CNN Has Now Become the Mouthpiece for the Terrorists Propaganda Campaign

found this one while lookin at the other one......


this is what our troops have to go through everyday!!!!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5801775573093794666&q=bomb+iraq

 

Oh, I certainly know that. My point is that the US was busy losing the war at the time, politically, not winning it. The defeat of the VC during Tet was the straw that broke the camel's back... for the US. It was a military defeat for the VC, and a huge political victory for North Vietnam, which led directly to the inevitable pullout by the United States. The pullout should have been much sooner, but Nixon and Kissinger dragged the conflict out for several more years, and thousands and thousands of lives, because they didn't want to leave without declaring "victory."



Keep D&D Civil.

 

do you honestly think OBL does not want war mongering neocons/repubs to stay in the whitehouse?

do you think those snipers were taking their time and having fun killing our soldiers because of the media or was protesters or because people like you sent our soldiers into iraq to die for a meaningless cause?

 

Are you serious? You can't be serious.

You want to know how somebody that supports the war that doesn't enlist or seek a commission is a p***y? It's because they are p*****s.

The police analogy is ridiculous and you know it. Nobody supports murderers and they are far from a national "threat."

A self-destructive war on non-democracy at the expense of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis is another thing altogether.

Removing a cruel dictator from office is a great idea. It's also a good idea to adopt an orphan. Unfortunately the mouth-breathing bible-bangers advocate what amounts to adopting an orphan and then chaining "it" in the basement with only regular beatings to break the monotony. The point is that life will be worse for the child.

As it is for Iraqi citizens. Not to mention the American soldiers you evidently wish to see killed.

No good can come from the Iraqi invasion whatsoever. Everyone knew it and said it. The chorus hasn't changed.

My original point is that the few proponents of the war that still show their face are phonies because they refuse to fight it. All the rhetoric in the world won't change the fact that you don't deserve to live in America.

 

Is Osama running for Congress or has he become a lobbyist?

 

The strategic importance of oil has played a huge role in both Iraq wars. To deny that is dumb. That people don't support fighting a war to secure oil reserves is perfectly rational.

The argument being made is meant to underscore how little the current leadership and many of their wealthy supporters risk in continuing to pursue this dumb war by putting US troops at risk. US troops that are made up of folks that traditionally have not been able to affect the power structure in this country, ie the poor, the non-white, the disenfranchised, etc. Thus, questioning what it is you're willing to risk to support this debacle is a perfectly legitimate question. The record shows what Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Pearle, etc are willing to risk personally to serve their country in time of war. The answer is nothing at all and that really is a poignant backdrop to their joke of a performance in running this war. Maybe you missed it but all of those things in addition to the fact that the chief financial beneficiaries of this war, big oil and Halliburton, both have iron clad ties to Bush and Cheney tends to piss people off these days. It all makes for an outrageous story that kids in history class 50 years from now are going to have a hell of a time believing even if it's all true.

 

I had an answer typed out until I realized your response didn't warrant one. If you can come up with a cogent argument that doesn't resort to the types of attacks you claim to hate from those opposed to you and doesn't argue points that I did not make, I will answer.

Although I disagree with what you're saying, I'm appreciative that you've at least responded in a semi-respectful manner.

With regards to the oil, the slogan of blood for oil was simply an easy thing to chant in the lead up to the war. Much like the rationale for the war has evolved over time in the eyes of many, the left-wing's ideas of the reasons we have entered the war have also evolved over time. I just don't believe that we fought a war "for oil." If you ask many who claim that we have what they mean, many cannot provide an answer (although you have at least attempted to). I'm not saying it's not possible I just don't believe that's the reason we entered the fight.

As far as the "why don't you go fight" argument, I feel that basing someone's active participation in a cause as an indicator of how much they believe in it is misguided. Take for example the thread on the smoking ban. There are great differences in opinion on there. How many of those posters are going to even attempt to do anything about the issue other than talk about it on a message board? Probably 0.001% and that's an issue that doesn't require a great deal of risk to become involved with.

I support the actions we've taken in Iraq but feel that they were mismanaged. On the first part, I assume we differ and on the second part we agree. Claiming that I'm a p***y because I chose not to enlist is not only slander it's a baseless argument.

Say for example the second world war was fought with a volunteer army on the part of the United States. Would you call anyone who did not volunteer for that war a p***y? Of course, not. War sucks. Nobody WANTS war to happen despite what many on the other side of the political aisle believe. It takes a special kind of person to enlist in the armed services. That's why I place soldiers number one on my most respected professions list.

Let's try a more current hypothetical. The situation in Darfur. Let's say it escalated to an even worse situation than anyone could have anticipated. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone that was in favor of what was going on over there. Does that mean that the 70 or so percent of Americans that don't volunteer for the army are cowards? No, because you do not need to be an active participant in a cause to be a supporter of it.

