As the news media struggle to find equilibrium in an era of increased competition and decreased trust, we have some lessons that defy current conventional wisdom. The most important is that newspapers—yes, old, print-based, non-digital, non-instantaneous, so-1950s newspapers—still matter enormously. The other is that the outlet best equipped to provide instant 24-7 news, the cable channel—and CNN in particular—has become a… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (176)Completely agree with Susan. I would add that CNN and all the cable and network media milk stories to the very last drop. For instance, the piece about the young Boy Scout lost in the wilds of North Carolina was carried by CNN for more than 45 minutes yesterday (21 March) morning, while all other stories were put on the back burner. . They should have made a brief announcement that the kid had been found alive and then gone on to other stories, but no, they kept at it, beating it to death. This is but one example. There are many more.
Dr. Panglosss
Posted by drpangloss on Mar 22, 2007 at 1:41 PM Were it so benign. CNN seems to be on a path of not only trivialization, but of rightwingification. They both work in tandem to prevent the public from getting the news it needs to take back our nation from its corporate masters.
And while it’s all well and good that some of us have the time and motivation to actually go and find things out on our own using outher sources, most of those folks Bush calls “uniquely American”—those working two or maybe three jobs to make ends meet since Reagan demolished the middle class—don’t have that luxury. So they’re looking for a quick summary, and CNN, if left to do its will, is happy to mollify them on behalf of their right wing owners and sponsors.
CNN has drifted right because the small highly vocal well funded minority has been loudly complaining. We have to make them realize those people will never be satisfied, and with a loud and unanimous voice beckon them to return to at least a bare minimum of jouralistic standards.
Posted by trippin on Mar 22, 2007 at 3:05 PM I remember when I was in college in the early 1990s and CNN was the gold standard for news. Those days are long gone.
Posted by lams712 on Mar 22, 2007 at 3:35 PM I have been a fan of Susan Douglas for some time. Her articles are always insightful and right on target. I am currently on a one-person boycott of CNN. Infuriated by the inane comments of Glen Beck and his obvious bias against Democrats and others who don’t completely agree with him; put off by Solidad O’Brian’s often snooty interviews; and finally, just plain exhausted by the Anna Nicole Smith obsession, I said, no more. It’s too bad, because there are some neat and talented people with CNN, but over all, the Glen Becks and Nacy Graces and the tabloid content of most of the stories simply ruin anyone from wanting to tune in. They sure did me.
Posted by tem2007 on Mar 22, 2007 at 5:39 PM CNN is awful but it has nothing to do with the profit motive or that all purpose scapegoat here, the capitalistic system, but its own pragmatist ideology. Like the NY Times and The Washington Post, CNN wants to be near power. All three totally lied about the second as well as the first
Gulf Massacre, I agree with Chomsky that these were one-sided massacres rather than wars. CNN was never the gold standard for news but it HAS gotten noticeably worse. The difference between them and Fox is getting narrow and of course, Brokaw, Rather, Jennings, ad nauseum, went along with the 9-11 hysteria as well as the Bush-AIPAC
war. I used to work in an office building where the damn CNN was on all
the time but don’t get cable at home, thankfully.
Posted by blondemike on Mar 22, 2007 at 6:17 PM If you really want to see something striking, compare CNN International, broadcast outside of US timezones, to the “domestic” version. Not to say that CNNI is above criticism (pah! hardly!), but it is much more characterized by a “hard news” focus compared to homestyle CNN. I’ve seen this for years, and it gets worse and worse every time I return home to visit family and click on CNN. Homestyle CNN includes a much larger proportion of so-called “human interest” stories (if anyone is really so “interested” in the disposition of Anna Nicole’s remains) and emphasis upon the doings of celebrity reporters instead of significant world events. I see a clear difference between the homestyle broadcasts’ apparent mission to titillate and entertain, compared to CNNI’s at least tacit mission to inform (though, again, not to exalt even the international version… it’s just much better than the domestic one).
I find it particularly disturbing because when I look at the huge difference between the two versions, I can’t help but conclude that there’s an effort in hand to lull American viewers into an uninformed, though more entertained and distracted, state. The difference between how CNNI looks at what’s going on Iraq, compared to how domestic CNN looks at it, is only one vivid example. Really, if y’all haven’t seen the difference for yourselves, I think you’d be stunned at just how striking it is.
Dare I conclude that a conscious decision to “soften” the news for American viewers has been made, in the guise of “giving the viewers what they want”? Sure looks like that to me!
Posted by Kuya on Mar 23, 2007 at 3:23 AM Thanks, again, Kuya, learned something new again from you.
