Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Does this surprise anyone?
Published on October 26, 2004 By Dr Guy In Current Events
In September, we had Rathergate, forged documents that were proven forged by little old bloggers, not the 'main stream' media with their wealth of resources. We should have learned from that, then and there, that some members of the mainstream media were just not playing with an unbiased book. Indeed, CBS and Dan Rather have never apologized for the smear they tried to perpetrate.

Now we appear to have caught the NY Times, that [sarcasm] bastion of non-partisanship [/sarcasm] with their pants down. They reported a story that was 18 months old as if it happened in the last month. OMG! 380 tons of weapons just up and disappeared on the Bush Watch!

But alas, it was not the blogosphere that outted this as another attempt at a smear. It was NBC News that reported it 18 months ago. Why? Because they were there!

But today, more dirt has surfaced. It appears that CBS also had the false story before the NY Times, and was going to run it on Sunday, October 31st, just 2 days before the election! The reason they did not? They did not think it would hold until then! Not that they wanted to report the truth, for it would only have taken a few hours, not 5 years, to reveal the truth to this lie. No, they wanted to sabotage the Bush campaign again. And behind it all, was none other than……drum roll…….Dan Rather!

These 2 episodes are not isolated incidents; just the most overt examples of what the main stream press, and in particular, the NY Times, CNS and Dan Rather, are really all about. Not the truth, but smear, smear and smear.

Now some on this blog may be liberal, and some are conservatives, but no honest person can argue that the mainstream media is impartial. Not with this deceit and deception and outright lies that they push as news.

The really sad part about this whole sordid affair is that Dan Rather got a second chance to smear the president. That shows that CBS is rotten to the core, and as trustworthy as Saddam Hussein. I wonder when the CBS (VIACOM) stock holders are going to just pull the plug on this sleaze outfit? It is their money that they see spiraling down that toilet bowl.



Addendum - 10/27/2004:

f there was any doubt this was a planned smear, just check out this link:

http://www.johnkerry.com/video/102604_obligation.html

It clearly shows that the day after the story broke, Kerry had an ad out. You cant produce an ad in less than 24 hours, without prior knowledge to the story. Just another example of the biased nature of the mainstream media, and how they have lost all claim to objectivity.

Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Oct 27, 2004

And just for the record: " It was proved it was long gone, and CBS, Dan Rather, and the Kerry Kool aid drinkers are the only ones trying to stretch credulity to suggest otherwise. "

Quote: CBS News' "60 Minutes" was planning to hold the story until Halloween, two days before Election Day, according to the Drudge Report Tuesday. "Our plan was to run the story on October 31, but it became clear that it wouldn't hold..." Jeff Fager, executive producer of the Sunday "60 Minutes," reportedly said in a statement.

LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/yahoo/la-fg-cbs26oct26,1,565561.story

"The reason the IAEA didn't make it public sooner, via a report to the security council, is because they wanted to give the U.S. time to try and track these explosives down or explain what happened to them. The media didn't KNOW about this story until it got a copy of the memo. Leaks are an everyday occurrence. This is hardly a case of media conspiracy to get Bush. For God's sake, they gave him such a free ride during the run up to the war, it is inconceivable to think they waited to break the story on purpose because they are "out to get him." It's just nonsense. "

Quote:NBCNEWS Jim Miklaszewski quoted one official: "Recent disagreements between the administration and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency makes this announcement appear highly political."

Quote: MIKLASZEWSKI: April 10th, 2003, only three weeks into the war. NBC News was embed with troops from the Army's 101st Airborne as they temporarily take over the Al Qaqaa weapons installation south of Baghdad. (explosion, scream) But these troops never found the nearly 380 tons of some of the most powerful conventional explosives, called HMX and RDX, which is now missing. The U.S. troops did find large stockpiles of more conventional weapons but no HMX or RDX -- so powerful...

Trouble is, while Brokaw retracted NBCs original statement, the rest of NBC does not and the embedded reporter sticks to their story.

 

For the second day Mr. Bush did not speak about the issue, twice ignoring questions from reporters

How do you respond to a lie?  You cant.  To answer it is to validate it.  So he did the only thing he could do, ignore it.

