Traitors at NBC News

Originally posted by thermopolis

I do agree we let the terrorist grow in power becuase we didn't bomb every mosque and level the sunni triangle.

Yep because genocide is the answer to all the worlds problems
I swear to god I just don't understand humans sometimes.

Originally posted by boogyman

Yep because genocide is the answer to all the worlds problems

I swear to god I just don't understand humans sometimes.

Well from a scientific point of view... no people...no problem....

Of course from a moral view it's just wrong. Killing people for no reason is murder, and as Albert Einstein said on war:

"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despiceable an ignoreable war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder."-- Albert Einstein

And this street goes both ways if you think of it.

I seem to rely a lot on Einstein for the good quotes. But that's what you get from one of the smartest minds in the history of man

[edit on 25-3-2006 by Sir Solomon]

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Originally posted by thermopolis

I do agree we let the terrorist grow in power becuase we didn't bomb every mosque and level the sunni triangle.

If you did that you would have even more opposition. It would be seen as a blatant attack on muslims in that country, instead of simply an invasion.

No, bombing every mosque would back-fire badly on the US, giving the Sunni insurgents even more ammo for their cause.

This is typical tactical ignorance of non military "generals" running the war as all the "experts" in the media.

War is kill the enemy, remove their capability to make war.

Once again...........Peace IS NOT the abcense of war, it is the inability to make war.

Kill the enemy, destroy his home, his will to fight. Stop helping the enemy in the war like NBC did.

When Joshua destroyed the 5 cities.............GOD told him to kill every living thing..........everything.

Originally posted by thermopolis

War is kill the enemy, remove their capability to make war.

That may be so, but I can assure you that destroying mosques will not diminish the Sunni's resolve to fight back. It will definitely increase it. They will be asking for vengeance, and they will definitely want to go on a Jihad.

Those who in the beginning were sitting on the fence would immediately be swayed to undertake a Jihad. Even those who are barely muslims will feel a great anger in them. In fact, Sunnis from other countries may even go over there to fight.

I am absolutely, without a shred of doubt certain of this. I'd wager my life on this.

Originally posted by thermopolis

This is typical tactical ignorance of non military "generals" running the war as all the "experts" in the media.

War is kill the enemy, remove their capability to make war.

Once again...........Peace IS NOT the abcense of war, it is the inability to make war.

Kill the enemy, destroy his home, his will to fight. Stop helping the enemy in the war like NBC did.

When Joshua destroyed the 5 cities.............GOD told him to kill every living thing..........everything.

Can we agree that there are more terrorists in Iraq now than there were before the US invasion? How is this helping to remove the capability to make war? Shouldn't the vaunted generals have foreseen this inevitability? Perhaps they should have listened to the CIA specialists that predicited the insurgency, the influx of terrorists and the civil war. Personally I think they did - they want as much war and unrest as possible, because a truly liberated Iraq wouldn't need the US and allies there anymore.

I still don't see how NBC has helped the enemy here - and I must state again that had the military not wanted this story to run it wouldn't have.

Finally, with all due respect to all members with religious affiliations - do you not find it a bit silly to follow a book (or books) that clearly were written by man? Religion has been used for centuries to scare and control the masses, as it is today. Wasn't it Jesus that said God was in all of us - to find him look within yourself (paraphrased of course)?

God - life-bringer, creator, all-powerful and benevolent - calling for war. Hmmm......something just doesn't flow here. But as the holy book says - kill EVERYTHING. LOL....

Originally posted by thermopolisI do agree we let the terrorist grow in power becuase we didn't bomb every mosque and level the sunni triangle.

Most people in this countries are not Nazis and will take human rights over such nationlist hubris anyday.

And, you would soon find out that the very country you claim to be "protecting" will be against you too.

[edit on 26-3-2006 by Jamuhn]

Originally posted by thermopolis
I do agree we let the terrorist grow in power becuase we didn't bomb every mosque and level the sunni triangle.
I do blame the major media whiny, whimpy,, PC girlymen, for not letting the military finish the job.
The one really positive thing about the Iraqi war as I see..... it...... is there are many fewer reporters now.................
As far as reading books............based on the books,,,,,,it could create more morons.............like the hollywood "elite".

The above left me somewhat astonished. Leveling the Sunni triangle would have been an act of mass murder, not stabilisation, and would have resulted in a literal firestorm. Condone mass murder do you?
As for the media stopping the military from doing the job - I thought that the Pentagon gave the orders, not Dan Rather. You obviously have an over-inflated idea of the reach of the media, although it would be nice to have the ability to pick up a phone and order an airstrike on our nearest rivals.
Fewer journalists thanks to the war. What a crass and vile thing to say. People have died doing their jobs in Iraq and you think that it's a good thing. Keep digging, your personal standing is going down quite fast. Those men and women were doing their jobs, reporting on what is going on. Several have even been killed in friendly fire. And you think that this is a good thing.
Your books comment was the crowning touch. Books have been the driving force of my life, since I was about 4 years old. I have an awful lot of them now and I cherish them all. I've always thought that the more books you read (just as the more you travel) the more open your mind is. Books are portals to places and times and people that you might never otherwise encounter. Open an autobiography and you step into someone's shoes. Open a history book and you can smell the dust and sweat of a city that has been a ruin for a thousand years. One good book is better than a thousand bloody awful TV shows. I'm not going to speculate on how many you have read, as I'm still trying to retain a facade of civility.
I await your next rant of ignorance with breathless unconcern.

Originally posted by thermopolis
Nope, I saw those traitors interviewing castro and saddddam. Good reporting died in the 60's in vietnam.

If "those traitors" interviewed Saddam during the 80s he would have been an ally of the United States at the time:

"Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West."

-Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad

Originally posted by thermopolis
Nam reporting has twisted reality once again based on YOUR own words. Those of us who lived it know the truth. YOUR version "ain't" it.

I'm assuming that when you say "Those of us who lived it" you mean to say that you were there during the Vietnam war, either as a soldier or fulfilling some other duty. You are then aware that 1 in 4 soldiers were addicted to heroine which they could buy cheaply and in a very pure form thanks to the CIA.

My opinion is that if an American news agency knows how to make contact with a high ranking enemy commander, then they better notify the authorities so that said leader can be killed either before or after the interview, which ever the parties find more desirable.

That an American news agency would put a scoop before national security is disgraceful and if I were president there would many many job openings at that particular news agency.

thermopolis

nbc ? just nbc ?

I'm afraid, I don't trust
any of them !!!

ever see the SMEAR
60 min did on chris ruddy ?

DISGRACEFUL , is an understatement !

it is telling of the insidious manipulations
at the top, without fear of consequences.
it was a sanctioned whitewash/smear campaign !
but by whose orders ?

and thinking it was
confined to JUST ONE STORY
or ONE MEDIA OUTLET
is naiive.

we've been cleverly manipulated
with a hidden agenda since we were born.

popular opinion is CREATED by spinmasters
above and beyond what usually is thought of
as spin.

[ henry kissinger is pushing a NWO in his
recent book and people still don't even believe
a NWO exists ! how does THAT happen ? by accident ? ]

war is and has been perpetrated
on our perceptions since the
manipulators gained control of
the large news outlets then slowly
added politically correct to familiarize us
with the NEW language [ hello george orwell ]

real mass media news is dead,
there is only propaganda and advertising.

Originally posted by thermopolis
This is typical tactical ignorance of non military "generals" running the war as all the "experts" in the media.

Your comment is typical of the ignorance displayed by just about every armchair warrior out there. You obviously know nothing about sucessful warfare in the 21st century.

War is kill the enemy, remove their capability to make war.

Very good. This part is true. Now, what does this have to do with mosques, reporters, ect?

Once again...........Peace IS NOT the abcense of war, it is the inability to make war.

Wrong. Peace is restraint from making war.

Kill the enemy, destroy his home, his will to fight. Stop helping the enemy in the war like NBC did.

Destory his home and family and places of worship, and you solidify his resolve to destroy you. Haven't you ever heard the adage, that the most dangerous man is the man who has nothing left to lose?

When Joshua destroyed the 5 cities.............GOD told him to kill every living thing..........everything.

Thats very nice. We already know the Hebrew god was a genocidal blood thirst maniac. Is this what you wish to emmulate?

Originally posted by curme
An interview with Hitler? During the Battle of Briatin? Man! That would of been fascinating!

I guess the phrase "Know your enemy" never really resonated with you.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by curme]

Knowing your enemy is one thing, collaboration is quite another and this does cross that line....

i see that people around here like to start threads by making very illogical arguments and bombastic claims just so they can have thier bars change color.

Originally posted by krossfyter
i see that people around here like to start threads by making very illogical arguments and bombastic claims just so they can have thier bars change color.

Very true. I personally think that well-thought out and articulate arguments make a lot more sense. I also note that Thermopolis has not reappeared recently to restate his... opinions.
Of course thinking that logic and reason are more important than meaningless rants makes me some sort of dinosaur.

Originally posted by thermopolis
I can not imagine the BBC or other media in WWII interviewing Hitler during the battle of Britian.

My apologies if this point has already been made and I've missed it but the BBC, (and others), did interview active service terrorists from a number of organisations in Northern Ireland including the IRA in the 1970's and at least one film was made of an IRA unit on patrol.
homepages.strath.ac.uk...

Following very major arguments between the Government and the broadcasters new powers prevented the broadcast of statements by a number of political groups which resulted in the idiocy of lip synched interviews with Sinn Fein members as a regular event on UK television news.

The problem is that if "your" broadcasters don't show this information then somebody else will which may mean that the only access to some elements of a story are those presented by organisations which may have other agendas. What you have to decide is just how far do you trust the independence of your own media and how much do you want to hear what they have to say?

[edit on 22-8-2006 by timeless test]

[edit on 22-8-2006 by timeless test]

I just did a Google search for interviews with Hitler and came up with the big bupkus. I'm rather surprised, considering how media-conscious he was, that no actual interviews exist or at any rate none survived. But anyway . . .

Yes, any journalist during World War II who would turn down an interview with Adolf Hitler would have been no journalist.

The worst thing about the views expressed by the OP, though, is not his belief that seeking the news about the "enemy" amounts to treason, but the conviction that we are at war with Islam. Not even President Bush has gone that far, in fact he has specifically denied that we are at war with Islam. In fact, so far as I know the only people who say we ARE at war with Islam, other than the OP, are all members of al-Qaeda and similar organizations. They insist that Islam is at war with us, but what they mean is that it ought to be, not that it really is.

Sounds as if the OP is on the same page as Osama bin Ladin to me.

Originally posted by Two Steps Forward
I just did a Google search for interviews with Hitler and came up with the big bupkus. I'm rather surprised, considering how media-conscious he was, that no actual interviews exist or at any rate none survived. But anyway . . .

Yes, any journalist during World War II who would turn down an interview with Adolf Hitler would have been no journalist.

Hitler declined to be interviewed because it was well known, that while as an orator and public speaker, he was hypnotic, but in private or one on one conversations, he was an absolute bore and was far from impressive. His propoganda minister, Goebells knew this as well, which is why he did not give interviews.

Originally posted by thermopolisAnytime you put the "enemy" on national TV it helps "their" cause. Especially in a media that reports only the bad events.

First, when you put an enemy on national TV it doesn't help their cause. I don't like people who often dress wierd, brandish Kalashnikovs and chant "death to the USA". So seeing them on TV does not motivate me to fell sympathetic towards them. It does the opposite. So, I conclude, your statement is false.

The alphabet networks are providing propaganda for the defeat of the US in Iraq.

The US cannot in fact be defeated in Iraq. It's trying to stop a brutal civil war from escalating further, and even if it fails to do so, that's not a defeat. Now, we as American citizens should know how well our tax money is spent, right? So when I see the mess created in Iraq, I do feel upset and I think that a few persons in Washington DC should be made accountable for it.

The mainstream media are TRAITORS.....

What? The FOX are also traitors? These robots who keep spewing ridiculous slogans such as "we need to fight them there so they don't come here"? Hmm, I need to think about that one... Maybe you are right the the FOX are indeed traitors of the American People.

Originally posted by XphilesPhan

Originally posted by curme
An interview with Hitler? During the Battle of Briatin? Man! That would of been fascinating!

I guess the phrase "Know your enemy" never really resonated with you.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by curme]

Knowing your enemy is one thing, collaboration is quite another and this does cross that line....

So does that mean that you people who disagree with the idea of free press will be boycotting Mike Wallace, 60 Minutes and CBS as they are surely guilty of treason too for interviewing Admandajanahan a couple weeks back, aren't they?
Also, just out of curiousity, since Admanshanahanjihad is against Israel so much, and Mike Wallace did interview him, is Mike Wallace an "anti-semite" because of that interview?