More Rethuglican scumthuggery

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by justbill_redux, Mar 29, 2006.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. justbill_redux

    justbill_redux King Missile

    So Hugh Hewitt is interviewing Michael Ware the Time magazine Baghdad bureau chief on his reporting on Iraq and specifically on the "morality" of spending time with and covering the insurgents and jihadists, which Ware has done. Somewhere down the line Hewitt starts to grill this guy and being the asshole that he is


    HH: I'm really fascinated by the question of whether or not it's ever good journalism to consort with the enemy in search of interesting stories. And there's not denying, Michael, where you get scoops. It's fascinating to read. You've got a great deal of courage, of physical courage, in doing this. So no one's denying that. I'm just wondering whether or not there's a line that you have in your mind reconciled yourself to crossing not once, but scores and scores of times, to report on the enemy, and whether or not that's a good thing. And you think it is, I think I hear you saying, because the public will not otherwise know what it is that you're reporting. Is that a fair summary?

    MW: That is fairly accurate, and let's look at it this way. I mean, you're sitting back in a comfortable radio studio, far from the realities of this war.

    HH: Actually, Michael, let me interrupt you.

    MW: If anyone has a right...

    HH: Michael, one second.

    MW: If anyone has a right to complain, that's what...

    HH: I'm sitting in the Empire State Building. Michael, I'm sitting in the Empire State Building, which has been in the past, and could be again, a target. Because in downtown Manhattan, it's not comfortable, although it's a lot safer than where you are, people always are three miles away from where the jihadis last spoke in America. So that's...civilians have a stake in this. Although you are on the front line, this was the front line four and a half years ago.

    Last edited: Mar 29, 2006