How about let's deal with it. I quote from ex-CIA director who admits the US
put the Shah h in power in Iran. Notice the CIA deletes 30 years of history
about this! " Known as Persia until 1935, Iran became an Islamic republic in
1979 after the ruling shah was forced into exile.
==================================
<< Get over it... >>
that is what the power players in this country want! you go along right with what they want, the media plays this game and you follow like sheep. what the hell do you mean "get over it" what kind of country do you want to have? one that is so dishonest that the CIA ignores 30 years of history? this is done by the way to deceive Americans about what foreign policies really have been about. can you answer a direct question do you think it is OK for the government and the media to deceive the public about what the actions of US foreign policy have been?
The media is never explaining these things to you so apparently that is why you can't see a shameful practice today! You think it is honorable to delete 30 years of history because the actions were so dirty?
The thing you swallow without question, and if you are HONEST you will see that the media does this as well, is that these actions are for the "good of America". Would you wake the hell hep.
Remember Enron (and I don't think that story was reported honestly and completely to the American people)? If you listened to some of the testimony, an Enron executive claimed that what his company was doing was "for the good of Californians". An executive actually tried to sell that BS, but one of or Representatives wasn't buying it. These bastards ALWAYS claim what they are doing is for the public good! You don't know that Enron was ripping Californians off by creating a fake energy crisis. Remember the neo-Cons that insisted that "the liberals" were "crazy" to think Enron conspired to manipulate the energy market to create a fake crisis in order to make themselves money? Did the media make that clear to you? The plans had names like "Death Star" and it was to screw over Americans.
Problem is these guys can get away with anything in foreign affairs if they do ANYTHING in foreign affairs. The public has been trained to think that these acts are for the "public good"
We are supposed to be the government. It is a very sick and unhealthy person that goes through his life in denial living lies. That is what you think is OK was you react to the CIA's lie of omission AND the media's same lie of omitting you actually believe that the media is in an adversarial role to the powerful that control this country? That is very naive.
<< We do what we need to do for THIS country and at the time it needs doing. >>
"We" do? And "we" lie to ourselves about it? We are a people that fought to free ourselves from a king. I can only imagine what the revolutionaries that fought to create our country would think of you who make excuses for installing a king over a foreign peoples. Your attitude is no doubt the product of a media and education that has driven basic principles out of your head that you don't have any sense at all. You act like this is all on the level and you act as if you can't even imagine that "moneyed interests" would ever use their power unjustly!! LOOK at the damn CIA page, it is a clear sign of a very corrupt system. Then look at the subservience of mainstream media, they PLAY ALONG with this lie of omission "get over it"?? it hasn't even been admitted by the elite that control our country, they have effectively continues the lie that our foreign policies have been noble. NO WONDER so many Americans actually believe it, the media keeps feeding them this BS all the time.
<< As times change, so do policies. Or haven't you got that far in school yet? >>
aren't you clever. Look at the school textbooks, how many, if any educate our kids about the fact we overthrew a democratically elected leader and installed a king? How many? You think this kind of deception is healthy for a country? (of course most Americans can't understand these thing, these things have been intentionally withheld from them) You really don't know why the deception is done?
You really don't understand the concept of corruption and greed? Our country was set up with the idea of checks and balances. What check and balance do you possible imagine there is on what these businessmen do in foreign affairs? The Governments doesn't admit it. The media doesn't admit it. The schools don't admit it. How can the people keep these powerful men in check? on top of all that, they get ridiculed (absurdly) that they are "anti-American if they dare point out that the polices are not conforming to what we say our values are.
<< Consider, as an easy example for you, Germany and Japan. >>
you example is what? that it would be OK to undermine democracy and even create countries that have serious problems like Germany and Japan had during the pre WWII period. MY EXAMPLE was not about undoing injustices, it was about our policy makers CREATING THEM.
<< I assume you want that pride?
>>
Answer this: are you proud when you read the CIA page about Iran's history and they can't even mention decades of history?
Are you proud that Enron screwed over Americans? Big Brokers have been caught giving BIASED advice to investors. Motive? Love of America or greed? Who is going to report that Big Media is giving BIASED reporting? Motive? Greed.
Pride isn't a knee-jerk reaction to make an excuse for US policy makers. You pervert the very notion of "patriotism" with this crap:
<< old "draft dodging" professors >>
Bush dodged the draft, deal with it. He didn't want to join the 58,000 Americans that lost their lives over in Vietnam. A war fought AGAINST democracy. (although I am sure that is not the reason Bush didn't want to be in it) what does it say about you that you support a President that is guilty of the exact same thing you claim others are guilty off? Is your who life a lie wrapped within a lie?
<< We are for the USA , not for some 2-bit ass-backward country >>
I am sure you would have been one of those screaming "nigger lover" at those that dared say 200 years ago that slavery was wrong. you need to wake up from the delusion that the "we" you refer to is really for the "USA" the powerful have shown time and again that they are for themselves and that they are willing to deceive the public.
Why not go to you local school board and ask to review the textbooks that they are teaching our kids with. Look and see if they teach the kids that we overthrew a democratically elected leader and installed the Shah.
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
<< You appear have a slanted view of America and US foreign policies. >>
<< But let's put that aside for a moment. >>
How about let's deal with it. I quote from ex-CIA director who admits the US put the Shah h in power in Iran. Notice the CIA deletes 30 years of history about this! " Known as Persia until 1935, Iran became an Islamic republic in 1979 after the ruling shah was forced into exile. Conservative clerical forces subsequently crushed westernizing liberal elements. Militant Iranian students seized the US Embassy in Tehran on 4 November 1979 and held it until 20 January 1981." CIA - The World Factbook 2002 -- Iran Now look at mainstream media no mention either.
You miss the whole point about government and control. If you have very powerful corporations controlling the news and selecting it, you cannot have democracy. If the people are no involved and don't have a say in what the selections of what is "news" then you have a slanted news that is not representative of the people. In America far too few people can even imagine that mainstream media is not on the level. In the USSR, a huge percentage of people did seek out foreign sources of info because they realized they were not getting the whole story. In America, far too many people THINK they understand how this system works. It doesn't occur to them to seek out alternative sources. Israel is a dramatic example. The votes in the UN have been 181 to 2, 175 to 2 and so on. Vote after vote after vote. Are ALL the countries in the UN wrong? The fact is they see something that the American public doesn't see. They know about the racism and discrimination that goes unreported here in America. Now as a news source you have to use logic. I never said that all media tells lies all the time. Or that the US media lies and foreign media tells the truth. The point is all have biases and you need to look at them and apply LOGIC and RESEARCH the facts. The ISRAELI newspaper (a right wing one two) published this:"It is no secret that Arab Israelis face constant discrimination, either open or institutional, in virtually all walks of life. Although they constitute nearly 20% of the population, their representation in many publicly or privately owned corporations, such as the Israel Electric Corporation or Bezeq, is minuscule - and non-existent when it comes to top management. The same can be said with respect to government ministries. Whenever this fact is pointed out, various non-convincing excuses are trotted out..." -The Jerusalem Post July 15, 1999 Now if THEY are willing to say this, that should tell you something. If you look at the facts, the source documents and evidence, you will see that the media has presented a VERY distorted picture of what Israel is about. Now the media is functioning along with what the powerful in this country have dictated the foreign policies are. You really don't hear it reported that the UN votes for decades have been running to such a dramatic was as ALL the countries are voting one way and the US and Israel are alone in covering for racist and unjust policies. The mainstream media never showed a map of the supposed "generous offer" given to Arafat!! The average person doesn't realize what he ISN'T being show. Even though a deal involving land is discussed most people apparently didn't think it was odd that there wasn't a map show of what Israel "generously" offered what we heard was a lie that the media allowed unchallenged the fact is that nowhere near 97% was offered. (let's see the map.) Look what this Israeli human rights group shows:B'Tselem - Publication Summary - Land Grab - B'É http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/Land_Grab_Map.asp This isn't something new. We have a horrible history of injustices. The British thought us hypocrites when we talked about the rights of men when we had SLAVES!! The same extreme of over the top wrongs carried out because of greed can be see in our foreign policies.
Look for God sakes at the CIA web site and tell me what happened to 30 years history? Not to honest about their crimes. But the point is the media plays the role of serving the interests of the powerful. A "free market" is not going to produce a media system that represents the interests of the average America. The interests of Big money are served and they don't want the public to know how corrupt and sick the Israeli system is. Huge amounts of money are in play. You have to have a nonprofit media system that is open to the public wherein the public has a say in the topics covered and where information is not excluded because powerful interests don't want it reported.
<< But let's put that aside for a moment. >>
How about let's deal with it. I quote from ex-CIA director who admits the US put the Shah h in power in Iran. Notice the CIA deletes 30 years of history about this! " Known as Persia until 1935, Iran became an Islamic republic in 1979 after the ruling shah was forced into exile. Conservative clerical forces subsequently crushed westernizing liberal elements. Militant Iranian students seized the US Embassy in Tehran on 4 November 1979 and held it until 20 January 1981." CIA - The World Factbook 2002 -- Iran Now look at mainstream media no mention either.
You miss the whole point about government and control. If you have very powerful corporations controlling the news and selecting it, you cannot have democracy. If the people are no involved and don't have a say in what the selections of what is "news" then you have a slanted news that is not representative of the people. In America far too few people can even imagine that mainstream media is not on the level. In the USSR, a huge percentage of people did seek out foreign sources of info because they realized they were not getting the whole story. In America, far too many people THINK they understand how this system works. It doesn't occur to them to seek out alternative sources. Israel is a dramatic example. The votes in the UN have been 181 to 2, 175 to 2 and so on. Vote after vote after vote. Are ALL the countries in the UN wrong? The fact is they see something that the American public doesn't see. They know about the racism and discrimination that goes unreported here in America. Now as a news source you have to use logic. I never said that all media tells lies all the time. Or that the US media lies and foreign media tells the truth. The point is all have biases and you need to look at them and apply LOGIC and RESEARCH the facts. The ISRAELI newspaper (a right wing one two) published this:"It is no secret that Arab Israelis face constant discrimination, either open or institutional, in virtually all walks of life. Although they constitute nearly 20% of the population, their representation in many publicly or privately owned corporations, such as the Israel Electric Corporation or Bezeq, is minuscule - and non-existent when it comes to top management. The same can be said with respect to government ministries. Whenever this fact is pointed out, various non-convincing excuses are trotted out..." -The Jerusalem Post July 15, 1999 Now if THEY are willing to say this, that should tell you something. If you look at the facts, the source documents and evidence, you will see that the media has presented a VERY distorted picture of what Israel is about. Now the media is functioning along with what the powerful in this country have dictated the foreign policies are. You really don't hear it reported that the UN votes for decades have been running to such a dramatic was as ALL the countries are voting one way and the US and Israel are alone in covering for racist and unjust policies. The mainstream media never showed a map of the supposed "generous offer" given to Arafat!! The average person doesn't realize what he ISN'T being show. Even though a deal involving land is discussed most people apparently didn't think it was odd that there wasn't a map show of what Israel "generously" offered what we heard was a lie that the media allowed unchallenged the fact is that nowhere near 97% was offered. (let's see the map.) Look what this Israeli human rights group shows:B'Tselem - Publication Summary - Land Grab - B'É http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/Land_Grab_Map.asp This isn't something new. We have a horrible history of injustices. The British thought us hypocrites when we talked about the rights of men when we had SLAVES!! The same extreme of over the top wrongs carried out because of greed can be see in our foreign policies.
Look for God sakes at the CIA web site and tell me what happened to 30 years history? Not to honest about their crimes. But the point is the media plays the role of serving the interests of the powerful. A "free market" is not going to produce a media system that represents the interests of the average America. The interests of Big money are served and they don't want the public to know how corrupt and sick the Israeli system is. Huge amounts of money are in play. You have to have a nonprofit media system that is open to the public wherein the public has a say in the topics covered and where information is not excluded because powerful interests don't want it reported.
IndpendntThinkr, it is their country. When the people made it clear they didn't want us in the school, the DECENT thing to do is get out of the school. Of course that isn't done and of course you can't see that as wrong. If you take the time to research the story you find the troops asking "can we shoot sarge?' there was no urgency, and no necessity to shoot. You now are using the Baath party's actions as an excuse for US actions? How low are you going to sink? It is their country but of course you have this idea in your head that we are the heroes running in to rescue them. The media pushes this idea into your eager brain by a NEWS BLACKOUT on reporting the fact that the US was responsible for putting the Baath party into power in the first place. That the US handed over the names of hundreds of intellectuals for the Baath party to kill. The media withholds it and the result is most Americans are ignorant of it. It means nothing that in theory that people "could" get these facts if they knew enough not to trust mainstream media. Put how is the average person going to know this? Why would it ever occur to them that mainstream media is EXTREMELY manipulative and BIASED in the direction of the owners and their customers (the ADVERTISERS). The viewers are the product.
The most extreme thing is the way I imagine many newspapers at the time of slavery skipped along without a hint that an ENORMOUS WRONG was being committed. Slavery was a business arrangement that far to many people didn't have the guts to speak out against. The US is responsible for horrific wrongs, including backing Saddam and FUNDING the radical extremist Islamic fundamentalists like bin Laden. Doing a sick thing like attacking the progressive government of Afghanistan in order to give the Soviets a hard time is DISGUSTING and CRIMINALLY wrong. (terrorism is fine to some of the businessmen who dictate US foreign policy)
A sign that the media is MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE is that not a single reporter reported that Bush lied about why America was targeted. The effect of the lie of course is to fool the public into thinking there is nothing that needs to be changed as far as the foreign policies. The fact is there are many things that are seriously wrong. It is on par with the game the media played during slavery. It is sick for them to play along with Bush's lie. 3,000 people are killed on 9/11 and this son of a bitch had the balls to lie to America about why we were attacked!!? The licenses of the networks must be revoked immediately for such a violation of their OBLIGATION to broadcast in the public good. It is not in the public good to play along with Bush's lie in order to keep these foreign policies going. It is in the interests of the greedy power players who profit from the current arraignment and who own and fund the network news.
When they talk about "democratization" for Iraq there is not a hint of skepticism. (the media supposedly is in an adversarial role to the government if you are to believe the MYTH!!) But the fact is our government is in the pocket of the rich and powerful and the media are owned and ARE the rich and powerful. I have not seen a single report that even questioned the idea that the government would actually be setting up a real democracy in Iraq! ALL mainstream media has played along with this while IGNORING 50 years of evidence that shows that US foreign policies have UNDERMINED democracies. This takes work, for the reporters in these news rooms not to know the facts about the last 50 years of Middle East manipulation takes work. That is why the reporters you see on the news have their jobs, because they are willing to play along with something as off the wall as this. You can see the history if you look into it. Mainstream media goes out of its way NOT TO LOOK into it. Knowledge is power and the powerful don't want certain facts known by the general public. The business arrangements that result in the news you see at night function to keep most of these facts from the public.
"while the US public has a moral responsibility to monitor its government's actions, quite often only those who undertake or have access to independent research are in a position to act in a sensible and informed manner, a serious departure from functioning democracy." -Noam Chomsky
the fact is that country after country in the Middle East, the US foreign polices have been over the top corrupt because corrupt businessmen have made it that way. These are powerful players and the media plays along. The CIA plays along. LOOK at what the CIA says (see their web site) for Iran's history. They had to ignore over 30 years of history because of the horrible crimes committed in the name of the US. (the media has not made the public aware of this CIA's 1953 crime against democracy) "In Iran in the early 1950's the CIA, under President Eisenhower's instructions, helped overthrow the Mossadeg government and re-install the Shah. Given what's happened in Iran since 1979, Mossadeg looks pretty good by comparison. In retrospect it would have probably been a better idea to let Iran take its own course then -- there might not be so much resentment against the U.S. there now if we had kept our hands off."- Mr. James Woolsey, former director of the CIA Online NewsHour Forum: American Foreign Policy É
(for those that can't believe we do these kinds of things) I still get people REFUSING to believe we backed the coup to put the BAATH party into power.(becasue they didn't see it reported on TV) Considering how the media has been covering the topic of Iraq intensively for over half a year, this is criminal.The CIA and Saddam. With 50 years of history showing the US has undermined democracy, it is off the wall for reporters to be talking in a way that takes the governments claims at face value!! A "liberal" media just accepts the premise that the decision makers actually want to set up a democracy in Iraq???? Come on, wake the hell up guys. The media serves the interests of powerful men who profit from manipulating the Middle East and they don't want that changed. Reporters are selected who will play the game either out of ignorance or because of a corrupt cynical attitude that rationalizes not telling the public these things. Think about it, given what the history has been HOW THE HELL can reporters state that Bush plans to set up a democracy in Iraq without pointing out that it would be a DRAMATIC departure from what the US has done in the Middle East fro the last 50 years. (including Afghanistan! and that is very recent!!) if the plan of "establishing democracy" was actually true (They accept the premise without question) one of the first questions is why the departure from US foreign policy of undermining democracy. NOT A SINGLE reporters has asked this. (they are supposed to be "liberal"? Give me a freakin brake!) If a guy has a long history of decades of molesting children and one day makes an announcement that he is opening a daycare center, it is criminal not to point out his history.
<< Funny, the actions of our military offend you more than the acts of a dictator and his thugs >>
Funny that you cannot see or acknowledge that the actions of this dictator and the US have been ONE AND THE SAME for years. You make this statement without a hint of irony!! the acts of this dictator and those of our militray were one in the same as we waged a war of agression on Iran and assisted in the gassing of human beings. The US was hand in hand with Saddam, helping him carry out some his worst crimes, like using gas on Iranians!! It takes brainwashing to consider Saddam's actions the height of evil yet when the US HELPED him carry out actions you cannot bring yourself to condemn it. I condemn all of Saddam's evil acts AND the evil acts of the US WHICH INCLUDES some of the SAME!! the SAME ACT. We shot down a civilian airplane and Bush Sr. said "I will never apologize, I don't care what the facts are"!!! For the media to sit by as dozens of dishonest people repeatedly listed Saddam's crimes WITHOUT making note of the US's role and response to many of them is criminally manipulative, NO WONDER SO MANY AMERICANS ARE CLUELESS, THE MEDIA IS SO TOTALLY CORRUPT, WHAT OTHER IDEA COULD THEY HAVE?? many people hate the US for supporting Saddam, the us doesn't give American viewers a hint about htis. bin LAden has complaied about our support of Saddam, the media never reported this interesting fact.
No, it doesn't help that they "could" find out the truth. It doesn't occur to many people (as evidenced here in this forum) that the media would be doing these manipulatively sick things.
I just saw Tom Brokaw (now is HE a liberal to you nuts?) stand there as Bush said "what Arafat did to Clinton" What the hell does Bush think Arafat did to Clinton? Brokaw doesn't ask!!!
The most extreme thing is the way I imagine many newspapers at the time of slavery skipped along without a hint that an ENORMOUS WRONG was being committed. Slavery was a business arrangement that far to many people didn't have the guts to speak out against. The US is responsible for horrific wrongs, including backing Saddam and FUNDING the radical extremist Islamic fundamentalists like bin Laden. Doing a sick thing like attacking the progressive government of Afghanistan in order to give the Soviets a hard time is DISGUSTING and CRIMINALLY wrong. (terrorism is fine to some of the businessmen who dictate US foreign policy)
A sign that the media is MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE is that not a single reporter reported that Bush lied about why America was targeted. The effect of the lie of course is to fool the public into thinking there is nothing that needs to be changed as far as the foreign policies. The fact is there are many things that are seriously wrong. It is on par with the game the media played during slavery. It is sick for them to play along with Bush's lie. 3,000 people are killed on 9/11 and this son of a bitch had the balls to lie to America about why we were attacked!!? The licenses of the networks must be revoked immediately for such a violation of their OBLIGATION to broadcast in the public good. It is not in the public good to play along with Bush's lie in order to keep these foreign policies going. It is in the interests of the greedy power players who profit from the current arraignment and who own and fund the network news.
When they talk about "democratization" for Iraq there is not a hint of skepticism. (the media supposedly is in an adversarial role to the government if you are to believe the MYTH!!) But the fact is our government is in the pocket of the rich and powerful and the media are owned and ARE the rich and powerful. I have not seen a single report that even questioned the idea that the government would actually be setting up a real democracy in Iraq! ALL mainstream media has played along with this while IGNORING 50 years of evidence that shows that US foreign policies have UNDERMINED democracies. This takes work, for the reporters in these news rooms not to know the facts about the last 50 years of Middle East manipulation takes work. That is why the reporters you see on the news have their jobs, because they are willing to play along with something as off the wall as this. You can see the history if you look into it. Mainstream media goes out of its way NOT TO LOOK into it. Knowledge is power and the powerful don't want certain facts known by the general public. The business arrangements that result in the news you see at night function to keep most of these facts from the public.
"while the US public has a moral responsibility to monitor its government's actions, quite often only those who undertake or have access to independent research are in a position to act in a sensible and informed manner, a serious departure from functioning democracy." -Noam Chomsky
the fact is that country after country in the Middle East, the US foreign polices have been over the top corrupt because corrupt businessmen have made it that way. These are powerful players and the media plays along. The CIA plays along. LOOK at what the CIA says (see their web site) for Iran's history. They had to ignore over 30 years of history because of the horrible crimes committed in the name of the US. (the media has not made the public aware of this CIA's 1953 crime against democracy) "In Iran in the early 1950's the CIA, under President Eisenhower's instructions, helped overthrow the Mossadeg government and re-install the Shah. Given what's happened in Iran since 1979, Mossadeg looks pretty good by comparison. In retrospect it would have probably been a better idea to let Iran take its own course then -- there might not be so much resentment against the U.S. there now if we had kept our hands off."- Mr. James Woolsey, former director of the CIA Online NewsHour Forum: American Foreign Policy É
(for those that can't believe we do these kinds of things) I still get people REFUSING to believe we backed the coup to put the BAATH party into power.(becasue they didn't see it reported on TV) Considering how the media has been covering the topic of Iraq intensively for over half a year, this is criminal.The CIA and Saddam. With 50 years of history showing the US has undermined democracy, it is off the wall for reporters to be talking in a way that takes the governments claims at face value!! A "liberal" media just accepts the premise that the decision makers actually want to set up a democracy in Iraq???? Come on, wake the hell up guys. The media serves the interests of powerful men who profit from manipulating the Middle East and they don't want that changed. Reporters are selected who will play the game either out of ignorance or because of a corrupt cynical attitude that rationalizes not telling the public these things. Think about it, given what the history has been HOW THE HELL can reporters state that Bush plans to set up a democracy in Iraq without pointing out that it would be a DRAMATIC departure from what the US has done in the Middle East fro the last 50 years. (including Afghanistan! and that is very recent!!) if the plan of "establishing democracy" was actually true (They accept the premise without question) one of the first questions is why the departure from US foreign policy of undermining democracy. NOT A SINGLE reporters has asked this. (they are supposed to be "liberal"? Give me a freakin brake!) If a guy has a long history of decades of molesting children and one day makes an announcement that he is opening a daycare center, it is criminal not to point out his history.
<< Funny, the actions of our military offend you more than the acts of a dictator and his thugs >>
Funny that you cannot see or acknowledge that the actions of this dictator and the US have been ONE AND THE SAME for years. You make this statement without a hint of irony!! the acts of this dictator and those of our militray were one in the same as we waged a war of agression on Iran and assisted in the gassing of human beings. The US was hand in hand with Saddam, helping him carry out some his worst crimes, like using gas on Iranians!! It takes brainwashing to consider Saddam's actions the height of evil yet when the US HELPED him carry out actions you cannot bring yourself to condemn it. I condemn all of Saddam's evil acts AND the evil acts of the US WHICH INCLUDES some of the SAME!! the SAME ACT. We shot down a civilian airplane and Bush Sr. said "I will never apologize, I don't care what the facts are"!!! For the media to sit by as dozens of dishonest people repeatedly listed Saddam's crimes WITHOUT making note of the US's role and response to many of them is criminally manipulative, NO WONDER SO MANY AMERICANS ARE CLUELESS, THE MEDIA IS SO TOTALLY CORRUPT, WHAT OTHER IDEA COULD THEY HAVE?? many people hate the US for supporting Saddam, the us doesn't give American viewers a hint about htis. bin LAden has complaied about our support of Saddam, the media never reported this interesting fact.
No, it doesn't help that they "could" find out the truth. It doesn't occur to many people (as evidenced here in this forum) that the media would be doing these manipulatively sick things.
I just saw Tom Brokaw (now is HE a liberal to you nuts?) stand there as Bush said "what Arafat did to Clinton" What the hell does Bush think Arafat did to Clinton? Brokaw doesn't ask!!!
Tuesday, April 29, 2003
<< So 9/11 was because of Clinton's foreign policy. Is that what you really meant to say? >>
The foreign policies that have been effect for 50 years.
We had domestic polices that put people into slavery. Today the most evil policies are exported. There are still horrible things done by people who call themselves Americans. What about values? We made a big deal about the rights of men, the English thought we were hypocrites when we fought a revolution against them talking about the rights of men when we had slaves. (the British had already outlawed slavery)
Today businessmen don't own slaves in America but they do subject foreign people to oppression. We fought to free ourselves from a King yet today our policy makers are in bed with kings, we prop them up and we impose them on people.
The foreign policies that have been effect for 50 years.
We had domestic polices that put people into slavery. Today the most evil policies are exported. There are still horrible things done by people who call themselves Americans. What about values? We made a big deal about the rights of men, the English thought we were hypocrites when we fought a revolution against them talking about the rights of men when we had slaves. (the British had already outlawed slavery)
Today businessmen don't own slaves in America but they do subject foreign people to oppression. We fought to free ourselves from a King yet today our policy makers are in bed with kings, we prop them up and we impose them on people.
Monday, April 28, 2003
If you mean do I think that ownership of major industries should be like public utilities and transit systems, yes and really more so. The decisions should be representative of the public and that can only happen when ownership is publicly held (meaning by all the citizens with all their equal fair share) and the people have an input as to how these major industries impact their lives and how they can be run to the benefit of the public.
Like a Representative Government should be. We have seen the horrific corruption of the public good by these media corporations. They have withheld vital information because owners cater to their customers: wealthy corporations which are buying their service. When looked at by what the power dynamic is: what is being bought and what is being sold: the product is viewers. If you watch
Checks and balances in media. You can't have a system like the one I described above and expect that the service which is designed to entice viewers to sit and watch commercials to be fulfilling the FCC requirement of operating in the public good. The good they operate in is of those that generate the income to pay their salaries. Although obviously good intentions (the requirement was to use the airwaves for the public good) the effect was not achieved. It is one thing to try to protect the real interests of the public with stated policy, it is another to actually deliver on the protection by actually working in their interests. Money is power and if the power situation is such that a TV program does present itself as attractive to the consumer which is the advertiser then it cannot survive economically and get removed. The companies that buy time from the networks are the consumers, they buy the time from the networks to sell their goods or services).
The majority of the people voted and said they want input into what gets covered on the news. The system would be representative
Otherwize the playing field is rgged. the palying field or actaully the public forum. Where ideas get debated and discussed, If this areana of public discussion is rigged, then we get a biased and distorted presentation of "news" and entertainment.
Like a Representative Government should be. We have seen the horrific corruption of the public good by these media corporations. They have withheld vital information because owners cater to their customers: wealthy corporations which are buying their service. When looked at by what the power dynamic is: what is being bought and what is being sold: the product is viewers. If you watch
Checks and balances in media. You can't have a system like the one I described above and expect that the service which is designed to entice viewers to sit and watch commercials to be fulfilling the FCC requirement of operating in the public good. The good they operate in is of those that generate the income to pay their salaries. Although obviously good intentions (the requirement was to use the airwaves for the public good) the effect was not achieved. It is one thing to try to protect the real interests of the public with stated policy, it is another to actually deliver on the protection by actually working in their interests. Money is power and if the power situation is such that a TV program does present itself as attractive to the consumer which is the advertiser then it cannot survive economically and get removed. The companies that buy time from the networks are the consumers, they buy the time from the networks to sell their goods or services).
The majority of the people voted and said they want input into what gets covered on the news. The system would be representative
Otherwize the playing field is rgged. the palying field or actaully the public forum. Where ideas get debated and discussed, If this areana of public discussion is rigged, then we get a biased and distorted presentation of "news" and entertainment.
"It is no secret that Arab Israelis face constant discrimination, either open or institutional, in virtually all walks of life. Although they constitute nearly 20% of the population, their representation in many publicly or privately owned corporations, such as the Israel Electric Corporation or Bezeq, is minuscule - and non-existent when it comes to top management. The same can be said with respect to government ministries. Whenever this fact is pointed out, various non-convincing excuses are trotted out..." -The Jerusalem Post July 15, 1999 "Equal rights, equal responsibilities"
No secret for Israelis in Israel yet in America it is basically a secret. A secret that the mainstream media does an efficent job keeping.
Note: Here in America, exucuses are really not necessary since mainstream media doesn't make the public aware of these facts.
Descrimination against Arabs: The Racist System against Israeli-Arabs imposed by Israeli-Jews.
Examples of this can be found in "Israel's Changing Society", written by Calvin Goldscheider.
Calvin Goldscheider is an Israeli citizen. He was educated in Israel, served in the Israeli military and taught at Hebrew University. His book, "Israel's Changing Society," gives clear examples of the racism of Israel. The differences between Arabs and Jews are striking. Mr. Goldscheider said, "If you ask any Israeli, they will say the Arab-Israelis have the right to vote, have the right to work in this society and have been thoroughly integrated into the economy." But Goldscheider said, "this integration has led to their thorough discrimination." according to his research of the data from the Central Bureau of Statistics of Israel.
Goldscheider explained that by being integrated into the Israeli economy, Arabs have been kept under control. "They have to work for Jews. They don't have control over their own lives. Arab-Israelis who are educated have a very difficult time translating that into better jobs, if they don't control the economy."
Take, for example, an Arab and a Jew applying for a job. "They are both equally qualified," Goldscheider said. "But who do you think gets hired? My cousin or the individual who has been demonized by the society as a whole?"
Goldscheider equated the Arab-Israelis to the blacks of America, a position that is greeted with vehement opposition from fellow Israelis - not because the Arabs are the blacks, Goldscheider said, but because "the Jews don't want to be seen as the white oppressors."
In addition to seving in the IDF (the Israeli Military)m he is a professor of sociology and Judaic studies.
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
http://www.bayefsky.com/themes/equality_employment_concluding-observations.php
Israel, CERD, A/53/18 (1998) 30 at para. 84.
The State party should reinforce its efforts to reduce the persisting gap between the living standards and the involvement in national affairs of the Jewish majority and the Arab minority. This should be done in a manner consistent with the measures adopted for assisting the integration of Ethiopian Jews. The State party is encouraged to adopt new labour legislation in order to secure the protection against ethnic discrimination of the rights of Palestinians working in Israel on a daily basis. The rights of migrant workers, including undocumented workers, are also a matter of concern.
Israel, ICCPR, A/53/40 vol. I (1996) 45 at para. 308.
Deeply embedded discriminatory social attitudes, practices and laws against Arab Israelis that have resulted in a lower standard of living compared to Jewish Israelis, as is evident in their significantly lower levels of education, access to health care, access to housing, land and employment, are of serious concern. That discrimination against members of the Arab minority appears to be extensive in the private sector is also of concern. The State party is urged to take steps without delay to ensure equality to Arabs and to proceed as soon as possible with the planned formulation of a draft law on discrimination in the private sector and to adopt it at an early date.
No secret for Israelis in Israel yet in America it is basically a secret. A secret that the mainstream media does an efficent job keeping.
Note: Here in America, exucuses are really not necessary since mainstream media doesn't make the public aware of these facts.
Descrimination against Arabs: The Racist System against Israeli-Arabs imposed by Israeli-Jews.
Examples of this can be found in "Israel's Changing Society", written by Calvin Goldscheider.
Calvin Goldscheider is an Israeli citizen. He was educated in Israel, served in the Israeli military and taught at Hebrew University. His book, "Israel's Changing Society," gives clear examples of the racism of Israel. The differences between Arabs and Jews are striking. Mr. Goldscheider said, "If you ask any Israeli, they will say the Arab-Israelis have the right to vote, have the right to work in this society and have been thoroughly integrated into the economy." But Goldscheider said, "this integration has led to their thorough discrimination." according to his research of the data from the Central Bureau of Statistics of Israel.
Goldscheider explained that by being integrated into the Israeli economy, Arabs have been kept under control. "They have to work for Jews. They don't have control over their own lives. Arab-Israelis who are educated have a very difficult time translating that into better jobs, if they don't control the economy."
Take, for example, an Arab and a Jew applying for a job. "They are both equally qualified," Goldscheider said. "But who do you think gets hired? My cousin or the individual who has been demonized by the society as a whole?"
Goldscheider equated the Arab-Israelis to the blacks of America, a position that is greeted with vehement opposition from fellow Israelis - not because the Arabs are the blacks, Goldscheider said, but because "the Jews don't want to be seen as the white oppressors."
In addition to seving in the IDF (the Israeli Military)m he is a professor of sociology and Judaic studies.
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
http://www.bayefsky.com/themes/equality_employment_concluding-observations.php
Israel, CERD, A/53/18 (1998) 30 at para. 84.
The State party should reinforce its efforts to reduce the persisting gap between the living standards and the involvement in national affairs of the Jewish majority and the Arab minority. This should be done in a manner consistent with the measures adopted for assisting the integration of Ethiopian Jews. The State party is encouraged to adopt new labour legislation in order to secure the protection against ethnic discrimination of the rights of Palestinians working in Israel on a daily basis. The rights of migrant workers, including undocumented workers, are also a matter of concern.
Israel, ICCPR, A/53/40 vol. I (1996) 45 at para. 308.
Deeply embedded discriminatory social attitudes, practices and laws against Arab Israelis that have resulted in a lower standard of living compared to Jewish Israelis, as is evident in their significantly lower levels of education, access to health care, access to housing, land and employment, are of serious concern. That discrimination against members of the Arab minority appears to be extensive in the private sector is also of concern. The State party is urged to take steps without delay to ensure equality to Arabs and to proceed as soon as possible with the planned formulation of a draft law on discrimination in the private sector and to adopt it at an early date.
Sunday, April 27, 2003
(<<Empire500>> claims he learned something from 9/11)
<< Hmmmm. You're going to tell me I did not learn anything? I would say you learned something, Tom. What you learned is that when someone attacks you you go to your knees and apologize for forgiveness. -Empire500>>
No I called for apprehending the people responsible, that is not "dropping to my knees"
<< You watched the towers collapse and thought, my God, we must give in to terrorism. -Empire500>>
"Give in"? Don't be an ass. I said the people responsible should be caught and punished.
<< The enemy will not break the spirit of this country, my friend. No matter what our policies are, no one attacks us and expects the white flag to go up. -Empire500>>
Catching the people and holding them responsible and punishing them is not "putting up a white flag"
<< Get that into your thick Socialist skull. -Empire500>>
You still don't understand how this economy really works do you?
Do you think we never should have "given in to terrorism" when we had terrorism because of slavery? Should we have kept slavery because "no matter what the policies are" we must continue with those policies if someone attacks us because of them?
Nat Turner led a group of terrorists that killed men women and children. According to him, it was religious mission that was made clear to him by a sign form God. The killed men, women and children. Does that mean we should have continued with slavery because if we ended slavery that would be "giving in to terrorists"? Slavery was wrong and Nat Turner's terrorism was wrong. Two wrongs. Is that hard to grasp? But just because these terrorist acts were committed doesn't mean we had to continue to screw over people and continue to use them as slaves.
Yes, our policy makers have been screwing these people over in the Middle East.
<< Conjecture. -Empire500>>
No not "conjecture". Was it "conjecture" that slavery screwed over black people? You don't want to deal with the harm caused by unjust policies.
When you write something as off the wall as that, I really have to wonder if you give a damn about the truth.
<< What's off the wall is the idea that this country should be brought down -Empire500>>
"brought down", why the melodrama? Was our country "brought down" because we don't have slaves anymore?
<< For any mistake we made or the people we supposedly supported? You fail to realize that an Allie can become an enemy somewhere down the road. If the truth is we supported the Baath Party, as you claim, then today we are not. This country should not be told we cannot attack or terminate relations with someone because we supported them in the past. -Empire500>>
That is not my argument the point is powerful people have kept basic facts from the American people in America (a country that supposedly is the most free country on Earth. the problem is you can't be ignorant and free)
We imposed Saddam on them for God sakes!!! what more do you need to see?
<< You can keep screaming until you are blue in the face, Tom. I am not buying your story. -Empire500>>
You still didn't look into it? You rather have an opinion based on nothing more than what you are presented by mainstream media? Whether we imposed him or not is not the case anymore. If it was our mess, then we are cleaning it up. You want to hang the present administration for supposed crimes of past administrations. Have any of your relatives committed crimes in the past? Should we hold you accountable for them?
I have said repeatedly to hold those responsible for it, not others. But the point is, it is manipulative to deceive Americans about the actions of their government.
<< We do not support evil things -Empire500>>
We supported Saddam AND we supported the mujahdeen!!
<< The Soviet Union and Iran were our main rivals back then, Tom. -Empire500>>
Why? What did they do to us?
<< Sometimes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. -Empire500>>
Now the were "enemies"? Why?
<< Crap, my own family members form alliances with each other to put one over whoever they are at odds with. When the fight is over they renew their feud. Unfortunately, national security must come before morality. There are no favorites in war.-Empire500>>
When are you going to wake up?
<< When are you? We will NOT leave them alone. We will not get out of the Persian Gulf. -Empire500>>
should we bring back slavery? Was slavery wrong in your eyes?
I thought you were the guy that did care about justice and morality. Now
it doesn't mean a damn thing to you?
<< Justice and morality have nothing to do with it. It is a matter of security. -Empire500>>
These foreign polices make us less secure, not more.
<< Israel is our allie. -Empire500>>
WHY?
<< The oil fields are of strategic value. You would allow people like Bin Laden to topple Saudi Arabia and control those oil fields? -Empire500>>
Bin Laden is represents a very small minority. The overwhelming majority of the people don't want the extremeteh extreme system he wants. Saudi Arabia is by no means an angel. The Kings that rule it are kept in power by us. If it was a democracy, it would be more moderate. I have see polls that indicate this. They are as two faced as the guy from Batman. But, a radical Islamic State is by far the worse of it. Saudi Arabi is a radical Islamic state, it is considered "moderate" because US businessmen are in bed with them (these businessmen dictate US foreign policy)
We must never allow that to happen.
<< We will not abandon our alliance with Israel -Empire500>>
WHY? Are you a racist Empire500? Why support a racist country? Why won't we
"abandon our alliance with Israel"?
<< I am not a racist. -Empire500>>
That's good, so I assume you wouldn't want to support racism.
<< Israel is not a racist country. -Empire500>>
You seriously need to do some research. Israel has about the same percentage of non-Jews (approx. 20%) inside it as we have Blacks in America.
<< To brand Israel a racist country means you support the Arabs who have constantly referred to the Jews as "the Zionist Entity." -Empire500>>
Next I think you are going to call me a "nigger lover" for saying that we should not have oppressed blacks in America.
<< The Arabs are as racist as they come, Tom. -Empire500>>
You said you weren't racist, yet you make a comment like this?
<< To speak on their behalf is racism. As long as we are friends with Israel the Arabs will never consider invading them. It also keeps the Arabs in control. -Empire500>>
Like in South Africa, the way we supported the racist South African government that oppressed the blacks. We even called Nelson Mandella a terrorist.
<< I'm sure, even you would admit, the last you want to see on the desert horizon is a division of Israeli tanks coming your way. -Empire500>>
Do you know the first thing about Israel? I very much doubt it.
<< I know that they can be an arrogant bunch of sniffs. Who cares? They stood up to these Arab dogs and won a nation. -Empire500>>
"stood up to"? A minority of Palestine imposed a racist system on the majority of the people living there. "Dogs"? Because they didn't want a small minority to make them into second class citizens in their own land?
<< They have been blown up, highjacked, executed, invaded for as long as they have been a country. -Empire500>>
Jews have done this too, it just gets suppressed here in America.
<< With so many people wanting you dead, I'll grant them their behavior at treating terrorist the way they do. If the Arabs cheer their mad dog killers on, then they deserve to get slapped around. -Empire500>>
Here we go. The excuses. It can't be that the majority of the people don't want to be mistreated, it "must be" that they want the Jews dead. You really swallow the propaganda.
<< That is the basis of all this. Bin Laden says get out, so we have to leave? -Empire500>>
No, not because bin Laden says so, because it is wrong to screw people over the way US policy makers do.
<< Hear that? It's the worlds smallest violin and it's playing a sad song for your desert hero's. You may think our policy is screwing these people over. The fact is that "these" people have been uncooperative to any reasoning at all for over 50 years. -Empire500>>
That is a lie.
<< They will never be at peace with Israel. Their only goal is to kill every last Jew in the Middle-East. -Empire500>>
Another lie.
<< They will either comply or be destroyed. It's as simple as that, Tommy. -Empire500>>
Kind of like the slaves we had in America.
<< They forced war upon us. -Empire500>>
What the hell are you talking about? Nearly everyone in the Middle East doesn't want us to manipulate their affairs.
<< They hate us. Who gives a shit what they want? They don't make the rules anymore, my friend. They had many chances. Like a bad gambler they rolled snake eyes too many times. The game is over. Step away from the table Hassan. -Empire500>>
I bet you would have said the same about Nat Turner at the time.
The extremists (and you must admit that when the US policy makers throw them
BILLIONS of dollars it makes them stronger) have made it clear they don't
want us too (in addition to the millions of non-terrorist citizens. )
<< Again. What do I care what they want? The US has what I had hoped for 12 years would have. A nasty wedge right between Syria and Iran. Now, the second Battle for Iraq can begin. We'll draw every terrorist into a killing field. Our Armies will smash them in Iraq and Afghanistan. What makes it funny is that the stupid ragheads are willing walking into the fight. How stupid is that? -Empire500>>
bin Laden asked for years and made it clear we were interfering, he got
people to follow him because the fact is the wrongs are real and nearly
anyone would be angry about them.
<< Oh, brother! If that is not a clear way of saying you support Bin Laden, I don't know what is! -Empire500>>
Well, you don't know much then. Bin Laden represents a small group. (the U.S. is very much at fault for pumping billions into this kind of movement. Then they turn around and blame ALL of Middle Easterners for the radical few. A few that the U.S. supported like I said) I never supported them, the U.S. policy makers on the other hand made an excuse to!
<< Whether you know it or not, you just justified 9/11 for that sick old man and his wacko crew. -Empire500>>
This is the game played by those that want to continue the unjust policies. The claim that you make, looking at the motives means "justifying them, is sick and simpleminded.
I have given you the example of two wrongs. Lets say you live in a building with others and one of them goes around the neighborhood killing people's pets. Lets say one of those pet's owners burns down the building that you and the pet killer live in. Now lets say you make it out alive and the police try to figure out a motive for why the building was burned down. Are you going to jump all over the cop that figures out that the motive was that a guy that lives in your building had been killing people's pets and one of the owners flipped out and burned your building down?
Would you dare tell the cop that he is "justifying" the crime?
<< That makes you equal to the terrorists, Tom. We can end these talks right here and now. You have made yourself and enemy of the United States. As of this moment, I hereby declare your citizenship renounced. You are no longer an American in my eyes, if you ever were one. Your flag is the green Islamic Nazi flag. This is the last time I respond to your posts. Keep screaming, loser. No one hears you anymore. I say we should all block MediaReform and any "form" he takes. He can write all the posts he wants. No one has to read them. Good-bye, Tom. Enemy of the state. -Empire500>>
You have got to be kidding me.
<< Hmmmm. You're going to tell me I did not learn anything? I would say you learned something, Tom. What you learned is that when someone attacks you you go to your knees and apologize for forgiveness. -Empire500>>
No I called for apprehending the people responsible, that is not "dropping to my knees"
<< You watched the towers collapse and thought, my God, we must give in to terrorism. -Empire500>>
"Give in"? Don't be an ass. I said the people responsible should be caught and punished.
<< The enemy will not break the spirit of this country, my friend. No matter what our policies are, no one attacks us and expects the white flag to go up. -Empire500>>
Catching the people and holding them responsible and punishing them is not "putting up a white flag"
<< Get that into your thick Socialist skull. -Empire500>>
You still don't understand how this economy really works do you?
Do you think we never should have "given in to terrorism" when we had terrorism because of slavery? Should we have kept slavery because "no matter what the policies are" we must continue with those policies if someone attacks us because of them?
Nat Turner led a group of terrorists that killed men women and children. According to him, it was religious mission that was made clear to him by a sign form God. The killed men, women and children. Does that mean we should have continued with slavery because if we ended slavery that would be "giving in to terrorists"? Slavery was wrong and Nat Turner's terrorism was wrong. Two wrongs. Is that hard to grasp? But just because these terrorist acts were committed doesn't mean we had to continue to screw over people and continue to use them as slaves.
Yes, our policy makers have been screwing these people over in the Middle East.
<< Conjecture. -Empire500>>
No not "conjecture". Was it "conjecture" that slavery screwed over black people? You don't want to deal with the harm caused by unjust policies.
When you write something as off the wall as that, I really have to wonder if you give a damn about the truth.
<< What's off the wall is the idea that this country should be brought down -Empire500>>
"brought down", why the melodrama? Was our country "brought down" because we don't have slaves anymore?
<< For any mistake we made or the people we supposedly supported? You fail to realize that an Allie can become an enemy somewhere down the road. If the truth is we supported the Baath Party, as you claim, then today we are not. This country should not be told we cannot attack or terminate relations with someone because we supported them in the past. -Empire500>>
That is not my argument the point is powerful people have kept basic facts from the American people in America (a country that supposedly is the most free country on Earth. the problem is you can't be ignorant and free)
We imposed Saddam on them for God sakes!!! what more do you need to see?
<< You can keep screaming until you are blue in the face, Tom. I am not buying your story. -Empire500>>
You still didn't look into it? You rather have an opinion based on nothing more than what you are presented by mainstream media? Whether we imposed him or not is not the case anymore. If it was our mess, then we are cleaning it up. You want to hang the present administration for supposed crimes of past administrations. Have any of your relatives committed crimes in the past? Should we hold you accountable for them?
I have said repeatedly to hold those responsible for it, not others. But the point is, it is manipulative to deceive Americans about the actions of their government.
<< We do not support evil things -Empire500>>
We supported Saddam AND we supported the mujahdeen!!
<< The Soviet Union and Iran were our main rivals back then, Tom. -Empire500>>
Why? What did they do to us?
<< Sometimes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. -Empire500>>
Now the were "enemies"? Why?
<< Crap, my own family members form alliances with each other to put one over whoever they are at odds with. When the fight is over they renew their feud. Unfortunately, national security must come before morality. There are no favorites in war.-Empire500>>
When are you going to wake up?
<< When are you? We will NOT leave them alone. We will not get out of the Persian Gulf. -Empire500>>
should we bring back slavery? Was slavery wrong in your eyes?
I thought you were the guy that did care about justice and morality. Now
it doesn't mean a damn thing to you?
<< Justice and morality have nothing to do with it. It is a matter of security. -Empire500>>
These foreign polices make us less secure, not more.
<< Israel is our allie. -Empire500>>
WHY?
<< The oil fields are of strategic value. You would allow people like Bin Laden to topple Saudi Arabia and control those oil fields? -Empire500>>
Bin Laden is represents a very small minority. The overwhelming majority of the people don't want the extremeteh extreme system he wants. Saudi Arabia is by no means an angel. The Kings that rule it are kept in power by us. If it was a democracy, it would be more moderate. I have see polls that indicate this. They are as two faced as the guy from Batman. But, a radical Islamic State is by far the worse of it. Saudi Arabi is a radical Islamic state, it is considered "moderate" because US businessmen are in bed with them (these businessmen dictate US foreign policy)
We must never allow that to happen.
<< We will not abandon our alliance with Israel -Empire500>>
WHY? Are you a racist Empire500? Why support a racist country? Why won't we
"abandon our alliance with Israel"?
<< I am not a racist. -Empire500>>
That's good, so I assume you wouldn't want to support racism.
<< Israel is not a racist country. -Empire500>>
You seriously need to do some research. Israel has about the same percentage of non-Jews (approx. 20%) inside it as we have Blacks in America.
<< To brand Israel a racist country means you support the Arabs who have constantly referred to the Jews as "the Zionist Entity." -Empire500>>
Next I think you are going to call me a "nigger lover" for saying that we should not have oppressed blacks in America.
<< The Arabs are as racist as they come, Tom. -Empire500>>
You said you weren't racist, yet you make a comment like this?
<< To speak on their behalf is racism. As long as we are friends with Israel the Arabs will never consider invading them. It also keeps the Arabs in control. -Empire500>>
Like in South Africa, the way we supported the racist South African government that oppressed the blacks. We even called Nelson Mandella a terrorist.
<< I'm sure, even you would admit, the last you want to see on the desert horizon is a division of Israeli tanks coming your way. -Empire500>>
Do you know the first thing about Israel? I very much doubt it.
<< I know that they can be an arrogant bunch of sniffs. Who cares? They stood up to these Arab dogs and won a nation. -Empire500>>
"stood up to"? A minority of Palestine imposed a racist system on the majority of the people living there. "Dogs"? Because they didn't want a small minority to make them into second class citizens in their own land?
<< They have been blown up, highjacked, executed, invaded for as long as they have been a country. -Empire500>>
Jews have done this too, it just gets suppressed here in America.
<< With so many people wanting you dead, I'll grant them their behavior at treating terrorist the way they do. If the Arabs cheer their mad dog killers on, then they deserve to get slapped around. -Empire500>>
Here we go. The excuses. It can't be that the majority of the people don't want to be mistreated, it "must be" that they want the Jews dead. You really swallow the propaganda.
<< That is the basis of all this. Bin Laden says get out, so we have to leave? -Empire500>>
No, not because bin Laden says so, because it is wrong to screw people over the way US policy makers do.
<< Hear that? It's the worlds smallest violin and it's playing a sad song for your desert hero's. You may think our policy is screwing these people over. The fact is that "these" people have been uncooperative to any reasoning at all for over 50 years. -Empire500>>
That is a lie.
<< They will never be at peace with Israel. Their only goal is to kill every last Jew in the Middle-East. -Empire500>>
Another lie.
<< They will either comply or be destroyed. It's as simple as that, Tommy. -Empire500>>
Kind of like the slaves we had in America.
<< They forced war upon us. -Empire500>>
What the hell are you talking about? Nearly everyone in the Middle East doesn't want us to manipulate their affairs.
<< They hate us. Who gives a shit what they want? They don't make the rules anymore, my friend. They had many chances. Like a bad gambler they rolled snake eyes too many times. The game is over. Step away from the table Hassan. -Empire500>>
I bet you would have said the same about Nat Turner at the time.
The extremists (and you must admit that when the US policy makers throw them
BILLIONS of dollars it makes them stronger) have made it clear they don't
want us too (in addition to the millions of non-terrorist citizens. )
<< Again. What do I care what they want? The US has what I had hoped for 12 years would have. A nasty wedge right between Syria and Iran. Now, the second Battle for Iraq can begin. We'll draw every terrorist into a killing field. Our Armies will smash them in Iraq and Afghanistan. What makes it funny is that the stupid ragheads are willing walking into the fight. How stupid is that? -Empire500>>
bin Laden asked for years and made it clear we were interfering, he got
people to follow him because the fact is the wrongs are real and nearly
anyone would be angry about them.
<< Oh, brother! If that is not a clear way of saying you support Bin Laden, I don't know what is! -Empire500>>
Well, you don't know much then. Bin Laden represents a small group. (the U.S. is very much at fault for pumping billions into this kind of movement. Then they turn around and blame ALL of Middle Easterners for the radical few. A few that the U.S. supported like I said) I never supported them, the U.S. policy makers on the other hand made an excuse to!
<< Whether you know it or not, you just justified 9/11 for that sick old man and his wacko crew. -Empire500>>
This is the game played by those that want to continue the unjust policies. The claim that you make, looking at the motives means "justifying them, is sick and simpleminded.
I have given you the example of two wrongs. Lets say you live in a building with others and one of them goes around the neighborhood killing people's pets. Lets say one of those pet's owners burns down the building that you and the pet killer live in. Now lets say you make it out alive and the police try to figure out a motive for why the building was burned down. Are you going to jump all over the cop that figures out that the motive was that a guy that lives in your building had been killing people's pets and one of the owners flipped out and burned your building down?
Would you dare tell the cop that he is "justifying" the crime?
