Where are the Reporters?

Today, President Bush got bashed by reporters because the NIE report claims that Iran may not be as close to atomic weapons as earlier believed.

We no longer have reporters - all we have is narrow-minded, biased political hacks.

Seems to me it wasn't all that long ago that Intelligence reports claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

So, why are know-nothing reporters so eager to believe Intelligence reports now? Perhaps because those reports make it look like Bush is wrong.

I declare unequivically that, had those reports said that Iran was only a week away from nuclear weapons, that the press would be taking the opposite stance, and would be claiming that the reports are "hyped" by the Bush Administration.

Frankly, what those dunce reporters believe has nothing to do with anything. The only thing that matters is the truth. Dumb-ass reporters can believe the sky is falling, if they wish (and, as far as global warming is concerned, they do), but that does not mean the sky is falling.

Iran is our enemy. Period. They want to destroy us. Period. We know this because their leaders have actually stated these things, and because their religious beliefs are diametrically opposed to our own. Iran is still working hard at producing nuclear fuel, which can still be used to build nuclear weapons. Just because they are not currently building the weapons, themselves, may be nothing more than a case of choosing to put the horse before the cart.

In closing, we would all be well-advised to note that the "facts" behind this weeks NIE report were actually determined in 2003. It has taken our "intelligence" agencies four years to analyze that info and bring forth a report. So, it would follow that, whatever Iran is doing TODAY will not be made available in a report until 2012. So, if we are 4 years behind in our information, it is entirely possible that Iran is back to building the warheads.

If I were a reporter, I think I would refrain from playing politics, and simply try to be objective. In the long run, that would help insulate me from being seen as one of the fools that persist in the White House Press Room these days.

Case in point: Helen Thomas. This "reporter" is so incredibly biased and so terribly ignorant that it amazes me she has even managed to survive past childhood. Her comments yesterday about civilians that may have been killed in the Iraq war is just so stupid and ignorant as to not even warrant a response. But I must.

Ms. Thomas is old enough - Lord only knows she's old enough - to have lived through several wars. And she, like everyone else, knows that civilians get killed in wars. There is no other way to win a war.

Perhaps Ms Thomas is so dumb as to think that, in World War II, when we were bombing German cities, that those cities were populated only with soldiers. Or maybe she is so ignorant as to believe Nagasaki and Hiroshima were nothing more than military installations when we dropped the bomb on them.

OK, Helen, now hear this: in a war, there can only be one of two outcomes - you either win, or you lose. And in order to win, there must be collateral damage. It simply cannot be avoided. And if a person is so incredibly arrogant and disingenuous as to believe that America has ever intentionally killed civilians without a military objective, then those people should get the Hell out of this country - we do not need them here. If they think America is so bad, they should leave. After all, if you don't like the place you live, it only makes sense to move. If you choose to stay, you have no room for complaint.

Ms. Thomas, if you and your ilk do not like America, then we Americans who do love our country invite you to find a better place to live. Can I buy you a one-way ticket to Venezuela? The Sudan? Russia?