Skip to comments.
New York Times Defends Missing Explosives Story
CSN NEWS.com ^
| October 26, 2004
| Robert B. Bluey, Staff Writer
Posted on 10/26/2004 5:07:22 PM PDT by focusandclarity
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-84 next last
To: focusandclarity
The MSM has had a monopoly on "political thought" in this country since the late 1960's - or so they think. Couple that with the "dumbing down" of the public school system and the politicizing of nearly all major university staffs in the US, and you have, in less than two generations, created a population that is ripe to be fitted with the chains of socialist slavery. When I went to school, they taught us something that may have been lost over the last decades - critical thinking.
Moving 400 tons of anything is a daunting task, be it bags of rice, or crates of C4. And doing it under the noses of surveillance planes during wartime and getting away with it, is nearly impossible. No, if there ever was anything in those storage areas, it was removed prior to the US entry into Iraq.
61
posted on
10/26/2004 6:19:31 PM PDT
by
45Auto
(Big holes are (almost) always better.)
To: focusandclarity
New York Times: "All the news that fits, we print."
62
posted on
10/26/2004 6:22:06 PM PDT
by
JoeGar
To: shrinkermd
Still, in order to move that much material, a fair size convoy would be needed; it sure as heck wasn't done after initial hostilities ceased since there was too much surveillance going on in those first weeks, a lot of it by aircraft, and (I wouldn't doubt) a lot by satellite.
63
posted on
10/26/2004 6:22:39 PM PDT
by
45Auto
(Big holes are (almost) always better.)
To: focusandclarity
You were had Ted N.Y. Times.
64
posted on
10/26/2004 6:29:51 PM PDT
by
bayourod
(Old Media news is poll driven, not event driven, not fact driven, not newsworthy driven.)
To: 45Auto
I agree, and I've been sold on the notion that it went via truck caravan to Syria while the UN security Council dithered about votes. [In fact I was just reminded that an article I found about the facility before the war had Uday (who I suspect might have been the family member who might have been in charged of the joint) quoted that September 11th would look mild compared to what they had in store for our troops. Didn't Uday and his brother travel to Syria (incognito) and then returned to meet their untimely and unsuspected fate? Going to try to find that article.]
To: focusandclarity
Thanks for the post.
We need to stop buying newspapers that are corrupt like
NYT, L.A. Times.
I stopped buying L.A. Times, long ago.
We need to point out these newspapers every error, and tell
your friends. Show your friends where the paper is wrong.
This is best done when the newspaper has a write up about
something you know much about. Point out their inconsistencies
point out their illogical extrapolation of information,
point out the weaknesses in the research methodology.
And don't buy the paper. You can get all the news you
want from the internet, and other sources.
Newspapers, can now be considered irrelevant as sources
of news. Unless you don't use a computer. Time to put the
untruthful newspapers out to pasture.
66
posted on
10/26/2004 6:33:39 PM PDT
by
Getready
((...Fear not ...))
To: focusandclarity
The NBC Nightly News revealed Monday evening that it had an embedded reporter at Al Qaqaa on April 10, 2003, one day after the fall of Baghdad, and that none of the 380 tons of explosives were present. "NBC News was embedded with troops from the Army's 101st Airborne as they temporarily take over the Al-Qaqaa weapons installation south of Baghdad," Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski reported Monday. "But these troops never found the nearly 380 tons of some of the most powerful conventional explosives, called HMX and RDX, which is now missing."
What part of NBC's report don't those syphilitic editors of the NYT understand? The explosives were not there to be guarded when our troops got there. When the NYT says the weapons disappeared "sometime" before April 9, does that leave open the possibility "sometime" means days, weeks, hours, or minutes?
67
posted on
10/26/2004 6:38:48 PM PDT
by
Auntie Dem
(Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Terrorist lovers gotta go!)
To: focusandclarity
NYT = Nasty Yellow Turd
68
posted on
10/26/2004 6:47:20 PM PDT
by
fightu4it
(conquest by immigration and subversion spells the end of US.)
To: focusandclarity
"The IAEA took an inventory of the materials in January, 2003. In early March, right before the beginning of the war, the IAEA went to the site and found that the seals on the bunkers were still intact. So let me get this straight. The only FACTS they KNOW are:
- The stuff was inventoried in January
- In EARLY March, the seals appeared intact
- The Americans did not arrive on scene until around April 9
From this they ASSUME that the explosives were taken after our troops arrived, rather than in the intervening MONTH between the March inspection and our April arrival, when Sadaam's regime was intensely preparing caches of arms and explosives for a post-invasion guerilla war
Or, indeed, possibly before March, thru a hidden tunnel that would have bypassed the sealed door
And, obviously, it's all Bush's fault
69
posted on
10/26/2004 6:47:41 PM PDT
by
SauronOfMordor
(What Is Best In Life? To crush your enemies and see them driven before you)
To: shrinkermd
45Auto, your reasoning is impecable except you assume using 1/2 ton trucks. If you use 60 foot vans 60 foot vans require paved roads. What kind of roads were there by the bunkers? Unless they were alongside a paved highway, forget it.
70
posted on
10/26/2004 6:55:07 PM PDT
by
SauronOfMordor
(What Is Best In Life? To crush your enemies and see them driven before you)
To: Semi Civil Servant
George Bush needs to personally address this issue NOW. I hate to say it, but the Clinton team was 1000% better than the Bush team at responding to politically damaging information.
-----
Bush didn't have to respond to the CBS forgeries. CBS was forced to admit their "error" by the alternate media...US. Just like this story was outed the same way. NYT forgot about the embedded Journalists who were filing reports daily, but when you have an army of tens of thousands,and I daresay, millions of alternate media people out there, someone is going to remember an obscure article about a munitions storage site that was inspected, found empty and disregarded. They simply can't get away with this anymore. The MSM needs to realize this or I shudder to think of their fate.
71
posted on
10/26/2004 7:00:59 PM PDT
by
gooleyman
((Half the Babies aborted would have grown up to be women. What about their "RIGHT TO CHOOSE"??????))
To: focusandclarity
"Pentagon and White House officials told the Times, as the story says, that the materials vanished sometime after the U.S.-led invasion.Manure.
72
posted on
10/26/2004 7:07:38 PM PDT
by
facedown
(Armed in the Heartland)
To: focusandclarity
NYT is the buffoon of newspapers. Shilling and lying are no way to operate a media outlet. WRITE them!
73
posted on
10/26/2004 7:14:57 PM PDT
by
manic4organic
(Kerry/Edwards - Both ends of the horse)
To: facedown
"Pentagon and White House officials told the Times, as the story says, that the materials vanished sometime after the U.S.-led invasion."
The Pentagon says it isn't true; the White House says it isn't true. They've already been proven to fabricate at least this aspect of the story.
The "unnamed sources" bit from these idiot journalists is, to put it mildly, becoming ridiculous.
To: pnz1
Since this was a well bombed site, much of it may have been blown up. Being a powder the wind could have gotten some of what was left. Didn't some from the 101 get sick there and they thought it was WMD bio or chem poisoning?
75
posted on
10/26/2004 7:28:25 PM PDT
by
GailA
( hanoi john, I'm for the death penalty for terrorist, before I impose a moratorium on it.)
To: focusandclarity
See BS also gave them the "play book" for discredited stories.
76
posted on
10/26/2004 7:30:18 PM PDT
by
Henchman
(Who gave KERRY entré to the VC @ Paris? T.Kennedy? McGovern? ...some"high" low D'rat probably)
To: focusandclarity
Is the NYT morphing into the Guardian, or is the Guardian morphing into the NYT? Too philosophical for me...
5.56mm
77
posted on
10/26/2004 7:31:15 PM PDT
by
M Kehoe
To: focusandclarity
They probably figure with only a week left they can beat this one into the ground because after election day it is a non story. The only gain that can come from this is after this election the majority of people will finally see how blantantly biased the MSM is.
78
posted on
10/26/2004 7:34:57 PM PDT
by
Sparky760
(The sleeping Giant has been awakened)
To: Made in USA
yup, that's exactly what the NYT, MSM will do, twist this right up until election day to sway the feeble minded. Sad thing is there are tooooo many feeble minded voting.
79
posted on
10/26/2004 7:36:33 PM PDT
by
SeaBiscuit
(God Bless President GWB and our Brave Troops)
To: shrinkermd
I'm not a logistics man, but I think his point dealt with both weight and volume. I'ts not like they would be hauling 380 tons of steel. A clarification from someone who knows would be good for all us to know the logistics of this...
I'm not buying that it just dissappeared into the desert. With that kind of weight they would sink. Had to be on the road and we had tanks on those roads.
80
posted on
10/26/2004 7:51:15 PM PDT
by
dannyboy72
(it's time to take on the media)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-84 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson