Drudge Smears CNN’s Michael Ware As Alcoholic Activist, Ware Responds
Drudge Smears CNN’s Michael Ware As Alcoholic Activist, Ware Responds
CNN’s Baghdad correspondent Michael Ware has reported from Iraq for four years and regularly corrects the record when politicians mislead about conditions on the ground there. Now he’s under attack.
Yesterday, right-wing Internet gossip Matt Drudge posted an “exclusive” report — based on an anonymous, unnamed source — claiming that Ware had acted inappropriately during a weekend press conference and implying that Ware is an alcoholic:
During a live press conference in Bagdad, Senators McCain and Graham were heckled by CNN reporter Michael Ware. An official at the press conference called Ware’s conduct “outrageous,” saying, “here you have two United States Senators in Bagdad giving first-hand reports while Ware is laughing and mocking their comments. I’ve never witnessed such disrespect. This guy is an activist not a reporter.” [...]
This morning on CNN, Ware said the attack was a fabrication: “I did not heckle the senator. Indeed, I didn’t say a word. I didn’t even ask a question. In fact, when I raised my hand to ask a question, the press conference abruptly ended.” Watch it:
Drudge’s “exclusive” also implies that Ware is an alcoholic, quoting an appearance last year on Bill Maher’s HBO comedy show:
Michael Ware has also publicly expressed his views on the war last year in an interview with Bill Maher, saying, “I’ve been given a front-row ticket to watch this slow-motion train wreck … I try to stay as drunk for as long as possible while I’m here … In fact, I’m drinking now.”
It’s clear from the video, which you can watch below the fold, that Ware was joking when he talked about his drinking habits.
UPDATE: AmericaBlog has more.
CNN transcript:
Let me ask you a question. There was a report that said you were heckling and you were laughing during the senator’s press conference. Is that true?
WARE: Well, let’s bear in mind that this is a report that was leaked by an unnamed official of some kind to a blog, to somewhere on the Internet. No one has gone and put their name forward. We certainly haven’t heard Sen. McCain say anything about it or any of his staff have come forward to say anything about it. I did not heckle the senator. Indeed, I didn’t say a word. I didn’t even ask a question. In fact, when I raised my hand to ask a question, the press conference abruptly ended. So what I would suggest is that anyone who has any queries about whether I heckled, watch the videotape of the press conference. Soledad?
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
265 Responses to “Drudge Smears CNN’s Michael Ware As Alcoholic Activist, Ware Responds”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Another right-wing talking head display the Republican party's true values: personal attacks and smears. Just like Jesus taught.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:13 pm"Michael Ware has also publicly expressed his views on the war last year in an interview with Bill Maher, saying, “I’ve been given a front-row ticket to watch this slow-motion train wreck … I try to stay as drunk for as long as possible while I’m here … In fact, I’m drinking now.â€
Yeah, that's proof right there because as everyone knows, alcoholics are always very upfront about their addiction.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 pmHow dare Ware try to speak the truth the American people like this. He MUST be brought down. We're only allowed to have the "official White House" version of events in Iraq, not the truth. Who cares what casualty numbers say, or what the Iraq people feel, the right-wing talking heads (safely in their US homes) are telling me Iraq is fine and Iraqis want us there. When have right-wing pundits ever been wrong about anything?
/end sarcasm
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:17 pmBy the way, while we're smearing people, Matt Drudge is a closeted, self-hating homosexual who is wrong on 99.9999% of his "Drudge exclusives". No amount of flashing sirens will change that.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:19 pmIf Rove can joke about ripping the heads off of little animals Ware can surely joke about drinking because of the Hell the Iraqi conflict is.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 pmFrankly, I'm surprised it took this long to start the rightwing smear on Ware.
He's a fantastic reporter, and I give his reports more weight than any others coming out of Iraq.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 pmbased on an anonymous, unnamed source
Oh why don't they just say Karl Rove. We all know who the #1 annonymous, unamed source is.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmDrudge=Republican Cultist
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pmI'd like to see a fist fight between that sissy-assed Matt Drudge and Michael Ware-----Drudge scratching and biting while Ware beats the shit out of him.
But at any rare, I heard Ware's response this morning and believe him over an anonymous, unnamed source . Ware has logged more time in the Iraq combat zone than Drudge, Hannity, Limpbaugh, and all the rest of his critics combined.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pmI wrote to CNN about Michael Ware and told them he was doing a great job. More power to Michael Ware.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:26 pmDrudge is sludge and a certified pathological liar and closeted Gay too.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:26 pmIf I were Ware and had to see what he sees every day, I'd get drunk and stay so. Given the soberness of his reporting, he is not.
"In fact, when I raised my hand to ask a question, the press conference abruptly ended."
Figures
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:27 pmWare further commented, "But since Drudge reported it, it must be somewhat true and therefore CNN will run with this story for the next three days."
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:27 pmWHUTTUP zOOEY!
The SLUDGE report??!!?
LYING?Unsubtantiated slander?
never.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:29 pmGive Drudge credit, he put this link up also to a report in which Ware slaps the whole thing down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGc5Vkh_1g
By the way, what's up with Lindsey Graham buying five rugs? Maybe he's redecorating...
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:30 pmWhen facts clash with emotion, the GOP tends to side with and endorse the emotional aspect of the story--especially when the facts are contrary to their ideology. They don't like what Matthew Dowd says about the Bush White House? "He's having problems at home." Don't like the bad news pouring out of Iraq from Michael Ware? "He's a drunk and unreliable." Those pesky facts have a way of giving the GOP one kick to the nuts after another.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmthey are so very desperate
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmHey whitey,
I'm getting ready to leave for school. How's it going?
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmThose pesky facts have a way of giving the GOP one kick to the nuts after another.
Comment by AboveTheClouds
Right. As it should be.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:33 pmWare doesn't care that his nose is on the side of his face so do you think he cares about this pissant Drudge?
Six Pack, that would be a quick fight.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:34 pmLet's see, who am I gonna believe, some guy that runs a sh!tty looking web site, that looks like it crawled outta 1992. (Hey Drudge, it's called web design, get some) or a guy that has been living in Iraq since day one?
I am gonna go with crappy web site guy.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 pmcan I give the GOP one swift kick to the nuts after another??I'll do it for free...
:)
Dandy like candy,Zooey, Dandy like candy...
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:36 pmIt's way past time for Drudge to be outed as Gay. Out Rush Limbaugh too.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:36 pmThis Michael Ware guy is so not a hero. He's only spent 4 years in Iraq trying to report events. How dare he say things aren't going great.
Just because he puts himself in harms way to speak the truth does not mean he should be treated with the same respect as Drudge, O'Reilly and Limbaugh.
If he does in fact have a drinking problem then he better get to the White House so he can replace Tony Snow PRONTO! Now there's a job that requires some serious inebriation.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:37 pmI would hope McCain and Graham will respond, but I'm not holding my breath.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:39 pmDuring a live press conference in Bagdad, Senators McCain and Graham were heckled by CNN reporter Michael Ware. An official at the press conference called Ware’s conduct “outrageous,
Drudge asserting through proxy (because that's really what this "unnamed source" is) that Ware's conduct was "outrageous" is black humorous in a silly sort of way, coming as it does from The Eggman.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:39 pm#15 – Perhaps Graham and his family are closeted Allah worshipers – can’t let that get out.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:41 pmDrudge, your credibility is in serious doubt. You had better produce evidence NOW, i.e., a videotape of Ware "laughing," or face serious declines in your readership.
The clock is ticking...Until then, I reserve judgment on the merits.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:42 pmSo instead of debating the serious topic of how bad things have become/are becoming in Baghdad and Iraq, we get the standard GOP yelling match. The debate will now become a "he said/he said" argument over whether a left leaning reported (since fact are known to have a liberal bias) said or did something to disrespect those in power. Because you known we haven't changed since the 60's, when we were a bunch of rude and unwashed hippies.
Meanwhile our soldiers and innocent Iraqis die daily.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:42 pmMeanwhile, it's noticable that the latest bizzare rants from Chimpy :
he's been hitting the sauce.
Let's talk about this GOP.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:46 pmBy the way, what’s up with Lindsey Graham buying five rugs? Maybe he’s redecorating…
Comment by Pinson
Just another rich Repuglican taking advantage of some desperate guy trying to put a meal on his table.
What gets me is that Graham has the GALL to brag about only paying $5 bucks total for them. Even in Iraq that is absolutely a basement price, and it just serves as an outrageous display of an American politican taking advantage of a poor merchant.
Lindsey Graham showed just what a classless, Repuglican butthole he really is.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:47 pmI'd rather have a bottle in front of me, (Ware),
than a Frontal Lobotomy'. (Drudge).
Boy, more lies from the Bushlickers in the ethernet this Monday a.m. than usual.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:49 pmW, life is like a sled...once you start going downhill, you go faster & faster & faster. Hitting bottom is the real bitch. Hang on tight, your ride is just about over.
As usual, when they can't debate the issues, they attack the messenger...
Drudge is a test for your sanity. How much you believe him equals how much Lithium you need...
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:50 pmHas anyone else been expecting Gonzo and/or other members of the justice department to admit that they have a drinking problem and checking in to rehab? That seems to be a normal repub response to getting caught.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:50 pm...“here you have two United States Senators in Bagdad (sic) giving first-hand reports while Ware is laughing and mocking their comments. I’ve never witnessed such disrespect."
Obviously Drudge has never paid any attention to the reception those two fools masquerading as Senators get at home.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 pmNext time a right wing idiot tries to reference the Drudge Report in a debate, I suggest laughing and heckling them.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 pmHey if Graham had given the merchant more than $5 for 5 rugs that guy would have taken those big profits and supported the terrorists - after all they ARE all in Iraq, aren't they?
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 pmLindsey Graham showed just what a classless, Repuglican butthole he really is.
Comment by Joe Sixpack
Oh, c'mon, Joe.
Don't be shy.
Tell us how you really feel.
:}
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 pmWhat gets me is that Graham has the GALL to brag about only paying $5 bucks total for them. Even in Iraq that is absolutely a basement price, and it just serves as an outrageous display of an American politican taking advantage of a poor merchant.
Another term from the Vietnam war era that's making a resurgence:
Ugly American.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:53 pmWare has abudantly more creditbility than Graham or Mccookoo. When's the last time Mccain met members of Al Queda in Iraq face to face?
If I had been in Iraq as long as Ware has and seen the things he has seen, I be drinking like crazy too. Drudge is a limp wristed little sally that should get his ass over to McCain's Iraqi funzones and do a little broadcasting.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:57 pmCheck out the above thread.
Snipers are back at the marketplace McCain visited yesterday.
That's progress. No snipers for 1 friggin' day.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:57 pmDid Drudge buy $5.00 rug from that peaceful street in Baghdad?!!
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmMichael Ware was attacked because his story on CNN contradicted McCain and senator's Graham stories about the situation in Iraq.
Time for 'swift boating'...
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:02 pmDrudge is an idiot. Really, truly... a bona-fide e-vegetable.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:02 pmWare's telling the truth; anything else is pure drivel & propaganda. We can see for ourselves that what Drudge is dredging up is nonsense.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:02 pm…“here you have two United States Senators in Bagdad (sic) giving first-hand reports while Ware is laughing and mocking their comments. I’ve never witnessed such disrespect.â€
No one but barbara cartland characters talk like that. But rethugs eat the shit up.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmI'm not sure I want to be here for the 2008 election, if this crap has begun already.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:07 pmGraham, Mc Cain regular carpet baggers , shamefull lies , shameless bragging. And we went to war for these a....holes
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:08 pmDrudge is pretty quick on that "smear the messenger" thing. I see Karl Rove is handling not using e-mail just fine.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 pmmaybe alcoholism's contagious, and ware's been hanging out with christopher hitchens
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 pmBaseless, cowardly attacks like this are the right wing's stock in trade. It is all they know.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:12 pmGraham got 5 rugs for 5 bucks, but those rugs cost McCain his chance for the White House.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:13 pmI'm tired of the bitching and moaning about Drudge. Why do we stop there? Why do people accept his constant slander, libel, lies etc etc? I'll tell you why. Because we've all been dumbed down and desensitized over time. That's why. It's time to sue the bastard and repeatedly....every time he does it.
LEGAL DEFINITION OF SLANDER:
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:14 pmslander n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease, or being unable to perform one's occupation are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious, and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much if not more than printed publications
Did they bring home a rug for Specter?
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:14 pmHis is wearing thin & needs a dye job badly.
Raw has a story with video refuting Drudge's claims:
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:19 pmhttp://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_reporter_slams_Drudges_charge_that_0402.html
Michael Ware is an "...an alchoholic" and Matthew Dowd "...is suffering from personal problems."
When they can't defend the message, attack the messenger. Will some day the media call this administration on their smearing of any and all critics?
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:20 pmDoes everybody see now?
We have been heralding this feature of the right wing for years now.
When ANYONE, and I do mean ANYONE, dares to challenge anything the right wing says, they do not attempt to discredit the challenge, but instead attack the challenger.
Does everybody see that?
Forget Michael Ware has been imbedded in Iraq since the beginning. Forget he has worked with the Military and the Iraqi's and has the BEST first hand real time information out there. Forget he has risked his life on a day in day out basis, for FOUR YEARS.
Forget all that.
Some pompous, arrogant little right wing prick says he's a bad guy now, because he won't say what they want him to say.
Forget discrediting his information.
Just discredit him.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:20 pmHey big thinkers, your own headline is more misleading than Drudge's whole story. Drudge repeated Ware's own words verbatim from his Bill Maher appearance.
The alluding to, or word alcoholic was never used, and the only mention of drinking or alcohol was the quote from Mike Ware himself.
How deceptively ignorant can you guys get?
Reading comprehension - Try it sometime.
Funny how progressives hate it when you confront them with their own words.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:30 pmGame, set and match!
Bush was right about one thing.
This is about good and evil.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:31 pm[...] turned out to be totally false. He isn’t running a correction, but Ware has responded, saying the following: Well, let’s bear in mind that this is a report that was leaked by an unnamed official of some [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:35 pmGive Lindsey Graham some credit. He is going to make a killing on ebay.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:38 pmGame, set and match!
Comment by 1986 — April 2, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
So you are suggesting Drudge did not state that Ware is a liberal activist?
Are you suggesting Drudge did not state that Ware "HECKLED" the senator, when all he did was raise his hand to ask a question?
Better buy a calculator if you think that is the match.
Bozo.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:41 pm#186 Game, set and match!
Sorry there buddy, you can't referee your own debate, which I might add, was pathetic. This reading comprehension you speak of? Try it some time. Did Drudge mention it was clearly a joke? No? Then he was using it to smear Ware. Simple as that. Oh, wait Drudge and pathetic right wing zombies like you wouldn't take something out of context!!!!
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pm186 sez:
Yes, but he repeated them out of context. Or can't you see that?
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:45 pm... puff puff ... mowing break... i forgot about that damned part of spring...
just want to say, i remember that interview with maher... it did bring a chuckle... i knew it was "tongue-in-cheek"...
however - if ANYone deserves to get sloshed over there, it's ware...
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:46 pm...
How deceptively ignorant can you guys get?
Reading comprehension - Try it sometime.
Funny how progressives hate it when you confront them with their own words.
Game, set and match!
Comment by 186'd — April 2, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Ummm, reading comprehension you say? Okay, from the thread directly:
Drudge’s “exclusive†also implies that Ware is an alcoholic, quoting an appearance last year on Bill Maher’s HBO comedy show:
Hmmm, implies? What doest that mean, exactly? Oh, well here's a good definition...
To express in a suggestive manner rather than as a direct statement.
So, you're overall argument of a misleading headline is now debunked!
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:49 pmGame Set Match indeed!
And since you're in a combative, but defeated mood, please explain the relevence of Ware's sarcastic statement of drinking every day to his non existent outrageous behaviour at a press conference?
Take your time in not responding!
Druge, in typical "pretend it never happend" fashion, has pulled the Michael Ware smear from his site.
I really need to start a site that simply lists all of the Drudge "exclusives" that turn out to be nothing more than fabricated lies...
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:49 pmThe alluding to, or word alcoholic was never used, [...]
Comment by 186 — April 2, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
The word was never used, but the implication was clear: quoting Ware as if he were serious was to grossly misrepresent what happened during his appearance in Maher's how.
and the only mention of drinking or alcohol was the quote from Mike Ware himself.
Yes, and he was joking. That much is quite obvious to anyone with half a brain.
How deceptively ignorant can you guys get?
Reading comprehension - Try it sometime.
This is really rich coming from you, the one with the biggest reading comprehension problem who is trying to spin away the obvious.
Game, set and match!
LOL -yeah, do your victory lap too! You won the "debate" in your own mind! Woo hoo!!
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:50 pm-this is what the dogs of war in d.c. accuse all those who are telling the TRUTH
"It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face, was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime "
- George Orwell's 1984, page 54
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:50 pmRawstory has the unedited video up, showing Drudge is a liar and showing evidence to support Ware.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_reporter_slams_Drudges_charge_that_0402.html
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:53 pmAre you really surprised that Drudge got something wrong? As a harvester/presenter of news, he does a fair job (he use to do much better)... but as an unbiased analyst? Fugedaboudit.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:03 pmWhen this war is done Michael Ware should SUIT Drudge for slander.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:04 pmGame, set and match!
Comment by 186
Delusional rethug thinking at it's finest. They really do live in an alternate reality.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:07 pmComment by 186 — April 2, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Why don't you watch the tape you ignorant ass wipe. I guess you don't get "tongue in cheek" humor. None of you Fox News idiots do.
And next time you type a transcription of the words why don't you type all the words that are said.
HI JAKE
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:10 pmMatt Drudge LIED.
He said Ware "Heckled" during the press conference.
But unfortunately for Matt Drudge the LIAR, we have the video tape of the press confernece and it shows Michael Ware DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are we learning yet troll number 186?
Drudge is a liar.
You are a liar.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:13 pmBush said this is about good and evil.
And he was right.
Good= Truth
Evil= Lie
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:15 pmGame, set and match!
Comment by 186
You and your bowling buddies should learn that Game, set and match is a tennis score.
And yes, I am suggesting you are an ignorant a**hole.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:15 pmMatt Who?
Sludge? Never heard of him.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:16 pmWell troll number 186?
What is your answer to that?
Drudge stated that Ware heckled.
The video shows Ware didn't say a word.
:|
No answer?
Ok. Very well then.
Game.
Set.
Match.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:19 pmComment by I WORFEUS — April 2, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
But, but, but Ware raised his hand to ask a question and McCain poopied his pants. Ware MUST have been drunk to think you can get an answer from a Republican.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:21 pmGee, I've never known Drudge to lie his ass off before. This is so unusual.
/sarc
Didn't McCain hire a bunch of Bush's dirty campaign pros to work on his campaign? Leave it to some Rove wannabes to spread some bullshit like that.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:31 pm[...] This morning on CNN, Ware said the attack was a fabrication: “I did not heckle the senator. Indeed, I didn’t say a word. I didn’t even ask a question. In fact, when I raised my hand to ask a question, the press conference abruptly ended.†Watch it. [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:33 pmThis is not on sludge's site today. It was on yesterday with his infamous
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:35 pm'developing" e.g. We'll make up more stuff as we go.
I feel a little filthy, after briefly visiting the sludge factory.
In BushCult-land, raising your hand to ask a question is heckling and can earn you the label "radical leftist extremist".
You are not supposed to question your betters, don't cha know?
/sarcasm off
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:37 pmIt's obvious that Rove et al. have decided to smear Ware because he consistently gives honest, powerful reportage from Iraq, all of which consistently contradicts the rose scenario purveyors. The iron is that they will get Ware more attention and more credibility by attacking him in such a foolish and dishonest way.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:41 pmIt’s way past time for Drudge to be outed as Gay.
David Brock (who's gay himself) already outed The Eggman in his book Blinded by the Right.
Not that the wingnut moral brigade cares, as long as Drudge serves its purposes.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:51 pmThis is not on sludge’s site today.
Comment by helenahandbasket — April 2, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
I was able to read it on his site.
Here is where it is.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:05 pmWare drinks to much and works for the Clinton News Network
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:07 pmLooks like piss-soaked troll 186 took a page out of the Drudge training manual.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:08 pmThe right wing trolls in here, not to mention a lot of CNN and MSNBC pundits, like Chris Matthews, like to point to Drudge as a fair and balanced voice.
Now we can put that misguided theory to rest.
Once and for all.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:11 pmWare drinks to much and works for the Clinton News Network
Comment by pauxatauny phil — April 2, 2007 @ 3:07 pm
Thank you Joe Goebbels.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:15 pmI think its about time to punch every right winger we see, right in their big, fat lying mouths.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:17 pmWare drinks to much and works for the Clinton News Network
Comment by phil a show — April 2, 2007 @ 3:07 pm
Glad you could take the time out of your very hectic schedule to show us again why you're the master of debate.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:29 pm(do your parents know you're using their computer again?)
I've always liked Ware: next to Amanpour, he's the only other objective voice CNN has.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:29 pmWhy are liberals so full of hate?
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:31 pmWhat Michael Ware has is a good memory, unlike the geriatric McCain.
Ware has heard some many lies about success in Iraq that he no longer falls for them and he has no problem pointing out McCain simply spouting propaganda.
Unlike McCain, who drudge also pointed out, on the same day, couldn't remember if Kerry asked him to be his VP candidate.
Why would anyone trust someone who's memory is that poor?
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:32 pm#92 Aww, phil. Typical wingnut. Always the victim.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:33 pmPhil,
Because we're sick of being lied to, and we're sick of people who dare to tell the truth being attacked or criticized (or, in some cases, their wives' CIA identities exposed).
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:37 pm"Yeah, that’s proof right there because as everyone knows, alcoholics are always very upfront about their addiction."
Comment by KRank
Depends if they are still lying to themselves about the problem their drinking is causing OR if they 12 Steppers....(Pssst....nothing to do with "Dancing with the Stars" or "Men in Drag")
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:43 pmWhy are liberals so full of hate?
Comment by phil — April 2, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
So you call carpet bombing, then invading a country, slaughtering their citizens like cattle, imprisoning them by the 10's of thousands, destroying their homes, buildings and infrastructure, and act of love?
In fact, don't bother to answer that, I am sure you do.
What I hate jackass, is evil.
And you are evil.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:44 pmwhen I read your story I went straight to the CNN comments link and send in glowing praise of Ware.
I also pointed out that being attacked by Drudge was further indication of how capable and effective a reporter he is.
Could I suggest you ask all your readers to contact CNN as well as the other blogs, on his behalf, he certainly deserves everyone's support.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:54 pmYou're right 186, "Game, set and match"
or how about "Mission Accomplished"? That seems to have worked out well....
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:03 pmAnd if anyone thinks its over the top to call this clown "evil", just remember this.
The greatest tool of evil, is the lie.
Always has been.
Always will be.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:07 pmWare is basically a puppet who says whatever his Al Qaeda stringers tell him to say.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:08 pmPatrick1
One troll scurries away with it's tail between it's legs and another shows up!
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:15 pmPROOF DRUDGE LIED ABOUT THE PRESS CONFERENCE:
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_reporter_slams_Drudges_charge_that_0402.html
See the video for yourself. Where did Ware "heckle" in any way???
Drudge and the right-wing blogs LIE, once again.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:20 pmFirst, note that it took Michael Ware a bit of time to actually deny he heckled McCain.
Second, note that Ware spends the first part of the interview accusing McCain and others of repackaging old news as new. McCain said he has never been able to go out into the city as he has been now. Michael Ware says that generals do it all the time, so this is not news, but propaganda according to Ware.
Here's the funny thing though, Ware said the things McCain mentioned as showing signs of progress are "no way a sign of the real progress of the surge, which the Senators should be talking about." And his vocal emphasis was on the words "which" and "should." Go see and listen for yourself. Start at 1:20 mark.
What this tells me is that Michael Ware thinks there were other signs that the surge is working and McCain and the administration *should* focus on those signs.
My question is, has Michael Ware? Every report I've seen from him in Iraq has been to emphasize what a disaster the war has been and is. He is not focusing on the signs of progress either. Instead, he's using his unique outlet to the world to convey terrorist propaganda films of the terrorists killing American troops while Ware willingly provides commentary.
Why is Ware still at CNN?
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:23 pmLooks like 186 is just another pathetic troll making a cowardly hit, then running away with its tail between its legs.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:27 pm#104 You pathetic plagiarizer. You just took that from a post at Red State and copied it here. Pathetic little cypher.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:27 pmhttp://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_reporter_slams_Drudges_charge_that_0402.html
Patrick1, open that link. It has video of the actual press conference in question. Please, open the link and see for yourself what happened. How is Ware "heckling" anyone? He doesn't even get to speak or ask a single question. He doesn't do anything wrong at all. This entire effort to smear him is just disgusting.
In case you didn't know, about a week ago, Michael Ware was on the air saying Democrats were "aiding the enemies of America" by putting together a plan to withdraw in a year, so he's obviously not a partisan Democrat, or even in favor of withdrawal from Iraq, despite your efforts to paint him as some kind of anti-war leftist.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703090006
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:29 pmComment by Patrick1
the video footage seen linked by me and a few others, shows it happened just as Ware stated.
Guess that make both you and Drudge liars.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:30 pmBut we already knew those facts too, patrick dumbass
And it is wrong how?
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:30 pmWhat this tells me is that Michael Ware thinks there were other signs that the surge is working and McCain and the administration *should* focus on those signs.
Who the f*ck are you trying to kid, Patrick1? What a joke. Why don't you tell us about some crazy a*s interpretation of Revelations, while you're at it.
Sheesh, talk about inventing reality out of nothing. You should audition to replace Krauthammer when he finally blows one fuse too many.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:30 pm#106 Way to go, JPark.
Hard takedown, Patrick1. What are you going to do about it?
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:31 pmClinton smeared Michael Ware as an alcoholic activist too.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:31 pmWhy is Ware still at CNN?
Comment by Patrick1inch — April 2, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
I've read Patrick's posts. Actually, I've tried to read and comprehend them. As JPark has pointed out, that was no Patrick post on #104. (But he does get brownie points for figuring out the cutty and pasty thing on his puter screen)
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:33 pmSTFU, Jake. You are a loser. Go crawl back into your slimy hole.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:33 pmWare is basically a puppet who says whatever his Al Qaeda stringers tell him to say.
Comment by Pricktrick1 — April 2, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Like I said folks.
Right in their big, fat, mouths.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:34 pmClinton smeared Michael Ware as an alcoholic activist too.
Comment by Jake
Another liar pops up his ugly head.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:34 pm#111 If his post is any longer than a sentence, you know it isn't him. Quick Google...busted.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:34 pmMichael Ware = the right's new "Jamil Hussein".
Pretend one single messenger has an agenda, or is lying, and you can use that to discredit ALL reporting out of Iraq.
This is just the latest effort by the right to hide their heads in the sand.
They're not even logical in their delusions. If everything in Iraq is fine, why did we even need a "surge" in the first place? According to the right-wingnuts like powerline, or michelle malkin, etc., all these negative stories are just lies, and Iraq is going really well. Why did we need the "surge" of more troops then?
If you can stroll down the streets of Baghdad without protection, THEN WHY ARE WE STILL THERE???? That sounds like we've stabilized the country, so can begin withdrawing, right??? Mission accomplished, right?
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:35 pmI love it when a pathetic little troll sticks its little head out of its little shell and has it promptly chopped off. How about, 186? How about it Patrick1? How do you losers feel about that?
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:36 pmClinton smeared Michael Ware as an alcoholic activist too.
Comment by Jake(NoDebate) — April 2, 2007 @ 4:31 pm
And Jake stated that a woman should just lay back and enjoy her rape!
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:37 pmKinda tells you something about Jake as a NeoCon, eh?
It all makes me wonder why losers like Jake and Patrick1 show up day after day, peddling the same ridiculous lies no matter what.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:38 pmWell, since about 70 percent of the country agrees with us, and 30 percent of the country agree with dumb and dumber here, all they are doing by smearing this man, is making people who didn't really notice him before, like him.
:O
oops
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:40 pmJake and Patrick, I wish you guys luck trying to explain ten years from now why you continued to support the Bush regime long after it was discredited and destined for nearly universal condemnation.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:43 pmClinton smeared Michael Ware as an alcoholic activist too.
Comment by Jake
Prove it, asswipe.
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:44 pmhas ware gone on the cable news talk shows drunk like christopher hitchens? i didn't think so. if the beltway was on old kung fu movie, hitchens would play "the drunken master."
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:51 pm[...] AMERICAblog, Think Progress, Crooks and Liars, The Daily Whim, Power Line, Right Wing Nut House, News Bloggers Blog, Cliff [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:55 pmWhiteHouse's favorite DrudgeReport Headlines:
http://www.whitehouse.org/ask/mdrudge.asp
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:18 pmAm I the only one who noticed that the date of this report is April Fool's Day?
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:39 pmDrudge needs to get his pap smear.
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:49 pmJust imagine the fight Ware was in to have his nose end up sideways like that. I'd like to see Drudge in a fight with Ware.
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:56 pmWhy are liberals so full of hate?
Comment by phil — April 2, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
Because neocons exist.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:00 pm#134
Well at least you admit it.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:03 pmWell at least you admit it.
Comment by Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
We hate lies.
We hate deception.
We hate corruption.
We hate murderers.
:|
Which one of those did you have a problem with again?
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pm#135 I am rubber and you are glue...I know you are but what am I. Hold on, let me get my 4th grader and see what other gems we can come up with.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pmI know I am but what are you?
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:15 pm#136
I pitty you for hating so much.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:26 pmTracy has pitty, what's that, some new underarm infection?
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 pm#136 I pitty you for hating so much.
Comment by Tracy
Wow, completely missed the point, didn't you?
I hate bad spelling: P-I-T-Y
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:38 pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ware
...sniper videos.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:39 pmtracy: I "pity" you for not taking more ESL classes.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:39 pm#136
I pitty you for hating so much.
Comment by Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 6:26 pm
Really?
So lets see, what things did I say I hated in the post you are criticizing?
Hmmm..
Lies. Deception. Corruption. Murderers.
So, if you pity me for hating these things, then that means you do not hate these things.
:|
So there you have it people. A right wing troll, Tracy, admits what he embraces.
Lies. Deception. Corruption and Murder.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:40 pmIf this was Drudge's idea of an April Fool joke...It was a very BAD one.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:41 pmIt was as understandable untill the one about hating murderers. It's different than the previous three I WORFEUS posted.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:41 pmWhy are liberals so full of hate?
Comment by phil
Sorry, but I don't exactly see you neoCON trolls spreading love here. And am I to believe that neoCON pundits like Ann-thrax Coulter, Rush Limpballs, Bill O'Lielly, Michelle Malice, etc. are making big bucks by spreading words of tolerance towards those with different political sentiments?
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:43 pmLook in the mirror before asking such hypocritical questions.
#143
A typo and you expect me to know what ESL classes are? You however seem to know what they are.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:44 pm#144
"So, if you pity me for hating these things, then that means you do not hate these things."
Again, understandable and in agreement for all of those except hating murderers. You were OK untill you put a noun in.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:47 pmTracy, relax, its just a bunch of rabid libs attacking you.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:47 pmIt was as understandable untill the one about hating murderers. It’s different than the previous three I WORFEUS posted.
Comment by Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
I hate murderers.
But I am sure you love them.
You and Jesus.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:49 pm"Look in the mirror before asking such hypocritical questions."
Just because I might listen to those you mentioned doesn't mean I hate others here or otherwise. I disagree very much, but I don't hate anyone.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:49 pm#151
Again...I pity you for hating murders.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:51 pmJust because I might listen to those you mentioned doesn’t mean I hate others here or otherwise. I disagree very much, but I don’t hate anyone.
Comment by DICK Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 6:49 pm
Who cares?
Who cares what you "feel".
Its what you do that counts.
Hundreds of thousands of people have died because of your "opinion".
F#$k your opinion, and you along with it.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:52 pm#150
It's OK, they are here for my entertainment.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:53 pmTracy, relax, its just a bunch of rabid libs attacking you.
Comment by ForTruth — April 2, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Yea, imagine that.
A right wing blog troll who starts trouble at every turn, being "attacked" in a liberal blog.
Who'dve thunk it?
:|
You two should get a room.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:54 pm#151
Again…I pity you for hating murders.
Comment by Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
And I pity you for supporting them.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pm#152
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pmThe advice was directed at phil, who originally, posted the question. If you are taking it personally, maybe I ought to paraphrase the Bard: Methinks the troll doth protest too much."
#154
LOL!...and I am one inch from from you LITTLE face.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pmRepublican thought is not really about ideology.It is a MENTAL ILLNESS that is taking this great country down the drain.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 pmDRUDGE = SLUDGE
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pmDRUDGE = CUA (Completely Useless American)!!
#159 Get help.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pmNo one cares that Michael Ware put a al Qaeda propoganda video on CNN?
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:04 pm#154
LOL!…and I am one inch from from you LITTLE face.
Comment by DICK Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
I'm sorry, was there supposed to be a sentence in there?
Don't try to talk tough here skippy, or I'll pop those zits on that pimpled pigskin you call a face.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:06 pmNo one cares that Michael Ware put a al Qaeda propoganda video on CNN?
Comment by Tracy — April 2, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
So has the White House numbskull.
We see Al Qaeda propaganda videos that were given to CNN by the DOJ.
So whats your point?
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:13 pmNope i aint gettin a room with her.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:24 pmSorry if I missed it, but has CNN denounced the sliming? Should that have two m's?
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:48 pmJohn McCain should take HIS family, Matt Drudgery's family, and T'rashy Tacy's family...
...to Baghdad on vacation and a shopping spree...
...WITHOUT the security...
...take Bushiva,L'il Dick,Rove,and ALLof their right wing TREASONOUS hordes...
...and let them ALL resettle Tal Afar and the Baghdad suburbs...
...no good scummy a*s racist mass murdering pigs....
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:17 pmim surprised ware has time between cocktails to air terror propaganda tapes of our troops being snipered. go on michael, tell us more about the war with the lowest number of casualites in our nations history....
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:24 pmwilson : 117,000 casualties (germany never attacked us)
roosevelt: 458,000 casualties (germany never attacked us again)
truman: 55,000 casualties (korea never attacked us)
johnson: 58,000 casualties (vietnam never attacked us)
bush: 3,200 casualties (iraq never attacked us)
yet you cooks admire your great liberal mass murderers, and spew lies and hatred about the man fighting to keep you alive every day? too much kool aid at your pot parties kiddies.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:30 pmComment by big #170
You dumb a*s trick...
...you're being bankrupted by a mass murdering TREASONOUS, criminal cabal...
...and you're so racist and AFRAID that the Bushite-Halliburton- Fox Propaganda Corporation...
...have your stupid a*s who*ing for them to bankrupt your children, grandchildren and GREAT-grandchildren...
...while your POOR silly a*s is here in desperate, destroyed DUHmerica...
...your gods Bushiva,L'il dick and company...
...will be laughing at your starving redneck a*s in Dubai...
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:49 pm[...] Smears CNNs Michael Ware As Alcoholic Activist, Ware Responds (w/vid Drudge Smears CNNs Michael Ware As Alcoholic Activist, Ware Responds (w/vid Video of Michael Ware responding to a report on DrudgeReport that he “heckled” Sen. [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:04 pmwilson : 117,000 casualties (germany never attacked us)
roosevelt: 458,000 casualties (germany never attacked us again)
truman: 55,000 casualties (korea never attacked us)
johnson: 58,000 casualties (vietnam never attacked us)
bush: 3,200 casualties (iraq never attacked us)
Comment by big bozo — April 2, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
Lets see, Germany was invading France, Poland, Beligium and bombing the crap out of our closest ally, England.
North Korea was invading the ROK (Republic of South Korea)
In Viet Nam the DRV and the Viet Cong had attacked the RVN and were trying to spread communisim throughout southeast Asia.
Iraq was trapped by us on all sides and currently doing nothing when we bombed the shit out of them.
Jackass.
Get a job.
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:09 pm#4 Brian--Thanks for your info on Drudge---I had long suspected him of being a closet homosexual like CHIMPya, Rove, Cheney, most all of Bushland Uber Allies and a lot of repugnant-repugs in congress----STRANGE how these gay ganders LIKE TO REVILE gays isn't it---THEY HAVE A LOT OF EMOTIONAL AND SANITY ISSUES COMPOUNDED BY THEIR OWN SELF-LOATHING----in Drudge's case, his SWIFT-BOAT-SMEARS are an extension of his homosexual wish to DEVOUR EXCREMENT AND SPREAD IT ALL OVER HIS OWN BODY AND ONTO OTHERS IN A COPROPHAGIC DESIRE TO SMEAR HIMSELF AND OTHERS LIKE MICHAEL WARE
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:30 pmI WORFEUS
iraq had killed 400,000 of its own people, 750,000 of its neighbors, invaded two of hits neighbors, launched missles at our ally israel, paid money to families of suicide bombers, bribed half the security council in the oil for food scandal, violated 14 u.n. resolutions.....yea swell place....
using the same liberal view that iraq and saddam were "contained", then why not apply that logic to the latest liberal cause in darfur. darfur is part of sudan, sudan is contained, they are not doing anything to us, so why stop them from killing their own people? is a life in darfur more important then a life in iraq? i guess in the democrat primary it is.
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:30 pmiraq had killed 400,000 of its own people, 750,000 of its neighbors, invaded two of hits neighbors, launched missles at our ally israel, paid money to families of suicide bombers, bribed half the security council in the oil for food scandal, violated 14 u.n. resolutions…..yea swell place….
Comment by big brownshirt — April 2, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
You're an idiot.
Iraq was in a box.
If you remember 2003 you'll remember that Saddam had to sleep in a different house EVERY NIGHT.
Moron.
The CIA said they were literally down to only about 6 hours behind him, and they were getting closer.
You're a fool.
We all know Saddam was a bad guy. And the CIA was going to get him sooner or later. But you idiots thought he was worth more than 3000 Americans dead, 20,000 wounded, half a million dead Iraqi's and millions wounded and displaced, 700 Billion dollars, and the current ethnic cleansing that is taking place while we watch.
No one is arguing Saddam was a bad man. But there are LOTS of bad men in the world.
Too bad we have to number our own President among them.
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:44 pmAnd Saddam wasn't currently waging war on his own people you grade school dropout.
He was too busy running for his life.
If you had half a brain you'd remember that from 2002.
But you don't.
Saddam was a dead man. Period. It was just a matter of time.
But you jackasses. You cost the US thousands of our young men and womens lives, 700 billion dollars and counting, slaughtered and helped to be slaughtered half a million people or more, destroyed an ancient countries history and destroyed its infrastructure all to get one man.
And worse, you cost us our international credibility and respect.
We are most hated now.
So listen up. You can debate the morals of your neocon facist bullshit till you're blue in the face, but at the end of the day, its you're utter incompetence that has done you in.
Or did you think you still had a prayer of being taken seriously any time in the next decade or two?
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:51 pmIn the words of Forrest Gump, "stupid is as stupid does".
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:56 pmthis war had to be fought on some front.....better the oil rich, educationaly and militarily advanced iraq then the resourceless afghanistan. changing iraq, due to is wealth and position in the region, can influence the entire middle east forever more. this is the chance to either wipe of extremision and bring democracy, or to feed extremisism by running away like cowards.
was korea worth 55,000 soliders? was vietnam worth 58,0000? ww2 worth half a million? this nation should be willing to sacrafice as much as our grandparents did during ww2, seeing that islamic extremism is far more dangerous then hitler ever was. maybe killing half a million americans is ok as long as your a democrat....funny, vietnam wasnt a problem until it was passed from a democrat off on a republican....i hope bush passes this off to hillary...what goes around comes around
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:56 pmour president is one of the strongest leaders we have ever had. his predecessor was the soft, poll crazed, ego maniac that gifted rapped 9/11 for osama. ignoring CIA suggestions to capture or kill bin laden, refusing to respond to the 93 bombing, black hawk down, 2 embassy attacks, kobar towers, uss cole......all the while doing nothing but fiddling interns while 17 al queda trained in flight schools right under his nose. clinton couldnt make a tough decision, not if it dared effect his polls. a real leader can make unpopular decisions without worrying about his legacy, doing what is right isnt always doing what is popular. american people want to just get out...but the american public are not military experts...why would you take military advice from a waitress in boise or an actor in hollyweird or a steel worker in pittsburgh....maybe the liberals should all patraeus to do his work and put a sock in it...they are watching a modern churchill command a modern eisenhower...and they need to stop it...because american deaths in iraq is electoral gold for the left.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:00 amthis war had to be fought on some front…..better the oil rich, educationaly and militarily advanced iraq then the resourceless afghanistan.
