Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/
That generates a lot friction between America and Britain if the anti-British rantings on Little Green Footballs are anything to go by.Admiral Valdemar wrote: Over here the bias is more to sympathy for the Gazans to varying degrees, unlike the staunch Israeli lobby party that run TV news in the States.
Mainstream politicians and media people never give equal weight or consideration to the position of either side, and never have.Coyote wrote:People criticise Israel constantly, and not just here. Only the most hard-core right wingers refuse to criticise Israel; they treat Israel with softer kid gloves than most Israelis I've met.Illuminatus Primus wrote:Of course, because the one thing you can NEVER criticize is Isreal. Seriously, I think criticism of the AFGHAN war effort after 9/11 or discussion of blowback and moral culpability on the part of the U.S. was more tolerated than criticism of Israel.
What are you trying to do/say?
Exactly right. I'm talking about North American mass media. The thing your average voter, consumer, and man gets his information from. And its completely one-sided.Darth Wong wrote:The BBC is COMPLETELY different from news coverage in North America. It's like night and day, switching back and forth between them.
Fuck 'em. I've not been amenable to the idea of a "special relationship" with the 13 colonies since Bush took the throne. And to be honest, I've been less accepting of the incumbent party in Whitehall too, so that's even longer.Big Orange wrote:
That generates a lot friction between America and Britain if the anti-British rantings on Little Green Footballs are anything to go by.
Too bad you’re stuck with it since you’ve now placed your entire nuclear deterrent in the hands of missiles which while jointly owned on paper, can only be serviced and loaded in US owned facilities. It would have been wise to have kept some gravity bombs around, but that would have cost some completely trivial yet apparently unaffordable amount of money needed to fund political asylum for captured pirates, or something.Admiral Valdemar wrote: Fuck 'em. I've not been amenable to the idea of a "special relationship" with the 13 colonies since Bush took the throne. And to be honest, I've been less accepting of the incumbent party in Whitehall too, so that's even longer.
And when a nuclear war breaks out, I'll still not care. We've bigger issues to contend with, and frankly, nowadays it's not how lame the Western militaries are becoming, but how they're fucking over our general lives. Something Whitehall and the White House have perfected recently.Sea Skimmer wrote:
Too bad you’re stuck with it since you’ve now placed your entire nuclear deterrent in the hands of missiles which while jointly owned on paper, can only be serviced and loaded in US owned facilities. It would have been wise to have kept some gravity bombs around, but that would have cost some completely trivial yet apparently unaffordable amount of money needed to fund political asylum for captured pirates, or something.
I don't know, the US Military has been pretty good to me.Admiral Valdemar wrote:
And when a nuclear war breaks out, I'll still not care. We've bigger issues to contend with, and frankly, nowadays it's not how lame the Western militaries are becoming, but how they're fucking over our general lives. Something Whitehall and the White House have perfected recently.
Kanastrous wrote:Unless the cause is Arab oil producers throttling back production as a direct response to Israeli/US policy (may be but have not heard it reported), I wonder what the connection between Gaza and higher price-at-the-pump would be.
They own it to make money, and contrary simplistic understandings of media corporations, while they may broadly conform to the class interests of their owners, particular stockholders cannot veto verboten statements on the channels. They do not have active editorial control.Lonestar wrote:As for the Media being rabidly pro-Israeli, okay, but any news organizations where the Saudis own 5%(CNN) or 5.6%(FOX) where it's promptly stated that "People are paying a higher price at the pump for Israel's War on Terror" is not one completely beholden to the Pro-Israeli lobby.
No, but they can call Rupert Murdoch and "request" that the editorial slant of the coverage of certain newsstories changes...and then boast about it later.Illuminatus Primus wrote:
They own it to make money, and contrary simplistic understandings of media corporations, while they may broadly conform to the class interests of their owners, particular stockholders cannot veto verboten statements on the channels. They do not have active editorial control.
