FOXNews shows off its douchebaggery yet again

[Darth Wong]

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2009/03 ... cking.html

Fox News show raises ire by mocking Canadian Forces
Last Updated: Monday, March 23, 2009 | 10:42 AM ET
CBC News

The intentionally inflammatory Fox News show Red Eye, with Greg Gutfield, has sparked outrage with a segment mocking the Canadian Forces within days of the latest Canadian deaths in Afghanistan.

The extreme late-night cultural commentary show — broadcast on Fox at 3 a.m. ET during the week — is hosted by Gutfield, a former Maxim and Stuff magazine editor, who moderates a round table of panelists who deliver off-the-cuff musings and crack jokes about a wide range of topics from the worlds of news, entertainment and sports. Commentators have included comedians, Fox News anchors, actors and Girls Gone Wild founder Joe Francis.

In a five-minute Red Eye segment broadcast last week, Gutfield mocked the Canadian Forces, noting Gen. Andrew Leslie's recent comment that the military may need a year to recover after Canada's mission in Afghanistan ends in 2011.

"Meaning, the Canadian military wants to take a breather to do some yoga, paint landscapes, run on the beach in gorgeous white Capri pants," Gutfield said.

"I didn't even know they were in the war," panellist and comedian Doug Benson added. "I thought that's where you go if you don't want to fight. Go chill in Canada."

The panellists continued by joking about invading Canada and poking fun at the RCMP.

On Friday, military officials announced that four more Canadian soldiers were killed and eight others were wounded in two separate roadside bomb blasts outside Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan.

The Red Eye segment has sparked outrage from a range of Canadians, including thousands of comments on YouTube and Facebook.

"Our soldiers are dying for them and they have the audacity and the ignorance … to say something like that, it is insulting. It's the most ignorant thing I've ever heard," Sam Warren told CBC after watching the segment.

The clip has also drawn criticism from Conservative author, columnist and commentator David Frum.

"The clip in question is a sequence of goofs about the feebleness, uselessness and absurdity of the Canadian armed forces. Why would I call that dumb? Here's why," Frum says on his New Majority.com blog before listing the Canadian soldiers, aid workers and a diplomat who have been killed in Afghanistan since 2002.

"Sorry I disrespected your show, Red Eye fans, but you disrespected the dead," Frum adds.
The Department of National Defence declined comment.

What is it with David Frum? First he says that Rush Limbaugh is bad for the conservative movement, then he complains about FOXNews acting like, well, FOXNews. Doesn't he understand that this kind of knuckle-dragging dumb-fuck tough-guy wannabe behaviour is the populist base of modern conservative politics? Is he still so in denial that he thinks conservatism draws strength from people like him?

[Ziggy Stardust]

What the fuck is this show? I've never even heard of it. Run by a former editor of Maxim, who likes to talk to people like the founder of Girls Gone Wild? This shit should be on public access, not a major television network (even if it is 3am).

[Darth Wong]

Maxim and Girls Gone Wild is actually a perfect representation of the Republicans' true support base: crass, commercial, and almost pornographic, but they stop just short of an invisible line because they want to maintain the illusion that they are something other than what they are. It reminds me of the NFL football fans who were outraged at Janet Jackson's titty shot in the Super Bowl because they had children present, but they had no problem with anything else there.

[Johonebesus]

You know, you really need a more descriptive thread title. Fox has so much douchbaggery, from an anchor sobbing while exclaiming, "I love my country and I'm so afraid for it," to publishing lists of the worst liberals who are destroying the country, to questioning whether Obama is legally the president, to devoting a whole hour asking how a revolution against the government might play out, et cetera ad nauseum. Really, this is not particularly bad by Fox standards. Didn't you already know that Canada is an evil, socialist, atheist country with no morals or virtues at all? Just listen to O'Reilly and Hannity for a while, if you have the stomach for it.

[Solauren]

The real douche-baggery is that the Americans cut and ran to Iraq, while we stayed to fight.

And yet, these idiots question our fighting of terrorism.

[Darth Wong]

Actually, the Americans maintained a significant force in Afghanistan and continue to take casualties there at rates at least as great as those of Canadian forces. It's just galling because they could bring so much more force to the table if not for that Iraq misadventure, while the Canadian forces are stretching themselves to the breaking point in an attempt to shore up the Americans' flanks, so to speak. And then they have the gall to mock our forces and devalue or ignore their contributions. The Republicans continue to use Canada as some sort of political bogeyman, to scare their constituents through fear of the Great Canadian Red Menace.

[Burak Gazan]

Not to mention the miserable cockbreath's timing , considering we just lost another 4 guys KIA Friday.

[Count Chocula]

Considering that Canada is both smaller than the US and has a correspondingly smaller Armed Forces, why are Canadians still fighting and dying in Afghanistan after seven years? The US has to be there, but there's no question that Canada is one of America's strongest allies; I would not, and don't think anyone I know, would object to Canadian forces withdrawing from the field. Hell, I bet more than half of Americans don't even know that other nations' soldiers are even in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Are Canadian forces committed by agreement or treaty to fight in Afghanistan, or is it a show of support for the US? If the latter, there are other, better ways to show support than risk Canadian lives in a fight that's largely America's to wage.

I've got nothing to add on the Fox douche, except that he's a fine example of a show host who'd rather be a shock jock.

[The Spartan]

It's just galling because they could bring so much more force to the table if not for that Iraq misadventure, while the Canadian forces are stretching themselves to the breaking point in an attempt to shore up the Americans' flanks, so to speak.

This is one of the most frustrating things to me when discussion over Iraq comes up. No one, no one, I have spoken to has given consideration to the fact that we pulled spec ops guys and other forces out of Afghanistan, and the search for Bin Laden as a result, to go into Iraq. They're usual response when I point it out is usually along the lines of, "Oh, I hadn't thought of that."

[Phantasee]

My friend showed this to me last night. I was pretty pissed off. I predict it's going to be the topic du jour at campus.

Actually, I'm still pretty pissed off. I hate it when people are ignorant and spew bullshit, but it's even worse when it's on television. And it stings a bit more when it's about you, in a way.

[Captain Kruger]

[Texas-sized sarcasm] Wow, way to go FOX News! Thanks for doing your part to make our allies really really want to be there for us! You guys rock! [/Texas-sized sarcasm]

For someone who's never exactly considered himself a Democrat, I'm starting to think more and more that the destruction of the Republican Party would be a good thing, even if it leaves us a one-party state.

[Ekiqa]

The Canadian Army will be in Afganistan until atleast 2011. The Armed Forces are running out of vehicles though, so its possible that they could be home sooner.

[Drooling Iguana]

By KATHLEEN HARRIS, Sun Media


OTTAWA — The host of a Fox News program that mocked the Canadian military and sparked outrage across the country has apologized.

In a statement issued to Sun Media by the U.S. network today, Greg Gutfeld, who led the panelists in the tirade making fun of Canadian soldiers and the RCMP, said sorry for the offending remarks.

“The March 17th episode of Red Eye included a segment discussing Canada's plan for a ‘synchronized break,’ which was in no way an attempt to make light of troop efforts. However, I realize that my words may have been misunderstood,” Gutfeld said in the statement. “It was not my intent to disrespect the brave men, women and families of the Canadian military, and for that I apologize. Red Eye is a satirical take on the news, in which all topics are addressed in a lighthearted, humorous and ridiculous manner.”

Defence Minister Peter MacKay called the segment “crass” and “disgusting” and demanded an unqualified apology.

“They should simply retract these remarks and apologize to the families, most particularly to the memory of these soldiers and to Canadians more broadly,” he told CTV News today.

The five-minute segment, which aired on the Fox News late-night program and was later posted on YouTube.com, features American panelists suggesting Canadian soldiers need time off for "manicures and pedicures." The item aired after Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, the Canadian Forces Chief of Land Staff, told a Senate committee the military would need a one-year break from operations after the mission in Afghanistan winds down in 2011.

"The Canadian military wants to take a breather to do some yoga, paint landscapes, run on the beach in gorgeous white capri pants," Gutfeld said with a sneer.

Another panelist Doug Benson said he was unaware Canadian troops were on the ground in Afghanistan.

"I didn't even know they were in the war. I thought that's where you go if you don't want to fight -- you go chill in Canada," he said.

The segment has been posted online (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcJn5XlbSFk) by an outraged Canadian who titled it "How to Lose Friends and Alienate Countries."

Ottawa-based Conservative commentator Geoff Norquay called the segment "insulting and beneath contempt."

"In a week when we lost four more brave soldiers, Canada deserves better from this so-called news network," he said. "I really wish I subscribed to Fox News so I could cancel it."

Steve Staples, director of the Ottawa-based Rideau Institute, called it a "shameful display" to laugh it up at the expense of families who have lost loved ones.

"The dismissal of Canadian efforts in Afghanistan simply rubs salt in the wounds of Canadian families whose sons and daughters have been injured or killed in the war."

Liberal MP and defence critic Denis Coderre urged Canadians to write to Fox News to protest the panel and said Canada should raise the issue with U.S. President Barack Obama.

"What's a disgrace is that a lot of people are watching this and it is promoting stereotypes," he said.

Calling Canada's military "the best little army in the world," retired Gen. Lewis MacKenzie lambasted the American panelists as "distasteful" and showing an "appalling ignorance."

The bodies of the four fallen Canadian soldiers are being brought home to Canada today, three days after their deaths in two separate bomb arracks in Afghanistan. Flag-draped caskets of Master Cpl. Scott Vernelli, 28, Cpl. Tyler Crooks, 24, Trooper Jack Bouthillier, 20, and Trooper Corey Joseph Hayes, 22, will arrive at CFB Trenton for a repatriation ceremony.

The military death toll in Afghanistan now stands at 116.

kathleen.harris@sunmedia.ca

Let Fox News know how you feel. E-mail Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld at redeye@foxnews.com.

[Thanas]

"which was in no way an attempt to make light of troop efforts"

Yeah, right buddy, because apparently all soldiers you know need to take a break for manicures.

A complete worthless apology.

[Duckie]

I like how nobody ever admits they're wrong in America. You're only "Misunderstood". You were correct and your words were right, they just heard you wrong.

[Erik von Nein]

Yes, but if you admit you made a mistake then people could sue you. So, obviously, it was never your fault. Ever. No matter how blatant it is that you meant something bad. But try proving intent. That's always fun.

[Zixinus]

The USA starts a war.
The USA drags every one of its allies into it, including Canada.
Every one of its allies are suffering from casualties taken for fighting a war they didn't start or didn't even have a say into.

And these fuckers mock these people?

Then again, we're talking about jingoists here who likely don't know jack shit about the situation.

[Imperial Overlord]

I would be outraged if it wasn't FOX news. To say they're lower than slug slime is to malign slugs.

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually, the Americans maintained a significant force in Afghanistan and continue to take casualties there at rates at least as great as those of Canadian forces.

Every single year, and into this year US has taken more losses then all other international forces put together, which amount to be six times Canadian losses alone. You have ~3000 men in Afghanistan, against 34,000 American forces.

It's just galling because they could bring so much more force to the table if not for that Iraq misadventure, while the Canadian forces are stretching themselves to the breaking point in an attempt to shore up the Americans' flanks, so to speak.

The Soviets tried the mass warfare strategy already; it will not work unless we are prepared to kill every Pashtun in the country, and in Pakistan. The Soviets had a stronger local government to support too. In Iraq the table was stacked on our side by far, it was a job of nation rebuilding, not doing the job from the ground up while trying to avoid offending the local culture and tribal structure, a ridiculous proposition. In Afghanistan strong central authority has never ever in all of history existed and no basis exists for it.

Even 150,000 American troops wouldn’t do jack shit to change that, and the military oriented strategy being pursued now with limited forces sure wouldn’t give me any hope we’d have acted differently with more manpower. Afghanistan is much bigger, and much more rugged too, meaning that many units the US has couldn’t even make a worthwhile contribution and would just be an ever bigger drain on an ever more tenuous supply line.

The world is better off committing only limited forces, because sustaining some presence for a very long time is far more likely to work then trying to go all out to win the war in a year, failing at it and then becoming frustrated into a withdrawal.

The USA starts a war.
The USA drags every one of its allies into it, including Canada.
Every one of its allies are suffering from casualties taken for fighting a war they didn't start or didn't even have a say into.

Cut the bullshit please if you’re going to complain about other people spewing it, no one was fucking forced into ISAF. The only people dragged into this are the people of Afghanistan itself.

[Edi]

Skimmer, you seem to conveniently forget that the Afghanistan action was done under the auspices of the Nato Article 5 in response to the September 11 attacks when it became clear that AQ and the Taliban were responsible for it.

So the Canadians were sort of obligated to go in there in support, as were many others. It was Iraq were nobody was obligated to do shit to support the US.

And in this light the Fox News conduct is utterly despicable and that fuckwit of a show host hasn't provided any kind of apology. Just bullshit weasel words.

[Ender]

The USA starts a war.
The USA drags every one of its allies into it, including Canada.
Every one of its allies are suffering from casualties taken for fighting a war they didn't start or didn't even have a say into.

And these fuckers mock these people?

Then again, we're talking about jingoists here who likely don't know jack shit about the situation.

It is absolutely hilarious that you claim that they don't know jack shit about the situation, when not a single part of your post is factually accurate.


Let us have a little geography lesson here:

This is Iraq

America started a war here. It is widely regarded as "a poor decision", resulting in many of our allies deciding to not go along with it. Appeals to invoke the NATO treaty were vetoed by its members.


This is Afghanistan

They hosted, harbored, supported and funded a force that launched an unprovoked attack on America, resulting in our allies agreeing to invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which they were all willing signatories of.

America did not start this war. Our allies willingly decided to authorize the invoking of part of a mutual defense treaty that they all signed onto years before with their eyes wide open.

I'm sure that you will now try and backtrack and claim that someone legally leasing a military base in another country is being aggressive towards them, or that one of our allies behaving in an unrestrained fashion to another group they have no connection with (and honestly hate as well) is an act of war, or that we staged the attacks, or that providing insufficient foreign aid to them justified their attack, or some other bullshit that you think would be sufficient provocation to kill 3000 civilians.

[Aaron]

Are Canadian forces committed by agreement or treaty to fight in Afghanistan, or is it a show of support for the US? If the latter, there are other, better ways to show support than risk Canadian lives in a fight that's largely America's to wage.

We were committed under the NATO agreement after Article 5 was invoked due to 9/11, same with most of the Western troops in Afghanistan right now. Whether or not we still "need" to be there I'll leave for folks who aren't emotionally invested in the war but we have been taking a fair number of casualties and six years is a long time for an Army with less then 20,000 troops to be participating in a war.

As it stands right now, we are committed until 2011 when we are supposed to pull out. We where supposed to stay until 09, when a last minute pledge from the US and some NATO allies promised extra troops to help take the load off of us.

[Ender]

Skimmer, you seem to conveniently forget that the Afghanistan action was done under the auspices of the Nato Article 5 in response to the September 11 attacks when it became clear that AQ and the Taliban were responsible for it.

So the Canadians were sort of obligated to go in there in support, as were many others. It was Iraq were nobody was obligated to do shit to support the US.

Whether invoking NATO was justified was put to a vote with the conclusion being that it was. Canada could have vetoed the resolution just as Germany and Belgium did when the question of whether Iraq warranted Article 5 came up. And more to the point, the more out of line part of the post was the assertion that America started the war. Unless Zixinus has evidence that America falsified the attacks and that our growing hostility to wards China that summer was a clever ruse to throw people off as to who the real enemy was, that claim is both blatantly false and highly insulting

And in this light the Fox News conduct is utterly despicable and that fuckwit of a show host hasn't provided any kind of apology. Just bullshit weasel words.

Yep. It is just another aspect of the idea that the military is around solely to accomplish things for you so that you get what you want without expending one iota of effort to get it. We are just a means to an end to most of the folk out there.

[Ender]

Are Canadian forces committed by agreement or treaty to fight in Afghanistan, or is it a show of support for the US? If the latter, there are other, better ways to show support than risk Canadian lives in a fight that's largely America's to wage.

We were committed under the NATO agreement after Article 5 was invoked due to 9/11, same with most of the Western troops in Afghanistan right now. Whether or not we still "need" to be there I'll leave for folks who aren't emotionally invested in the war but we have been taking a fair number of casualties and six years is a long time for an Army with less then 20,000 troops to be participating in a war.

As it stands right now, we are committed until 2011 when we are supposed to pull out. We where supposed to stay until 09, when a last minute pledge from the US and some NATO allies promised extra troops to help take the load off of us.

Honestly, I support our actions there, as that is the power that attacked us, but I would dearly love to know what the fuck our plan is. Hell, with Iraq at least that was all somewhat on the table - knock over the government, rebuilt, tadaa. Afghanistan they never really explained. Toppled the Taliban and then we just kinda ran off to Iraq. No reconstruction, no education, no infrastructure, nothing. And now it has gotten bad again and there's not plan. And that needs to be answered quickly, as the loss of the airbase we were using and the surrounding terrain means we need to have a clear solid plan before logistics kills the mission and the fuckers rebuild and comeback.

[Sea Skimmer]

Skimmer, you seem to conveniently forget that the Afghanistan action was done under the auspices of the Nato Article 5 in response to the September 11 attacks when it became clear that AQ and the Taliban were responsible for it.

No actually I know what the treaty actually says and I know what it means. Article 5 explicitly concerns only the North Atlantic and Europe. No confusion ever existed over this issue and NATO was never meant to be involved in any military action outside of its defined boundaries. This is why it took TWO YEARS before a NATO command was formed in Afghanistan. It was blatantly beyond the scope of the treaty and took a long period of negotiations to convince everyone to simply expand the scope of the organization, something that eventually passed by unanimous vote. It was even proposed to amend the treaty at one point, but a movement had already been going on since 1999 for a 'new NATO' so they decided not to bother. The specific geographic limitations on NATO are exactly why we used to also have SEATO, but it died off after South Vietnam fell.

What’s more, the whole NATO banner only covers ISAF, which is the secondary force in Afghanistan and does not conduct offensive operations.

Most US forces are separately commanded under OEF-A, along with most of the Canadian and some British forces. This stupidity of having to split the command of less then 60,000 men in total is a direct result of the fact that NATO would only enter Afghanistan in a limited ‘security and assistance’ role. OEF-A meanwhile wages war, whatever that requires. The fact that they serve in OEF-A is why US, British and Canadian losses are so high in comparison to every other NATO contingent.

So no, no one was fucking forced into Afghanistan, and above all not Canada. They voted in support of the idea, and then went further and deliberately placed themselves outside the scope of NATO in a high intensity role because they wanted to do as much as they could.