digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

O’Reilly: Taliban Resurgence In Afghanistan Is A ‘Myth’

thinkprogress.org — the Taliban will be an “annoying.” When his guest, Harvard University professor Sarah Sewall, pointed out that people on the ground disagree, O’Reilly dismissed her, stating, “I talked to everybody.” Watch it:

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -11/+68Tell that too all the Canadians Dying there from the Resurgence of the Taliban.
    • dealsdealer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+59then why doesn't he go there , have a personal visit ?
    • pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25He has been to gitmo... I will pay for some of his ticket to Afghanistan. My Best friend is heading back for a Second tour, this guy could at least drop by and assimilate some knowledge.
    • Highborn, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3And I suppose the Irish Curse is a myth too? Poor O'Reilly has major compensation issues.
    • aleahey, on 10/12/2007, -41/+14@psuedojd

      I don't buy this whole feeling sorry for troops being deployed crap. Nobody was drafted. I'm not happy to see anybody get hurt, but lets face it, people enlisted looking for a free education or for whatever other reason but thats just it. They enlisted, they volunteered.
    • peritonlogon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33One way to stop O'Reily from spreading disinformation is to simply never watch or listen to his show. Rush and O'Reily get a lot of viewers and listeners who disagree with them because of their confrontational style. Just let it go, there's no sense arguing with the nonsensical or listening to propaganda.

      To people on the left who go on his show, just don't. People usually just get bullied there, so why go and allow yourself to be bullied or, have your mic cut? That will make it clear to everyone who doesn't know already just what his show is: propaganda.

      Why even talk about him? He's an extreme radical who gets center stage, we should all just treat him like he treats other people on the margins: ignore him.
    • justice7, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21@aleahey

      you are one nieve and ignorant ***** arent you

      the people that serve in the military do it for more than "free education". There are far easier ways to get an education than to get shot at -- and go through basic training etc. Not to mention serving in the armed forces is probably one of the hardest professions out there physically.

      Those that serve imo deserve the right to free education and deserve decent pay. They risk their lives and put their entire family's on hold so that they can tour.

      You sir, need to live in France in 1941 and tell us that having a strong military isn't important.
    • tjthayer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12I thought American "friendly fire" was killing the Canadians in Afghanistan...
    • graemee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12justice7

      France had a large powerful, modern army in 1941. It was their belief in a what type of war that would be fought that did them in, they invested heavily in large static forts. They expected another war would be with WWI trench type battles. They didn't adapt. The Belgians did the same.

      So how's the war on terrorism going, are you adapting yet?
    • RaistlinMajere, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4@graemee:

      Umm, excuse me, but France fell to Germany in 1940, not 1941. So technically in 1941 they had no army to speak of.
    • spankaccount, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3Thinkprogress is a George Soros funded left wing think tank. It's important that we understand where these opinions are coming from.

      O'Reilly is a blow-hard in my opinion.
    • dextroz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@justice7

      Aleahey is correct about a significant people joining the US Army because of a lack of personal direction in life, free education, get some 'experience' kicking some ass and being macho.
    • webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I'd forgotten until a couple of weeks ago just how damned good the Canadians are. I'm glad it's them alongside the UK troops.

      Answers the question why you never hear about Gold, Juno and Sword. :)
    • Maaarrrk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I wonder if O'Reilly would get frag'd
    • aleahey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@justice7

      Kindly reread what I said. Next time, make sure you know what was said before you launch off with your response.
    • belfastbiker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't know who I'd stab in the face first - O'Reilly, Hannity or Malkin.

      At least Coulter has the good grace not to pretend to be anything other than ***** insane.


    • deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The sad part is that numb-nuts like O'Reilly have a following who eat his ***** up. Just like Rush Limpdick who said that Micheal J. Fox was acting like he had Parkinson's. What idiots?

      It goes to show you how desperate these neo-cons are to hide the truth to their sheep. Personally, I think they are just as bad as North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il, who tells his people that the outside world is in ruin. And that they have it good (while his people are eating bark off the trees due to starvation).

      These ***** are out of touch, just like George W. Bush, who says that there is no civil war in Iraq (mean time hundreds of Iraqis are being killed every day).

      And people wonder how was it possible that Bush won two terms in office?
      I'm an American and I could tell you that half this country is stuck on stupid.
      And that's why Republicans hold power and people like O'Reilly & Limpdick have a voice.
  • Kinser, on 10/12/2007, -50/+1Blah blah blah.
  • covareo, on 10/12/2007, -33/+4Who is parroting what?
  • w0rd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+55If every crazy thing that O'Reilly said was promoted to the front page, we'd have nothing but O'Reilly stories to read.
    • Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2But instead, every crazy thing that Keith Olbermann says gets promoted to the front page.
  • OBDriftwood, on 10/12/2007, -9/+70O'Reilly is such an arrogant schmuck. "I talked to everybody". The dude just makes stuff up.
    • cx1oggy1, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14This guy will say anything to win an argument, support his wacky assertions or just save face for whatever he is peddling at the moment. I am surprised he didn't offer his guest a copy of his book, "Cultural Warrior".
    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Reminds me of that Tom Leykis asshole in California. He knows everything because he knows everything. It's that sort of flawless logic that not only drives you nuts, but also suicidal from lack of faith in the intelligence of general humanity.

      Some similar tactics between the two:

      Prattle off "facts" that cannot immediately be disproven, and assert that they are, in fact, correct.

      Talk over the other individual in the argument.

      Discrediting the other person by assaulting their personal traits or beliefs.

  • Ascendant, on 10/12/2007, -9/+81Bill O'Reilly: America's answer to the Iraqi Information Minister
    • dealsdealer, on 10/12/2007, -14/+18AMEN !!! bro ...
    • Wamzlee, on 10/12/2007, -9/+26"They are no where near Baghdad! We are pushing them back!"
      -Iraqi Information Minister a day before Baghdad fell.
    • ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25I would agree with you, except that Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf was at least comical in his claims. O'Reilly is just a jerk and a phone sex operator wannabe.
  • successrealm, on 10/12/2007, -11/+29Poor O'Lielly....

    Does this clown ever base anything on the TRUTH? Arrogant, Uninformed, and blind.
    Just like a 29 percenter...

    Baaaa Bill, Baaaaaa!
  • sirbe, on 10/12/2007, -24/+9O'Reilly is not as stupid or evil as many think, he perfected 'double think', entertains many people who love to believe that stuff and makes tons of money in the process. Watch O'Reilly on Daily Show with Stewart and you'll see a totally different person.
  • adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -10/+18That duche needs to go back to hosting "inside edition". How did he ever get his own show.
    • plastek, on 10/12/2007, -15/+10Funny that you word your comment like this. Every time I see some Oreilly story on digg, i think "what a douche" to myself.
  • aleahey, on 10/12/2007, -10/+11Why isn't this under "Political Opinion", where it belongs?
    • peritonlogon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10because opinion = I think this

      and news = someone said or did this

      It's semantic, but it's a real distinction (personally I think that any news that is not substantive and reflecting reality isn't really news).

      The first is expressing an opinion (ex. the Taliban is not reemerging in Afghanistan).

      The second is reporting an event (ex. O'Reily spreading misinformation)
    • aleahey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1But it's O'Reilly's opinion. Its not "disinformation", unless you personally have been there and seen that what he has said is untrue.
    • peritonlogon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Opinions can be wrong and I don't need to be an eye witness to know this.
  • trenchcoat, on 10/12/2007, -34/+11Anybody else tired of seeing the words O'Reilly or Olberman on the front page? Show of hands?
    • aleahey, on 10/12/2007, -25/+7Colbert and Stewart, O'Reilly and Olberman, Foley and Bush.

      Been tired, crap keeps spreading out in to other topics too, so you can't even avoid it.
    • timbellomo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+31I for one am NOT tired of it.

      Besides, elections are right around the corner -- this is the kind of crap that people need to be talking about right now.
    • trenchcoat, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4Except O'Reilly isn't running for anything.
    • aleahey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14@timbellomo

      No, its not. People put entirely too much emphasis on talking heads. People should be talking about what each individual Republican and Democrat are saying, and what their policies are. Bickering over what this pundit said and what that pundit said will get you NOWHERE. Neither will voting along party lines.

      People need to start thinking for themselves, and stop looking for a jerk behind a desk on a cable channel to tell them what they should or shouldn't believe.

      Being this close to election time, stories about O'Reilly should never make it to the main page, they should be entirely drown out by stories about the people that are actually running for office.
    • soviyet, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7@timbellomo

      Agreed, except what O'Reilly or Limbaugh or Coulter have to say has very little to do with the elections. They're not politicians, folks.

      If a politician up for election or re-election is saying something like this, promote it. Attacking the Republicans by pointing out how stupid conservative radio and tv personalities are is a little bit retarded. Let's get the stories about what the people who actually have some power are saying out there.
    • peritonlogon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@aleahey

      I agree with you in theory. But, on the other hand, pundits have been given most of the power to frame the debate in this country. They should lose this power immediately, since, as liars, they just abuse and confuse. I don't mind participating in discrediting them on an Internet forum from which they derive no revenue or ratings.

      I think people should just not watch any O'Reily or Rush when it gives their employers revenue and their words clout. Proving that they're full of *****, on the other hand, that only subtracts from the clout they have and the revenue they generate for their employers.
    • timbellomo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's an important conversation to have. To expose O'Reilly on his falsehoods is a GOOD thing near election time (in my opinion).

      Hearing an inspiring and factually-based Olbermann rant is a GOOD thing near election time (in my opinion).

      The thing that really sets Olbermann apart from Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and Coulter is that he doesn't flat-out lie in his punditry (word?).
  • Wollstonecraft, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Why do people even pay O'Reilly the courtesy of watching him? The man has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that he is an ass.

    Pay him no attention.
  • JonnyTrombone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20I don't care how conservative (or not conservative) you are. O'Reilly is a mannerless bully.
  • mikesherov, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11He should change his name to:
    OH, rly?
    • soviyet, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Catchphrase ahoy!
    • isthisnametaken, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3sorry man, digging you down. that joke has been done many, many times.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That's "O RLY?"
    • sebnukem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No we should call him Baghdad Bill, in memory of late Baghdad Bob, the Iraqi Information Minister.
  • Cymrubeats, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11He's got some seriously damaging information on someone to remain in his job.
  • totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14what an assclown.
  • Ronnie, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Says it all... http://www.sweetjesusihatebilloreilly.com/
    • Popdmb, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3I'm all for hating Bill O'Reilley, but when you have a website that sells "Anti-Factor" gear, you're a raging tool.

      Oh yes, this also goes for the asshats that operate sites like moorewatch and coulterwatch and all the rest of that *****. No one remotely intelligent pays attention to any of these guys. None of these website operators are doing a good service to society. Let's stop giving them attention and a false sense of appreciation.
  • SpamHater, on 10/12/2007, -26/+3All the sad little Liberals, whining over the fact that one of their cherished myths is being ripped apart by someone who actually does some research.

    Face it, the war on Terror is going better than the Mainstream Liberal Media claims, and that's cheesing the Liberals off.
    • nailz420, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12O'Reily does research? Ow right, he talked to everyone..
    • Popdmb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7He's not there. You're not there. A good deal of the media reports from Afghanistan; a country whose opium supply is off the charts now that the drug market has picked up.

      Not every piece of truth is a "moonbat leftist agenda."

      Thanks for your insight though. Go die.
    • Jonface, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm optomistic about my country, but seroiusly why are there so many idiots who believe this stuff? Is it cause their Daddies told them that democrats were satan and anything with the word "republican" will bring the second coming of christ or something?

      I just can't wrap my head around the idiocy. I think many democrats are idiots too by the way, bieng moderate is the only way to be inteligent I think. That way you can lean either way on a case by case basis.
    • PixelCloud, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13O'Reilly or a Harvard Prof..


      i think i know who'd i'd trust
    • habfan29, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Tell that to the families of the 42 dead Canadian soldiers asshole.
  • rabiddogma, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2You guys just don't get it, he's doing comedy!!
    • kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7If it were comedy, it would be funny. It's not.
    • rabiddogma, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I didn't say it was funny comedy. It's Fox News comedy.
    • webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2A comedy is a comedy in the classical sense if someone - anyone - gets married*. It doesn't matter if everyone else dies. Romeo and Juliet would have been a comedy if they had got married before killing themselves.

      *IIRC
    • ddig, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@webcrumb

      I have heard the definition that anything that ends happily is a comedy, regardless of preceding carnage.

      There are many definitions, though. According to the below page that explains the origins of Greek comedy, it originated in part as some kind of wild country festivals and later evolved into theatre making fun of people the playwright didn't like. Plato defines it as anything that provokes laughter, which is more in line with the everyday use today.

      http://www.theatrehistory.com/ancient/bates001.html
  • ArbeitScheiss, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@timbellomo

    You said: "Being this close to election time, stories about O'Reilly should never make it to the main page, they should be entirely drown out by stories about the people that are actually running for office."

