Read e-book Sound of Shadows: A Deke Gannon adventure novel (Deke Gannons first adventure Book 1)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Sound of Shadows: A Deke Gannon adventure novel (Deke Gannons first adventure Book 1) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Sound of Shadows: A Deke Gannon adventure novel (Deke Gannons first adventure Book 1) book. Happy reading Sound of Shadows: A Deke Gannon adventure novel (Deke Gannons first adventure Book 1) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Sound of Shadows: A Deke Gannon adventure novel (Deke Gannons first adventure Book 1) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Sound of Shadows: A Deke Gannon adventure novel (Deke Gannons first adventure Book 1) Pocket Guide.
1. [leondumoulin.nl] Sound of Shadows: A DekeGannon adventure novel (Deke Gannon's first adventure Book 1) PdfFree. 2. 3. 4. From I Universe. 5. audiobook.
Table of contents

What is worse is that I am not really sure what Eason really meant to communicate to us, but I do know that he was quite passionate about it. Members of the audience took away what they wanted to hear, and now they will use it in every vile and twisted way imaginable. But take a look at this exchange between Hugh Hewitt and Rebecca MacKinnon, journalist turned blogger, a former associate of Mr.

Jordan at CNN, who was also at Davos, and who covered the incident on her own blog, and had agreed to answer Hewitt's questions about the incident. A: A news report by a newspaper or news agency would have included verbatim quotes, ideally double-checked from a digital or tape recording made by the journalist. A TV or radio report would have included the actual "soundbite. As I've said before, his account of what transpired is consistent with my recollection of the event. However, since nobody has verbatim quotes, all we have are Jordan's clarifications after-the-fact, in which he admits to have mis-spoken.

So to answer your question: yes, Rony's initial blog post was "accurate" in the sense that several of us in the room have corroborated his account. He has a great memory for detail. But would any news editor have relied on his or anybody else's memory for a news story? Despite later charges that Jordan was part of a coverup and refused to admit to saying what he said, it turns out that he readily responded to questions from bloggers when asked to clarify what he meant. The first such response was received by Ms. MacKinnon and posted in her blog.

If you're interested in following this story further you need to take a moment and read Eason Jordan's explanation of what he was trying to say. You'll notice that he says several times that he does not believe that the US military is deliberately targeting journalists, that he was not trying to say that they did at Davos, and that he was using "targeted" in a highly limited way, to differentiate the fate of so many journalists in Iraq from the category of "collatoral damage," in which Barney Frank had just placed them during a discussion of the huge number of journalists who have died in Iraq since the American invasion.

Note that this is consistent with one thing Abovitz says, i. Note, also, that the date of this post is February 2nd. Let's see, that means that Eason Jordan "stonewalled" for all of three or four days. Another blogger got a similar reply from Eason Jordan. Carol Platt Liebou was less inclined than Ms. MacKinnon to take Jordan's words at face value.

Cutting to the Chase

Ms Liebou's commentators were even less inclined than she to take Eason Jordan's integrity at face value, and if you want a sense of what emotions and what habits of mind and argument fueled what had now become a self-described "blog swarm," you can't do better than to read the comments to a post that featured these words from Eason Jordan himself:.

Great scoop, Carol. This sounds like more of the same spin we received from CNN - that his remarks were taken out of context, he didn't say what he meant, he didn't mean what he said, etc. Thanks for putting this up, but it does sound like Jordan's trying to lie his way out of the hole he dug with his own mouth. This man has been involved with journalism for years.

Does he really expect us to believe that he doesn't know the meaning of the words he is using? Are we to understand that he wasn't aware of the nature of those to whom he was speaking? If the journalists he is speaking of were "targeted" in the military sense, what were they doing standing opposite American forces during a fire fight?

The Full Word List - Alphabetical - n5dwi.com

Were they acting like the stringers who just happen to be around for events such as the murder of election officials on Haifa Street? While I have sympathy for those innocently caught in a cross-fire, I have none for those who give voice to, and act as a propaganda tool for, the enemy. Such people get our people killed.

I'm not saying that this is the case here, but there are enough reporters over there that fit the bill, that I have to ask the question. Both reinterpretations of existing terms are absurd. Jordan must have stayed up all night looking for a way out of his bold-faced lies. Comments like these, which seemed unable to fathom as straighforward an assertion as Jordan's declaration that he doesn't believe American troops were deliberately targeting journalists as a matter of policy and had said so at Devos, branding it immediately a lie, a coverup, coupled with callous expessions of hostility to journalists who get in the way of American troops, were repeated again and again, with some variations, on all the blogs that were happy to consider themselves part of the swarm, as well as at PressThink.

One of the characteristics of the Eason Jordan blogswarm was the apparent attempts on the part of many of its members to do some actual journalism. The date of her own post answering those questioins was February 7th. The questions themselves seem fairly straightfoward. On one of the key issues, was Eason Jordan responding to something that Barney Franks said about dead journalists being collatoral damage, Ms.

MacKimmon doesn't remember it that way, although she reminds Hewitt that she, like apparently everyone else in attendance at Davos, didn't take any written notes. That would leave that issue fairly open, would it not? But the real queestion is this; were her answers of any real interest to Hewitt? Were his questions an honest attempt to find out what happened? You can supply your own answer by taking at look at Hewitt's postings on the subject to his own blog for February 2nd, five days earlier, here and here. Marshall "leans to the left" and John is "firmly in the conservative camp.

The paper ought to have asked is Eason Jordan a journalist? I doubt very much that any blogger who speculated that the American military had targeted and murdered a dozen journalists would keep his or her readership or at least their reputation. When Kos slandered the American contractors dead in Fallujah as mercenaries, the blowback was immediate. Jordan slams the U. Here is the key quote from a first-person account of Jordan's remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos:. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience the anti-US crowd and cause great strain on others.

That is remarkable. One of the most senior news execs in the world tells a crowd of dignitaries from around the globe that the U. Where are the press ethicists at Poynter? What does Howard Kurtz or Jay Rosen have to say about this? Or is it ok for an American news executive to feed anti-American propaganda machines the most incendiary of fuels for the benefit of a crowd's applause and approval? I hope Rush devotes some time to this today. I certainly will, as I have heard from members of the military too often about the American media slagging them like this and walking away back to the green room for cupcakes and coffee.

You might want to let CNN know what you think. CNN posts this at its "Contact Us" page :. And we want to hear what you think. If you have a comment, suggestion or have spotted a mistake, please select one of the links on this page". If you post on this subject, send me the link with "Eason Jordan" in the subject line. I will post them here. We could learn something about the way to coordinate an attack from these folks. But remember this irony; they have many more allies in the MSM they so revile than we do.

Who can be surprised that Mickey Kaus would respond to CNN blood in the water; CNN has been identified as the "liberal" cable news network, what else would Kaus need to know to join the attack?

Lonely Hearts and Happy Trails

Precisely nothing. And then there's Fox News, of course, whose bias slants in the, uh, right direction, so no problem. Here's more Hewitt, later in the day for that same date, February 2nd, that goes directly to the issue of Eason Jordan's claim that he was responding to Barney Frank's collatoral damage formulation: Updated at PM, Pacific As the list of blogs focusing attention on Eason Jordan's blood slander on the U. Jordan's remarks out of context. Eason Jordan does not believe the U.

Publishers Marketplace: Log In

Jordan simply pointed out the facts: While the majority of journalists killed in Iraq have been slain at the hands of insurgents, the Pentagon has also noted that the U. The Pentagon has apologized for those actions. Jordan was responding to an assertion by Cong.

Frank that all 63 journalist victims had been the result of "collateral damage. This statement directly contradicts the account of Rony Abovitz whose post on the Jordan remarks began the controversy.


  • Sun #218.
  • Make Your Move 11 - It's Over, Duder!!
  • The Big Tease: *a Femdom Tease Fantasy*!
  • Suicides by firearm in New York City;

Abovtz's bio: Rony Abovitz, M. Abovitz has twelve years medical device development experience in the area of orthopedic, neurological, and cardiovascular surgery. Abovitz worked on projects such as the development and testing of nitinol AAA stent-graft implants acquired by Medtronic AVE and the development and testing of orthopedic implants joints and trauma.

Abovitz led ZKAT. He has a B.