|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106188] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 00:06   |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
| SEAL |
What a reliable and proffesional news source :rolleyes:.
I stick to unbiased sources, thanks.
|
Which source would that be?
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106222] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 06:07 |
NHJ BV
Messages: 712
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| SEAL |
| NHJ BV |
Sources that do not exist primarily to bash someone?
|
What he said. For the same reason, I take "Fahrenheit 9/11" with a grain of salt.
|
Indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106231] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 08:30 |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Crimson |
Which source would that be?
|
Jim Lehrer's News Hour. On that news show, they actually bring in interesting people to talk about interesting things, not like FOX News where they always bring some Republcan on to talk about what John Kerry did today is very bad, very bad.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106259] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 11:38 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
There is one unbiased news source. That's C-SPAN.
Fahrenheit 9/11 was indeed filled with footage and sources, but the footage is usually edited or cut-off to change the intended meaning of the deliverer.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106261] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 11:48 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Nodbugger |
Have you ever watched FOX?
Almost all of their guests have opposing view points.
They bring in experts to explain situations.
|
Yes, I have. And every time, I have to turn it off in disgust. It's not news. Have you seen Hannity and Colmes? Colmes looks like a skeleton and never proves Hannity wrong when he starts lying, and they bring fools on ot the show.
Like, they'll be replaying Bush's new campaign commercial over and over again and discussing how good it is blah blah blah.
FOX Sucks. It's not news, it's entertainment.
Crimson - I actually enjoyed watching the Democratic Convention on C-SPAN. It's kind of nice to just be able to watch events without having talking heads tell you what to think, whether it be left or right.
I think the real message F9/11 should get across is that war is horrible, and we should only go if absolutely necessary. The graphic footage Moore added really showed that war is not a happy happy joy joy affair.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106279] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 13:50 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
President Bush wantss to make it seem like this is a largely bloodless war, doing things like not allow cameras to view the coffins of dead soldiers being returned from Iraq.
Perhaps happy happy joy joy was an overstatement, but this administration is trying to cover up the real cost of the war.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106313] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 18:10 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
We've lost over 900 U.S. Soldiers in Iraq. That's not bloodless. It's not close to bloodless. In World War II, those casualties were terrible, but they had to occur to end the Nazi scourge over Europe. Iraq isn't really a scourge over anything, since they knew we would come kick their ass again if they invaded another country. It's not killing their army that hurts our guys, its occupying their cities and fighting guerilla warriors.
| Nodbugger |
Coffins have never been allowed to be photographed.
|
Completely and utterly wrong.
| Nodbugger |
How has has he made it seem like a bloodless war?
|
By not allowing coffins to be photographed, among other things.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106318] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 18:58 |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi |
Yes, I have. And every time, I have to turn it off in disgust. It's not news. Have you seen Hannity and Colmes? Colmes looks like a skeleton and never proves Hannity wrong when he starts lying, and they bring fools on ot the show.
|
| Quote: |
I think the real message F9/11 should get across is that war is horrible, and we should only go if absolutely necessary. The graphic footage Moore added really showed that war is not a happy happy joy joy affair.
|
Now I get it! It's okay to lie if your intent is to stop a war (oh, and if your name is Michael Moore).
Name just one factually incorrect statement (that means there are facts to prove the statement incorrect, so don't go saying "He said there were WMDs in Iraq, and that's not true!" because there are no facts to prove such a statement false) that Sean Hannity has not corrected himself for.
| Quote: |
President Bush wantss to make it seem like this is a largely bloodless war, doing things like not allow cameras to view the coffins of dead soldiers being returned from Iraq.
|
Firstly, it is largely a bloodless war since only 900 men have died out of 100,000 men stationed there. That's 0.9% of all men stationed there who have died. It's more bloodless than bloodful. Secondly, I remember seeing a coffin with an American flag on it being taken out of an airplane that held the body of someone who died in Iraq on Fox News, so how can he not allow cameras to view coffins when he DID allow them to view the coffins?
EDIT: Apparently SuperFlyingEngi isn't the only one mad at Fox News. As told in this article, some Democrats have written a letter to Rupert Murdoch whining about the "bias" on Fox news. Read the article. It's a good read.
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
[Updated on: Thu, 05 August 2004 19:23] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106323] |
Thu, 05 August 2004 19:25 |
|
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Nodbugger |
Actually a little more 130,000 are in Iraq. With another 75,000 in the Area, Along with 12.000 in Afghanistan.
And photographing coffins have always been shunned upon.
|
Ah, so the percentage is even lower than 0.9%! You shouldn't be complaining that it's so high, Super, you should be celebrating that it's so low!
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
(<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
(<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| And people want to vote for this guy? [message #106348] |
Fri, 06 August 2004 07:14 |
NHJ BV
Messages: 712
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
If the US would invade any country which was killing civilians they would have quite a job for the next few centuries. And I'm trying to find the numbers, but my newspaper's site (there was an article about it a while ago) isn't very cooperative.
EDIT and just because they're "only" 0.02% of the population doesn't make it any less bad.
[Updated on: Fri, 06 August 2004 07:17] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