    The problem however is that O'Reilly has a following and some portion of that following probably votes. So if these voters opinions are being shaped by someone like O'Reilly then he's a significant part of the process and the veracity of his comments needs to be debated and if proved false exposed. If there is a consistent pattern of deceit then that also merits discussion.
    • timbellomo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This article points to the absurdity of his claim -- that's why it's favorable in my opinion. It's not echoing his sentiments, it's criticizing them.
  • Aliasing, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Dear Bill,

    ***** you, please.

    Love, Canada.
    • justice7, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9i second that.

      ***** you, Bill.

      Love from Canada.
  • sizzzzlerz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9"Face it, the war on Terror is going better than the Mainstream Liberal Media claims, and that's cheesing the Liberals off."

    And you can, of course, back these statements up with the appropriate citations? Or are you just echoing back things you've heard from the non-Mainstream Liberal Media (what ever that is) or, dare I suggest, are simply pulling things out of your ass?

  • landmonster, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Bill O'Reilly is a stupid ***** *****. I hope he gets cancer of the face.
  • Greyhaven7, on 10/12/2007, -16/+4More thinkprogress.com spam... yay!
  • innerspirit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7You people don't get it, O'Reilly gets paid to be controversial and thus get more viewers. He is not a politician, he has nothing to lose, only to win, by saying these things. It doesn't matter if the people who watch him hate him or not, as long as they watch the commercials. By making this news post you are just working for him. Bury please.
    • ninti, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"You people don't get it, O'Reilly gets paid to be controversial and thus get more viewers. He is not a politician, he has nothing to lose, only to win, by saying these things. It doesn't matter if the people who watch him hate him or not, as long as they watch the commercials. By making this news post you are just working for him. Bury please."

      I'm tired of people saying this. Pointing out another O'Reilly lie is not getting him any more viewers, it is losing him viewers. At one point in time people could take him seriously, but he has been shown to be such a completely consistant liar and fabricator that no sane person (which excludes SpamHater) can possibly believe what he says anymore.

      We didn't get to this point by ignoring him, we got to this point by pointing out lie after lie after lie until even the most hardheaded Republican has to come to the realization that the guy is complete scum. You don't fault falsehood by ignoring it and letting it stand unopposed, you fight it by countering it with the truth over and over again.
    • ddig, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Oh, you can watch the show. Just remember to say that you never do when a ratings institute calls and to abstain from watching it if you ever get a Big Brother TV set (that watches you as you watch it) in your house. Also, don't go to the web page. Have fun.
  • enki25, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Take notice wingnuts, this criticism is not about O'reilly being biased. It's about O'reilly being a liar. The "facts" he is broadcasting to his thousands of viewers are unfounded and clearly aimed to benefit a particular political party.
  • Buckeye70, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4 Bill O'Reilly is a commentator. He is not a newscaster. I love it, everyone gets completely out of shape when he says something. But when Airhead America says something (or robs from the Boys and Girls Club) not a word. When it is on the daily show, it is gospel. This website has turned into moveon.org.
    • EComni, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Oh my god, the logic is actually physically hurting me.

      Guy: Pigs can fly. I've talked to everybody.
      Diggers: Guy, you're a ***** moron.
      Guy: I'm just a commentator! digg.com is biased!!


      "Airhead America"? That is the epitome of genius there.
  • DaveV, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5O'reilly is not news. O'reilly is an opinion show, just like Rush, and Hannity, and all the other pundit shows.

    Not NEWS, OPINION.

    Please get the topic straight.
  • DaveV, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3thinkprogress.org is not news. thinkprogress.org is an opinion blog, just like moveon.org and all the other pundit blogs out there.

    Not NEWS, OPINION.

    Please get the topic straight.
  • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3FTA
    O'Reilly "All right, so have I. Our information is that there’s no danger at all of the Taliban reclaiming that country, none. They’ll be annoying. There will be a guerrilla warfare. It will not happen. I believe that."

    It's not that inaccurate.

    Too much spin on Digg.
    • ddig, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"Our information"?

      Does he have an intelligence outfit of his own hidden somewhere?
  • dvfreelancer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The extreme right in America are like people waking up with a horrific hangover. And not the fun kind where you get up and your head throbs but you vaguely remember it was well worth it. The horrible kind of hangover where you wake up in bed with some fat, nasty chick and the only thought that can pound its way through the pain is how are you going to get out of there before you puke.

