Media Bias and WMD (1 Viewer)

[aquapub]

From another thread...

World Champs:

Don't you know that these were "found" in 2004? It's not like these degraded and old and virtually useless weapons were uncovered this week!

I read this and it made me wonder...why haven't we heard about this if it is such an old story?



Despite the bogus smokescreen liberals are throwing up about the age of the WMD, this find does invalidate their primary criticism of the war.

 

[Deegan]

From another thread...

World Champs:

Don't you know that these were "found" in 2004? It's not like these degraded and old and virtually useless weapons were uncovered this week!

I read this and it made me wonder...why haven't we heard about this if it is such an old story?



Despite the bogus smokescreen liberals are throwing up about the age of the WMD, this find does invalidate their primary criticism of the war.

Who cares, as they say in church, "his will be done" and we have our war, one we agree with, why lower yourself to the left, they can only whine about when we come home!

History is a long way off, but I have the time, and I think this will pay off, for them first, and for us.

 

[jfuh]

Who cares, as they say in church, "his will be done" and we have our war, one we agree with, why lower yourself to the left, they can only whine about when we come home!

History is a long way off, but I have the time, and I think this will pay off, for them first, and for us.

Perhaps some do, but not all of us whine about when to come home. Is it wrong then to ask for what exactly what the outcome this administration is looking for is? Do you know? I'm lost as to what they want to do exactly.

 

[Hoot]

Perhaps some do, but not all of us whine about when to come home. Is it wrong then to ask for what exactly what the outcome this administration is looking for is? Do you know? I'm lost as to what they want to do exactly.

Sheesh...where have you been? I know exactly what the administration wants to do...

"Stay the course." LOL

 

[Kandahar]

Do you think the media silence on this huge discovery constitutes liberal media bias?

No. However, FOX News' hyping of this bogus "discovery" certainly constitutes right-wing media bias. Fortunately, the rest of the news media has seen Santorum's desparate cry for votes for what it is: a desparate cry for votes.

Even the White House is running away. Santorum has ZERO support among his colleagues on this. Give it a rest.

 

[Stace]

Uh....I don't know what rock you folks have been living under, but I remember this story coming out years ago when the shells were initially found.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Hoot:
Sheesh...where have you been? I know exactly what the administration wants to do...

"Stay the course." LOL

What the f.u.c.k does that mean? "Stay the coarse!" That's Bush-talk for, "Believe my lies are truth".

 

[aquapub]

No. However, FOX News' hyping of this bogus "discovery" certainly constitutes right-wing media bias.

Bush's allegation: Saddam is a terror-sponsor with WMD. WMD have been found. Saddam could have (just as Bush alleged) handed chemical weapons to Al Queda to use against us.

What exactly is it about finding WMD in Iraq that you liberals can't grasp/won't admit validates the claim that....WMD existed in Iraq?

The fact that FOX News is covering it the way it should be covered is more indicative that FOX is THE channel that will cover incredibly significant events-even when they benefit Republicans. Give me a break. And Fox isn't "hyping" it. Conservative PUNDITS like Hannity and O'Reilly are recognizing it for the milestone it is, but the regular FOX reporters especially aren't "hyping" it.

No matter how dissmissive you try to act about this, it invalidates your central criticism of the war. You have no more excuses for smearing this war.



There are 4 primary problems with this "the weapons are old, so they don't count" smokescreen.

1) Bush's WMD claim wasn't that Saddam had brand new WMD, just that he had WMD.

2) Those nerve agents, in the hands of an Al Queda operative, could still be used to commit mass murder.

3) They aren't new WMD that were being built just before the invasion in 2003, but that doesn't mean there weren't newer weapons that he got rid of during the months and months we gave him while we publicly debated going in.

4) The WMD was only one of many valid reasons for going into Iraq (like the fact that Saddam had links with Al Queda and was a known terror-sponsor, that he kept expelling U.N. inspectors, that there had already been 15 years of failed diplomacy, etc., etc.). The war was valid either way.

 

[aquapub]

What the f.u.c.k does that mean? "Stay the coarse!" That's Bush-talk for, "Believe my lies are truth".

Stay the course means don't retreat just because obstacles appear. I know that is an alien concept to your side of the aisle, but eventually you will realize that it is better to have some sort of spine when dealing with your enemies.

You will also someday (hopefully) realize that finding WMD in Iraq proved Bush right, hence, now that you have made a total rectum of yourself, you can stop lying about him. :mrgreen:

 

[scottyz]

Uh....I don't know what rock you folks have been living under, but I remember this story coming out years ago when the shells were initially found.

Same here. Does not paying attention count as media bias?

 

[Stace]

Same here. Does not paying attention count as media bias?

It would appear so.....

 

[Captain America]

Uh....I don't know what rock you folks have been living under, but I remember this story coming out years ago when the shells were initially found.

So do I. This is just another non-issue coming out to rally the sheeple. They seemed quite upset that the media didn't buy into it this time. They should distance themselves from this BS like the Whitehouse but nooooo.....:rofl

Wah! Wah! Wah!

You can only cry wolf so many times before people start totally ignoring you.

 

[Caine]

So do I. This is just another non-issue coming out to rally the sheeple. They seemed quite upset that the media didn't buy into it this time. They should distance themselves from this BS like the Whitehouse but nooooo.....:rofl

Wah! Wah! Wah!

You can only cry wolf so many times before people start totally ignoring you.

WOLF WOLF WOLF WOLF!!!! OVER THERE! ITS A WOLF!!!

Wait... its not a wolf... its a dead dog.

 

[aquapub]

So do I. This is just another non-issue coming out to rally the sheeple. They seemed quite upset that the media didn't buy into it this time. They should distance themselves from this BS like the Whitehouse but nooooo.....:rofl

Wah! Wah! Wah!

You can only cry wolf so many times before people start totally ignoring you.

Um, sure, except for the fact that it proves Bush right about the WMD.

The story coming out in 2004 means it doesn't invalidate the Left's primary criticism against the war? Nice reasoning.

Ever try logic? :roll:



I will spell it out for you short bus liberals...


The most talked about of Bush's claims: Saddam has WMD.

Then we invaded.

Then we found WMD.

Connect the dots, genius.

 

[Stace]

Short bus liberals? Not necessary, aquapub. Keep it civil.

 

[Alastor]

Depleted shells that used to contain Sarin constitute WMD?

If that's the case, we've dropped WMD on Ohio multiple times as we've found hundreds of burried shells of depleted sarin near Wright Pat in Ohio...

I'm a Republican, and even I don't buy into this poppycock. At some point we must stop cheering for "our team" and start improving the way we govern.

 

[Captain America]

Short bus liberals? Not necessary, aquapub. Keep it civil.

That's like asking a baby not to cry. The ultra-right don't have a civil bone in their body.

But I wish he'd share with the class whatever it is he's been smoking. Now he's dreaming up some sort of significant WMD find that doesn't exist.

The desperation of this proud bunch to maintain any sort of credibility is simply amazing.

It's too late for that. They should just fade into the sunset and hope that in time people will soon forget how rediculous they were.

They must just be gluttons for punishment.

Aquapub wouldn't know logic if it slapped him in the face. Too funny.:mrgreen:

 

[Caine]

Um, sure, except for the fact that it proves Bush right about the WMD.

The story coming out in 2004 means it doesn't invalidate the Left's primary criticism against the war? Nice reasoning.

Ever try logic? :roll:



I will spell it out for you short bus liberals...


The most talked about of Bush's claims: Saddam has WMD.

Then we invaded.

Then we found WMD.

Connect the dots, genius.

Maybe its not good enough for you, ya know, the word of the White House itself.....
But to me, when the White House says its not the weapons they were convinced Iraq possessed and its not the weapons that we invaded for, thats all I need to know.

Thankfully enough, the White House has more sense than to act like this bum group of nearly worthless chemunitions was the reason why we invaded.

Of course, if its good enough for you, fine, but it proves nothing, the White House even said so (in not so many words, but still).