And about my records,wait, I didn't say anything about any records - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-01-2004, 05:30 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:58 AM
And about my records,wait, I didn't say anything about any records

Yikes, Tom Brokaw slipped up and allowed John Kerry to admit that he hadn't released all of his millitary records
Quote:
Brokaw: Someone has analyzed the President's military aptitude tests and yours, and concluded that he has a higher IQ than you do.

Kerry: That's great. More power. I don't know how they've done it, because my record is not public. So I don't know where you're getting that from.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6354942/

well thats all fine, its good to see a politician be honest to the people, but unfortunately the MinTruth didn't care too much for it
Quote:
Brokaw: "Someone has analyzed the president's military aptitude tests and yours, and concluded that he has a higher IQ than you do."

Kerry: "That's great. More power. I don't know how they've done it."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6363856/

Like magic a slip of the tongue can just dissapear as if it never existed. So lets see what other wierd and wonderful stories the media can hide from us about that superman that is Kerry.
Quote:
Brokaw: This week you've been very critical of the president because of the missing explosives in Iraq. The fact is, senator, we still don't know what happened to those explosives. How many for sure that were there. Who might have gotten away with them? Is it unfair to the president, just as you believe he's been unfair to you, to blame him for that?

Kerry: No. It's not unfair. Because what we do know, from the commanders on the ground, is that they went there, as they marched to Baghdad. We even read stories today that they broke locks off of the doors, took photographs of materials in there. There were materials. And they left.

Brokaw: The flip side of that is that if you had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. Because you...

Kerry: Not necessarily at all.

Brokaw: But you have said you wouldn't go to war against him...

Kerry: That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons.

Brokaw: But he wasn't destroying them...

Kerry: But that's what you have inspectors for. And that's why I voted for the threat of force. Because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war. And we might have gone to war. But if we did, I'll tell you this, Tom. We'd have gone to war with allies in a way that the American people weren't carrying the burden. And the entire world would have understood why we were doing it.
Hmmm, not quite nuanced enough - needs a little bit more slight on there to make it more believable.
Quote:
Brokaw: "The fact is, Senator, we still don't know what happened to those explosives, how many for sure that were there, who might have gotten away with them. Is it unfair to the president, just as you believe he's been unfair to you, to blame him for that?"

Kerry: "No. It's not unfair. The truth is, they were warned about the ammunition dumps. They didn't give the right orders. They didn't secure it. The ammunition is missing. Those are the facts. And it happened on this president's watch."

Brokaw: "The flip side of that is that if you had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. Because you—"

Kerry: "Not necessarily at all."

Brokaw: "Well, you have said you wouldn't go to war against him. And he would have his hand on those 350,000 tons, or however—"

Kerry: "No. Tom."

Brokaw: "Three hundred and fifty tons, or however many it is."

Kerry: "No, that's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons."

Brokaw: "But he wasn't destroying them."

Kerry: "And we would, but that's what you have inspectors for. And that's why I voted for the threat of force. Because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war. And we might have gone to war. But if we did, I'll tell you this, Tom. We'd have gone to war with allies in a way that the American people weren't carrying the burden, and the entire world understood why we were doing it."
Well it does look less like Kerry blames the troops themselves from walking away in this "special edition" of the interview. Now it doesn't completely diminish the circular logic that Kerry puts upon UN inspectors solving the problem, even though the material was supposed to be destroyed several years ago, oh well - with friends like these in the media you can only blame yourself when you loose.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 06:52 AM   #2
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 340
Local Time: 12:58 PM
I think Kerry's wrong, in that this stuff was supposed to be destroyed years ago. From what I've read, Iraq was allowed to have these explosives.
__________________

__________________
strannix is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 06:58 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:58 AM
The US petitioned the IAEA to destroy it in the mid 1990's, as such beurocracies work it was determined that it was perfectly alright for the regime to maintain these materials provided the IAEA put seals out front.

The issue at stake here is not about the explosives (they were a dud anyway) but media responsibility, is it right for the media to pursue one candidate strongly while covering up the mistakes of (as displayed here) and smearing the opponents of (the Swiftboat Veteran's for Truth) another candidate during an election.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 07:26 AM   #4
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 340
Local Time: 12:58 PM
Quote:
The issue at stake here is not about the explosives (they were a dud anyway) but media responsibility, is it right for the media to pursue one candidate strongly while covering up the mistakes of (as displayed here) and smearing the opponents of (the Swiftboat Veteran's for Truth) another candidate during an election.
Groan.

Look, I'll say it as simply as I can. If the media were really out to get Bush, he'd have been impeached and probably imprisoned by now. Count your blessings, Bush fans.
__________________
strannix is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 07:35 AM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:58 AM
No there is not some nefarious massive conspiracy by the owners of the media to go out and get Bush, the man (Rove) knows how to play it like a fiddle but there are some journalists who would allow their dislike of Bush to get the better of their journalistic standards, case in point Dan Rather and the Fabricated TANG documents. Right here you can see the altered transcript that displays Kerry in a more favourable light, is this dishonesty excusable when it is for the greater good.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 01:12 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Elvis Presley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: eachnotesecure.com
Posts: 5,058
Local Time: 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
No there is not some nefarious massive conspiracy by the owners of the media to go out and get Bush, the man (Rove) knows how to play it like a fiddle but there are some journalists who would allow their dislike of Bush to get the better of their journalistic standards, case in point Dan Rather and the Fabricated TANG documents. Right here you can see the altered transcript that displays Kerry in a more favourable light, is this dishonesty excusable when it is for the greater good.
No it is not excuseable. I sometimes wonder how these men can call themselves journalists. At least Micheal Moore can say that his movie is for "entertainment".....
__________________
Elvis Presley is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 01:19 PM   #7
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,447
Local Time: 01:58 PM
unfortunately this is nothing new

and on a side note... reading kerry's real explanations makes my head want to explode.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com