NY Times failed to identify Rice's "heckler" as a former U.S. diplomat
In an October 20 article on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's questioning before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, The New York Times reported: "The hearing was punctuated by a heckler who called for an end to the war, only to be hustled out." But what one would not know from reading the Times' account was that the "heckler" is a former senior-level U.S. diplomat and former Army colonel. The Washington Post report on the hearing noted:
As Rice testified, former U.S. diplomat Mary Ann Wright stood up and shouted from the audience, "Stop the killing in Iraq. You and Congress have to be responsible." Wright, a senior envoy in the U.S. embassies in Afghanistan and Mongolia, resigned in protest in 2003.
As the Associated Press reported on May 25, 2003, Wright was "former deputy chief of mission at U.S. embassies in Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and most recently Mongolia" as well as "a former Army colonel," who joined two other diplomats in sending resignation letters to then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell because "they found the Bush administration's case for war unconvincing and its approach toward other countries condescending."
From the October 20 Times article, by reporter Steven R. Weisman:
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, facing tough questions about Iraq from Republican and Democratic senators, asserted that progress was being made in securing the country but declined to predict when American forces could withdraw or to rule out widening the war to Syria.
In three and a half hours of hearings at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ms. Rice was both conciliatory and combative, rebutting the gloomy assessments from senators of both parties but at the end offering a weary concession to Senator Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois.
"I understand that, yes, it might not work," Ms. Rice told Mr. Obama, referring to American plans to raise the effectiveness of Iraqi forces and heal Iraq's fractious society. "But every day we have to get up and work at our hardest to make it work."
It was a day that echoed the anguish, anger and skepticism that opinion polls show have begun to dominate the thinking of Americans. The hearing was punctuated by a heckler who called for an end to the war, only to be hustled out. There were also a few glimmerings of a change in the administration's tone on a few subjects.
Well once again how you describe something changes the impact completely. Heckler sounds like some drunk obnoxious person at a comedy club. However this sounds newsworthy..
As Rice testified, former U.S. diplomat Mary Ann Wright stood up and shouted from the audience, "Stop the killing in Iraq. You and Congress have to be responsible." Wright, a senior envoy in the U.S. embassies in Afghanistan and Mongolia, resigned in protest in 2003, was quickly hustled out of range of the cameras and microphones.
I added the last bit, but it certainly describes the situation clearly.
And these stories are edited; so what's left out speaks to the impression the provider of the story wants to leave with the reader.
Correct. It shows what kind of "emphasis" you want to put on the situation by "omitting" certain facts.
I call it propaganda. Of course, the NY Times is a "liberal" paper according to almost every conservative that breathes, so it could only mean that the propaganda is "liberal" right?
While "heckler" certainly is an accurate attribute of this boorish woman, I agree that knowing her employment history is interesting. We can all thank our lucky stars that this unprofessional and delusional nut is no longer a diplomat.
Amazing that you can call this person "an unprofessional and delusional nut", when you weren't even there, and haven't even met the person.
This was more of an outburst than heckling. The choice of the word "heckling" was intended to marginalize the speaker as one who is drunk and disorderly. By virtue of this usage I guess anyone who refuses to accept the Bush administration at face value and speak out is a "heckler".
The propaganda isn't conservative or liberal, it is simply saying that dissent is unwanted, that is a threat to all idealogy. To label a point of view as simple heckling it marginalizes everyone involved in political dialog.
She may be boorish but what part is delusional? That Rice and Congress can do anything to affect change in our Governments policies? Now that you mention it I'm sure she's delusional because Congress couldn't have stopped this war if they'd even tried.
It's not her point of view that is heckling. It's her conduct in a Senate Committee chamber.
I agree that it's interesting to know her background, but I hardly think that leaving it out constitutes "misinformation". MMFA is doing more and more articles like this: additional background that is germane to a topic, but whoose omission in a news blurb doesn't rise to the level of "distortion". Perhaps MMFA should re-write its mission statement.
"Perhaps MMFA should re-write its mission statement."
Perhaps conservative posters should come up with a new schtick. "MMFA got it wrong" has become the talking point du jour for you guys. I haven't seen you make a convincing case yet. Give it a rest.
Perhaps you should come up with a better schtick, because...
1. I'm not a conservative.
2. I didn't claim MMFA got anything wrong here.
Ommission is a form of misinformation. Not quite a lie, but certainly not the whole truth. Good thing they're not under oath.
we agree she was out of line to interupt the proceedings. She is a former official who smelled the stink long before the rest of us. Does that make her delusional or just more in tune to the lies fed to us, ALL of us, by this administration.
The truth is our true diplomats and statepersons probably are having a hard time disguising their disgust at this point. As the administration has decided to abandon all reason, open dissent is to be expected, I am suprised we have not seen more of it.
