Warning over Jazeera bombing report 20 minutes ago

From the bbc link

I suppose anything is possible....i just can't take the allegations seriously. If these boards had been around when Ronnie uttered his 'bombing the soviet union' sound check....half our posters would have been headed for the bomb shelters. (the other half...of course...would have been hooting HELL YEAH!! and cheering him on ).

 

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAA! Yet another baseless accusation. Minus zero evidence. Do you report UFO's often as well?

 

I think Bush is clearly tasteless enough, and stupid enough, to make a joke like that with another head of state. Yet another pathetic example of the "quality" of our leadership. I don't think this was serious. Of course, we could be wrong. What if Blair thought he was serious, if even for a moment? Man, I would have loved to see his double take. Poor guy. I bet he ponders late at night about his decision to hitch a ride with Bush into Iraq.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

Based on this Times of London report which starts:

[rquoter]
NEWSPAPERS editors were threatened with prosecution under the Official Secrets Act last night if they published details of a conversation between Tony Blair and George Bush in which the President is alleged to have suggested bombing al-Jazeera, the Arab news network. Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney-General, informed newspapers editors including that of The Times that “publication of a document that has been unlawfully disclosed by a Crown servant could be in breach of Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act.”
[/rquoter]

I have no doubt that there is a document which was leaked by a government employee that is being supressed by the British Government under the Official Secrets Act. Given England's extremely tough anti-libel laws, I believe that publishing something this detailed if it were untrue would be actionable. Lord Goldsmith would only have to prove action, not intent. The evidence for action is the article in the paper.

Whether the words were taken out of context is another subject, but there sure is a whole lot of smoke. If there's no fire (and there may not be), the British Government at the very least could have done a beter job of not making it look like there was something to hide.

 

This seems most likely. I don't doubt Bush made a joke, or was mostly joking, Blair talked to him about about it, thinking he was serious. But without seeing what they are talking about it is all inconclusive.

 

They're scrambling trying to save face....

 

why do you have to go to name calling and not stick to the facts / discussion on hand..

who's sad, desperated, and pathetic now???

 

if you think that 70% of americans who are against Bush's policies/war on iraq solely because of "I told you so" and not because of the lives, money, and grief this has cost the people of the US, iraq, and the world then you have a brain no bigger than a child..

 

you the man.. so you get off on thinking that you 'own' people in a basketball discussion board??

I'm beginning to think understand now why you have to use the word big on your nickname..

 

- denial I'm not in "denial" I just want proof that Bush wanted to bomb Al Jazeera
- dismissing the source I haven't seen anyone dismiss the source, just the article's claim
- disparaging the victims Victims of what?
- attacking the poster/thread starter Disagreeing with a poster does not equal "attacking" a poster. Adults can discuss issues without getting banned...
- Hey it's part of War On Terror Who said that?

Typical reaction from wnes, believing everything he reads and, when challenged, pointing a finger back at the challenger.

 

That's all I'm saying.

 

I saw the bombing of the Al-Jazeera office live on Dubai TV, and there was clearly no sniper fire sound coming from that area. I saw the Al-Jazeera cameraman on the top of the office's roof with his camera pointed towards the sky to capture the bombers flying overhead. In both bombings (the Al-Jazeera HQ in Afghanistan and then in Iraq) took place despite Al-Jazeera taking the initiative of providing the coordinates of their offices to the U.S. military, hoping to avoid such fate.

Look, Al-Jazeera are incredibly annoying because they have a camera sticking in people's faces in Iraq and elsewhere. Their coverage for the war was unparalelled and was an incredible feat and a milestone of courage (bombs were literally dropping on their heads while filming live coverage of the "shock and awe" campaign).

I completely understand why Al-Jazeera can be viewed as an 'unfriendly force' in combat zone, because militaries naturally want to operate with more freehand away from public attention, because they know war is ugly and people do nasty things during war.

The USA military has a huge PR/Propoganda machinery, and Al-Jazeera was not playing nice; in a way they brought it on themselves.

 

lol! drummer, i didn't exactly have you in mind when i wrote that post. apparently my observation of the pattern hit some nerves -- be my guest!