<< That makes you equal to the terrorists, Tom. We can end these talks right here and now. You have made yourself and enemy of the United States. As of this moment, I hereby declare your citizenship renounced. You are no longer an American in my eyes, if you ever were one. Your flag is the green Islamic Nazi flag. This is the last time I respond to your posts. Keep screaming, loser. No one hears you anymore. I say we should all block MediaReform and any "form" he takes. He can write all the posts he wants. No one has to read them. Good-bye, Tom. Enemy of the state. -Empire500>>
You have got to be kidding me.
letter to someone:
I think you have a distorted view of the reality of the public forum in the US. You write, "I think it should be pretty clear that there's a wide range of intellectual opinion in the US, including Chomsky himself.", in an attempt to refute Chomsky's argument that "in the bourgeois democracy of the US, the American elite only maintains its legitimacy through a kind of self-brainwashing which differs from Soviet totalitarianism only by being more subtle and more effective."
You overlook the point (and Chomsky himself has said this) that what is critical is what most people get a chance to hear. Basically if most of the people are fooled most of the time, that is not a desirable system. THAT is the problem. And the fact that there is a "wide range of intellectual opinion" is not meaningful to what influences the public if the public does not get the practical chance to hear from that wide range. By this I mean it does people no good that there is a book somewhere that contains information if people are unaware of it and have a distorted idea of what it says. (if they even knew about it to read it) What is presented is a narrow range to most people by a media that is owned by rich and powerful people.
You write "As an aside, I would also suggest that anyone who wants to be well-informed about international politics should switch off their TV." I agree that mainstream TV is a poor tool to educate oneself. But that is because of the ownership and control. Here is where I think you miss the point because you write, " Even the best-intentioned TV news director isn't capable of presenting the complexities of international politics on TV." I disagree, I have seen shows about many topics on TV about complex issues. The problem is the issues that the rich and powerful prefer the public not get a chance to hear get left off the table. This is called "playing the game". Those selected to present the news either think the way the bosses want or pretend to, otherwise they don't have a job. Even the best-intentioned TV news director is intent on getting paid. Going against what the owners want isn't the way to maintain job security. Advertisers pay the bills and bosses cater to their viewpoints and waht they think is their viewpoints.
I actually talked to someone who said they worked in the media. (they didn't want to give their name, think about that.) I asked him why mainstream TV didn't have Chomsky as a guest to explain his views about 9/11. The guy claimed that Chomsky was a "poor speaker", that he wasn't "good" on TV. So that was why he was invited as a guest on TV. I didn't agree with his claim but said that even if "Chomsky is a poor speaker", Chomsky's ideas could have been explained on TV. I said that they managed to communicate the complex idea about how the WTC had collapsed and that was accomplished even without in the architect explaining it himself. I made the point that Chomsky's points could be presented without Chomsky having to speak them if he is "such a poor speaker". The guy quickly walked away! The thing is people in the media "play the game" and they do it as people that internalized the beliefs or they fake it.
You can see the bias by what isn't reported. There are many dramatic examples, Chomsky has pointed many out. If you want a really good book about Chomsky's thinking, get Understanding Power. You can get it at my web site http://www.RepresentativePress.org A good example is that not one mainstream reporter pointed out that Bush lied about America was attacked on 9/11. No one mainstream reporter has reported that the U.S. backed the coup that installed the Baath party and gave names of peole over to the Baath party to be killed. These are dramatic examples.
-Tom
I think you have a distorted view of the reality of the public forum in the US. You write, "I think it should be pretty clear that there's a wide range of intellectual opinion in the US, including Chomsky himself.", in an attempt to refute Chomsky's argument that "in the bourgeois democracy of the US, the American elite only maintains its legitimacy through a kind of self-brainwashing which differs from Soviet totalitarianism only by being more subtle and more effective."
You overlook the point (and Chomsky himself has said this) that what is critical is what most people get a chance to hear. Basically if most of the people are fooled most of the time, that is not a desirable system. THAT is the problem. And the fact that there is a "wide range of intellectual opinion" is not meaningful to what influences the public if the public does not get the practical chance to hear from that wide range. By this I mean it does people no good that there is a book somewhere that contains information if people are unaware of it and have a distorted idea of what it says. (if they even knew about it to read it) What is presented is a narrow range to most people by a media that is owned by rich and powerful people.
You write "As an aside, I would also suggest that anyone who wants to be well-informed about international politics should switch off their TV." I agree that mainstream TV is a poor tool to educate oneself. But that is because of the ownership and control. Here is where I think you miss the point because you write, " Even the best-intentioned TV news director isn't capable of presenting the complexities of international politics on TV." I disagree, I have seen shows about many topics on TV about complex issues. The problem is the issues that the rich and powerful prefer the public not get a chance to hear get left off the table. This is called "playing the game". Those selected to present the news either think the way the bosses want or pretend to, otherwise they don't have a job. Even the best-intentioned TV news director is intent on getting paid. Going against what the owners want isn't the way to maintain job security. Advertisers pay the bills and bosses cater to their viewpoints and waht they think is their viewpoints.
I actually talked to someone who said they worked in the media. (they didn't want to give their name, think about that.) I asked him why mainstream TV didn't have Chomsky as a guest to explain his views about 9/11. The guy claimed that Chomsky was a "poor speaker", that he wasn't "good" on TV. So that was why he was invited as a guest on TV. I didn't agree with his claim but said that even if "Chomsky is a poor speaker", Chomsky's ideas could have been explained on TV. I said that they managed to communicate the complex idea about how the WTC had collapsed and that was accomplished even without in the architect explaining it himself. I made the point that Chomsky's points could be presented without Chomsky having to speak them if he is "such a poor speaker". The guy quickly walked away! The thing is people in the media "play the game" and they do it as people that internalized the beliefs or they fake it.
You can see the bias by what isn't reported. There are many dramatic examples, Chomsky has pointed many out. If you want a really good book about Chomsky's thinking, get Understanding Power. You can get it at my web site http://www.RepresentativePress.org A good example is that not one mainstream reporter pointed out that Bush lied about America was attacked on 9/11. No one mainstream reporter has reported that the U.S. backed the coup that installed the Baath party and gave names of peole over to the Baath party to be killed. These are dramatic examples.
-Tom
<< I learned quite a bit on September 11th, watching the soot of 3,000 people fall from the sky like snow. I learned quite alot. >>
You didn't learn anything. Yes, our policy makers have been screwing these people over in the Middle
East.
<< Conjecture. >>
When you write something as off the wall as that, I really have to wonder if you give a damn about the truth.
We imposed Saddam on them for God sakes!!! what more do you need to see wee
support EVIL and do EVIL things (like supporting Saddam whcih finally TODAY
everyone sees as a bad guy)
<< We do not support evil things >>
We supported Saddam AND we supported the mujahdeen!!
When are you going to wake up?
<< We will NOT leave them alone. We will not get out of the Persian Gulf>>
WHY? I thought you were the guy that did care about justice and morality. Now it doesn't mean a damn thing to you?
<< We will not abandon our alliance with Israel >>
WHY? Are you a racist Empire500? Why support a racist country? Why won't we "abandon our alliance with Isreal"?
Do you know the first thing about Israel? I very much doubt it.
<< That is the basis of all this. Bin Laden says get out, so we have to leave? >>
No, not because bin Laden says so, because it I wrong to screw people over the way US policy makers do.
<< They forced war upon us. >>
? What the hell are you talking about? Nearly everyone in the Middle East doesn't want us to manipulate their affairs. The extremists (and you must admit that when the US policy makers throw them BILLIONS of dollars it makes them stronger) have made it clear they don't want us too (in addition to the millions of non-terrorist citizens. bin Laden asked for years and made it clear we were interfering, he got people to follow him because the fact is the wrongs are real and nearly anyone would be angry about them.
*The bottom line is rich and powerful people have put us in harms way because of their greed. You want to tell my how that is not true?
You didn't learn anything. Yes, our policy makers have been screwing these people over in the Middle
East.
<< Conjecture. >>
When you write something as off the wall as that, I really have to wonder if you give a damn about the truth.
We imposed Saddam on them for God sakes!!! what more do you need to see wee
support EVIL and do EVIL things (like supporting Saddam whcih finally TODAY
everyone sees as a bad guy)
<< We do not support evil things >>
We supported Saddam AND we supported the mujahdeen!!
When are you going to wake up?
<< We will NOT leave them alone. We will not get out of the Persian Gulf>>
WHY? I thought you were the guy that did care about justice and morality. Now it doesn't mean a damn thing to you?
<< We will not abandon our alliance with Israel >>
WHY? Are you a racist Empire500? Why support a racist country? Why won't we "abandon our alliance with Isreal"?
Do you know the first thing about Israel? I very much doubt it.
<< That is the basis of all this. Bin Laden says get out, so we have to leave? >>
No, not because bin Laden says so, because it I wrong to screw people over the way US policy makers do.
<< They forced war upon us. >>
? What the hell are you talking about? Nearly everyone in the Middle East doesn't want us to manipulate their affairs. The extremists (and you must admit that when the US policy makers throw them BILLIONS of dollars it makes them stronger) have made it clear they don't want us too (in addition to the millions of non-terrorist citizens. bin Laden asked for years and made it clear we were interfering, he got people to follow him because the fact is the wrongs are real and nearly anyone would be angry about them.
*The bottom line is rich and powerful people have put us in harms way because of their greed. You want to tell my how that is not true?
Saturday, April 26, 2003
<< Why do you stay stuck in the past? >>
I am not "stuck in the past". But you cannot think that this government and political and public system is healthy when the fact we helped kill hundreds of people to get the Baath party installed in Iraq is effectively SUPPRESSED by mainstream media.
<< Are you saying that our government is corrupt no matter what and we need a complete change? >>
the first thing we need is media reform. It is a crime that basic facts are withheld by the media. this is why people have such a distorted view of things.
<< To socialism, perhaps? >>
we basically have socialism, the problem is that it goes to the benifit of the rich and powerful.
I am not "stuck in the past". But you cannot think that this government and political and public system is healthy when the fact we helped kill hundreds of people to get the Baath party installed in Iraq is effectively SUPPRESSED by mainstream media.
<< Are you saying that our government is corrupt no matter what and we need a complete change? >>
the first thing we need is media reform. It is a crime that basic facts are withheld by the media. this is why people have such a distorted view of things.
<< To socialism, perhaps? >>
we basically have socialism, the problem is that it goes to the benifit of the rich and powerful.
<<>>
I was living in NYC on 8th street when it happened my sister was going to work at the time and could have been killed by debris, (a woman on the same street was hit by a piece of the plane)
The powerful have screwed over people in the Middle East and even funded the same extremists for years! The FBI testified that the foreign policies: those of manipulating the region and interfering and violating the rights of these people is what the motives were.
UPDATE: Exposing the fact that politicians and pundits are lying about "why they hate us."
Let's say you lived in an apartment building and someone in your building went around killing people in the neighborhood. Now let's say someone gets so enraged that he burns down the building that the killer and you live in. Can you now grasp the concept of two wrongs? Is this so difficult to understand? It was wrong to kill and it was wrong to burn down the building.
Yes, our policy makers have been screwing over Middle Easteners. We imposed Saddam on them for God sakes!!! What more do you need to see "we" (U.S. politicians) support EVIL and do EVIL things (like supporting Saddam which finally TODAY everyone sees as a bad guy.) If they partner with evil people, what does that make the US policy makers?
These are the specific grievances that MANY (not just the terrorists) in the region have.
I was living in NYC on 8th street when it happened my sister was going to work at the time and could have been killed by debris, (a woman on the same street was hit by a piece of the plane)
The powerful have screwed over people in the Middle East and even funded the same extremists for years! The FBI testified that the foreign policies: those of manipulating the region and interfering and violating the rights of these people is what the motives were.
UPDATE: Exposing the fact that politicians and pundits are lying about "why they hate us."
Let's say you lived in an apartment building and someone in your building went around killing people in the neighborhood. Now let's say someone gets so enraged that he burns down the building that the killer and you live in. Can you now grasp the concept of two wrongs? Is this so difficult to understand? It was wrong to kill and it was wrong to burn down the building.
Yes, our policy makers have been screwing over Middle Easteners. We imposed Saddam on them for God sakes!!! What more do you need to see "we" (U.S. politicians) support EVIL and do EVIL things (like supporting Saddam which finally TODAY everyone sees as a bad guy.) If they partner with evil people, what does that make the US policy makers?
These are the specific grievances that MANY (not just the terrorists) in the region have.
<< I'll bet putting mustard on my hot-dog GUARANTEES terrorism, Tom. >>
No it doesn't.
<< So let's cut to the chase and just say anything we Americans do will inspire terrorism. >>
No not "anything". Specifically helping thug like Saddam and the Baath party take over Iraq. Motive? Qassim who was the most popular leader of Iraq and he nationalized part of the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC), the foreign oil consortium that exploited Iraq's oil. So we help oust him and but the Baath party into power. we help get hundreds of people killed by handing their names over to the Baath party.
(this creates hate, bin Laden specifically complained about our support of Saddam) (the fact we put the Baath party into power and that bin Laden hates the fact that we supported Saddam doesn't get reported to the American public because the media serves the interests of powerful groups who prefer this doesn't get reported.
In Iran we overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran and installed the Shah. Again, this creates hatred because ti is over the top interference with their own country and lives. Again the media plays the game and doesn't do a good job educating the public about this.
You assume that our media system is the most efficient media system since it is "based on capitalism" and that it "naturally" best meets the needs and serves the interests of the American people. The truth is the money that pays these media outlets comes from powerful groups and they want things to serve their interests, not those of the general public.
No it doesn't.
<< So let's cut to the chase and just say anything we Americans do will inspire terrorism. >>
No not "anything". Specifically helping thug like Saddam and the Baath party take over Iraq. Motive? Qassim who was the most popular leader of Iraq and he nationalized part of the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC), the foreign oil consortium that exploited Iraq's oil. So we help oust him and but the Baath party into power. we help get hundreds of people killed by handing their names over to the Baath party.
(this creates hate, bin Laden specifically complained about our support of Saddam) (the fact we put the Baath party into power and that bin Laden hates the fact that we supported Saddam doesn't get reported to the American public because the media serves the interests of powerful groups who prefer this doesn't get reported.
In Iran we overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran and installed the Shah. Again, this creates hatred because ti is over the top interference with their own country and lives. Again the media plays the game and doesn't do a good job educating the public about this.
You assume that our media system is the most efficient media system since it is "based on capitalism" and that it "naturally" best meets the needs and serves the interests of the American people. The truth is the money that pays these media outlets comes from powerful groups and they want things to serve their interests, not those of the general public.
<< Could someone tell me where it is morally right to attack a country for being arrogant? >>
the terrorism is a result of some people trying to stop the US foreign policies from preventing them form self determination. THAT is what the motives for 9/11 were, an attempt to force US policy makers to stop interfering in the affairs of the Middle East. How? Doing things like installing the Baath part, installing the Shah. Yes, when the US does things like that, helping kill people that want to exercise their political rights, people get angry.
There was the election in Algeria that gets over turned because the powers that be don't like what the people voted for. These are examples of the US and Western powers undermining and preventing self determination for the people of the Middle East.
You can see that the preferred kind of ruler is either an undemocratic king or undemocratic dictator.
There has not been a commitment to democracy in the Middle East. In fact, the US undermines it. We are a people that fought to free ourselves from a king yet we continue to impose kings and undemocratic monarchies on the people of the Middle East. Look at Kuwait, a chance to let there be democracy in 1991? Nah, the Western powers are happy with the profits they make with the undemocratic arrangement so that after the Gulf War back goes in the monarchy. Kuwait is a very good example of how there is no commitment to democracy for the Middle East on the part of the US.
After the Gulf War, there was the opportunity for the Kuwaitis to have democracy but the US and Western powers had no use for it. Back in goes the monarchy. Back to the money flowing to the West and the hell with the common man in Kuwait.
the terrorism is a result of some people trying to stop the US foreign policies from preventing them form self determination. THAT is what the motives for 9/11 were, an attempt to force US policy makers to stop interfering in the affairs of the Middle East. How? Doing things like installing the Baath part, installing the Shah. Yes, when the US does things like that, helping kill people that want to exercise their political rights, people get angry.
There was the election in Algeria that gets over turned because the powers that be don't like what the people voted for. These are examples of the US and Western powers undermining and preventing self determination for the people of the Middle East.
You can see that the preferred kind of ruler is either an undemocratic king or undemocratic dictator.
There has not been a commitment to democracy in the Middle East. In fact, the US undermines it. We are a people that fought to free ourselves from a king yet we continue to impose kings and undemocratic monarchies on the people of the Middle East. Look at Kuwait, a chance to let there be democracy in 1991? Nah, the Western powers are happy with the profits they make with the undemocratic arrangement so that after the Gulf War back goes in the monarchy. Kuwait is a very good example of how there is no commitment to democracy for the Middle East on the part of the US.
After the Gulf War, there was the opportunity for the Kuwaitis to have democracy but the US and Western powers had no use for it. Back in goes the monarchy. Back to the money flowing to the West and the hell with the common man in Kuwait.
"President Bush raised the possibility Thursday that any Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were destroyed before or during the U.S.-led war, suggesting for the first time that coalition troops may come up empty in their search." http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-2602091,00.html
and the Bush followers are going to go along with it. No matter how crazy the "logic" is, the Bush followers follow.
"A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Bush's remarks were based on information from at least one Iraqi scientist who has led coalition forces to materials used in the production of weapons of mass destruction and who has said some weapons were destroyed before the war, others perhaps afterward. "
keep in mind:
what we know about this Iraqi scientist comes from NYT reporter Judith Miller.
"The deal she made with her sources prevented her from interviewing the scientist or even visiting his home. Her military handlers asked that she not identify the scientist or name the uncovered chemicals, that she hold her story for three days, and that she let the military check it prior to publication. The facts in Miller's Monday story appear to have flowed directly from the mouths of her MET Alpha military sources."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2081905/
and the Bush followers are going to go along with it. No matter how crazy the "logic" is, the Bush followers follow.
"A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Bush's remarks were based on information from at least one Iraqi scientist who has led coalition forces to materials used in the production of weapons of mass destruction and who has said some weapons were destroyed before the war, others perhaps afterward. "
keep in mind:
what we know about this Iraqi scientist comes from NYT reporter Judith Miller.
"The deal she made with her sources prevented her from interviewing the scientist or even visiting his home. Her military handlers asked that she not identify the scientist or name the uncovered chemicals, that she hold her story for three days, and that she let the military check it prior to publication. The facts in Miller's Monday story appear to have flowed directly from the mouths of her MET Alpha military sources."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2081905/
Friday, April 25, 2003
<< Do us a favor MediaRefrom, and be hoest to youself, you want the Jews wiped off the face of the earth, JUST ADMIT IT END AND THIS LITTLE GAME YOUR PLAYING >> ( AOL member Dbetter )
Aren't you ashamed of yourself for posting trash like this?
<< Let me repeat MediReform, COME CLEAN >> ( AOL member Dbetter )
What does it say about you that you resort to this sick tactic? So what you are saying is that you can no longer debate the facts and must resort to outrageous insinuations that anyone that demands equal and fair treatment of all people wants "the Jews wiped off the face of the earth"
This sick tactic is supposed to shield Israeli Jews from all criticisms? Have you no shame at all? What do you think people reading this think when you can't debate the facts and instead resort to such an ugly statement like that?
Aren't you ashamed of yourself for posting trash like this?
<< Let me repeat MediReform, COME CLEAN >> ( AOL member Dbetter )
What does it say about you that you resort to this sick tactic? So what you are saying is that you can no longer debate the facts and must resort to outrageous insinuations that anyone that demands equal and fair treatment of all people wants "the Jews wiped off the face of the earth"
This sick tactic is supposed to shield Israeli Jews from all criticisms? Have you no shame at all? What do you think people reading this think when you can't debate the facts and instead resort to such an ugly statement like that?
<< you are fighting a loosing battle here. You see, America has freedoms. I'm free to boycott something for whatever reason. >>
you see, you really are ignorant. I am not saying that you should not be free, the point is it is wrong to try to hurt people financially just for speaking their mind.
By the way, you are more ignorant than you realize, you are not free to boycott Israel. Didn't know that did you?
you see, you really are ignorant. I am not saying that you should not be free, the point is it is wrong to try to hurt people financially just for speaking their mind.
By the way, you are more ignorant than you realize, you are not free to boycott Israel. Didn't know that did you?
<< I don't own a Dixie Chicks album and yes, we are entitled to free speech in this country, >>
OK then don't talk about punishing people for having an opinion.
<< And the people who have boycotted their albums also have the right to refuse to buy their albums. What's so difficult to understand about that??
>>
That's the thing about rights, you have a right to be an ass. The insistence that people remain quiet about their beliefs otherwise you will hurt them financially is SICK. You are playing a game by pretending that I said people don't "have the right" to not buy their albums. I never said that. But if you want to live as a decent person that understands the principles this country is built on, they you should accept that people will say things you don't agree with. Attempting to silence them by making them wary of voicing an opinion is sick. What is hard to understand about that?
OK then don't talk about punishing people for having an opinion.