Posted by blondemike on Mar 23, 2007 at 4:47 PM mike, I’m sure you won’t be surprised when I mention how pronounced these differences have seemed since Sep. 2001, and even more so (dude!!) since March 2003. I will admit my own “radar” for evaluating news has been more sensitive since these dates, but my question to CNN (not rhetorical!) is, why the huge difference?
Hoping to foster docility, perhaps? I can’t think of a single other motivation that would adequately explain.
Personally, I go to Google’s online news page for most of my news. It can be a little time consuming to dig around among all the sources that contribute, but at least I get some breadth in my news. Al-Jazeera, Int’l Herald-Trib, Monsters & Critics, WSJ, Christian Science Monitor, BBC, many local newspapers’ online editions, Fox, VOA, Xinhua, and even good ol’ CNN’s online version plus (so Google asserts) more than 4000 other possible sources. Ain’t perfect, and there is still garbage to wade through, but it liberates me from the factor of TV/CATV ratings as a filter of what I’m looking at. When I want news, I really don’t give a damn what the ratings per channel may be, don’t even want to take it into consideration or worry that some unknown program manager may have had to do so, under instruction from his or her executive board.
Posted by Kuya on Mar 26, 2007 at 4:45 AM Thanks again, Kuya, for the refs and update, will check them out. Your
take here seems right on target.
Posted by blondemike on Mar 26, 2007 at 5:07 PM All of the cable outlets mine bleeder stories, so CNN can hardly be singled out. Cable “news” is really entertainment anyway, and the bleeders are what most people want. Those who watch Nancy Grace more than once already know she’s the Bleeder Queen of Cable, and she brings her own razor. What I can’t stomach about CNN is Glenn Beck. Lou Dobbs talks about nothing but outsourcing / illegal aliens, so you can turn off the sound and know what he’s saying, but Beck’s hobby horse is war with Iran. Now THAT is something to blame CNN for. When I see his name in the info bar, I surf past CNN2 so fast I never have to see his disgusting, smirky face.
Posted by scottsemans on Mar 27, 2007 at 7:06 PM Ever notice how all neocons have smirking faces ? Bush for instance.
Posted by blondemike on Mar 28, 2007 at 10:09 PM I rather like Glenn Beck, actually. He’s a conservative, sure, but then many more people in the U.S. identify themselves as conservative than they do liberal, so what’s the big surprise?
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that Glenn advocates war with Iran, but he is a strong voice saying that we need to wake up and realize the danger that Iran (the leadership, not the people) poses to world security and stability. I don’t think too many people disagree with that general feeling.
They (the leadership, not the people) held Americans hostage for over a year back in 1979. They’re almost certainly on a path toward violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N. They (the leadership, not the people) advocate an end to Israel daily, and threaten this country with death to boot.
Just recently, they kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters, and are now proceeding to parade them for the cameras against that sacred Geneva Convention. Yes, I think we need to pay attention to people like this.
I find Beck to be a refreshing voice, one who is not scared to say what needs to be said. He is happy to sit down with Al Sharpton, for example, for the entire hour, and discuss a variety of issues in an extremely good natured and respectful manner.
As for CNN and all the cable news shows generally, I can’t for the life of me understand how that many people can possibly be interested in Anna Nicole, the gal lost in Aruba, or Britney’s baldness night after night after night.
Glenn Beck however seems to generally steer clear of this kind of fluff. He strikes me much more as a right vs. wrong kind of guy, instead of the tired old unproductive right vs. left variety.
Posted by Natalie on Mar 29, 2007 at 10:57 PM Hi Natalie! How are you? Still selling (or buying?) snake oil?
“kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters, and are now proceeding to parade them for the cameras “
They were detained, not kidnapped. Otherwise Guantanamo is full of kidnapping victims. Yes?
I would also remind you that CNN (and others) have shown video of ‘detainees’ on parade as well.And whose water it is has NOT been proven to my satisfaction. For instance ...
“The Iran/Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British Government,”
“Those red lines going out to sea have just been invented by the British Government.”
“This published boundary is a fake with no legal force,”
“They are not internationally recognised, they are not the subject of any international treaty.”
“Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the (Persian) Gulf,”
“So, the British Government, I’m perfectly prepared to believe, the coordinates of where it happened, but there’s no way of telling if those are Iranian or Iraqi waters because they are disputed.”
“If you measure the precise coordinate it is actually closer to Iranian land than it is to Iraqi land, which is an interesting fact.”
“I really don’t think it helps for us to be saying this was clearly Iraqi water when everyone knows this is subject to an international maritime dispute, it will just put the Iranian backs up further.”
—Craig Murray - former head of Britain’s Foreign Office’s maritime section
“almost certainly on a path toward violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N”
Iran is NOT violating the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. There is no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons except hearsay from people who are proven liars. And other countries, like the USA and Israel for instance, thumb their nose at the UN.
“advocate an end to Israel daily, and threaten this country with death to boot. “
Please ... spare me. They, Iran and Israel, threaten each other every day. And twice on Sundays.
“we need to wake up and realize the danger that Iran (the leadership, not the people) poses to world security and stability. I don’t think too many people disagree with that general feeling.”
Don’t forget the danger that the United States of America poses to world security and stability.
I think that many people agree with that general feeling.
US ‘biggest global peace threat’
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Mar 29, 2007 at 11:48 PM They were detained, not kidnapped. Otherwise Guantanamo is full of kidnapping victims. Yes? I would also remind you that CNN (and others) have shown video of ‘detainees’ on parade as well.
If you like “detained” better, that’s fine. The difference between uniformed soldiers operating under an identifiable banner, and unidentifiable enemy combatants as it relates to the Geneva convention is apparently lost on you. The difference between the actual captors parading their prisoners (detainees does sound much nicer), and a private media outlet showing the fact that the captors are doing this, is also apparently lost on you. Last time I checked, CNN doesn’t take hostages, or capture anyone, although judging from his deep forehead lines, I’m suspicious that Anderson Cooper is reporting the news under duress.
And whose water it is has NOT been proven to my satisfaction. For instance ...
“This published boundary is a fake with no legal force,”
“They are not internationally recognised, they are not the subject of any international treaty.”
“Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the (Persian) Gulf,”
“So, the British Government, I’m perfectly prepared to believe, the coordinates of where it happened, but there’s no way of telling if those are Iranian or Iraqi waters because they are disputed.”The question that comes to mind….If this is all so disputed and undecided, then how and why are the Iranians so sure that they were in their waters? They claim to know exactly where the boundary was. The next question that comes to mind is why you would choose to take the word of oppressive thugs over that of polite to a fault, tea-sipping Britons?
Kaiyan Kaikobad is a professor of international law at Durham University in Britain who has advised the United Nations and written extensively about Persian Gulf maritime disputes. He notes that Iran and Iraq have still not agreed on a formal maritime boundary in that area where the Shatt-al-Arab flows into the Gulf…...
......Kaiyan Kaikobad says that even if British craft had strayed into what Iran claims as its waters, under international law, Iran had no right to seize the sailors.
“Even if a naval vessel, a warship, from Iraq or from the United Kingdom strays into Iranian territory by mistake, even if that is the case, you can’t arrest it,” he said. “You can’t board that craft. All that you do is you can ask that vessel, ‘we want you to leave.’ You can persevere in that. But you can’t go about arresting them. You can’t go about keeping their people in captivity.”
So yes, they were detained if you prefer. But it certainly looks like they were detained illegally. I still think kidnapped works better.
“violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N”
Iran is NOT violating the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. There is no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons except hearsay from people who are proven liars. And other countries, like the USA and Israel for instance, thumb their nose at the UN.Actually, my wording that you selectively used was:
“They’re almost certainly on a path toward violating international agreements and developing nuclear weapons, as they thumb their nose to the U.N.”
I did not say that they were violating the treaty.
However, I’m at a loss as to why they refuse to allow UN nuclear inspectors in to verify what they and you claim so adamantly. Help me to understand just what makes these goon’s word so golden to you.
If Iran hasn’t thumbed its nose at the U.N., I fail to understand the justification for the sanctions against them, or why they expanded their uranium enrichment program in response to them. I don’t believe that Israel or the U.S. has any U.N. sanctions imposed on them, but I guess I could be wrong on that. I regularly thumb my nose at the UN myself, so you may have a point.
“advocate an end to Israel daily, and threaten this country with death to boot.”
Please ... spare me. They, Iran and Israel, threaten each other every day. And twice on Sundays.The difference between calling for, and urging crowds of thousands to chant “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” and legitimate defensive actions against such fervent wishes is apparently lost on you as well.
Don’t forget the danger that the United States of America poses to world security and stability. I think that many people agree with that general feeling.
Yes, and I remember the same kind of world opinion regarding Ronald Reagan’s stance against communist aggression. He turned out to be right, and leftist inspired and ginned up world opinion was wrong. Now, most except the stubborn fringe left look back and admit that. So much for the value of “world opinion”.
How odd that you’d side with a bunch of fundamentalist fascists, David. It just seems so unlike you. I wager that the average Iranian on the street would be disappointed by your attitude against the country they largely adore, and in favor of the Mullahs they largely despise.
