Biden says he also was shot at in Iraq

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/30/unlike-clinton-biden-gets-pass-saying-shot-iraq/

Unlike Clinton, Biden Gets Pass for Saying He Was 'Shot At' in Iraq
When Hillary Clinton told a tall tale about "landing under sniper fire" in Bosnia, she was accused of "inflating her war experience" by Barack Obama's campaign -- but the campaign has been silent about Joe Biden telling his own questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.
By Bill Sammon

FOXNews.com

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

1 x
in order to recommend a story, you must login or register.
131 Comments | Add Comment
Photos

Barack Obama and Joe Biden wave to the crowd as they arrive for a rally in Fredericksburg, Va., Saturday. (AP Photo)

When Hillary Clinton told a tall tale about "landing under sniper fire" in Bosnia, she was accused of "inflating her war experience" by rival Democrat Barack Obama's campaign.

But the campaign has been silent about Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, telling his own questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.

"Let's start telling the truth," Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube last year. "Number one, you take all the troops out - you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."

But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being "shot at" and instead allowed: "I was near where a shot landed."

The senior senator from Delaware went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

"No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

The rest of the press ignored the flap at the time because Biden was viewed as having little chance of ending up on the Democratic presidential ticket. But even after Biden was selected to be Obama's running mate last month, his claim to have been "shot at" drew no scrutiny from the same reporters who had savaged Clinton for making a similar claim that turned out to be false.

FOX News has been asking the Obama campaign for details of the alleged shooting in Iraq ever since Biden was tapped to be vice president. Biden campaign spokesman David Wade promised an answer last week, but failed to provide one.

Meanwhile, the gaffe-prone Biden has again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones - this time in Afghanistan. Biden said he will grill Republican rival Sarah Palin in Thursday's vice presidential debate about "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan where my helicopter was forced down."

"If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where Bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Senators Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

"We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."

Biden never explicitly claimed his chopper had been forced down by terrorists. Nonetheless,

John McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said Obama-Biden officials have been less than forthcoming about Biden's dramatic war stories.

"They never explained Biden's helicopter story from last week - which is very similar to the story about getting 'shot at' in Baghdad," Rogers said.

Looking forward to the debate tonight.

**sebster**

Dude, FOX? Really?

Also, I like how Hillary has become a victim in the eyes of FOX. This time last year she was the summoning rod for rightwing hatefests, and now she's the candidate sidelined by sexism. I guess it isn't the cynicism that really surprises me, but how shameless they are about it.

**Frazzled**

I like how the moderator for the debate is in the tank for Obama and stands to make hundreds of thousands of dollars in book sales if he wins. But only FOX can be biased...

**Da Boss**

Nah, everyone can be biased.
But FOX is way way way worse than most.
Waaaaaaaaaaay worse.
So bad it's entertaining in a darkly humourous way.

**Frazzled**

Nope: Fox is conservative and bombastic. It just grates you in comparison to other media with its heavy leftward shift. You want biased, watch MSNBC.

**Da Boss**

MSNBC?
I'll give it a go.
Fox are proven to be factually wrong an awful lot.

**Frazzled**

As has every news outlet. Especially recently with the current market turbulence. Most reporters seem at the level of politicians in the knowledge category.

**lord_sutekh**

jfrazell wrote:I like how the moderator for the debate is in the tank for Obama and stands to make hundreds of thousands of dollars in book sales if he wins. But only FOX can be biased...

I like how your description of the moderator is almost exactly what Rush and that insane columnist, Michelle Malkin, said about her. They need to give clues on how to vary the talking points, otherwise you sound like you're copying one another.

**Frazzled**

Well we all get our talking points sent to us every morning. You can't expect us to vary from those now can you?

**lord_sutekh**

Not after the chip was installed, joining you to the hive mind, no.

**dietrich**

Maybe Biden is just confused because people have threatened to take a shot at him.......

**dogma**

jfrazell wrote:I like how the moderator for the debate is in the tank for Obama and stands to make hundreds of thousands of dollars in book sales if he wins. But only FOX can be biased...

Um, What? Gwen Ifill is a very well respected political journalist, and a major component of Jim Lehrer's PBS program News Hour. This is a woman who has a reputation at stake; damage to which could only hurt the credibility, and therefore sales of, her book. And speaking of the book, do you even know what it's about? Because it isn't pro-Obama, nor does the title indicate that in the slightest. Rather, the book its a historical study of the factors which have contributed to the acceptance of a Black Presidential candidate.

From Amazon-
"In THE BREAKTHROUGH, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.

Ifill argues that the Black political structure formed during the Civil Rights movement is giving way to a generation of men and women who are the direct beneficiaries of the struggles of the 1960s. She offers incisive, detailed profiles of such prominent leaders as Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and U.S. Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama, and also covers up-and-coming figures from across the nation. Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the "black enough" conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.

THE BREAKTHROUGH is a remarkable look at contemporary politics and an essential foundation for understanding the future of American democracy."

**Lemartes**

Stop it all ready with the facts. It's so much easier to just make uninformed opionionated statements. The excuse machine has started early for why Palin can't debate and she hasn't even gone on yet. Give her a chance instead of making excuses she may do just fine. As for moderator both parties have agreed.

**AgeOfEgos**

jfrazell wrote:As has every news outlet. Especially recently with the current market turbulence. Most reporters seem at the level of politicians in the knowledge category.

You're so wrong, you must watch Fox News!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fox_News

Seriously, don't waste your life defending Fox. They use hyperbole, outright lies and pandering to attract their audience. Entertainment perhaps...news definitely not. There are much better sources of information such as the BBC, NPR, PBS, etc

**Frazzled**

Lemartes wrote:Stop it all ready with the facts. It's so much easier to just make uninformed opionionated statements. The excuse machine has started early for why Palin can't debate and she hasn't even gone on yet. Give her a chance instead of making excuses she may do just fine. As for moderator both parties have agreed.

I'll only say, they agreed before this information came out. I actually like Gwen and think it will be ok. I'm just hoping Palin decks somebody, because America sorely needs a VP who'll deck somebody in a bar fight, and we haven't had that since Johnson was VP.

**Lemartes**

Seriously, don't waste your life defending Fox. They use hyperbole, outright lies and pandering to attract their audience. Entertainment perhaps...news definitely not. There are much better sources of information such as the BBC, NPR, PBS, etc

I'll second that. I lost all respect for Fox fair and balanced take right after the debate between Ob and MC. I fliped thru all the major news channels to check thier polls. All had a slight edge for Obama which was typically about 46 to 34. I flip over to fox during the Hannity show and it was 82%Mcain. Another example is right after the Katie K interview almost all the news stations were playing clips from it about how she did. Tuned it to Fox and nothing. Now I watched the debate OB/MC and had it fairly even. I do still like to tune into O'Reilly tho' for his opinion takes and especially like how he calls out Judges ect on letting child abusers off the line.

**sebster**

jfrazell wrote:I like how the moderator for the debate is in the tank for Obama and stands to make hundreds of thousands of dollars in book sales if he wins. But only FOX can be biased...

Yeah, this has been a fairly standard Republican talking point throughout Bush’ term, especially trumpeted by Rove. No matter who someone is, no matter their reputation you just have to point out some half-assed possibility of bias and this somehow means everything they say is invalid.

See, bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing. There’s a myth that you have to occupy the exact middle ground between two opposing view points. But the problem here is that sometimes one side is utterly wrong, either badly mistaken or purposefully lying. It’s perfectly alright to cover that by pointing out each and every lie.

What you have to be is honest and capable of constructing a mature argument. FOX doesn’t do that.