<< And the people who have boycotted their albums also have the right to refuse to buy their albums. What's so difficult to understand about that??
>>
That's the thing about rights, you have a right to be an ass. The insistence that people remain quiet about their beliefs otherwise you will hurt them financially is SICK. You are playing a game by pretending that I said people don't "have the right" to not buy their albums. I never said that. But if you want to live as a decent person that understands the principles this country is built on, they you should accept that people will say things you don't agree with. Attempting to silence them by making them wary of voicing an opinion is sick. What is hard to understand about that?
"I just punched up a map of the middle east, and maybe you could share with us what land Israel is planning on Taking. Is it Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Saudia Arabia, or maybe the whole wide world."-comment
of course you have to get melodramatic. But did you ever take the time to look at the facts?
Israel has never had internationally declared borders, but continues to tinker endlessly with its own size. Did you not know this??
"In fact, Israel has signed and honored agreements with Egypt and Jordan," -comment
Egypt offered to settle it back in 1971, it is Israel that refused for years.
"I just punched up a map of the middle east, and maybe you could share with us what land Israel is planning on Taking. "-comment
I posted what Ben Gurion himself has said, you need me to repost it? For God sakes it is in this same thread, what is with you?
You are getting such an extremely distorted view about what Israel is about since you rely on what the American media chooses to tell you.
"Israel has signed and honored agreements with Egypt and Jordan"- comment we have seen what Israel thinks of even its own agreements. Did you or did you not read what Ben Gurion said about agreements being temporary (and that is when they honor them)
Look at the ethnic cleansing that Israel did and never has complied with the right of return which it promised it would. Israel was accepted into the United Nations on condition that it accept the Right of Return of the Palestinian refugees. Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 273 of May 11, 1949 ) requires Israel to comply with General Assembly Resolution 194 of December 11, 1948 and Israel stated it agreed to comply with this resolution.
You overlook the fact that at every point along the so called "peace process" the Israelis have CONTINUED to build encampments and settlements on the remaining portion of Palestine. The chuzpa is incredible do you not know about this? No one seriously interested in peace keeps pushing and pushing and pushing, building on someone else's land (and destroying the houses of others too!)
the American media is withholding facts from the American public (that is why the public is so clueless compared to the rest of the world.) do you not know how the votes have been in the UN for decades. votes like 151 to 2 , 171 to 2. 181 to 2.
any fair-minded person should look at this and see the problem (notice the UN vote tallies are not reported to the public?)
are we to believe that every other voting nation on the face of the Earth is "anti-Semitic" the claims of "anti-Semitism" are so cheap, so disgusting it is unreal. think the KKK or the Old South could have gotten away with deflecting all criticisms as "anti-white? think South Africa could have gotten away with this? By the way the us did call Nelson Mandella a terrorist fro years and used the CIA to get him arrested (so much for the idea that the US stands by moral countries and on the side of justice!)
and anyone that dares look at the facts is attacked and slandered with name calling. Look what happens when an award winning journalist does report the truth, specifically about the targeting of children: he is vilified.
We here all the time about Palestinians terrorism but Israeli terrorism (and no, not just by the IDF) goes unreported here in America.
of course you have to get melodramatic. But did you ever take the time to look at the facts?
Israel has never had internationally declared borders, but continues to tinker endlessly with its own size. Did you not know this??
"In fact, Israel has signed and honored agreements with Egypt and Jordan," -comment
Egypt offered to settle it back in 1971, it is Israel that refused for years.
"I just punched up a map of the middle east, and maybe you could share with us what land Israel is planning on Taking. "-comment
I posted what Ben Gurion himself has said, you need me to repost it? For God sakes it is in this same thread, what is with you?
You are getting such an extremely distorted view about what Israel is about since you rely on what the American media chooses to tell you.
"Israel has signed and honored agreements with Egypt and Jordan"- comment we have seen what Israel thinks of even its own agreements. Did you or did you not read what Ben Gurion said about agreements being temporary (and that is when they honor them)
Look at the ethnic cleansing that Israel did and never has complied with the right of return which it promised it would. Israel was accepted into the United Nations on condition that it accept the Right of Return of the Palestinian refugees. Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 273 of May 11, 1949 ) requires Israel to comply with General Assembly Resolution 194 of December 11, 1948 and Israel stated it agreed to comply with this resolution.
You overlook the fact that at every point along the so called "peace process" the Israelis have CONTINUED to build encampments and settlements on the remaining portion of Palestine. The chuzpa is incredible do you not know about this? No one seriously interested in peace keeps pushing and pushing and pushing, building on someone else's land (and destroying the houses of others too!)
the American media is withholding facts from the American public (that is why the public is so clueless compared to the rest of the world.) do you not know how the votes have been in the UN for decades. votes like 151 to 2 , 171 to 2. 181 to 2.
any fair-minded person should look at this and see the problem (notice the UN vote tallies are not reported to the public?)
are we to believe that every other voting nation on the face of the Earth is "anti-Semitic" the claims of "anti-Semitism" are so cheap, so disgusting it is unreal. think the KKK or the Old South could have gotten away with deflecting all criticisms as "anti-white? think South Africa could have gotten away with this? By the way the us did call Nelson Mandella a terrorist fro years and used the CIA to get him arrested (so much for the idea that the US stands by moral countries and on the side of justice!)
and anyone that dares look at the facts is attacked and slandered with name calling. Look what happens when an award winning journalist does report the truth, specifically about the targeting of children: he is vilified.
We here all the time about Palestinians terrorism but Israeli terrorism (and no, not just by the IDF) goes unreported here in America.
Input from debater:<< Intelligence is what I base all my thoughts on. Want to know how it works? You consider all sources known and available to you, use your brains and take into consideration where the source come from and try to have an open mind in determining what may be biased or not biased in their information and try to come to the best judgement because after all, your judgement really reflects back on you. There is a plentiful supply of information and the resources to obtain it. >>
could you tell me what these sources are and how you think they are "all sources known" the mainstream media has created a false reality by excluding important facts from public debate. the gives people like you adistorted view of the world. You probably assume that the media is a check and balance on government power, the truth is they serve government policies just as powerful people influence the government undemocratically. Your previous response: "You need to smack yourself in the head and knock out some of the dumbness. Read what you have just wrote. You have said the most untruthful thing about America. Of course the Iraqi people will deal with their own government for their country. Do you think we will say no, go home and stay home, we are another Saddam and you will do as we Americans say. What a joke! Did all that brightness burn out in that alarmingly intelligent brain of yours. I can see your mouth hanging agape right now with your intelligent brain sizzling with more unintelligent hot air to blow. I mean really, how ridiculous your words are." You really don't know that is what our policy makers have done? country after country? Look at the history, a history that the media doesn't bother to tell you since the media serves what powerful people want and they don't want these foriegn policies questioned. What policies? for example ousting a democratically elected leader in Iran and installing the Shah. Yes it did happen. look at what James Woolsey has said. now notice the CIA doesn't want you to know about it.
could you tell me what these sources are and how you think they are "all sources known" the mainstream media has created a false reality by excluding important facts from public debate. the gives people like you adistorted view of the world. You probably assume that the media is a check and balance on government power, the truth is they serve government policies just as powerful people influence the government undemocratically. Your previous response: "You need to smack yourself in the head and knock out some of the dumbness. Read what you have just wrote. You have said the most untruthful thing about America. Of course the Iraqi people will deal with their own government for their country. Do you think we will say no, go home and stay home, we are another Saddam and you will do as we Americans say. What a joke! Did all that brightness burn out in that alarmingly intelligent brain of yours. I can see your mouth hanging agape right now with your intelligent brain sizzling with more unintelligent hot air to blow. I mean really, how ridiculous your words are." You really don't know that is what our policy makers have done? country after country? Look at the history, a history that the media doesn't bother to tell you since the media serves what powerful people want and they don't want these foriegn policies questioned. What policies? for example ousting a democratically elected leader in Iran and installing the Shah. Yes it did happen. look at what James Woolsey has said. now notice the CIA doesn't want you to know about it.
Privacy Policy
Here is the link for the main web site called Representative Press
The Privacy Policy for the Representative Press Blog isn't different from Google's privacy policy (see Advertising and Privacy and Google Advertising Cookie and Privacy Policies.) If you require any more information click here
As Google says, the privacy policy should include the following information about Google and the DoubleClick DART cookie:
- Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on this site.
- Google's use of the DART cookie enables it and its partners to serve ads to this site's users based on their visit to your sites and/or other sites on the Internet.
- Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy.
The Network Advertising Initiative suggests the following language for data collection of non-personally identifying information:
We use third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our website. These companies may use information (not including your name, address, email address, or telephone number) about your visits to this and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here.
Archives
04/01/2003 - 04/30/200305/01/2003 - 05/31/2003
06/01/2003 - 06/30/2003
07/01/2003 - 07/31/2003
08/01/2003 - 08/31/2003
10/01/2003 - 10/31/2003
11/01/2003 - 11/30/2003
12/01/2003 - 12/31/2003
02/01/2004 - 02/29/2004
03/01/2004 - 03/31/2004
04/01/2004 - 04/30/2004
05/01/2004 - 05/31/2004
06/01/2004 - 06/30/2004
07/01/2004 - 07/31/2004
08/01/2004 - 08/31/2004
09/01/2004 - 09/30/2004
10/01/2004 - 10/31/2004
11/01/2004 - 11/30/2004
12/01/2004 - 12/31/2004
01/01/2005 - 01/31/2005
02/01/2005 - 02/28/2005
03/01/2005 - 03/31/2005
04/01/2005 - 04/30/2005
05/01/2005 - 05/31/2005
06/01/2005 - 06/30/2005
07/01/2005 - 07/31/2005
08/01/2005 - 08/31/2005
09/01/2005 - 09/30/2005
10/01/2005 - 10/31/2005
11/01/2005 - 11/30/2005
12/01/2005 - 12/31/2005
01/01/2006 - 01/31/2006
02/01/2006 - 02/28/2006
03/01/2006 - 03/31/2006
04/01/2006 - 04/30/2006
5/1/06 - 6/1/06
6/1/06 - 7/1/06
7/1/06 - 8/1/06
8/1/06 - 9/1/06
9/1/06 - 10/1/06
10/1/06 - 11/1/06
11/1/06 - 12/1/06
12/1/06 - 1/1/07
1/1/07 - 2/1/07
2/1/07 - 3/1/07
3/1/07 - 4/1/07
4/1/07 - 5/1/07
5/1/07 - 6/1/07
6/1/07 - 7/1/07
7/1/07 - 8/1/07
8/1/07 - 9/1/07 *
*See left hand column for latest archives
Representative Press Blog
See: Representative Press Web Site
Join the Mailing List
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
