Why didn't the mainstream media cover this?

He still has a point. If the news SUPPORTS the President...well...we gotta be SURE, but if it is negative....let's RUN with it. Media bias...pure and simple.

Hey, I bet even if it IS true 1) it will run off page one, and 2) it will be always "alleged" only. :angry:

 

None of this matters. All we really want is the oil from Iraq. That's why we aren't in Pakistan looking for Bin Laden, nor are we in N. Korea dismantling nukes.

Nate

 

I guess it depends on your interpretation of “mainstream media.†Or if "you" (whomever) cares to hear about it.

January 2004
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../ixnewstop.html
http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107946,00.html

January 2005
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6834079/

March 2005
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2.../2/230625.shtml

April 2005
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20...21915-1667r.htm

 

And from CNN.com in April 2005:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/04/26/...main/index.html

 

Like Saddam was actually going to get caught with WMD's in his possession thereby justifying Bush's actions to the entire world.

 

What proof does Gen. Sada present? Pics of planes being loaded/unloaded? Pics of the stuff stacked up in Syria? And US surveillance never saw it?

Was he one of Bush's "deck of cards" guys? All those who were caught were interrogated, and the media reported that all denied Saddam had a WMD program after Iraq I. Did the US fail to speak to Sada?

Why would he use the occasion of a book to make this revelation? Not to cause a sensation and make money from the book, surely? Why not at least leak it to our media anytime in the last THREE YEARS?

 

It would be so awesome if they found WMD's hidden away within some deep bunkers in Iraq.

The opportunity to kick sand in the faces of those who scream bloody murder at the U.S. for its "unjust" invasion of Iraq, would be priceless.

 

The big question is, if he provided proof, would any of you actually believe him?

Or would you simply spin more theories that Bush was behind the whole thing, the "proof" was an absolute sham, yada, yada, yada....


...wait, I already know the answer to that....

 

There are varying degrees of "proof." And everybody has their own opinion about what is good-enough-rock-solid-I'm-scared-sh/tless-proof and what is dubious, you-gotta-be-kinding-is-that-all-you-got-proof.

Case in point:
Some might believe this: I think the "mystery" behind Squid is that he is actually a terrorist. I was just paid $250,000 to reveal this information and therefore we must take action against him NOW. No time for inspectors. What would you prefer, Squid, missle strike or ground artillery barrage?

Then there are other people that might believe there is not enough to gone on here to take such drastic actions but we all know they are idiots!

 

Yeah, that media bias. It never ceases to amaze me how Clinton never got a word of criticism during his entire two terms, yet with Bush it's just been 4 years of continual moaning ever since that twin towers fiasco. Boy did they lay into him after that.

PS - anyone who doesn't support pre-emptive strikes against Mystery Squid better think long and hard about why they hate PriusChat. I for one trust Slortz to do whatever it takes to protect PriusChat against evildoers.

 

Why don't you join up and go to Iraq to help them look?

 

bullsh*t. If it was true that Iraq had WMD, Fox News would have been running that story nonstop 24 hours per day and the administration would have made sure that everyone knew about it. Negative or not, that kind of news would be HUGE and everyone would be reporting it. You can't get away with that media bias excuse any longer with Fox News there to report the news the way conservatives like to hear it.

 

North Korea is harder to invade. Their army would put up more of a fight.

Not that Iraq is going particularly well. . .

 

the wimps who have oil, at least

 

Umm, even the administration has given up finding WMDs in Iraq. Where do you propose they haven't looked? Do you think finding WMDs wasn't a priority from the early days of the invasion, both for politics AND to keep them from being used? Even if the alleged story above were true, it's amazing how they evacuated ALL the WMDs PLUS the materials to make them AND the evidence either existed.

It's funny liberals complain about the bias in the press, and conservatives complain about the bias in the press. I suppose if you try not to take a side you'll never be popular with either.

If fighting terrorist was our biggest goal, why take the focus off Afganistan? What about Iran, whose government has similar ideology to Al Queda or North Korea, with certain weapons and a government willing to wager anything to stay in power? Or the greater humanitarian crisis in Sudan? The Iraqi people had tough conditions but they don't hold records for human suffering.