Who's been sipping on the Cool-Aid?

 

The correct term is Kool Aid.

 

Did I ever mention ANYTHING related to 30 years ago anywhere in my blog site or in yours?

 

I never said you did.  But in 2000, it was the October surprise of the DUI.  IN 1992, it was Walsh indicting Weinberger on the eve of the election.  IN 2004, it is the 380 tons of explosives.

 

In the first case, it was 30 years old, something you have already argued should not be brought up about Kerry and his treason.  In the second, the case was thrown out laughably, and in the last case, running out of indictments and 30 year old stories, it was just a lie.

 

Everyone but you knows it was Dan Rather’s story, as he runs the news at CBS (otherwise, how do you explain an incompetent person staying in a high profile job?)

 

You forgot that your post contained no facts, just “maybe’s”.  This blog is about known facts.  You can post a rebuttal on your own blog site, and have at it.  I don’t read your stuff anyway as it is filled with half truths, propaganda and lies anyway.

on Oct 27, 2004

Dr. Guy:

The FACTS are that when the soldiers were advancing on Baghdad they "passed by" the dump and it went UNSECURED for 2 weeks that could have been used to take some or all of the explosives. The FACTS are that when they passed by the Iraqi soldiers were retreating and not mounting any offensive. The FACTS are that the millitary command did not ISSUE COMMANDS to take the supply dump so they passed it by.

This does not show incompetence on the part of the soldiers. This show INCOMPETENCE of our intelligence and chain of command, which starts at, oh, let me see, oh yes, the COMMANDER IN CHIEF. Now that would be.......George W. Bush.

Your facts are based on the lies of CBS and the NYT.  You cannot base facts on lies and forgeries.

And besides, you dont even quote the facts correctly.  It was not bypassed. It was inspected and found to be empty.

Those are the facts.  Yours is just llies and myths.

on Oct 27, 2004
The reason this is news now is that people didn't connect the dots until the last few weeks regarding just how many tons of explosives had gone missing. Apparently, the Bush government has known for months, but didn't bother telling anyone. Of course, that's not clear, because the Pentagon has been inconsistent in its responses to reporters' questions, and George Bush wasn't willing to say anything about this yesterday
An important qualification devoutly to be deleted by the Dr.& Co.
on Oct 27, 2004

An important qualification devoutly to be deleted by the Dr.& Co.

 

Beeep!  Wrong. I dont delete just because it is incorrect or stupid.  I let it stand as a testament.

And of course the quoted material is incorrect. Even the NYT is now backing off the story. Looks like the only ones that are not are CBS (big surprise there) and Kerry.

on Oct 27, 2004
The FACTS are that when the soldiers were advancing on Baghdad they "passed by" the dump and it went UNSECURED for 2 weeks that could have been used to take some or all of the explosives. The FACTS are that when they passed by the Iraqi soldiers were retreating and not mounting any offensive. The FACTS are that the millitary command did not ISSUE COMMANDS to take the supply dump so they passed it by. This does not show incompetence on the part of the soldiers. This show INCOMPETENCE of our intelligence and chain of command, which starts at, oh, let me see, oh yes, the COMMANDER IN CHIEF. Now that would be.......George W. Bush.


MAN!......I have to keep reminding myself that it is the week before the election and the leftists will throw everything but the kitchen sink out there (actually I expect to see the sink too)
CrispE,
How many people do you think will actually buy in to these 11th hour attempts to sway their votes. You'd have to be a borg drone to assimilate this BS! I give you credit for this world record setting spin though.
on Oct 27, 2004
CrispE,
How many people do you think will actually buy in to these


What kind of man (you're a guy, right, CrispE?) would he be if he felt as strongly as he does about the possible consequences of another 4 years of Bush and yet said nothing. How could he NOT try to convince others? Wouldn't him sitting silently and ignoring his convictions be more wrong?
on Oct 27, 2004
As has been clarified in other threads on this topic, the allegation is hogwash. The only logical and tenable explanation for the missing explosives is that they were removed by Saddam during the month prior to the invasion and stashed in mosques & grade schools, just like he's done before. Doesn't anyone else remember all the footage of the huge weapons caches in schools & mosques right after the invasion? Where the hell did that stuff come from? Were the UN inspectors so stupid that the stuff was sitting in those schools & mosques all along? Of course not - the stuff was moved there in the runup to the war from all sorts of ammo dumps like al Qaqaa.

