On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:46:55 -0400, NOYB wrote:


I'm not quoting Limbaugh. I'm quoting the Iraqi PM, al-Jaafari, from an
interview he had with David Gregory less than a month ago:

English is Jaafari's second language. Interesting that you have to rely
on him for a definition of insurgency or terrorism. Although, I suppose
it's better than relying on our President. English appears to be his
second language also.


" I certainly, again, would not call this an insurgency. I would call it a
group of terrorists who are out to kill as many people as possible. That
is easy to do. Anyone can come in and blow himself up and choose the
softest targets possible and carry out acts of terror.

Clearly, we are fighting terrorists in Iraq. Anyone who targets
civilians, is, by definition, a terrorist.


And all of them come from outside Iraq and they admit this freely on TV
when they are interrogated.

BS. If all of these terrorists are coming from outside of Iraq, where are
the bodies? In every study I could find, foreign fighters make up a very
small percentage of those fighting, typically less than 10%.. NOYB, you
have been using this "foreign fighter" argument for some time. Come on
now, show us a source. Where are the numbers?


"Insurgents" only refers to people who have a social base and have
support. They carried out either armed uprising or peaceful uprising like
Gandhi but these are no such thing. They are terrorists."

So, NOYB, have you read the new studies about just who these foreign
fighters are? It seems they are not al Qaeda. It seems they *weren't*
terrorists at all, although they are now. It seems they "are part of a
new generation of terrorists responding to calls to defend their fellow
Muslims from 'crusaders' and 'infidels.'" In other words, they are *our*
creation.

http://forums.santacruzsentinel.com/...c;f=1;t=002361

Just imagine if the Chump hadn't invaded Iraq. The chances are al Qaeda
would be in ruins, bin Laden may even have been brought to justice, and
quite possibly, the world would be at peace. We are now embroiled in a
problem we created. A problem that might never have existed, if it
weren't for the stupid SOB in the White House. A problem that just isn't
going away.

thunder wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:46:55 -0400, NOYB wrote:

And all of them come from outside Iraq and they admit this freely on TV
when they are interrogated.


BS. If all of these terrorists are coming from outside of Iraq, where are
the bodies? In every study I could find, foreign fighters make up a very
small percentage of those fighting, typically less than 10%.. NOYB, you
have been using this "foreign fighter" argument for some time. Come on
now, show us a source. Where are the numbers?

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question. He flatly stated that 95% of the
insurgency are disenfranchised Sunni Iraqis and maybe 5% tops are foreign.

-rick-

--
ignoring reality won't make it go away...

"-rick-" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:46:55 -0400, NOYB wrote:

And all of them come from outside Iraq and they admit this freely on TV
when they are interrogated.


BS. If all of these terrorists are coming from outside of Iraq, where
are
the bodies? In every study I could find, foreign fighters make up a very
small percentage of those fighting, typically less than 10%.. NOYB, you
have been using this "foreign fighter" argument for some time. Come on
now, show us a source. Where are the numbers?

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question.

Who was the General? Is he on active duty, or is he a "former General" who
doesn't really have his finger on the pulse over there? Was he interviewed
while in Iraq, or was he sitting in Fox News' broadcast building?

If you can provide his name (or even the name of the person who interviewed
him) we can read the transcript and see exactly who this General was and
what he actually said (not that I don't believe somebody like you who refers
to Fox News as Faux News). Time to put up or shut up.

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:45:21 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"-rick-" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:46:55 -0400, NOYB wrote:

And all of them come from outside Iraq and they admit this freely on TV
when they are interrogated.


BS. If all of these terrorists are coming from outside of Iraq, where
are
the bodies? In every study I could find, foreign fighters make up a
very small percentage of those fighting, typically less than 10%..
NOYB, you have been using this "foreign fighter" argument for some
time. Come on now, show us a source. Where are the numbers?

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question.

Who was the General? Is he on active duty, or is he a "former General"
who doesn't really have his finger on the pulse over there? Was he
interviewed while in Iraq, or was he sitting in Fox News' broadcast
building?

If you can provide his name (or even the name of the person who
interviewed him) we can read the transcript and see exactly who this
General was and what he actually said (not that I don't believe somebody
like you who refers to Fox News as Faux News). Time to put up or shut up.

Put up or shut up? Damn, if I wasn't asking for your sources up-thread.
Is this a little bait and switch? Here is one source that says foreign
militants are "perhaps as little as 5%":

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...1n5terror.html

"As little as 10%":

http://www.boston.com/news/world/mid...error_in_iraq/

Now, perhaps you will share a source or two in support of your belief that
we are fighting mainly "foreign militants".

thunder wrote:
Put up or shut up? Damn, if I wasn't asking for your sources up-thread.
Is this a little bait and switch? Here is one source that says foreign
militants are "perhaps as little as 5%":

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...1n5terror.html

"As little as 10%":

http://www.boston.com/news/world/mid...error_in_iraq/

Now, perhaps you will share a source or two in support of your belief that
we are fighting mainly "foreign militants".


Why, that's what President Bush and Vice President Cheney are saying all
the time. They also say that Iraq was involved in the Sept 11th mass
murders. You don't think they'd *lie* do you??!?

DSK

NOYB wrote:
"-rick-" wrote in message

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question.


Who was the General? Is he on active duty, or is he a "former General" who
doesn't really have his finger on the pulse over there? Was he interviewed
while in Iraq, or was he sitting in Fox News' broadcast building?

If you can provide his name (or even the name of the person who interviewed
him) we can read the transcript and see exactly who this General was and
what he actually said (not that I don't believe somebody like you who refers
to Fox News as Faux News). Time to put up or shut up.

Calling it faux news is a cheap shot but generally deserved.

The story aired between about 9:30 and 10 AM PDT 7/25/05. It appeared
that the general was on active duty. He was shown in uniform commenting
from Iraq. I was exercising on the elliptical without glasses and
couldn't read his name on the 13" tube across the room. I'm sure they
introduced him but I was paying attention to the newspaper until the
discussion moved to the make up of the insurgency.

A more diligent or competent researcher could probably find a transcript
(LexisNexis?). I briefly searched the Foxnews site but didn't find a
reference to that particular story. Sorry, but it's now exceeded my
struggle/fun ratio threshold.

-rick-

"-rick-" wrote in message
news
Sorry, but it's now exceeded my struggle/fun ratio threshold.

I like that statement. I think I'll save it for future use. ;-)

"-rick-" wrote in message
news
NOYB wrote:
"-rick-" wrote in message

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question.


Who was the General? Is he on active duty, or is he a "former General"
who doesn't really have his finger on the pulse over there? Was he
interviewed while in Iraq, or was he sitting in Fox News' broadcast
building?

If you can provide his name (or even the name of the person who
interviewed him) we can read the transcript and see exactly who this
General was and what he actually said (not that I don't believe somebody
like you who refers to Fox News as Faux News). Time to put up or shut
up.

Calling it faux news is a cheap shot but generally deserved.

The story aired between about 9:30 and 10 AM PDT 7/25/05. It appeared that
the general was on active duty. He was shown in uniform commenting from
Iraq. I was exercising on the elliptical without glasses and couldn't read
his name on the 13" tube across the room. I'm sure they introduced him but
I was paying attention to the newspaper until the discussion moved to the
make up of the insurgency.

A more diligent or competent researcher could probably find a transcript
(LexisNexis?). I briefly searched the Foxnews site but didn't find a
reference to that particular story. Sorry, but it's now exceeded my
struggle/fun ratio threshold.

-rick-

Well, based on NOYB's rules, the story did not exist. Nor did your TV, your
exercise machine, glasses, newspaper, and perhaps even your house. The
existence of all these things depends on the name of the person who was
interviewed.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"-rick-" wrote in message
news
NOYB wrote:
"-rick-" wrote in message

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question.


Who was the General? Is he on active duty, or is he a "former General"
who doesn't really have his finger on the pulse over there? Was he
interviewed while in Iraq, or was he sitting in Fox News' broadcast
building?

If you can provide his name (or even the name of the person who
interviewed him) we can read the transcript and see exactly who this
General was and what he actually said (not that I don't believe somebody
like you who refers to Fox News as Faux News). Time to put up or shut
up.

Calling it faux news is a cheap shot but generally deserved.

The story aired between about 9:30 and 10 AM PDT 7/25/05. It appeared
that the general was on active duty. He was shown in uniform commenting
from Iraq. I was exercising on the elliptical without glasses and
couldn't read his name on the 13" tube across the room. I'm sure they
introduced him but I was paying attention to the newspaper until the
discussion moved to the make up of the insurgency.

A more diligent or competent researcher could probably find a transcript
(LexisNexis?). I briefly searched the Foxnews site but didn't find a
reference to that particular story. Sorry, but it's now exceeded my
struggle/fun ratio threshold.

-rick-

Well, based on NOYB's rules, the story did not exist. Nor did your TV,
your exercise machine, glasses, newspaper, and perhaps even your house.
The existence of all these things depends on the name of the person who
was interviewed.

The interpretation of actual facts depends on the person being interviewed,
and the person listening to the interview.

rick tipped his hand about his bias when he called Fox News "Faux News".
That alone gave me doubt as to the veracity of his report.

Fox interviews folks from both ends of the political spectrum. I'd just
like to know some particular biographical facts on this "general" to
determine for myself if he's someone who actually has a clue as to what's
going on...or if he's just repeating party lines to further a particular
agenda.

That's fair, isn't it?

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"-rick-" wrote in message
news
NOYB wrote:
"-rick-" wrote in message

There was a US General on Faux News (of all places) this morning
addressing that very question.


Who was the General? Is he on active duty, or is he a "former General"
who doesn't really have his finger on the pulse over there? Was he
interviewed while in Iraq, or was he sitting in Fox News' broadcast
building?

If you can provide his name (or even the name of the person who
interviewed him) we can read the transcript and see exactly who this
General was and what he actually said (not that I don't believe
somebody like you who refers to Fox News as Faux News). Time to put up
or shut up.

Calling it faux news is a cheap shot but generally deserved.

The story aired between about 9:30 and 10 AM PDT 7/25/05. It appeared
that the general was on active duty. He was shown in uniform commenting
from Iraq. I was exercising on the elliptical without glasses and
couldn't read his name on the 13" tube across the room. I'm sure they
introduced him but I was paying attention to the newspaper until the
discussion moved to the make up of the insurgency.

A more diligent or competent researcher could probably find a transcript
(LexisNexis?). I briefly searched the Foxnews site but didn't find a
reference to that particular story. Sorry, but it's now exceeded my
struggle/fun ratio threshold.

-rick-

Well, based on NOYB's rules, the story did not exist. Nor did your TV,
your exercise machine, glasses, newspaper, and perhaps even your house.
The existence of all these things depends on the name of the person who
was interviewed.

The interpretation of actual facts depends on the person being
interviewed, and the person listening to the interview.

rick tipped his hand about his bias when he called Fox News "Faux News".
That alone gave me doubt as to the veracity of his report.

Fox interviews folks from both ends of the political spectrum. I'd just
like to know some particular biographical facts on this "general" to
determine for myself if he's someone who actually has a clue as to what's
going on...or if he's just repeating party lines to further a particular
agenda.

That's fair, isn't it?




It's fair as long as you also realize that you heard comments from
what's-his-name - the Iraqi guy you're comfortable with, but you were not
actually sitting there wtih him doing the interview. You do realize you
weren't with him, right? He was interviewed by another person, who also may
have asked a set of questions which prompted certain replies.