Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Fox, meet henhouse tularetom Aug 2015 #1
Schumer is probably calling other Democrats now madville Aug 2015 #2
And he'd be lying just as AP here is lying to YOU, its trusted audience blm Aug 2015 #83
Are We Sure That What Is Being Said.... global1 Aug 2015 #3
The author of this article Senator Tankerbell Aug 2015 #4
Accused by pro-Palestinian websites madville Aug 2015 #5
What's wrong with being pro-palestinian? Senator Tankerbell Aug 2015 #6
Its like Hillary being criticized by Jeb. 7962 Aug 2015 #11
Even if the criticism is factually accurate? Senator Tankerbell Aug 2015 #16
You have a low post count, but some people on DU like to kill the messenger... happyslug Aug 2015 #35
I have to say StoneCarver Aug 2015 #37
I read a lot of people on DU, and I hate it when people leave do to attacks by others happyslug Aug 2015 #38
You should say, as calling out people for low post counts violates DU Rules. n/t whathehell Aug 2015 #54
Bias calling our bias is not too credible. LanternWaste Aug 2015 #84
Ok, you can aim to discredit the source, but... renegade000 Aug 2015 #8
Right up there with the Bibi-Bomb! randome Aug 2015 #19
So in your mind being pro-Palestinian is a bad thing. This explains geek tragedy Aug 2015 #15
Bias is a two-way street madville Aug 2015 #18
lol, as if you would dismiss a site as "pro-Israeli" geek tragedy Aug 2015 #22
I do see their point madville Aug 2015 #26
Actually I think you have it backwards padfun Aug 2015 #59
Here is a non pro-Palestinian website still_one Aug 2015 #31
Not apparently, he does still_one Aug 2015 #30
I just saw an administration official leftynyc Aug 2015 #40
wow this sounds bad Enrique Aug 2015 #7
Actually, if you read the full article it reveals that this involves geek tragedy Aug 2015 #17
Meanwhile, the 24 day waiting period remains intact. 7962 Aug 2015 #20
Iran deal opponents now have their "death panels" lie, and it's a whopper geek tragedy Aug 2015 #21
Wow, thats a long article to TRY to explain it away. And pretty much failing. 7962 Aug 2015 #23
you didn't read the article. geek tragedy Aug 2015 #24
A lot of their work is/has been done at military sites. 7962 Aug 2015 #33
And a shrouded mirror LuvLoogie Aug 2015 #36
You can't 'hide' radiation in 24 days. You're determined to put the worst possible light on this. randome Aug 2015 #25
"Stability"? Not if another 1/2 dozen countries get nukes. 7962 Aug 2015 #34
Without the deal, Iran could get a bomb within a few months karynnj Aug 2015 #60
But they keep saying they dont have a weapons program, so how would that be possible? 7962 Aug 2015 #87
Ask Netanyahu or the UN that put the sanctions in place karynnj Aug 2015 #88
Of course I dont believe it, its just what they've insisted. 7962 Aug 2015 #92
RW media knows SO much more than nuclear scientists. GOP voters have been swallowing blm Aug 2015 #85
LOL - The AP article was propaganda that YOU are supporting. blm Aug 2015 #78
Wow. A thread here and in GD. This must really bug you. randome Aug 2015 #9
In related news, OJ Simpson to search for real killer 6chars Aug 2015 #10
To be explained away at a later date. As soon as they can come up with something! nt 7962 Aug 2015 #12
You know who George Jahn is? still_one Aug 2015 #28
No, because we happen to know that Parchin isn't even a nuclear research site. geek tragedy Aug 2015 #14
No, it doesn't concern at all, seeing as the story was bullshit. gcomeau Aug 2015 #89
Parchin is a NON-NUCLEAR site. geek tragedy Aug 2015 #13
The author, George Jahn, here is some background on him still_one Aug 2015 #27
Here is what the Guardian has to say about George Jahn on a related matter still_one Aug 2015 #29
An administration official has leftynyc Aug 2015 #42
the ap already updated it's story and the administration never confirmed the story karynnj Aug 2015 #43
You're dreaming if you think leftynyc Aug 2015 #46
the administration does not trust the mullahs and has said so karynnj Aug 2015 #63