Comment by big mess — April 2, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
And there you have it folks.
In the face of unrelenting logic, the neocon cannot help himself, and in his desire to see his actions as right and moral, he finally admits, albeit unwittingly, the real truth.
The real reason why we went to Iraq.
Straight from the horse's ass.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:03 amwas vietnam worth 58,0000?
Comment by big body-count — April 2, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
No.
What good did it accomplish?
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:07 amthis nation should be willing to sacrafice as much as our grandparents did during ww2
Comment by big blowhard — April 2, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
We'd be willing to sacrifice you.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:08 amiraq had killed 400,000 of its own people, 750,000 of its neighbors,
really? is that why a puppet court just put the country's leader to death for a mere 148 deaths? why werent the entirety of saddams crimes put on display for everyone to see?.. oh wait.. we helped him commit the majority of them... and wernt those 750,000 foreigners he allegedly killed IRANIANS? dont we dislike them? arent we talking about bombing them ourselves? didnt we help saddam bomb them? oh.. and how many Iraqis have been killed because of United States actions? should we use the same logic on ourselves that your using to demonize the former iraqi government?
invaded two of hits neighbors
hahahha. dude.. we HELPED and ENCOURAGED THEM to attack Iran... and you're now using that as justification for our invasion? its like giving someone a gun, knowing what they are going to do with it, then condemning them when they do... HIPOCRITE
launched missles at our ally israel so does lebanon..should we bomb them too? hezbollah was launching the missles and it was part of the lebanese government.. so they deserve some airstrikes from us too, right?
and I'm sorry, I dont recall exactly what Israel does for us in return for us fighting thier wars for them..... can you remind me again?
paid money to families of suicide bombers the saudis have frikking telethons for them, implicitly sanctioned by thier government....should we bomb them too...? besides... I beleive, im not sure, but I think what saddam was doing was merely paying people who had been victims of israels "collective punishment" policy...(ie. someone related to you did something bad to us, so we'll destroy your stuff)
bribed half the security council in the oil for food scandal
care to discuss the bribery and corruption convictions in the Us government for war profiteering, etc etc.. Ney, Abrahoff...etc etc.. or does your self righteous indignation extend only to them foreigner types?
violated 14 u.n. resolutions
so your saying we should bomb every country who violates UN resolutions?
and re: your darfur argument.... I dont know much about darfur, but from what I understand , there is actual ongoing slaughter there now, which people are saying should be stopped.. there was actually almost no ongoing slaughter in iraq when we invaded, in fact, saddam had mellowed out somewhat from the height of his brutality, which was, ironically, when we were allies with him...
Big the inbred redneck lives in the united states of amnesia
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:09 amthis war had to be fought on some front…..better the oil rich, educationaly and militarily advanced iraq then the resourceless afghanistan. changing iraq, due to is wealth and position in the region,
Comment by big — April 3, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Pay close attention here folks.
For those 75 percent of you who call yourselves Christian, this is a prime manifestation of the oldest sin in the world.
Murder to get gain.
Cain did it to his brother Abel, and man has been doing it ever since.
Murdering to posses their brother wealth. Murdering to posses their brothers land.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:11 amour president is one of the strongest leaders we have ever had.
Comment by big buttkisser — April 3, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Who cares about his bench press?
:|
We need someone smart.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:15 amislamic extremism is far more dangerous then hitler ever was.
Comment by big sissy — April 2, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
Why are republicans all such cowards?
You guys are soooooo afraid of getting hurt, by a bunch of guys from a country that doesn't even have a navy or even a long range air force.
What a bunch of puss's.
You guys need to quit watching 24.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:18 amJust because you call it war when you bomb and invade a country, killing hundreds of thousands of its citizens, doesn't mean God will.
An Iraqi baby, is of no less worth in the eyes of God, then an American baby.
Even though it clearly is in yours.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:23 amclinton couldnt make a tough decision, not if it dared effect his polls
Comment by big baby — April 3, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Clinton didn't sit there on 911 like with a deer in the headlights stare after leaning his country was under attack.
And when CLintons terrorist struck, and blew a whole in the Oklahoma City Federal bldg the size of Montana, Clinton GOT HIS TERRORIST.
Wheres Osama Bin Laden again????
Like I said slappy, at the end of the day, its your utter incompetence that will do you in.
:|
Lets just hope it doesn't do us all in.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:33 amthe only ignorance here is the liberal idolitors who ignore how vital oil is. "we just went for oil" oil keeps everything spinning, without it our, the worlds economy crashes, goods cant be shipped, including food and medicine, so along with the economic disaster that would ensue, famine, plague, worldwide pandemic would take place. a chance to spring up democracy, to create an arab democracy in the heart of the middle east, an oil rich ally that shares our system of goverment, and alternative oil source that would finally allow us to break free of the saudi strangle hold on this country. but the shortsited socialist mind that makes up the left in this country cant think more then 5 minutes in front of his own face. 100s of thousands have died, to save the millions that would if we had not acted. the liberal approach, the carter doctrine of appeasement and surrender has failed this country over and over. the middle east needs to be reformed or destroyed, it cannot carry on like this any more. time to snap back to reality, the only way to get alternative fuel is to use iraqi oil instead of saudi oil. in the process, finally pressing the country most responsible for 9/11. that, or the liberals can pony up the tens of trillions that it would take to reshape and remake our entire society to exist without oil. didnt think so.
so what if it was for oil, you really think FDR didnt know pearl harbor was coming? you really think he didnt send hundreds of thousands to die in europe to get us out of a depression?
but it wasnt just for oil, the entire region was chaotic due to hussein. without hussein, 9/11 never happens. bin laden never preached against american until the first gulf war, because the saudis rejected his offer to protect them from hussein. the saudis requested our help, and it is this moment that bin laden turns on us, the very people the indeed helped him defeat the soviets. without husseins chaotic grip on the region, bin laden would never had turned his attention to us. husseins invasion of kuwait was the spark that ignited the whole thing, combined with clinton's refusal to take any action at all to stop al queada despite repeated attacks against our country. no hussein, no 9/11. who knows what his next chaotic decision would have brought us,im glad we dont have to find out.
plus, iran, and all its problems fall squarely on carter, had he done what was right and sent marines and special forces to aid the shah, hamas, hizzbollah, and the mullahs drive for nuclear weapons would not have happened. without carter and clinton, the middle east would be closer then ever to democracy and peace, but their selfishness and gutlessness led us to this point.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:37 ammaybe killing half a million americans is ok as long as your(SIC) a democrat….funny, vietnam wasnt a problem until it was passed from a democrat off on a republican
(re:Clinton) ego maniac that gifted rapped(sic) 9/11 for osama. ignoring CIA suggestions to capture or kill bin laden, refusing to respond to the 93 bombing, black hawk down, 2 embassy attacks, kobar towers, uss cole……all the while doing nothing but fiddling interns while 17 al queda(SIC) trained in flight schools right under his nose.
Spin by big
Sorry, big-baby, but there were plenty of anti-Vietnam War demonstrations going on while Johnson (D) was president.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:39 amAs for more recent history, 9/11 occurred on Bush's watch--eight months into his presidency. The first attack on the World Trade Center occurred much earlier into Clinton's presidency, yet I haven't heard Democrats/liberals putting the blame on Bush Sr. the way you neoCONs love to blame everything on Clinton. Moreover, Clinton managed to capture and imprison some of the perpetrators.
Meanwhile, there is more than ample documentation that the Bush White House was presented with reports like "Bin Laden determined to attack on US soil" and FBI reports about the uncanny number of Arabs enrolling in US flight schools (this, too, happened under Bush Jr.--not Clinton). These were all ignored so that your oh-so-strong president could take his five-week vacation. And some 5 1/2 years after 9/11, Bin Laden still hasn't been found "dead or alive," has he?
his terrorist? osama is clintons terrorist, and he got passed off on bush because clinton didnt have the stomach to even attempt to go after him, well not until he got caught plugging the intern.
clinton did nothing in response to the embassies bombings, black hawk down, the uss cole.
he did get usef, snatching him from a safe house in pakistan. but, against the wishes of the FBI and CIA, he refused to take down the whole safe house, including the man who lived in the room next door to usef, his god dammed uncle kahlid shaek mohammed. clinton could have had him in 95. he could have had bin laden when sudan OFFERED HIM UP ON A SILVER PLATTER. but not for slick willy, not if its gonna mean bad poll numbers, no sir.
now the left want us to go back to that leadership, what a joke.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:42 am“Bin Laden determined to attack on US soilâ€
no clinton only got the report "BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO HIGHJACK AIRPLANES AND OTHER ATTACKS" i guess it got stuffed into monica like a cheap cigar.
to get bin laden we would have to invade pakistan, and knowing the pathetic left, they would cide with bin laden and his pakistani aids' civil liberties before they side with bush.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:46 amhis terrorist? osama is clintons terrorist, and he got passed off on bush .
Comment by big bumpkin — April 3, 2007 @ 12:42 am
Osama didn't blow up the Oklahoma city bldg you inbred hack. Didn't your momma teach you that in the home school classes?
A guy named Tim McVeigh did.
And Clinton GOT him.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:46 amOklahoma City was Clintons 911, and he didn't freak out and invade Bolivia.
Clinton got his mastermind terrorist for his 911.
Where's Bin Laden again?
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:48 amAnd by the way Einstein, Bin Laden did try to blow up the World Trade Centers on Clintons watch, and Clintons people STOPPED IT.
So Osama waited till Bush was in the White House, and then he struck.
And Osama is still laughing at us, while you idiots make excuses.
What a pathetic bunch of bumbling incompetent losers.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:50 amBin Laden attacks us, and you guys respond by invading Iraq.
Brilliant.
Just brilliant.
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:58 am[...] I got nothing politically to add tonight April 2, 2007 Posted by Andre the Defiant in Uncategorized. trackback Despite maybe poking a little fun at that nitwit Drudge… [...]
April 3rd, 2007 at 1:30 am[...] Via ThinkProgress [...]
April 3rd, 2007 at 1:56 amShorter big. Whaaaaa!!! I can't debate my way out of a wet paper bag!!!!!
April 3rd, 2007 at 2:08 am[...] He passed on the worst rumors that Rush and the gang pick up and pass on as fact. This time he smears Michael Ware a reporter for CNN who stated that McCain was flat wrong when McCain stated that Baghdad was so [...]
