1
   

CBS, the Kerry campaign, and dirty politics

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 04:22 pm
My species? Human?
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 04:25 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Damn that CBS and their low blow politics.....you'd think they were a Sinclair Broadcasting station....


My point exactly, Bear. Sinclair is a media conglomerate controlled by conservatives who are bent on pushing a Rebuplican agenda.

Just, as you point out, CBS is on the other side.

Thank you for helping me to make my point. Smile
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 04:28 pm
I'm sure CBS didn't use that same liberal, Democratic Party operative producer who passed the forged documents over to the Kerry Campaign, as she is probably on their version of admin leave.

Which shows that CBS is just crawling with her types.....
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 04:32 pm
Mcg
Your species someone who believes the republican lies and is voting for Bush. The dumbest animal alive. :wink:
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 05:00 pm
McG

Always leave them laughing.

George, Laura, and Dick are flying on Halliburton's private jet.

George looks at Laura, chuckles and says, "You know, I could throw a
$100.00 bill out the window right now and make somebody very happy."

Laura shrugs her shoulders and says, "Well, I could throw ten $10.00 bills
out the window and make 10 people very happy."

Cheyney says, "Of course then, I could throw one-hundred $1.00 bills out
the window and make a hundred people very happy."

The pilot rolls her eyes,looks at all of them and says to her co-pilot,
"Such Bigshots back there.....I could throw all of them out the window and
make millions happy.
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 09:27 pm
oh not again, more ill-informed and silly right wing bloviations straight from the fermented brains of faux tv viewers and drudge suckers?

al qaqaa weapons cache links below that put to shame the bushevik excuses and shrill accusations of just "playing politics." the american people have every right to question the competence of the masterminds of this freakshow.

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Al_Qaqaa_Weapons_Cache

kerry AND the american people ought to beat bush's ass like he stole money for this fu&k-up. letting this happen makes barney fife look like a friggin' genius compared to the busheviks running the show.

the next thing you know bush will let congress sunset a law that stops any ole' terrorist from buying a kalishnikov rifle at a gun show.... wait that just happened.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 09:45 pm
You cast aspersions on drudge, then you post a link to www.dkosopedia.com? Rolling Eyes

I read the article you linked, and it is very interesting to note that under the listing of "Current News and Background Reports" it failed to list one of the many news reports that indicate the US Military did not find these explosives when it arrived at the al Qa Qaa site, yet it does list the Jerusalem Post article that quotes a Pentagon spokesman who would only speak on the condition of anonymity. Not the most neutral website out there is it?
0 Replies
 
mikey
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 09:50 pm
A Lone Voice,,,, you should post this nonsensense in the Fairy Tale thread. Are you right-winger's blind or just suicidal?
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 11:20 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
You cast aspersions on drudge, then you post a link to www.dkosopedia.com? Rolling Eyes

I read the article you linked, and it is very interesting to note that under the listing of "Current News and Background Reports" it failed to list one of the many news reports that indicate the US Military did not find these explosives when it arrived at the al Qa Qaa site, yet it does list the Jerusalem Post article that quotes a Pentagon spokesman who would only speak on the condition of anonymity. Not the most neutral website out there is it?


You read the "article?" The page linked had 35-40 links.

I doubt you read more than a couple of them, for had you, you would have seen that even that paragon of truth, Faux news reported on April 4, 2003 that US officers were saying that they had found what is now believed to be those high grade explosives at al Qaqaa. That was 6 days before that Drudge reports US Airborne arrived there, which Drudge redacted from NBC's reports, which were themselves pulled when found wanting.


Quote:
"The DOD now claims [3] that no weapons were there when U. S. troops arrived at the facility after the invasion:

The IAEA returned to the site two months later, in March 2003, and confirmed the equipment it had tagged was still there.

However, coalition forces found no evidence of the weapons in question when they first arrived at the sprawling Al-Quaqaa facility, 30 miles south of Baghdad, about April 10, 2003, according to a defense official.

The troops searched 32 bunkers and 87 other buildings, finding some weapons and explosive material, but nothing close to the quantity reported missing by the Iraqi government, and none with IAEA seals, he said.

This account has been discredited by the embed reporter travelling with the 101st Airborne Division -- the unit who first arrived at that facility.



Quote:
"We didn't know it as the Qaqaa facility at that point but when they did bring us over there we stayed there for quite a while. We stayed overnight, almost 24 hours. And we walked around, we saw the bunkers that had been bombed, and that exposed all of the ordinances that just lied dormant on the desert.


