To: Dog
Is Debka not the most reliable of sources?
To: HHKrepublican_2
Is Debka not the most reliable of sources?No. Grain of salt the size of a boulder.
49 posted on
11/24/2005 3:49:45 PM PST by
Bahbah
(Free Scooter; Tony Schaffer for the US Senate)
To: HHKrepublican_2
Debka is definitely not factual and much of it is speculation, but they are often the first to report things.
They are decent at reporting Israeli issues and they will often acknowledge something a few days before the Israeli media reports it.
As a source of credible information--Debka should not be used.
95 posted on
11/24/2005 5:08:41 PM PST by
Jaysin
To: HHKrepublican_2
Is Debka not the most reliable of sources? I stopped believing Debka when before the war they claimed that US Special Forces were watching every WMD installation in the country and knew exactly what was where.
If we were, it wouldn't have been so easy to spirit out of the country.
No, I don't really believe Debka, much as I might hope this story is true and has legs.
111 posted on
11/24/2005 6:22:57 PM PST by
America's Resolve
(I've become a 'single issue voter' for 06 and 08. My issue is illegal immigration!)
To: HHKrepublican_2
Is Debka not the most reliable of sources
I think its tied with 60 Minutes ........
112 posted on
11/24/2005 6:26:46 PM PST by
festus
(The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
To: HHKrepublican_2
Is Debka not the most reliable of sources?No, they are not, though they have been right at times.....And usually when they are, it is a couple of days before it is reported on CNX and the like.......
134 posted on
11/25/2005 9:20:02 AM PST by
b4its2late
(Why is it that most nudists are people you don't want to see naked?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson