War on Terror

HomeLAN said:
I can't close it in this forum, but I'm on very good terms with the people who can. Be aware, it's being watched. Closely.
Click to expand...


I couldn't close the one I did either. As far as I know, fURY still hasn't changed his password yet.
 
Wasn't that the point that Bish was making? I don't go to fox news for my news, any more than I go to any other 'news' outfit, such as ABC, or CNN. They're all crap, as far as I am concerned. :shrug:

<edit> I generally stick with google.news.
 
CNN is just as leading - in the opposite direction. That never seems to raise any hackles. Remember, it's only OK ONE way.....
 
BeardofPants said:
Wasn't that the point that Bish was making? I don't go to fox news for my news, any more than I go to any other 'news' outfit, such as ABC, or CNN. They're all crap, as far as I am concerned. :shrug:

<edit> I generally stick with google.news.
Click to expand...
 
I must be the only one that reads the BBC. For all I know they are the less biased.
 
Luis G said:
I must be the only one that reads the BBC. For all I know they are the less biased.
Click to expand...

BBC swings to the left. They're rather like the NY times though. Lots of good info so it's worth reading but you can feel the swing. Atleast i perceive it that way.
 
I still laugh when I see people slam an Associated Press article just because it was found of the Fox site. At those times, I like to pull the exact same story from CNN, MSNBC, etc. just to show these people how they're so closed-minded in their hatred of Fox News that they glaze over everything else.
 
BeardofPants said:
None taken... ;)

*wonders how long it will take before someone points out how PC that was :retard:
Click to expand...
Not PC, per se...more like polite.

***

Shall we get back to the thread in question?
 
The war on terror, cont.....From the ROP:

A declaration of war on Britain and the West is continuing to be issued by British Muslims in the United Kingdom, as the pro-jihad message of Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, recently banned from Britain, is echoed by his followers who have remained behind.

“We should, all of us, glorify the terrorism. And we should incite religious hatred. Don’t worry… it’s not illegal for us to say that mujahadin (jihad fighters) on 9/11, were the magnificent 19, and it’s not illegal for us to say that Mohammad Sidique Khan (the suicide bomber who blew himself up in London) and the four on 7/7 (London attacks), that they were the fantastic four – now we can say so without any worry.”


“We will always glorify killing the kuffar in the name of Allah. To raid the kuffar in the name of Allah. Even if some women and children are caught in the raid by accident. They are part of them, it is not your fault,” said Mizaan.

“In fact, we should give them another magnificent day in history. Another fantastic four (the four London suicide bombers). We should hit them time after time, day after day, every single week, every single month, every single year, we should hit them from every side, from the left and the right. From the planes above them, and the trains below them, we should hit them every way we can.”

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340,L-3156809,00.html
Click to expand...
 
flavio said:
I think the point is with heaps of evidence showing how Bush screwed things up you're not being very honest when you try to blame 9/11 on Clinton.
Click to expand...

Able Danger was a small, highly classified U.S. Army intelligence program under the command of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC). It was created as a result of a directive in early October 1999 by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hugh Shelton, to USASOC to develop a campaign plan against transnational terrorism, "specifically al-Qaida." According to claims made by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and confirmed by four others, Able Danger had identified the 9/11 attack leader, Mohamed Atta, and three other 9/11 hijackers as possible members of an al Qaeda cell operating in the United States by mid-2000, more than a year before the attack. Data mining has been cited as the method by which this information was found. The claim appears to contradict the official conclusion of the 9/11 Commission that American intelligence agencies had not identified Atta as a terrorist prior to the attack. This has resulted in a political controversy that has begun to damage the credibility of the 9/11 Commission.
Click to expand...

Able Danger is shining more light upon the previous administration than the current. Daily, there is more info & more insiders stepping to the forefront. Look into it. Bill is.
 
flavio said:
Funny cause I see "Results 1 - 10 of about 6,050,000 for bushknewbefore 9/11".

The info is there if you want it.
Click to expand...

Able Danger Warned of USS Cole Attack
October 20, 2005 05:20 PM EST



By Sher Zieve – Two weeks before the USS Cole was attacked, Able Danger members sent out a memo warning members of the Clinton Administration, Rep. Curt Weldon, (R-PA) said Thursday. On the Sean Hannity program, Rep. Weldon said that members of the Able Danger team had also warned the former Clinton administration not to send the USS Cole to Yemen, 2 days before it was bombed, and are willing to testify to it under oath.
Weldon also said that the Pentagon and the DOD are doing all that they can to silence the now 7 individuals, all former members of Able Danger, who want to testify. Weldon advised that all of these individuals maintain “impeccable credentials”. Rep. Weldon also advised that he has evidence that staff members supporting the Senators of the 9/11 Commission did not want former Clinton Administration officials ‘outed’ and, therefore, failed to give them the necessary Able Danger information.

All of the former Able Danger members, who are willing to testify, have been placed under “gag orders” from the Pentagon and the Department of Defense.
Click to expand...
(source=some right wing rag)
 
ekahs retsam said:
Come on now, you know it is biased and even if you disagree you must know other people find it to be so. Either way it shouldn't be used because if you believe it isn't but others do, it still holds no credibility with many of those reading the post.

That makes whatever point you or other people are trying to make impossile to effectively express.
Click to expand...

Hannity & Colmes, Bill O'Reilly & Gretta are opinion shows. The news segments present news (too bad there is so little hard news between dead Aruban-American princesses, the aforementioned shows & Mikey Jackson spots)
 
"Determined to strike the US". No shit sherlock.

Gven the fact that A)it's the government & B)there is no hostory of an attack on American soil, 35 days is relatively immediately, so I'd not expect much in the line of real changes. The memo gets passed & discussed for 6 months is SOP.

None of the Presidents, since 1972, had taken the initiative & done enough to end aggression from terrorists. After 29 years, look at the reaction one gets when they do act. One would think there'd be more appreciation fro stopping murderes.
 
rrfield said:
That's sensationalism, not bias.
Click to expand...

Nope. It's a lie. Funny thing is...the folks who watched CNN and MSNBC believed that lie. Now if they are willing to lie about something an innocuous as a picnic bench being washed over the side of a pier, what else would they lie about? That's where the bias comes in.
 
ekahs retsam said:
Ok here you go, compare the Fox article to the CNN article on the same subject. Often Fox's biased is in how the article is written.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171420,00.html

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/06/bush.iraq/index.html
Click to expand...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Amid dropping public approval for the Iraq war, President Bush said Thursday the fight against terrorism must continue there because it is the center of a terrorist movement to "intimidate the whole world."

Click to expand...

There's your banner for CNN...notice the bias there?

WASHINGTON — Laying out a broad plan to win the War on Terror, President Bush on Thursday outlined an approach that includes public diplomacy, “city-by-city” fighting, military support for Iraqis and ridding that country and the world of terrorists.
Click to expand...

Now show me the bias in Fox. You, my friend, have what I like to call "selective reading". In the CNN headline, the bias is quite plainly stated. What they said is not news. It's an opinion. The Fox headline lists Who, What, Where, and When. Facts. You may now go back to sleep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top