As far as the police example I gave earlier, the situations are similar as much as the esteemed crums17 would have you believe otherwise. I'm sure most people in this country support the efforts of the police departments in their respective cities to fight crime. Therefore, there should be a huge supply of police officers as every American would be applying, right? Of course not. Some people do and others don't. Should we make a blanket statement calling those that do not join cowards?

 

*insert 'aw jeez, not this sh*t again' pic here*

 

The funniest thing is that it's become pretty clear that OBL's pre 2004-election video was designed to boost Bush's chances of reelection. OBL is playing people like T_J like a fiddle.

 

I apologize sir. I didn't mean to make an argument with which you did not agree. In the future I will not argue unless you first approve said argument as cogent in your understanding.

I'm actually confused as to your contention. Do you not think that the 11 or 12 people that still support the Iraq war are not p*****s?

Or do you think that I represent the "liberal" "anti-war" crowd?

I'm not a "liberal."

I think it's time that hillbillies put their money where their slack-jawed mouth is. If the war is so just and important, why aren't there more rednecks fighting it? Good Americans are dying so that rednecks can stand on their soapbox in places like Central Texas and speak in fantastical absolutes.

At least explain you contention.

 

I do not wish to get into a pissing contest with you. If you want to understand my point of view, read the above post in its entirety.

I'm not a redneck nor am I one of the "hillbillies" you refer to. I don't have a soapbox and as I goto school in Austin, I can tell you that the soapboxes here are all occupied by fringe radical groups.

As for the attacks on my dentistry, I do have a slight overbite but I do not believe I would qualify as "slack-jawed." I could get my dentist to give expert testimony on this matter, if you would like.

I also find great irony in the misspelling of the word "your" in the last sentence of your post qualifying me as an uneducated product of the boondocks.

 

Umm...just in case you guys haven't noticed, CNN is a 'global' news network, with a larger audience overseas than right here at 'home'.

Moreover, since we live in an increasingly globalized world, why should MNCs care about presenting themselves as 'American'? Do you honestly think CNN would suffer if they moved their headquarters to - say - London?

Tune into Fox News if you want news catered to your sensibilities.

Nationalism, so 20th century...

 

this video makes me so mad!

 

From a logistical standpoint, I still find it amazing how an group of decentralized village farmers can defeat the world's greatest army. Makes you think who would really win a battle when conventional weaponry of war is used.

 

No other way to say it.... That is ****ED up. God damnit that makes me really pissed off.

 

Where do you get this stuff? Do you get a lot of emails?

 

Or maybe TJ is really liberal and is playing us like a fiddle.

 

This guy is infinitely better at that.

 

Osama Bin Laden was Trader_Jorge's Catholic priest when T_J was six years old.

To this day, T_J is unable to eat Shish Kabob because of childhood trauma.

He also has trouble sitting down for more than fifteen minutes at a time.

 

http://www.xignite.com/xWorldNews.aspx?articleid=GMP20060824342002

[rquoter]
Global Islamic Media Front Discusses Plan for Penetrating US Media

Originally published on 8/23/2006 by Jihadist Websites -- OSC Report in Arabic

Terrorism: Global Islamic Media Front Discusses Plan for Penetrating US Media

On 11 August, a jihadist website posted a message entitled "The Global Media: A Work Paper for Invading the US Media, Prepared by Najd al-Rawi," in which Al-Rawi presents a plan to "invade the US media" and explains various types of work needed and instruments to be used to achieve this goal.

A summary of the message follows:

Najd al-Rawi states that while the military battle against the Americans is getting stronger and more serious, the people of jihad should start a media war which must go on side by side with the military war. Because of the significance of the statements and speeches issued by the mujahidin, Al-Rawi recommends that such statements should be accompanied by their translations or subtitles [in case of videos] in English. Therefore, Al-Rawi explains, there is a need for a group of people who are proficient in the English language, both spoken and written, to translate all the Arabic messages "which are intended for the American people." He also states that there will be a need for another group to write articles and powerful messages to the American people and another whose members are capable of working with graphics. Finally, Al-Rawi explains that a fourth group will be required to do the quality control. This group will be responsible for the contents of the resulting media products. In addition to ensuring good grammar, spelling, production, etc., they will have to ensure that the material does not conflict with Islamic principles.

In explaining the type of work these teams will be doing, Al-Rawi says that the translation team will be in charge of translating the military operations against the US as well as speeches, articles, and analysis. They will also be preparing audio messages in English. These messages might be speeches, news reports, or interviews. Al-Rawi stresses the importance of this form of work. In addition, the teams will be expected to translate the statements that were or are issued by "the shaykhs of jihad such as 'the ruling on the usage of weapons of mass destruction' by Shaykh Nasir Al-Fahd" and others. Among the targets where these products are to be used, he lists: American forums, American Pal Talk chat rooms, well-known American newspapers and magazines, American TV stations which have websites and electronic email addresses, and well-known American writers such as [Thomas] Friedman and [Francis] Fukuyama.[/rquoter]

looks like friedman and CNN got the memo.