Zarqawi 'survived initial strike' BBC

[tantopia]

Why cant you post this nonsense on a political website? I come hear to understand more about ts as well as enjoy there beauty. From your posts, you obviously know everything so why don't you run for president of the USA? I am particularly offended by your relentless attacks against usa and the people who live here as well as our soldiers. No, I dont support our president but it is what it is. I am tired of hearing how our soldiers should walk away and disobey orders and all that other nonsense. Yes, mistakes were made and are still be made but your rants on a ts website is not making a difference. Try another media outlet. Lets hope we as well as others learn from the mistakes that have been made and go forward. Life has never been 100 % perfect and it never will. If you want to make a difference do it, but stop trampling on others. I am sure you aren't as pefect as you think. I can't wait for you to attack me now. I am not trying to start trouble but I am tired of hearing you complain about everything. Go ahead, trash me now!

[specialk]

Nicely handled Tantopia

[chefmike]

The Washington Times Slimes Democrats With a Lie


Wingers online, already high off their I-told-you-so buzz permeating from the killing of Abu Musab Zarqawi (a pro-war buzz we haven't sensed since Saddam was captured, his sons were killed, or his statute was toppled -- take your pick) were cackling over a Washington Times article posted late Thursday afternoon.

Headline: "Democrats call Zarqawi killing a stunt."

First sentence: "Some Democrats, breaking ranks from their leadership, today said the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi in Iraq was a stunt to divert attention from an unpopular and hopeless war."

Matt Drudge immediately posted the article up high on his site, while Power Line, Michelle Malkin and legions from the 101st Fighting Keyboarders touted the piece as proof Democrats can't even back Bush, let alone the U.S. military, when a ruthless terrorist is finally knocked out. That's how crazy conspiratorial Democrats are, they think the killing of Zarqawi was a stunt.

Slight problem. The Washington Times completely manufactured the story. Meaning the Washington Times article does not quote a single Democrat who thinks the Zarqawi killing was a "stunt." The article, as far as I can tell, was a pure Democratic hit piece from the right-wing daily owned by the Rev. Sung Myung Moon, who fancies himself to be the son of God. I realize it's not exactly news when the Washington Times adopts unique journalism guidelines, but this instance really did seem to break new ground for the money-losing newspaper since the piece appeared at first glance, based on the whiplash speed with which it made the rounds online, to have been part of an orchestrated campaign to damage Congressional Democrats.


Don't believe me that the Times made up the "stunt" story? Go read it. The article as posted online quotes exactly five Democrats in the story. Three of them, Sen. Harry Reid, Sen. Kent Conrad, and Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, all label the killing "good news." The other two Democrats quoted are well-known war critics, Rep. Pete Stark and Rep. Dennis Kucinich. Neither one of them though, suggested the killing was a stunt.

Kucinich was quoting as saying Zarqawi was a small part of "a growing anti-American insurgency" and that it's time to get out. He added, "We're there for all the wrong reasons," something Kucinich has been saying publicly for going on 40 months. Meanwhile, Stark was quoted as saying Iraq is still a mess and that the United States still needs to get out. Again, nothing new from Stark.

Here's the single convoluted sentence that the Times seems to build its entire article around:

""This is just to cover Bush's [rear] so he doesn't have to answer" for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat."


Note more than half that sentence is not a direct quote from Stark, rather it's the Times telling readers that Stark was supposedly making a connection between Zarqawi and Iraqi civilians. Readers also have to take the Times at its word that the "This" mentioned by Stark is in reference to the Zarqawi killing. But even if you're inclined to believe the newspaper on both points, where's the stunt quote that's the basis of the headline and the lede? Stark's "cover Bush's [rear]" quote in no way suggests he thinks the killing was a stunt, some sort of orchestrated event designed solely to divert attention. And where are the Democrats plural who think the killing was a stunt. The Times' headline and opening sentence clearly report that "Democrats" think the killing was a stunt, and it's the stunt angle that made the story so hot. Yet the best the Times can do is print a cut-up quote from a single Democrat who doesn't even say the killing was a stunt? Pathetic.

UPDATE: The Times cleaned up the story for Friday's print version, getting rid of the "stunt" angle. But no matter. It's sure to rattle around the Republican noise machine as a 'fact' for days to come.

article and links here-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-b...m_b_22599.html

[chefmike]

Sorry shrubya...if you've "turned the corner" this many times, it means that you're going in circles, dipshit...

In Washington, the president just announced we've "turned the corner" in Iraq. He really said that. I did a Nexis search and it turns out Iraq has turned so many corners that it might as well be at the Indy 500 qualifying.

It's that kind of circular logic that explains why Bush's approval ratings are stuck just above 30 percent, close to the Jimmy Carter level during the Iranian hostage crisis, approaching Nixonian levels during the Woodstein crisis.

Remarkably, Bush has 2 1/2 years to go - that's a long time to keep your fingers crossed - and he's desperately trying to hold on to the House. It's the House, of course, that Beauprez is abandoning and where polls have generic Democrats leading generic Republicans by more than 10 percentage points.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...719785,00.html

[White_Male_Canada]

The Washington Times Slimes Democrats With a Lie


Wingers online, already high off their I-told-you-so buzz permeating from the killing of Abu Musab Zarqawi (a pro-war buzz we haven't sensed since Saddam was captured, his sons were killed, or his statute was toppled -- take your pick) were cackling over a Washington Times article posted late Thursday afternoon.

Headline: "Democrats call Zarqawi killing a stunt."

m

Ah yeah, the Fluffington post. Good for a laugh every single day :

Am I the only one who thinks this is one big scam on America and the world, to make it look like they "killed a main terrorist" and rid the world of an evil person?"

They said they identified the so called body with his fingerprints, where did they get Zarqawi's finger prints? I know he was supposedly jailed in Jordan for a while. Do they keep fingerprints on everyone in the world? This news comes as the marriage amendment failed....again Bush's poll numbers are slipping faster then a speeding nascar. I don't buy it."-- "Wahoo," a poster on Democrats.com

The WT was wrong,demoncrats are calling it a "scam "

[White_Male_Canada]

polls have generic Democrats leading generic Republicans by more than 10 percentage points.

More Fluffington Post bizaroo world non-sense.

Where "generic" democrats always win their generic election. The problem is that pesky thing called reality.

Even where the previous Republican (Cunningham) is in jail and the hopes of the radical left was for a political victory does the left manage to hang themselves.Why? Because the "generic" candidate must actually speak and say what they believe.That`s where the democrats lose.

The Republican was up against 3 candidates,2 to the right and 1 to the left,and still won in California.

Minus the two right candidates, Griffin and King, Republican Bilbray would have won by 10% points.

Keep dreaming.

[tsluver247]

I guess the political positioning on "National Security" issues and the "War on Terror" issues have begun. Let the political sniping begin.

I am still amazed how the Bush Administration continues to politicize 9/11. He uses it as a way to strip away American's Constitution. You do not have to believe me. You can read the 31 page article on the Cato Institute's website for yourself. The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank.

Power Surge: The Constitutional Record of George W. Bush by Gene Healy and Timothy Lynch

Gene Healy is senior editor and author of "Arrogance of Power Reborn: The Imperial Presidency and Foreign Policy in the Clinton Years". Timothy Lynch is director of the Project on Criminal Justice and author of "Dereliction of Duty: The Constitutional Record of President Clinton."