Why Does CNN Suck?

Completely agree with Susan. I would add that CNN and all the cable and network media milk stories to the very last drop.  For instance, the piece about the young Boy Scout lost in the wilds of North Carolina was carried by CNN for more than 45 minutes yesterday (21 March) morning, while all other stories were put on the back burner.  .  They should have made a brief announcement that the kid had been found alive and then gone on to other stories, but no, they kept at it, beating it to death.  This is but one example.  There are many more. 
Dr. Panglosss

Were it so benign.  CNN seems to be on a path of not only trivialization, but of rightwingification.  They both work in tandem to prevent the public from getting the news it needs to take back our nation from its corporate masters. 

And while it’s all well and good that some of us have the time and motivation to actually go and find things out on our own using outher sources, most of those folks Bush calls “uniquely American”—those working two or maybe three jobs to make ends meet since Reagan demolished the middle class—don’t have that luxury.  So they’re looking for a quick summary, and CNN, if left to do its will, is happy to mollify them on behalf of their right wing owners and sponsors.

CNN has drifted right because the small highly vocal well funded minority has been loudly complaining.  We have to make them realize those people will never be satisfied, and with a loud and unanimous voice beckon them to return to at least a bare minimum of jouralistic standards.

I remember when I was in college in the early 1990s and CNN was the gold standard for news. Those days are long gone.

I have been a fan of Susan Douglas for some time.  Her articles are always insightful and right on target.  I am currently on a one-person boycott of CNN.  Infuriated by the inane comments of Glen Beck and his obvious bias against Democrats and others who don’t completely agree with him; put off by Solidad O’Brian’s often snooty interviews; and finally, just plain exhausted by the Anna Nicole Smith obsession, I said, no more.  It’s too bad, because there are some neat and talented people with CNN, but over all, the Glen Becks and Nacy Graces and the tabloid content of most of the stories simply ruin anyone from wanting to tune in.  They sure did me.

CNN is awful but it has nothing to do with the profit motive or that all purpose scapegoat here, the capitalistic system, but its own pragmatist ideology. Like the NY Times and The Washington Post, CNN wants to be near power. All three totally lied about the second as well as the first
Gulf Massacre, I agree with Chomsky that these were one-sided massacres rather than wars. CNN was never the gold standard for news but it HAS gotten noticeably worse. The difference between them and Fox is getting narrow and of course, Brokaw, Rather, Jennings, ad nauseum, went along with the 9-11 hysteria as well as the Bush-AIPAC
war. I used to work in an office building where the damn CNN was on all
the time but don’t get cable at home, thankfully.

If you really want to see something striking, compare CNN International, broadcast outside of US timezones, to the “domestic” version. Not to say that CNNI is above criticism (pah! hardly!), but it is much more characterized by a “hard news” focus compared to homestyle CNN. I’ve seen this for years, and it gets worse and worse every time I return home to visit family and click on CNN. Homestyle CNN includes a much larger proportion of so-called “human interest” stories (if anyone is really so “interested” in the disposition of Anna Nicole’s remains) and emphasis upon the doings of celebrity reporters instead of significant world events. I see a clear difference between the homestyle broadcasts’ apparent mission to titillate and entertain, compared to CNNI’s at least tacit mission to inform (though, again, not to exalt even the international version… it’s just much better than the domestic one).

I find it particularly disturbing because when I look at the huge difference between the two versions, I can’t help but conclude that there’s an effort in hand to lull American viewers into an uninformed, though more entertained and distracted, state. The difference between how CNNI looks at what’s going on Iraq, compared to how domestic CNN looks at it, is only one vivid example. Really, if y’all haven’t seen the difference for yourselves, I think you’d be stunned at just how striking it is.

Dare I conclude that a conscious decision to “soften” the news for American viewers has been made, in the guise of “giving the viewers what they want”? Sure looks like that to me!

Thanks, again, Kuya, learned something new again from you.

mike, I’m sure you won’t be surprised when I mention how pronounced these differences have seemed since Sep. 2001, and even more so (dude!!) since March 2003. I will admit my own “radar” for evaluating news has been more sensitive since these dates, but my question to CNN (not rhetorical!) is, why the huge difference?

Hoping to foster docility, perhaps? I can’t think of a single other motivation that would adequately explain.

Personally, I go to Google’s online news page for most of my news. It can be a little time consuming to dig around among all the sources that contribute, but at least I get some breadth in my news. Al-Jazeera, Int’l Herald-Trib, Monsters & Critics, WSJ, Christian Science Monitor, BBC, many local newspapers’ online editions, Fox, VOA, Xinhua, and even good ol’ CNN’s online version plus (so Google asserts) more than 4000 other possible sources. Ain’t perfect, and there is still garbage to wade through, but it liberates me from the factor of TV/CATV ratings as a filter of what I’m looking at. When I want news, I really don’t give a damn what the ratings per channel may be, don’t even want to take it into consideration or worry that some unknown program manager may have had to do so, under instruction from his or her executive board.

Thanks again, Kuya, for the refs and update, will check them out. Your
take here seems right on target.

All of the cable outlets mine bleeder stories, so CNN can hardly be singled out.  Cable “news” is really entertainment anyway, and the bleeders are what most people want.  Those who watch Nancy Grace more than once already know she’s the Bleeder Queen of Cable, and she brings her own razor.  What I can’t stomach about CNN is Glenn Beck.  Lou Dobbs talks about nothing but outsourcing / illegal aliens, so you can turn off the sound and know what he’s saying, but Beck’s hobby horse is war with Iran.  Now THAT is something to blame CNN for. When I see his name in the info bar, I surf past CNN2 so fast I never have to see his disgusting, smirky face.

Ever notice how all neocons have smirking faces ? Bush for instance.

I rather like Glenn Beck, actually.  He’s a conservative, sure, but then many more people in the U.S. identify themselves as conservative than they do liberal, so what’s the big surprise?

I don’t think it’s accurate to say that Glenn advocates war with Iran, but he is a strong voice saying that we need to wake up and realize the danger that Iran (the leadership, not the people) poses to world security and stability.  I don’t think too many people disagree with that general feeling.

They (the leadership, not the people) held Americans hostage for over a year back in 1979.  They’re almost certainly on a path toward violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N.  They (the leadership, not the people) advocate an end to Israel daily, and threaten this country with death to boot.

Just recently, they kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters, and are now proceeding to parade them for the cameras against that sacred Geneva Convention.  Yes, I think we need to pay attention to people like this.

I find Beck to be a refreshing voice, one who is not scared to say what needs to be said.  He is happy to sit down with Al Sharpton, for example, for the entire hour, and discuss a variety of issues in an extremely good natured and respectful manner.

As for CNN and all the cable news shows generally, I can’t for the life of me understand how that many people can possibly be interested in Anna Nicole, the gal lost in Aruba, or Britney’s baldness night after night after night.

Glenn Beck however seems to generally steer clear of this kind of fluff.  He strikes me much more as a right vs. wrong kind of guy, instead of the tired old unproductive right vs. left variety.

Hi Natalie! How are you? Still selling (or buying?) snake oil?

“kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters, and are now proceeding to parade them for the cameras ”

They were detained, not kidnapped. Otherwise Guantanamo is full of kidnapping victims. Yes?
I would also remind you that CNN (and others) have shown video of ‘detainees’ on parade as well.

And whose water it is has NOT been proven to my satisfaction. For instance ...

“The Iran/Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British Government,”

“Those red lines going out to sea have just been invented by the British Government.”

“This published boundary is a fake with no legal force,”

“They are not internationally recognised, they are not the subject of any international treaty.”

“Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the (Persian) Gulf,”

“So, the British Government, I’m perfectly prepared to believe, the coordinates of where it happened, but there’s no way of telling if those are Iranian or Iraqi waters because they are disputed.”

“If you measure the precise coordinate it is actually closer to Iranian land than it is to Iraqi land, which is an interesting fact.”

“I really don’t think it helps for us to be saying this was clearly Iraqi water when everyone knows this is subject to an international maritime dispute, it will just put the Iranian backs up further.”

-- Craig Murray - former head of Britain’s Foreign Office’s maritime section

“almost certainly on a path toward violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N”

Iran is NOT violating the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. There is no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons except hearsay from people who are proven liars. And other countries, like the USA and Israel for instance, thumb their nose at the UN.

“advocate an end to Israel daily, and threaten this country with death to boot. ”

Please ... spare me. They, Iran and Israel, threaten each other every day. And twice on Sundays.

“we need to wake up and realize the danger that Iran (the leadership, not the people) poses to world security and stability. I don’t think too many people disagree with that general feeling.”

Don’t forget the danger that the United States of America poses to world security and stability.
I think that many people agree with that general feeling.
US ‘biggest global peace threat’

They were detained, not kidnapped. Otherwise Guantanamo is full of kidnapping victims. Yes?  I would also remind you that CNN (and others) have shown video of ‘detainees’ on parade as well.

If you like “detained” better, that’s fine.  The difference between uniformed soldiers operating under an identifiable banner, and unidentifiable enemy combatants as it relates to the Geneva convention is apparently lost on you. The difference between the actual captors parading their prisoners (detainees does sound much nicer), and a private media outlet showing the fact that the captors are doing this, is also apparently lost on you.  Last time I checked, CNN doesn’t take hostages, or capture anyone, although judging from his deep forehead lines, I’m suspicious that Anderson Cooper is reporting the news under duress.

And whose water it is has NOT been proven to my satisfaction. For instance ...

“This published boundary is a fake with no legal force,”
”They are not internationally recognised, they are not the subject of any international treaty.”
“Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the (Persian) Gulf,”
“So, the British Government, I’m perfectly prepared to believe, the coordinates of where it happened, but there’s no way of telling if those are Iranian or Iraqi waters because they are disputed.”

The question that comes to mind....If this is all so disputed and undecided, then how and why are the Iranians so sure that they were in their waters?  They claim to know exactly where the boundary was.  The next question that comes to mind is why you would choose to take the word of oppressive thugs over that of polite to a fault, tea-sipping Britons?

Kaiyan Kaikobad is a professor of international law at Durham University in Britain who has advised the United Nations and written extensively about Persian Gulf maritime disputes.  He notes that Iran and Iraq have still not agreed on a formal maritime boundary in that area where the Shatt-al-Arab flows into the Gulf......

......Kaiyan Kaikobad says that even if British craft had strayed into what Iran claims as its waters, under international law, Iran had no right to seize the sailors.

“Even if a naval vessel, a warship, from Iraq or from the United Kingdom strays into Iranian territory by mistake, even if that is the case, you can’t arrest it,” he said.  “You can’t board that craft.  All that you do is you can ask that vessel, ‘we want you to leave.’ You can persevere in that.  But you can’t go about arresting them.  You can’t go about keeping their people in captivity.”

So yes, they were detained if you prefer.  But it certainly looks like they were detained illegally.  I still think kidnapped works better.

“violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N”
Iran is NOT violating the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. There is no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons except hearsay from people who are proven liars. And other countries, like the USA and Israel for instance, thumb their nose at the UN.

Actually, my wording that you selectively used was:

“They’re almost certainly on a path toward violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N.”

I did not say that they were violating the treaty.

However, I’m at a loss as to why they refuse to allow UN nuclear inspectors in to verify what they and you claim so adamantly.  Help me to understand just what makes these goon’s word so golden to you.

If Iran hasn’t thumbed its nose at the U.N., I fail to understand the justification for the sanctions against them, or why they expanded their uranium enrichment program in response to them.  I don’t believe that Israel or the U.S. has any U.N. sanctions imposed on them, but I guess I could be wrong on that. I regularly thumb my nose at the UN myself, so you may have a point.

“advocate an end to Israel daily, and threaten this country with death to boot.”
Please ... spare me. They, Iran and Israel, threaten each other every day. And twice on Sundays.

The difference between calling for, and urging crowds of thousands to chant “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” and legitimate defensive actions against such fervent wishes is apparently lost on you as well.

Don’t forget the danger that the United States of America poses to world security and stability.  I think that many people agree with that general feeling.

Yes, and I remember the same kind of world opinion regarding Ronald Reagan’s stance against communist aggression.  He turned out to be right, and leftist inspired and ginned up world opinion was wrong.  Now, most except the stubborn fringe left look back and admit that.  So much for the value of “world opinion”.

How odd that you’d side with a bunch of fundamentalist fascists, David.  It just seems so unlike you.  I wager that the average Iranian on the street would be disappointed by your attitude against the country they largely adore, and in favor of the Mullahs they largely despise.

Here’s someone who agrees with you.  At least you don’t still subscribe to the sheer lunacy near the end of the clip.

Prez of Iran is refreshing, his holocaust revisionist conference was the best thing to happen in that region for 30 years. Many neoconwomen like Natalie are still trying the old anti-A-Rab line even though Iran is Persian, not Arab. Natalie, if AIPAC gets us into a war with Iran you are not going to believe the reaction against yo’ peepul that will happen here. Maybe they are not foreskinned but they better be forewarned.

“they kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters”

So ... we agree that they have detained the British soldiers that were clearly in waters whose boundaries are disputed ? Yes? Much better, Natalie, thanks for the clarification.

I did not say that they were violating the treaty.

And I did not say “you” did ... I ... (that’s me) ... stated that they were not violating the treaty. Come on, Natalie, you can do better than that! And your attempts to make it appear my words supported the actions of the Iranian government are equally lame.

“almost certainly ”

So ... we agree that almost certainly is an exaggeration based on the proof at hand and seems like support for fundamentalist fascists of a different color (red, white and blue)? Yes? Again, my thanks for the clarification.

They all look like Sneetches in Fascist Breetches to me.

Hi Natalie. What happened? Did Honest Joe go back to the asylum? I think you’ll find your snake oil is a much harder sell in most of the other forums but I hope you do try. Imagine the problems Iran could cause us in Iraq, just when we’ve got things going so well there. Better check the rust on our over used saber before suggesting more ‘rattling’ anywhere.

Great post David. Make an honest woman of her-get her to confess she’s a paid hack for the 4 horsemen, betting on total devastation to win, place, and show.

Natalie, please don’t support the warmongering of your nation.
Please ... for the good of your soul!

What’s your opinion on the Iraq war these days, Natalie?
Is there a war you don’t like?

Do the good guys always win?
Will they have stars on their bellies or no?

Are you a Yook or a Zook?
Do you butter your bread butter-side up or butter it butter-side down?

“they kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters”
So ... we agree that they have detained the British soldiers that were clearly in waters whose boundaries are disputed ? Yes? Much better, Natalie, thanks for the clarification.

Very well David, I was not aware that the boundaries were disputed.  Regardless, it still appears that the Iranian action was against international law.  Can we agree on that?  And no, I don’t think we necessarily know all the particulars about what SOP may have been in place, even temporarily, for those operating in those waters. 

I did not say that they were violating the treaty.
And I did not say “you” did ... I ... (that’s me) ... stated that they were not violating the treaty. Come on, Natalie, you can do better than that!

You reproduced my sentence out of context, making it appear that I was saying that they HAD violated the treaty.  Then you immediately proceeded to state with much confidence that they HAVEN’T violated the treaty.  So what’s the reader to think?  And what in the world makes you so sure that they haven’t?  Do you have a secret source inside Iran?  I hope you’re right, but I’m fully expecting, based on events and on their behavior, that one of these months they’ll announce that they’ve gone nuclear, and are withdrawing from any international agreements and treaties.

And your attempts to make it appear my words supported the actions of the Iranian government are equally lame.

Well when you define the Britons as detainees, when they were taken illegally, and you construct an equivalency between the Iranians and CNN in the showing of hostages on TV, and you give the benefit of the doubt to them on matters of nuclear issues after they’ve illegally held Americans for 444 days, blocked inspections of their facilities, and held holocaust denial conventions featuring David Duke, excuse me for assuming that you in effect are supportive of the actions of the Iranian govt.  I’m relieved to see that you aren’t, and I apologize for misinterpreting your position.

Natalie, please don’t support the warmongering of your nation.
Please ... for the good of your soul!

Now you’re misrepresenting MY position.  I’ve never said I support war with Iran. I don’t think it’d be wise.  I support a strong and united stance by the world that will force them to open their facilities to inspectors.  I support the eventual overthrow of those few a##holes who oppress their people, by those people. But how in the world are we ever going to get anywhere with these stubborn intransigents, who as far as I can see have NO desire to meet anyone halfway, if we adopt your lamb-like attitude.

Where would we be in this world if we’d taken that attitude during WWII?  Certainly you wouldn’t be free to farm in peace and type away to the rest of the world on your computer that you can regularly replace with one twice as good for half the price.  They’re confiscating satellite dishes in Iran, and restricting and censoring the Internet.

Nobody wants war, but you can’t just withdraw from the world and expect those bent on controlling people to suddenly change.  That’s a Dr. Seuss dream world, not reality.

The British Sneetches do have stars on their bellies. The Iranians are treating them like plain bellied Sneetches who have non upon thars.  And you seem to want to just accept it, excuse it, read children’s books and soul search.

What an utterly strange holier than thou post, Arpie, coming from someone who couldn’t for a time quite decide whether or not his own govt used explosives to bring down the WTC towers.

I’m reluctant to trust your take on saber oxidation and honesty.

Hi Natalie, I am happy to see you agree that whose water it is does not seem to be so clear as you first asserted. And yes I would agree that it is possible that the Iranian government’s detention of these British soldiers is a violation of international law. (Now the US/UK invasion of Iraq ... that was a violation of international law. Yes? Was it a wise war? And in retrospect?)

I did not reproduce your sentence out of context, Natalie. Perhaps I added to the context by pointing out a point you had perhaps forgotten. Your sentence was carefully constructed to make it appear that Iran is almost certainly on a path to violating international agreements etc. I disagree and responded that Iran is not violating the NPT and evidence of nuclear weapon development is hearsay and from many of the same liars who lied their way into the Iraq war. If Iran does decide to withdraw from the NPT, as is their right, I won’t be too concerned. As I said (and seemingly many in the world agree) I am more concerned with the warmongering and nuclear weaponry (consisting of the invasion of Iraq and use of depleted uranium munitions and the threat of a nuclear attack option against Iran) of the United States of America and it’s allies.

Thanks for the apology, Natalie. It seems I owe you one too.

I am very happy to see you do not support an attack on Iran. Good for you, Natalie! Again ... I apologize for misrepresenting your position. I hope that Iran, and all countries, would be honest and open about their nuclear intentions and capabiltites. And I certainly hope Iran’s government finishes the parade and releases the British soldiers soon too. But most of all I hope that the USA does not attack another country and kill hundreds of thousands more innocent people.

But I disagree with your statement that nobody wants war . It certainly appears that some people do want war despite their protestations to the contrary. But not you, Natalie.

Happily, Natalie, I can withdraw from the world and enjoy Dr. Seuss dream worlds.
There is much to learn from it and it’s good for the soul.

I realize that the Sneetches are treating one another differently and that’s the point.
Regardless of a star on our belly or not.
We are all Sneetches!

What an utterly strange holier than thou post, Arpie, coming from someone who couldnt for a time quite decide whether or not his own govt used explosives to bring down the WTC towers. Im reluctant to trust your take on saber oxidation and honesty.

Heh Heh. Holier than thou? Now Natalie, surely you remember Im an atheist. I notice as usual you didnt touch the pertinent question; what will happen in Iraq if we attack Iran? Do you think we have a
workable game plan for that? Now try and focus N, and answer that question first before trying to undermine the questioner. Betcha cant do it, and count on me to call you on it when you do!

Yes some of the conspiracy arguments did seem worth looking into and Im still far from certain our government wasnt involved on some level. Several of my questions and those of others you never answered, and 40% in polls agree with Joe. But I stated at the start of entering that insane little dance you and Joe conducted for how many reply pages?-at LEAST 20-that I had serious doubts. Comes from keeping an open mind N, and not putting blind faith in the government-especially this administration.

Regarding taking my tarnished credibility-I did argue with you in Faith so I agree its questionable- about the condition of our saber, you neednt take my word. Both the links below-and you can find thousands on Google-quote government and military officials regarding the crisis in both troops and equipment. Take your pick. Post some that say the opposite. I couldnt find any. And just wait for when other countries like Brazil to our south start alliances with Iran. Saber Crisis

70% in one European poll picked this country as the greatest threat to world peace. Too bad they just dont understand-ours is the rusted saber of righteousness! Keep singin the my country right or wrong tune along with Bush, and maybe we can convince that other 30 %. Retainment Crisis

Kudos once again David. We have to really hold Ns feet to the fire with her famous tactic of ignoring questions she cant answer without contradicting herself. As youve seen, shes big on newspeak, and obfuscation. What doesnt ring true is those with her perspective arent generally prone to volunteering time. Dedicated capitalist want capital for any effort. Wonder who pays for all the time she spends writing here and on other forums?

ANYWAY...Getting back to the issue of why CNN is such a Crappy “News” Network, the reason for its downfall is that its acronymn should be “LNN” (lazy news network), or GNN (gossip news network) or RNN (repeat news network).  It seems as though CNN has become so comfortable with its status as the “leader” of cable news that it has just stop trying to make a difference, be provacative, unique or relevant.  All it gives is cookie cutter news and FOX does THAT better.

It’s LNN because its reporting is inexcusably lazy.  It just trots out the same type of stale stories hour after hour after hour, day in day out , month after month, year after year.  The teleprompter reading “anchors” just mouth the same text over and over again.  No attempt to find a new or fresh angle for their stories or provide any depth to their reporting is made.  Quality interviews are rare because CNN refuses to devote sufficient time to actual news segments due to its preference for entertainment and light (feel good) stories over hard news.

It is “GNN” because it relies on news “personalities” such as Carol Costello and Kelly (What’s her face) Arena whose “reporting” has all the professionalism of the conversations held over backyard fence or at the office water cooler.  Even “ace journalist” Anderson Cooper leans heavily toward a gossipy/petty style of reporting. CNN has become so “influential” that it has all the “right contacts” and “inside sources” among the powerful elite and the timidity that produces shows in its reporting.  If what’s going on at CNN is any indication, the era of journalistic independence is a thing of the distant past. 

Did anyone check out the recent banquet in DC with all the reporters on stage goofing with Carl Rove?  It was all just a little too chummy and I’m sure only a glimpse of what really goes on when the cameras aren’t filming.  For all of its allegedly aggressive “investigative reporting”, CNN tends to focus on soft targets who can’t fight back or powerful targets who have already been brought low.  Talk about taking fruit from the low hanging branches…

It is Repeat news network because it cycles the exact same stories.  The main CNN network is obviously bad, but Headline News is especially bad.  It appears that the first news cycle is taped with a live anchor and is just rerun.  You can tell that the anchor is not live because all the gestures, stupid jokes and comments are the same hour after hour after hour.  But it doesn’t stop there, the main CNN network doesn’t even pretend to have live news coverage between midnight and 6am as it just repeats Larry King “Live” and Anderson Cooper 360.  Apparently, nothing of significance happens in the world during the late night hours worthy of a live anchored broadcast, so why bother. 

Whatever independence and outsider edginess CNN had when it started is COMPLETELY gone.  It’s now just a corporate hack tool of the establishment.

Gigi

Heh Heh. Holier than thou? Now Natalie, surely you remember Im an atheist. I notice as usual you didnt touch the pertinent question; what will happen in Iraq if we attack Iran? Do you think we have a
workable game plan for that? Now try and focus N, and answer that question first before trying to undermine the questioner. Betcha cant do it, and count on me to call you on it when you do!

Well so am I, hence it becomes simply a figure of speech now doesn’t it?  You come on and quite comically accuse me of peddling “snake oil”, and yet you are the one who was seduced by all the 9/11 hogwash.  AND, it appears you’re STILL not completely over your virus yet:

“Yes some of the conspiracy arguments did seem worth looking into and Im still far from certain our government wasnt involved on some level.”

Perhaps you didn’t complete your antibiotic regimen.

Then you simply assume, without evidence, that I surely would like to see us invade Iran, simply because I, like Glenn Beck and many people, view Iran as a serious troublemaker, and a potentially devastating threat to free nations everywhere, and that we should recognize and understand the true ambitions of the leadership, and work to find ways, hopefully short of military action, of bringing about their demise.

Along with the demise of freedom-squelching tyrants everywhere.

I don’t think that ANYONE thinks that “invading” Iran would be a good idea, or is a desirable course of action.  I don’t think that ANYONE doesn’t think that they could and would do a lot of (further) damage to our efforts in Iraq if we did.

However, the lay down and submit crowd would have us do nothing less than promise that we would never do it.  I can’t think of a better way of emboldening and encouraging them to continue their destabilizing ways in Iraq, Lebanon, and even North Korea.  Only a foolish and declining nation takes the possibility off the table.

As for our “saber”, there is no doubt we’ve stretched our military beyond what is comfortable.  There’s also no doubt that the lay down and submit crowd is always eager to let everyone know the details of it, along with every other strategic secret we may have.

Consider the possibility however, that what you read in the paper may not necessarily be entirely true.  We all know it wouldn’t be the first time.  Iran knows better than to take American hostages, doesn’t it?  At least under this President.  Perhaps they know something the WaPo doesn’t.

Sleep with one eye open, Mr. Mullah.

Natalie, you are the same LYING ugly old HOLOHOAX mongering whore and Israeli disinformation agent.  Simply a repeat of your lying Iraq campaign. If you AIPAC traitors compound the Iraq fiasco with Iran you bastards better sleep with BOTH eyes open.

Oh yes Natalie, I’m sure the Iranians are really frightened after seeing how well we made Iraq and Afghanistan bend to our will. Iran’s land area and population is only three times that of Iraq, and they have many Shiite pals not only in Iraq but throughout the gulf region. Heard anything about the price of oil lately?

CNN is like the rest of the media-it gives people the news they want to watch. People may not know who Alberto Gonzales is, but they all know Paris Hilton or Nicole Smith. Who’s responsibility is that?

Who do you think is really responsible for bringing down the WTC towers on 9/11, Blondie?

I need to know this for my records.

TIA

Just as soon as the Iranians take American hostages again I’ll agree with you Eric, that they really aren’t “frightened” of us.

My point is why work so hard to convince them that they shouldn’t be afraid.  If they were reasonable, responsible leaders, that would be entirely appropriate.  However, they’re brainwashed fundamentalist nut-cases and any show of weakness only emboldens them to carry out nuttier and more dangerous actions.

CNN being mostly populated by liberals, and having a mostly liberal audience, presents news that liberals mostly want to hear.

Fox does the opposite.

And of course we all apparently are interested in Paris, Anna, and Britney.

Yo’ ugly mama, Natalie. CNN is no more “liberal” than Fox and most rightists like myself OPPOSE Bush and neocon blowjobers like you.

Yo’ ugly mama, Natalie. CNN is no more “liberal” than Fox and most rightists like myself OPPOSE Bush and neocon blowjobers like you.

Uh huh, uh huh.

And the towers?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Why does CNN suck?  Because they don’t emulate the fair and unbiased practices of their fellow journalists in Iran, who manage to print news in defiance of any and all govt. and corporate influence.

British Marines Enjoying So-Called Captivity
TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- “The first independent news source of Iran.”

While British Prime Minister Tony Blair still makes wrathful statements about the TV interviews of his country’s marines, the latest series of photographs released by FNA display that British troops are enjoying their ideal conditions in Iran.

Today’s photographs show that the British troops are having fruit and coffee, speaking to each other, playing chess and on the whole spending their desirable leisure time in Iran instead of serving missions in the cumbersome conditions of the Persian Gulf.

The 15 detainees, including 8 sailors and 7 British marines, were arrested by Iran’s boarder guards on 23 of March, 2007.

In interviews broadcast by Iran’s state-run TV, 4 of the said troops explicitly acknowledged that they had trespassed on Iran’s waters and apologized to the Iranian nation for their intrusion.

[wait guys....those waters are disputed.....how do you know you were in Iranian waters?  They could have been Iraqi waters.]

Meantime, the data and information extracted from the Global Positioning System (GPS) of the British troops substantiate their illegal entry into Iranian waters.

[Oh, that’s how.  GPS.  But....the waters are still disputed, right?  So..... never mind.]

Despite allegation by some western media that the marines had made the confessions under duress, photographs, specially those taken today, prove that the British troops have acknowledged to their guilt freely and under an open atmosphere.

[pictures don’t lie, ya know]

In the same interviews, the British marines said that they understand Iranian nation’s anger at the action, and advised London to give up unfounded claims and extend formal apology to Iran instead.

In clear reference to the improper statements of the British Prime Minister, Iranian First Vice-President Parviz Dawoodi Tuesday morning stressed that the issue of the marines would not be solved in the near future if Britain continues making hue and cry.

CNN!  Take a page!

Consider the treatment the British sailors and marines are receiving. Note the smiling faces and relaxed atmosphere with food and flowers and compare it to the way detainees are treated at Abu Ghraib Prison and Guantanamo Detainment Camp.

I guess that would make sense if polite, tea-drinking law-abiding uniformed soldiers operating under UN mandate and illegally taken hostage were in the same category as non-uniformed, fascist wack-jobs taking pot-shots at, and blowing up into little pieces, Iraqi, U.S., British, and other nation’s soldiers, and innocent civilians all over the world.

But the point was really just how unbiased and independent the Iranian media is.  Surely CNN would improve its standing if it could manage to do even half the job these intrepid writers and photographers do.

I think I’ve figured out the criteria the Iranians use for determining their maritime boundaries.  They’re officially defined as running exactly 25’ the other side any foreign ship at any time Iranians choose to intervene.

That was easy!

I guess that would make sense if ...

Treating people with respect and dignity always makes sense.

But the point was really just how unbiased and independent ...

I agree that the Iranian media is biased but I see the same bias from the media of any country.

For example, if CNN (or BBC) was less biased perhaps instead of repeating ad nauseum Tony Blair’s assertion that “they were in Iraqi waters” perhaps they could report that the waters are disputed. Instead of repeating ad nauseum that the soldiers were “under a UN mandate” they could report that the mandate does not extend into the territorial waters of Iran and as these boundaries are disputed it may not be so clear as to if they were “illegally” captured (by the way, Natalie, I think the use of “hostage” is an unfair characterization).

I think I’ve figured out the criteria ...

Yeah ... that sounds like the same type of half assed criteria the USA uses when it decides which country to shock and awe back to the stone age.

Actually David, I believe that the vast majority of the Afghan and Iraqi populations were pretty damn happy to see their oppressors shocked and awed back to the stone age.

The problem arose when a relative few of those fascist wack-jobs I was talking about refused to share in that happiness.

The US bears responsibility for not sufficiently foreseeing and planning for this, but let’s not make like CNN and leave out this portion of the context.

“Treating people with respect and dignity always makes sense.”

Tell that to people who truly need to hear it.  Sure, there are a few isolated instances of abuse by US and British forces, but it’s hardly their SOP. 

Hundreds of millions of innocent people were murdered by totalitarian govts. in the twentieth century.  Most committed by us, and you, were an unfortunate and necessary by-product of the effort to stop them.

You’ve got your demons out of order.

“Hostage” is entirely appropriate.  They were taken illegally, and are being held against their will, until supposedly certain conditions are met by the British Govt.

“I agree that the Iranian media is biased but I see the same bias from the media of any country.”

The same bias?  You continue to construct these ridiculous equivalencies.  Ours and yours is truly an independent media, fluff and ratings aside.  They are entirely free to publish and show whatever they want, within the bounds of common decency.  I hope you know that the reports coming from Iranian media are a product of something much more influential than simple, relatively harmless bias.

Nice of you sitting on your ass over here to decide which people thousands of miles away are happy to be bombed but the evidence doesn’t support you. The Iraqis are far worse off in every way because of our invasion and now we have alienated so many Afghanis that the Taliban controls much of the country again and will get even more. As far as the Brits in Iranian waters, they were properly arrested and they have no right to be in Iraqi waters either. Be careful of that hundreds of millions argument, we know the whole holocaust legend is a hoax unto its very name, Jews did not die en masse by fire and not by gas chambers & not systematically & not even a million, much less six million, have given numerous refs on this board elsewhere, and we do know that the US state killed four million in Indochina, millions more by proxy states from Indonesia to Guatemala to South Africa to Zaire, etc. William Blum’s CIA is a good work here. There were tens of millions killed by Mao and Stalin but then the US is responsible for tens of millions of black slave and Indian deaths.  Nor was WW2 ever fought to stop any deaths, it made possible many more deaths because it cut off avenues of flight and we in fact turned back Jews from here. So don’t hand us the BS line about fighting to save lives, we never have nor has anyone else either. The “isolated” incidents of US-UK atrocities and lesser acts short of that ARE SOP as Guantanamo shows in spades and again as our history does for hundreds of years. Don’t bother trying to peddle that Made in Israel rat poison here but no one is buying it, including many of us who radically disagree with each other on many issues. Go back to the Mossad, your odor betrays you.

I retract the word same and extend the word different .
So my words should read “a different bias” .
Thanks for the correction, Natalie.

Different.  As in completely fabricated and state-dictated as opposed to however a free media organization chooses to describe it and interpret it.

Different is accurate, but far from sufficiently descriptive.
Detainee is accurate, but far from conveying the full context.

I made a correction too.  The U.S. doesn’t “bare” responsibility, they “bear” responsibility.  D’oh!

Go back to the Mossad, your odor betrays you.

not even a million, much less six million he says.  Odor indeed.

What is fabricated and state dictated , Natalie?
What is sufficiently descriptive ?
What is context ?

The smiles (and smirks) on their faces?

Do you think after the photo opportunity that the evil Iranians took that bowl of fruit (I saw the bananas!) on the table and tortured the detainees in horrible and terrible ways?

This morning I was watching CNN (it does suck) and they announced that the 15 British sailors and marines are being released.

Too bad, the Brits are war criminals.

Natalie-This will be my last reply on this or other topics to you, and I would strongly recommend other users here follow suit. Here’s why. Paid or not, Natalie is clearly a spokesperson for nearly all that the majority of users on ITT find offensive about the attitudes and body politic in this country. Like most of her ilk, she is weak on history and primarily a one-trick pony. Notice how she inevitably keeps bringing up 9/11 though that is not the subject here. She will also avoid responding when she can find no rationale for her position in reply.

Many click on ITT to read the articles, but I suspect not 100 people a day read any of these discussions. So what’s the point of responding to someone like Natalie? You know you will never change anything about her myopic world view or any of the tiny number of similar non-thinkers who come here by accident. These folks are not big readers. So if anyone can explain the point in engaging her here and creating a platform for more one sided propaganda from the right, please do so. She actually sees CNN as being a bastion of liberals, in the name of Allah. Natalie, there IS no real liberal media in the U.S. by international standards. The on-air debate here is between the extreme right and the lunatic fringe right, period.

“Sure, there are a few isolated instances of abuse by US and British forces, but it’s hardly their SOP.”-

Have you heard it mentioned in all the 15 sailors brouhaha about all the Iranians we have illegally detained in Iraq, including 5 diplomatic officials? Well, just before the release was announced this morning it appears we finally decided to allow the Iranian Embassy folks to see them. So maybe the Iranians had to break international law-assuming the sailors were in Iraqi waters-had to break international law in order to force us to marginally comply with it?

In 1953 we and the British orchestrated a coup to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and inserted the Shah-remember him?-into power. We have done this all over the world where popular leaders couldn’t be bribed or threatened to bow to our economic interests as opposed to those who elected them. This is certainly nothing new, and goes back to our dealings with Mexico, France, and leaders of the native tribes. This country was founded, as were nearly all others, through force and exploitation.

“Only a foolish and declining nation takes the possibility off the table.”

You made our case here, Natalie. We were certainly foolish to Invade Iraq, and by any and all measurements we are in decline-or perhaps free-fall. Our economy could be shut down tomorrow by communist China not buying anymore of out increasing debt, and you think we are in a position NOW to threaten Iran? Ah yes, then there’s the matter of the only WMDs old Saddam ever had-the ones we gave him to use on Iran!

David-I know this is a position change for me, and I was previously delighted to see you refute Natalies illogical rants. But if you can see a reason to give her further time here in debate, I’d like to read it, and please address each of the points I made above. Dont you dare Nat me, heeheheh. Focus all your attention on the discussions with those from whom you can attain new insights and ideas. Nothing to be gained by taking her on. Leave her to Mike. If he cant dissuade her nobody can.-Arpie

Arpie, although I respect your opinion I must disagree.

Natalie has as much right to participate in these discussions as anyone. If nothing else her commentary provides a contrast by which we develop and improve our own commentary. So, you see, having a discussion with Natalie does help me attain new insights and ideas.

Beyond that ... Natalie and I are old friends. If I ignored her I am afraid her feelings might be hurt. And out of my concern for her, and others like her, I feel compelled to encourage them to overcome a lifetime of patriotically pathologic indoctrination.

Thanks David, you are truly a nice guy, although I don’t think the leadership in Iran deserves as much benefit of the doubt as you think they do.

I hope you are right, and that they don’t break their promise not to develop nuclear weapons, and that they’ll see fit to enable the world to verify this.  Iran’s people are truly wonderful, as I’ve met a few of them who were engineering students of my dad, and it saddens me to hear about the oppression that apparently is regularly carried out by the leadership.

I’m glad the hostages er..uh… detainees have been freed, er...uh...had their status changed, and I hope that they will be free and/or willing to share exactly what went on with regards to exactly who’s idea it was to say what they said on Iranian TV.  Unfortunately, it may be part of the agreement that they must stay quiet.  (just a guess....Pres. A. seemed a bit uncomfortable about what they might say)

I guess I see things quite a bit differently than most of you.  I see millions of peace-loving ordinary people and families being oppressed and denied modern standards of living by a very few power-hungry dictators, and religious extremist brain-washers.  Although the situation in Iraq is not pretty as of late, I have a more long-term opinion that the era of Arab non-democracy is at the beginning of its end, and that the Iraq invasion will eventually be viewed as a turning point.

Perhaps I’m completely wrong, but in terms of the timeline necessary for nations to transform and develop, it’s still early in the game.

I believe in the empowerment of ordinary people to be able to vote for their leaders in truly fair elections, not like the unanimous one for Saddam Hussein or Yasser Arafat, and not like the one in Iran where the Mullahs have the power to select the candidates.  I believe in the open flow of information, like what is happening now in Iraq between bombings, and like what has been trying to flower in Iran but is now unfortunately being restricted and destroyed. I believe that people will tend to vote for who is most likely to help bring peace and properity to their everyday, ordinary lives, if they are able to vote.

I understand that the U.S., Britain and others have done some things in the past that have worked to bring about some of the trouble we see today.  However, there’s also been a heap of good done, without which the world would likely be an extremely dark and hopeless place today for millions upon millions of average, everyday, ordinary formerly American and Canadian Sneetches, both star-bellied and plain.

David-You actually Nated me!! This is what happens when you hang with the wrong people. First, I never said or insinuated that Natalie didn’t have the right to participate here. Perish the thought. In fact, I will even still read her delusions just to see how the die hard my country right or wrongers are trying to spin things these days. I’m merely pointing out it’s a waste of time trying to engage her in logical debate, and self defeating.

Not only does this take away time you could be using to post more of your thoughts on faith in Human, we are affected by those we associate with. If you read my last reply again then look at yours, you will see similarities to how Natalie responds. Show me where I said she shoudnt be allowed or didnt have the right to post here? Show me where you answered my query as to the futility of creating-with your replies-a platform for her disinformation, or justify the time spent. Learn something? Old friends? Be real David. I thought it was intriguing she would keep responding to Joe’s rants in Faith. Now that I have seen her views on a wider range of issues its pretty clear Natalie is more than just misguided. She has sufficient intelligence to see beyond her right-eous blinders, but her hypocrisy will never let that happen. Being up north you may not be familiar with this type. I am. If she ever acknowledged the larger international reality it would destroy her with self loathing. She has no comprehension of what this country really stands for; unbridled self gratification and damn the consequences. That’s basically why humans form countries, and the most powerful are generally the most obnoxious.

Anyway, if you wish to waste time-go for it. Amusing to read. David doing his online rendition of the visiting orator at the asylum for the deaf and the dumb.

You know Arpie, when you poked your nose into the conspiracy “discussion”, and were trying to find answers to all your questions, I was polite and directed you to where you could find the answers.  You were still confused, didn’t know what side to take, and then started playing the referee between me and Joe.  I continued to treat you with respect, I thought, pretty much, although I was starting to get annoyed with your jumping from one side to the other, declaring one round lost and one round won, and coming off like the smartest person in the room by finally declaring me the winner and that indeed, Steven Jones was a kook.  Well, DUH.  And you have the temerity to address me and my grasp of reality with words and phrases like “logical debate”, “delusion”, “disinformation”, “misguided”, “sufficient intelligence”, “blinders”, “dumb” and above all, “hypocrisy”?

Gosh, I even thanked you for calling the match in my favor.

Then you implored us to stop the discussion, shut it down, game over, listen the the Ref, darn it!!!  Give it up Joe, stop responding, Natalie.

And now you start berating me here, simply for not agreeing that the U.S. is the root of all evil in the world, or that the Iranian leadership is on the same moral plane as us and the Brits, and then start appealing to others regarding how you think I should be responded to, or not at all.

What extraordinarily strange behavior.

“I never said or insinuated that Natalie didn’t have the right to participate here.”
“Show me where I said she shouldn’t be allowed or didnt have the right to post here?”

Arpie, maybe its just semantics then;

“This will be my last reply on this or other topics to you [Nat], and I would strongly recommend other users here follow suit.”

Sounds to me like you are trying to deny her participation by boycotting any dialogue with her and encouraging others to the same (much the same way that the USA treats Iran). Technically not denying the right to comment here but certainly seeking to leave Natalie talking to herself and feeling isolated. How does that help?

“Show me where you answered my query as to the futility of creating-with your replies-a platform for her disinformation, or justify the time spent.”

Natalie is on her soapbox and I am on mine. For the reasons I explained earlier I do not think it’s futile or a waste of time. Frankly, I think it is time spent in a worthwhile pursuit.

And don’t worry about me associating with the wrong people. Someone I admire spent a fair bit of his time with eating, drinking and talking with tax collectors and prostitutes so I am just following his example and breaking down barriers that separate us.

“I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them”
-- Baruch de Spinoza

Natalie, you are an imbecile recycling old, discredited arguments about some imaginary good the US and UK governments have done, well, they haven’t, neither at home or abroad. Abroad has been a total horror and whatever liberties we have left at home are in spite of the US & UK states.  I have no respect for you or your arguments such as they are.

Thank you for your comments, Blondie.  I felt kind of bad and discouraged, until I remembered what you said before:

“not even a million, much less six million”

...and I was comforted by the realization that you are probably 180 degrees wrong on your above post as well, not to mention everything else you’ve ever said.

What an emotional roller-coaster.

Someone I admire spent a fair bit of his time with eating, drinking and talking with tax collectors and prostitutes so I am just following his example and breaking down barriers that separate us.

He floats like a butterfly, stings like a bee!
Is that you, Muhammad Ali?

;-)

Mike-if she was another of the sites imbeciles I wouldnt have bothered trying to engage her in dialogue in the Faith forum. She is far from that. She has intelligence, but as David said she has a lifetime of patriotically pathologic indoctrination to overcome and the resulting hypocrisy is something I have encountered too often. Fact is, she represents a far higher level of the Rove/Cheney ideological sophistry than one would expect to encounter in a forum such as this and it truly does piss me off by association. That I allow myself to react that way pisses me off even more! You have the energy and verve to keep her in check, and are renowned for your ability to not let things become personal. Dont make my mistake and allow her to drag you into an ad-hom duel. Nail her on the way she uses semantics to skew any logical debate.

“Just when I thought I was getting out, they keep pullin me back in..” David-I agree that what I was suggesting was that she be isolated, as are most Americans-the one country that commandeers the entire hemisphere as its own-who post here within the larger society. Her views represent the vast majority nationwide. As a result they dont even realize how few others on this dying planet share their national self esteem. Note the underlined quote below regarding our moral superiority to the Iranians.

… simply for not agreeing that the U.S. is the root of all evil in the world, that Iran is on the same moral plane as us and the Brits..

You know Arpie, when you poked your nose into the conspiracy discussion

Please also consider her underlined remark above. Doesnt it imply I had no right to enter that thread? When I first posted on this site, I mentioned I wouldnt be doing it much as I didnt believe in singing to the choir. Yet what I have found is that even deferentially presented ideas to those who think like Natalie, on their own turf, can get you not only shunned but banned. Want to bet I couldnt get banned on her home site just through politely presented but well constructed contrary ideas? One of your guru’s many messages that falls short; he never mentions what action should be taken once the other cheek has been turned. At what point does this become not an example of tolerance but a Marx brothers dope slap? I will save that discussion for the Human thread.

I agree I may have been a tad harsh with Natalie encouraging users to shun her. You and others who dont have to live among those such as she perhaps will learn something about how to understand their indoctrinated perspectives via confronting them; as I said before-go for it. Not me. I will engage you and LB on issues of faith, but I am no longer willing to give Jehovah’s Witnesses any of my limited time. Get the connection? -Arpie

Gosh Arpie,

I used to think you might be a somewhat open-minded guy, albeit suffering from a bite from the 9/11 conspiracy bug.

You eventually came to the correct conclusion, but the point is that you even considered it a possibility.  It goes to your willingness to buy into anything that affirms your now obvious world-view, even though presented with all the quality of a supermarket tabloid.  It goes to your ability to discern quality information from ridiculous propaganda and misguided fantasy.

Putting that aside, now you are anything but open-minded.  Now you come off as intolerant and closed minded, someone who just can’t stand to even discuss things with someone who doesn’t happen to share his minority world-view.

Natalie strikes me as a standard neoconman shill, RP. I defer to your greater experience with her but I’ve read nothing original or historically
accurate from her. Her weak comeback when I questioned her bogus
stats and made a passing ref to my dissent from standard “holocaust”
figures confirmed that she’s neocon. The old Right hated FedGov’s domestic and foreign policies. Natalie’s neocon to the core. I’ve never
had much interest in 9-11, chickens coming to roost as a result of 60 years of US foreign policy in the Near East but antiwar.com has had a great deal on the Israeli connection and I wouldn’t doubt it for a split-second.

“Thanks David, you are truly a nice guy, although I don’t think the leadership in Iran deserves as much benefit of the doubt as you think they do.”

Thank you, Natalie. I think that everyone deserves the benfit of the doubt until all doubt is removed.
And even then there is mercy for mistakes and forgiveness for faults.

“confronting them; as I said before-go for it. Not me. I will engage you and LB on issues of faith, but I am no longer willing to give Jehovah’s Witnesses any of my limited time. Get the connection?-Arpie”

Arpie, that’s funny because I do give Jehovah’s Witnesses my time. I have been talking with them for years and the last time I moved they arranged for a different neighbourhood disciple to knock on my door. They like me so much they have asked me to be a guest speaker down at the local Kingdom Hall.

But I do get the connection and understand your point.
See you at the Reclaiming What Makes Us Human thread.

“antiwar.com”

Mike, good site with good information.

I couldn’t agree more when you said “Nice of you sitting on your ass over here to decide which people thousands of miles away are happy to be bombed but the evidence doesn’t support you. The Iraqis are far worse off in every way because of our invasion ...”.
Worth repeating!

My way of joking is to tell the truth. That’s the funniest joke in the world.

-- Muhammad Ali

Mike-you just caught me before going to town. I agree with everything you stated last reply. Make an honest woman of her.

Going to break my vowel not to reply to you this one last time Nat-ocon. I was going to send links to polls showing the citizens of even our closest allies see us as major peace threat, but then remembered you just dismiss any evidence that doesnt support your position so why bother? You say Im closed minded yet continue to bring up my willingness to consider the possibilities regarding a 9/11 conspiracy with every reply.

Yes I have become intolerant of hypocrisy, and my world view regarding the international role of this country is only in a minority IN amerika. Worldwide it is you who are part of a very small and shrinking minority. I am always willing to discuss things with those who do not argue solely from a position of ideological ignorance, and have debated some on ITT. But unlike David I am too familiar with those who share your mindset to believe I have anything to gain by taking the time to write out replies. I will keep reading this thread though, just for chuckles. Perhaps I will make it a game; how many questions and rebuttals can Natalie ignore in one thread before others come to the same conclusion I have regarding the futility of taking the time to write them. Did you notice after a while it was just you and Joe on the 9/11 thread? I think I know why; do you?

If you wish to comment on this post address it to David as I’m really no longer interested.

David: Just caught your two posts-second one was inspired. I gotta google Ali quotes-he was great. Good luck with Nat-betcha will long for a chat with the JWs soon-they’re more open minded.-Arpie

“Dont make my mistake and allow her to drag you into an ad-hom duel.”

What’s this about becoming “intolerant of hypocrisy”?  Let’s review Arpie’s first post to me here:

Hi Natalie. What happened? Did Honest Joe go back to the asylum? I think you’ll find your snake oil is a much harder sell in most of the other forums but I hope you do try. Imagine the problems Iran could cause us in Iraq, just when we’ve got things going so well there. Better check the rust on our over used saber before suggesting more “rattling” anywhere.

Great post David. Make an honest woman of her - get her to confess she’s a paid hack for the 4 horsemen, betting on total devastation to win, place, and show.

So here you managed to call me a charlatan, dishonest, a warmonger and having ulterior financial motives—without me ever saying boo to you.

I dragged you into an ad-hom duel?

What’s up with that?

Natalie, you must bring out the worst in other people to listen to your silly whining but the truth is you bring out the worst in yourself. In light of 60 years of terrible US Israel-dictated policy in the Near East and the current disastous war(s) and the next war you neoconmen are itching to get us in, no one has the patience for you.  Your about as welcome around here as a case of liver cancer. Even though of us who don’t agree with each other oppose the war. Your shit is just boring at this point.

I gotta agree with recursive prophet & blondemike, I originally was for the war with Afganistan (And I still am - they were harboring a scumbag and wouldn’t give him up - time to clean their clocks), and was sort of concerned when the current administration decided to open up a second front in Iraq.

Basic military strategy is: close one front before opening another - a lesson the Germans didn’t learn - twice. It would be pure stupidity to open a third front at this time, plus is it really a viable option to occupy what, like about 1/5 the land area occupied by Arbaic / Islamic people? Isn’t that what started this whole garbage for the last 6 years?

Is it going to take a plane smashing into a nuclear plant, or a car bomb in front of your kids’ school to get the point across to you Natalie? I agree, the boobs that caused all the ruckus in the first place should be hunted down and summarily tortured, but putting an entire country/region into chaos isn’t going to help anyone.

I’m sorry Blondie, but I’m having trouble taking someone with your POV regarding the Holocaust seriously on anything. 

You’re the silly one, in actuality, and your rude and inacurate accusations are boring as well.

I find it interesting how quickly I get labeled a “neoconwoman”, simply because I, like a majority of the country and the congress at least at the outset, supported the invasion of Iraq. Are 60-70 some percent of the country neocons?

No, I don’t support invading Iran, and yes, I’m starting to sour on the Iraq war, as are many.

But....I still hold out hope.  I guess that’s not allowed here.

Well shiver me timbers! Hide the good silverware lads-weve just been boarded by a pirate. He likely got confused by all the ‘raven’ going on in this thread. Welcome aboard, KFZ. Bet I know how you found your way to this hidden little nook in the metaverse. Glad you did.

Sadly you have arrived at the scene of my first hissy fit on ITT, and I still am amazed I let the lady who just called us all ‘hopeless’ arouse my ire. I think its mostly her sanctimonious style and the way she cherry picks her issues in such a similar way to the Prez, who she obviously admires. The only thing Ive read by her that surprises me is that shes starting sour on the war. And just when the surge-good name for more of the same-was going so well.

Meanwhile, most here would agree-if not on much else-that Bush is probably the worst president this country has EVER had. You can certainly verify my claim that those with views contrary to the establishment can be quickly banned on sites where they are in the minority. And often the ones who rant about tolerance have little of it for any who disagree with them, as we both well know.

There are several other posters on this site who also buy into a lot of the right wing propaganda without employing its mindless techniques in making their case. They will respond in full to points made by others, and at least know the history even if IMHO they misinterpret it. Natalie, on the other hand, has only done the required reading on the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Now that she outlasted-and I do give her points for tenacity-all those who challenged her in a long series of diatribes, she has apparently decided to broaden her horizons. I have no problem reading her misinformed tripe, but long ago saw the futility of writing out replies to it. Had you not showed up tonight I doubt I would have sent any further comments here. I would have kept reading it just to see at what point David-a bright lad-gives up in despair. He is one of those rare, intelligent Christians and I hope to soon have time to debate him on the big myth further on the thread which you’ll find on the first link below. The second was my favorite thread so far here, which you should check out as you are mentioned there.

A final off-topic remark: This topic should have been about Why Does the Media Suck? CNN is certainly not alone in its miserable failure to keep the public informed; and there are certainly worse. Natalie, for example, gets her news mostly from FOX, so she likely still believes Saddam planned 9/11 and that we are winning hearts and minds in Iraq and Afghanistan. One thing I have never heard mentioned in any of the media-including NPR or the BBC-is the fact that these folks have much more patience than we do and think in terms of decades, not 2 year election cycles. None challenge Ws insane claims about not setting a withdrawal date, when who in their right mind would argue that our occupation of Iraq will continue after the next election? And if it doesn’t stop then, what? 20 more years? Does anyone think we could even afford to PAY for such madness? Of course we arent really paying for it; the Chinese and Japanese are. But our credit will be gone long before the religious fundamentalist in Iraq embrace a system of government they neither sought nor understand. Thats the big flaw in our golden rule. The others may want something worlds apart done unto them then we would chose for ourselves.

So lets see if you gotten rusty without me around to keep your sword sharp, Z. Show the gathered how its done. They dont ban people here for expressing their views, so you dont have to hold back. A few can be rather brusque though, so bring your flame retardant and do check out the 2 threads below.-Arpie

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/discuss/3060/
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/discuss/3003/in_you_more_than_yourself/

60-70% of the country are morons at any given time as their support for both Gulf Wars shows. Now most are wising up. Frankly if I have disturbed your “holocaust” religion, tough, because that’s all it is.
As the saying goes, if it looks, smells, walks and quacks like a duck or a neocon, then it must be one. As far as “boring” goes take a look in the mirror.

No, it’s not a religion, it’s just one of the most studied and well-documented events in history.  People who attempt to revise history, and/or to revise engineering and physics, simply have another agenda that this revisionism serves to (falsely) support.

It would be highly instructive to see how many other posters here support your statement:

“not even a million, much less six million”

UK sailors tell of execution fears
By Christopher Adams in London
April 6 2007 20:45

The British sailors and marines held captive in Iran told on Friday how they had been subjected to blindfolding, isolation and threats that led them to fear they would be executed.

The revelations came as the UK moved to show that their detention was not the civilised affair depicted on Iranian television.

Their dramatic account of almost two weeks in detention – and insistence that they had been ambushed by Iranian forces 3.1km inside Iraqi waters in an “illegal” operation – were dismissed by Tehran.

Iranian state television said the UK Ministry of Defence had “dictated” what the sailors should say and called the press conference at a Royal Marine base at Chivenor in south-west England “a show”.

The sailors and marines told reporters of the moment when they feared they could be executed. At a detention centre in Tehran, blindfolded, handcuffed and forced against a wall, they heard the sound of guns cocking.

Joe Tindell, a 21-year-old marine from London, told the BBC: “Someone, I’m not sure who, someone said, I quote: ‘Lads, lads, I think we’re going to get executed.’ After that comment someone was sick and, as far as I was concerned, he had just had his throat cut.”

It emerged that the only woman, Leading Seaman Faye Turney, 26 and married with a three-year-old daughter, had been kept isolated from the others for several days and told within hours of her arrival that the rest had been sent home.......

.......The accounts contradicted Tehran’s assurances that they had been treated well and contrasted with TV pictures that showed them smiling and relaxing. Chris Air, a marine captain, called the broadcasts, including several in which members of the group admitted straying into Iranian waters, “a media stunt”.

Throughout their detention, they were kept in isolation, were interrogated regularly and “faced constant psychological pressure”.

The sailors said in a prepared statement: “We were interrogated most nights and given two options. If we admitted that we had strayed, we would be back on a plane to the UK pretty soon. If we didn’t, we faced up to seven years in prison.”........

Those wacky schizophrenic tea lovers.  I’m just not sure what account to believe now.  After all, the Iranian media story sounded much nicer, much more cheerful, and said that the pictures “proved” the soldiers weren’t under duress.  And indeed, they were smiling.  And that map was so well-drawn, and looked extremely reliable and accurate.  Could it possibly be that the Iranian media was deliberately misportraying the story, and if they’d printed anything else they would have been seriously killed?

No, that’s silly.  More likely the cameras at the British press conference had guns implanted in them, and the soldiers were made acutely aware of this fact.  Yes, the moral plane of the British is certainly in steep decline, as anyone but the most “delusional” and “misguided” can almost intuitively see.

It’s not documented at all and the works of Arthur Butz, Paul Rassinier, Germar Rudolf, Robert Faurisson, David Hoggan, Walter Sanning and several other have totally discredited it. Even the very name “holocaust” meaning death by fire is a big lie, the Jews of Europe who did die, probably well less than a million died of typhus largely and shooting secondarily. Go to the IHR.org and VHO.org websites, you can download many books and many essays. The whole thesis of six million dead, gas chambers, mass extermination program or plot, Frank’s “diary” etc., doesn’t stand up.  Finally the truth of something does not depend on the quantity of its adherents as you demonstrated in your earlier support for Iraq war example. The “holocaust” is now the main tenet of the Jewish religion along with Israel and this shows the total intellectual & moral bankruptcy of same. Anyway, Natalie, your postings are getting to be the most boring event in world history since your wedding night so get your stinky behind elsewhere.

RP, what a surprise to see you here! I was just out stumbling around on different sites, I think I saw somebody else’s name from L3 that was banned shortly before you also, but I just can’t remember who it was...?

Well, folks as it appears that I am the lone Libertarian ‘round these parts, lemmie put in my two cents, so I can be labeled “closet Democrat” and “closet Republican”.

First of all, I still support the war in Afganistan, and if we had focused more troops there (like for instance, all of the troops that are now in Iraq), I believe that sneaky bearded SOB wouldn’t have escaped to a safer areas.

Second, Iraq is a fiasco. Generals forgot the sting that Vietnam gave us, and the supposed solid info that we got from our “intelligence” is just another reason to distrust big government. One more reason to scrap our “intelligence” services.

Third, anyone that actually believes these BS 9/11 theories out there better hit the books regarding engineering and physics or get therapy. It’s okay to hate the party in power since that is protected by the 1st Amendment (Ask me how - my party is never in power), but coming up with stupid theories just makes whoever is posing them look like jerks. Those theories have been debunked by Popular Mechanics (which we all know is part of the secret plan to dominate the Earth), Scientific American (a blanket organization that is secretly controlled by Dr. Evil), Der Spiegel (Europe’s most widely circulated magazine, edited by Hitler’s disembodied brain), and a South Park episode “Mystery of the Urinal Duece” (directed by a kiniving Libertarian that is also looking to take over the world). Grow up, folks. Isn’t it strange that every time a world-shaking event happens in modern history, everyone and their cousin/wife rolls out of their wooden shack claiming it was all part of a conspiracy? How many people are commonly in a conspiracy? Any more than five and the conspiracy is in danger of being let out of the bag. Frankly, it is part of human nature to want to blame some other group/family/secret organization/known organization/religion/race/political party/alien beings/and-or trained monkeys, rather than to believe a sociopath/psychopath and his circle of minions was responsible.

A friend of mine once mentioned he read “The Naked Ape”. I think Desmond Morris should re-release that book and expand a bit more on the human condition regarding conspiracy theories and rampant environmentalism as he did in the naked ape with man’s relation to “god”.  It would make a fun read funner.. and funnier.

“The whole thesis of six million dead, gas chambers, mass extermination program or plot, Frank’s “diary” etc., doesn’t stand up.”

You’re a sad joke, little mikey, [at least regarding the subject of the Holocaust] and you’re apparently so deep in denial that you can’t cry or laugh.  Your silly sources have all the credibility of the Globe, the Star or a text book on intelligent design.

You should consider yourself lucky to live in the country you do, (you know, the one with all its freedoms being taken away?) because you’d be arrested in many for even expressing such views.

It’s actually shocking that you’re apparently not a 9/11 conspiracy nut.  That group is brimming with little Shoah-shirkers, or “revisionists”, as they prefer to be called.

Check ‘em out!

Natalie, check out the refs that I gave, they totally debunk the conventional fairy tales of the misnamed “holocaust.” Since you are scared to do so and never have, how can you vouch for the credibility one way or the other ? And the very fact that people go to jail for doubting this horseshit PROVES my point. If they were mere flatearthers you could laugh them off, this is the only historical controversy where disbelief is punishable by prison. I’m not “little” or “sad” little Natalie. Nor am I in the least impressed by a piece of neoconwoman asswipe like yourself.  As far as “denial” goes it’s like “denying” god, there’s nothing to deny, the whole thing is preposterous. The stated Jewish death toll at Auschwitz-Birkenau has gone down from 9 million to 4 million to 900,000 and will eventually go down the30,000 Jews actually detained there from the exact German figures and not all of those died. But so far all you can do is argumentum ad hominem and argument from authority, both logical fallacies.  The revisionists are winning the argument, these Stalinophile laws only prove how desperate the Exterminationists are. As far as 9-11 goes, I don’t care. They came over here IN RESPONSE TO 60 YEARS OF THE USA BEING OVER THERE. CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROOST. I DON’T DOUBT THAT THERE ARE CONSPIRACIES ALL THE TIME AND NOT ALL OF THEM ARE BAD THINGS EITHER. Sorry about the innocents killed but that wouldn’t include the Pentagon. As Jacobo Timmerman wrote, “There’s no business like Shoah Business !”

Ironically, as I recall, leftist Ward Churchill very much shares your opinion regarding chickens coming home.  I believe the reason we were attacked has more to do with the fact that the stubborn and non-compromising tenets of radical Islam are simply incompatible with the non-Islamic world, and indeed even so with the vast majority of Islam itself.

However, I can agree that technically you are both correct to a point, which is that something we have done has pissed these guys off enough to kill innocents along with themselves in order to prove their (IMHO) misguided and sick points, and in their brainwashed minds advance their bigoted, fascist-like, and universally unpopular agenda.  Not that large swaths of Islam don’t feel joy at the thought of Americans or Israelis getting slapped down, but when the true intent of their temporary heros becomes obvious in their own communities, suddenly the admiration ends.

However, Mr. Churchill, to his credit and my surprise actually, doesn’t share your theories regarding the Holocaust.  In this article, he makes that perfectly clear, and highlights a book that you, I think, really should read.

I have read his views on holocaust revisionism, totally disagree and wrote him a rebuttal at length.  I’ve read the article you reference and was not impressed at all. Nor do I agree with his idiotic views on “little Eichmanns” since I know 90% of the stuff printed on the big Eichmann was bullshit, see the Real Eichmann Trial by Paul Rassinier. At this point you can either check out my refs or not but don’t bother writing me that you disagree. I could care less. And Ward is a white guy posing as an Injun to peddle his own inflated holohoax claims. He justs resents the Jews for monopolizing the