No, I didn't say any of that, or intend any implications other than that I know people who work for FOX who don't have much respect for the integrity of FOX reporting. Nothing more, nothing less. I've been trying to avoid Iraq discussions because 1)it makes me very angry; and 2)it wastes too much of my trading time...
Wait a minute, Al Jazeera is an Arabic news network, not "Iraqi TV". Please don't conflate the two. Cubano, please don't go for the same low blows of your compatriots by questioning my ability to think clearly based simply on my age. Of course I don't know EXACTLY how the world works (neither do any of you). That bias, that you seem to offhandedly dismiss, can, and does, often delete vital information, which, if included, would completely change the picture. (Just how many times was Umm Qasr taken, for example?) The reason I didn't include "Eastern Media" in the heading was because, although I am certain it is biased, the radio interviewee's views where regarding the western coverage". And, also, of course, because I imagine just about every single person reading these threads would be watching the Western coverage, and Fox in particular (given how many people love it).
Alfonso, please show me one post of mine that says Al jezeera should be "taken Out".....You my friend are the one that confused the 2 ( IRAQI TV and Al Jezeera ).... Al Jezeera can report whatever they want.
and BTW, just for the record, i'm opposed to the war because i feel that it's bad for america and the rest of the free world, it's bad for america's economy, and it's bad to have innocent people die. plus it only feeds the anti-americans more ammunition, and inspires more terrorism. i have friends over there now fighting, and i want them to stay alive. that's another reason i oppose the war. it's depressing to see when people who are pro-war call the anti-war people communists, pinkos, pansies, etc. it's depressing to see people who cannot articulate their opinions well enough, or make their arguments intelligently enough, that they must call anti-war people names. (one thing i've learned from this whole thing, since i wasn't alive during vietnam, that it is very easy to quickly spark the flames of hatred and anger in emotional people at a time like this -- MUCH easier than to get people to think for themselves about what the war will actually mean for the country and its people, or to get them to think about WHY other people may be for or against the war). and it's depressing to see pro-war people attack the other side and automatically assume that anti-war people want american soldiers to die. if i wanted that, i'd be all for the war. and i fail to see how killing america's finest countrymen makes sense in order to save lives...(not to mention our allies' casualties, and the lives of iraqi civilians who are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time). this is my last comment on all of this, with maybe one exception in the near future. you guys who think that anti-war people want anything but the best for america and its heroes are sorely mistaken, and i feel very sorry for you.
with pleasure, Cubano! Quote from AAAintheBeltway: Iraqi TV has been spewing lies that are eagerly fed to Arab world by Al Jazeera and other irresponsible Arab media. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from El Cubano: I don't understand why they let this propaganda machine continue its service...This should have been taken out on day 1. Ok, it was misunderstanding. But you can see how, right?
PENTAGON THREATENS TO KILL INDEPENDENT REPORTERS IN IRAQ According to Ms. Adie, who twelve years ago covered the last Gulf War, the Pentagon attitude is: "entirely hostile to the the free spread of information." "I am enormously pessimistic of the chance of decent on-the-spot reporting, as the war occurs," she told Irish national broadcaster, Tom McGurk on the RTE1 Radio "Sunday Show." Ms. Adie made the startling revelations during a discussion of media freedom issues in the likely upcoming war in Iraq. She also warned that the Pentagon is vetting journalists according to their stance on the war, and intends to take control of US journalists' satellite equipment --in order to control access to the airwaves. Another guest on the show, war author Phillip Knightley, reported that the Pentagon has also threatened they: "may find it necessary to bomb areas in which war correspondents are attempting to report from the Iraqi side." " Oh I will be. And what actually appalls me is the difference between twelve years ago and now. I've seen a complete erosion of any kind of acknowledgment that reporters should be able to report as they witness." " The Americans... and I've been talking to the Pentagon ...take the attitude which is entirely hostile to the free spread of information." "Even if they were journalists ..' Who cares! ' said.. [inaudible] .." Kate Adie: " The telephones and the television signals." Tom McGurk: " And they would be fired on? " Kate Adie: " Yes. They would be 'targeted down,' said the officer." Tom McGurk: " Extraordinary ! " http://homepage.eircom.net/~gulufuture/news/kate_adie030310.htm what the firggin world we live in!!! It's our view or no view but of course.. information control is paramount
Depending on which side of the planet you get your news from is basically the picture that is painted....... let me pose a question ( and for the record I am agasint the war, for Economical and American soldier casualty reasons only)..If you were an Iraqi living under the conditions set forth by the Saddam Regime, would you oppose an American invasion for whatever reason ( be it a lie or the truth ) that may let your children live in a better enviroment ( wether it does afford your family a better life or not is not the question the chance that it will be better is good enough for me)..... I would rather die trying to make life easier for my children than live under the conditions set forth under the Saddam Regime.
I am anti-war for the same reasons you are.....It was no intent for me in my post to either bash you or change ur views in any way..I apologize if i have offended you...I actually like your posts very much and wish you would continue posting your point of view....
Cubano, I know this is going to sound incredible to you, and probably indelibly characterise me as a harrytrader-level loonie (unless I already have been), but I wouldn't be so quick believe all these reports of just how totally intolerable life is under Saddam. Has it occurred to you that to MANY Saddam is a HERO? For standing up to the West? For keeping Iraq as, well, as Iraq (democracy is going to be the end of the Iraqi state)? There are probably a lot of other reasons that a sizeable proportion of his population likes the Baath party. I don't want to make it sound as though I firmly believe that's the case -- I need more info -- but given the wholesale misreporting of events in the former Yugoslavia (which I would debate with anyone, anytime), I simply cannot bring myself to trust what the mass media tells us is the case in Iraq. As I said, it's a crazy idea, but one I'm not yet willing to dismiss.
Even you know its a crazy Idea.... I can assure you that Saddam is a far more atrocious leader than Fidel. To think that people would risk their lives crossing the florida straits on an inner tube should speak volumes of what you think you may or may not know...Have you ever seen the rallies put forth on Cuban TV ( very much pro Fidel, according to the rallies you would think he is a national hero), but I can assure you with the upmost conviction that the 300 or so ralliers that they parade in front of the TV do not represent even a miniscule of what the 10 million or so Cubans feel....peace. p.s. I truly in my heart think that you know you are wrong in your statement.....Would you rather live under the Saddam Regime or the Bush Regime???