Right, but if this was Fox news everyone of you, including yourself, would be up in arms about the GOP and biased media. This is a news organization that people are supposed to be getting their impartial news from and it's fine with you?! Why?! I'll tell you why... it's because you'll find a way to support Kerry in everything he does. You're a front-running hypocrite...

I agree that this is substantiated politics but have also said the same thing for Bush regarding Sinclair and other smearing attempts. These are the same attempts from Bush that you’ve refuted to the very end. Why the double standards? Why are these moves considered okay for Kerry and CBS when the movie from Sinclair (which was deemed fit by the FCC contrary to Chris' "OWN3D" rants toward me with njc200) -and- other recent smears from Bush poor politics and/or shallow?

 

I just like saying OEN3D. The difference I see, though slight I'll admit, is that there was more personal perspective and opinion in the Sinclair "film" whereas this munitions story is a hard fact. The other difference is that the Sinclair film was designed to specifically atack one specific person, whereas this news story is information regarding a general mishap. Not once did they say "Bush personally did this!"

-Chris

 

Chris the idea that this stuff was taken "on our watch" is ludicrous. Major combat ops weren't over officially until May 2, and it's obvious that they aren't really over even now. The explosives were gone by April 10, which was the earliest our forces could get there considering that they had to fight all the way from Kuwait.
The original story, which is that the explosives were some how lost after US forces had taken control, is completely wrong, you must admit that.

Here's the letter that started the whole thing: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/20..._CA0ready.html
"after 9-4-2003" means 10-4-2003 or later. Our guys were there on 10-4-2003. The explosives were gone. The letter is wrong. The NY Times story and Kerry's whining on the subject are both debunked.

 

Digging up 30 years ago and talking about current events are very different. The sinclair thing can be debunked the same way repub's say farenheight 9/11 can be debunked. It would be like Kerry wanting to show Farenheight on national TV because it shows how the president handled Iraq amongst other things. It wouldn't fly and it shouldn't because it is propaganda just like the Sinclair peice....

BTW....I never once commented on the sinclair thing, Farenhype or farenheight so you must have me confused with someone else. Don't go around calling people hypocrites when you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Do I think that Farenheight is propaganda - yes

Do I think the Sinclair thing is propaganda - yes

Do I think Fox is biased - yes

Do I think CNN, Msnbc, CBSNews, SFGate and all the other media outlets are biased - yes

Do I think you are a Bush loving conservative hiding in a "I don't really like 'im but gosh durn it I think he is the lessur of two evuls" coat - Yes

So start the name calling there guy, you're good at it.....

 

We don't know when they were lost because Bush didn't send enough troops to secure the explosives.

 

Didn't send enough troops? I think what you mean to say is that troops were not there soon enough. The whole point of what I've been telling you is that the explosives were gone before our troops got there. They were removed some time before the war or in the first 3 weeks of the war.

 

I merely quoted you when I was refering to others here, sorry.

 

I know...You just caught me right after my gf was yelling at me for something...Sorry for going off.... No worries...