April 3rd, 2007 at 2:17 amno clinton only got the report “BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO HIGHJACK AIRPLANES AND OTHER ATTACKSâ€
knowing the pathetic left, they would cide(SIC) with bin laden
spin by big-baby
Condi even admitted to the 9/11 Commission that the Bush Jr. WH received the "Bin Laden Determined to Attack on US Soil" report--not that it moved them to pay attention and cut short their summer vacations.
April 3rd, 2007 at 2:30 amBYW, "cide" indicates a person or thing that kills; so I guess you are saying that what you call the "pathetic left" would actually kill Bin Laden. Or do you mean "drinking cider?"
liberal logic in motion.....clinton(the fbi actually with no effort by bj clinton) arrested mcveigh, who is a citizen on the u.s. and hid...in the u.s., and that absolves him for failing to arrest khalid shaek mohammed for the first wtc bombing, he failed to arrest anyone involved in the embassy bombings or kobar towers attack, he failed to stop the al queada trained somlians from draggin our troops through the streets, he failed to arrest bin laden after he blew up a u.s. warship.......he avoided 12 actionable cases in which the CIA begged him to take action and order the strike on bin laden, and he only shot once, after tipping off bin ladens friends in pakistan, all because he was involved in impeachment and needed a distraction.....after the uss cole attack...the CIA has zero actionable scernarios against bin laden, no hard intel, zip. bill just didnt realize that 17 arabs taking flight classes, without taking classes on how to take off or land.....nope wasnt suspicious at all. clinton is as guilty as mohammed atta for 9/11.
"Bin Laden attacks us, and you guys respond by invading Iraq."
you guys? you mean the overwhelming number of democrats who voted for the war? you mean bj clinton who created the iraqi liberation act of 1998 making it u.s. policiy to change the regime of hussein because of his threat to the nation? who is "you guys"? edwards? kerry? hillary?
no, dems just do what they always do, voted for something because the polls told them to, and now the polls have changed, time to bail. pathetic. the casualties of this war equal any 2 weeks of democrat FDR's mass murder of americans(as defined by liberal logic)
hey maybe if hillary wins, and pakistan offers to extradite bin laden to the u.s., she can turn them down just like her pervert husband did with sudan. yayyyyy!!!!
17 al queada training to fly planes here on bill clintons watch, at the same exact time he has a report titled "BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO HIGHJACK AIRPLANES" on his desk....and ol BJ clinton does......nothing.
in slick willys own words " i tried...and i failed".......and the left wants his failure family back in power...whether either them or the former muslim barrack hussein...ah gotta love those wacky libs...cant beat the muslims, might as well make one the president.
April 3rd, 2007 at 2:45 amif this war is so wrong, and the left believes it so strongly....then why couldnt your pathetic speaker take a straight up or down vote for a withdraw measure in the spending bill? why did it take millions for peanut storage, and spinach farmers to get people to vote for this if its such a moral issue, the sole issue they got elected on. you mean after years of treasonist attacks by the left on our president, undermining our mission and our troops, they couldnt simply have a straight up or down vote? they couldnt vote on morals alone? they needed money for peanuts before deciding the fate of 140,000 troops in harms way? pathetic......liberals are the greatest weapon bin laden could ever had asked for....
senator obama admitted the left was just playing chicken with our troops' funding...saying after the veto they will pass it without the withdraw measure....charlie rangle said on meet the press they didnt to buy the few votes needed for it to pass because without the earmarks they didnt have the votes.....you know, the earmarks speaker skankbag insisted on abolishing during one of her ethics tirades.....dems are a joke
April 3rd, 2007 at 2:58 amSorry, big baby, but your beloved Dumbya hasn't even tried.
April 3rd, 2007 at 2:59 amPs. big-baby,
April 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 amSince you are obviously so hung up about Clinton's dalliance with Monica, could you please tell us what gay hooker Jeff Gannon/James Guckert was doing at the WH several times (while advertising his services on the Internet at $200/hr) even before the Talon News website from which he found employment was even set up?
#164
Any time you are ready little man. I will give you the same chance I gave a little wimp named Ryan Neat who use to post here.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:35 am#165
"We see Al Qaeda propaganda videos that were given to CNN by the DOJ."
Like?
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:36 am#189
You don't seem to realize that Bush got the man responsible for 9/11...and it wasn't bin Laden.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:45 am#191
"And some 5 1/2 years after 9/11, Bin Laden still hasn’t been found “dead or alive,†has he?"
The man responsible for 9/11 is in jail. Why are you so fixed on bin Laden? BTW the ones responsible for attacking the USS Cole are desert dust thanks to Bush taking care of something Clinton failed to do.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/11/04/yemen.blast/index.html
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 am#194
Oooo a domestic terrorist that didn't have the brains to leave the country after the attack. Tim McVeigh was no hard catch.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 am#195
bin Laden wasn't the mastermind of 9/11!! LOL!
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:54 am#196
"And by the way Einstein, Bin Laden did try to blow up the World Trade Centers on Clintons watch, and Clintons people STOPPED IT."
No bomb exploded in the bottom on the WTC in 1993?
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:55 am#204
She had to buy the votes. With all that pork it never would have passed.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:58 am#205
He has tried far more than Clinton did.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:00 amHe did?! Oh, don't hold us in suspense .... do tell! Who was he? Elmo? No, wait ... that dude in Guantanamo who confessed to shooting down Amelia Earhart's plane? Common, spill the beans!
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:20 pmJack Abramoff?! Tom Delay?! No wait, he is on the way to jail, not in it ... wait, wait .... "Duke" Cunningham?! So that's what that boat was for? Smuggling of Jihadis past the border security?
Oh the suspense is killing me!
April 3rd, 2007 at 12:25 pm#216 and #217
Please try and keep up.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/14/guantanamo.mohammed/index.html
April 3rd, 2007 at 1:03 pmOh so it was that dude in Guantanamo!
It's sooo cool.
I hear that they are only a few waterboardings away from getting him to confess to where he put that Jimmy Hoffa guy too!
But the list of his crimes is long. There is evidence that he was involved it some set-to in Russia one September going by an obscure Islamic handle of "Lenin".
Following which he admitted to messing up Germany in a clever, insidious effort to take over the world in the name of Allah (although he managed to convince the Germans to call Allah "Gott", which they proudly displayed on their belt-buckles). That is why all these learned, distinguished conservative scholars so accurately call that whole Al-Queda thing "Islamofascist". What insight! And that was even before Khalid confessed to all of his dastardly plots in Berlin.
And then there was his operation in Vietnam. What a nasty bit of work that was. I hope they waterboard him until he coughs up all of the locations of all those MIA Americans he personally backstabbed there.
And don't even get me started with the Kennedy thing. Like we didn't always know that Khalid was the one on the "grassy null". But I am sure a few hot irons under his nails will get us all the details of how he and that fall guy Oswald planned such underhanded assasination.
In short: Great Work, oh Great Conservative Warriors of Global War on Terra. Great indeed.
For your next trick I recommend getting the Holy Insquisition reinstated. Those guys really knew how to conduct thorough investigations and how to get results from all those heathen heretics and witches!
April 3rd, 2007 at 1:25 pma year or two ago Talking Points Memo (J. Marshall) published a rumor that Drudge was gay. I never heard Drudge respond to that. Not that there's anything wrong with that (unless you represent republican interests, of course).
April 3rd, 2007 at 3:43 pm#219
You need to change your name because it's insulting to the definition.
April 3rd, 2007 at 4:20 pmOh My, Is old Leather Lips Drudge going to Iraq now?
He really should go stay in Baghdad for a few months,
to make sure we Americans are getting the "truth". We
all know Matt would never tell a lie, or twist the truth
in favor of the Right Wing, Right?
Maybe he could do a few Stand Up Comedy gigs while he
April 3rd, 2007 at 4:49 pmis there.
195
bin Laden wasn’t the mastermind of 9/11!! LOL!
Comment by Tracy
How do you know that the man currently in jail is really the mastermind of 9/11 and not just playing the fall guy to get Bin Laden off the hook? Why after all these years of description of Bin Laden as Al Qaeda's has another man suddenly become the mastermind of everything? Never considered that, did you?
April 3rd, 2007 at 5:21 pmIn any case, even if Bin Laden wasn't the mastermind, with his vast inherited wealth, he certainly has been a major source of $ for Al Qaeda, and that's why he should still be important.
Oops. I left out the word "leader" after "al Qaeda's" in line three of my post #224, though I suppose most people can figure out what I meant without it.
April 3rd, 2007 at 5:26 pm"How do you know that the man currently in jail is really the mastermind of 9/11 and not just playing the fall guy to get Bin Laden off the hook?"
Well that's what the 9/11 Commission concluded. Do you have another conspiracy theory you wish to present?
"Why after all these years of description of Bin Laden as Al Qaeda’s has another man suddenly become the mastermind of everything?"
Because bin Laden is the "face" of al Qaeda and has been since it's inception.
"In any case, even if Bin Laden wasn’t the mastermind, with his vast inherited wealth, he certainly has been a major source of $ for Al Qaeda, and that’s why he should still be important."
Agreed...and I never said it wasn't. BTW if you are thinking that the Bush administration isn't still trying to track down bin Laden just because of his infamous words about "not caring" where he is, then you are delusional. Also, the past news about the special covert CIA unit responsible for tracking being shut down doesn't mean for a second that another unit hasn't already replaced it. The media knows very little, and should know very little about our CIA's operations.
April 3rd, 2007 at 5:54 pmAnd you also know little about the CIA's operations, so don't pretend you know better than everyone else here what's going on. You don't. You agreed in #225, capturing the major source of funding for Al Qaeda is important, so that should answer your question in #210: "Why are you so fixed on bin Laden? "
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:05 pm#226
"And you also know little about the CIA’s operations, so don’t pretend you know better than everyone else here what’s going on."
My brother has associates inside CIA and he has hinted to me multiple times to me that there are operations currently underway to track bin Laden. I do know more.
I asked "Why are you so fixed on bin Laden" because it seemed to me that you and many here only think of bin Laden and don't really think that capturing someone like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was that big of a deal much less knowing that he was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:19 pmI myself know someone in the CIA but will say no more about this.
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmYour last paragraph is a mere assumption. Whether the supposed mastermind of 9/11 was captured or not, Al Qaeda is apparently still going strong and, according to various media reports, enjoying a resurgence, along with the Taliban, in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mind you, I wrote "parts"--not the entire country, so don't go LOLing, as you have before, that I appear unaware that Afghanistan has a central government.
I am aware that it has a central government that isn't in control of the entire nation.
#228
"Your last paragraph is a mere assumption."
So the fact that he confessed doesn't mean much to you? When he is convicted and sentenced will that be enough for you? BTW it's a mere assumption that bin Laden is a major player in al Qaeda today. I think he is still a player but not near to that extent that he once was.
"Al Qaeda is apparently still going strong and, according to various media reports, enjoying a resurgence, along with the Taliban, in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Again another assumption if you want to get down to it...although it's one that I agree with. The media has exactly quantified their assumptions.
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:33 pmWhat I referred to as your mere assumption is your statement "because it seemed to me that you and many here only think of bin Laden and don’t really think that capturing someone like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was that big of a deal much less knowing that he was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks."
April 3rd, 2007 at 6:42 pmYou've now repeated the same mistaken assumption in #229. I can't speak for what the others are thinking, but I never said that capturing Khalid is a trivial matter. That's merely your assumption. Give it up already!
Satire.
Specifically, satire of your wacky faith in "confessions" compelled via waterboarding.
And your complete inability to grasp that for characters like ole Khalid taking credit for every Jihadi attack ever commited and having eager "infidels" believe every word of it is a point of great pride.
The only thing preventing him from claiming responsiblity for even more plots was his aversion to offending his other Jihadi pals! But worry not, add a little bit of torture and weeee, no more inhibitions!
Give him enough info and "incentive" and he will claim to be responsible for the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby.
And the likes of you will eagerly swallow every bit of it.
Meanwhile the spiritual and financial heart of Al-Queda, Osama Bin Ladin, laughs his ass off at you while putting in place 20 replacements for Khalid.
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:19 pm"Satire"
No, fact. You need to present some.
"Meanwhile the spiritual and financial heart of Al-Queda, Osama Bin Ladin"
He isn't as big as you portray him especially when you seem to think that bin Laden is some kind of great terrorist plotter. LOL!
"Specifically, satire of your wacky faith in “confessions†compelled via waterboarding."
Now that's an assumption on your part based on zero facts.
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:38 pm#230
I am not the one making a baseless assumption that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad isn't responsible for planning the 9/11 attacks. What exactly would it take to convince you that he was?
"That’s merely your assumption. Give it up already!"
It's no different that your assumption that al Qaeda and the Taliban are somehow "enjoying" a resurgance in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Why would you believe unaccountable media outlets over the 9/11 Commission who has far more information and access to intelligence sources than any new source could?
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:48 pm#165
“We see Al Qaeda propaganda videos that were given to CNN by the DOJ.â€
Like?
Comment by Dink Tracy — April 3, 2007 @ 9:36 am
Like a couple of days after 911 when the FBI released the video of Bin Laden talking and laughing about 911, and warning us that "his timetable, was not our timetable".
How bout we start there?
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:11 pmI like Ware, but watching CNN tonight, they had to cut him off. He was three sheets to the wind. I am sure it will be all over the internet shortly. Embarrassing.... The guy needs a break.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:16 pmeven ware's face leans to the left, what a joke he is...
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm“That’s merely your assumption. Give it up already!â€
It’s no different that your assumption that al Qaeda and the Taliban are somehow “enjoying†a resurganceSIC) in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Why would you believe unaccountable media outlets over the 9/11 Commission who has far more information and access to intelligence sources than any new source could?
Comment by Tracy —
Can you read English, or do you just like taking people's words out of context?
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:00 pmI specifically wrote in the sentence prior to "That's merely your assumption": "I never said that capturing Khalid is a trivial matter." To explain what I thought was clear English to you, that means you have assumed that I think capturing Khalid is trivial, though I never wrote such a thing. Capisce?
In addition to following news sources, I also happen to know people who have been to Afghanistan or Pakistan near the border in recent months. "Unaacountable news sources," eh? I haven't even heard that anyone from the 9/11 Commission has been to Afghanistan/Pakistan lately or that they have been denying a resurgence of the Taliban/Al Qaeda in that region.
even ware’s face leans to the left, what a joke he is…
Comment by big
So, big-baby, please go to Iraq and report on the things you see there, with your face leaning to the right.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:01 pmI am simply challenging your unverifiable, baseless assumptions which you wish to present as the Holy Truth. In this case I do not even have to present facts. Since it is you making these extraordinary claims, it is your responsibility to back up your assertions. And since you cannot do anything of the sort, you are reduced to quoting some ridiculous third-hand innuendo and propaganda dreck.
Really? That is amazing since it is precisely the "portrait" which was presented to us for the last 20 years or so. The CIA first financed him to the tune of millions, then hunted him for decades claiming that he was the main funder of Al-Queda and the "go-to" man in it, following which, suddenly, in the last year or so all of the Al-Queda operatives which Bush managed to capture became THE Al-Queda instead. And that Osama dude? He became "Bin Who?".
I am sure that whomever came up with this pathetic bait-and-switch scheme was counting on people being as gullible as you, but the rest of us aren't.
Either the "anti-terrorism" experts were lying their asses off for the last 20 years or so, or they are doing so now. Given that lying now advances the cause of Bush and supports the delusion of "successes" in the GWOT which yelds rewards in form of power and money to the said "experts", I am going to go with "now" as the answer.
What? You mean to tell us that totrure is a proven and reliable interrogation method and that I have to present facts to the contrary?! You are that delusional?!
It is you who has to prove your extra-ordinary, contrary to all historical evidence (hey check out the Holy Inquisition - I think I mentioned them) assertion. The onus of proof is on you!.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:47 pmhas ware ever reported the number of enemy combatants killed? any clue? or does he only get his kicks by being over dramatic about american casaulties, which are the lowest in any war of this scope in the history of the planet.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:52 pmhad this country had a 24 hour news cycle in the 30's and 40's we lose WW2, the non stop glee reporters get in reporting every bullet fired an american's way is ridiculous. imagine that kind of defeatest coverag imbedded on the beaches of normandy. we lost 15 soldiers on that day alone. this country doesnt have the guts or spine for that kind of sacrafice anymore. if ware and people like him were around back then, we would all be speaking german today.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:54 pmYou are the laziest most pathetic trolls I've seen yet.
You can't keep up blow for blow, so you disappear, and spend a day fabricating answers, then post them once everyone has moved on to new threads.
If your peabrains can't keep up, then maybe you should refund the GOP their money.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:26 amAnd by the way you big sack of crap.
Michael Ware has been LIVING in the most dangerous parts of Iraq for 4 years now, while your fat, snibbling chickenshit self has been sitting here telling people how brave you are.
Ware is ten times the man you could ever be, that is if you were a man.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:28 amthis country doesnt have the guts or spine for that kind of sacrafice(SIC) anymore. if ware and people like him were around back then, we would all be speaking german today.
Comment by big —
What sacrifices have you made, big baby, if any?
April 4th, 2007 at 12:29 amAlso, maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing for you to learn some German, as writing English does not seem to be your forte.
#239
"I am simply challenging your unverifiable, baseless assumptions which you wish to present as the Holy Truth."
So you consider the 9/11 Commmission's findings that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was the chief architect for the 9/11 attacks as bogus? And his confession? What would convince you, along with Lora, that he was responsible?
"Really? That is amazing since it is precisely the “portrait†which was presented to us for the last 20 years or so."
Well if you can point to one terrorist plot that he personally planned then by all means do so. Yes he was a financier and co-conspirator in many attacks but I have yet to see him be indicted for what Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was, i.e. personally plotting the actual attacks.
"What? You mean to tell us that totrure is a proven and reliable interrogation method and that I have to present facts to the contrary?!"
You need to provide some proof that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was tortured into his confession for the 9/11 attack among others.
"I am sure that whomever came up with this pathetic bait-and-switch scheme was counting on people being as gullible as you, but the rest of us aren’t."
You guys are the ones so fixated on bin Laden. Others however that have been captured like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who have been found to be personally involved in plotting 9/11, is mearly a baseless assumption according to you and others. It would suprise me a bit that if and when bin Laden himself is captured you and others here would say that it's a baseless assumption that bin Laden was involved in any of that past al Qaeda attacks.
"Either the “anti-terrorism†experts were lying their asses off for the last 20 years or so, or they are doing so now"
Well they haven't been lying their asses off about Khalid Sheikh Mohammad who BTW has been involved in terrorist plotting well before bin Laden even started the terrorist operations for al Qaeda, after that Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan.
April 4th, 2007 at 9:54 am#237
"To explain what I thought was clear English to you, that means you have assumed that I think capturing Khalid is trivial, though I never wrote such a thing."
You specifically said you have doubts that he was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks! Sounds like you are trivializing it to me. If that wasn't your intent then you need to explain how you could possibly think that the 9/11 Commission's findings are unfounded and let me know why you could possibly think that KSM could be a "fall guy" for bin Laden.
"I haven’t even heard that anyone from the 9/11 Commission has been to Afghanistan/Pakistan lately or that they have been denying a resurgence of the Taliban/Al Qaeda in that region."
Well isn't that lovely, because I haven't heard anyone say that they doubt that KSM was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks....like you have.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:44 amAnalysis done by a neutral party. Trial by an impartial court, say in Hague. Or as a matter of fact anywhere where the "jury, judge and executioner" does not have an axe to grind with the dude. Not to mention that all evidence obtained under duress, including "confessions", is null and void, no exceptions both on moral and practical reliability grounds in any sane court in any civilized nation. Something you clearly do not even begin to comprehend.
So if the Iraqis ever get Rusmfeld in court for all the vile shit he has done to them that will make Bush merely a "co-conspirator" because he was not the one to actually put pins into the map to represent the specfic targets for bombing?
Khalid is an equivalent of a commander in an army headed by Osama. Without Osama's guidance, finances and recruitment efforts he would have been reduced to trying to kidnap some hapless tourists in Middle East instead of executing far-reaching schemes involving coordinated overseas strikes. Osama is the one who put together the movement. He is the one on the Al-Queda recruitment tapes, not Khalid.
Besides it is impossible for anyone to determine the relative involvement of Osama and Khalid in the actual planning of 9/11 based on "confessions" extracted out of him (and the previous detainees) under duress. Extracted by a group of people who can be called anything but "impartial".
And it is such unreliable, biased, self-serving evidence which the 9/11 commision used. Which renders their report as credible as the "slum dunk" one about WMD locations in Iraq.
You gotta be kidding me. You mean you missed the whole brouhaha about the Geneva Conventions provisions being "quaint". The cages and GITMO? The standard operating procedure and Abu Ghraib? The secret CIA prisons? The snatching of people from streets of cities in Europe? You are really gotta be kidding me.
The thugs in charge have thoroughly and completely destroyed any presumption of decency and rule of law in these Gulags.
Therefore the onus is on you to demonstrate that he was not tortured. All of the "evidence" obtained by the idiot warriors of GWOT is tarnished and highly suspect by default. And they only have to thank their own stupidity for it.
How many times do I have to repeat it: the reason we are "fixated" on Osama because for decades the "experts" have been feeding us a steady stream of "evidence" which painted him as I described earlier. Now these very same "experts" are pretending to have a mighty conveniently timed collective amnesia and you are taking the new party line at face value.
"We have always been at war with Oceania" comes to mind.
Really? So which one of the two became the "face" of 9/11 immediately after the attcks at the urging of the very same "experts"? Or is your memory, like theirs, highly selective?
Most people did not even hear about Khalid Sheikh Mohammad until he was captured. Meanwhile the "experts" where beating the drum of Osama Bin Ladin on every damned interview on every damned channel.
Daily.
April 4th, 2007 at 4:48 pmYou specifically said you have doubts that he was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks! Sounds like you are trivializing it to me. If that wasn’t your intent then you need to explain how (blah, blah, blah.....)
Comment by Tracy
No matter how many times I have written that you are making assumptions about something I never wrote or said, you still repeat the same drek. You are not my boss, teacher, or ruler, and I am under no obligation to explain anything further to you--especially something I have already explained. As far as I am concerned, you can go Cheney-off.
April 4th, 2007 at 6:20 pm#247
Can you explain why you agree with the 9/11 Commissions findings about the Taliban/Al Qaeda resurgence, but doubt their findings about KSM?
"...Cheney off?"
So you don't have the courage to type what you really ment? Doesn't suprise me a bit as it does for so many others here who tell people fuck off and the like. I thought you were above all of that. I guess I was wrong.
April 4th, 2007 at 7:28 pm#250
April 5th, 2007 at 5:27 pmI have seldom used the "f..." word in my entire life, and I've only told one other person to "Cheney off;" and that was in December 2005. I've got to get pretty disgusted and/or reach a certain boiling point to use such language, but maybe that's what someone like you who freely dismisses so many things as "BS" understands best. In any case, you are in no position to tell me what I have to do/give orders to me.
Since I recall your dismissing the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission as a "wish list," I find your sudden devotion to its conclusions about other things a bit amusing. I have not written or meant to imply that catching Khalid is insignificant; however since Bin Laden is a major Al Qaeda funder, he needs to be caught, too--something you already agreed with. I do not wish to extend this discussion further.
#247
"Analysis done by a neutral party. Trial by an impartial court, say in Hague. Or as a matter of fact anywhere where the “jury, judge and executioner†does not have an axe to grind with the dude."
Well considering Pakistan, the country where KSM is from, is not an ICC member state, your suggestion is meaningless.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court
"The Court can generally only exercise jurisdiction in cases where the accused is a national of a state party, the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state party, or a situation is referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council."
"Not to mention that all evidence obtained under duress, including “confessionsâ€, is null and void, no exceptions."
And what is your definition of "duress"?....Torture? OK, again you are going to have to provide proof of the torture, which you STILL haven't done.
"So if the Iraqis ever get Rusmfeld in court for all the vile shit he has done to them that will make Bush merely a “co-conspirator†because he was not the one to actually put pins into the map to represent the specfic targets for bombing?"
Well if that's your warp way of thinking then we would, if they were still alive, you would need to put quite a few past American presidents on the stand like oh say Roosevelt, Kennedy, Truman, Reagan, Johnson, Clinton, Bush Sr., ect..... Give us a break!
"Osama is the one who put together the movement. He is the one on the Al-Queda recruitment tapes, not Khalid."
Bin Laden didn't and isn't doing any of the plotting and planning...just as I said. I take it that you are going to be able to point to an attack planned by bin Laden? Please by all means, try again.
"Besides it is impossible for anyone to determine the relative involvement of Osama and Khalid in the actual planning..."
I don't think anyone has actually fingered bin Laden in anyway for the actual planning of the 9/11 attacks.
"Extracted by a group of people who can be called anything but “impartialâ€."
As if the ICC is impartial. The judges are all members of states that have signed on to the ICC and again Pakistan isn't one of them. In fact here is a map of the ICC member states. I don't see many Middle Eastern countries on there....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:World_map_ICC_member_states.png
"And it is such unreliable, biased, self-serving evidence which the 9/11 commision used."
Well I guess everyone is entitled to their self serving opinion.
"Therefore the onus is on you to demonstrate that he was not tortured."
BS! I subscribe to the innocent untill proven guilty rule of law....but obviously you don't.
"How many times do I have to repeat it: the reason we are “fixated†on Osama because for decades the “experts†have been feeding us a steady stream of “evidence†which painted him as I described earlier."
So? He isn't the only big fish out there. The fixation comes from what the media reports about al Qaeda...not what the experts at the CIA has been reporting for years on terrorists like KSM and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Osama is the "figure head" and is the most visible figure of Al Qaeda.
"Now these very same “experts†are pretending to have a mighty conveniently timed collective amnesia and you are taking the new party line at face value."
What amnesia? They captured the architect of 9/11 and you and others like Lora think somehow he wasn't the main plotter.
"So which one of the two became the “face†of 9/11 immediately after the attcks at the urging of the very same “experts�"
I am not referring those so-called "experts" that showed up on the cable talk shows, I am talking about the real experts inside the CIA that presented that 9/11 Commission their information about KSM.
"Most people did not even hear about Khalid Sheikh Mohammad until he was captured."
No?...really? Now do you understand why the "fixation" on bin Laden is the media's and their "experts" call own fault? I knew right after 9/11 happened that the U.S. was looking intently for KSM and Zawahiri. I guess it matters what news sources you read or listen to if you didn't know that the U.S. was hunting these two people immediately after 9/11 if not prior to.
April 5th, 2007 at 6:55 pm"Since I recall your dismissing the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission as a “wish list,†I find your sudden devotion to its conclusions about other things a bit amusing."
A list of recommendations and my opposition to some of them is quite a bit different than a specific conclusion(s) reached about an international terrorist base on intelligence and other facts. It's not even in the same realm.
Again, can you explain why you agree with the 9/11 Commissions findings about the Taliban/Al Qaeda resurgence, but doubt their findings about KSM?
April 5th, 2007 at 7:03 pmIf this question was addressed to me, which is unclear since the numbering of posts is unreliable, I will answer:
I never said I "agree" with this or that finding of the Commision. I find the Commision to be yet another "cover your ass with paper", infested with lobbyists and self-serving "securocracy" "experts", full of political dealers and wheelers, bureaucratic excercise in futility. The reliability of its "report" ranges anywhere from that of "Might actually be true", via "we know where Saddam stashed them WMDs" to rather sratchy toilet paper.
Which is true of most of the "intelligence" related information that comes out of the government these days. Such is the state of decay of the whole system. Amongst other things it is the result of privatisation of vital governmental functions to well-connected "old boys" network contractors, misguided focus on high technology when faced with low-tech opponent (mostly because the "old boys" can make oodles of mulah that way), entrenched inflexible career personell refusing or incapable to let go of still fighting the Cold War, etc, etc.
April 7th, 2007 at 10:33 pmRight wing lies spoon fed through Drudge & the "Mighty Wurlitzer" of neo-con disinformation. Activist reporter or truth teller?
Were Drudge's panties in a bunch when it concerned the right wing activist reporter & male prostitute, Jeff Gannon, being let loose in the White House?
Well probably... but for a different reason I'm sure. Another example of TOP GOP journalism?
April 10th, 2007 at 2:12 pmRE: Post#203
The FBI was responsible for capturing Timothy McVeigh so no credit can be given to Clinton (even though in reality a police officer had stopped McVeigh).
The FBI failed to put together the seperate pieces of Middle eastern individuals in flight training across the U.S. & FBI HQ in D.C. altered the FISA requests made by field agents in Minnesota, to examine Moussaui's laptop (which contained information on Mohammed Atta) prior to 911 - but this is now Clinton's fault & not a failing of the FBI?
Clinton sends cruise missiles to Afghanistan as retaliation to Osama one of his terrorist acts, but the right wing idiots all scream "wag the dog" in unison. Clinton doesn't feel he can continue these types of attacks and certainly cannot put ground troops in if public sentiment is not there (elected officials work for the people of the U.S.)
Bus43 was in office for 8 months prior to 911 and received repeated warnings of a large scale attack on US soil from Tenet, Clarke & numerous foreign governments. Bush did NOTHING!
And if you believe anything a right wing liar says, "911 changed everything" is their mantra and supposedly things are different now.
But if you remember 911 happened after Clinton left office.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:50 pmSorry! It turns out the right wingnuts are right after all. And torture does work! If your overwhelming goal is to gain an admission to sell to the masses and not the actual truth, that is.
April 11th, 2007 at 12:40 am
With link
http://www.shout.net/~bigred/Khalid.html
April 11th, 2007 at 12:40 amApril 11th, 2007 at 12:42 am
#256
So you don't think that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed planned and plotted 9/11? You aren't one of those wacko Rosie O'Donnell types that think that the 9/11 attacks were and inside job...are you?
April 11th, 2007 at 7:41 pmJim Crow Laws Family Law Law School Rankings...
I didn't agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me...
October 4th, 2008 at 2:03 amoceania cruise line...
I found your post comments while searching Google. Very relevant especially as this is not an issue which a lot of peaople are conversant with....
October 27th, 2008 at 1:21 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass...
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view...
November 2nd, 2008 at 1:02 pmVacation Rental Vacation Package Cruise Travel...
I didn't agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me...
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:59 pmImage Print And Design Ware...
One notable blogging tool that does not support trackback yet is Blogger. The term is used colloquially for any kind of Linkback....
November 12th, 2008 at 9:06 pmDog Obedience Training...
I love what I am reading here. Shall drop by again....
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:07 am