if you recall watergate was once a story relegated to one paper, and no senior reporters wanted to take it on. "america didn't care", they said.
the story took a while to pick up steam. eventually there were fisticuffs to cover it. one month before the election it was reported that there was an espionage campaign against the democrats by the nixon re-election committee.
nevertheless nixon was re-elected by a nation that knew about the break-in! he won 49 states!
these things take time, and the press is probably being stand-offish because of their complicity in the iraq war. embeds anyone? they traded some souls for a seat on the 50 yard line. i think many regret it.
watch out for koeppel, he's got the look of the frothy mouth pitbull lately.
hell even dan rather pretty much asked colin powell how it felt to have lost complete credibility.
americans are not stupid or dumb.....it just takes 'em a while
Guess what. It doesn't matter because neither are true. We did not find Y or Z, so Bush is a liar.
Oh, and as Hassan pointed out, "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." (Bush)
But most of all, it doesn't matter how you pick apart the statement. It reads, 'we found WMD' to anyone. You can try to play with semantics, but there is no avoiding the fact that the Bush admin's message is 'we found WMD' no matter which way you slice it.
This thread is about the fact that 1/3 of americans believe something that isn't true, and this is why.
means that Bush states that they have either found banned manufacturing devices OR banned weapons.
I read it as "Those who say we haven´t found banned manufacturing devices AND those who say we haven´t found banned weapons are wrong." For me thats the only way to read the sentence. Or else this sentence would be right: "Those who say the moon is made of green cheese or dust and rocks are wrong. It is".
But since they found neither Bush is wrong either way...
None of this even matters, because, if you'll notice, Bush says, "And we'll find more weapons as time goes on." In other words, contrary to Alcimedes' parsing, Bush appears to consider mobile biolabs to be actual WMD, with no further distinctions. Otherwise, what else could he have meant by saying "more weapons" if the "labs" were the only thing yet found?
(Please note, however, that the existence of banned weapons in Iraq and Bush's appalling lack of honesty (or contact with reality) are actually independent issues.)
The common refrain of "the news is not reporting on this" is total crap.
I agree, Scott, but it depends on where you read the news. The mainstream press is pretty cowardly these days, but there has been excellent coverage on the net, and in print here in Europe.
Bob Harris over on thismodernworld ran a whole list of the other poll results (and the link to the poll site). If you think the 1/3 belief in found WMD is scary, read the rest. Although the Elvis-is-alive is running at 7%...
Use the full power of the internet to search for your own answers instead of relying on the sanitized sound-bitesized coverage in the mainstream press. Plenty of people are asking tough questions.
I agree, Scott, but it depends on where you read the news. The mainstream press is pretty cowardly these days, but there has been excellent coverage on the net, and in print here in Europe.
...
Sorry I don't but it. Every major network and news paper has reported on the as yet not found WoMD. Also I disagree that the coverage in Europe has been "excellent". The press in Europe loves to take pot shots at the US and it leads to bias and false reporting the doesn't get corrected often enough.
yep. spincity link says basically the same thing, only much more drawn out.
of course, it also points out that bush made the statement "We found the weapons of mass destruction" and that the only way it can be true is if we pretend that 'weapons' means 'weapons programs' (apparently in the same way that I mean I have a 'tree' in my kitchen when I say I have a 'chair'). From the article: White House Press Secretary Ari Flesicher has suggested that Bush uses "weapons" and "weapons programs" interchangeably, there is clearly a difference between evidence suggesting weapons were produced and actual weapons.
But both of you make the same mistake: "By combining them in this way, Bush implies that weapons have actually been found, but he does so in such a way that he can claim he was only discussing manufacturing devices." Taking apart that staement on its own is wrong in itself, since Bush clearly states that "We found the weapons of mass destruction."
