Well, maybe Iraq had Al-Qaeda ties after all.

[chequita guevara]

R. Novak is hardly the most trust-worthy source. He's a right-wing hack.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

...or more simply, the Telegraph has added whatever name they found among the prominent Iraqis to make their forged story look more credible

You shouldn't be puzzled too much by anything written in the Telegraph's article, until you see something about it somewhere else.

well at least they dont repeat stories about 9/11 as a US conspiracy, etc, etc.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
then allawi will deny it tomorrow and the story will die.

If he's even aware that a British rag misquoted him. And nobody would bother reporting the denial IMHO. The proof of Iraq-AQ links is newsworthy, but the denial of an Iraqi official's misquote is not. Maybe the Telegraph would print the denial if forced by the law.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

...or more simply, the Telegraph has added whatever name they found among the prominent Iraqis to make their forged story look more credible

You shouldn't be puzzled too much by anything written in the Telegraph's article, until you see something about it somewhere else.

quoted looked pretty specific to me.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
well at least they dont repeat stories about 9/11 as a US conspiracy, etc, etc.

I'm not suprised they'd have found "exclusive proof" of US involvement in Sept. 11 if they were leaning that way

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

If he's even aware that a British rag misquoted him. And nobody would bother reporting the denial IMHO. The proof of Iraq-AQ links is newsworthy, but the denial of an Iraqi official's misquote is not. Maybe the Telegraph would print the denial if forced by the law.

When the Guardian misquoted Wolfowitz that got plenty of play among those who dislike the Guradian, and i bet people who dont like the DT will play up evidence of a misquote. And i presume Iraqi pols are QUITE interested in what widely quoted Brit papers say about them.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



No ones annexing Iraq.

OK, you're definitely starting to show some arguments here!
All right, I will change my phrasing: replace annexation by "puppeting of a government accompanied by economic vassalization". Is that more appropriate?
Yet I fail to see how petty cosmetics such as these could detract from my main point. I'm not doing this again.

[lord of the mark]

heres a gem of a cartoon from Le Monde



I guess the Telegraph doesnt match such a reputable French paper, does it?

[Spiffor]

I'm sorry about what I said by this story not being repeated by the rest of the media.

After a quick google research, it appears the story has been widely picked by the 2 most serious sources, i.e. Freerepublic and Worldnetdaily.

As for Le Monde:
Le Monde has pieces of opinion scattered throughout the journal, and the separation between information pieces and opinion pieces is clear. The information content of Le Monde is great (both in quantity and quality). A cartoon has no pretense of being informative but of being one person's opinion.
Le Monde's senior cartoonist, btw, is the most famous political cartoonist in France and has worked for them for more than 20 years. Even when they don't agree with him (which happens quite often), the bosses can not get rid of him.

[lord of the mark]

is le monde diplomatique all opinions?

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
heres a gem of a cartoon from Le Monde


I guess the Telegraph doesnt match such a reputable French paper, does it?

What's wrong with this cartoon? Seems witty and funny to me.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I'm sorry about what I said by this story not being repeated by the rest of the media.

After a quick google research, it appears the story has been widely picked by the 2 most serious sources, i.e. Freerepublic and Worldnetdaily.

As for Le Monde:
Le Monde has pieces of opinion scattered throughout the journal, and the separation between information pieces and opinion pieces is clear. The information content of Le Monde is great (both in quantity and quality). A cartoon has no pretense of being informative but of being one person's opinion.
Le Monde's senior cartoonist, btw, is the most famous political cartoonist in France and has worked for them for more than 20 years. Even when they don't agree with him (which happens quite often), the bosses can not get rid of him.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3159262.stm

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
heres a gem of a cartoon from Le Monde

What's wrong with it, other than Israel can do no wrong?

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
is le monde diplomatique all opinions?

No.
Though I wonder if you are being sarcastic. In any way, its objectivity level can never be any lower than most American mass media.

[Patroklos]

Well, the fact that Jenin is not leveled, its population is not ash in a creamatorian, there was never a wall build around it and the Americans are not Nazis....

Has this what the Iraq cririsism crowd has to resort too now that the facts have escaped you? Comparing AMericans to Nazis? Does that make the mulsim Iraqis Jews, interest dicotomy.

-Pat

[Zevico]

Patroklos, sorry to embarass you like this, but...Jenin is in the occupied territories....
Although what you say makes is perfectly true incidentally, for the Israeli army that was involved in the altercation there. 56 people, of which more than half were combatants, were killed in Jenin--as for the houses, not that many were actually destroyed, as well as the fact that booby traps, and enemy combatants hid in them.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
is le monde diplomatique all opinions?

Le Monde Diplomatique has a very, very clear bias. I'm not aware of any forgery from them, but it is clear they use only the information they need to further their agenda (sometimes very obscure and very interesting). Don't forget the idea of ATTAC was born in Le Monde Diplomatique's journalists minds.

Besides, "Le Monde" and "Le Monde Diplomatique" have become increasingly separate over the years. At first, le Diplo was an appendix to "Le Monde", that was less opinionated, and was oriented at in-depht information. While the "in-depth" spirit still lives on (making it a very elitist newspaper), the bias is obvious to whomever reads it.

As for the sacked journalist:
This story takes its roots in Le Monde's recent evolution under the triumvirat leading it. The Three become increasingly pissed at whatever mud flinged at them, and there has been much of mud recently.
Schneidermann's is a senior writer of Le Monde's TV appendix. He wrote the editorials of the TV appendix and that's about it. He was sacked because he wrote in a book that the behavior of the Three was bad, and made the attackers of Le Monde right.

Plantu (the senior cartoonist) is another thing altogether. His cartoons have been on Le Monde's frontpage every day for more than 20 years. His drawings are almost as important to current Le Monde's image as the logo of the journal. The Three have often been pissed by his free spirit, and sometimes his public critics of the journal, but they couldn't act against him.

[Oerdin]

Pztroklos: It's an anti-Israeli cartoon not an anti-American one.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Le Monde Diplomatique has a very, very clear bias. I'm not aware of any forgery from them, but it is clear they use only the information they need to further their agenda (sometimes very obscure and very interesting). Don't forget the idea of ATTAC was born in Le Monde Diplomatique's journalists minds.

I may be a victim of their bias myself, but the enormous load of information they get to support their point is impressive. I doubt they even have to hide anything. In most of their articles, the hard evidence they provide seems overwhelming.

IMHO they don't offer much solutions to the problems they describe. But as an independant and trustworthy source of information they are necessary. Call this "bias" if you wish. Personnally I'll keep it to "intellectual independance". We've got nothing (on the left side of politics) that approaches the professionalism of "Le monde diplomatique" in America.

[Spiffor]

Le Diplo sure is highly professional, and any info you'll read in can be marked as serious and double-checked IMHO. However, it still is a left-wing paper, and should not be seen (especially by foreigners who don't know what French jounralism looks like) like a neutral paper.
The left-wing bias is obvious from the fist line to the last. It doesn't make the read any less interesting.

[rev]

Atta-Saddam link discredited by FBI records

So this document is apparantely another forgery, and the Telegraph opted not to fully research it and instead run to the presses with unsubstantiated information.

[Spiffor]

Thanks for the link, Rev

Now, are we allowed to consider the Telegraph as an outright lying newspaper, or are we to think the poor tories just got manipulated by a skilled forger?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Thanks for the link, Rev

Now, are we allowed to consider the Telegraph as an outright lying newspaper, or are we to think the poor tories just got manipulated by a skilled forger?

Ive already posted a thread about this. Telegraph reiterates that they got the document from an Iraqi Gov. Council source. Isikoff article doesnt state whether they reiterated that it was alawi. No response from Alawi.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Ive already posted a thread about this. Telegraph reiterates that they got the document from an Iraqi Gov. Council source. Isikoff article doesnt state whether they reiterated that it was alawi. No response from Alawi.

Oops, sorry, I've overlooked it Care to tell me what thread it is?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Oops, sorry, I've overlooked it Care to tell me what thread it is?

"update on Telegraph story"

Not sure how to link to threads

[orange]

Originally posted by Tuomerehu

Ha, ha, ha.

[Spiffor]

Not a problem, I found it

And to link to threads, it's very simple:
1) copy the adress of the thread in your adress bar
2) paste the adress in the post you're writing, and 'Poly will make a link all by himself (it works for all links on the internet)

[Ned]

As I said, this is not be relied upon until both Brit and US intelligence confirms it.