NBC.Brokaw, Interviews Caughlin Live

NBC News | 12-13-03 | Dasboot

[dasboot]

Oh, Laughing: tears in eyes:

A gal from the Washington Post, Ms. Priest, interviewed by Russert [rough quote], "This capture has nothing to do with the war on terror; it will do nothing to change the minds of AlQ and others plotting against the US."

Musta just woke up!

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

The same memo describes both Atta and the Nigerian Uranium conncetion!? How plausible is that? I suspect this to be a forgery by an overzealous Iraqi coalition government.

[KSCITYBOY]

bump

[MaryFromMichigan]

This news is much too good to watch anything but Fox.
The other news programs only sour my grateful and happy mood.
Who needs their depressed slants on this wonderful news day!
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
GROUP HUG!

[dasboot]

Can't help rubbernecking as I pass a big accident.

[E=MC²]

I just love days when the news is soooooo good that the demonrat media can't cover it over with their lies and distortions no matter how hard they try.

[Moose4]

Wow. Just...damn! If that pans out to be true and authentic, that's not a smoking gun, it's a smoking HOWITZER! If we can get this news past the blockade you just KNOW the liberal media will throw on it...

}:-)4

[1066AD]

Maybe some hard questions for the Chinese would be in order too
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/14/wterr214.xml

[Maigrey]

I guess I just lost my plug nickel.

Amazing that someone from the alphabet soup people actually mentioned it.

Might it be because they captured him this morning? and they are wanting to blunt the impact on their news organization.

[Paladin2]

"The second part of the memo, which is headed "Niger Shipment", contains a report about an unspecified shipment - believed to be uranium - that it says has been transported to Iraq via Libya and Syria."

Looks like it's a twofer.

When will this second part be given CBSABCBSNBCBSCNNBS(sic)NPRBS coverage?

[skinkinthegrass]

blunt the impact on their news organization.

They are doin' a poll...after that's done they'll respond.

[MeekOneGOP]

Yet another Bush LIE !
There is NO link to Saddam and 9-11 !
None whatsoever !!!

[cwb]

Great! Does anyone have that report from a couple months ago about how those who watch/listen to Foxnews are intentioanlly being manipulated into believing there is a connection between Saddam/AQ and 9/11? Although Fox never directly implied a conection between Saddam and 9/11, the AQ connection was always very probable. I supppose NBC and Tom Brokaw are now apart of the VRWC.

[Maelstrom]

Crow pie

Crow con Carne

Crow stew

Crow steak

Roast Crow

and

Kentucky Fried Crow

Time to go feed some liberals.

[blanknoone]

It may well be that NBC brought this up today because it would quickly be buried by Saddam...in other words, no one would notice it, but they could say they covered it.

It is possible that it is a forgery, but a forger would likely have typed it...less chance of being detected. This was hand written...and confirmed as the hand writing and signature by people who worked for the IIS. Possible it is a forgery? Yes. Likely? No.

[LS]

I have thought ever since the war that the WMDs are there; that the AQ connection was obvious; and that it is only a matter of time until we completely establish both.

I think in both cases, the Bush administration gave up trying to convince the press, and instead (as Rush says he does with his listeners), wants the press to "discover" this stuff on their own, where it will have (in the media's eyes) "more credibility."

I think it became obvious early on that every false lead would be played up, and every genuine connection or piece of evidence would be downplayed, so the administration just decided this was a PR war they could not win, and instead the media will "break" all this info on their own, for the reasons people here have identified. Then it cannot be said to have "come from the Bush administration."

[LS]

Well, get ready for bomb #3: I think the Dow will likely go up, a lot (I had predicted 300 points, but given that this has occurred on a weekend, maybe 150-200 is more likely). I've also said Osama's capture/death would be good for a 500-point leap in the Dow.

[dasboot]

Perhaps GW can stroll into the hallowed halls of the Capitol and serve it on a platter to the left side of the assembly?

Pinch me...gotta be sure I'm not dreamin'.

[cwb]

I think the liberal media is going to have to re-evaluate their investigative skills. Or better yet...just stop ignoring the obvious, in an attempt to advance a partisan, political agenda. When I read liberal "studies" that attempt to infer some sort of campaign to misinform Americans by Foxnews (and right-wing print media), I have to wonder just who it really is that is runnning a misinformation campaign.

Foxnews and Republicans never attributed a direct connection to Saddam and 9/11...although some peripheral evidence did exist. Most of these attributions had to do with Saddam's ongoing ties to terrorist networks, like AQ. For these people to claim this as misinformation, when even many of their own reporters made such claims as far back as 1998, is a blatant lie...and disinformation, in itself. Looking at this story (below) from a couple months ago...and seeing what is happening today, it is obvious who is doing the misinforming. And even if the media's defense is that these stories haven't been corroborated, that too, is a lie, as this media has gone to print with virtually every rumor that adversely effects this war and the Bush administration.

"Misinformed America: What we don't know could hurt us all"

"We take pride in being a democracy. But a democracy is only as good as the choices of its voters. A recent study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) revealed some disturbing facts about how misinformed many Americans are, and how that affects our country.

The PIPA group looked at how accurately Americans responded on key questions about Iraq involving terrorist links, weapons of mass destruction and global support for invasion. It then compared where the respondents got their news, and their level of support for both the war and President Bush.

The research showed that the more misperceptions a person held, the greater was their likelihood to support the war or the president's choices. For example, only 23 percent of the people who were accurately informed about Iraq supported a unilateral war, compared with 86 percent of those with misperceptions on all key facts. Even a couple of common misperceptions can alter major national policies that affect our economy, our freedoms and more.

The study then looked at where the respondents got their news. NPR/PBS had the best record with only 23 percent of their audiences having one or more wrong perceptions. At the other end of the spectrum was Fox News, with 80 percent of its audience having at least one misperception. Tragically, the most common one was that Saddam Hussein was linked to al-Qaida and 9-11. In between NPR/PBS and Fox came (in order from best to worse results) print media, then CNN, then the network channels."

Just who in the hell are these people to label someone's "misconceptions" as wrong when those so-called misconceptions may have been right all along? We're still in the middle of a war, developing new leads and evidence everyday...which means information is fluid. Where is this study's evaluation of those liberal networks that got everything wrong, from the (under)size of the military to the unequipped supply-lines to the sand-strom quagmire...to even the body counts? Was that misinformation, because if so, Foxnews was the only one who got it right. Is Tom Brokaw and NBC now a part of the misinformation campaign, ala Foxnews....or is he finally reporting on a story that has long had legs?

The terrorist ties between Saddam and AQ have been well documented from as far back as 1998 (some as far as 1993)...by some of these very journalists. They've ignored the important relevance of people like Abu Nidal, Abu Abass and Al Zachawri, who's very presence in Baghdad should've raised important questions. But because it doesn't now fit the poltical agenda of the left, they have ignored the existence of these connections. When Clinton needed an excuse for his impeachment-eve bombing of Iraq, the media was more than happy to provide the Ameican people with evidence of Saddam's betrayals. But when Bush looks for that same support, the liberal media ignores the very evidence they accumulated during the Clinton years...and beyond. With the abundance of evidence available to show...at the very least, a link between Saddam and AQ/terrorism, one has to ask himself, just who is running a "disinformation" campaign?

[Dilbert56]

"Democrat talking points today: Bush lied about Thanksgiving dinner in Bagdad and kept an eight-hour secret that Sadaam had been captured. What else has he lied to the American people about? Wahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"

He lied about Democrats and Republicans being united against terrorism. Republicans and the American People are united against terrorism. The Democrats are more concerned with the legitimacy of the Hague than the security of the United States.