As such, your attempts to defend the statement are immediately disproven by the fact that he actually did specifically refer to weapons themselves. In short, your are full of **** and arguing about it ain't going to change a thing. Let me remind you:
There's a lot of good stuff to read there giant. Like all the lies spread by the media about the president.
What's interesting s that here you see an analysis of Bush's words that demonstrate exactly how his statements skew information in order to sway public opinion. The rest of the admin is different, but Bush's speechwriters try to use these tricks to try to put the blame on the public for falling for his BS.
It's like I pointed out in the other thread how the claim about existing stockpiles of VX and sarin conveniently exclude the fact that they would have degraded by now. Sure they might be there, but they are useless. The public doesn't know that, and the Bush admin capitalizes on that ignorance
I do have to give that website credit for acknowledging the decietful nature of Bush regarding Iraq and his tax policies
If by "full of shit" you mean that my intestines contain the digested products of food that I have eaten recently the yes you are correct.
If you look at the quote at the top of the post, you would notice that I was not talking to you. Though I am sure you will have a chance to use that comment some other time, so put it in your sock drawer for another day.
If you look at the quote at the top of the post, you would notice that I was not talking to you. Though I am sure you will have a chance to use that comment some other time, so put it in your sock drawer for another day.
Comments
the story took a while to pick up steam. eventually there were fisticuffs to cover it. one month before the election it was reported that there was an espionage campaign against the democrats by the nixon re-election committee.
nevertheless nixon was re-elected by a nation that knew about the break-in! he won 49 states!
these things take time, and the press is probably being stand-offish because of their complicity in the iraq war. embeds anyone? they traded some souls for a seat on the 50 yard line. i think many regret it.
watch out for koeppel, he's got the look of the frothy mouth pitbull lately.
hell even dan rather pretty much asked colin powell how it felt to have lost complete credibility.
americans are not stupid or dumb.....it just takes 'em a while
Originally posted by alcimedes
[a lot of pointless babble using symbols]
Guess what. It doesn't matter because neither are true. We did not find Y or Z, so Bush is a liar.
Oh, and as Hassan pointed out, "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." (Bush)
But most of all, it doesn't matter how you pick apart the statement. It reads, 'we found WMD' to anyone. You can try to play with semantics, but there is no avoiding the fact that the Bush admin's message is 'we found WMD' no matter which way you slice it.
This thread is about the fact that 1/3 of americans believe something that isn't true, and this is why.
Originally posted by Anders
Alcimedes. I read it as you are saying that:
means that Bush states that they have either found banned manufacturing devices OR banned weapons.
I read it as "Those who say we haven´t found banned manufacturing devices AND those who say we haven´t found banned weapons are wrong." For me thats the only way to read the sentence. Or else this sentence would be right: "Those who say the moon is made of green cheese or dust and rocks are wrong. It is".
But since they found neither Bush is wrong either way...
None of this even matters, because, if you'll notice, Bush says, "And we'll find more weapons as time goes on." In other words, contrary to Alcimedes' parsing, Bush appears to consider mobile biolabs to be actual WMD, with no further distinctions. Otherwise, what else could he have meant by saying "more weapons" if the "labs" were the only thing yet found?
Btw, here's some info on the "biolabs":
http://www.observer.co.uk/internatio...977853,00.html
(Please note, however, that the existence of banned weapons in Iraq and Bush's appalling lack of honesty (or contact with reality) are actually independent issues.)
Originally posted by Scott
The common refrain of "the news is not reporting on this" is total crap.
I agree, Scott, but it depends on where you read the news. The mainstream press is pretty cowardly these days, but there has been excellent coverage on the net, and in print here in Europe.
Bob Harris over on thismodernworld ran a whole list of the other poll results (and the link to the poll site). If you think the 1/3 belief in found WMD is scary, read the rest. Although the Elvis-is-alive is running at 7%...
Use the full power of the internet to search for your own answers instead of relying on the sanitized sound-bitesized coverage in the mainstream press. Plenty of people are asking tough questions.
The truth is out there, right?
The strategically ambiguous George W. Bush
Originally posted by anamac
I agree, Scott, but it depends on where you read the news. The mainstream press is pretty cowardly these days, but there has been excellent coverage on the net, and in print here in Europe.
...
Sorry I don't but it. Every major network and news paper has reported on the as yet not found WoMD. Also I disagree that the coverage in Europe has been "excellent". The press in Europe loves to take pot shots at the US and it leads to bias and false reporting the doesn't get corrected often enough.
Originally posted by Scott
Here's a full report wrt Bush's statements about found WoMD.
The strategically ambiguous George W. Bush
Wow. Scott for once posted something relevant.
Of course, had I linked to that, I would have been labeled 'anti-american'
Originally posted by giant
Wow. Scott for once posted something relevant.
Of course, had I linked to that, I would have been labeled 'anti-american'
There's a lot of good stuff to read there giant. Like all the lies spread by the media about the president.
Originally posted by alcimedes
yep. spincity link says basically the same thing, only much more drawn out.
of course, it also points out that bush made the statement "We found the weapons of mass destruction" and that the only way it can be true is if we pretend that 'weapons' means 'weapons programs' (apparently in the same way that I mean I have a 'tree' in my kitchen when I say I have a 'chair'). From the article: White House Press Secretary Ari Flesicher has suggested that Bush uses "weapons" and "weapons programs" interchangeably, there is clearly a difference between evidence suggesting weapons were produced and actual weapons.
But both of you make the same mistake: "By combining them in this way, Bush implies that weapons have actually been found, but he does so in such a way that he can claim he was only discussing manufacturing devices." Taking apart that staement on its own is wrong in itself, since Bush clearly states that "We found the weapons of mass destruction."
As such, your attempts to defend the statement are immediately disproven by the fact that he actually did specifically refer to weapons themselves. In short, your are full of **** and arguing about it ain't going to change a thing. Let me remind you:
Bush: "We found the weapons of mass destruction."
Originally posted by Scott
There's a lot of good stuff to read there giant. Like all the lies spread by the media about the president.
What's interesting s that here you see an analysis of Bush's words that demonstrate exactly how his statements skew information in order to sway public opinion. The rest of the admin is different, but Bush's speechwriters try to use these tricks to try to put the blame on the public for falling for his BS.
It's like I pointed out in the other thread how the claim about existing stockpiles of VX and sarin conveniently exclude the fact that they would have degraded by now. Sure they might be there, but they are useless. The public doesn't know that, and the Bush admin capitalizes on that ignorance
I do have to give that website credit for acknowledging the decietful nature of Bush regarding Iraq and his tax policies
Originally posted by Scott
If by "full of shit" you mean that my intestines contain the digested products of food that I have eaten recently the yes you are correct.
If you look at the quote at the top of the post, you would notice that I was not talking to you. Though I am sure you will have a chance to use that comment some other time, so put it in your sock drawer for another day.
the only reason i care at all about his exchange is that i keep seeing you posting this:
Bush: "We found the weapons of mass destruction."
when in fact, there is no point where Bush ever said "We found the weapons of mass destruction"
learn how to use quotation marks properly if you want quote people. otherwise, people will call you on it.
Originally posted by alcimedes
giant, you're supposed to be a librarian.
And apparently you need some help. Well, here's the transcript:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/g8/interview5.html
now do a search for "We found the weapons of mass destruction" without the quotes.
Doesn't it ever bother you that you are always so wrong about everything?
Originally posted by alcimedes
my apologies, the original, Washington post link left out the first sentence.
Apology accepted, and I like your sig.
Originally posted by giant
If you look at the quote at the top of the post, you would notice that I was not talking to you. Though I am sure you will have a chance to use that comment some other time, so put it in your sock drawer for another day.
Yes I know. I couldn't resist replying.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
and the people that watch jay leno.
Better than the folks that watch letterman