    Imagine waking up to discover that you've been getting your political philosophy from petty, angry, ignorant people. That your cause is championed by a neurotic shrew, a pervert with anger management issues and a drug addict. Yeah, some real classy people you're in bed with there, aye religious right. They either have to keepon defending a failed philosophy or sober up and admit they made a mistake. Not an easy thing to do when you have all the answers and have spent the last decade stumping around, patting yourself on the back for how right you are.
  • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Title is inaccurate.

    FTA
    "SEWALL: Unfortunately, Afghanistan’s going backwards.

    O’REILLY: That’s a myth."

    O'Reilly never claimed there was no resurgence of the Taliban.
    • totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10He must have spoken to Anne Coulter, who claimed "Afghanistan is going swimmingly".
  • wozley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7No, no, no. We should all be saying, "Who is this O'Reilly guy, anyway?"
  • franksmith, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2I wish we could get a story from somewhere other than "think progress"... which should be "think slanted"

    There might be a story here but since it is reported TP (perfect initials I think) there is no hope of finding the truth here. People like to talk about how Fox is right slanted... as it does tend to be but they do have some left representation also like Colmes and Bluestreak...

    TP is nothing but FAR LEFT biased vitriol that is not worth the TP it is printed on.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5What site this was on is irrelevant. O'Reilly made those statements. Just because it flies against your own bias doesn't mean you should shoot the messenger...
  • schwit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I have a brother over there. He says the Taliban are little more than a nuisance, similar to the scuds during Gulf War 1. He also says that Pakistan's Musharraf is playing both sides.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Tell that to the Canadians in Kandahar. There are areas of Kandahar that are more dangerous than Iraq.

      Just because your brother is in a safe are doesn't mean that all of Afghanistan is going well...the truth is that the situation there is a lot worse than it was 6 months ago.
  • badnewsblair, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2Wow. Someone needs to cut off User: "aaaz".

    Every Thinkprogress.com link is submitted by him/her.
  • otte316, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4What a DICK!
  • mikeazorin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9What the ***** is wrong with Fox News? How could anyone possibly do this and not be fired?
  • idiotic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6talking "to everyone" must be hard work, maybe things went to hell while he was taking a break.
  • hawkeye17, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Thanks for that Baghdad Bill.
  • Equalizer, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Funny that Bill destroys olbermann by ONE MILLION VIEWERS (at a minimum) PER NIGHT...

    Whaaawhhhaaaawaaaaa lib crybabies!
    I wouldn't be surprised if Afghanistan is ***** up BECAUSE we let the Canadians in there...
    Commence Neg. Diggs, Bitches!
    • tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Typical neocon idiot.
    • successrealm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You're being "negged" because you tried to "shift" from the topic and your blatant idiocy "Equalier"...
  • chiste, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5O'Reilly makes me ashamed I'm Irish....................
    • Moonpig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1O'reilly isn't Irish, he's Irish AMERICAN, big difference, big difference.
      Feel free to be ashamed if you too are Irish American. God love yous all but I got so tired, when I lived over there, of explaining the complexities of Northern Ireland to people who supported 'the struggle'.
  • Maaarrrk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Dark Master Rove order O'Reilly to use the Dark Sides power of deception on as many as possible before Nov 7.

    VOTE
  • cyberdork, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Only thing this guy is short of is a red/white/black armband.
  • SteveSgt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6069842.stm

    "On the road with the Taleban

    By David Loyn, BBC News, Afghanistan

    Nato troops in Afghanistan have been facing a growing number of suicide bomb attacks. It was hoped the troops would be able to make peace, win friends and provide security for reconstruction projects, but now it seems the regime they removed is beginning to return..."
  • RojoKayako, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I bet Osama Bin Laden really loves America's Liberals.
    • Moonpig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Whoa, deep and insightful political commentary.
  • DrDabbles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not sure what the bid deal is with this clip...For O'Reilly this is a completely rational discussion.
  • Buckeye70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Unlike George Soros, Air America, Moveon.org. Those all tell the truth 100% of the time. Free speech as long as it agrees with liberal ideals.
  • steveTr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hey bad point buckeye. Any chance you're from the middle of the country? Yup. Yup. Go with christ.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.