cj001f Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 ...than an (ex)CBS news staffer. Shouldn't that be on a Sinclair station? Quote
Peter_Puget Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 Two Words: Catherine Breillat Quote
slothrop Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Where's the "wildly tangential reference to a provocative French film director that's over everyone's head" gremlin? Quote
chucK Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 What a f**King liar that Drudge guy is. Check out the NBC news story about the NBC newsstory that Drudge refers to. Then check out what Drudge linked (CNN!). The CNN story completely leaves out the part about Pentagon Officials stating that the site was searched and that the weapons were there. Check out what the embedded NBC news reporter actually said too, as reported by NBC, as opposed to Drudge. She tells a totally different story. Finally, since you've been soiled by the Drudge report you owe it to yourself to now read Salon's interview with a weapons expert about this thing. Sheesh. Talk about scare tactics!! Holy Cow! Quote
Fairweather Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 I watched the actual story on NBC Nightly News last night. It stated that the entire bunker complex had been searched upon US troop's arrival and that an embedded reporter was with the unit. The story you link to is not the story that ran last night. It has been modified and embellished. Look at the date of the "updated version". Fuking Kerry-loving media dickheads, and the choads like ChucK who swallow it down without missing a drop. Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 and skip shit like this... Annan and this... Oil for Terror Quote
Fairweather Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 ...But as lame as our media is here, at least we don't tolerate media threats against our leaders and listen to constant and overt shit like that foisted on the Brits.... America Under Attack ... by British Media Monday, October 25, 2004 By Scott Norvell Anyone thumbing through The Guardian's (search) weekly entertainment guide this past weekend could be forgiven for spitting coffee all over the couch when they reached the television listings section. In a weekly TV column, writer Charlie Brooker (search) launched into a refrain familiar to anyone who regularly reads The Guardian, the house organ of London's liberal left-wing. Taking on George W. Bush's performance during the recent debates, Brooker dubbed the president a "lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat." He concluded his ditty with the following paragraph: "On November 2, the entire civilized world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. -- where are you now that we need you?" Sputter. Our friends the Brits, indeed. Brooker's longing for an assassin (The Guardian apologized for it Monday, calling it an "ironic joke") is an extreme, but by no means atypical view among London's punditry class these days. Thumbing through the rest of the week's television listings in the same magazine as Brooker's column says much about how Britain's media feel about America and Bush in particular. It's the week before the election, of course, and programmers are scurrying to get their harangues on the air while there's still some semblance of an excuse — a "news peg." The BBC (search), Britain's taxpayer-funded broadcaster, has the most ambitious schedule of anti-American fare. Sunday's Panorama magazine show was about how 9/11 and Bush's "war on terror" (the Beeb uses these derisive quotation marks whenever it mentions our war on Islamic fundamentalists) have polarized the American populace. Over on BBC4 (search) the same night was "The America Debate," a political roundtable broadcast from Harvard University featuring an uncharacteristically balanced panel interspersed with hopelessly biased reports from correspondents around America (the BBC doubts America's "great Liberal tradition" will survive unless the Democrats win the election.) Tuesday, BBC2 (search) offers us a rant in the form of a travelogue titled "Holidays in the Danger Zone: America Was Here." This week's program focuses on El Salvador, and if last week's episode on Nicaragua (the Nicas were living the Socialist dream of peace and equality under the Sandinistas (search) until big, bad America started financing the Contras (search) in the 1980s) then every problem currently faced by El Salvador is sure to be laid at American feet. Wednesday, the broadcaster treats us to the second installment of a three-part series titled "The Power of Nightmares," which reports that a cabal of U.S. neo-conservatives (search) have fabricated the idea of Al Qaeda (search) and an international terror threat in order to solidify power. Not surprisingly, The Guardian has been lapping up this line of thinking with special reports tied to the broadcasts and op-ed columns galore about its insightful portrayal of that dubious "war on terror." Thursday, the BBC is re-running "Who Runs America," a series which uses profiles of prominent Americans to validate every stereotype and prejudice BBC staffers have about America and Americans. A FDA official talks about how overweight Americans are. An evangelical pastor from California speaks to the country's fanatical religiosity. The CEO of General Motors addresses our love affair with gas-guzzling cars and greedy overuse of the world's natural resources. New York police commissioner Ray Kelly talks about his success fighting crime in the Big Apple "at the expense of burgeoning prison populations," and an FBI official is interviewed about how American law enforcement has run amok in the name of homeland security. All this is to be expected, of course, from the BBC. The commercial broadcasters aren't much better, however. Channel 4 goes for the jugular whenever it can, and this week provides plenty of opportunity. Saturday, the network visits the latest output in the "American Empire" -- Angola -- to tell how we are tightening our grip on African oil because of the chaos in the Middle East. Monday, Channel 4 kicks off an entire month of special programming titled (cue sarcasm here) "The Greatest Democracy on Earth." The inaugural show, "The White House for Sale," sets the tone for the rest of the month with descriptions of how the country that imposes its Democratic ideals on hapless nations around the world is actually corrupt to the core. Saturday, Channel 4 returns to that favorite topic of the British chattering classes -- those wacko fundamentalists in America. "With God on our Side" describes how ignorant, whacked-out Christians in several swing states have kidnapped the American electoral process and are leading the Beacon of Freedom inexorably toward religious extremism. Television is not the only medium for such tripe. Newspaper op-ed pages are awash in columns along the same vein, and radio programs are not much better. The handful of dissenting voices are drowned out by the chorus of conspiracy theories, Bush-bashing and cultural stereotyping. Americans who applaud the resoluteness of our British allies in the War on Terror would do well to refocus their applause on 10 Downing Street (search) and the British Ministry of Defense. Blair has endured a drubbing about Iraq such as few Americans could comprehend, yet he has stuck to his guns. And if this week's television fare is any indication, the drubbing will continue well past the American election and into Blair's own electoral season next year. He's going to need all the well-wishes he can get, because there won't be any coming from this side of the pond. Scott Norvell is the European Bureau Chief for FOX News. He is based in London. Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 ...and I also wonder hwo it isn't an emintent threat when someone who has tried to assasinate a former president, funds terrorists, and murders his people and has threatened our country has 1000's of tons of an explosive that can bring a plane down with less than a lb. Quote
chucK Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 I watched the actual story on NBC Nightly News last night. It stated that the entire bunker complex had been searched upon US troop's arrival and that an embedded reporter was with the unit. The story you link to is not the story that ran last night. It has been modified and embellished. Look at the date of the "updated version". Did you click on the video Fairweather? The video clearly states that the entire complex was not searched. There is an interview with that exact embedded reporter. If you'd have actually watched the story as you claim, you'd have figured that out pretty easily. Interesting that, I noticed that between the time I first looked at this story and the second, the reference to Pentagon statements that the weapons were indeed there has been removed. Quote
chucK Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Scott, Where are you getting this stuff about Saddam funding terrorists? I've seen you've state this at least twice today. Do you know something that I haven't even seen on Fox News? If so, I'd like to know. Quote
slothrop Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Dammit, Fairweather, now I'm confused. I thought Britain was our ally? You know, like, part of the coalition. How can British people not like us? Is it something we said? From the NBC news story chucK linked: Reporter Lai Ling Jew, who was embedded with the Army’s 101st Airborne, Second Brigade, said Tuesday on MSNBC TV that the news team stayed at the base for about 24 hours. “There wasn’t a search,” she said. “The mission that the brigade had was to get to Baghdad. That was more of a pit stop there for us. And, you know, the searching, I mean, certainly some of the soldiers headed off on their own, looked through the bunkers just to look at the vast amount of ordnance lying around. “But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away.” If the 101st didn't thoroughly search the huge complex ("1,000 buildings") on April 4 or 10, how could they say whether the HMX/RDX was there or not? In any case, the Iraq Survey Group says there was a period of seven weeks where the complex was left unguarded by US troops. It doesn't matter what the original story was... when new facts come up, stories are corrected or added to ("embellished"). I don't understand your gripe with the date. Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Scott, Where are you getting this stuff about Saddam funding terrorists? I've seen you've state this at least twice today. Do you know something that I haven't even seen on Fox News? If so, I'd like to know. I do believe he gave 15 grand to the families of suicide bombers in Palestine. These suicide bombers are referred to as "terrorists" in the vernacular of not just the US right, but the US mainstream as well. (In the middle-east, they are referred to as "resistance fighters", "holy warriors", "freedom fighters", etc etc.) Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 I jsut watched the video twice and it did not say that at all chuck. The one thing I did find odd was that the reporter said that it soudned "strangely political" given the timing so close to the election. I think you are blowing smoke. 2 times I watched it and never did it say that the compound was not searched entirely. Quote
slothrop Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Are we living in Palestine? Did Saddam ever fund terrorists attacking Americans? Read the article chucK linked. The reporter clearly states that the complex was not thoroughly searched. Quote
AlpineK Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 I watched it and never did it say that the compound was not searched entirely. I am richer than Bill Gates. Just try and prove I'm not. Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Iraq had been directly funding such groups as the Arab Liberation Front, the Palestine Liberation Front and the Arab Socialist Party. link Quote
slothrop Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 WND is not a source, sorry. Primary or respectable sources, please. And none of those organizations attacked Americans, unless you'd like to inform me otherwise. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 I do believe he gave 15 grand to the families of suicide bombers in Palestine. Palestine?? Did I miss the statehood ceremony? ...and yes, Terrorists. Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 I watched it and never did it say that the compound was not searched entirely. I am richer than Bill Gates. Just try and prove I'm not. Oh... you are looking at the updated link. Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Link Saddam Hussein would pay $US25,000 ($47,000) to the family of each suicide bomber as an enticement for others to volunteer for martyrdom in the name of the Palestinian people. Quote
slothrop Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Hey, guess what? The US gives money to Israel to spend on weapons and bulldozers and settlements. Palestinians would probably consider that "funding terrorists". Maybe, just maybe, that has something to do with why Muslims don't like us. Quote
scott_harpell Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Are we living in Palestine? Did Saddam ever fund terrorists attacking Americans? Among Saddam's victims have been U.S. and European citizens who were visiting Israel. Here ya go. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 We gave $$$ to The Palestinian Authority too! Until they decided to use it to kill our Israeli friends and buy ships full of weaponry from Iran. Israel could disappear tomorrow.....the Muslim extremists would still kill Americans at every opportunity. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.