Who is "they"? Saudis? Saudis are not Palestinians, and it doesn't mean the Palestinians have anyone's ear at FOXNews or CNN.Lonestar wrote:No, but they can call Rupert Murdoch and "request" that the editorial slant of the coverage of certain newsstories changes...and then boast about it later.Illuminatus Primus wrote:They own it to make money, and contrary simplistic understandings of media corporations, while they may broadly conform to the class interests of their owners, particular stockholders cannot veto verboten statements on the channels. They do not have active editorial control.
Yup. Specifically the Saudi Prince Al-Walid bin Talal.Darth Wong wrote: Who is "they"? Saudis?
No, but they (The Saudi Leadership) do have a vested interest in knocking Israel down a few pegs, and using the IvP situation as a bloody shirt for their own people.Saudis are not Palestinians,
It does mean anti-Israeli folks do have someone's ear at FOX and CNN, however. If absolutely nothing else it's a useful investment so that the Saudi leadership can have the MSM parrot the "The reason why prices are rising at the pump is because of the situation in Gaza/Lebanon".and it doesn't mean the Palestinians have anyone's ear at FOXNews or CNN.
That's taking it too literally-- the point was, a party that cannot in any way be considered "neutral" or "objective" owns a share in the very media that is reporting on the situation.Elfdart wrote:Why would the GOP buy a share of the Newscorp cow when the milk is free?
Elfdart wrote:Palestinians are depicted as little more than animals in most US media and Faux News is among the worst.
It would just be redundant if right-wingers bought into FOX.That's taking it too literally-- the point was, a party that cannot in any way be considered "neutral" or "objective" owns a share in the very media that is reporting on the situation.
If you look carefully, in between the Juice and All, someone has inserted 'zionist'. I guess they realised they were going to look anti-Jewish if they just left it as it is.Count Chocula wrote:
There's some fruit-hatin' going on too (from Little Green Footballs).
LINKOn January 11, an estimated 10,000 people rallied in front of the Israeli consulate in midtown New York in support of Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip. The rally, which was organized by UJA-Federation of New York and the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York in cooperation with the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, featured speeches by New York's most senior lawmakers. While the crowd was riled to righteous anger by speeches about Hamas evildoers, the event was a festive affair that began and ended with singing and joyous dancing.
There's more at the link.Sen. Chuck Schumer highlighted Israel's supposed humanitarian methods of warfare by pointing to its text messaging of certain Gaza Strip residents urging them to vacate their homes before Israeli forces bombed them. "What other country would do that?" Schumer shouted from the podium. Gov. David Paterson appeared on stage wearing one of the red hats distributed to demonstrators as symbols of the red alerts some residents of Israel endure when Palestinian groups fire rockets their way. Paterson cited the many Qasam rockets that have fallen on Israel as a justification for the country's operations in Gaza, a military assault that has resulted in over 800 casualties and thousands of injuries.
Then Paterson highlighted the anti-Semitism that has followed in the wake of Israel's attack on Gaza, highlighting the beating of a teen-age girl in France. "This kind of anger and hatred spreads like a disease," Paterson said, "and one thing I've always pointed out is there's no place for hate in the Empire State."
But hatred was plentiful at the rally Paterson addressed. Right in front of the stage, a man held a banner reading, "Islam Is A Death Cult." Rally attendees described the people of Gaza to me as a "cancer," called for Israel to "wipe them all out," insisting, "They are forcing us to kill their children in order to defend our own children." A young woman told me, "Those who die are suffering God's wrath." "They are not distinguishing between civilians and military, so why should we?" said a member of the group of messianic Orthodox Jewish Chabad-Lubavitch group that flocked to the rally.
No one I spoke to could seem to find any circumstance in which they would begin to question Israel's war. No number of civilian deaths, no displays of human suffering -- nothing could deter their enthusiasm for attacking one of the most vulnerable populations in the world with the world's most advanced weaponry. There are no limits, no matter what Israel does, no matter how it does it.
HuffPo sides with antivacciners. Nuff. Said.Elfdart wrote:Even "liberal" media outlets like Huffington Post are chock full of IDF camp followers and fanwhores like Alan Dershowitz who claims that IDF atrocities are perfectly legal. Not only do they run this kind of excrement on their front page, they vigorously censor any posts that bring up his column in the Jerusalem Post calling for Lidice-style retaliation against Palestinian civilians.
