Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 144
  1.    #1  
    Another great take down of the LAT. Except for the Gelertner Op-Eds, why would anyone read that commie rag?

    http://patterico.com/2005/04/30/2934...g-us-position/
  2. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Another great take down of the LAT. Except for the Gelertner Op-Eds, why would anyone read that commie rag?

    http://patterico.com/2005/04/30/2934...g-us-position/
    Why can satellites track obscure Italian cars but not WMD's?
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Another great take down of the LAT. Except for the Gelertner Op-Eds, why would anyone read that commie rag?
    It's the Sports section I keep telling you. That's why we read...(and the fact that they pay my salary)
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  4. jlczl's Avatar
    Posts
    905 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,936 Global Posts
    #4  
    Because WMD's are carefully camoflauged to be moved without detection while italian sports cars are meant and made to be noticed.
    Palm VII-Palm Vx-Palm M125-Clie T615-Sony NZ90-Sony NX80-Toshiba E800-Sony NZ90 (again)-Treo 600-HP 6315-Treo 650-Moto MPX220-SX66-Treo 650 (again)-QTek 9100-HP6515-Cingular 8125-Moto Q (10 days)-Cingular 8125 (again)-Nokia 9300-Cingular 2125 & Nokia E62-ETen M600+-Cingular 3125-Treo 750 & Samsung Blackjack-Cingular 8525-iPhone-Moto Q9-at&t Tilt-iPhone3G-Nokia E71-HTC Diamond-Blackberry Bold-at&t Fuze-SE Xperia X1a-Treo Pro.

    Be very, very quiet. I'm gonna catch me a rhinoceros.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Another great take down of the LAT. Except for the Gelertner Op-Eds, why would anyone read that commie rag?

    http://patterico.com/2005/04/30/2934...g-us-position/
    That's is why I don't subscribe to LA Times anymore. I do miss the sports and funny pages.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by ronbo2000
    That's is why I don't subscribe to LA Times anymore. I do miss the sports and funny pages.
    Bring back the Herald!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Another great take down of the LAT. Except for the Gelertner Op-Eds, why would anyone read that commie rag?

    http://patterico.com/2005/04/30/2934...g-us-position/
    hey and patterico says that Al Jazeera is fairer than the LA Times too!

    http://patterico.com/

    It seems like there is a whole slew of articles like that which trash the LA Times. Patterico is one indignant man (or woman?) who is on a hate the LA Times rampage.

    I guess if I spent too much of my time on right wing blog rantings, I would be angry too.

    But hey, thats what is great about this country we have a diversity of opinion.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 05/01/2005 at 01:52 PM.
  8. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #8  
    By ELI STEPHENS

    It was reported a few days ago:

    "U.S. soldiers reportedly have been cleared of wrongdoing in the shooting of an Italian journalist and an intelligence agent last month in Baghdad.

    "The car was about 130 yards from a checkpoint when the soldiers flashed their lights to get it to stop. They fired warning shots when the car was within 90 yards of the checkpoint, but at 65 yards, they used deadly force. Calipari was killed and Sgrena wounded."

    Sgrena has told CBS that the car she was in was going 30 mph. At 30 mph, a car is going 15 yards per second. So, according to the U.S. military, they fired warning shots within 2.7 seconds of flashing a warning light, and used "deadly force" 2.3 seconds after that. And actually, if the U.S. military story were true and the car were really travelling at "high speed", let's be generous and call that only 45 mph, that's 22 yards per second, meaning 1.8 seconds between warning lights and warning shots, and 1.6 seconds between warning shots and deadly shots.

    Now, there are variables, but typical perception plus reaction times are of the order of 1.5 seconds, that is, the time it takes to perceive a problem (such as a warning signal) and move your foot to the brake. That means that, according to the military's story, shots were fired at the vehicle less than 0.3 seconds after the vehicle could possibly have begun to slow down, even if they were paying close attention and they had immediately perceived that the alleged flashing light was meant as a signal to stop.

    However that 0.3 second is actually overstated, because the gunman (or gunmen), attempting to perceive if the car was responding to their warning signal to slow down, have perception and reaction times of their own, so in fact, they were pulling the trigger before they could possibly have perceived if the car were slowing down. And likewise, if the so-called warning shots were supposed to have served any purpose whatsoever, once again the "deadly force" shots were being squeezed off well before the warning shots could possibly have had any effect.

    And on that basis, the military has "exonerated itself" from any wrongdoing.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/stephens04182005.html
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Another great take down of the LAT. Except for the Gelertner Op-Eds, why would anyone read that commie rag?

    http://patterico.com/2005/04/30/2934...g-us-position/
    We worry about "commie" papers like the LA Times, and at the same time we just ignore the real "commies" ie North Korea, who just test fired another missile into the Japan Sea. Isn't that ironic?

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...an_north_korea
  10. #10  
    The term "commie" makes me laugh. Maybe the paper (like the New York Times) has a liberal angle to it, but it is certainly not anti American ("commie" makes it as such) and there are many conservative publications in the U.S. too. Don't like to read a liberal paper then read something else. But "commie"? Give me a break.
    You don't stop laughing because you grow old. You grow old because you stop laughing.
    -Michael Pritchard
  11.    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    We worry about "commie" papers like the LA Times, and at the same time we just ignore the real "commies" ie North Korea, who just test fired another missile into the Japan Sea. Isn't that ironic?

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...an_north_korea
    And we can thank your boy Bill and Maddy Halfbright, sheperded by that patron of peace, Jimmy Carter, for the nuclear technology they now have.

    Also, who do you think out ballistic missile defense system is intended to deter, and why do you think they're going operational in Alaska first? Plenty of people are worried about Korea.
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    By ELI STEPHENS

    It was reported a few days ago:

    "U.S. soldiers reportedly have been cleared of wrongdoing in the shooting of an Italian journalist and an intelligence agent last month in Baghdad.

    "The car was about 130 yards from a checkpoint when the soldiers flashed their lights to get it to stop. They fired warning shots when the car was within 90 yards of the checkpoint, but at 65 yards, they used deadly force. Calipari was killed and Sgrena wounded."

    Sgrena has told CBS that the car she was in was going 30 mph. At 30 mph, a car is going 15 yards per second. So, according to the U.S. military, they fired warning shots within 2.7 seconds of flashing a warning light, and used "deadly force" 2.3 seconds after that. And actually, if the U.S. military story were true and the car were really travelling at "high speed", let's be generous and call that only 45 mph, that's 22 yards per second, meaning 1.8 seconds between warning lights and warning shots, and 1.6 seconds between warning shots and deadly shots.

    Now, there are variables, but typical perception plus reaction times are of the order of 1.5 seconds, that is, the time it takes to perceive a problem (such as a warning signal) and move your foot to the brake. That means that, according to the military's story, shots were fired at the vehicle less than 0.3 seconds after the vehicle could possibly have begun to slow down, even if they were paying close attention and they had immediately perceived that the alleged flashing light was meant as a signal to stop.

    However that 0.3 second is actually overstated, because the gunman (or gunmen), attempting to perceive if the car was responding to their warning signal to slow down, have perception and reaction times of their own, so in fact, they were pulling the trigger before they could possibly have perceived if the car were slowing down. And likewise, if the so-called warning shots were supposed to have served any purpose whatsoever, once again the "deadly force" shots were being squeezed off well before the warning shots could possibly have had any effect.

    And on that basis, the military has "exonerated itself" from any wrongdoing.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/stephens04182005.html
    Written by someone who has never been anywhere or done anything more dangerous than organize a bong party for his frat.
  13. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Written by someone who has never been anywhere or done anything more dangerous than organize a bong party for his frat.
    Intelligent way to deal with that post.
  14.    #14  
    Actually, yes it was.

    Let me guess...you think the military deliberately targeted that vehicle? If so, they really are incompetent because they didn't kill everyone in the car.

    Also note the actual speed of the car was 60mph, which halves the reaction time those soldiers had.

    The bottom line is that the LAT edited a story to make the American military look bad.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    And we can thank your boy Bill and Maddy Halfbright, sheperded by that patron of peace, Jimmy Carter, for the nuclear technology they now have.

    Also, who do you think out ballistic missile defense system is intended to deter, and why do you think they're going operational in Alaska first? Plenty of people are worried about Korea.
    My "boy" Bill and Maddy Halfbright? I sound like a deadbeat "dad" or something but I do not know who they are. 1911, I wish you would not play this game of blaming everything on every democrat you can think of, or making me defend everything every democrat ever did.

    But one thing I can tell you is that there were no nukes built during Carter or Clinton, and six nukes (best estimates) built by N Korea during Bush. Also, N Korea was held to a missile test ban starting during Clinton, and this is the first violation of it - as it happens during Bush's administration.

    North Korea sees us as too occupied with Iraq to worry about them. They also seem to take home the message that we are out to invade them, and the only defense against that is by going nuclear. I wonder where they got that idea? I think Iran is taking that message to heart too.

    And against this background, Bush would rather not talk face to face to N Korea, but rather have China do it for us as part of some multi-lateral talks. So we should trust China to look out for our interests? Thats a load of bull. I would give Bush's handling of foreign affairs in this area a D minus.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Written by someone who has never been anywhere or done anything more dangerous than organize a bong party for his frat.
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Intelligent way to deal with that post.
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Actually, yes it was.
    1911: even if you disagree with NRG about his post, why do you get personal on ELI STEPHENS?

    If I use your logic than only someone who has 'been somewhere or has done something more dangerous than organize a bong party' is entitled to write an opinion or post an article. Am I over analyzing what you wrote?

    I dont mind one bit that you are critical of the sources that people use, but that doesnt mean its automatically something to be discarded without critiquing the article on its merits (assuming it has any )
  17.    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    My "boy" Bill and Maddy Halfbright? I sound like a deadbeat "dad" or something but I do not know who they are. 1911, I wish you would not play this game of blaming everything on every democrat you can think of, or making me defend everything every democrat ever did.

    But one thing I can tell you is that there were no nukes built during Carter or Clinton, and six nukes (best estimates) built by N Korea during Bush. Also, N Korea was held to a missile test ban starting during Clinton, and this is the first violation of it - as it happens during Bush's administration.

    North Korea sees us as too occupied with Iraq to worry about them. They also seem to take home the message that we are out to invade them, and the only defense against that is by going nuclear. I wonder where they got that idea? I think Iran is taking that message to heart too.

    And against this background, Bush would rather not talk face to face to N Korea, but rather have China do it for us as part of some multi-lateral talks. So we should trust China to look out for our interests? Thats a load of bull. I would give Bush's handling of foreign affairs in this area a D minus.
    If North Korea thinks that wer are preoccupied with Iraq, why are they worried about us invading them? They've got to know that our military is stretched to the point where it would take months for us to establish a meaningful ground force present on the penninsula. And why are you complaining about the US using a multi-lateral format...I can still hear you guys squealing about Bush acting in a unliateral fashion. Or is it that some foreign policy areas require nuance? And as far as including China, they've got the most leverage. We'll be squaring off with them in the Pacific basin soon enough.

    North Korea is a sick old man the bellows frequently to make sure someone comes running with the bed pan. Their population has turned to cannabilism, another communist success story. They're going to go with a whimper, not a bang. It'll be interesting to see how the CHICOMS react when that happens.

    By the way, that would be Bill Clinton and his stellar secretary of state, Madeline Albright.
  18.    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    1911: even if you disagree with NRG about his post, why do you get personal on ELI STEPHENS?

    If I use your logic than only someone who has 'been somewhere or has done something more dangerous than organize a bong party' is entitled to write an opinion or post an article. Am I over analyzing what you wrote?

    I dont mind one bit that you are critical of the sources that people use, but that doesnt mean its automatically something to be discarded without critiquing the article on its merits (assuming it has any )
    You are quite right...I did personalize that comment and I was wrong. I extend my apologies.

    When I see someone try to apply algorithms to close quarter combat, espeically someone who hasn't BTDT, then I throw the BS flag. I also note that the counter punch "source" accepts as fact the 30 mph speed. I also know that counter punch is very much a left wing website. Draw your own conclusions.
  19. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    You are quite right...I did personalize that comment and I was wrong. I extend my apologies.

    When I see someone try to apply algorithms to close quarter combat, espeically someone who hasn't BTDT, then I throw the BS flag. I also note that the counter punch "source" accepts as fact the 30 mph speed. I also know that counter punch is very much a left wing website. Draw your own conclusions.
    Really not that much different then your right leaning source now is it?
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    I also note that the counter punch "source" accepts as fact the 30 mph speed. I also know that counter punch is very much a left wing website. Draw your own conclusions.
    I didnt know that about counter punch...so its helpful to everyone who reads the article.

    As far as whats been going on Iraq...I don't evny any of our guys. We put them in incredibly difficult conditions and hold them to the highest standards. 2 seconds...6 seconds...its difficult to assess a tactical situation like that whether the vehicle is traveling 30 mph or not. My .02
Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions