Guest Vern Gagne Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 Did anyone else see in Friday's New York Times the detailed description of an invasion of Iraq and overthrow of Sadaam Hussein. The White house denies any plan is in place but if a plan is in place, why is the New York Times giving out detailed military information. I for one don't want to know the plans for any invasion, the public shouldn't want to know any of this. If it's true it could very easily jeoparadize the entire invasion. Another thing what jerk told the New York Times all this information. He should be fired immediately. Freedom of the Press is fine but sometimes the Press should think about what they are reporting.
Guest bob_barron Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 I saw it on the Drudge Report and I agree its wrong to leak information like that. I'm thinking that they may've been intentionally linked to throw someone off.
Guest Cancer Marney Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 I'm not sure why this is news to anyone.
Guest Some Guy Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 The Times much like their Boston subdicision (the Boston Globe) are a heavily leftist paper, why wouldn't they want fuck up the President's possible plans? It's typical.
Guest EricMM Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 I don't think they'd try to fuck up a military mission. They may (may) be "leftist" but they're not necessarily stupid. And this is very old news. During the Gulf War Saddam just had to turn on CNN and see what America was up to. He just couldn't... do... anything...
Guest Cancer Marney Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 The level of anger in this thread is really rather amusing. As if one generalised document leaked to the press could possibly have the effects you lot are postulating. As if you would know even if it could.
Guest NoCalMike Posted July 6, 2002 Report Posted July 6, 2002 Errr, most papers and networks have reported this, as do they everytime we plan for this type of invasion. I don't see how a generalized report is going to damage any plans for this attack.
Guest areacode212 Posted July 7, 2002 Report Posted July 7, 2002 I wouldn't call the NYT "heavily leftist". Yeah, they're a generally _liberal_ paper, but you make it sound like they're one of those Socialist papers that are sold for a quarter at Free Mumia rallies.
Guest LesnarLunatic Posted July 8, 2002 Report Posted July 8, 2002 Now, where's the rage against Drudge and others for linking to the story? Heck, it's disinformation. Plain and simple. and if you're a cynic. you can say this is trying to provoke Saddam to fire first.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now