Comments on: North Korea Cranking Up Its Military Machine

By: Tully

Tully — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:03:34 +0000

Congrats, Cernig, you can cut and paste! Scissors and Elmer’s?

The stories themselves are anonymously sourced and have not a shred of actual hard evidence to back them.

Wrong again. They are quite speculative in spots, but the background is solidly factual. Some of the speculation is based on unnamed designated sources, and that should always be noted when assessing reliability. But that doesn’t mean they’re wrong, it means they should not be relied upon without confirmation. It doesn’t mean that anytime a journalist offers an unnamed or anonymous source they’re just making shit up.

Examples of factual evidence in the Korea story: Israeli aircraft did indeed destroy a facility in Syria, and the CIA did indeed offer up solid evidence that it was a nuclear facility. NK and Syria do indeed have close relations, and there was indeed a massive and explosive train disaster four years ago in Ryongchon, North Korea, that killed dozens, including foreign Syrian nationals who were military arms technicians. There has indeed been an increase in "scientific personnel" traffic between NK and Syria. China did sell Syria a reactor. NK has a habit of building aircraft launch ramps and artillery emplacements deep inside of mountains–it’s the only way they can keep them operational against a massive first-wave airstrike. Mr. Rone-ry has no trouble wasting people on brute excavation projects to get results.

Etc. I happen to agree that the particular journalist you love so much is not exactly one of the profession’s most dependable, but rather than dismissing ad hominem all stories coming from him (especially ones with other’s bylines also attached) one should always check for the specifics and address the specifics. Ad hominem is just a lazy way to avoid doing that.

By: Cernig

Cernig — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:12:20 +0000

The stories themselves are anonymously sourced and have not a shred of actual hard evidence to back them. Ad Hominem: Ad hominem arguments are always invalid in syllogistic logic, since the truth value of premises is taken as given, and the validity of a logical inference is independent of the person making the inference. However, ad hominem arguments are rarely presented as formal syllogisms, and their assessment lies in the domain of informal logic and the theory of evidence.[1] The theory of evidence depends to a large degree on assessments of the credibility of witnesses, including eyewitness evidence and expert witness evidence. Evidence that a purported eyewitness is unreliable, or has a motive for lying, or that a purported expert witness lacks the claimed expertise can play a major role in making judgements from evidence. Regards, C

By: Tully

Tully — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:59:53 +0000

Maybe you should look up what ad hominem means…

In any case, his is not the only name on those stories and your hard-on for him does not address the stories themselves. I mean, even Dan Rather found a fact now and again.

By: Cernig

Cernig — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:07:58 +0000

Ad hominem my ass, Tully. The guy’s a serial reporter of fabrications using "anon sources". Even rightwing Israeli observers like Yourish say so. That fact makes anything further he writes using similiar sources likewise difficult to believe.

By: Tully

Tully — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:33:24 +0000

Gee, Cernig, you really have a rock-solid ad hominem hard-on for the guy, don’t you?

By: Cernig

Cernig — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:48:49 +0000

LOL!The author of that Times report is Uzi Mahnaimi, author of more crappy anti-Iran stories than even Amir Taheri, as PJM’s Yourish has noted often enough. He’s also author of the Brits Held In Iran story in the same paper today.

Regards, C

By: Michael Merritt

Michael Merritt — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:05:51 +0000

"Who knew that the North Korean leaders enjoy watching the Thunderbirds?"

You’re talking about Kim Jong Il and his cronies. This is the guy who loves everything Western, while denying anything for his people.

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:03:00 +0000

Good luck landing back in the "tunnel!"

Someone needs to brush up on his Battlestar Galactica.

By: Patrick Murphy

Patrick Murphy — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 20:42:24 +0000

Good luck landing back in the "tunnel!" This digging runways into mountains by the NKAF is nothing new, it has been going on for years, along with the movement of troops and supplies forward. Basically the whole story is a big yawn and is old news. Face it, none of the aircraft in military use by NK can stand up to a fight with anything the West has and more to the point the kind of aircraft prevelent in their inventory are of a defensive nature.