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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site. Perhaps they wanted
to wait until they had something to write, rather than puking all over
themselves like the news sources designed for people like you - people who
claim to have ADD because they're too lazy to read more than a paragraph,
or, heaven forbid, a book.

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.

NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.
Did you not take a basic civics class - ever?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was
arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.

The guy admitted to removing documents. That's illegal. If it was
inadvertent, then it's not quite as egregious an infraction as intentionally
removing them...but it's illegal nonetheless.

I suspect it was intentional. The NY Times suspects it was "inadvertent".
However, as an unbiased news outlet, the NY Times should not say
unequivocally that it was inadvertent.

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was
arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.

The guy admitted to removing documents. That's illegal. If it was
inadvertent, then it's not quite as egregious an infraction as intentionally
removing them...but it's illegal nonetheless.

I suspect it was intentional. The NY Times suspects it was "inadvertent".
However, as an unbiased news outlet, the NY Times should not say
unequivocally that it was inadvertent.



You suspect? Is that from your perspective as a 32-year-old dentist
inexperienced in the world, living in a backwater part of the country,
who gets his news from CBN?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was
arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.

The guy admitted to removing documents. That's illegal. If it was
inadvertent, then it's not quite as egregious an infraction as
intentionally
removing them...but it's illegal nonetheless.

I suspect it was intentional. The NY Times suspects it was
"inadvertent".
However, as an unbiased news outlet, the NY Times should not say
unequivocally that it was inadvertent.



You suspect? Is that from your perspective as a 32-year-old dentist
inexperienced in the world, living in a backwater part of the country,
who gets his news from CBN?

Yeah. That's my perspective. And I'm 33, not 32 you dimwit. Interestingly,
when I first came on rec.boats and starting slapping you around, I was not
even 30. That's pretty sad for you.

The CBN news link was from a Yahoo news search. The same story was
confirmed in the Reuters link that I provided.

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

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was
arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that
he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.

The guy admitted to removing documents. That's illegal. If it was
inadvertent, then it's not quite as egregious an infraction as
intentionally
removing them...but it's illegal nonetheless.

I suspect it was intentional. The NY Times suspects it was
"inadvertent".
However, as an unbiased news outlet, the NY Times should not say
unequivocally that it was inadvertent.



You suspect? Is that from your perspective as a 32-year-old dentist
inexperienced in the world, living in a backwater part of the country,
who gets his news from CBN?

Yeah. That's my perspective. And I'm 33, not 32 you dimwit.
Interestingly,
when I first came on rec.boats and starting slapping you around, I was not
even 30. That's pretty sad for you.

The CBN news link was from a Yahoo news search. The same story was
confirmed in the Reuters link that I provided.



Krause cannot attack the message, only the messenger...his typical MO.

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was
arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.

The guy admitted to removing documents. That's illegal. If it was
inadvertent, then it's not quite as egregious an infraction as
intentionally
removing them...but it's illegal nonetheless.

I suspect it was intentional. The NY Times suspects it was
"inadvertent".
However, as an unbiased news outlet, the NY Times should not say
unequivocally that it was inadvertent.



You suspect? Is that from your perspective as a 32-year-old dentist
inexperienced in the world, living in a backwater part of the country,
who gets his news from CBN?

Yeah. That's my perspective. And I'm 33, not 32 you dimwit. Interestingly,
when I first came on rec.boats and starting slapping you around, I was not
even 30. That's pretty sad for you.

If I thought you or your remarks had any significance in the real world,
I'd remember your age, and I'd refer to you by name. But as you are an
anonymous twit, why should I attribute any real meaning to anything you
post?

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 16:44:16 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

NOYB wrote:

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


This time, the so-called "Newspaper of Record" buried what was arguably
the
biggest story on Tuesday.


Hmm. It's right there on the front page of its web site.

And in typical NY Times fashion, they write suppositions as fact:

"...Berger inadvertently removed..."

Inadvertently? According to whom? Berger? Eyewitnesses say that he
"inadvertently" stuffed them down his pants and socks.




This is still the united states, dipstick, and berger hasn't been
convicted of anything. Ergo, the assumption is he is innocent.

Unless, of course, it applies to your supposition that Bush "lied"...

Dave

Dave Hall wrote:


Unless, of course, it applies to your supposition that Bush "lied"...

Dave




Lied? Lies.

Bush has lied about his time in the National Guard, and lied about his
criminal history. He lied about his relationship with Ken Lay, he lied
about who would benefit from his tax cuts, and he lied about stem cells.
He lied about his visit to Bob Jones University, he lied about why he
wouldn't meet with Log Cabin Republicans, and he lied about reading the
EPA report on global warming. He lied about blaming the Clinton
administration for the second intifada, he lies constantly about how he
pays no attention to polls, he lied about how he loves New York, and he
lied about moving the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. He lied about
finding WMD in Iraq, he lied about making his decision to go to war, he
lied about the CIA's dismissal of the yellowcake rumors, and he lied
about the IAEA's assessment of Iraq's nuclear program. He lied about
funding the fight against AIDS in Africa, he lied about when the
recession started, and he lied about seeing the first plane hit the WTC.
He lied about supporting the Patient Protection Act, and he lied about
his deficit spending.