What the New York Times didn't say..... - Page 2

JP5 · #11 (**permalink**) 11-06-2006, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaar";p=&quot

So you say...

Yet, the only "evidence" supplied by those who refute them is that they are not "proven", even though some of them do IN FACT represent factual information.

It seems that people like yourself are most likely to believe those things that support your assertions and dismiss the things that do not...

Again, picking and choosing those things depending on what it is YOU believe rather than what the Documents say.

Why is that you suppose?

Regards,
Gaar

Where is the "evidence" these documents even exist? No, the Republican Standard does not count, that is a lying propaganda machine.

Really? I wonder if you read the WSJ editorial by Fred Barnes, Editor of the Weekly Standard, that I just read this morning....IF you'd still think that? Barnes was very critical of the Republicans---both Pres. Bush and the Republican majority Congress and Senate. This kind of "not towing the party line" is something one rarely sees in the liberal press like the NYTimes or Washington Post! So, Hard-Driver, is the Weekly Standard a "lying propaganda machine???" If so, I'll certainly totally disregard the critical aritlce I just read about the Republicans from Barnes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p=&quot

Show me the independent translators who can attest to the content. Show me the govenment saying that is what these documents say. The right wing is a bunch of gullible and shallow lemmings who will believe any lie they are told.

And let me ask you a question, if Move-on claimed that they had evidence that Bush was a neo-nazi and had documents to prove it. But they could not produce the documents, and no other source claimed the documents existed, would you believe them?.

The documents are available to Congress and the press. They were found INSIDE Iraq at the government officies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p=&quot

The weekly standard is a lying piece of poop. And so unless you guys can come up with a better "source", it is dismissed as another republican/straussian lie.

Good to know. I thought when Fred Barnes said in his WSJ op-ed piece that the Republicans, including Bush, deserve a loss if it happens and point out all the reasons why, that he was onto something. But hey, HD---thanks for clearing that up for us. I don't want to see ANY of you Dems using the article as ammunition either. Now, that we got the word from you they are "lying pieces of poop."

Metrophobe · #12 (**permalink**) 11-06-2006, 07:31 AM

One thing is certain: if there was a smoking gun, this administration would be the first to use it.

You guys can have a little source-war here, but the fact that the administration is not holding this stuff up as proof of one of their justifications for pre-emptive war makes it dubious at best. IF this material was legit, the administration would be trumpeting some re-mix of vindication at full volume for a myriad of motivations; mid-term elections, exoneration, credibility repair, etc... They would never let this go. Their silence is proof enough that it doesn't pass the smell test.

Hard-Driver · #13 (**permalink**) 11-06-2006, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP5";p=&quot

Good to know. I thought when Fred Barnes said in his WSJ op-ed piece that the Republicans, including Bush, deserve a loss if it happens and point out all the reasons why, that he was onto something. But hey, HD---thanks for clearing that up for us. I don't want to see ANY of you Dems using the article as ammunition either. Now, that we got the word from you they are "lying pieces of poop."

I certainly don't speak for all dems. (In fact I am a disenfranchised registered republican). But I will not use his article myself if that makes you happy.

Mack · #14 (**permalink**) 11-06-2006, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metrophobe";p=&quot

One thing is certain: if there was a smoking gun, this administration would be the first to use it.

You guys can have a little source-war here, but the fact that the administration is not holding this stuff up as proof of one of their justifications for pre-emptive war makes it dubious at best. IF this material was legit, the administration would be trumpeting some re-mix of vindication at full volume for a myriad of motivations; mid-term elections, exoneration, credibility repair, etc... They would never let this go. Their silence is proof enough that it doesn't pass the smell test.

Exactly. Now we can watch the neo-cons ignore this argument and continue to pat themselves on the back.

JP5 · #15 (**permalink**) 11-06-2006, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mack";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metrophobe";p=&quot

One thing is certain: if there was a smoking gun, this administration would be the first to use it.

