Posted on 10/27/2004 10:42:20 PM PDT by neverdem
Edited on 10/27/2004 10:47:51 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The liars at the NY Slimes must be passing out as this story unwinds:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1259507/posts
MSNBC BREAKING NEWS: RUSSIANS MOVED EXPLOSIVES
MSNBC
Posted on 10/27/2004 7:58:47 PM PDT by MichaelTN04
Just saw on MSNBC Scarborough Country, Pat Buchanan said that the Wash Times is set to report that Russian Troops helped move the explosives and weapons to Syria before the invasion...
The thing is, they are not MAINSTREAM, they are LEFT STREAM.
Bloggers have questioned the timing and accuracy of the report, done in conjunction with the CBS program "60 Minutes," with one posting on FreeRepublic.com saying the paper "has no interest in accuracy or integrity"...
I agree.
Wow, an article on the NY Times that doesn't have that stench of bias.
The story about the Russians moving the explosives has international legs:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1259571/posts
The Financial Times: Russians ‘May Have Taken Iraq Explosives'
The Financial Times ^ | October 28, 2004 | Demetri Sevastopulo, Guy Dinmore and James Harding
Posted on 10/27/2004 9:04:27 PM PDT by quidnunc
Washington DC and Lancaster County, Pennsylvania – The controversy over Iraq’s missing explosives intensified on Wednesday as the Bush administration rejected charges of incompetence and a senior Pentagon official claimed the munitions may have been removed by Russians before the US-led invasion.
Breaking his silence over an issue that has dominated headlines since Monday, President George W. Bush accused John Kerry, his Democratic challenger, of making “wild charges” over the 350 tonnes of explosives and weapons.
The Pentagon is still investigating their disappearance. But Scott McClellan, White House press secretary, said there was a “very real possibility” the munitions were taken by the Saddam Hussein regime before US troops arrived at the munitions facility at al-Qaqaa, south of Baghdad.
At a rally in Iowa on Wednesday, however, Mr Kerry claimed that Mr Bush had allowed the explosives to fall into the hands of Iraqi rebels. Later, his campaign conceded that the Hussein regime might have removed the munitions before the invasion.
But in a further development, John Shaw, a deputy under-secretary of defence, suggested that “Russian units” had transported the explosives out of the country.
In an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Shaw said: “For nearly nine months my office has been aware of an elaborate scheme set up by Saddam Hussein to finance and disguise his weapons purchases through his international suppliers, principally the Russians and French. That network included. . . employing various Russian units on the eve of hostilities to orchestrate the collection of munitions and assure their transport out of Iraq via Syria.”
Tough shit brokaw. Wet your panties!!
It is our duty to bring the MSM to justice after this election. seeBS and NYT take notice!
Ironically, the NYT's big story about the disappearance of 380 tons of powerful explosives also turns out to be political Jihad. And just like CBS, their big story is blowing up in their faces.
When you deal in forged government documents with DNC fingerprints all over them, I guess that could qualify as "a big opportunity".
Notice that the examples of personal attacks and bad manners come from leftist blogs against others they don't consider liberal enough. Gotta chug that koolaid by the gallon.
Politics of personal distruction coming from the left? Who would have thought?
the A.P.'s bureau chief in Washington, said, "We get lobbed at from the left and the right, so I think probably that puts us squarely in the middle, which is where we want to be."
Percetage is the key. What is the percentage of complaints from the right and the left? Washington Journal on C-Span once said that 90% of their complaints about bias came from the right with 10% coming from the left.
I saw the post. Somewhere on the forum I saw a comment that because its source is the Wash Times, the MSM won't give it any coverage, at least not until the election is over. I'm afraid that's correct.
A report says that the Russians moved the explosives and furthermore, documents from Jan 04 show that there were only 3 tons of the stuff not 380...Sattelite pics supposedly show the Russian Military taking munitions out of Iraq before the war started. They were trying to cover up their involvement with Iraq, selling weapons etc. There is a speculation that they might have also moved WMD. Sounds reasonable...
Actually pretty good.
Did you see the tactic used in the article - "include both sides" - cancels everything good out - it is what the media does all the time - Especially on Fox - that's a big one for them -
There are some web sites where you have to "log in" in order to see the postings - might be a good idea starting like this Monday - :)
I do agree with one part of the article - people do have a habit of attacking in a personal way - I've seen that more than once - how a person looks should have nothing to do with anything - and as was just written - it works to hurt a site that is really trying to make a difference for the people -
Nice find! Much harder to ignore.
"It's really an attack not just on the liberal media or press bias, it's an attack on professionalism itself, on the idea that there could be disinterested reporters."
Rosen, I occassionally read your blog, but this is just idiocy.
I respect real journalism and consider it one of the most important professions and one of the most vital to a free society.
What I don't respect is biased trash and lazy "he said, she said" back and forth reporting without some real legwork.
And most of the media does both these days.
Too bad. Real journalism....like that practiced by Hume, Gertz, Bret Baier etc...can have an impact and shine some light on the truth without shilling for one point of view.
I wish these guys would just quit lying about trying to be fair and balanced or professional (ethical) journalists, etc. There's no such thing and never has been. The first amendment does not demand fair and balanced and neither do the citizens. Newspapers from the very beginning have been politically oriented. The New York Times simply happens to be the paper of ^liberal^ record.
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.