Tell that to the people who watched it. Everyone I know who watched it without looking up the evidence said that Bush let them go. The way it was presented made it seem like Bush did it. The scene takes place at the airport on the day flights are starting up again after 9/11 with the bin Ladens waiting to fly. They didn't actually fly for another 2 weeks, once they were cleared by the FBI. But again, Moore made it seem they flew that day. It was all deliberately misleading and left out crucial facts. The whole movie is that way.
It's not a surprise they ate soup. It's a surprise we actually found some that old. Fossils stick around a while in the ground. Some metals, stones, etc preserve well. Soup? It's a rare find. If someone makes some soup, it's usually then eaten. If they died before eating, it would likely have been eaten by someone else, spilt, or otherwise lost or destroyed in the next 24 centuries. So yes, it's surprising to find old soup.
Oh christ, just one? Google Fahrenheit 9/11 and error, or hoax, or lies. He accused someone who said he had a toll free number of not even having a 1-800 number...it was a 1-888 number. He said the White House let the bin Ladens leave after 9/11, implying Bush just let them go. Actually, someone else in the White House let them go after the FBI investigated them for 2 weeks. His movies are filled with blatant lies and deliberate misrepresentations. I wouldn't trust a single thing he says, even this.
All right... all right... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans ever done for us?
As opposed to what? The good ol' days when editors read the articles and proof-read submissions? When men were real men, and small furry creatures, etc etc.
That's the way it goes? So you can claim that it never happened without offering any proof other than that one of the networks that reported it also reports things with which you disagree? I would have thought the onus would be on you too. Oh well, here's another couple of links.
I can do this all day, since you apparently can't. Saying I do this for a living and asking what you do is not an ad hominem attack, regardless of how snarkilly I say it. It's directly relevant to the conversation. Your comment about "your cut-price low tax state gave you after cutting back education" and "putting together glorified high school reports from people that don't even speak the fucking language " and "you wouldn't have written the recycled Fox bullshit" when what I posted didn't come from Fox all sound like personal attacks not relevant to the discussion. I am in fact a senior all-source intelligence analyst with 14 years experience in the intelligence community, and have created products using methods such as Social Network Analysis at about a Master's level, Analysis of Competing Hypotheses, human factors analysis, et al, a far cry from "glorified high school projects".
To get back to the point, there are multiple reports of the Taliban targeting the sources reported in wikileaks, in US papers and UK papers as well. We know there are sources named in the leaked documents (it was one of the first things announced in the press). It stands to reason that the Taliban would then target them (why would they let spies just stay in their midst?). IF the Taliban were not in fact targeting them, there should be a reason why there are so many reports in so many newspapers in the US and UK that say they are. No reasons come to mind. My bullshit detector is not going off here. You, on the other hand, rejected all the reports outright on the sole grounds that a news station, Fox, that also separately reports things you disagree with, also reported this, as if the station can never report anything that is true. You have since refused to offer any other evidence or logical argument. My bullshit detector is going off, and it's pointed at you.
Joking aside, I think she simply meant that we should do more to find him than issue a warrant and wait for him to turn up. I think she was saying we should use the tried and true methods used in Afghanistan and elsewhere to Find-Fix-Finish him, ie track his communications, determine where he beds down, and arrest him in the middle of the night.
That and his entire platform consisted of, "I was in 'Nam." The fact that he negotiated on the part of US with the Vietnamese in 1973 without the government's consent (which is in the definition of treason) didn't help either.
*Sigh* Not this again. OK, first of all, my nick is a term used in intel analysis. As with most things, there's a great page on wikipedia on it. Then there's my blog link where I have pics of Iraq and posts about analytical tools. FYI, everything I've said is found on the internet and I did not say what exactly I do. I did not disclose anything sensitive or classified. And I've done more than "write glorified high school reports". And I don't watch Fox News, partly because I don't have a TV. I've also taught critical thinking (aka bullshit detecting) for several years, so I think I can handle myself here. The leaked information contained sources and methods. There are multiple reports of the Taliban then targeting them. If you have some credible evidence that this "certainly never happened", please provide it already and quit with the pointless (and completely inaccurate) ad hominem attacks.
Wow, interesting comeback. Actually, I'm an intelligence analyst and do this for a living (what do you do again?). Quite well-read too thankyouverymuch, and haven't read fiction in over 7 years. We knew there were going to be sources and methods in the leaked information before it was leaked, BECAUSE THEY TOLD US, just like we know the next batch is going to contain information on banks. It was quite well known. And what do you think would happen to sensitive sources placed in hostile territory?
Thanks for trying, but no. And in the future, if you're going to make blanket statements that something never happened, you could try, I don't know, googling it first. There's tons of hits for Taliban punish sources wikileaks.
I really just can't let this ludicrous attempt at logic stand. You're projecting your hate of Republicans on me, a liberal Nader supporter, and accuse me of being in denial and not properly using evidence. Ironic much? To which you add some drivel about torture and bin Laden, as if the two are somehow related. We know where he is. In a sovereign nuclear nation that does not want us there. Would you like us to invade Pakistan? Maybe if Obama invades a country it'll better than if mean 'ol Bush does it, right?
I voted for Nader. But hey, since everyone who disagrees with you is wrong, why bother with troublesome facts? Like I said, it doesn't make a difference anyway, and you proved my point again.
Yeah, I guess my 14 years in the intelligence community and my trip to GTMO to train interrogators at Camp Delta haven't prepared me for "what torture really is all about" as...what do you do again? Help desk? Programmer?
Funny, waterboarding is the only form of "torture" that Marines do to each other on weekends for fun. Not even remotely kidding. I was in the Marines, and I have friends who waterboard each other for fun.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell that to the people who watched it. Everyone I know who watched it without looking up the evidence said that Bush let them go. The way it was presented made it seem like Bush did it. The scene takes place at the airport on the day flights are starting up again after 9/11 with the bin Ladens waiting to fly. They didn't actually fly for another 2 weeks, once they were cleared by the FBI. But again, Moore made it seem they flew that day. It was all deliberately misleading and left out crucial facts. The whole movie is that way.
It's not a surprise they ate soup. It's a surprise we actually found some that old. Fossils stick around a while in the ground. Some metals, stones, etc preserve well. Soup? It's a rare find. If someone makes some soup, it's usually then eaten. If they died before eating, it would likely have been eaten by someone else, spilt, or otherwise lost or destroyed in the next 24 centuries. So yes, it's surprising to find old soup.
It should be served as leftovers. You know, tomb marrow will be better.
OK, honestly, I think that was the worst pun I've ever used. I'll show myself out now.
Oh christ, just one? Google Fahrenheit 9/11 and error, or hoax, or lies. He accused someone who said he had a toll free number of not even having a 1-800 number...it was a 1-888 number. He said the White House let the bin Ladens leave after 9/11, implying Bush just let them go. Actually, someone else in the White House let them go after the FBI investigated them for 2 weeks. His movies are filled with blatant lies and deliberate misrepresentations. I wouldn't trust a single thing he says, even this.
What a coincidence! That's the combination to the airlock protecting the planet!
All right ... all right ... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order ... what have the Romans ever done for us?
Sure, but how many thieves have 18/100 STR? Wait, wait, we're taking about fighters switching classes. My bad.
And what's the thief supposed to use, mythril lock picks? Hmm?
As opposed to what? The good ol' days when editors read the articles and proof-read submissions? When men were real men, and small furry creatures, etc etc.
That's the way it goes? So you can claim that it never happened without offering any proof other than that one of the networks that reported it also reports things with which you disagree? I would have thought the onus would be on you too. Oh well, here's another couple of links.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/wikikills_LBS03WQRVZuuTYuTYN2t5L
http://www.registan.net/index.php/2010/07/30/taliban-use-wikileaks-to-hunt-murder-named-afghans/
http://www.dailytech.com/Taliban+Murders+Afghan+Elder+Thanks+Wikileaks+for+Revealing+Spies/article19250.htm
I can do this all day, since you apparently can't. Saying I do this for a living and asking what you do is not an ad hominem attack, regardless of how snarkilly I say it. It's directly relevant to the conversation. Your comment about "your cut-price low tax state gave you after cutting back education" and "putting together glorified high school reports from people that don't even speak the fucking language " and "you wouldn't have written the recycled Fox bullshit" when what I posted didn't come from Fox all sound like personal attacks not relevant to the discussion. I am in fact a senior all-source intelligence analyst with 14 years experience in the intelligence community, and have created products using methods such as Social Network Analysis at about a Master's level, Analysis of Competing Hypotheses, human factors analysis, et al, a far cry from "glorified high school projects".
To get back to the point, there are multiple reports of the Taliban targeting the sources reported in wikileaks, in US papers and UK papers as well. We know there are sources named in the leaked documents (it was one of the first things announced in the press). It stands to reason that the Taliban would then target them (why would they let spies just stay in their midst?). IF the Taliban were not in fact targeting them, there should be a reason why there are so many reports in so many newspapers in the US and UK that say they are. No reasons come to mind. My bullshit detector is not going off here. You, on the other hand, rejected all the reports outright on the sole grounds that a news station, Fox, that also separately reports things you disagree with, also reported this, as if the station can never report anything that is true. You have since refused to offer any other evidence or logical argument. My bullshit detector is going off, and it's pointed at you.
Joking aside, I think she simply meant that we should do more to find him than issue a warrant and wait for him to turn up. I think she was saying we should use the tried and true methods used in Afghanistan and elsewhere to Find-Fix-Finish him, ie track his communications, determine where he beds down, and arrest him in the middle of the night.
That and his entire platform consisted of, "I was in 'Nam." The fact that he negotiated on the part of US with the Vietnamese in 1973 without the government's consent (which is in the definition of treason) didn't help either.
*Sigh* Not this again. OK, first of all, my nick is a term used in intel analysis. As with most things, there's a great page on wikipedia on it. Then there's my blog link where I have pics of Iraq and posts about analytical tools. FYI, everything I've said is found on the internet and I did not say what exactly I do. I did not disclose anything sensitive or classified. And I've done more than "write glorified high school reports". And I don't watch Fox News, partly because I don't have a TV. I've also taught critical thinking (aka bullshit detecting) for several years, so I think I can handle myself here. The leaked information contained sources and methods. There are multiple reports of the Taliban then targeting them. If you have some credible evidence that this "certainly never happened", please provide it already and quit with the pointless (and completely inaccurate) ad hominem attacks.
Wow, interesting comeback. Actually, I'm an intelligence analyst and do this for a living (what do you do again?). Quite well-read too thankyouverymuch, and haven't read fiction in over 7 years. We knew there were going to be sources and methods in the leaked information before it was leaked, BECAUSE THEY TOLD US, just like we know the next batch is going to contain information on banks. It was quite well known. And what do you think would happen to sensitive sources placed in hostile territory?
Thanks for trying, but no. And in the future, if you're going to make blanket statements that something never happened, you could try, I don't know, googling it first. There's tons of hits for Taliban punish sources wikileaks.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8166084/Taliban-prepare-to-punish-WikiLeaks-Afghan-informers.html
Would this include the sources whom the Taliban then targeted and killed?
Way to blow your shot at FR1ST CN0TACT post. Nice going.
The caliber of AK-74 is smaller than that of M16, but the latter has looser tolerances, and is generally more reliable as a result.
How is 7.62mm less than 5.56mm?
I really just can't let this ludicrous attempt at logic stand. You're projecting your hate of Republicans on me, a liberal Nader supporter, and accuse me of being in denial and not properly using evidence. Ironic much? To which you add some drivel about torture and bin Laden, as if the two are somehow related. We know where he is. In a sovereign nuclear nation that does not want us there. Would you like us to invade Pakistan? Maybe if Obama invades a country it'll better than if mean 'ol Bush does it, right?
You Republicans are truly awful
I voted for Nader. But hey, since everyone who disagrees with you is wrong, why bother with troublesome facts? Like I said, it doesn't make a difference anyway, and you proved my point again.
Dear AC troll, trying reading more than one link. kthxbai.
So it really doesn't even matter what the evidence is, you're still going to hold the same position. Awesome.
Yeah, I guess my 14 years in the intelligence community and my trip to GTMO to train interrogators at Camp Delta haven't prepared me for "what torture really is all about" as...what do you do again? Help desk? Programmer?
*Sigh* Hey, maybe it actually had something to do with Iraq being connected to Al Qaeda or something. Try looking around, like here:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=iraq+al+qaeda
First link there is pretty good.
Or this one: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=iraq+wtc+1993
Or this one: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=iraq+okc
Funny, waterboarding is the only form of "torture" that Marines do to each other on weekends for fun. Not even remotely kidding. I was in the Marines, and I have friends who waterboard each other for fun.