User talk:Mrfixit

Well Bob, You apparently prefer to cite biased reporting by communist journalists than information provided by an individual who is familiar with the subject of the SourceWatch entry. With respect to references to a person's background, references only to media commentary is disingenuous and far from complete, unless you subscribe to the fanciful notion that all journalism is based on sound reporting and not simply provided to lazy reporters by the personal enemies of the subject about which the article is written. Clearly, you have heard of whisper campaigns. I do believe that Mr. Vest, who is the reporter whose article is cited in Mr. Murray's entry as a reference for apparent truth on the subject, was used like a pawn by Mr. Murray's critics. Those critics can also be identified as those who brought the US the catastrophic intelligence failures of 9-11, Iraq WMD, the Chinese Embassy Bombing, the El Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant bombing, and other critical mishaps that have caused damage to our homeland and national security. Mr. Fixit.


 * This sort of irrational reply isn't going to win you many friends here. Since you yourself are editing anonymously (Mrfixit is not your real name), of course we have no way of knowing whether or how you are "familiar with the subject of this SourceWatch entry." As for the notion that the article reflects "biased reporting by communist journalists," that's a sloppy attempt at ad hominem attack. The article currently references three journalists who have written about Murray: one at Newsweek, one at the Washington Times, and one at the Nation. The Washington Times is a conservative newspaper. Do you think Newsweek is a communist publication? And the Vest article that has you upset is only used as reference to the lead sentence, which contains nothing but a list of positions that Murray has held. --Sheldon Rampton 00:10, 3 Oct 2006 (EDT)

Sheldon,

Was there something that bothered you in my version? Perhaps, it was objective truth as opposed to hyperbole and biased assertions.

And, this may be your only way of making friends, but my objective here is to ensure that the truth is understood.



Hi Mrfixit, welcome to Sourcewatch. There are a couple of ground rules you may not be familiar with: a) we discourage individuals from editing their own page, so if you are Patrick Murray I would encourage you to post suggested additions to the 'talk' page (accessed by clicking the 'discussion' tab); then myself or other contributors can see what is worth adding and know where it is coming from; b) we require key points to be referenced - see http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=SourceWatch:References for more information and c) we require substantive changes such as deletions to be accompanied by an explanation so other users can follow it. For these reasons I reverted your changes --Bob Burton 05:06, 25 Sep 2006 (EDT)