If the NY Times were to report D-Day today:

cincybearcat

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

That this whole thing could've been prevented but a procrastinator (i use that term loosely. Mentally retarded would probably suit him better) decided to go on vacation decided to leave it for another day.

I think it safe to say that America didn't take the threat as seriosuly as it should have....long ago and up to 9/11/01. Sure, people talked about it, btu we did very little. That's true.

Vedderlution_Baby

cincybearcat wrote:

I think it safe to say that America didn't take the threat as seriosuly as it should have....long ago and up to 9/11/01. Sure, people talked about it, btu we did very little. That's true.

it just upsets me. Sorry if it seemed like i was directly attacking you. I just pisses me off that all of the information was handed to this administration and they just laid it on a desk, without doing anything about it.

Bu2

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

it just upsets me. Sorry if it seemed like i was directly attacking you. I just pisses me off that all of the information was handed to this administration and they just laid it on a desk, without doing anything about it.

And when we "went to war with" Iraq, a lot of people had access to the briefings that warned we'd be stuck there and we'd lose a lot of American lives and we'd spend a lot of American dollars (borrowed from China, no less) but did our Senators, et.al., read the briefings? No. Only about 7 of them did. Hillary wasn't one of them. I don't believe Biden was one of them. Edwards wasn't one of them either. Only 7 or 8 people read the full briefings.

Yet Hillary and Edwards have the nerve to stand up there with Obama the other night, in the second Dem presidential debate, and both of them act as though Obama is the new, dumb, kid on the block.

Meanwhile Obama, back in 2002 wasn't yet a US Senator and didn't have access to those briefings but he already KNEW what would happen.

*whups Hillary and John upside the head and down the backside with the briefing neither read*

And don't get me started on the Republicans....

even flow?

Drew263 wrote:

June 6, 1944. -NORMANDY- Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children.

After going home and watching a few shows on the whole invasion, I found this to be pretty stupid considering how many people got killed.

Then I reread this this morning and I now know why America thinks they won the entire war all by themselves. First paragraph explains that there were no other military might involved. The guy who put this garbage together must have been skooled in Yankyville. "America's invasion". ha ha

Discussing war is one thing. Making fun of an event that probably turned the tide in a war, just to get a silly point across is another. Comparing the controlling of oil fields for greed and the fact that the American public will swallow any excuse to go to war and when they are wrong or bad just substitute it with another to make them feel good is what this tool should have really typed about.

Drew263

RainDog wrote:

Drew, I'm sorry, but I didn't get past the second paragraph of this utter shit. There are a few things to remember:
1. Hitler wasn't the soverign ruler of France.
2. Hitler's power in France wasn't secured by American involvement and support for fifteen years prior to D-day.
3. Hitler isn't Saddam Hussein anymore than he's George W. Bush.

I could write an article similar to this, only casting Iraq as France, the U.S. as Germany, Britian as Italy, and the insurgents as the French underground - but I've long since realized that the axiom "Mention Hitler and you Lose the Argument" is true.

Reminder: The Iraq War Is Not World War II.

It's just a joke. Sometimes we all need a laugh. Everyone chill.

Some of you get your panties in a wad way too easily..(in even flow?'s case, a thong )

suntzu98

Just be honest here the NYT is a leftist paper, and has been for quite some time now; just be honest. What has really been pissing me off lately is Bush has kept people in this country safe since Sept 12, 2001 and no one and I fucking mean no one gives him credit for any of this. There have been numerous plots to kill innocent Americans since 9/11 and yet all we seem to worry about is his approval rating, or the Iraq Budget witn pork tenderloins all of it, Harry Reid comes to mind and his state of Nevada. They reported this story underneath why Fuddrucker's is a good spot for children's bday parties. Are you fucking serious? If FDR was a Rep, the NYT would crucify him if it wasn't going well, since he wasn't and if we lost, the NYT would report that it was Rep's fault for not giving enough support.

RainDog

suntzu98 wrote:

Just be honest here the NYT is a leftist paper, and has been for quite some time now; just be honest. What has really been pissing me off lately is Bush has kept people in this country safe since Sept 12, 2001 and no one and I fucking mean no one gives him credit for any of this. There have been numerous plots to kill innocent Americans since 9/11 and yet all we seem to worry about is his approval rating, or the Iraq Budget witn pork tenderloins all of it, Harry Reid comes to mind and his state of Nevada. They reported this story underneath why Fuddrucker's is a good spot for children's bday parties. Are you fucking serious? If FDR was a Rep, the NYT would crucify him if it wasn't going well, since he wasn't and if we lost, the NYT would report that it was Rep's fault for not giving enough support.

This story? Which story are you talking about?

"For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."
- Sun Tzu

Drew263

suntzu98 wrote:

Just be honest here the NYT is a leftist paper, and has been for quite some time now; just be honest.

See..to the leftists, it's not a leftist paper. It's the "news". But don't get them started on Foxnews Channel. THAT is just propaganda.

See how it works?

RainDog

Drew263 wrote:

See..to the leftists, it's not a leftist paper. It's the "news". But don't get them started on Foxnews Channel. THAT is just propaganda.

See how it works?

I'd pit the New York Times journalistic integrity over Fox News (i.e. the New York Post, if I'm not mistaken) any day.

Hey, how about Fox News's William Jefferson coverage? They figured out who he is yet, or are they still randomly pointing cameras at black congressmen and shouting "thar 'e is"?

mammasan

suntzu98 wrote:

Just be honest here the NYT is a leftist paper, and has been for quite some time now; just be honest. What has really been pissing me off lately is Bush has kept people in this country safe since Sept 12, 2001 and no one and I fucking mean no one gives him credit for any of this. There have been numerous plots to kill innocent Americans since 9/11 and yet all we seem to worry about is his approval rating, or the Iraq Budget witn pork tenderloins all of it, Harry Reid comes to mind and his state of Nevada. They reported this story underneath why Fuddrucker's is a good spot for children's bday parties. Are you fucking serious? If FDR was a Rep, the NYT would crucify him if it wasn't going well, since he wasn't and if we lost, the NYT would report that it was Rep's fault for not giving enough support.

We where safe during most of Clinton's administration as well, except for the first WTC attack, does anyone give him credit for that. 9/11 was a one in a billion shot in the dark. Most plans are broken up prior to the attack occuring because of the work of law enforcement, be it federal, state or local. It's not really the president who protects us it's the people out in the field. I wouldn't give the president credit for keeping us safe just as I wouldn't blame the presidnet for the actual attack.

mammasan

Drew263 wrote:

See..to the leftists, it's not a leftist paper. It's the "news". But don't get them started on Foxnews Channel. THAT is just propaganda.

See how it works?

It's the New York Times what do you expect. A paper based in one of the most liberal cities in the country sure as hell isn't going to be leaning to the right.

Drew263

mammasan wrote:

It's the New York Times what do you expect. A paper based in one of the most liberal cities in the country sure as hell isn't going to be leaning to the right.

I'm not arguing that. I'm talking about the people here..not the paper.

Drew263

RainDog wrote:

I'd pit the New York Times journalistic integrity over Fox News (i.e. the New York Post, if I'm not mistaken) any day.

Hey, how about Fox News's William Jefferson coverage? They figured out who he is yet, or are they still randomly pointing cameras at black congressmen and shouting "thar 'e is"?

Of course you would, that's my point.

How much coverage is that story getting in the Times?

$90k in his freezer...nothing to see here..move along..nothing to see here.

RainDog

Drew263 wrote:

Of course you would, that's my point.

How much coverage is that story getting in the Times?

$90k in his freezer...nothing to see here..move along..nothing to see here.

Well, I don't usually buy the Times, but considering I saw it on the cover of just about every newspaper when the indictment was handed down, I'd say plenty. Only, see, in those newspapers, they showed a picture of the right black congressman.

NCfan

RainDog wrote:

I'd pit the New York Times journalistic integrity over Fox News (i.e. the New York Post, if I'm not mistaken) any day.

Hey, how about Fox News's William Jefferson coverage? They figured out who he is yet, or are they still randomly pointing cameras at black congressmen and shouting "thar 'e is"?

OMG, first of all you can't have a straight comparison becuase one is a cable news outlet and the other is a news paper. What a cheap shot with the Jefferson flub!

NCfan

mammasan wrote:

We where safe during most of Clinton's administration as well, except for the first WTC attack, does anyone give him credit for that. 9/11 was a one in a billion shot in the dark. Most plans are broken up prior to the attack occuring because of the work of law enforcement, be it federal, state or local. It's not really the president who protects us it's the people out in the field. I wouldn't give the president credit for keeping us safe just as I wouldn't blame the presidnet for the actual attack.

This global Jihad didn't even get going until late into Clinton's second term. The Taliban didn't take over in Afghanistan until what, 1997? Still, I'll give him credit where credit is due. I'm not bashing Clinton, personally I thought he was a pretty good president.

RainDog

NCfan wrote:

OMG, first of all you can't have a straight comparison becuase one is a cable news outlet and the other is a news paper. What a cheap shot with the Jefferson flub!

Well, if you'll read up a bit, you'll see I'm not the one who made the original comparison.

As for the cheap shot, well why not? Fox News is the cheap shot network, and I never claimed to be above them. Besides, it was funny.

mammasan

NCfan wrote:

This global Jihad didn't even get going until late into Clinton's second term. The Taliban didn't take over in Afghanistan until what, 1997? Still, I'll give him credit where credit is due. I'm not bashing Clinton, personally I thought he was a pretty good president.

My point is, and maybe i didn't express it clearly, is that the President hasn't done anything substancial to safe guard our country. WE are protected by the people in law inforcement and the intelligence community. The same way these people protected us prior to 9/11.

VictoryGin

NCfan wrote:

OMG, first of all you can't have a straight comparison becuase one is a cable news outlet and the other is a news paper. What a cheap shot with the Jefferson flub!

new york post is a paper. it is owned by r.murdoch's news corp. it's a paper that i'm sure had the JFK TERROR PLOT [TO KILL US ALL BECAUSE THEY HATE US] on the cover, just like they had paris hilton's prison photo on the cover this week and a-rod's stripper lady friend recently.

NYT to NYP comparison is completely valid, well at least in the sense that they are both paper objects.

Pacomc79

I always considered the NY Post to be a tabloid???