Quote:
One more fact: At a density of 1.91 g/cm³, 1 metric ton of packed HMX explosive should occupy a space of about 1/2 cubic meter. Even loosely packed crystal, 400 metric tons would easily fit into a large warehouse and would be consistent with Col. John Peabody's account quoted in the AP report above of finding thousands of 2-inch-by-5-inch boxes, each containing three vials of white powder

As now seems likely, this white powder was the HMX or RDX explosive. Indeed if it was not the explosive, then what was the material in the vials and where is it now?


MSNBC video link…..

http://www.shadowtv.com/redirect/notification.jsp?vid=74fed94051cbec2f589187acc5e84db5

Quote:
Amy Robach: And it's still unclear exactly when those explosives disappeared. Here to help shed some light on that question is Lai Ling. She was part of an NBC news crew that traveled to that facility with the 101st Airborne Division back in April of 2003. Lai Ling, can you set the stage for us? What was the situation like when you went into the area?
Lai Ling Jew: When we went into the area, we were actually leaving Karbala and we were initially heading to Baghdad with the 101st Airborne, Second Brigade. The situation in Baghdad, the Third Infantry Division had taken over Baghdad and so they were trying to carve up the area that the 101st Airborne Division would be in charge of. As a result, they had trouble figuring out who was going to take up what piece of Baghdad. They sent us over to this area in Iskanderia. We didn't know it as the Qaqaa facility at that point but when they did bring us over there we stayed there for quite a while. We stayed overnight, almost 24 hours. And we walked around, we saw the bunkers that had been bombed, and that exposed all of the ordinances that just lied dormant on the desert.
AR: Was there a search at all underway or did a search ensue for explosives once you got there during that 24-hour period?
LLJ: No. There wasn't a search.
The mission that the brigade had was to get to Baghdad. That was more of a pit stop there for us. And, you know, the searching, I mean certainly some of the soldiers head off on their own, looked through the bunkers just to look at the vast amount of ordnance lying around. But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away. But there was - at that point the roads were shut off. So it would have been very difficult, I believe, for the looters to get there.
AR: And there was no talk of securing the area after you left. There was no discussion of that?
LLJ: Not for the 101st Airborne, Second Brigade. They were -- once they were in Baghdad, it was all about Baghdad, you know, and then they ended up moving north to Mosul. Once we left the area, that was the last that the brigade had anything to do with the area.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/26/155411/70

Did you note that the reporter stated that there was NO securing of the area, yet the reporter said there was a "vast amount of ordnance lying around" the area?


I don't know what it is with right wingers who exhibit such cognitive dissonance when documented facts undermine their bizarre mental narrative of reality.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 11:35 pm
A Lone Voice wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Damn that CBS and their low blow politics.....you'd think they were a Sinclair Broadcasting station....


My point exactly, Bear. Sinclair is a media conglomerate controlled by conservatives who are bent on pushing a Rebuplican agenda.

Just, as you point out, CBS is on the other side.

Thank you for helping me to make my point. Smile


So you're saying that this TRUE story is less important than the fact there is media bias.

That is amazing.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Oct, 2004 11:48 pm
kuvasz: My point being that this page you linked to, with its 35-40 links, did not approach the subject matter without bias. The site is upfront with its bias, and clearly indicates it on its home page. It does not present any of the facts that indicate the explosives in question were not present when the US military arrived. So I suggest that your "documented facts" are lacking.

I'm well aware that the reports are the Third Infantry Division beat the 101st Airborne, Second Brigade to the site by almost a week. That fact takes away from the ballyhood reporting of the NBC reporter claiming there was not much of a search when she was there, almost a week later. The fact that the 3rd Infantry Division found explosives at the site does not prove that the explosives they found were the explosives that came up missing. Is that the point you're trying to make? If the US Military found the explosives on April 5, 2003, and failed to secure them, that would be a f**k-up without a doubt. But that hasn't been established yet.

I've not seen any reports that indicate the HMX and RDX explosives that had been sealed by the IAEA were present at that site after US forces gained control, and were subsequently lost. You can point me to these facts?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 12:07 am
Rush noted today that nobody "loots" 400 tons of anything. Disappearing 400 tons of something requires tractor trailors, like the ones observed moving **** from Iraq to Syria while the UN and the democrats gave Saddam Hussein several extra months to do that sort of thing.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 01:56 am
gungasnake wrote:
Rush noted today that nobody "loots" 400 tons of anything. Disappearing 400 tons of something requires tractor trailors, like the ones observed moving **** from Iraq to Syria while the UN and the democrats gave Saddam Hussein several extra months to do that sort of thing.


