has anyone heard of this? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

blktour · 05-28-2005, 11:36 AM

I don't know if this is a repost if it is please delete.

this guy has made numerous websites on his stance against the military.
now he is seen here in person trying prove is stance.

this guy is really ignorant, and he has no really good reason to back up his point of view! when i watch this video, i see that he barely says a word and gets totally thrashed on this "debate". what do you all think of this guy?

i dont know how to post links!! sorry!

LInky

Rlyss · 05-28-2005, 12:30 PM

I think those two newsreaders were pompous assholes who should learn how to conduct an interview. The guy should have just told them to keep quiet at the start so he could explain his point of view. Once he lets people know what he's all about then they can start asking questions.

I don't agree with his points of view but the thing that reocurred over and over and over again in the 'interview' was the fact that those people are defending his right to free speech, and they're fighting to let him say those sorts of things.

Of course it's a slap in the face to every soldier to hear someone like him say those things, but as the interviewer said, they're fighting for his right to say it. The soldiers are fighting for his right for freedom, including freedom of speech to say what he wants. If it's how he feels, if that's what he wants to say, and the soldiers are fighting for his right to say it, then I don't quite understand why he should be bashed for doing exactly what the soldiers are allowing him to do. A slap in the face, true, but if the coalition governments are involved in a war, partly to ensure people can say what they want, then why bash the guy for doing what they're ensuring he can do?

I don't agree with the guy's opinions, but those interviewers should be sacked for being grossly unprofessional. Call the person you're interviewing an 'idiot' and you lose a lot of dignity and credibility as a journalist. If they don't agree with his beliefs then discuss it using facts and figures, like the second interviewer <i>almost</i> did, instead of acting childish and clearly taking pleasure from hearing your own voice and puffing up your patriotic chest.

nothingx · 05-28-2005, 09:53 PM

I agree with Rlyss to an extent. Those "interviewers" were really more interested in interrogating, which is indeed, pretty unprofessional.

On the other hand, that guy is so fucking stupid, I believe they can call him an idiot on television and get away with it. I wonder if he has any idea, any fucking clue, what would happen to his life if there was no military. This country would be claimed by some other nation in seconds. He would be learning to speak Russain or Aribic or whatever language the first country to get here would be. Calling soldiers "scumbags" for serving the country is just plain ridiculous, for any reason, period. I think that is the reason these interviewers trampled all over him without giving him a chance. They realize there is no possible reason to hate soldiers that will ever make an ounce of sense. What he's saying is about the equivalent of spitting on your friendly Walmart door greeter because you think Walmart is taking over the world. If you have a problem with Walmart, you take your problem to the people that make decisions, not the 65 year old guy handing out stickers to children.

I work for the Army. My sister and several other family members are enlisted. To hear this guy talk disgusts me. He has openly disrespected and insulted those that would die for his safety... and the amazing part is, they're still going to do it anyway. I can only hope that one day he'll be smart enough to realize this, and perhaps, who knows, even be the slightest bit thankful.

iccky · 05-28-2005, 10:10 PM

Well, obviously the guy is an idiot. And while the interview style is overly aggressive and keeps him from making his point (I still don't know if he think troops are paid too much or too little), its kind of hard to interview an idiot.

We should realize the game they're playing here though. The right, and Sean Hannity in particular, love to pick the craziest, looniest lefties out there, bring them on their show, demolish them (because, in most cases, they are indeed idiots) and they pretend that those lunitics are all liberalism has to offer.

The other way to look at this is that most cable news screamfests aren't about news, they're about entertainment. This guy isn't really news, but seeing him get demolished gets our blood up and makes us feel like righteous Americans.

fulltiltgonzo · 05-29-2005, 04:44 AM

The producers and moderators shouldn't have given that idiot the free air-time and publicity that he obviously is seeking. They set him up as a human punching bag and used his inability to communicate his point as an opportunity to flag wave...

On the other hand. Michael Crooks is a bottom feeder and I wish somebody would put a boot in his ass...

fulltiltgonzo · 05-29-2005, 04:52 AM

Further proof that the man is a bottom feeder...

Reward for Soldier's Camera?