This is a totally manufactured campaign smear, one that will kick back hard. That Kerry is perpetuating this lie & bashing Bush relentlessly, even after his own advisors have admitted they don't know what happened to the explosives & when, is despicable. But, hey, that's just Kerry being Kerry.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Oct 27, 2004
Meanwhile, we know that the explosives were there right before the war, and we know the Bush administration had been warned of the importance of the site.


We do NOT KNOW that the explosives were all there immediately before the war....the BA was told that the site had been searched. The location was NOT marked by IAEC

the U.S. had allowed to IAEA to FINISH their job instead of rushing to war, this whole thing would be a non-issue.


And just how long do they need to finish......10-15 years? This is really a moot point, but one I just felt the need to point out
on Oct 27, 2004
The timing of the release of this story is highly suspect, especially given that CBS has admitted they were sitting on an 18 month old report with plans to release it the day before the election. How obvious can you get?

Even if American troops had a yard sale with a big 'Free weapons for terrorists ... bring your own truck' sign, why else would a news organization wait until the day before the election to release the story, when they had known about it for so long?

Why not the day after the election, unless they were trying to effect the results? I mean if you've waited 18 months, one more day is not going to make that much of a difference, relatively speaking.

For those that don't see a blatant attempt by MSM to influence voters, suppose the day before the election Fox released a story about Kerry making a deal 18 months ago with the UN to release Saddam and let him go back to power in Iraq, if he was elected? Wouldn't that seem a bit suspicious to you, especially if Fox had known about it for all that time?
on Oct 28, 2004
I thought there were no WMD’s in Iraq: explosives designed to ignite Nuclear weapons isn’t TNT. The media double standard, in collusion with foreign institutions, permits kerry, the bum, to flip, flop, and say anything to expedite his pomp & circumstance desire to occupy the White House. I suspect that the lower this bum, kerry, descends, the greater the statistical differential in the outcome of the race will be.
on Oct 28, 2004
It pisses me off that the main stream media can't be truthfull.
Essentially, we are losing our freedom of speech.
I did my own blog on this subject awhile back. (The whole story)
Mine was more on Lybia. None of the main stream did a story on this. You know, when Lybia made a big step and surrendered WMD's? Why? Because Bush made a stand against terrorism. It didn't come out for a long time...
Did you know that large corporations own almost ALL of our mainstream media? Doesn't that scare the hell out of you?
Take TimeWarner for instance. Mr. Microsoft. AOL. We all know that Gates owns all of these, but did you know he owns like half of the cable companies in the US? Cox Cable Co. East Coast area. TimeWarner Cable Co. TX area, and Comcast in midwest area(like, NM). Just to name ones off the top of my head. All of which, I have used.
Independent news sources are becoming minute. There are only a few left that are reputable sources. This is big.
Extinction can not be an option.
on Oct 28, 2004

Shhh!  Crazy Lady!  Dont confuse liberals with facts.  It makes them mad!  And nasty as hornets!

on Oct 28, 2004
Your facts are based on the lies of CBS and the NYT. You cannot base facts on lies and forgeries.And besides, you dont even quote the facts correctly. It was not bypassed. It was inspected and found to be empty.Those are the facts. Yours is just llies and myths


Exactly right, Dr Guy.
But no big news coverage on that, huh?

CrispE,
try these out. I know it might be hard for you to read something so far right, but these are done from fellow bloggers. So you can't pick on the source. They have done their homework.

http://www.crushkerry.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=314&mode=&order=0&thold=0

http://www.crushkerry.com/article315.html
on Oct 29, 2004
OMG my bad, Dr Guy!
We don't need any more confusion!!
Oh, and I loved the lies and myths analogy.
3 Pages1 2 3