Fox News internal memo: "Be On The Lookout For Any Statements From The Iraqi Insurgents…Thrilled At The Prospect Of A Dem Controlled Congress"
We report, you decide.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Oliver Willis
Like Kryptonite To Stupid
-
-
Breaking News
- Tila Tequila Live Streaming Mental Meltdown
- 31 Die In Chinese Mine Blast In Heilongjiang Province, 82 Trapped
- Victoria Justice Stars In New Nickeloden Show “Victorious”
- CERN’s Large Hadron Collider Back Up And Running
- Megan Fox Alive For Transformers 3
- Maryna Linchuk @ 2009 Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show
- Madison Parker Works Out
- Sony Reveals Lame Attempt To Fight iTunes
- Brian Thomas: UK Man Gets Away With Killing Wife In His Sleep
- Olivia Wilde @ US Weekly Hot Hollywood 2009 Party
Live News
There was a saying in the USSR:
“Izvestia – ne izvestia; Pravda – ne pravda,” which translates as “Izvestia is not the news and Pravda is not the truth.” Fox actually scores on both counts as it is neither the news nor the truth.
We distort – you decide.
That is quite interesting, however, I don’t think that there is anything surreptitious, or even surprising about that. However, something that we ought to think about is the reason why some nutcases in Lebanon and Iraq are “praising” the fact that the DEMS have taken control.
Please explain why anything a nutcase says is of value? I know we’re in the era of Limbaugh, Hannity, & Co. but c’mon.
Wonder why the ellipses for “who must be”.
And exactly why wouldn’t the insurgents in Iraq be thrilled at the prospects of defeating the US – of sending American soldiers home defeated.
After all, that is a position some Democrats have taken – and now Democrats are in power. A good newsroom would be on the lookout for that dynamic. Of course, savvy insurgents/terrorits may just lay low, not wanting to rock the ‘cut and run’ Democrats’ boat.
A newsroom NOT looking for this dynamic is biased, IMO.
Yes, obviously Oliver and the Huffington Post are addressing rational people. Not you, Dugger.
The terrorists are pissed. They want Bush in power which means Republicans. Who else can bungle wars so badly? Who else provides them with easy targets? Who else would give them so much money? Who else could ruin the US’s reputation so badly?
Bush tells us the terrorists hate us for our freedom. Who takes it away but Bush and the republicans? He’s winning their war for them.
midderpidge, you’re going to make pedugger cry.
Dugger | Nov 15, 2006 7:54:02 AM
“‘cut and run’ Democrats’ boat.”
In contrast to the ‘SCREW strategy, let’s just invade and contravene international law when it suits us!!’ Republicans’ boat?
pedugger, if Rumsfeld goes to jail are you going to visit him?
“A newsroom NOT looking for this dynamic is biased, IMO.”
CNN runs a video of insurgent snipers and Wolf Blitzer should be hung as a traitor. FOX is actually on the look out for enemy propaganda that they can use to attack the new duly elected Congress and influence American policy and they’re stalwart journalists. Okay, whatever you say Dugs.
What Duggy can’t seem to grasp is that plans for redeployment have a far better chance to achieve our goals in Iraq than Bush’s current laisse faire cock up because it will help open up channels for diplomacy. What shitheels like dugs always over overlook is that the Dem plan is not a plan for disengagement, it is a plan to re-engage the problem from a different angle, one that takes the polarizing presence of US troops out of the equation — while maintaining the abilty to respond military when and where it is necessary on a limited basis.
But of course we know that Dugs only wants to WIN, he doesn’t actually care about havign a plan to win.
Dugger,
UBL hoped the U.S. would waste men and treasure, just as the Soviet Union had, in a futile effort to fight an idea. With Republicans in charge, UBL has gotten his wish in spades.
Dugger’s all for staying the course long after the President has abandoned the idea (and pretended he never said it), failing to realize that it’s not a sign of weakness to change direction.
While Dugger would prefer that we keep ramming the brick wall with our collective head, some of us would like to take a few steps back from the wall and see if there isn’t a way around it, instead.
You know, zadura, you are one of the few people who seems to know what UBL thinks. How’d it happen? Is he a relation and talks to you? Do you know magic? I mean the rest of us can only analyze and guess, but you ‘know’ what he hopes.
nevertheless, it doesn’t take a rocket science to understand that the terrorists and insurgents want to win and that some of the new Democrats in power are proposing to hand them a victory. Thats very basic.
What’s also very basic is the Republican strategy for Iraq. “What we’re going to do is ‘win’. We’re going to achieve ‘victory.’”
How does victory happen, Republicans?
“Well, the violence stops and democracy occurs.”
So if the people decide to democratically elect a power-mad zealot…you know, the way Iran did…and if one of the sectarian militias finally annihilates the other, then will we be able to claim “victory”?
“Sure. Because we’ll finally have avenged 9/11.”
By…allowing the mastermind to run free.
A thousand monkeys at a thousand typewriters, I swear.
Dugger, I don’t presume to know what goes on inside UBL’s head, but I do try to follow what he says and what he does.
He made it quite clear in his 1996 Declaration of War that he hoped to drag the U.S. into a regional conflict and bankrupt us just as he believes he did the Soviet Union.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
Fact is, we’re half a trillion into this thing, Dugger, and are not an inch closer to solving it. Time to change course.
Not to mention the rhetoric he speaks to his own potential pool of recruits. He used to go on and on about how America was evil because they would one day invade a sovereign Muslim nation to subjugate the people within.
One irresponsible, slapdash war and several Abu Ghraib photos later, we justify all of his propaganda, and then seem baffled as to why there are so many insurgents and foreign terrorists everywhere in Iraq.
Dugger is probably part of an Al Qaeda sleeper cell. His sole terrorist mission is to post disguised pro-Al Qaeda comments on American blogs. Hence his unflagging rhetoric supporting George Bush and the Republicans. Way to go Dugger bin Lian.
Time for another round of “Guess the Terrorist Mastermind”
(Z adura is prohibited from playing due to the ironclad “no psychics” rule)
–
“We, alongside the mujahedeen, bled Russia for 10 years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat…”
“All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations…”
“We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.”
zadura,
It indeed might be time to change course. Might not be time, too. We don’t know. Myself, I think leaving per a fixed timetable is the worst thing we can do. But UBL attacked our homeland and our actions are now, ostensibly, driven by what we think is right for us – regardless of UBL’s announced strategy (that get you to thinking at all – that you think you and others know his strategy – since he announced it). Whats to say UBL is not a clever dude and figures if he says he wants us to do something, we will do the opposite. And all along its really that opposite he wants. Bottom line: we gotta do what we think is right for us. Thats what the Pres and a bipartisan Congress did.
“Thats what the Pres and a bipartisan Congress did.”
Nice. A majority of Democrats voted agains the Iraq War resoltion but now it’s a “bipartisan” congress.
Dugger, if we aren’t supposed to care what Bin Laden thinks or wants us to do, why the fuck are we supposed to care what Iraqi insurgents think about our election?
Dugger’s steely resolve seems about as limp as a wet noodle all of a sudden.
“Might be time to change course. Might not be. We don’t know.”
“UBL might be provoking one reaction, and he might be provoking the other reaction. We don’t know.”
But his thesis is that we “gotta do what we think is right for us.” He just can’t tell us what that is.
And it’s supposed to be the Democrats who have no plans or strategy.
Democrats (House & Senate total) voted 43% in favor of the resolution. That’s 110 for and 147 against. In fact, the Senate democrats voted 58% in favor.
It’s not unreasonable to call 110 democrats (with the majority of the Senate democrats) supporting the president as “bipartisan.”
That’s great JWG.
The next time a conservative tells me that liberals want to “cut and run” from Iraq while conservatives want to win, I’ll just tell him that there has been bipartisan opposition to the war from the very beginning since some Republicans voted against the resolution too.
For a guy who finds it impossible to know the motives of anyone, he sure knows alot about the strategy and motives of Osama bin Laden.
Dugger,
Maybe the iocane powder is in both glasses.
Yeah, because less than 3% of Republicans (7 total votes) voting against the resolution is as similarly bipartisan as 43% of Democrats (110 total votes) voting for the resolution.
To recap: 3% compared to 43%
To recap: 7 compared to 110
As someone likes to say…idiot.
Remember that war vote? I mean where GW Bush claimed it was absolutely essential that he have the ability to decide to go to war so he could leverage Hussein into inspections and so on? Well, Bush got his inspections and the info he fed congress was cooked and nearly everything he claimed about Iraq being a danger was false. Now we are stuck in a quagmire because alot of Democrats and even more republicans probably never suspected or didn’t want to publicly appear to suspect that the President of the United States would lie about the intelligence that would lead us to a war.
Good…so we’re agreed that it was a bipartisan vote. I’ll let frameone know since he had some difficulty with his math classes in school.
What lie did the Pres tell, midder? Name it.
Dugger, for the love of God.
What was true Dugger bin Lian? You have failed to rise to the challenge to document all the Bush Administration Iraq WMD claims that he based his justification for invasion on, that turned out to be true. Good luck. We are eagerly awaiting your report.
“Yeah, because less than 3% of Republicans (7 total votes) voting against the resolution is as similarly bipartisan as 43% of Democrats (110 total votes) voting for the resolution.”
Um, it was still a bipartisan vote, JWG. Republicans and Democrats opposed the war.
If you think that’s a misleading statement it’s no less misleading than Dugger’s implied assertion here (and direct elsewhere) that Democrats equally supported war with Iraq as demonstrated by their vote on the resolution. Many Democrats voted for the resolution as a means to avoid war, hoping that the threat of force would be enough to get HUssein to allow inspectors back into the country. The resolution also required the Bush administration to certify that it had exhausted all other mneans of verifying Iraq’s WMD capabilities and enforcing UN resolutions requiring disarmament. Of course as soon as the inspectors got back into Iraq the Bush administration began to undermine their efforts.
So if Dugger wants to distort the context of the vote as bipartisan support for war with Iraq, I have no problem making the true statement that there was bipartisan opposition with a majority of House Dems voting against it.
Actually frame is correct. Unfortunately for him, the bipartisan support ‘for’ was a majority and the bipartisan support ‘against’ was a minority. There this little thing called democracy.