Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PurpleMan
This has been said before, so there's no reason to assume you'll get it this time either, but that is partial information. The numbers are right, but the perspective is wrong. Just like yours.

It is not the Army's responsibility to refute partial reports by leftist anti-military sources. Perhaps you should take it upon yourself to aquire some perspective on the things you have swallowed from the left by looking up the suicide statistics of the population at large. I'm always curious as to why people like you want to besmirch our military on a conservative site using CNN as a source. I'm sure you won't explain it, but I'm curious nonetheless....

125 posted on 05/13/2009 9:04:53 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]


To: ohioWfan

“It is not the Army’s responsibility to refute partial reports..” Hell it isn’t. What do you think their people who work with the media do when there is wrong info? Sit there with their thumbs in their ears? No, they get the record corrected. Moreso, they talk with the reporters ahead of time to make sure they have their facts correct. DUH? What a novel idea! Your lack of understanding of how reporters and the military work wiith each other is mind-boggling.

“...by leftist anti-military sources.”

So CNN, NYT, Military Times, JAMA, San Jose Mercury and the Hartford Courant are leftist anti-military sources? Baised? Sure. Everyone is. “Leftist anti-military sources?” Wow. You’d better leave now. Joseph Farahis is calling you to write some articles.


126 posted on 05/13/2009 9:22:01 AM PDT by PurpleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson