Anthrax Terror attack, not from Middle East!

ib1yysguy said:
Yeah, it's far more likely that this newspaper fabricated letters to the editor going back to 1977 from this guy than it is that he was hoping to poison his "liberal heros" to get a seat next to Carter at the DNC.

Do you have any idea how retarded you sound? No? Didn't think so.
Click to expand...

Given the fact that most newspapers are Liberal meccas, and the Democrats aren't above forging documents (see; Rather-gate) I wouldn't say it's out of the realm of possibility here.
 
Dixie said:
Given the fact that most newspapers are Liberal meccas, and the Democrats aren't above forging documents (see; Rather-gate) I wouldn't say it's out of the realm of possibility here.
Click to expand...

Rather's documents were never proven to be forgeries, fyi. Not to mention, Rather didn't forge them. He was duped by someone who submitted them to CBS and they didn't scrutinize them heavily enough before going ahead and airing the story.

Journalists at little newspapers like the one that published this guy's letters have better things to do than impugn their credibility by forging documents from some murderer. I don't know what kind of paper you worked for, but you guys must have really been shitty journalists if you think anyone working today would do that - journalism jobs as scarce as they are. It would be career suicide.

Not to mention, everything he said in those letters is backed up by the testimony of his neighbors/coworkers.

You're really, really retarded if you think that's a likely scenario. You're just as retarded for suggesting your highly implausible reasoning for this guy's actions. You still haven't addressed this idea that he's got some kind of cure for anthrax hidden up his sleave that nobody but him has access to. That's not what this guy even did. He wasn't in the business of making cures for deadly diseases, you curly-haired hick. He was in the business of making the diseases. Specifically, he was in the business of working with wet-spore anthrax. Not even dry spore anthrax, like the ones that were sent out in the letters.
 
Rather's documents were never proven to be forgeries, fyi.
Click to expand...

FYI, yes they were, beyond any reasonable shadow of a doubt. Not only that, but when they were proven to have been forged, Democrats immediately started to blame it on Karl Rove and the Bush Administration, just like they are doing with this.
 
Why only select a single sentence from my post? It appears you're backing off of your absurdly wild assertion that this guy was a liberal pinhead bent on getting national recognition for creating some cure for anthrax that nobody else has and then poisoning his liberal heros. Not only that, but you called him an "obvious pinhead"! Amazing. You really have to be trying hard as fuck to come up with something that outrageous then present it with a straight face and then attempt to defend it.
 
Journalists at little newspapers like the one that published this guy's letters have better things to do than impugn their credibility by forging documents from some murderer.
Click to expand...

Smaller papers have very little else to do. They have no worries about credibility because no one reads their papers anyway. Being that most of them are owned and operated by devout liberals, it wouldn't surprise me one bit to find, these letters were from a completely different person.

You still haven't addressed this idea that he's got some kind of cure for anthrax hidden up his sleave that nobody but him has access to. That's not what this guy even did. He wasn't in the business of making cures for deadly diseases, you curly-haired hick. He was in the business of making the diseases. Specifically, he was in the business of working with wet-spore anthrax. Not even dry spore anthrax, like the ones that were sent out in the letters.
Click to expand...

My goodness, you certainly know a lot about this guy who was a supposed 'right-wing religious nutbag' no one even knew existed before this week. He must be all the rage at the pinhead blogs or something, for you to know as much as you do.

I was going by what I heard on the news briefly this afternoon, which was that, he sent the Anthrax in hopes of testing a cure he had developed. Other than that, I have to plead ignorance on the subject. I don't spend my time conspiring on liberal blogs like you do, so I am sure you know more about this than myself.
 
I read the news. Shoot me. It's called the Associated Press. Very interesting stuff on there. Try reading it sometime.

Few journalists work harder than the journalists at little newspapers. And few journalists have more to lose - usually journalists trying to start their careers don't shoot themselves in the foot by fabricating letters from someone entirely different... particularly when it's so easy to check the archives of the paper to see if they were or were not actually published. This entire line of logic you've come up with is making me sick to my stomach.

Why don't you tell us which "news" you heard claim that this guy wanted to test some cure? In fact, why don't you tell me which liberal blogs even have something about this guy on it. All my info came from the AP.
 
Dixie said:
Well, it's not common knowledge. In fact, it should be common knowledge the documents were forgeries, especially since CBS issued an apology and essentially 'fired' Rather over it.
Click to expand...

Rather resigned over the controversy because he could not prove they weren't forgeries. They weren't proven to be forgeries either. His credibility was shot and he did the right thing by stepping down.
 
ib1yysguy said:
I read the news. Shoot me. It's called the Associated Press. Very interesting stuff on there. Try reading it sometime.
Click to expand...

LOL... I actually work for them, so I do tend to read AP a lot.

Few journalists work harder than the journalists at little newspapers.
Click to expand...


LMAO... yeah? At what, covering the local bake-off? recording the minutes at the City Council meetings? Not to say that big time journalists work much harder, they just have more DNC functions to attend and liberal blogs to update...documents to forge, etc....

usually journalists trying to start their careers don't shoot themselves in the foot by fabricating letters from someone entirely different... particularly when it's so easy to check the archives of the paper to see if they were or were not actually published. This entire line of logic you've come up with is making me sick to my stomach.
Click to expand...

Kudos on getting sick, I hope you throw your guts up until they bleed, I have this really big smile on my face at the moment, just thinking about that!
Oh, I don't think they fabricated anything, they may have mistaken the identity of someone.... ooops, wrong Bruce Ivins.... our religious nut spelled it Ivans.... ohhh... so sorry about that, hope we didn't cause too much trouble.... we're really, really sorry about it.... Wouldn't be the first fucking time, is all I'm saying. It's awful funny, the minute this story breaks and suddenly here is all this shit to tie him to the right like a Siamese twin! That's just too fucking convenient, if you ask me.

Why don't you tell us which "news" you heard claim that this guy wanted to test some cure? In fact, why don't you tell me which liberal blogs even have something about this guy on it. All my info came from the AP.
Click to expand...


I can't tell you about the liberal blogs, as I said, I don't frequent them. I can't recall what news network reported this, I heard it on the radio... I think it was CBS Radio News.... which means, it very well could have been inaccurate, that wouldn't be the first time for CBS to get it wrong.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Rather resigned over the controversy because he could not prove they weren't forgeries. They weren't proven to be forgeries either. His credibility was shot and he did the right thing by stepping down.
Click to expand...

Well you just said it was common knowledge they weren't forgeries! How come he resigned? How come his credibility was shot? And how did they ever explain how a document which would have been typed on an IBM Selectric, clearly wasn't? The document was forged, everyone including Dan Rather, knew they were forged in the end. You are just a liberal hack moron who has drank too much koolaid, but that's okay, you are in for a good puke real soon!
 
Dixie said:
Well you just said it was common knowledge they weren't forgeries! How come he resigned? How come his credibility was shot? And how did they ever explain how a document which would have been typed on an IBM Selectric, clearly wasn't? The document was forged, everyone including Dan Rather, knew they were forged in the end. You are just a liberal hack moron who has drank too much koolaid, but that's okay, you are in for a good puke real soon!
Click to expand...

No, I said it was common knowledge that they were never proven to be forgeries, you lying toad. The rest of your post is worthless and based upon your lie about my statement.
 
Small papers are notoriously understaffed. I never worked harder than when I worked at a 15,000 circ paper. Sixteen hour days were not terribly uncommon.
 
No, I said it was common knowledge that they were never proven to be forgeries...
Click to expand...

Depends on what you call "proof" I suppose, but the fact that they couldn't have been composed on a typewriter that didn't exist at the time, and should have been composed on a typewriter they clearly weren't composed on, is pretty damning evidence. It's kind like... they never "proved" O.J. killed Nicole.... right?


Yes, Y'scrack, they pretty much proved beyond any reasonable doubt, those particular documents were not authentic. You can claim they didn't if you like, you are a moron, you are entitled to act like one.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Small papers are notoriously understaffed. I never worked harder than when I worked at a 15,000 circ paper. Sixteen hour days were not terribly uncommon.
Click to expand...


Small papers are looking to get in the national spotlight. Particularly now, when most of them are going belly-up because young people don't read newspapers. Given the fact that most of them are liberal owned, operated, and edited, I would not doubt some shenanigans behind the scenes with this. Especially since the MoveOne Machine has launched this latest "conspiracy" about Bush/Rove. It was just too well orchestrated... and here are the message board sycophants... parroting the buzzwords... blustering up the smoke... pointing out how this guy was one of those "religious nuts" obviously from the right, because we all know the left are a bunch of Godless heathens... right?
 
Dixie said:
Depends on what you call "proof" I suppose, but the fact that they couldn't have been composed on a typewriter that didn't exist at the time, and should have been composed on a typewriter they clearly weren't composed on, is pretty damning evidence. It's kind like... they never "proved" O.J. killed Nicole.... right?


Yes, Y'scrack, they pretty much proved beyond any reasonable doubt, those particular documents were not authentic. You can claim they didn't if you like, you are a moron, you are entitled to act like one.
Click to expand...

The typewriter did exist at the time. Stop lying.
 
Dixie said:
Small papers are looking to get in the national spotlight. Particularly now, when most of them are going belly-up because young people don't read newspapers. Given the fact that most of them are liberal owned, operated, and edited, I would not doubt some shenanigans behind the scenes with this. Especially since the MoveOne Machine has launched this latest "conspiracy" about Bush/Rove. It was just too well orchestrated... and here are the message board sycophants... parroting the buzzwords... blustering up the smoke... pointing out how this guy was one of those "religious nuts" obviously from the right, because we all know the left are a bunch of Godless heathens... right?
Click to expand...

Why the hell does a small paper which circulates locally care about "national spotlight" attention? Nobody in Alabama is going to buy the paper that republished these letters to the editor. Nobody on my coast is going to buy them either. It serves no purpose.

Where do you get the energy to defend these stupid ideas of yours? It's obvious to ANYONE that this guy was a right winger, or at least hated Democrats and the media. He mailed them anthrax for Christ sake. The idea that this guy was some liberal out to save his heros is the most retarded thing you've come up with since your notion that 1/3 doesn't exist.
 
You still haven't shown us anything from any news source that says this guy was out to test some anthrax cure.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Why the hell does a small paper which circulates locally care about "national spotlight" attention? Nobody in Alabama is going to buy the paper that republished these letters to the editor. Nobody on my coast is going to buy them either. It serves no purpose.

Where do you get the energy to defend these stupid ideas of yours? It's obvious to ANYONE that this guy was a right winger, or at least hated Democrats and the media. He mailed them anthrax for Christ sake. The idea that this guy was some liberal out to save his heros is the most retarded thing you've come up with since your notion that 1/3 doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Because "national spotlight attention" means they can sell twice as many ads to the local yokels and make twice as much money, because they are "famous" and the public is interested in them.

Now you said earlier, I don't know this guy's political leanings, and I won't pretend to (unlike you). Sounds like you have changed your mind. Sounds like you are pretending to know pretty well, by indicating that it is "obvious he is a right-winger", that sounds like a complete contradiction of your previous claim. OR... are you just a bald-faced liar?

Here's something for you to consider, just like they never proved the CBS forgeries were forged, you haven't proved this guy wasn't a liberal pinhead. And by the way, I never argued that 1/3 doesn't exist. I would be ashamed if I were you.... telling a bald-faced lie that retarded, people can generally tell you are lying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top