You wrote, "..i think it's common knowledge that the israeli settlements are illegal."
People are not born with the knowledge so where are they supposed to learn it? American TV news reports clearly play the game when they keep their mouths shut. and there are indeed many people that do not know it.
You are in denial if you think it makes sense not to report a fact as important as the legal status of these settlements. CLEARLY they are reluctant to inform people that do not know about the illegal status.You can't be claiming that all AMericans know, so why would the news make a point of not informing people that do not know? This has been going on for years, as people grow up, they should be able to learn by hearing basic facts on TV. You really are trying to hard to excuses. N.J. Burketts didn't expect to be confronted on what he had been doing and he pulled an absurd excuse out of his ass. It is sad that you can convince yourself that it makes sense. It is one word: "illegal" and it would carry so much information, no way in hell is there an innocent reason for it not being reported You are in extreme denial if you think there is.
You know damn well why it is happening, these reporters are playing the game. I haven't posted the NJ Burkett story "at least 5 times", you resent that I am informing people about the truth. Reporter N.J. Burkett is an embarrassment, here is his comments from Gaza: "I mention in the piece that the prayers reached a cresendo as the troops were breaking in and that was extraordinary - that was a moment that I will never forget and I'm not Jewish, and as I made my way through the crowd I suddenly realized that here I was and their world as they know it was falling apart all around them, and I'm not wearing a yarmulke. I pulled out a handkerchief from my back pocket and covered my head as a gesture of respect." http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/BurkettGaza/wabc_081805_gazaPM.html
"Wolfowitz's statements: the Bush administration, he said, was disappointed that the Turkish military "did not play the strong leadership role on that issue [i.e., the Iraq debate] that we would have expected. .. in Turkey the meaning seemed painfully clear: The United States wished the Turkish military had either overruled the elected government or perhaps even pushed it aside in favor of one more subservient to U.S. demands.
As numerous Turkish commentators have noted, that's an odd stance for a country now presenting itself as the champion of Middle Eastern democracy."
You are in denial about Wolfowitz. Look at "Wolfowitz's career – like his strong support for Suharto in Indonesia, one of the last century's worst mass murderers and aggressors, when Wolfowitz was ambassador to that country under Ronald Reagan.
As the State Department official responsible for Asian affairs under Reagan, Wolfowitz oversaw support for the murderous dictators Chun of South Korea and Marcos of the Philippines."
U.S, policy makers showed pathological disregard for the improvements to the lives of the Afghanis, what they did to Afghanistan had nothing to do with helping the Afghan people.
"In August 1979, three months before the Soviet intervention, a classified State Department Report stated: 'the United States's larger interests ... would be served by the demise of the Taraki-Amin regime, despite whatever setbacks this might mean for future social and economic reforms in Afghanistan. ... the overthrow of the D.R.A. [Democratic Republic of Afghanistan] would show the rest of the world, particularly the Third World, that the Soviets' view of the socialist course of history as being inevitable is not accurate.'" http://www.doublestandards.org/blum6.html
There was a "large following of people who favored reforms and didn't want to live under a fundamentalist Islamic government" and you think it was OK to support Muslim fundamentalist extremists?!
Many improvements were being made in Afghanistan, girls were going to school. The U.S. actions destroyed that by backing extremist fundamentalists, backing them with BILLIONS of dollars. The CIA was literally shipping Korans and weapons. You think it was a good idea to encourage violent Muslim fundamentalism????
It is unbelievable that you can make excuses for backing violent Muslim fundamentalists after 9/11. You really are too much, it is absolutely unbelievable given what happened on 9/11.
By the way, it isn't just my opinion that what the U.S did provoked the Afghan war, Brzezinski brags about drawing the Russians into "the Afghan trap." This guy was willing to use the Afghan people as expendable chess pieces in a game just to hurt the Russians. "We didn't push the Russians to intervene," Brzezinski said, "but we knowingly increased the probability that they would." http://members.aol.com/bblum6/brz.htm
if it's a closely guarded secret, how did wikipedia find out?
Brzezinski made his statements in 1998, the guy that wrote the wikipeda article could have found out just like I did. The point was it was a lie pushed on the American people and kept secret for years. Obviously after Brzezinski is talking about it publicly people can learn about it.