OT: Interesting news.

[Laughing Cow]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20030314/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq_forgery

[ZIM]

And this is surprising in what way?

Its interesting in a historical sense that our Intelligence communities have increasingly become the 'kingmakers' for the Presidency in recent decades since Reagan, isn't it? Before that, we preferred those with military backgrounds.

Anyhow, they've brought their attitudes from that Cold War background, we're approaching the creation of secret police forces, etc. and have already clamped down forcibly on dissent. Whatever are they worried about?

Hey, no paranoia here, Guv! ;) :p

[logic]

boom

[Merryprankster]

I don't understand why this is a big deal. We get bad information all the time. It's not easy to seperate the chaff from the wheat. And yes, ZIM's a bit paranoid.

[Marky]

A Democrat is trying to get Bush in trouble? I absolutely won't hear of it =)

Heard another interesting thing in the news the other day. There was an anti-war rally in Chicago with 2500 attendees, and a local newspaper had an enormous article about how wonderful and amazing it was. A week later, there was a Bush support rally in the same place, 6000 attendees, the same newspaper only had a small blurb mentioning that there were "hundreds in attendance".

There was another good one about a college professor who agreed to give extra credit to her students for writing letters to President Bush in regard to the war. Anyone who wrote a letter supporting Bush was told that their work was "unacceptable", because she meant they were supposed to write letters AGAINST THE WAR.

And we all know how informative and thought-provoking Dan Rather's interview with Saddam was.... I can rest easy now that I know Saddam's favorite color, and that he can say a few words in English.

[PHILBERT]

Originally posted by Marky
A Democrat is trying to get Bush in trouble? I absolutely won't hear of it =)

Heard another interesting thing in the news the other day. There was an anti-war rally in Chicago with 2500 attendees, and a local newspaper had an enormous article about how wonderful and amazing it was. A week later, there was a Bush support rally in the same place, 6000 attendees, the same newspaper only had a small blurb mentioning that there were "hundreds in attendance".

There was another good one about a college professor who agreed to give extra credit to her students for writing letters to President Bush in regard to the war. Anyone who wrote a letter supporting Bush was told that their work was "unacceptable", because she meant they were supposed to write letters AGAINST THE WAR.

And we all know how informative and thought-provoking Dan Rather's interview with Saddam was.... I can rest easy now that I know Saddam's favorite color, and that he can say a few words in English.

In regard to the first paragraph, because it's human's natural choice to complain rather than complement. How many times do you go to the grocery store, have a nice sacker or cashier and go to a manager and say "That sacker over there is VERY nice." Now if you get a nasty cashier, or nasty sacker or your eggs get crushed, would you tell a manager "That sacker broke my eggs" or "That cashier is rude." Same thing with a waiter in a resturaunt. Would you tell a manager "This waiter was VERY good, I'd come back and request to eat in his/her section". The protesters were complaining so it got more attention.

In regard to the second paragraph, I'd tell my professer in college she can take her report and shove it up her ***** so far she'll be ****ting the paper for a week if she says it can only be negative.

In regard to the third paragraph, what is his favorite color?

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
I don't understand why this is a big deal. We get bad information all the time. It's not easy to seperate the chaff from the wheat. And yes, ZIM's a bit paranoid.

So, should it be investigated, given that it was used as evidence to support Bush's excuses?

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by logic
boom

Honest neutral clarity.

Sober yet?

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Marky
A Democrat is trying to get Bush in trouble? I absolutely won't hear of it =)

...
And we all know how informative and thought-provoking Dan Rather's interview with Saddam was.... I can rest easy now that I know Saddam's favorite color, and that he can say a few words in English.

About as informative and thought-provoking as anything you've managed to come up with in your entire posting history. We all know Laughing Cow's opinions and agenda, and you can agree or disagree... but at least offer some ****ing relevance instead of unsupported, random ****.

If you can step out of your little box for a second, do you not for one moment think that an absolute lie concocted by a foreign government with it's own possibly undiscovered agenda, and sold by the American administration to the American people to garner support, is slightly more of an important issue than just more inter-party mudslinging? Not that I'm trying a leading question or anything...

What's YOUR favorite color kiddo?

[Merryprankster]

My point, Mat, is that it's unsurprising there was forged information.

If the admin accepted and used that information in good faith, then nothing deceitful was done, as far as this government is concerned. The deceit lies in other places.

It is unfair to leap to the conclusion that the Bush admin was aware this was a forgery and used it anyway. Investigate, and let the chips fall as they may.

So yeah, I agree there should be an investigation, but the idea that I should slaver over some percieved administrative shiftiness is ridiculous. The left is just as bad about this as the right was about Clinton--every mistake that ever happens is a willful act calculated to further nefarious agendas.

God forbid we all develop a little rationality and withhold judgment until the facts are in. :rolleyes:

[Mr Punch]

Thanks for clarifying your stance MP. Erudite as ever. That's why I asked... I'm too ****ed off with this whole thing and some of the ****wits on this board to give it much rationality at the mo...

BTW, I wasn't suggesting the admin did know it was fake.

[Merryprankster]

No problem. I hope you don't think the slightly annoyed tone of my post was directed at you. I'm just, as you, somewhat tired of covering the same stupid inconsistencies as though they were deceits of tragic proportions.

[Marky]

Hi Mat,

"About as informative and thought-provoking as anything you've managed to come up with in your entire posting history. We all know Laughing Cow's opinions and agenda, and you can agree or disagree... but at least offer some ****ing relevance instead of unsupported, random ****.

If you can step out of your little box for a second, do you not for one moment think that an absolute lie concocted by a foreign government with it's own possibly undiscovered agenda, and sold by the American administration to the American people to garner support, is slightly more of an important issue than just more inter-party mudslinging? Not that I'm trying a leading question or anything..." Mat

I agree that the heart of the issue is important, but "inter-party mudslinging" clouds things. You might not think so, but it always has and it always will, to some degree. Just as the entire issue was created out of a lie, it can be perpetuated by more lies. That's all I was saying!

In regard to the rest of your post, where you insult me in one sentence then demand relevant facts in the next, I can only say you should practice what you preach. You can insult me all day, it only makes ME feel better because you aren't posting any information that argues my point.

My favorite color? Depends on the year, the season, and the time of day...

And if you just came off sounding like you did (or as I thought you did) because the topic is starting to drive you crazy... I feel your pain there!

[ZIM]

I don't understand why this is a big deal. We get bad information all the time. It's not easy to seperate the chaff from the wheat. And yes, ZIM's a bit paranoid.

MP- just playing around, no problem. Really, 'the war' itself doesn't matter a great deal to me, but I am more concerned with civil & human rights, always have been. ;)

[Royal Dragon]

Maybe Saddam had a feind of his plant it, so later if he was in a bind he could say "Hey, the evidance they used against us was FORGED!!!"

Maybe it was an "Ace in the hole" self defence tactic on Saddam's part.

[red5angel]

I am with MP, this kind of thing happens all the time, except now it suits someons goals if it is highly publicized. I don't think there was anything shifty going on, the government is much better at being shifty then people would give credit for .

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Marky
Hi Mat,

Hi.


I agree that the heart of the issue is important, but "inter-party mudslinging" clouds things. You might not think so, but it always has and it always will, to some degree. Just as the entire issue was created out of a lie, it can be perpetuated by more lies. That's all I was saying!
Inter-party mudslinging does 'cloud things': I agree. You were actually saying jack **** that was relevant.



In regard to the rest of your post, where you insult me in one sentence then demand relevant facts in the next, I can only say you should practice what you preach. You can insult me all day, it only makes ME feel better because you aren't posting any information that argues my point.
Where did I insult you? What was your point? I didn't see one, hence my post...

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
My point, Mat, is that it's unsurprising there was forged information.

If the admin accepted and used that information in good faith, then nothing deceitful was done, as far as this government is concerned. The deceit lies in other places.

It is unfair to leap to the conclusion that the Bush admin was aware this was a forgery and used it anyway. Investigate, and let the chips fall as they may.

So yeah, I agree there should be an investigation, but the idea that I should slaver over some percieved administrative shiftiness is ridiculous. The left is just as bad about this as the right was about Clinton--every mistake that ever happens is a willful act calculated to further nefarious agendas.

God forbid we all develop a little rationality and withhold judgment until the facts are in. :rolleyes:

Red5, read this. Then post again.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by red5angel
I am with MP, this kind of thing happens all the time, except now it suits someons goals if it is highly publicized. I don't think there was anything shifty going on, the government is much better at being shifty then people would give credit for .
I don't think that's quite what MP was saying.
And here's a question: you don't think there was anything shifty going on, so ... what..? We don't need an investigation?

And because corruption is there, does it mean it's right?

[red5angel]

I don't have a problem with an investigation at all. If it is found that this was all perpetrated by our government wittingly then someone has to pay the price for the deception. What I am saying is that while the press broke on this story, seemingly with an "anti-war" bent, I don't think that the US government was trying to mislead the public or anyone else with these documents. They recieved them in good confidence and I believe they used them in good confidence.

as for corruption being right or wrong, it's always a part of politics seemingly. Is that right? No, but I don't think it's going to change drastically anytime soon. As long as human beings who crave power, money, and control run the worlds governments and organizations then you will always have corruption. Like terrorism, you root it out when you can, fight it anyway you know possible and don't spend too much time worrying there is a conspiracy 'out to get you' or anyone else for that matter.