It really doesn't look that way leftynyc Aug 2015 #70
that is what they did in multiple hearings and many karynnj Aug 2015 #71
No - speeches is not what I'm talking about leftynyc Aug 2015 #73
The deal has been published and is on various websites karynnj Aug 2015 #74
Well, maybe because you personally leftynyc Aug 2015 #77
"I know DU trusts the oh-so-trustworthy mullahs " still getting your information geek tragedy Aug 2015 #64
I did a google search and leftynyc Aug 2015 #51
Here's one link karynnj Aug 2015 #53
I am pointing out that the story is misleading at best. It is an intentional still_one Aug 2015 #49
It doesn't look misleading to me leftynyc Aug 2015 #52
AP has removed the claim that Iran would be making the inspections themselves, rather than UN still_one Aug 2015 #55
And I can't find that revised report ANYWHERE leftynyc Aug 2015 #56
and I cannot either. However, I still question the original stories' implication still_one Aug 2015 #62
There are several things that have come out subsequently. For one thing, AP definitely distorted still_one Aug 2015 #75
AP's propaganda reeks to high heaven. Surprised you didn't smell it. blm Aug 2015 #79
That poster bases their opinions on what John Bolton tells them to think geek tragedy Aug 2015 #80
This message was self-deleted by its author 840high Aug 2015 #32
That's a much different argument leftynyc Aug 2015 #41
link please that says specifically what AP misreported nt karynnj Aug 2015 #44
I saw the administration guy on CNN leftynyc Aug 2015 #45
I am not calling you a liar karynnj Aug 2015 #50
If you're suggesting the administration has confirmed that it's going to allow geek tragedy Aug 2015 #67
You actually think that? Then there is little help for you. 7962 Aug 2015 #47
It's called sovereignty padfun Aug 2015 #61
Thank you. Darb Aug 2015 #68
Don't bite off more than you can chew. Darb Aug 2015 #69
HA! Good to know we've got DUers who are fine with North Korea & Iran having a nuke! 7962 Aug 2015 #72
How many RW fundie Republicans here in US would 'Nuke em' or 'Glass em' or blm Aug 2015 #81
Yes, but they also dont run the country like the Ayatollahs do. 7962 Aug 2015 #86
There are none so blind, Darb Aug 2015 #91
Yet what I say is true. Look up the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. 7962 Aug 2015 #93
Horsepoo - Half of the pro-war voices are sitting in Congress and Senate. blm Aug 2015 #95
Many folks have better ideas. Pretty simple, really. 7962 Aug 2015 #96
And then 2 years later without an agreement, then what? Utter nonsense that you think blm Aug 2015 #97
Fine. Happy for you. Like I said, we'll see what happens. 7962 Aug 2015 #99
So long - O'Reilly and Trump can't be kept waiting. blm Aug 2015 #100
Yes, because anyone who has a problem with it MUST back one of those idiots. 7962 Aug 2015 #103
and you can ask them to make you a sandwich while they're at it. geek tragedy Aug 2015 #98
Shhh…he's moved on now…to Huckabee School of Foreign Policy. blm Aug 2015 #101
Some want war, I just wish they would fight it randys1 Aug 2015 #102
Odd though, how NONE of my comments mention any military action at all. 7962 Aug 2015 #104
Weak sauce. Darb Aug 2015 #90
When you've got nothing, resort to insults. Typical. 7962 Aug 2015 #94
This one doesn't pass the smell test. Pure BS propaganda. harun Aug 2015 #48
The story has subsequently been revised by the AP still_one Aug 2015 #57
Looks like it didn't pass their smell test either. harun Aug 2015 #58
Now if that doesn't call for a "WTF??" nothing does. Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #65
The AP's controversial and badly flawed Iran inspections story, explained geek tragedy Aug 2015 #66
AP has deliberately distorted the story. The Obama administration has said the following: still_one Aug 2015 #76
Funny thing - those posting their 'concern' over this seem to show up….. blm Aug 2015 #82
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»AP EXCLUSIVE: UN TO LET I...»Reply #63