You guys can have a little source-war here, but the fact that the administration is not holding this stuff up as proof of one of their justifications for pre-emptive war makes it dubious at best. IF this material was legit, the administration would be trumpeting some re-mix of vindication at full volume for a myriad of motivations; mid-term elections, exoneration, credibility repair, etc... They would never let this go. Their silence is proof enough that it doesn't pass the smell test.

Exactly. Now we can watch the neo-cons ignore this argument and continue to pat themselves on the back.

It's not conservatives who are ignoring things. It's Dems who are totally ignoring these documents.....or at least the ones that point to connections between Saddam and terrorists. I'm not saying the documents are everything; but they are something. You, on the other hand, are saying they are nothing.

DuH2 · #16 (**permalink**) 11-06-2006, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Where is the "evidence" these documents even exist?

They used to be public record at the Foreign Military Studies Office Webite-
http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mi

That link has been shown here numerous times over the past month months notably by The12thMan. There have been numerous articles and translations of documents that where on that site.

Quote:

Iraq Document Web Site Shut After Report of Access to Nuke 'How-To' Content
Saturday, November 04, 2006

WASHINGTON — An official U.S. government Web site that offered the public a look at captured Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi documents was taken down Thursday night after a published report said the site included detailed "how-to" information for making atomic weapons.

In a statement Thursday night, a spokesman for National Intelligence Director John Negroponte said his office has suspended public access to the site "pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public viewing."

The action came after The New York Times raised questions about the contents of the "Operation Iraqi Freedom Document Portal." The Times' Web site reported Thursday night that weapons experts said documents posted there in recent weeks provide dangerous detail about Iraq's covert nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227309,00.html

The Far Left .one of the most vocal for freedom of access has(was until the NYT suddenly bothered to report) was granted that freedom to tons of Iraqi documents.adn what have they done withit?

Ignored it.

Well expect when the NYT finally decided to bother itself to report on one of them..then they used it to blame Bush for doign what..grnatign them the access they demand.

The Far Left.... if nothing else can be said about the.... they are consistent hypocrites.

SO HarDriver is the document the NYT had "weapons experts" deemed dangerous do to the information it had to manufature some aspect of a nuclear weapon fake?

Frankly HardDriver all I can think is that you intentionally ignored them when they where linked here and now that you know the site is down are playing "wheres the evidence" for them.

Mack · #17 (**permalink**) 11-07-2006, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP5";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mack";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metrophobe";p=&quot

One thing is certain: if there was a smoking gun, this administration would be the first to use it.

You guys can have a little source-war here, but the fact that the administration is not holding this stuff up as proof of one of their justifications for pre-emptive war makes it dubious at best. IF this material was legit, the administration would be trumpeting some re-mix of vindication at full volume for a myriad of motivations; mid-term elections, exoneration, credibility repair, etc... They would never let this go. Their silence is proof enough that it doesn't pass the smell test.

Exactly. Now we can watch the neo-cons ignore this argument and continue to pat themselves on the back.

It's not conservatives who are ignoring things. It's Dems who are totally ignoring these documents.....or at least the ones that point to connections between Saddam and terrorists. I'm not saying the documents are everything; but they are something. You, on the other hand, are saying they are nothing.

George Bush is ignoring these documents. I guess he is a democrat.

The12thMan · #18 (**permalink**) 11-07-2006, 09:51 AM

When the administration ignored Dan Rather's memos, there were people who used that fact to "prove" that they were real.

Metrophobe · #19 (**permalink**) 11-07-2006, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The12thMan";p=&quot

When the administration ignored Dan Rather's memos, there were people who used that fact to "prove" that they were real.

12th, that logic doesn't really make sense. These documents would support the administration's positions and motivations for war. Why wouldn't the administration use them if they were credible? Given their track record and use of mediocre and misleading intel, this stuff must be really shoddy. Having said that, if the administration wants to bring it up in the future as evidence to support their motives, and vindication of their actions, it will deserve a much closer look. As it stands, the administration isn't even touching it. That says a lot.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode