This is what's typical of these far-right extremist "nutjobs":

1.) They classify anyone that questions the "far-rightist's" "official" stories as a "far-leftists"...

1a.) ...not taking into account that people from all walks of life and of varying political position (fl--left--ml--middle--mr--right--fr) with any common sense will not blindly and automatically believe all the official stories when coverups and secrecy is a prime factor involved with governments for several centuries.

2.) They can't seem to keep their body language stabilized, and usually have a smile on their face when they're ranting. I'm not a body linguist specialist, but I would like to see one analyze these random flailing movements that people like this man (David Brooks) or Rush Limbaugh exhibit.

3.) While some make several logical and valid points in their arguments, they will rarely if ever agree to anything thier "perceived-opponent" has to say.

4.) Many will attack the personal character of the individual they are ranting about. When confronted with these individuals on-air you rarely see the subject attack back in this manner. (bloggers in this case- which cannot immediately respond)

5.) Most of all they will compare freewill-speaking bloggers with a vile and evil character that has hurt many people in an attempt to villify their subject(s). In this case: Bloggers compared to Bin Laden.

6.) What they may not realize is that any sane individual can see through this type of pathetic and desperate attack. Unfortunately many people are not entirely sane in this world (possibly why a variety of people visit psychologists and take prescribed mind/mood altering drugs.)This would be their prime target audience.

Brooks is a major asshole. He's something like Friedman: clueless, yet nationally syndicated.

It is no surprise that he would equate American leftists with bin Laden.

The American right has been doing that for about six years now.

Brooks says some bone-headed things sometimes, but he's definitely not a "far-right extremist". He's pro-choice and in favor of gay marriage. He has also been one of the few conservative that's been questioning Bush's Iraq policy for years. Don't get me wrong - I watch the newshour every friday night, and nearly always find myself agreeing with Mark. But, compare him to Paul Gigot (whom he replaced), for instance, and he's much more centrist. In fact, IIRC, he used to be a registered democrat.

If that is his political stance then comments like this from him are unusual to say the least. This indicates a radical middle on our scale then.

Up-vote because there is a trend of conspiracy theorists etc. on lefty blogs.

There's a good share of conspiracy theorists on the right too chilaxe. After all.. humans do conspire. Even the "official" story is a conspiracy theory.

CNN did the same thing equating progressives with terrorists.

I hardly think he's equating leftists with terrorists. Rather that Bin Laden's latest video draws inspiration from the out there conspiratorial rants that you tend to find in the comment sections of political blogs. The point isn't that leftists are closeted terrorists, but that Bin Laden's latest video is as pathetic as the most out there conspiracy theorists.

Brooks is no centrist. He's a right-wing mouthpiece from the git-go.

The craziest conspiracy theory I've every heard of is the one where a bunch of losers from Arabia took a few weeks of flying lessons and figured out how to fly three 757s into three of the most high-profile targets on the eastern seaboard.

It's Shields and/or Lehrer's job to shame him for making such a statement, but it would appear they both just let it slide.

This whole stupid flap for clip of video that could have been made by anyone, anywhere.

I think that's the point bigbikeman - it wasn't made by just anyone, anywhere. It was part of one of the only news casts on US television that has any credibility left.

Theo - I disagree that Lehrer should have called him on that. It's the editorial part of the show and he is not acting as editor, but moderator. The fact that Shields didn't call him on it suggests that the reaction here (particularly to that terribly edited quote in the description) is pretty clearly overblown.

No, I think you're missing my point jonny . My original post was a bit ambiguous, I guess.

I'm referring to the subject of the flap: the OBL vid. AFAIK it's authenticity can't be verified. For all we know, the Chaser's War guys did it, or the DoD, or the CIA, or maybe some elements of al qaeda with a stand in for a dead Osama etc.

Or maybe it's real.

Either way, without any way of knowing who *really* authored the tape, who gives a shit? Maybe I'm just being cynical. <shrug>

Yes I did misunderstand - it was kind of ambiguous, for me at least.

I don't know any specific report on its authenticity, but I had assumed it had been validated to some extent to have received this much attention. I see your point - why bother even mentioning it until it has been verified.

So who's mouthpiece is Bin Laden, or the guy who looks like him ,whoever he is, and why the fuck should we care what Osama Bin-Put-In-Place says.....?

*waronterror

Adding video to channels (Waronterror) - requested by raven.