Correction is needed in this article!
NYT referenced the wrong country! The "Heckler" was NOT calling an end to the war in Iraq from the back of the Senate room, she was calling for an end to military actions in Syria (paraphrasing)and Iran.
[military actions against Syria apparently began sometime last week and is not being reported in our press or in the MSM!]
I don't have her exact quote because i didn't write her statements down, but i did watch the entire episode on C-Span last night.
Rice was being questioned on this administrations' "vision" for success and victory in Iraq, and in this context the issue of Syria and Iran came up. (with regard to military operations in these countries)Rice in uer usual manner of obfuscation refused to answer these questions directly . I believe the "Heckler" took the floor just as Senator Chaffee began his round of questioning when suddenly the "heckler" interupted, hurling with admonishments to both Rice and the Senators, reminding all present that only Congress has the sole power to declare war on another nation (again paraphrasing)which of course Rice refused to acknowledge.
on another note, it was infuriating to witness the Dems refuse to be more direct with Rice on this specific issue, and fail speak with more authority on this matter.
So, I say BRAVO to the Heckler who had the temerity to remind these officials who it is they're supposed to be serving and on the illegality of this war, and for giving Bush a blank check for expanding this administrations so called "War Powers".
Long let her voice ring in those halls! may they once again become "hallowed" instead of corrupt.
And btw, She left the room without a fuss upon request and in good grace.
Again Bravo to her, whoever she is.
This tone of this post is so shrill that its easy to dismiss as raving, but it does make a couple of concrete allagations.
she was calling for an end to military actions in Syria (paraphrasing)and Iran
Can anyone point to a video or audio recording of the proceedings?
military actions against Syria apparently began sometime last week and is not being reported in our press or in the MSM!
That US media would keep this under wraps might not be unimaginable, but why don't I find anything about it in The Guardian or at Al Jazeera? Can anyone point to a coroberating report?
another dirty little bit of deception by "da times". i hate dem bums. they can't or won't get it straight. it is always dirty and deceptive
How dare anyone speak to the warrior princess such - smite them. SMITE THEM ALL!!!!!
To bad somebody didn't "heckle" Condo Rice when she was lying about those aluminum tubes, or the fact that "nobody could have imagined terrorists flying an airplane into a building".
The British parliement conducts business like this all the time; maybe we should try it. I'd love to see the Democrats stand in unison and shout "LIAR" next time Bush starts peddling his propaganda.
I think yipee is making a good point that we aren't giving credit to. Even if the "heckler" makes a good point (which I think she does)her choice of time, place, and manner are such that that point gets lost. The story isn't that Condeleeza Rice failed to offer a compelling explanation to a well reasoned complaint, the story is an idealouge got thrown out of a meeting for heckling. We can complain that it's not fair and that George Bush censors his meetings so that dissent is never herd, but that doesn't solve the problem about the dissent not being heard--it would seem that liberals need to find a way to make their dissent heard without it getting blocked out by a side issue like was there heckling or not. Further, for us to make our dissent heard about issues like the war in Iraq we need to have a party line about what that position is. I think we've made the case the GW and gang lied, mis-led, bullied and coralled to get us into Iraq as well as we can make it, now we ought to tell people what that should mean for future action. Does the left want to leave Iraq entirely, end the fighting and call it a day (as the "heckler" seems to suggest), or do we want to stay in Iraq and do it differently (and if so, then how are we planning on running it differently). The left is going to remain viewed as hecklers as long as we are only making the negative case--why Bush and group are wrong and lying. This is an important first step, but it has to be followed by a positive case for why our way is better or we're never going to convince anyone who doesn't already agree that any plan is better than Bush's.
by ileangood - Friday October 21, 2005 10:51:11 AM EST
Excellent! That is my point exactly, much of your message is lost because of people like this lady. Everyone, left and right should object to this type of behavior! Thanks, ileangood. Perhaps you should change your name to ithinkgood!
"I think we've made the case the GW and gang lied, mis-led, bullied and coralled to get us into Iraq as well as we can make it,"
I disagree. This is the legacy of this administration. Yeah, the left has been making this case for two years, but too many Americans still either can't or won't admit it. This is Bush's blue dress, and we need to rub his nose in it.
I have to disagree with you on the idea that the is no one from the left that has any ideas. There has been plenty of ideas and options from the left, and I agree with you, there ahs been plenty of fingerpointing as well. Using this same analogy, I would like to add the following. There is also a large number of dems who know the cause of the fire, and have the tools and the courage to put it out. But the ones with the means to get the message out have decided only to point out the dems who are finger pointing, this serves to purposes, keeps the people on there side content, because they still believe the fire started in the waste basket, and the finger pointers are idiots for trying to blame there guy. They also know that if the dems with the tools to put out the fire get a chance to prove they can do it, then they will lose the precious position of majority rule, and the party is over.
Every one likes a party, and no one wants one to end
oops wrong spot
I see no intent here, but laziness - which I think is much more the problem with the media than any bias.
The reporter probably never bothered to track down who the heckler was. Maybe it was just too much trouble.
Nerzog has nicely summed up why liberals aren't getting into office...
"Yeah, the left has been making this case for two years, but too many Americans still either can't or won't admit it. This is Bush's blue dress, and we need to rub his nose in it."
Liberals are attacked in the right wing media, but we have to stop walking into the blade. Nerzog has neatly stated the basis for the liberal stereotype that the right keeps bludgeoning us with--liberals would rather be correct than propose a productive plan. A bunch of annoying know-it-alls who actually have no ideas except that your ideas are wrong.
Case in point, I am not saying that the left has made the case about Bush to the extent that it is believed by all, I said we have made it as well as it can be made. With the evidense we now have the left has convinced as many people as we are going to that Bush knowingly and intentionally lied--we can keep trying to rub his face in that but by so doing we aren't going ot convince more people that we are right we are just going to reinforce a stereo-type about insane dogmatism around being correct.
Right now we live in a house is on fire state. George Bush is telling us the house is onfire because a waste paper basket ignited with a cigarette in it, but we know that the house is actually on fire because of generations of faulty wiring that no one wanted to fix. George Bush and team conservative is trying to use water to put out the fire, which would work if the fire was the way they say it is, but is in fact only making the electrical fire worse. Conservative fire fighters are making up stories about how the water will work soon, we just need to give it time. Liberal firefighters at this point are standing on the sidewalk going the house is on fire, and the HOUSE IS ON FIRE because GW is lying about the cause of the fire so the fire won't get better. That's all well and good and while what liberals are doing isn't making the fire worse, it also isn't putting out the fire because our correct facts aren't leading to any coherrant plan for putting the fire. So the fire is spreading and the people whose lives are burning down aren't impressed with liberals who only seem interested in telling them that the house is on fire, and trying to rub the fact of and spread of the fire in face of the persons they blame for the fire. If we want A)get elected, and B)use power wisely, then at some point we have to be less interested in assigning blame for the fire, and more interested in actually using baking soda to put out the fire. In absence of a baking soda solution, people will stick with the ineffective water solution for lack of a better idea.
So Nerzog, if you want to keep rubbing Bush's face in the fact that he is a liar, be my guest, but don't expect to win an election that way and being right and not in power is about as useful to the liberal movement as balls on the bishop.
ileangood:
Which of the following charges by the Rightwing is the true one:
Democrats have no Ideas.
John Kerry is the most LIBERAL member of the Senate.
See, BOTH cannot be true, yet the Rightwing USED both when Kerry was running for President.
I'll give you a hint. A person can tell you a dozen Ideas, and you can easily discount them all (without even listening). You can say, simply, that they are not "NEW" ideas. Then you can say that the person has no ideas.
It's a transparent and bogus argument, especially when directed at the party (and its candidates) which successfully governed this nation for most of the last century (amassing a truly gigantic array of policies/ideas which have worked wonders in making this a better nation), but it's the talking point the right has chosen to adopt.
Other easy-to-make charges the Rightwing bring out, once again without even having to listen to the candidate, is that they are a "flip flopper" and that they do not tell the truth. These charges can be made on the scantest of evidence (or really, none at all), and then can be repeated endlessly ad nauseum. THIS is how the Rightwing campaigns. Formula.
And the beauty is, one size fits all. These are used, regardless of who the candidate is, or what they are saying.
I have to disagree with you on the idea that the is no one from the left that has any ideas. There has been plenty of ideas and options from the left, and I agree with you, there ahs been plenty of fingerpointing as well. Using this same analogy, I would like to add the following. There is also a large number of dems who know the cause of the fire, and have the tools and the courage to put it out. But the ones with the means to get the message out have decided only to point out the dems who are finger pointing, this serves to purposes, keeps the people on there side content, because they still believe the fire started in the waste basket, and the finger pointers are idiots for trying to blame there guy. They also know that if the dems with the tools to put out the fire get a chance to prove they can do it, then they will lose the precious position of majority rule, and the party is over.
Every one likes a party, and no one wants one to end
So, ileangood, (or is it kenkong?), being a "liberal" you must have some suggestions of your own?
To bad somebody didn't "heckle" Condo Rice when she was lying about those aluminum tubes, or the fact that "nobody could have imagined terrorists flying an airplane into a building".
---------------
"No one could imagine the levees in New Orleans failing." That is the problem with this administration they make up so many facts that the confuse what they read in reports with their imagination.