# CBC Writer Tries The Usual Stunts - But Lets Give Him The Afghan Offer!



## 54/102 CEF (5 Jun 2006)

CBC Writer John Gray has a piece on the deployment

Quality of writing (I don't think it can be called reporting) is for you to decide - call it as you see it - so here's a few comments from me - see the pics

DND can put the mark on all these jokers - 

"Dear Esteemed Member of the Press

We've noted your interest in things military per your article and would like to invite you to embed with the unit that's currently on deployment.

We're sure it will round out your experience with DND and add to your journalistic talents or lack thereof"

See link http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/realitycheck/20060605gray.html

See images below


----------



## yoman (5 Jun 2006)

> They are in harm's way all the time, and they have little idea what to do except to do what the Americans tell them to do.



Best part of the article.  :


----------



## kilekaldar (5 Jun 2006)

"our soldiers know little enough of where they are and most of them probably care less"

EXCUSE ME? I can only speak for myself, but I most definetly know and care about where I'm going in two months, and by the sounds of this article I've probably done more research on Afghanistan than this hack.

At our unit we've have multiple briefs about the country, it's culture, history and the dangers to expect. From what I could tell everyone found it very usefull and interesting. We also have a library of freshly bought books on A'stan that was rapidly emptied by various interested soldiers.

This hack is making up stuff as he goes. After 20 years in his line of work it's time he stopped inflicting himself on unsuspecting readers and retire.


----------



## Zarathustra (5 Jun 2006)

yoman said:
			
		

> Best part of the article.  :



*lol* I was going to quote this part too. And the author starts his article by quoting the New York Times.


----------



## HDE (5 Jun 2006)

John Gray is the Globe's "reality check" guy.  Sort of a general-purpose "expert" on pretty much everthing :


----------



## medicineman (6 Jun 2006)

I'm willing to bet he'd find a way to weasel out of any invites to be embedded with anyone except his mistress...

MM


----------



## S McKee (6 Jun 2006)

Is it just me? I get worn out reading this crap, I used to bang off a letter to the editor, but it's like casting pearls before swine.  The CBC "Reality Check" is "reality" viewed thru the lenses of Liberal red/ NDP orange colored glasses.


----------



## big bad john (6 Jun 2006)

My opinion of the CBC fell drastically this week when I watched the correspondants question period.  But then again I was raised on BBC, and they are a little bit left themselves.


----------



## vangemeren (6 Jun 2006)

The CBC changed the format of its website, maybe they mean that those authors need a reality check that they feature. :blotto:


----------



## pbi (6 Jun 2006)

Glad you guys picked up on this piece of ill-informed, slanted rubbish. I read it today and nearly chucked. I see hardly any "facts" in his piece, but I do see alot of broad generalization, speculation and stereotyping. Tellingly, I also see no reference to any time he has spent in Afgh.

It seems to me that people like Gray cannot grasp the idea that Canadian soldiers might actually be well-informed (at least, far better informed than the average Canadian), that they might know what they are doing in Afgh and why, and that under the OEF command arrangement in Afgh they are not "taking orders" from the Americans because Canada does not give command of its toops to other countries, and has not since at least WWI.

More handwringing about the sky falling.  I think these people desperately want our mision to fail, so that the Tories, the military, the CDS and (of course) the US are all discredited.

Cheers


----------



## pbi (6 Jun 2006)

Here is some more nonsense in the Globe and Mail by Lawrence Martin, whose journalistic skills have been reviewed elsewhere on these pages (and slammed by Christie Blatchford). You can find this at: http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet/story/LAC.20060606.COMARTIN06/TPStory/specialComment/columnists.



> The fear card has been dealt -- and Harper will play it
> 
> LAWRENCE MARTIN
> 
> ...



Of course: this was all dreamed up by the RCMP and the CF to boost support for the troops in Afghanistan, right?  Talk about "fear-mongering": isn't that exactly what Martin is indulging in? 



> He brought the Afghan war to the forefront, while leaving Darfur and Haiti to the side.



What? Who deployed Canadian soldiers *as part of OEF  * in 2002 and again in 2006 ? The Tories? Who withdrew our military from Haiti? Harper? Who initiated the approach to focus on Afghanistan and avoid Darfur (except to send Grizzlies?) The Tories?

This historical distortion seems to be SOP with people of this persuasion, whether they are scribbling in the Globe, posting on some lefty blog, or ranting down at the Student Union.

The Globe does itself no service by publish this kind of drivel.

Cheers


----------



## Kirkhill (6 Jun 2006)

I am trying to remember the title of a documentary on the Media coverage of Campaign 2004. The one before last.

I have a lasting memory of three of the nation's premier (where IS that sarcasm emoticon?) journalists standing outside one of Harper's buses poring over their blackberries in the final days of the campaign.

The three reporters were from different papers: the Star, the Globe and somebody else.  I forget who the other reporters were but I distinctly remember Lawrence Martin.

It was the "child pornography" issue that had come up - some overheated press release - and Harper had commented.  Martin asked "What can we say about that?"  The other reporters were inclined to say that Harper had defused the issue.  Martin rejoinded with "Well, we can say that he didn't deny it......." and then proceeded to set the story line for the next day's papers, not just his own.

I may be off on the details but I remember the exchange so vividly because it encapsulated for me everything that was wrong about the Canadian media in general and the Parliamentary Press Gallery in particular.

While many of them can convince themselves they are not Liberal, they revel in the notion that they are liberal and not conservative.


----------



## 54/102 CEF (6 Jun 2006)

John Gray seems to have good days and bad days http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/realitycheck/


----------



## Mike Bobbitt (6 Jun 2006)

We have to remember that journalists write what sells, and what sells to the majority of Canadians these days is getting Canada back to it's roots of social programs and a military that is to be seen (and not heard) only as international heroes in blue helmets. War is a terribly unsavoury topic, and journalists can easily capitalize on the fact that a sadly large number of Canadians don't consider our presence in Afghanistan a solution to anything.

Facts are not required to spin a "feel good" yarn about how we can (and should) blame the Tories for our unlawful invasion of an otherwise peaceful nation. In order for that story to work, our soldiers (poor brainwashed souls that they are) must not have the wherewithal to think for themselves, let alone understand the political, economical or cultural background of the job they are doing.

Don't blame the journalist for making a living writing what sells. Blame the readers who are willing to pay for it.


----------



## MarkOttawa (6 Jun 2006)

Three months and a bit into the mission and it's hopeless.  The headline and subheads:

    "Canadians in Afghanistan, where the news is never good

    The descent into anarchy

    Is it a war that is doomed to be lost?"

And the Globe knows it's a quagmire already.
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2006/06/afstan-globes-agenda-secret-no-more.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Infanteer (6 Jun 2006)

Good grief - the only reason Afghanistan is a quagmire is because the press has turned it into one.  Until we get the equivelent of a Col David Hackworth saying "This war is no good", I think these reporters should spare us the doom and gloom....


----------



## 54/102 CEF (6 Jun 2006)

Mike Bobbitt said:
			
		

> Don't blame the journalist for making a living writing what sells. Blame the readers who are willing to pay for it.



Best summary of how to fight them. Thanks Mike!


----------

