CNN HAS BEEN INFORMED WHAT WHACKJOB PITT REALLY THINKS OF THEM

dfu | 1-17-03 | dfu

[doug from upland]

Because JimRob does not want the name of the site mentioned, it will not be mentioned here. But you might find this interesting.

The co-author with Scott Ritter of a silly little book about Iraq is a whackjob named William Rivers Pitt. Pitt has been bragging that he has been talking to the CNN producer about going on the show.

I called earlier to let them know a little bit about Pitt. Whether that had any impact at all in keeping him off the show I cannot say.

I know we didn't need any more evidence to prove what a whackjob he is, but his latest action is really amusing. While trying to get on the show, he is badmouthing CNN behind their backs. Well, now CNN is in possession of what he has said.

After speaking with an assistant who knows who Pitt is, she gave me the e-mail address and told me to send the info to Molly Levinson. Here was my e-mail to the show: (newsnight@cnn.com)

ATTN: Molly Levinson

Molly, I thought you might like to know what a possible guest, William Pitt, really thinks of CNN.

Here is the link of what he just posted on the (redacted website)--- http://www.(redacted).com/duforum/DCForumID60/29044.html#13

BELOW ARE THE STATEMENTS FROM THE (redacted). Behind your back, he calls you "The Great Whore." He wants to be a guest but he mocks you. For your information, Pitt has taken his site www.WillPitt.com offline probably because he does not want people to be checking what he has written. He has actually put in writing that Ronald Reagan, through Ollie North, sent the bomb to Beirut that killed our Marines. He writes on all the anti-Bush internet sites and lives to do political damage to the president.

WilliamPitt Jan-17-03, 04:46 PM (ET) It is a NO-GO for me on CNN tonight (for now)

They are going in a "different direction" tonight, so I am off the hook.
BUT
She wants me to call her on Monday morning because they want to cover the protest in DC this weekend, and I told her I'd be there with Pacifica. So keep that karma coming.
And thanks.

dbaker41 (1075 posts)
Jan-17-03, 04:48 PM (ET)

2. Karma comin atcha, Bro!

I was looking forward to seeing you on the Great Whore CNN tonight.
Bake

WilliamPitt(12786 posts) Jan-17-03, 04:53 PM (ET)
Reply to post #2 3. The Great Whore will have to wait

LAST EDITED ON Jan-17-03 AT 04:53 PM (ET)
until Monday.

====================================

I gave them my full name and my phone number. You have to just love the rascal. He is begging to be on the show while calling CNN "The Great Whore."

If anyone would like to call CNN, the personnel for Aaron Brown's show get there about 2:00PM Eastern. I suppose they will be there now since it is an evening show. 212.714.7800

[Support Free Republic]

PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[doug from upland]

I thought you might enjoy this. I told Pitt about a year ago to take back his remarks about Reagan, but he wouldn't do it. He has a written portfolio of hatred and filthy speech. Mocking a show on which you are salivating to make an appearance doesn't seem like a Phi Beta Kappa move.

[rs79bm]

FYI, Both Pitt and Ritter are whackjobs.

[Poohbah]

He really said that Ollie North and Reagan bombed the barracks in Beirut?

YGBSM!

[rface]

Here's some more info - an interesting read:

[Poohbah]

It's tragic when someone doesn't take his meds..and then links up with someone ELSE not taking their meds :o)

[kcvl]

This nerd?

[The South Park Republican]

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/reviews?q=&p=DetWrite_W_t_40_L1&url=democraticunderground.com

[TLBSHOW]

I told Pitt about a year ago to take back his remarks about Reagan, but he wouldn't do it

YES YOU DID

[doug from upland]

He didn't say they bombed them. He said that the bomb that hit the barracks was sent there by Reagan through North. Yes, he really did say that.

[The South Park Republican]

This nerd?

He's more of a pansy than a nerd, really.

[doug from upland]

That is the weenie.

[demlosers]

WilliamPitt signed up 2001-06-13.
This account has been banned.

