›

Dems: Leaked Iraq report shows need for new direct

sabadabadasabadabada 5,966 Posts
edited September 2006 in Strut Central
You would think recent history would argue against building a campaign around an unsubstantiated CIA leak.Now where did I put that Sideshow Bob stepping on the rakes clip?

  Comments

  • spivyspivy 866 Posts
    you're boring!
  • Ex-BoyfriendEx-Boyfriend 795 Posts
    everyone knows the credibility of a source is determined by whether it tells you what you want to hear or not.
  • DjArcadianDjArcadian 3,632 Posts
    everyone knows the credibility of a source is determined by whether it tells you what you want to hear or not.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    You would think recent history would argue against building a campaign around an unsubstantiated CIA leak.


    Now where did I put that Sideshow Bob stepping on the rakes clip?

    Good point. Rove probably set up the leak of "damaging info" knowing that he would declassify it the end of October showing the leaks were "wrong".

    That way the Rs will win and you can go on believing everything is going great in Iraq.
  • sabadabadasabadabada 5,966 Posts
    from hugh hewitt professor at Chapman University School of Law

    Tuesday, September 26, 2006
    The NIE and the Chumps at the NYT
    Posted by Hugh Hewitt | 5:35 PM
    Keep in mind that the National Intelligence Estimate, portions of which were declassified today --hailed by the New York Times on Sunday as "a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government"-- begins its "Key Judgments" section this way:

    United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa'ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qaida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization.

    The Times' reporters and editors that ran Sunday's stories were either chumps who got played by anti-Bush leakers, or purposefully deceptive agenda journalists from the anti-Bush fanatics division.

    Read all of the declassified sections of the report. Nothing in it supports the Pelosi-Dean-Reid-Murtha Democrats' demand to cut-and-run from Iraq. Just the opposite in fact: "If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives."
  • SwayzeSwayze 14,705 Posts
    "If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years[/b], political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives."

    "it's cool dude, i'm totally looking for a job. i just need to crash on your couch for another...five years."
  • NocentelliNocentelli 29 Posts
    I've not seen any discussion on this - Is this likely to be a partisan attck?

    Army chief tells Bush: there's not enough money for Iraq war

    ??'Bungling' Rumsfeld must go, say retired officers
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington and Richard Norton-Taylor
    Tuesday September 26, 2006
    The Guardian
    www.guardian.co.uk
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    George Bush suffered a serious rebuke of his wartime leadership yesterday when his army chief said he did not have enough money to fight the war in Iraq.

    Six weeks before midterm elections in which the war is a crucial issue, the protest from the army head, General Peter Schoomaker, exposes concerns within the US military about the strain of the war on Iraq, and growing tensions between uniformed personnel and the Pentagon chief, Donald Rumsfeld.

    Three retired senior military officers yesterday accused Mr Rumsfeld of bungling the war on Iraq, and said the Pentagon was "incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically". Major General Paul Eaton, a retired officer who was in charge of training Iraq troops, said: "Mr Rumsfeld and his immediate team must be replaced or we will see two more years of extraordinarily bad decision-making."

    The rare criticism from the three officers, all veterans of the Iraq war... etc etc
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    from hugh hewitt lame right wing Talk Radio host[/b]

    Tuesday, September 26, 2006
    The NIE and the Chumps at the NYT
    Posted by Hugh Hewitt | 5:35 PM
    Keep in mind that the National Intelligence Estimate, portions of which were declassified today --hailed by the New York Times on Sunday as "a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government"-- begins its "Key Judgments" section this way:

    United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa'ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qaida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization.

    The Times' reporters and editors that ran Sunday's stories were either chumps who got played by anti-Bush leakers, or purposefully deceptive agenda journalists from the anti-Bush fanatics division.

    Read all of the declassified sections of the report. Nothing in it supports the Pelosi-Dean-Reid-Murtha Democrats' demand to cut-and-run from Iraq. Just the opposite in fact: "If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives."
  • white_teawhite_tea 3,262 Posts
    I don't even think it's debatable. Saddam ran a police state. Iraq is fucking anarchy right now. Of course terrorism will flourish under those conditions. How many suicide bombing attacks under Hussein? And how many since?
  • keithvanhornkeithvanhorn 3,855 Posts
    from hugh hewitt professor at Chapman University School of Law

    Tuesday, September 26, 2006
    The NIE and the Chumps at the NYT
    Posted by Hugh Hewitt | 5:35 PM
    Keep in mind that the National Intelligence Estimate, portions of which were declassified today --hailed by the New York Times on Sunday as "a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government"-- begins its "Key Judgments" section this way:

    United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa'ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qaida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization.

    The Times' reporters and editors that ran Sunday's stories were either chumps who got played by anti-Bush leakers, or purposefully deceptive agenda journalists from the anti-Bush fanatics division.

    Read all of the declassified sections of the report. Nothing in it supports the Pelosi-Dean-Reid-Murtha Democrats' demand to cut-and-run from Iraq. Just the opposite in fact: "If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives."

    without quoting some right-wing chump third tier law professor, explain why you think the classified report's findings, leaked by our president, supports the Iraq war. cnn.com has the full report btw.
Sign In or Register to comment.