Yo, Big Dog! Where are your facts?

December 18, 2007 in Political Animals | 8 comments

I am a firm believer that the best way to get a wingnut to expose him/her/itself as an unthinking buffoon is to ask a few simple questions, then sit back and watch the poor schlemiel thrash around in utter confusion. Let’s see if it works with a recent example of Big Dog’s rubbish:

The report is out and the intelligence community has weighed in on Iran and it has determined that Iran has no nukes and that while they might acquire the capability to build them, they are not yet at that state. Basically, according to the intelligence community, Iran does not pose a threat. Never mind the fact that this is the same intelligence community that said Iran was working on nukes and never mind the fact that Israel has a vastly different opinion. We should also ignore the fact that Iran stopped working on its nuclear program and then started back up without anyone knowing and that they deliberately took actions to keep from being detected. We should also forget that the people telling us Iran is not a threat is the same community that missed 9/11 completely.

Here are three simple questions for Big Dog to answer — if he can:

  1. Who in the intelligence community, specifically and by name, has indicated that Iran does not pose a threat?
  2. In what previous NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) report did “the intelligence community” state unequivocally that Iran was developing nuclear weapons?
  3. How do you reconcile your claim that the intelligence community “missed 9/11 completely” with the fact that the August 6, 2001, Presidential Daily Briefing, which was titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in US”, specifically noted that Osama bin Laden intended to conduct terrorist attacks on U.S. cities, that members of his Al Qaeda operatives had traveled to or lived in the U.S. for years, that bin Laden had previously expressed a desire to hijack an American aircraft, and that “FBI information since that time indicate[d] patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York”?

Let’s see if Big Dog can actually supply the facts to back up his spew.

8 comments

Comments feed for this article

December 18, 2007 at 3:31 pm

dan l (writing as BIG DOG)

I AM THE BIG DOG AND I WAS IN THE MILITARY. BIG DOG DOESNT WANT ANY GAYS AROUND HIM WHEN HE’S IN THE MILITARY. I JUST WANT TO BE IN THE MILITARY WITHOUT THE LIBRUHLS GOD DAMNED LIBRUALS ARE SO STOOOOPED.

YOU TOO MEAT SHIT LOL. WERE YOU IN THE MILITARY? WELL I WAS I ONCE DROVE A TRUCK IN THE MILITARY LOL LETS SEE YOUR DD214 WITH YOUR DISCHARGE I WANT TO SEE IF YOU VIOLATED DON’T ASK DONT TELL. I WAS IN THE MILITARY IN THE 103RD TRUCK DRIVING PLATOON SO I HAVE UNIQUE KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT MEANS WHEN THE INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATIONS COME IN.

YOU EVER BEEN IN THE MILITARY? NO. I SERVED THE COUNTRY HONORABLES.

December 18, 2007 at 3:43 pm

meatbrain

The email and IP addresses of the comment just above would seem to indicate that it was not, in fact, posted by “Big Dog”.

December 18, 2007 at 5:09 pm

dan l

It was a joke. Big Dog is silly. Especially that ridiculous cartoon of himself on his page.

What was really funny was the time he told his 4 listeners on WAR RADIO (YEAH WAR RADIO NUMBER 1) when he was on the radio with Jake Freedom Folk’ll (hillbilly who transplanted himself into Humboldt Park – a shitty area of Chicago and bitches about immigrants) that he was calling his friends in the military to track me down.

Hilarious.

December 18, 2007 at 7:31 pm

meatbrain

I agree with your assessment of Big Dog, Dan. However, I would much prefer that you leave your comments here under your own name.

December 18, 2007 at 10:28 pm

dan l

Yeah. Sorry. Was doing it to make it authentic.

December 18, 2007 at 10:46 pm

dan l

Dude, this dude is so good for the lulz.

Did you ever hear WAR? He was seriously nuts.

December 22, 2007 at 1:20 am

kender

Dan, I don’t remember Dig Dog ever saying such a thing, and as soon as I am home from vacation I can check the archives (if you have a date, which I doubt you do as I know you’re lying) and see if BD did say that when on the air with Jake.

And meaty, are you stating that iran IS a threat?

And why are the people that are so willing to believe this intel the same ones that seem to point out how faulty intel has been in the past? Why do some people only believe a source when it agrees with them?

December 22, 2007 at 10:23 am

meatbrain

And meaty, are you stating that iran IS a threat?

Had it read what I have written, shitmonkey would know that I have not said that. It has once again demonstrated its inability to pay attention.

That said… Yes, Iran quite clearly does threaten US interests. The threat posed by Iran does not, however, mandate that we go to war with that country. There are many countries around the world that threaten US interests, yet we do not hear the neocons demanding that we go to war with those other countries.

And why are the people that are so willing to believe this intel the same ones that seem to point out how faulty intel has been in the past?

The intelligence has been faulty in the past. The question is, has the process of gathering and analyzing intelligence data improved to the point that the conclusions of the recent NIE can be trusted? The Bush administration clearly thinks that it has.

Why do some people only believe a source when it agrees with them?

shitmonkey may wish to attend to the beam in its own eye, before it begins screeching about any mote in a neighbor’s eye.