[doug from upland]

I thought I was giving him good advice. I warned him that there would be a written record and he really should withdraw it.

Have you tried his personal website? It was down yesterday and today. Does he have rants he wants to hide? I sent an e-mail to the show yesterday with some of the same info as well as one of the most stupid political statements ever heard --- that he has not voted for Ted Kennedy because he is in John Kerry's district. That is from a high school teacher who teaches English, journalism, and history at a private school near Boston. I don't think the parents are getting their money's worth. Did you know that he actually went to a Jesuit school? They usually do better than that.

[doug from upland]

He only lasted here for a short time. He still worships at the altar of Clinton, does not believe the recession started under Clinton, and blames Bush for 9-11. I don't suspect that he knows after OKC only 5 fulltime FBI agents were working on Islamic terrorism. Clinton used OKC to save his presidency. He left loads of landmines when he left the White House that Bush now has the burden of solving.

[Petronski]

I applaud your efforts. Your response plan is instructive for us all.

[The Finman]

William Pitt (just like Scott Ritter) is a complete joke.

Occasionally some of his Liberal pablum puke crops up on our board at RonaldReagan.com...and how anyone can take his idiotic rambling serious is beyond me.

But for anyone not familiar with W.P. here is a post from him back in October that was posted on a board that I will not mention

"The Democratic Party has finally lost me With a few notable exceptions, Democrats in the Senate appear prepared to give George W. Bush everything he wants regarding war with Iraq. No matter that a vast majority of Americans do not want this war, no matter that the case for war has not been made, no matter that the international community repudiates such action, and no matter that this push for war has been put forth by the White House in a cynical attempt to deflect public attention from gross mismanagement of the government, and away from the catastrophes within the business community. Democratic House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt surrendered last week, and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is preparing to lead GOP mouthpieces like Joe Lieberman in a total capitulation to Bush's plans.

For one, brief, shining moment two weeks ago, it appeared the Democrats would stand up to the incredibly dangerous program put forth by the Bush administration. Al Gore spoke publicly and caustically about Bush's ham-fisted handling of the economy, and the variety of ways war with Iraq will make the world a more dangerous place for America. Senators Byrd and Kennedy likewise excoriated the administration. Daschle stood in the well of the Senate and demanded an apology from Bush, after Bush flatly stated that Democrats did not care about the security of the United States. Byrd and Kennedy have since been hung out to dry, and Daschle has proven himself to be unworthy of the title of leader. His little temper tantrum at the podium is bitter dust in the mouths of every American who hoped that, finally, finally, the Democrats would make a stand.

Because these jellyfish cannot find within themselves the courage to be moral, because the truth is not in them, because they have decided to accept the spoon-fed poison of Karl Rove's Machiavellian disinformation campaign, it might serve any American who reads this to be reminded of the truth, and the stakes, in this matter.

There is no case for war in Iraq. There is no proof whatsoever that Saddam Hussein poses a threat to America or his neighbors. The marvelously absurd Catch-22 we have heard so often is that Hussein is a mortal threat, and yet will be a pushover in battle. There is no proof that Hussein retains any functional aspect of the chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs that were totally dismantled and destroyed by the UNSCOM weapons inspectors from 1991 through 1998. Repeated attempts by the United Nations to reinsert more inspectors have been spurned by the Bush administration in favor of combat.

Back in 1991, when Hussein had vast stockpiles of these weapons, he did not use them when American forces were bulldozing through his country. When he fired SCUD missiles into Israel, there was no mustard gas or other chemical agent attached to the nose comes, and there could very well have been. The only time Saddam Hussein has used these weapons was during the 1980s, while in the paid employ of the American government under Reagan, which gave him most of the stuff in the first place. Should an American army arrive in downtown Baghdad, however, and should the dire rhetorical salvos of the Bush administration prove correct, American solders may come face to face with botulinin toxin. You can put Israel on the firing line right next to G.I. Joe.

The irony is rich, wretched and deadly: Hussein only used these weapons when he was a vassal of America, after receiving these weapons from America, never against Americans, and may only actually use them against America - if he still has them - if we invade.

The idea that Hussein has connections to al Qaeda terrorists is laughable; Hussein is a secular dictator who has crushed Islamic fundamentalism for 30 years. Bin Laden and al Qaeda despise him and want him dead. Hussein would sooner stick his face into a running chainsaw as give weapons of any kind to al Qaeda, because the end result of wither action would be the same.

The concept of bringing democracy to Iraq through war, proffered by the Bush administration, is a vomitous joke. Democracy in the western sense means majority rule, and the majority in Iraq is comprised of Shiite Muslims who are ideologically and theocratically aligned with the extremist mullas in Iran. The rest of the Iraqi population is comprised of Kurds, who will not be allowed to rule Iraq or anything else because of Turkey, and by the Sunnis, from whose vicious tribal politics came Saddam Hussein. Democracy in Iraq is a concept that terrifies our allies in the region, most notably Saudi Arabia. Given the fact that the House of Saud appears to have great management control over the House of Bush, it is profoundly unlikely that anything resembling democracy will ever come to exist in Iraq through this looming process. Whomever rules there after the 'regime change' will be as bad as Hussein, or worse.

Bush's resolution for war that is about to be swallowed whole by Congress speaks of making war on the "region," not just Iraq, thus giving him legal cover for total war upon the entire Middle East. This is the passionate dream of the extremist neo-conservative hawks within the Bush administration who are actually running American foreign policy and the War on Terror: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. Democratic Congressional leaders know these men, and know the dangers they represent, and yet appear fully capable of giving them a legal blessing to extend eternal war across the planet. George W. Bush is not running this government, and this war is not just about Iraq.

Should we attack Iraq with the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein, there will be no easy repeat of the Gulf War. American troops will face house-to-house combat in the streets of Baghdad, a city of five million people. One former combat general interviewed on a cable news station predicted the possibility of American casualties amounting to a battalion a day. In order to prosecute this urban war, Baghdad will have to be 'reduced' via aerial bombardment and artillery, which is likely to cause tens of thousands of civilian deaths. The resulting outrage – termed the 'Al Jazeera effect' after the Arabic news station that will broadcast the shattered bodies of Iraqi civilians all across the Middle East – will spawn new and more horrible terrorist attacks on our shores.

Last, but not least, it is painfully obvious to any clear-headed person that the Bush administration has pushed this war to shove Enron, Harken, Halliburton, Arthur Andersen and the woeful state of our economy and the stock market off the front pages and out of TV news rotation. Andrew Card, the White House Chief of Staff, looks at his President in terms of marketing. In fact, he was quoted last August as saying that the administration would not bring up war against Iraq at that point, because August is a bad time to introduce new products. They have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.

By not pointing out this obvious and bloody tactic, the Democrats have almost completely guaranteed their doom in the midterm elections come November. Today, they say they wish to see this war vote through "to get the Iraq debate behind us," thus fundamentally misunderstanding the planet they exist on. The media will feast upon this coming war, and will report on nothing else. Democrats could walk on water and raise the dead out by the Lincoln Memorial, and the media would show old footage of the Gulf War and slobbering Republicans pounding the war drums. Bank it.

Let us remember a few other key facts, as long as we are skipping down memory lane. When the conservative Supreme Court intervened in the Florida recount, in defiance of every states-rights platitude ever spit from their tall seats, when they handed the election to Bush based upon a dizzying twisting of constitutional law, Congressional Democrats rolled over and died. Only the Black Caucus stood tall in the aftermath, walking out of the chamber as the disaster was sealed with legislative wax. The Democrats overwhelmingly voted for the PATRIOT Anti-Terror Act, perhaps the most fundamentally contra-constitutional piece of legislation since the Alien and Sedition Act. There have been gut-checks upon gut-checks for these 'leaders,' and they have failed time and again. When Mr. Bush says "Frog," they jump. Period.

Now, we have this.

I have for my entire life been a Democrat. My parents came of age with the rousing words of John F. Kennedy ringing in their ears, and I was given their passionate liberalism with mother's milk. Mine has never been a starry-eyed liberalism; I voted for Clinton twice, and Gore once, both times without regret. Whichever way my own personal views have tended, I have always been a pragmatist when it comes to elections and politics. Win first, I have always said, and hope that the issues I believe passionately in will find their way into the policy realm. I have been feasting on half a loaf for years, and have never cried for my empty stomach.

That is all finished now. You may now call me a Street Democrat. I am unrepresented by the leadership of the party to which I have always given my loyalty. Accordingly, I have, and will continue, to take my opposition out onto the streets and news stands and bookstore shelves of America. I was in downtown Boston protesting Bush last Friday, I will be in Washington on October 26th for the massive anti-war rally that will be taking place, and I will be out on those streets at every opportunity. My leadership has failed, and I am forced to do their jobs for them. I am not interested in electoral gamesmanship, pragmatism or being a good party man any more. My essential core of ethics have been battered and bruised by the Democratic leadership for years. I have always accepted that half a loaf, and never cried for my empty stomach. No more. Not on this one.

Today, for the first time in my life, I am ashamed to be a Democrat.

Know this well, you fools. I am not alone in my disdain. Americans have been so badly abused by the process of politics in this country that more than half of them now refuse to vote. The rest wander the streets of this nation like Diogenes with his lamp, looking only for one honest man. The closer you cuddle to this administration, the farther you remove yourselves from your duties as the loyal opposition, the less of a distinction you offer to an American voting public desperate for leadership that knows what is right, and knows what it is doing.

Perhaps you have some master plan in the works. Perhaps you will take the dangerous words and intentions weaved through the Bush resolution for War on Iraq and turn it against him. Perhaps it only seems like you have left great men like Senator Byrd hanging out to dry. Perhaps there are wheels within wheels in this matter. I have always trusted you, always believed there was more than one game afoot. I do not believe it anymore, and woe unto you because of it. If you have lost me, you can be damned sure that you lost millions of others before me. I am the bitter end of your support, and I am finished with your farcical excuse for leadership.

Remember one last thing before you trundle into the chamber and sell us all down the river. The Democratic Party was virtually annihilated the last time it made a bad decision about a war. History may well record the coming debacle in Iraq as a Bush war, but I will remember you. I will never forgive, and I will never forget."

Which after reading that pablum puke I posted on our board at RonaldReagan.com quoting my good buddy Dutch, who summed it up best when he said....

"Here’s a clue for all the liberal/democRATs: IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU! YOU’RE REALLY NOT THAT IMPORTANT! GET OVER YOURSELF, YOU POMPOUS ASSES. AMERICAN SOLDIERS ARE GOING TO BE RISKING THEIR LIVES SO YOU CAN BE CONDESCENDING "HATE AMERICA FIRST" DROIDS... TRY BEING AN AMERICAN FIRST, BEFORE BEING A FILTHY, LYING POLITICAL HACK."

And here are some pictures of Will at a Liberal function with added quotes from his post above.

[DAnconia55]

Bwahahahahaha...

[doug from upland]

Come on. Are those real photos of him? Is he holding a cigarette?

He apparently just had it out with Aaron Brown, and I don't think he will be welcome on CNN. (Note: I cut and pasted. Typos were done by Whackjob.)

WilliamPitt (12810 posts)
Jan-17-03, 08:14 PM (ET)
I justn spent 1/2 an hour on the phone with Aaron Brown

LAST EDITED ON Jan-17-03 AT 08:41 PM (ET)
His producer got me on the phone with him, and he proceeded to scold me for the emails he got from those who read my letter to him. Apparently, a bunch of people wrote him to castigate him for not covering the iussue properly, and saw my letter as an invitation to that scolding, because I named him in it without stating clearly that I had written it without having seen his show. I told him that I wrote him specifically because I thought he'd speak truth to power, maybe. He didn't. Hence, the emails.

Let the record show that his program was NO DIFFERENT than the whores who had been on before him.

OOOHHH, it was a battle. Back and forth, "Excuse me, I'm Talking" and "Wait a minute" and "Hold on a second" and "You are SO wrong." I JUST HAD A F***ING PHONE WAR WITH AARON BROWN.

I f***ed him up. Bank it. The scolder became the scoldee.

I lectured the man, because he had phone etiquette.
EVERYTHING YOU EVER WANTED TO TELL A CNN PERSON, I told him tonight. Everything.

It was joy.

We parted on good terms, but I am doubting I'll ever be on his show, unless I get unavoidably famous.

========================

Why did Whackjob lecture Brown because he had phone etiquette? Phone etiquette is good.

[The South Park Republican]

No matter that a vast majority of Americans do not want this war

Hey Pansy Pitt...

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH IS NOT B.J. CLINTON! HE LEADS, HE DOES NOT ACT BASED ON POLLS! GET USED TO IT YOU LITTLE WORM!!

And besides...What's your definition of "Vast Majority"?? I don't believe a simple "Majority" has ever been against this war??

[Petronski]

Later in the same thread:

Told me he was "pissed," cursed a bunc of times, didn't get hysterical, but yo I had his goat by the f**king throat.

Bwa ha ha ha.

[doug from upland]

This has been a fun adventure. I sent the thread to Molly Levinson at CNN. If he were not insane, he might have had a shot at promoting his POS little book on CNN.

[kcvl]

He called me
Yo.


Yeah, I'm jazzed. Ready to protest tomorrow. Mother*uckers call me at my house ready to shame me better pack a *ucking lunch.

He didn't.

[Petronski]

Do you mean the POS book that he co-wrote with Skat el-Ritar?

[The Finman]

Yes, those really are pictures of William Pitt from a Liberal social event sponsored by the board that he spends most of his time on.

I've got a lot pictures from that event...I was able to save most of the images to my hard drive before the original thread was deleted.

[Petronski]

He's so....analytical. So relevant.

[kcvl]

t r u t h o u t | Letter
William Rivers Pitt, Author "War on Iraq"
to: Staff / Aaron Brown CNN

Subject: Flawed Report; Iraqi Warheads Found


Thursday 16 January 2003

My name is William Rivers Pitt. I am the author of the book 'War on Iraq,' which has appeared on the New York Times bestseller list, and has cracked the top ten bestseller lists of the Washington Post, L.A. Times, San Francisco Chronicle and others. I am also a writer for the publication truthout.org.

I apologize for flouting my resume at you, but I wanted to make sure that you do not dismiss this email as coming from someone not very well versed in this Iraq situation. A correspondent named (name deleted) at CNN gave me your address, so that I might pass a note through you to Mr. Aaron Brown. I am hoping he is prepared to hear what I am saying.

First things first: The warheads.

Let's be clear. These were not 'chemical warheads.' In the Iraqi arsenal, a warhead is a warhead - an empty ordnance space strapped to a missile. What matters is the payload, be it explosive or chemical or nuclear. The item placed in the warhead denotes the designation. These warheads were stone-cold empty, so by definition they are not 'chemical warheads.' They are, in fact, nothing, because they were loaded with no payload. Furthermore, the word 'warhead' is in itself misleading, as these were artillery munitions.

Second. Iraq is allowed by UN resolutions to have a variety of weapons, including the Al Samoud missile. We did not want to pull Iraq's fangs completely after the Gulf War, considering the neighborhood they live in. We allowed them to keep missiles that fly only a certain distance (150km most often). Many people will not know this, and will think the presence of these munitions will represent a breach of the UN resolution. This is not the case.

Third. Scott Ritter informed me today that these munitions were part of Iraq's declaration last December. I await further confirmation of this, and so should the journalism world.

Fourth. This is absolutely a vindication of the inspections regime. They found the stuff, and it will be destroyed, an no American soldiers or Iraqi civilians died in the process. Inspections work.

Fifth. Recall how the UNSCOM inspections were undermined by meddling from the American intelligence community. Understand that this warhead story did not come from Blix, or through the normal channels, but through a Japanese (read: close ally) inspector whop contacted the news media and let rip before the facts were in hand. Why?

Finally, I want to address a comment you made earlier this week. You said on your show that it was unconscionable that viewers were writing in claiming that CNN wants war because war is good for the media business. I understand that this idea offends the core of your professionalism, but I wonder if you have been watching CNN today.

Your station has referred, over and over again, to these discovered warheads as 'chemical warheads.' The debate has not been centered on what the facts are behind these items - when they were made, whether they were loaded with anything, how long they have been there, whether they were declared - and instead has focused on whether the White House can use this as a pretext for war. Calling these things 'chemical warheads' is a gross exaggeration, which I have heard on CNN no less than seven times during the period I have been writing this message. Mull that.

Please, take the data I have given you and air it, for the sake of a reasoned and complete debate. I remind you that CNN's viewership increased by 500% after 9/11 and that your network made its bones on the first Gulf War. I beg you to get this data out to the American people, who desperately need facts and not overheated innuendo.

With great appreciation,

William Rivers Pitt

[The South Park Republican]

I've got a lot pictures from that event...I was able to save most of the images to my hard drive before the original thread was deleted.

Well...The prudent thing seems to be for you to post those pictures over on a Freep New World Order, Randy Weaver or Waco thread. See what those fellas do with that information!

[nutmeg]

Great work Doug!

[Petronski]

I apologize for flouting my resume at you....

Flouting? That resume?

[kcvl]

To a degree
Yes. I made the point about hown overheated the coverage had been, and he agreed, but begged off, a la, "I don't make make the news," etc. Tagged him there, too.

---

Much of the conversation was about
'chemical warheads.' He got the message.

---

Pretty much
We went back and forth, his offended professionalism vs. my intent to tell him where and how his network had blown it repeatedly.

---

*uckem
They can have my freedom when they pry my cold, dead fingers from around their necks.

---

[The South Park Republican]

Let's be clear. These were not 'chemical warheads.' In the Iraqi arsenal, a warhead is a warhead - an empty ordnance space strapped to a missile. What matters is the payload, be it explosive or chemical or nuclear. The item placed in the warhead denotes the designation. These warheads were stone-cold empty, so by definition they are not 'chemical warheads.' They are, in fact, nothing, because they were loaded with no payload. Furthermore, the word 'warhead' is in itself misleading, as these were artillery munitions.

Look you little twerp...I just saw Spearker Gingrinch tell us that those were warheads that are used for chemical weapons ONLY. He also said they could be loaded in a matter of minutes.

Check your facts dumbass. I'm just some nobody on some message board...You're supposedly some kind of "Author". Well...So far, you suck.

[doug from upland]

He really is full of himself.

[Petronski]

Furthermore, the word 'warhead' is in itself misleading, as these were artillery munitions.

The 122mm shell is IIRC the Katyusha rocket (the famed "Stalin Organs" of the Ostfront in WWII). It has always been considered a rocket, as propulsion continues after the ordnance has left the launcher (as opposed to artillery which, like a bullet, is propelled solely by the expansion of gases in the breach of the gun).

Oh, and rockets have warheads.

[doug from upland]

This is too funny. He blew a chance to be on CNN. Apparently Aaron Brown called again, probably because they got another message and link showing them what Pitt and the RATS think of him and CNN.

======================================

WilliamPitt (12813 posts)
Jan-17-03, 09:38 PM (ET)
Aaron Brown just called to say I am "Shameless" - :o)
He did. Just called me at home again and scolded me again. Said I am shameless. Said he had never been so offended.

Some of y'all must have written him. So much for my mainstream career.

F*** the whores.

GO.

==============================

Did anyone see something about wanting to contact Dan Rather. I suspect that Rather is going to have to be informed about the mental patient. Anyone want to help?