Phony 'Forsake Our Troops' Site

Domains for Sale

He slams the troops, appears on TV to build publicity and interest, and then sells the domain names on E-Bay...

Priceless

Marvelous Marv · 05-29-2005, 08:36 AM

I'll echo fulltilt. This guy is simply a troller who's gotten way more attention than he deserves.

As someone who has been interviewed on television, I can tell you that all of the people involved did their jobs, or at least tried to.

The number one rule of being interviewed is to say what you wanted to say, regardless of what question is asked. That's what Crook was trying to do. Ever seen a politician pound the dais and yell, "Taxes are too high! The government is too wasteful!"

Hannity is far too experienced to fall for that, and kept cutting him off. Colmes, equally experienced (and aware that if he agreed with Crook, that there would be an outcry for him to be booted from the show) did the same.

The other person involved (me) just felt unclean after watching it. It was the same feeling I get after watching some scripted "reality" show like "Elimidate." Not that I watch them regularly.

We all should watch televised, or radio interviews with an eye (ear?) toward whether or not the interviewee answers the question, or just says whatever message he wants to get out. (Or NOT watch them, as I've decided. Arguing politics is pretty pointless.)

In this case, it isn't even the message-Crook just wants to be famous.

I think it's helping him sell shit on ebay, though. Some people will fall for anything.

turbofish · 06-01-2005, 03:00 AM

Just to play the devils advocate...

Quote:

The soldiers are fighting for his right for freedom, including freedom of speech to say what he wants.

How are the soldiers of the US fighting for his freedom? Aren't you guys just invading sovereign countries to give that freedom to *others*...

Carno · 06-01-2005, 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbofish

How are the soldiers of the US fighting for his freedom? Aren't you guys just invading sovereign countries to give that freedom to *others*...

Jesus Christ man. People hate the devil's advocate. Go to politics forum for that garbage.

It is not the soldiers' fault that they are in Iraq. They are only doing what they are lawfully bound to do. Got a gripe? Take it to the President, not the soldiers.

jaco · 06-01-2005, 03:47 AM

Even if you take into account the not so loved visits we are doing upon certain countries at the moment its still ludicrous to hate soldiers in general. Military might is half of what keeps a country what it is.

turbofish · 06-02-2005, 12:53 AM

I wasn't bashing the soldiers. And I'm not anti-american, nor do I hate the US soldiers in Iraq. I'm simply saying, maybe it's bull to say "Their over there fighting for *your* freedom, get in line", because just those kind of remarks strike me as very *un-freedomy* and/or leaning towards fascism. The guy is ignorant, but bashing him with those remarks is pure ignorance aswell.

Again, I know the real world isn't like many of us would like it to be and I understand the need for military power. I understand that sometimes, like during WW2, soldiers were actually protecting the US way of life - but this is not the case as of right now. Your not fighting for freedom, but power. Which may be just, the winner gets to write history. But hell, right me of as a lunatic, it's easier to brand people as comies, terrorists, or whatever, that way you don't have to actually answer their question. Because it was an actual question... And if you have a good answer, I'd like to hear it.

Carno · 06-02-2005, 02:44 AM

Yes I know you weren't bashing the soldiers, but you got in a huff when someone said "they're defending our freedom."

However right or wrong that statement is, this is not the politics forum, so if you want to discuss the validity of that statement, you should do so in the proper forum.

turbofish · 06-03-2005, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carn

Yes I know you weren't bashing the soldiers, but you got in a huff when someone said "they're defending our freedom."

However right or wrong that statement is, this is not the politics forum, so if you want to discuss the validity of that statement, you should do so in the proper forum.

Roger!

I don't think I will though, it just caught my attention...

Carno · 06-03-2005, 09:36 AM

Sorry, I didn't mean to jump all over you, but I just despise politics

MSD · 06-03-2005, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbofish

Just to play the devils advocate...

How are the soldiers of the US fighting for his freedom? Aren't you guys just invading sovereign countries to give that freedom to *others*...

That isn't playing devil's advocate. That's trolling. If you're going to jump out and say something like that, do it in politics, not here.

Suave · 06-03-2005, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rlyss

Call the person you're interviewing an 'idiot' and you lose a lot of dignity and credibility as a journalist.

They work for Fox News. I don't think they have any dignity or credibility left to lose.

turbofish · 06-03-2005, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct

That isn't playing devil's advocate. That's trolling. If you're going to jump out and say something like that, do it in politics, not here.

This isn't necessarily true. Playing devils advocate in my world is taking a point of view nobody wants to defend. But it's much easier to fend someone of as trolling.

05-28-2005, 11:36 AM	#1 (permalink)
blktour Psycho Location: Anchorage, AK	has anyone heard of this? I don't know if this is a repost if it is please delete. this guy has made numerous websites on his stance against the military. now he is seen here in person trying prove is stance. this guy is really ignorant, and he has no really good reason to back up his point of view! when i watch this video, i see that he barely says a word and gets totally thrashed on this "debate". what do you all think of this guy? i dont know how to post links!! sorry! LInky Last edited by maleficent; 05-28-2005 at 11:54 AM.. Reason: fixed link

05-29-2005, 04:44 AM	#5 (permalink)
fulltiltgonzo Upright	The producers and moderators shouldn't have given that idiot the free air-time and publicity that he obviously is seeking. They set him up as a human punching bag and used his inability to communicate his point as an opportunity to flag wave... On the other hand. Michael Crooks is a bottom feeder and I wish somebody would put a boot in his ass... __________________ I venture to suggest that patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. - Adlai Stevenson

05-29-2005, 04:52 AM	#6 (permalink)
fulltiltgonzo Upright	Further proof that the man is a bottom feeder... Reward for Soldier's Camera? Phony 'Forsake Our Troops' Site Domains for Sale He slams the troops, appears on TV to build publicity and interest, and then sells the domain names on E-Bay... Priceless __________________ I venture to suggest that patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. - Adlai Stevenson Last edited by fulltiltgonzo; 05-29-2005 at 04:55 AM..

06-01-2005, 03:47 AM	#10 (permalink)
jaco Crazy	Even if you take into account the not so loved visits we are doing upon certain countries at the moment its still ludicrous to hate soldiers in general. Military might is half of what keeps a country what it is. __________________ "How soft your fields so green, Can whisper tales of gore" "Thou art god"

06-02-2005, 12:53 AM	#11 (permalink)
turbofish Tilted	I wasn't bashing the soldiers. And I'm not anti-american, nor do I hate the US soldiers in Iraq. I'm simply saying, maybe it's bull to say "Their over there fighting for your freedom, get in line", because just those kind of remarks strike me as very un-freedomy and/or leaning towards fascism. The guy is ignorant, but bashing him with those remarks is pure ignorance aswell. Again, I know the real world isn't like many of us would like it to be and I understand the need for military power. I understand that sometimes, like during WW2, soldiers were actually protecting the US way of life - but this is not the case as of right now. Your not fighting for freedom, but power. Which may be just, the winner gets to write history. But hell, right me of as a lunatic, it's easier to brand people as comies, terrorists, or whatever, that way you don't have to actually answer their question. Because it was an actual question... And if you have a good answer, I'd like to hear it. __________________ ><((((°> Jag bara gissar o spekulerar o det jag skriver behöver inte ha någon förankring med verkligheten alls.

05-28-2005, 12:30 PM	#2 (permalink)
Rlyss The Pusher Location: Edinburgh	I think those two newsreaders were pompous assholes who should learn how to conduct an interview. The guy should have just told them to keep quiet at the start so he could explain his point of view. Once he lets people know what he's all about then they can start asking questions. I don't agree with his points of view but the thing that reocurred over and over and over again in the 'interview' was the fact that those people are defending his right to free speech, and they're fighting to let him say those sorts of things. Of course it's a slap in the face to every soldier to hear someone like him say those things, but as the interviewer said, they're fighting for his right to say it. The soldiers are fighting for his right for freedom, including freedom of speech to say what he wants. If it's how he feels, if that's what he wants to say, and the soldiers are fighting for his right to say it, then I don't quite understand why he should be bashed for doing exactly what the soldiers are allowing him to do. A slap in the face, true, but if the coalition governments are involved in a war, partly to ensure people can say what they want, then why bash the guy for doing what they're ensuring he can do? I don't agree with the guy's opinions, but those interviewers should be sacked for being grossly unprofessional. Call the person you're interviewing an 'idiot' and you lose a lot of dignity and credibility as a journalist. If they don't agree with his beliefs then discuss it using facts and figures, like the second interviewer <i>almost</i> did, instead of acting childish and clearly taking pleasure from hearing your own voice and puffing up your patriotic chest.

05-28-2005, 09:53 PM	#3 (permalink)
nothingx undead Location: nihilistic freedom	I agree with Rlyss to an extent. Those "interviewers" were really more interested in interrogating, which is indeed, pretty unprofessional. On the other hand, that guy is so fucking stupid, I believe they can call him an idiot on television and get away with it. I wonder if he has any idea, any fucking clue, what would happen to his life if there was no military. This country would be claimed by some other nation in seconds. He would be learning to speak Russain or Aribic or whatever language the first country to get here would be. Calling soldiers "scumbags" for serving the country is just plain ridiculous, for any reason, period. I think that is the reason these interviewers trampled all over him without giving him a chance. They realize there is no possible reason to hate soldiers that will ever make an ounce of sense. What he's saying is about the equivalent of spitting on your friendly Walmart door greeter because you think Walmart is taking over the world. If you have a problem with Walmart, you take your problem to the people that make decisions, not the 65 year old guy handing out stickers to children. I work for the Army. My sister and several other family members are enlisted. To hear this guy talk disgusts me. He has openly disrespected and insulted those that would die for his safety... and the amazing part is, they're still going to do it anyway. I can only hope that one day he'll be smart enough to realize this, and perhaps, who knows, even be the slightest bit thankful.

05-28-2005, 10:10 PM	#4 (permalink)
iccky Psycho Location: Princeton, NJ	Well, obviously the guy is an idiot. And while the interview style is overly aggressive and keeps him from making his point (I still don't know if he think troops are paid too much or too little), its kind of hard to interview an idiot. We should realize the game they're playing here though. The right, and Sean Hannity in particular, love to pick the craziest, looniest lefties out there, bring them on their show, demolish them (because, in most cases, they are indeed idiots) and they pretend that those lunitics are all liberalism has to offer. The other way to look at this is that most cable news screamfests aren't about news, they're about entertainment. This guy isn't really news, but seeing him get demolished gets our blood up and makes us feel like righteous Americans.

05-29-2005, 08:36 AM	#7 (permalink)
Marvelous Marv Cunning Runt Location: Taking a mulligan	I'll echo fulltilt. This guy is simply a troller who's gotten way more attention than he deserves. As someone who has been interviewed on television, I can tell you that all of the people involved did their jobs, or at least tried to. The number one rule of being interviewed is to say what you wanted to say, regardless of what question is asked. That's what Crook was *trying* to do. Ever seen a politician pound the dais and yell, "Taxes are too high! The government is too wasteful!" Hannity is far too experienced to fall for that, and kept cutting him off. Colmes, equally experienced (and aware that if he agreed with Crook, that there would be an outcry for him to be booted from the show) did the same. The other person involved (me) just felt unclean after watching it. It was the same feeling I get after watching some scripted "reality" show like "Elimidate." Not that I watch them regularly. We all should watch televised, or radio interviews with an eye (ear?) toward whether or not the interviewee answers the question, or just says whatever message he wants to get out. (Or NOT watch them, as I've decided. Arguing politics is pretty pointless.) In this case, it isn't even the message-Crook just wants to be famous. I think it's helping him sell shit on ebay, though. Some people will fall for anything.

06-02-2005, 02:44 AM	#12 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	Yes I know you weren't bashing the soldiers, but you got in a huff when someone said "they're defending our freedom." However right or wrong that statement is, this is not the politics forum, so if you want to discuss the validity of that statement, you should do so in the proper forum.

06-03-2005, 09:36 AM	#14 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	Sorry, I didn't mean to jump all over you, but I just despise politics