will eat my desktop dual G4 on webcam.
  • Reply 12 of 57
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    About Fox.



    Roger Ailes, who started and heads Fox News, has run or been involved in just about every Republican presidential campaign since Nixon. He was in charge of Bush I's campaign of 1988. (IMO, the worst campaign from either side in my lifetime - anyone remember Willie Horton/Flag factory/ACLU/pledge of allegiance/read my lips?) He was Rush Limbaugh's TV show producer.



    FAIR <a href="http://www.fair.org/extra/0108/sources.html"; target="_blank">did an analysis</a> of Fox's and CNN's flagship political shows, Special Report with Brit Hume and Wolf Blitzer Reports.



    On Fox, 89% of the guests were Republicans, and 11% were Democrats. On CNN, 57% were Republicans and 43% were Democrats.



    We report, you decide.



    And Turner when he started CNN was a well-known conservative. That was part of his maverick appeal, challenging the networks. Yes he married (and divorced) Jane Fonda, and yes he gave money to the UN. But is he a liberal Democrat? I don't know. But we know for sure Ailes is a big-time Republican.



    BTW, it doesn't bother me at all. I like to watch it sometimes. I kinda wish the networks identified themselves as liberal and conservative - I'd definitely watch the conservative networks so I could yell and throw stuff at the TV. I always like the news shows with an agenda to push better than the bland reporting of facts on traditional news.
  • Reply 13 of 57
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    [quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:

    <strong>Ken Lay et. al. probably won't even see a courtroom:they are far too well placed for such an eventuality. Mark my words. If I am wrong on that, I will eat my desktop dual G4 on webcam.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Cool!



    Now THAT'S something I'd stay up late to see!
  • Reply 14 of 57
    B. Russel to the rescue with actual facts. Refute that, pscates.



    [ 06-15-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 57
    holy **** , read <a href="http://www.fair.org/extra/0108/fox-main.html"; target="_blank">this</a> one!
  • Reply 16 of 57
    I have another observation. The logo for FOX NEWS' show Hannity and Colmes not so subtley depicts the former conservative host as angelic and the latter democratic host as devlish. How? The colors of the logos: hannity is white while colmes is red. More? Hannity's name is above Colmes, depicting the relative locations of Heaven and Hell.
  • Reply 17 of 57
    come on. REFUTE THESE FACTS!



    <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />



    I'm sorry. I'm just giddy at seeing an argument won.
  • Reply 18 of 57
    Personally, I think Fox News is a brilliant political weapon used by Republicans to convert more people to conservatism. I mean it's just brilliant! By claiming a middle of the road status but actually steering hard right, it can convert people! Ailes is a genius for sure!
  • Reply 19 of 57
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    I've never liked Fox because of their sensationalist tendancies (how they spin their sensational crap is another story), but I just posted the thing because I thought it was an interesting bunch of comments from someone most people probably assume to be a country knuckle-head.



    Again he's obviously exaggerating some things a bit, but I don't doubt for a minute that those bastards we're holding down there are living better now than they ever have (even though they're detained), and that they treat our servicemen and women like animals (throwing excrememnt at people pretty much indicates these pricks are sub-human). Yet we have to walk on egg-shells so as not to trample their precious rights (which as far as the constitution goes they're technically not even entitled to) because of all the media whores buzzing around looking to dig up dirt.
  • Reply 20 of 57
    It's a testament to our country that they live better in our prison system than they do while free at home. I think it's a good idea. Anyone who thinks otherwise lets the more torturous aspects of his or her personality get the best of him or her. You really want to see these guys fry don't you?
Sign In or Register to comment.