[Petronski]

Wow. If Brown actually called Pitt at home at 9:30 tonight, even more angry than before, then he must be reading their threads.

[doug from upland]

MIDI - YELLOW RIVER

There's a guy who's a lunatic…..on the fringe, man, he is really sick
Some medication might do the trick…William Rivers

He's not voted for Kennedy…this is funny, you must agree
He's in John Kerry's district, you see…William Rivers

William Rivers, William Rivers…he's teaching our kids everyday
William Rivers, William Rivers…he is a toon, what can we say

Should he be in a padded room…it should be understood
That's like asking do grizzlies crap out in the woods
Foolish William Rivers

He claims Reagan conceived a plan…the Beirut bombing had been a scam
Through Ollie he sent the bomb to Iran…William Rivers

He does not like our president…he's nuts, that is evident
I laugh out loud when I'm hearing him vent…William Rivers

William Rivers, William Rivers…he's teaching our kids each day
Yes, William Rivers, William Rivers…he is a toon, what can we say

Should he be in a padded room…it should be understood
That's like asking do the grizzlies crap out in the woods
Foolish William Rivers

William Rivers, William Rivers…he's teaching our kids each day
William Rivers, William Rivers…he's a toon, what can we say

[Petronski]

Fourth. This is absolutely a vindication of the inspections regime. They found the stuff, and it will be destroyed, an no American soldiers or Iraqi civilians died in the process. Inspections work.

Both Pitt and el-Ritar make the classic and fundamental error of assuming that the items found are the ONLY items to be found: an arrogant and potentially fatal error. I sure would love to play poker against such foolhardy minds!

If Pitt and el-Ritar are so bloody confident, they ought to take up the challenge of General McInerny (Ret.), and drive the lead tank in the assault without ABC gear.

[Monty22]

Wow, cnn dumping on a fellow liberal for being too insanely leftist (stupid).

Impressive.

[doug from upland]

I'm sending the threads.

[The South Park Republican]

WilliamPitt (12813 posts) Jan-17-03, 09:38 PM (ET) Aaron Brown just called to say I am "Shameless" - :o) He did. Just called me at home again and scolded me again. Said I am shameless. Said he had never been so offended.

Why would Aaron Brown even take this pissant's call? Let alone actually call him??

Should we believe this?

[Monty22]

This is a guy who complained that his fiancee thought his politics were akin to area 57 wacko level.

Yes, even she was tired of it. Never heard anything about this situation, since he hasn't brought it up. I am a scholar of will pitt, he's the most lunatic of leftists from du.

Aaron Brown's dumping on him, get this, is seen as a *BADGE OF HONOR*!!! LOL!!!!!!

[TruBluKentuckian]

I think this is the funniest thread I've ever seen on FR.

I love it.

[Petronski]

Pitt's fiancee? Isn't he 'out?'

[Petronski]

If it isn't true, it's still damn funny.

[VeniVidiVici]

He really is full of himself

My thoughts exactly. Even worse he is a groupie! A wannabe! And I'm no arty expert but it would seem to me a hollow warhead can only be filled by chemical or biological agents. I would think a regular round would be solid. DUh!

[doug from upland]

Ahhh. A guy who likes to laugh. I hope you enjoy THIS.

[kcvl]

WilliamPitt (12813 posts)
Jan-17-03, 05:24 PM (ET)

Don't burn the flag. Fly it proudly...upside-down.
This is the universal American sign for distress. See my sig below. If you want to make a statement with the flag, fly it upside down. You'll make your point without feeding the anti-liberal grist mill which we all have to deal with (yes we do).

Fly that *ucker in distress. Righteous.

[Monty22]

I guess not :)))

Wow, he blew it on this one. Ritter's disgraced, except for the few du types.

Remember though.. ritter got a full day this week on the media to push this leftism and enemy symptathizing. Hard to know how this will really go.

However, I know pitt bragged about being a du-representative to cnn. Sorry pitt, you lost! :)

Can't even get an uberliberal station to support this insanity.. At his level.