http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/10/what_the_mehlis.shtmlComment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 25.10.2005 @ 14:11
I wrote on Tony's blog several questions 1 of which was why he really thought the report was changed by Annan and Mehlis other than his obvious partisanship with Arab dictators.
Michael Young's Oct 24 Slate article only slightly touches on this.
I also asked if he thought the US State Dept was for the changed before and/or after the fact as a way of using it as "leverage" against Syria. As stupid as this idea is, it's still the State Dept.
So far Rick Moran was the ONLY one I have found that has touched on the State Dept angle. (see below)
RICK MORAN -
The Daily Star of Lebanon is reporting that the US State Department urged the censoring of the report.
This would seem to make sense given the current state of US-Syria relations.
RICK MORAN -
1) The Daily Star link that says the US urged for the changes is no good? You think "this would make sense"? given the US-Syria relations? They stink? I don't get your point.
Any other link to the article? Any opinions on its accuracy and why Tony, Michael and others have not posted or written about it?
TOM SDCEDUR -
.....It's barely possible that Annan's office (or Mehlis's office) decided that that was a slightly flimsy basis to be calling people out by name. Because lord knows, no one would EVER think of stripping out the context when repeating the accusations.
(I am torn between the "lack of computer skillz" theory and the "sneaky backhanded subversion of security by lower-down computer geek" theory.)
I agree! I highly doubt Mehlis would have severely argued with Annan for keeping the names out. Annan probably explained 'geo-political' reasons for editing them out.
And I highly doubt some computer geek read through the ENTIRE document and realized the importance of the track changes and decided to make sure everyone knew what had happened.
IT'S SIMPLE. THEY SCREWED UP ON THE WORD FUNCTIONS. I HAVE USED WORD FOREVER AND I JUST TRIED AGAIN AND CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO DISPLAY PREVIOUS CHANGES.
MikeComment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 25.10.2005 @ 14:10
Maybe you can tell me what the baseballs g-ds were doing in Game 1 of the 2000 Worldd Series.Comment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 26.10.2005 @ 03:21
When the Mets outhit the Yanks and blew 2 or 3 runs by a combination of home run balls hitting the top of the fence and bouncing up and back and baserunning errors. As well as stranding a runner on 3rd with 1 out in the top of the 9th inning. Culminated by a 15 or 20 pitch walk worked out by Paul O'Neil to start the Yankee 9th where they tied the game, miraculously didn't win it, though Benitez tried to give it away and then came back in extras, as usual and beat the Mets, thereby ending any hope of a competitive World Series. And denying an exciting fall classic subway series that New Yorkers had been dreaming about since the Brooklyn Bums left town for the baseball mecca of LA.
I didn't read the entire post. But I am a NY person and fan, Mets.
Your 2001 series analysis is tongue and cheek, however, the Yankees did not lose to an inferior team. In fact outside of late game heroics in 2 games the Yankees would have been down 3-1 or 3-2 at the least. The D Backs outhit, outscored and outpitched the Yankees. The Yanks won razor close games and were blown out in others. And having the best pitchers in a 7 games series is about the most important thing you can have on your team.
That being said the Yanks were still outhit and scored in the series.
And given the backdrop of 9-11 and the unbelievable magic the Yankees produced, that even a Yankee hater has to concede, it was one of the best World Series in history.
After that year Pauly O'neil, Tino Martinez and others left the team and the chemistry hasn't been the same since.Comment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 25.10.2005 @ 14:18
Here is the Daily Star piece that mentions the evidence of a Palestinian driver
Here is the Daily Star artilce you actually link to in this postComment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 26.10.2005 @ 11:38
Don't know what's up with your commentsComment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 26.10.2005 @ 04:46
WALL STREET JOURNAL PIECE BY YOUNG
SLATE ARTICLE BY YOUNG
Hit and Run piece mentioned at Tony's blog here.
Within that post are links to -
1) Michale Young's Hit and Run post.
This is where you left a comment with a link to a now defunct Daily Star piece that indicated the State Dept requested/demanded BEFORE the fact the report be altered.
2) Michael Young's WSJournal OpEd on the Mehlis Report
TONY'S NEXT POST hereComment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 26.10.2005 @ 04:43
links to Michael Young's article the next day in Slate.
No Absence of Mehlis
Syria faces the music over Rafik Hariri's assassination.
I questioned Tony about if the State Dept did something stupid like this... and if so why. And he referred me to some Michael Young pieces in Slate and the Wall Street Journal as well as in Hit and Run. No great revelations more than what you say above. I noted that the Daily Star link no longer works. You posted it at Hit and Run comments section.
HOWEVER -Comment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 26.10.2005 @ 03:26
Here I was talking about the Pali connection to the bombing. I have not seen THAT anywhere else and was wondering if and why not NONE of those other media sources (mentioned above) haven't.
How come this is the only place I have heard of this?
Did Tony at Across the Bay, Michael Young, Lee Smith or anyone else (Washington Times?) note this fact?
MikeComment Posted By Mike Nargizian On 25.10.2005 @ 14:21
Pages (1) :