You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #14: Terrible paper. Never to be forgiven for shilling for the war [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Terrible paper. Never to be forgiven for shilling for the war
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -This is how the New York Times tried to discredit Manning: shameful paper Catherina  Dec-04-10 11:12 PM   #0 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-04-10 11:15 PM   #1 
  - Pavulon, it was interesting knowing you. Goodbye n/t  Catherina   Dec-04-10 11:17 PM   #2 
  - Later, Equality is a great thing  Pavulon   Dec-04-10 11:21 PM   #3 
  - "When the truth is treasonous, we're all in trouble"  Dr.Phool   Dec-05-10 10:42 AM   #50 
  - Don't mind that one. He's just pissed that we haven't gone to War with Iran yet.  TheWatcher   Dec-05-10 11:28 AM   #54 
  - Secrecy is the crime, not telling the people what the regimes are doing.  Ken Burch   Dec-04-10 11:21 PM   #4 
  - Yes indeed. The Economist got something really right today  Catherina   Dec-04-10 11:26 PM   #5 
  - Glad that oped serves you position. Post it in LBN..  Pavulon   Dec-04-10 11:29 PM   #7 
  - Get elected to a senate seat  Pavulon   Dec-04-10 11:27 PM   #6 
  - So, we should not have any secrets? NOTHING should be classified?  Common Sense Party   Dec-04-10 11:49 PM   #10 
  - There have been many threads here explaining how lame that meme is.  Catherina   Dec-04-10 11:53 PM   #11 
  - To dodge the question is the lamest.  Common Sense Party   Dec-05-10 12:24 AM   #17 
  - There was a thread this morning about it. Plame's cover was blown because her husband exposed...  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 12:31 AM   #18 
     - So? Assange no doubt broke the cover of many (you're kidding  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 01:43 AM   #23 
        - No. He didn't break the cover of anyone.  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 02:14 AM   #26 
           - How can you say that? He's been trying to release 250,000  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 02:44 AM   #30 
              - Again:  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 02:46 AM   #32 
                 - Kennedy's words were not meant for this situation, as you know.  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 02:50 AM   #34 
                    - The principle here is not what the President approves of.  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 03:05 AM   #38 
                       - So should there never be any classified documents?  treestar   Dec-05-10 09:34 AM   #45 
                          - Not if they're 'classifying' documents to deceive the American people about what they're up to.  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 11:21 AM   #52 
                             - So there should never be any classified documents?  treestar   Dec-05-10 11:26 AM   #53 
                                - I'm inclined to say, "yes." The more I see about the motives for 'classifying' documents, the less..  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 01:24 PM   #55 
  - Distinction without difference as an excuse for being inconsistent  treestar   Dec-05-10 09:34 AM   #46 
     - Your name maybe, not mine n/t  Catherina   Dec-05-10 10:00 AM   #48 
  - Valerie Plame was exposed while the rest of the secrecy culture remained in place.  Ken Burch   Dec-05-10 01:00 AM   #20 
  - Yeah, so? The rest of the secrecy culture is doing fine now, too /nt  jberryhill   Dec-05-10 01:29 AM   #21 
  - 800,000 people had access to Top Secret files.  Overseas   Dec-05-10 10:19 AM   #49 
  - Diplomats often cannot conduct negotiations  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 01:40 AM   #22 
     - I'm for bringing down the shadow government. Lots of people here were at one time. nt  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 02:16 AM   #27 
        - Assange is attacking government period. Not just "shadow government."  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 02:43 AM   #29 
           - Again:  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 02:45 AM   #31 
              - Kennedy would never have said that 11,000 top secret documents  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 02:48 AM   #33 
                 - Well, he's not here to speak for himself  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 03:00 AM   #35 
                 - They'll have a lot easier time convicting Manning, who has already  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 03:02 AM   #36 
                    - Perhaps  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 03:07 AM   #39 
                 - This is the second time in this thread you've mistated the classification  Catherina   Dec-05-10 04:00 AM   #41 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-05-10 01:52 AM   #24 
  - What do you expect from the paper of record?  Scruffy1   Dec-05-10 04:35 AM   #43 
  - Why is the NYT site still available?  Downwinder   Dec-04-10 11:31 PM   #8 
  - The NYT shills for the government. Assange didn't provide the cables to the NYT  Catherina   Dec-04-10 11:45 PM   #9 
     - Thanks. Very informative post. nt  PufPuf23   Dec-04-10 11:56 PM   #12 
     - Like the Belafonte song.  Downwinder   Dec-04-10 11:57 PM   #13 
        - Terrible paper. Never to be forgiven for shilling for the war  Catherina   Dec-05-10 12:06 AM   #14 
  - And John Burns has been sliming Assange. Burns was one of the cheerleaders  EFerrari   Dec-05-10 12:14 AM   #15 
  - +1 nt  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 12:39 AM   #19 
  - No surprises there-the paper that sold the Iraq war to the American people. Shameless hacks. nt  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 12:18 AM   #16 
  - k&r  avaistheone1   Dec-05-10 01:55 AM   #25 
  - Downloading top secret files while "lip-syncing to Lady Gaga'?  Smarmie Doofus   Dec-05-10 02:28 AM   #28 
  - How is it defamation to quote Manning himself? n/t  pnwmom   Dec-05-10 03:04 AM   #37 
  - Ahem covers it. n/t  Catherina   Dec-05-10 09:21 AM   #44 
  - I'm surprised they haven't brought Judith Miller back. These kinds of smears are right up her alley.  laughingliberal   Dec-05-10 03:21 AM   #40 
  - They might as well. Same thought crossed my mind earlier n/t  Catherina   Dec-05-10 04:04 AM   #42 
  - They never have anything good to say about Manning  deaniac21   Dec-05-10 09:34 AM   #47 
  - Ellsberg/Manning-2012!  Dr.Phool   Dec-05-10 10:43 AM   #51 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC