tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post115024725542210843..comments2023-10-21T20:04:18.267-04:00Comments on TwoConservatives: Murtha Cuts-And-Runs from his bid for Majority Leader.Charleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04551264439871137611noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158371042467182122006-09-15T21:44:00.000-04:002006-09-15T21:44:00.000-04:00I should start a new thread....The facts about Al ...I should start a new thread....<BR/><BR/>The facts about Al Qaqaa were overblown. The first reports came right after the end of the ground war, but the New York Times resurrected the story, supposedly because of a new report but it wasn't new, right before the election.<BR/><BR/>A month later, when the election was over, not a WORD about this horrible thing that had happened. The next year the truth came out, it was mostly a problem of paperwork, most of the weapons had been destroyed, but the records weren't accurate.<BR/><BR/>Also, much of the facility had been bombed during the war, destroying much of what was there.<BR/><BR/>So in fact, there was no convincing evidence that ANY weapons of consequence made it out of the facility, much less that they ended up in the hands of the enemy. <BR/><BR/>That was all covered in the followup article, which was on I think page A17 of the New York Times when it finally came out.<BR/><BR/>Since the NYTimes went behind a wall of "for-pay", I haven't been able to find my references anymore (I've got a couple of links but they don't work). When I resurrect my laptop (which has a half-dead drive) I hope to find some saved copies of the articles in question. <BR/><BR/>I was working on an article about the weapons but never finished it and decided that since it had been dropped by the MSM and the opposition, there was no need to debunk it.<BR/><BR/>But apparently not entirely.Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04551264439871137611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158295928135699382006-09-15T00:52:00.000-04:002006-09-15T00:52:00.000-04:00"I don't agree that the invasion should have been ..."I don't agree that the invasion should have been cancelled because of the problem of Turkey, although that clearly left was a problem. Invading a month later however also would have had it's problems."<BR/>I agree, a month later, Saddam may have continued to cave to UN pressure and allow MORE of the last places NOT CHECKED in Iraq, his palaces, to be inspected.<BR/><BR/>"I remember the story about the explosives "dissappearing", it was another of those Octover surprises by the NYTimes trying to defeat Bush."<BR/>:::cough:::<BR/>THE NEW YORK TIMES CREATED AL QAQAA for political gain? Son, look up the date those hundreds of tons of weaponry being used to blow our guys/gals into too many parts to count were stolen. Stop being a stick-in-the-mud dittohead. Do something useful for our troops at war.<BR/><BR/>What you've completely overlooked is the consequences of this troop shortage, Al Qaqaa. Please reread my previous post, and when you have a handle on the catastrophe of Al Qaqaa, write Larry Bailey, on my belalf:<BR/>---------------------------------------<BR/>Larry Bailey of bootmurtha.com's private email address can be found at the top of this letter. Take a moment to drop him a note to ask if he's going to cut&run from my challenge.<BR/>For some samples of Diana Irey's Cut&Runs, go here:<BR/>http://community.cnhi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38410611/m/524108205?r=587104305#587104305<BR/>----------------------------------------<BR/><BR/>Subject: RE: Iraqi Governemt Kicks Dubya's "Stay the Course" TO THE CURB! <BR/>Date: 9/14/2006 10:16:18 A.M. Eastern Standard Time <BR/>From: JournalismIsFlat <BR/>To: bootmurtha@cox.net <BR/>CC: diana@irey.com, bill@irey.com, kphiel@hotmail.com, jason@irey.com, Rusty@irey.com, lbailey@bootmurtha.com, publicist@bootmurtha.com, webmaster@bootmurtha.com, comment@bootmurtha.com, JournalismIsFlat, osc@bootmurtha.com, opditch@gmail.com <BR/><BR/><BR/>It's "Show Time", wimp.<BR/><BR/>http://community.cnhi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38410611/m/628102694?r=262105205#262105205<BR/><BR/>Cliff Hancuff<BR/>The World of Journalism Is Flat, Toochancuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09414759595667939082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158198347755131852006-09-13T21:45:00.000-04:002006-09-13T21:45:00.000-04:00The intelligence committee was split on how to wri...The intelligence committee was split on how to write up the results, and two sets of conclusions. IN the end, the former Kerry campaign staffer working for Hagel convinced Hagel and Snowe to vote with the democrats, yeilding a "bipartisan" report which was the democrat report with two republicans joining in.<BR/><BR/>In other words, it was the report written by the democrats, not the report written by the republicans.<BR/><BR/>But that's not important. The important thing is that the summary doesn't comport with the facts as written in the report.<BR/><BR/>But the summary IS in perfect alignment with the stated plan of the democrats 3 years ago in the leaked memo, which explained how the democrats would push for this investigation, cooperate until the end, and then write a report that excoriated the administration.<BR/><BR/>That was before the investigation started.<BR/><BR/>There's another part that hasn't gotten out yet, the part about what lawmakers said before the war. It's not out because the republicans have included quotes from both sides of the aisle, and don't want to specify who said what -- and the democrats realise that without names, half the quotes they criticize could end up being their own.Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04551264439871137611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158198070213802112006-09-13T21:41:00.000-04:002006-09-13T21:41:00.000-04:00OK, so we are complaining because the Swift Boat V...OK, so we are complaining because the Swift Boat Veterans, whose sole purpose was to get out what they believed to be the truth about John Kerry, in response to what they believed were lies about their own service, did not also complain about the Iraq war, something they never discussed.<BR/><BR/>I will agree that the SBV never pointed out the lack of troops in the gulf war. I also stipulate that we had 40,000 troops too few because of Turkey.<BR/><BR/>I don't agree that the invasion should have been cancelled because of the problem of Turkey, although that clearly left was a problem. Invading a month later however also would have had it's problems.<BR/><BR/>If we are complaining we shouldn't have gone to war, that would simply mirror my opinion at the time, but has nothing to do with either the SBV who were upset at Kerry's perceived lies about their records, or Murtha's current complaints. <BR/><BR/>I remember the story about the explosives "dissappearing", it was another of those Octover surprises by the NYTimes trying to defeat Bush. I remember that the day after the election, that story dissappeared. When it resurfaced a year later, it turned out that the story was largely overblown and the truth not nearly so scary.<BR/><BR/>Which doesn't change the fact that we had too few troops at the start of the Gulf war.Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04551264439871137611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158138365527972642006-09-13T05:06:00.000-04:002006-09-13T05:06:00.000-04:00RE-POST WITH EXPLANATION. THE LINKS ABOVE ARE TRUN...RE-POST WITH EXPLANATION. THE LINKS ABOVE ARE TRUNCATED AND NOT CORRECT. THE LINKS HERE MAY APPEAR THE SAME, BUT THEY POINT TO THE PROPER PLACES.<BR/>------------------------------------------------------------------<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>"Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth" ignored a couple issues CRITICAL to our troops at war during the run-up to the 2004 election.<BR/><BR/>First, they sat silent knowing full well that Bush NEVER USED the number of troops he incessantly claims his generals asked for. Turkey would not allow the 40,000 troops of the 4th to pass through and participate in Bush's invasion of Iraq. <BR/><BR/>Bush waged war KNOWING our troops were 40,000 short. <BR/><BR/>Second, these same Lookatme! Showboaters sat silent when this very same troop shortage resulted in America's greatest tragedy of the war in Iraq.<BR/><BR/>EVERYONE who's ever gone through basic training knows that when you find your enemies weapons, you keep them secure. <BR/><BR/>Hundreds of tons of high explosives that our troops had captured at Al Qaqaa were abandoned specifically due to troops shortages, CREATED by Bush's incompetence in war.<BR/><BR/>These explosive stolen from Al Qaqaa are the weapons that have been used to blow our troops into too many parts to count each and every day of this war.<BR/><BR/>When some pasty butt wimp, like Larry Bailey of bootmurtha.com, decides to pass his "gimme' some money" collection plate to support his concept of patriotism for a circus tent performance at The Cambria County War Memorial on October 1st of this year ... <BR/><BR/>Some would say there's nothing more patriotic than putting a moron who's never given a hoot about our troops at war (or he would have spoke up about those 40k troops left behind and Al Qaqaa IN 2004) in his proper place ...he's a coward.<BR/><BR/>To make matters even MORE entertaining, Larry Bailey actually thinks having John O'Neill, the original Lookatme! Show Boater, as his surprise guest speaker is a feather in his cap.<BR/><BR/>You may not like the stand John Murtha has been making, but for anyone who supports our troops at war, there's no way to respond to these idiot Swiftboaters' Reunion in Murtha's home town of Johnstown, Pa, than a chorus of Bronx raspberries.<BR/><BR/>I hope this clarifies.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Cliff Hancuff<BR/>The World of Journalism Is Flat, Too<BR/>---------------------------------------------<BR/>Things are JUST NOT GOING WELL for the folks at the "Diana Irey for Congress" camp.<BR/><BR/>Diana Irey Press Release UPDATE!<BR/><BR/><BR/>http://community.cnhi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38410611/m/911101894<BR/>(read first 4 posts, the rest if you fancy to)<BR/><BR/>http://community.cnhi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38410611/m/631100794<BR/><BR/>http://community.cnhi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38410611/m/134103794<BR/>(click all links found in post, or you will get/be lost)<BR/><BR/>http://community.cnhi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/38410611/m/197109694chancuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09414759595667939082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158138334090745412006-09-13T05:05:00.000-04:002006-09-13T05:05:00.000-04:00"For those who don't want to follow the links, han..."For those who don't want to follow the links, hancuff is apparently citing the democrat-written summary of the Intelligence Committee report to claim that the actual facts in the report deny any relationship between Saddam and Al Qaeda."<BR/><BR/>:::cough:::<BR/><BR/>The Senate Committee who wrote this report was bi-patisan, with a Republican as head.<BR/><BR/>Where do you get this stuff? :-)chancuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09414759595667939082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1158099186063118552006-09-12T18:13:00.000-04:002006-09-12T18:13:00.000-04:00good evening, Charles. I beg to differ. I don't ...good evening, Charles. I beg to differ. I don't think you'll find this update to today's GOP cut&run from facts anywhere else. It's just me.<BR/><BR/>perhaps you'll take a moment from your busy schedule to protest Bush's incompetence in war that has been getting our troops blown to bits for over 3 years.<BR/>--------------------------------------chancuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09414759595667939082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1157937266899457252006-09-10T21:14:00.000-04:002006-09-10T21:14:00.000-04:00BTW, I can't say what chancuff's motive was in pos...BTW, I can't say what chancuff's motive was in posting this -- he's either trying to point out the silliness of the argument like I did, or he wanted to advance the argument (which I think not having visited his web site).<BR/><BR/>The tag "the anatomy of ... crash and burn" suggests a post which is critical of the Irey campaign, but his blog has a single post which seem supportive of Irey.Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04551264439871137611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23490549.post-1157937056816955582006-09-10T21:10:00.000-04:002006-09-10T21:10:00.000-04:00For those who don't want to follow the links, hanc...For those who don't want to follow the links, hancuff is apparently citing the democrat-written summary of the Intelligence Committee report to claim that the actual facts in the report deny any relationship between Saddam and Al Qaeda.<BR/><BR/>In addition to being a largely moot point because the reason for going to war with Saddam had nothing to do with al-qaeda ties, it turns out that the actual report (not the summary) contains evidence of the links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, and does not support the statements of the democrats about the report.<BR/><BR/>Of course, in any case it seems the democrats want a "do-over", like if they can prove that bush lied, we can magically go back in time, put Saddam back in power, and not have a war to fight anymore.<BR/><BR/>I don't get it -- how can our decision about what to do TODAY be in any way effected by what it turns out the intelligance community got wrong before we went to war? <BR/><BR/>I thought it was absurd that we were re-fighting the decision to go to war during the 2004 election, rather than what to do in the present. But at least you could argue that the opposition wanted to punish the man who got us into the war.<BR/><BR/>But in 2006, Bush is not running. <BR/><BR/>I guess if you have nothing positive for america, you have to keep re-fighting decisions which are irreversable and made years ago.Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04551264439871137611noreply@blogger.com