Christ, Gunga...you are a dreamer.

Your moron was wrong!

Stop trying to make him right by having the stuff shipped to Syria.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 04:30 am
There was no need to ship it to Syria or anywhere else. It was legally in posession of Hussein since it had non nuclear purposes.


And we had all these pictures and drones and spies telling us there were WMD, but no one saw or heard anything about 380 tons of explosives getting moved?

Come on. You can't apologize for Bush forever.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 05:56 am
Perhaps C-BS should read some of their own articles.

In April, 2003 they reported on the "'mysterious' site of Al Qaqaa", and even praised the good work by the Third Infantry in uncovering an equally mysterious white powder. Selective memory, perhaps?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/04/iraq/main547667.shtml
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 07:21 am
Quote:
(CBS) U.S. troops found thousands of boxes of white powder, nerve agent antidote and Arabic documents on how to engage in chemical warfare at an industrial site south of Baghdad. But a senior U.S. official familiar with initial testing said the materials were believed to be explosives.

Col. John Peabody, engineer brigade commander of the 3rd Infantry Division, said the materials were found Friday at the Latifiyah industrial complex just south of Baghdad.

"It is clearly a suspicious site," Peabody said.

CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin reports that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction continues at sites where the U.S. thought chemicals weapons might be hidden.

"And although there are no reports of actual weapons being found, there are constant finds of suspicious material," Martin said. "It obviously will take laboratory testing to find out exactly what that powder is."

The senior U.S. official, based in Washington and speaking on condition of anonymity, said the material was under further study. The site is enormous and U.S. troops are still investigating it for potential weapons of mass destruction, the official said.

"Initial reports are that the material is probably just explosives, but we're still going through the place," the official said. ....

The facility had been identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as a suspected chemical, biological and nuclear weapons site. U.N. inspectors visited the plant at least nine times, including as recently as Feb. 18.

The facility is part of a larger complex known as the Latifiyah Explosives and Ammunition Plant al Qa Qaa.



JW- You just proved the explosives were there when our troops arrived 4/4/2003 and that they obviously were not secured since they have since disappeared.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 07:42 am
Maybe they are with all the WMD's no one can seem to find either...
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 08:01 am
squinney wrote:
There was no need to ship it to Syria or anywhere else. It was legally in posession of Hussein since it had non nuclear purposes.


And we had all these pictures and drones and spies telling us there were WMD, but no one saw or heard anything about 380 tons of explosives getting moved?

Come on. You can't apologize for Bush forever.


And you can't apologize for Saddam forever. Twisted Evil

The missing explosives from al Qaqaa also raise the possibility that other WMD-related materials met the same fate. The IAEA had seen the al Qaqaa material in January 2003, but by the time U.S. troops showed up on April 10, they had disappeared. The dual-use technologies mentioned in the other IAEA report also had been moved or looted. This suggests that still other WMDs and related technologies might have been given or taken away in the days leading up to the war, or shortly after the Coalition attacks began. It is widely believed, though not conclusively proved, that much of this went to Syria. The Iraq Survey Group interviewed Iraqi agents who claimed to have helped moved the WMD materials. This charge was repeated by David Kay when he left the ISG earlier this year. The Blix Report found 1,000 tons of chemical weapons missing from Iraq, and last May this column discussed a planned al Qaeda attack in Jordan involving 20 tons of chemicals. The attack was broken up, and the subsequent investigation showed strong links to Syria. Connect your own dots.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 09:53 am
It sounds like you are saying that we allowed WMD to be looted too.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Oct, 2004 10:01 am
FreeDuck wrote:
It sounds like you are saying that we allowed WMD to be looted too.


That MIGHT be the position of the Kerry campaign, and with his capability to argue many sides of one particular issue, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't make that argument in the coming days. Of course that would be inconvenient, even for Kerry, given that he has claimed no WMD existed in the first place.

At least I think that is his current position. He might have changed that one. I'll have to check.

Let's not forget the role Saddam had to play, as we speculate on this matter. Should Saddam have spirited these explosives, and possibly WMD, away somewhere, it would come as no surprise that the DNC would be quick to blame the Bush Administration for allowing Saddam to do this. And, that would be a another telling example of the hypocracy of this candidate.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 10:08:37