Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Grey Lady's November Surprise (Dean Barnett on the NYT)
www.HughHewitt.com ^ | 11/03/2006 | Dean Barnett

Posted on 11/03/2006 9:15:26 AM PST by The Blitherer

You see kids – this is what happens when your worldview gets hopelessly narrow.

In its semi-annual November surprise, the New York Times “reveals” that the Bush administration put documents on the web that showed that Iraq was quite far along in its quest for nuclear weapons. Naturally, that’s not the focus of the story. The focus of the story is the cursed incompetence of the Bush administration, the Republican Party, and even right-wing media-types (like me!) who wanted the documents released.

But the takeaway from the story for normal people won’t be that conservatives both inside and outside the administration are all a bunch of blithering incompetents. Besides, Andrew Sullivan’s vote had already been pretty much sewed up. The “news” in the story is how far along Saddam was in his bid to acquire the ultimate WMD. While that’s an old story to many of us, it’s heartening to see the Times splash it all over this morning’s front page and in so doing refresh the nation’s memory regarding the most disputed causus belli of the current war.

The Times lengthy reportage pounds the theme that some of the documents could give potential malefactors like those nice Mullahs in Iran a shortcut to nuclear weaponry. The Times quotes a predictably unnamed diplomat fretting, “It’s a cookbook. If you had this, it would short-circuit a lot of things.”

Let’s just posit for the sake of argument that the Times’ huge exposé is news-breaking of the first order and is no way, shape or form a maladroit effort at electioneering. Let’s assume that the Times really does think that this information being posted on the web made the world a vastly more dangerous place.

If that’s the case, why did the Times wait until just last night to confront the government with this information even though the Times dates the concerns of experts to “recent weeks”? One would think the Times’ heartfelt patriotism would have compelled the paper to bring its concerns to the government immediately rather than hold off until four days before an election.

Giggle. Read the Times’ story closely and you’ll hear yet another death rattle from the lumbering carcass of the mainstream media.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: fmsodocuments; iraq; jveritas; newyorktimes; nyt; nytimes; nytreasontimes; prewardocs; saddamdocs; saddamnuke; santorum; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last
IMHO, Barnett is always good at making things seem extremely clear.
1 posted on 11/03/2006 9:15:27 AM PST by The Blitherer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer

Maybe I'm nitpicking, or maybe I'm just one of those dumb vets that Kerry mentioned, but isn't it a "bi-annual" November surprise, as opposed to "semi-annual"?


2 posted on 11/03/2006 9:19:39 AM PST by linear (Taxonomy is a willing and pliant mistress but Reality waits at home, sharpening her knife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer

Rush Limbaugh is saying that when the documents first appeared on the net, the democrats and the moonbat immediately doubted their authenticity.

It's just so typical of them. They demand something, get what they wanted, discount it as fake, hope it goes away, then cheer when it reappears because they've changed position.


3 posted on 11/03/2006 9:20:04 AM PST by cripplecreek (If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linear

A stopped calendar is right twice a year, of course.


4 posted on 11/03/2006 9:21:28 AM PST by wildandcrazyrussian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer
The NYT is just looking out for America. Conservatives are always making a big deal out of a info filled story.

Stupid Conservatives. They expect the news to actually report news for news' sake.. Idiots.

5 posted on 11/03/2006 9:22:29 AM PST by thehumanlynx (“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” -Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Well, the left also questioned the English translations of the documents.


6 posted on 11/03/2006 9:22:36 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Karl Rove you magnificent bastard!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wildandcrazyrussian

Unless it crosses the event horizion of a black hole, in which case it could be right four times a year.


7 posted on 11/03/2006 9:23:06 AM PST by linear (Taxonomy is a willing and pliant mistress but Reality waits at home, sharpening her knife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wildandcrazyrussian

Wearing my tinfoil hat here: maybe the Grey Lady has read the tea leaves and switched sides so that it can still claim to be relevant by affecting the outcome of the election.

Nah--too sophisticated for them.


8 posted on 11/03/2006 9:23:32 AM PST by caseinpoint (Don't get thickly involved in thin things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer; All

Captain Ed Morrissey has an excellent post on the subject:

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/008425.php

(He has many embedded links to a lot of important information, so I'll just post the link in stead of the article). Well worth your exploration.


9 posted on 11/03/2006 9:24:34 AM PST by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer
But that ain't no lady.


10 posted on 11/03/2006 9:25:02 AM PST by Petronski (CNN is an insidiously treasonous, enemy propaganda organ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

lol! That's REALLY funny!


11 posted on 11/03/2006 9:26:04 AM PST by The Blitherer (We all know the truth now, and it is incontrovertible: Karl Rove is one magnificent bastard! - D. B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer

Unfortunately, it's relatively simple to build a nuke. The tough part is finding enriched uranium.

http://www.beloit.edu/~belmag/03fall/03fall_features/03fall_dobson.html

Guess these college kids didn't go to Niger on spring break!

That's why the posting of the plans is not as catastrophic as it was made out to be. No, they shouldn't have been posted. But the Times has endorsed the view that these are a grand threat. It's the idea of Saddam's danger that's underlined.

Logic 101. Having these plans makes you a danger. Saddam had the plans. therefore he is a danger.


12 posted on 11/03/2006 9:26:51 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer
.


The Blitherer,


The NY-Times story is pathetic.


ANY knowlegable Mid-East journalist or military intelligence analyst (worth their salt) KNOWS that the Soviets have already given "miniaturized" nuclear-weapon design files to the Iranians, in exchange for Iran's giving the Soviets billions worth of nuclear facility and arms deals.


Privately, I think Iran ALREADY has nuclear weapons, already sitting on selected Shaab-3 missiles ... and are merely "baiting" Isreal to attack with a long, outrageous parade of diplomatic-military provocations.


Patton-at-Bastogne

"May God and His Angels Guard Your Sacred Throne, and May You Long Become It."

Shakespeare, Henry V, Act I, Scene II


.
13 posted on 11/03/2006 9:27:55 AM PST by Patton@Bastogne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer

If it's so dangerous, Iraq should not have had these documents, and Pres. Bush did the right thing.

END of story.


14 posted on 11/03/2006 9:28:01 AM PST by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer
Wait-a-minute but Saddam was contained... we had those iron-clad sanctions and oil-for-food program and the UN watching over him. Plus he had no interest in WMD, and had nothing to do with terrorism.

But somehow he had this 'how to build a nuke' primer, was a year away (if he could find a place to purchase yellow cake), housed terrorists (who mysteriously were killed on the eve of the war) and had terrorist training camp, openly paid for Palestinian suicide bombers, etc...

The cognitive dissonance is boggling...
15 posted on 11/03/2006 9:30:54 AM PST by FreedomNeocon (Success is not final; Failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

The larger point of the NY Times story is that it showed Joe Wilson to be a friggen liar, and vindicated the Bush administration.


16 posted on 11/03/2006 9:31:24 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Karl Rove you magnificent bastard!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Since when does the NY Slimes have a problem with revealing (allegedly) sensitive information?


17 posted on 11/03/2006 9:31:55 AM PST by talleyman (Kerry & the Surrender-Donkey Treasoncrats - trashing the troops for 40 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer

It's not a November Surprise....it's a ROVEmber Surprise.


18 posted on 11/03/2006 9:32:18 AM PST by Suzy Quzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer; Sturm Ruger
According to an old CNN article, In 2002, the UK declassified Nuke building docs
LONDON, England -- Britain's Ministry of Defence has confirmed it has made public information describing in detail the make-up of a nuclear bomb.

The plans give complete cross-sections, precise measurements and full details of materials used for all the components, including the plutonium core and the initiator that sets off the chain reaction causing the blast. [excerpt]

Thanks to Sturm Ruger for posting the link to the CNN article last night.
19 posted on 11/03/2006 9:33:04 AM PST by syriacus (2002-UK declassified Nuke building docs- http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/04/15/uk.nuclear/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

Has Carl Rove's magnificant mind control finally extended over the free-thinkers at the New York Times? Tune in next time...


20 posted on 11/03/2006 9:34:55 AM PST by The Blitherer (We all know the truth now, and it is incontrovertible: Karl Rove is one magnificent bastard! - D. B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson