a plea to all americans

In the world's hours of need........

Deep Freud Moors wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:04:44 -0500, "Tom Bellhouse"
wrote:


Interjecting here, a question about shared
intelligence. There was a story about forged
documents (through friendly intelligence agencies)
at the heart of the "nucalur material ... from
Africa" fiasco. So, * Who forged those documents,
and more important, why? * Surely by now somebody
has followed up that story.

Investigating something like that would be akin to admitting the
intelligence was ****e. And Bush has already assured us that the
intelligence was sound.

And plenty of Americans in this ng still believe everything they are
told by their leaders. What is the word that I am looking for that
would describe these people? 'Deluded' is not quite right...
---
DFM

____________________________________
Strong? Independent? Moral? Charitable?
Gee. I dunno.

....believe everything?.....
Oh, get a grip.
____________________________________
The chief source of the tainted Nigerian Uranium info was British intel
based on Italian intel that was shown to be not true only after the
police action and political carping started.
____________________________________
I am a resident of the U.S.A.
I love my state and my nation.
I have defended others.
I would do it again.
So enjoy your liberties.
Some of my friends cannot.
They died in defense of yours.
Don't like that, either? Tough.
__________________________________

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:07:10 +0100, Magda
wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:57:13 +1000, in rec.travel.europe, Deep Freud Moors
arranged some electrons, so they looked like
this :

... On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:04:44 -0500, "Tom Bellhouse"
... wrote:
...
...
... Interjecting here, a question about shared
... intelligence. There was a story about forged
... documents (through friendly intelligence agencies)
... at the heart of the "nucalur material ... from
... Africa" fiasco. So, * Who forged those documents,
... and more important, why? * Surely by now somebody
... has followed up that story.
...
... Investigating something like that would be akin to admitting the
... intelligence was ****e. And Bush has already assured us that the
... intelligence was sound.
...
... And plenty of Americans in this ng still believe everything they are
... told by their leaders. What is the word that I am looking for that
... would describe these people? 'Deluded' is not quite right...

Gullible ?

You do realize, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:07:10 +0100, Magda
wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:57:13 +1000, in rec.travel.europe, Deep Freud
Moors
arranged some electrons, so
they looked like
this :

... On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:04:44 -0500, "Tom Bellhouse"
... wrote:
...
...
... Interjecting here, a question about shared
... intelligence. There was a story about forged
... documents (through friendly intelligence agencies)
... at the heart of the "nucalur material ... from
... Africa" fiasco. So, * Who forged those documents,
... and more important, why? * Surely by now somebody
... has followed up that story.
...
... Investigating something like that would be akin to admitting the
... intelligence was ****e. And Bush has already assured us that the
... intelligence was sound.
...
... And plenty of Americans in this ng still believe everything they are
... told by their leaders. What is the word that I am looking for that
... would describe these people? 'Deluded' is not quite right...

Gullible ?

You do realize, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
you hope in vain
it is in the dictionary go:
http://tinyurl.com/2cxf3
Gullible = Leichtglaubig
---
KarlSr©

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:20:51 -0800, Karl Sigerist Sr©
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:07:10 +0100, Magda
wrote:

You do realize, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

you hope in vain
it is in the dictionary go:
http://tinyurl.com/2cxf3
Gullible = Leichtglaubig

Did it have your picture there?


************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:55:20 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:20:51 -0800, Karl Sigerist Sr©
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:07:10 +0100, Magda
wrote:

You do realize, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

you hope in vain
it is in the dictionary go:
http://tinyurl.com/2cxf3
Gullible = Leichtglaubig

Did it have your picture there?

Nice catch!
---
DFM

"Hatunen" wrote in message
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:20:51 -0800, Karl Sigerist Sr©
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message

Magda wrote:

You do realize, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

your hope is in vain
it is in the dictionary go:
http://tinyurl.com/2cxf3
Gullible = Leichtglaubig

Did it have your picture there?


No this URL points to a written dictionary, sorry no pictures
but your picture-dictionary "for the illiterate?" can be found
somewhere else,
---
KarlSr©

Magda wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:55:20 -0700, Hatunen wrote:


On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:20:51 -0800, Karl Sigerist Sr©
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:07:10 +0100, Magda
wrote:

You do realise, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

you hope in vain
it is in the dictionary go:
http://tinyurl.com/2cxf3
Gullible = Leichtglaubig

Did it have your picture there?



Want a scan of the page in my dictionary ?

(Boy, these guys are *really* gullible...)

So you went and looked it up, eh! Haw haw! GOTCHA!

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 21:24:20 -0500, The Grammer Genious
wrote:

Magda wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:55:20 -0700, Hatunen wrote:


On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:20:51 -0800, Karl Sigerist Sr©
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
m...

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:07:10 +0100, Magda
wrote:

You do realise, I hope, that the word "gullible" is not in the
dictionary.

you hope in vain
it is in the dictionary go:
http://tinyurl.com/2cxf3
Gullible = Leichtglaubig

Did it have your picture there?



Want a scan of the page in my dictionary ?

(Boy, these guys are *really* gullible...)

So you went and looked it up, eh! Haw haw! GOTCHA!

*shakes head in despair*
---
DFM

Hatunen wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 00:38:56 +0000, pmlt
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 19:34:02 -0500, nobody wrote:


Turkey from the nefarious effects of the ilegal USA invasion of Iraq. Yes, the
USA media refused to challenge what Bush said publicly.


The truth is, war sells more newspapers.

So do moon landings, major kidnappings, serial killers, etc, etc.

Afterall for the media as well it's all about business...

However it isn't fair for the general American citizen.

There's always the possibility to check other sources (media from
other countries) via the internet, but how many will do it??

You have proof that the media of other countries are neither
biased nor in it for the business?

A Pox on Fox: Latest Lies From Fox News
by Dale Steinreich
December 29, 2003

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/steinreich1.html


[i]t disturbs me because I think a lot of nasty stuff went on behind
the scenes [during Hussein's rule] that people don't know about and
they should.

~ Bill O'Reilly, Dec. 16, 2003

While the capture of Saddam Hussein has so far meant little in terms
of stemming the violence in Iraq, it has certainly emboldened the Fox
News Channel (FNC) to curiously trumpet the capture as ex post
validation of the coalition's invasion. Since Sunday December 14, FNC
has been almost one continuous Saddamathon with the now-famous footage
of the latex-gloved frisker searching Saddam triumphantly showing on
the channel almost every hour on the hour. The following is a
chronicle of recent war and other lies and spin from Fox. As with my
earlier report in June, my comments are in []s.

Sunday Dec. 14:
The Saddamathon begins. A David Lee Miller report runs several times
throughout the day purporting to be a history of Saddam's rise and
rule over Iraq. It's as if Hussein came out of nowhere to brutalize
Iraqis. [The effective lies by omission make the "report" surreal.
On the "Fair and Balanced" Fox, Miller inexplicably forgets to mention
the extensive U.S. involvement in effectively creating and sustaining
the Hussein monster: no mention of the U.S.-aided assassination of
Abdul Karem Kassim and rise of the Baathists in March 1963 (also the
U.S.-aided putsch of '68 – a great help to Saddam), no mention of
Reagan-administration support for Hussein (including ingredients for
biological and chemical weapons) during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, no
mention of former Hussein buddy Don Rumsfeld's December 19, 1983 (see
video at link) and March 24, 1984 visits to Baghdad (the latter visit
being on the very same day as press reports that a U.N. team found
that Iraqi forces had used mustard gas laced with a nerve agent on
Iranian soldiers).

There are constant references on Fox to Hussein "gassing his own
people" but no mention of Stephen Pelletiere's gutting of that tale.
Also no mention of Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly and U.S.
ambassador April Glaspie effectively giving Saddam the green light (as
Saddam apparently saw it) for his August 1990 invasion of Kuwait. No
mention of the slaughter of more than 100,000 Shiites that occurred
when the U.S. encouraged their rebellion and then failed to support
it. No mention of the estimated half million deaths from
U.S.-supported sanctions. All these topics are of course verboten on
"Fair and Balanced" Fox.]

The O'Reilly Factor (7:00 p.m. CT). O'Reilly's first guest is Marc
Ginsburg, presented not only on O'Reilly's show but numerous times on
Fox's Special Report with Brit Hume as an objective Middle-East
analyst. [Ginsburg – like the "impartial" Dennis Ross, Frank Gaffney,
and Cliff May – is of course a neocon shill every bit as much as Fox
contributors Kristol, Barnes, and Krauthammer. Sometimes Special
Report's All-Star panel is a stomach-retching neocon sandwich:
Krauthammer, Barnes, and Kristol bread with quasi-neocon Kondracke or
Sammon baloney filler laughably included for "balance."]

Next is O'Reilly's in-your-face trumpeting of a weekend report by the
appropriately named Con Coughlin of the London Telegraph supposedly
uncovering a direct link between Saddam and Osama bin Laden. The
report centers around a "top-secret memo" found by the U.S.-appointed
government of Iraq asserting that Mohammed Atta was trained in Baghdad
by Abu Nidal in the summer of 2001 just before the September 11
attacks.

Convenient for the Bush administration is that the memo was allegedly
written by the former head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam, however
the memo suggests that there really was a shipment of uranium from
Niger to Iraq after all. Further, the Niger shipment would never have
been accomplished without a "secret meeting" between Saddam and (how
convenient!!) current neocon bogeyman Syrian president Bashar
al-Assad. (You can almost hear Perle cursing in the background about
the "stupid ragheads" on Washington's payroll who manufactured the
memo but forgot that the White House conceded there was no shipment!)

[Update 12/17/03: Newsweek's Isikoff and Hosenball have labeled the
memo a probable fake, and report that the memo is "contradicted by a
wealth of information that has been collected about Atta's movements."
Despite this news, Bill O'Reilly tonight once again refers to the
Coughlin report on his show.]

[Update 12/18/03: California Republican Congressman David Drier on
Hannity and Colmes twice cites the Telegraph article based on the
fraudulent memo as evidence for a Saddam-al Qaeda link. Hannity also
briefly adduced the fraud toward the beginning of his show.]

[Recall Con artist Coughlin's visit to Fox in late April to trumpet
the Telegraph's Inigo Gilmore report claiming to find "the first proof
of direct links" between Saddam and bin Laden. We were to believe
that Gilmore just "sweet talked" his way past the 3rd Infantry into
the Mukbaharat to somehow find documents sitting out in the open that
the CIA just happened to miss. Because it followed so closely on the
heels of other false reports, few gave any credence to the article.
Interesting also for Con Man has been his recent work attempting to
bolster Tony "Bliar's" notorious and laughable 45-minute claim.

With regard to the neocon obsession with finding a link between Saddam
and 9-11/al Qaeda, recall also Fox's role in mid-November of playing
up Stephen Hayes' article in the Weekly Standard "Case Closed," which
supposedly provided proof of not just a link but a long-standing
"operational relationship" between Saddam and bin Laden. The article
wasn't much more than a collection of assertions from raw intelligence
data. Fox presented the article's contents as fact all day on
November 15, the same day as a DOD statement which labeled such
reporting "inaccurate." Fox still presented the article's assertions
as fact for another two days!]

Monday Dec. 15:
Fox and Friends. Fox Business analyst Neil Cavuto predicts a market
rally from the Saddam capture. [The know-nothing Cavuto, who
sometimes seems like he can't tell preferred stock from livestock, is
wrong as securities markets from NYSE (down 0.39%) to AMEX (down
0.59%) to NASDAQ (down 1.58%) all close down for the day. Even the
Wilshire 5000 is down 0.76%. Yeah, I'd say the markets were impressed
with the capture, Neil.]

It's Joe Lieberman Day at Fox, as footage of his comment that if
Howard Dean had his way, Saddam would still be in power is running
almost as much as the footage (running practically every ten minutes)
of the latex-gloved guy searching Saddam's hair and mouth for
insurgent cooties. [Fox really has their sites set on Dean. The
constant playing and replaying of the latex-gloved guy frisking the
mangy Saddam becomes so annoying I have to turn off Fox for the day.
Judging by reports about Fox e-mail, even many of the network's fans
are annoyed.]

Tuesday Dec. 16:
Your World with Neil Cavuto. Midway through the show (3:31 p.m. CT)
Cavuto refers to the day's stock-market performance as the Saddam
Rally. [I guess the Saddam Rally could have come next February if the
market's next rise hadn't been until then.]

Cavuto (3:49 p.m. CT) gives the frothing pro-war president of the
Catholic League, William Donohue, a platform to bash Cardinal Renato
Martino. Donohue says Martino only represents "the total fringe" in
the Catholic church. He claims that Catholics the world over were in
favor of the war. [Anti-war Catholics?! Why there's almost no such
thing!]

Special Report with Brit Hume (5:00 p.m. CT). A report by Bret Baier
on how the capture of Saddam with documents has yielded all sorts of
supposed benefits in terms of fighting the insurgency network. [Fox
journalists appear bent on showing immediate benefits, no matter how
vague or assertive, of Saddam's capture.] Reporter Mike Emanuel
repeats the tired lie that the U.S. killed 54 guerrillas in Samarra.
[Nine dead civilians is apparently the real story.] Footage is aired
of Don Rumsfeld claiming that Saddam's spider hole could hold WMD that
could kill scores of people. [Maybe true, but the misleading
implication Rumsfeld and (at times) Fox are trying to advance is that
the WMD jackpot, like Saddam, can be found with enough searching.]

The O'Reilly Factor (7:00 p.m. CT). [This was the most unbelievable
episode I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot.] In his opening
monologue O'Reilly rips into Cardinal Martino, but (unlike Hannity
later in the night) charitably quotes him: "I felt pity to see this
man destroyed. The military looking at his teeth, as if he were a
beast. They could have spared us these pictures. Seeing him like
this, a man in his tragedy, despite all the heavy blame he bears, I
had a sense of compassion for him." [Hannity removed the words in
bold italics.]

O'REILLY [Talking Points Memo]: The problem with the Vatican and the
UN and others who have no solution to fascism, terror, atrocities, and
mass murder is that they live in a dream world and they are afforded
that luxury by America, Britain, and other free nations who stood up
to the Nazis, communists, Japanese imperialists, and now the
terrorists. Cardinal Martino and Kofi Annan may be well intentioned
but they are not looking out for us. And we are the only thing
standing between them and a bullet to the head.

[The Vatican has no solution, lives in a dream world, and would get a
bullet to the head without the U.S.A.? O'Reilly next debates Father
Ryscavage, a Jesuit priest over the appropriateness of the humiliating
footage of Hussein.]

O'REILLY: Father, I don't get it here. I think that God actually
orchestrated this [the capture of Hussein], this is how religious I
am...you would censor that image?
RYSCAVAGE: I would censor the image of him being humiliated in
public.
O'REILLY: I would have no problem brutalizing this man to protect
others, to find out what he knows. I would not believe that would be
sinful, Father.
RYSCAVAGE: The Church provides a moral framework for decisions, it
doesn't tell you what you have to decide.
O'REILLY: Martino has been rabidly anti-American in this whole
campaign, in the beginning the Pontiff and this cardinal declared the
war immoral. I thought that declaration was immoral because of all
the people who have been killed by Saddam.

[Update 12/23: Recent reports have the Kurds orchestrating the
capture of Hussein. Fox has yet to mention these even to deny them.]

[Next came one of the most shocking exchanges, marking a new level of
overt depravity even for Fox.]

O'REILLY: Let me ask you about Jesus in the temple, driving the money
changers out with a whip. Was he affording those people dignity,
Father?
RYSCAVAGE: He was protecting the dignity of the temple, the people
who prayed in it and the merchants who worked in it.
O'REILLY: That's exactly what President Bush and the U.S.A. was [sic]
doing when they went in to remove Saddam. They were protecting the
dignity of the Iraqi people and they were protecting the dignity of
the world so we wouldn't have to deal with a guy who clearly was out
to hurt people...So we were doing exactly what Jesus did in the
temple, weren't we?
FATHER RYSCAVAGE: No, I don't think so.

[There you have it! George W. Bush and the U.S.A. "exactly" as Jesus
in the temple. This from the No Spin Zone.]

Hannity and Colmes (8:00 p.m. CT). Torture Saddam Day on H&C, with
Bill Bennett and Sean Hannity enthusiastic interlocutors on the
subject.
BENNETT: ...if it's the only means necessary to get information out
of him which will save other people...then yes I would do it...I would
not be reluctant to use fairly strong pressure.
COLMES: What do you mean?
BENNETT: The standard things people do. Sodium pentathol, needles
under the finger nails...I would do it publicly, admit I was doing it,
and say why I was doing it.

Hannity quotes Cardinal Martino, careful to doctor the quote
(especially on screen) to remove Martino's statement about Hussein
bearing blame for his predicament:
HANNITY [verbatim as if quoting Martino]: "I feel pity at seeing this
destroyed man treated like a cow, having his teeth checked. I have
seen this man in his tragedy. I have a sense of compassion." That's
fine but where has he [Martino] been for the compassion [sic] of all
the people that have been murdered all these years? I find this
embarrassing as a Catholic.
BENNETT: ...the Vatican has missed some things in the last couple
years, they've missed the moral significance of some things going on
in their own church and they've missed the moral significance of this
war.

[Of course there's no moral significance in a soi disant virtue czar
gambling away half a million dollars at the Bellagio in one weekend
while there are children starving in Iraq. Oh, that's right, Bennett
quit his lavish gambling for some reason.]

Wednesday December 17
Fox and Friends (5:00 a.m. CT). More denouncing of the Pope for being
anti-war. Host Brian Kilmeade celebrates the U.S.-appointed Iraq
foreign minister's condemnation of the UN for hindering the U.S.-led
invasion of Iraq. [As if there's any significance to what a U.S.
puppet minister thinks.] Then (7:10 CT) Kilmeade tells the Fox
audience that what's so neat about Hussein being handed over to the
CIA is that although they can't torture him, they can deprive him of
sleep, food, and light as well as blast him with unpleasant music.
[Kilmeade is a hilarious and psittacine disaster who shows what
happens when a sports reporter crosses over to serious news analysis.]

Host Steve Doocy proudly shows the audience photos of his family
socially cavorting with Don Rumsfeld and White House staff member
Bradley Blakeman. [Now try to imagine how conservatives, Republicans,
and latex-gloved friskers would have greeted say, CNN, for having a
morning show with hosts that cheered the Clintons, openly showed
themselves socially cavorting with their staff, while CNN claimed to
be "Fair and Balanced."]

O'Reilly Factor (7:00 p.m. CT). O'Reilly's opening monologue is
entitled "The Death of Shame in America." He cites "dishonest news
analysis" as a symptom of the death of shame. [No irony there! His
first guest is this odd ex-CIA guy who keeps referring to Hussein over
and over as "the hard drive:" "We will not take a sledge hammer to
the hard drive."]

O'REILLY: What about sodium pentathol, mind altering drugs,
chemicals, things like that?
SIMMONS: Fair game, absolutely fair game.
[There are U.S. officials – especially ex-CIA types like the guest –
who have almost, if not as much, information as Hussein has, since he
was their on-again, off-again employee. Will they be tortured as
well?]

(7:15 p.m. CT) O'Reilly tells Jessica Stern from Harvard's Kennedy
School that Syria and Iran should be nervous if they've hidden
Saddam's WMD. [Fox bashes Madeleine Albright for her nutty conspiracy
theory that Bush has bin Laden hidden away, yet they employ a grown
man who thinks it plausible that Syria or Iran has Saddam's
non-existent WMD.]

O'Reilly (7:38 p.m. CT) is enraged that Drudge exposed his Today show
lie that his new book is rivaling Hillary Clinton's in sales.
[O'Reilly's book sales aren't even half of Clinton's and are quite a
bit below those of his arch-enemy Al Franken. By the way, Matt,
O'Reilly repeated the same lie on his own show on Monday.] O'Reilly
states that "you can't believe a thing Matt Drudge says" yet doesn't
correct Drudge and calls Internet journalism "a threat to democracy."

[Recall O'Reilly suggesting on June 16 of this year that the Internet
should be federally regulated to prevent falsehoods from being told!
Apparently the big government-media establishment is the only entity
that should be able to lie with impunity. O'Reilly's two guests, Liz
Trotta and Quentin Hardy of Forbes, start fighting over whether
Internet free speech should be shut down because, God forbid, it's
allowing citizen journalists to have their say and that, according to
Trotta, has made the Internet "a garbage dump."]

HARDY: Are you telling me you want to shut down the Internet and keep
people from finding out information?
TROTTA: No, I want to keep it responsible and safe for democracy
instead of a garbage can for people's ridiculous fantasies.
O'REILLY: Shouldn't there be some standards of behavior, some kind of
standard?
TROTTA: Exactly.
HARDY: I believe the viewers can judge for themselves.
O'REILLY: Do you?

Hannity and Colmes (8:40 p.m. CT). When Hannity brings up the subject
of 270 mass graves under Hussein, actor Mike Farrell fights constant
interruptions from Hannity to point out that the mass graves were
mainly filled in during the Reagan and Bush I administrations.
[Hannity's brilliant rebuttal: "Oh, it's Reagan's fault!"]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, enough of Fox. The last four days have been quite a
re-education for me. Here's what I learned: that the history of
Hussein's rule of Iraq is relevant, but only selectively. The dirty
business that France, Russia, and Germany did with Hussein is an
endless outrage but when it comes to the U.S., no discussion is
allowed with offenders interrupted, shouted down, and called names. I
learned that the Internet needs federal regulation ("standards")
because the bad, bad people who write on it spin, distort, and
propagandize. "We Report, You Decide" is appropriate for Fox, but for
some reason I missed, not for the Internet.

I also learned that it's a respectable view (with no evidence
provided) that Saddam's WMD could be hidden in Iran or Syria and that
it couldn't possibly be a coincidence that those are the two nations
that our beloved neocons want to invade next. Most important of all,
I learned that George W. Bush and the U.S.A. are now Jesus, roaming
the world with a whip to root out sin and iniquity. Poor Jesus. I
guess He should feel so lucky to be compared to George W. Bush.

Dr. Dale Steinreich is a contributor to AgainstTheCrowd.com and an
adjunct scholar of the Mises Institute.