Here’s someone who agrees with you. At least you don’t still subscribe to the sheer lunacy near the end of the clip.
Posted by Natalie on Mar 30, 2007 at 10:48 PM Prez of Iran is refreshing, his holocaust revisionist conference was the best thing to happen in that region for 30 years. Many neoconwomen like Natalie are still trying the old anti-A-Rab line even though Iran is Persian, not Arab. Natalie, if AIPAC gets us into a war with Iran you are not going to believe the reaction against yo’ peepul that will happen here. Maybe they are not foreskinned but they better be forewarned.
Posted by blondemike on Mar 30, 2007 at 10:51 PM “they kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters”
So ... we agree that they have detained the British soldiers that were clearly in waters whose boundaries are disputed ? Yes? Much better, Natalie, thanks for the clarification.
I did not say that they were violating the treaty.
And I did not say “you” did ... I ... (that’s me) ... stated that they were not violating the treaty. Come on, Natalie, you can do better than that! And your attempts to make it appear my words supported the actions of the Iranian government are equally lame.
“almost certainly “
So ... we agree that almost certainly is an exaggeration based on the proof at hand and seems like support for fundamentalist fascists of a different color (red, white and blue)? Yes? Again, my thanks for the clarification.
They all look like Sneetches in Fascist Breetches to me.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Mar 31, 2007 at 1:56 AM Hi Natalie. What happened? Did Honest Joe go back to the asylum? I think you’ll find your snake oil is a much harder sell in most of the other forums but I hope you do try. Imagine the problems Iran could cause us in Iraq, just when we’ve got things going so well there. Better check the rust on our over used saber before suggesting more ‘rattling’ anywhere.
Great post David. Make an honest woman of her-get her to confess she’s a paid hack for the 4 horsemen, betting on total devastation to win, place, and show.
Posted by recursive prophet on Mar 31, 2007 at 2:26 AM Natalie, please don’t support the warmongering of your nation.
Please ... for the good of your soul!What’s your opinion on the Iraq war these days, Natalie?
Is there a war you don’t like?
Do the good guys always win?
Will they have stars on their bellies or no?Are you a Yook or a Zook?
Do you butter your bread butter-side up or butter it butter-side down?
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Mar 31, 2007 at 2:49 AM “they kidnapped British soldiers that were clearly NOT in their waters”
So ... we agree that they have detained the British soldiers that were clearly in waters whose boundaries are disputed ? Yes? Much better, Natalie, thanks for the clarification.Very well David, I was not aware that the boundaries were disputed. Regardless, it still appears that the Iranian action was against international law. Can we agree on that? And no, I don’t think we necessarily know all the particulars about what SOP may have been in place, even temporarily, for those operating in those waters.
I did not say that they were violating the treaty.
And I did not say “you” did ... I ... (that’s me) ... stated that they were not violating the treaty. Come on, Natalie, you can do better than that!You reproduced my sentence out of context, making it appear that I was saying that they HAD violated the treaty. Then you immediately proceeded to state with much confidence that they HAVEN’T violated the treaty. So what’s the reader to think? And what in the world makes you so sure that they haven’t? Do you have a secret source inside Iran? I hope you’re right, but I’m fully expecting, based on events and on their behavior, that one of these months they’ll announce that they’ve gone nuclear, and are withdrawing from any international agreements and treaties.
And your attempts to make it appear my words supported the actions of the Iranian government are equally lame.
Well when you define the Britons as detainees, when they were taken illegally, and you construct an equivalency between the Iranians and CNN in the showing of hostages on TV, and you give the benefit of the doubt to them on matters of nuclear issues after they’ve illegally held Americans for 444 days, blocked inspections of their facilities, and held holocaust denial conventions featuring David Duke, excuse me for assuming that you in effect are supportive of the actions of the Iranian govt. I’m relieved to see that you aren’t, and I apologize for misinterpreting your position.
Natalie, please don’t support the warmongering of your nation.
Please ... for the good of your soul!Now you’re misrepresenting MY position. I’ve never said I support war with Iran. I don’t think it’d be wise. I support a strong and united stance by the world that will force them to open their facilities to inspectors. I support the eventual overthrow of those few a##holes who oppress their people, by those people. But how in the world are we ever going to get anywhere with these stubborn intransigents, who as far as I can see have NO desire to meet anyone halfway, if we adopt your lamb-like attitude.
Where would we be in this world if we’d taken that attitude during WWII? Certainly you wouldn’t be free to farm in peace and type away to the rest of the world on your computer that you can regularly replace with one twice as good for half the price. They’re confiscating satellite dishes in Iran, and restricting and censoring the Internet.
Nobody wants war, but you can’t just withdraw from the world and expect those bent on controlling people to suddenly change. That’s a Dr. Seuss dream world, not reality.
The British Sneetches do have stars on their bellies. The Iranians are treating them like plain bellied Sneetches who have non upon thars. And you seem to want to just accept it, excuse it, read children’s books and soul search.
Posted by Natalie on Mar 31, 2007 at 5:52 AM What an utterly strange holier than thou post, Arpie, coming from someone who couldn’t for a time quite decide whether or not his own govt used explosives to bring down the WTC towers.
I’m reluctant to trust your take on saber oxidation and honesty.
Posted by Natalie on Mar 31, 2007 at 8:17 AM Hi Natalie, I am happy to see you agree that whose water it is does not seem to be so clear as you first asserted. And yes I would agree that it is possible that the Iranian government’s detention of these British soldiers is a violation of international law. (Now the US/UK invasion of Iraq ... that was a violation of international law. Yes? Was it a wise war? And in retrospect?)
I did not reproduce your sentence out of context, Natalie. Perhaps I added to the context by pointing out a point you had perhaps forgotten. Your sentence was carefully constructed to make it appear that Iran is almost certainly on a path to violating international agreements etc. I disagree and responded that Iran is not violating the NPT and evidence of nuclear weapon development is hearsay and from many of the same liars who lied their way into the Iraq war. If Iran does decide to withdraw from the NPT, as is their right, I won’t be too concerned. As I said (and seemingly many in the world agree) I am more concerned with the warmongering and nuclear weaponry (consisting of the invasion of Iraq and use of depleted uranium munitions and the threat of a nuclear attack option against Iran) of the United States of America and it’s allies.
Thanks for the apology, Natalie. It seems I owe you one too.
I am very happy to see you do not support an attack on Iran. Good for you, Natalie! Again ... I apologize for misrepresenting your position. I hope that Iran, and all countries, would be honest and open about their nuclear intentions and capabiltites. And I certainly hope Iran’s government finishes the parade and releases the British soldiers soon too. But most of all I hope that the USA does not attack another country and kill hundreds of thousands more innocent people.
But I disagree with your statement that nobody wants war . It certainly appears that some people do want war despite their protestations to the contrary. But not you, Natalie.
Happily, Natalie, I can withdraw from the world and enjoy Dr. Seuss dream worlds.
There is much to learn from it and it’s good for the soul.I realize that the Sneetches are treating one another differently and that’s the point.
Regardless of a star on our belly or not.
We are all Sneetches!
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Mar 31, 2007 at 10:56 PM What an utterly strange holier than thou post, Arpie, coming from someone who couldnt for a time quite decide whether or not his own govt used explosives to bring down the WTC towers. Im reluctant to trust your take on saber oxidation and honesty.
Heh Heh. Holier than thou? Now Natalie, surely you remember Im an atheist. I notice as usual you didnt touch the pertinent question; what will happen in Iraq if we attack Iran? Do you think we have a
workable game plan for that? Now try and focus N, and answer that question first before trying to undermine the questioner. Betcha cant do it, and count on me to call you on it when you do!Yes some of the conspiracy arguments did seem worth looking into and Im still far from certain our government wasnt involved on some level. Several of my questions and those of others you never answered, and 40% in polls agree with Joe. But I stated at the start of entering that insane little dance you and Joe conducted for how many reply pages?-at LEAST 20-that I had serious doubts. Comes from keeping an open mind N, and not putting blind faith in the government-especially this administration.
Regarding taking my tarnished credibility-I did argue with you in Faith so I agree its questionable- about the condition of our saber, you neednt take my word. Both the links below-and you can find thousands on Google-quote government and military officials regarding the crisis in both troops and equipment. Take your pick. Post some that say the opposite. I couldnt find any. And just wait for when other countries like Brazil to our south start alliances with Iran. Saber Crisis
70% in one European poll picked this country as the greatest threat to world peace. Too bad they just dont understand-ours is the rusted saber of righteousness! Keep singin the my country right or wrong tune along with Bush, and maybe we can convince that other 30 %. Retainment Crisis
Kudos once again David. We have to really hold Ns feet to the fire with her famous tactic of ignoring questions she cant answer without contradicting herself. As youve seen, shes big on newspeak, and obfuscation. What doesnt ring true is those with her perspective arent generally prone to volunteering time. Dedicated capitalist want capital for any effort. Wonder who pays for all the time she spends writing here and on other forums?
Posted by recursive prophet on Apr 1, 2007 at 1:32 AM ANYWAY…Getting back to the issue of why CNN is such a Crappy “News” Network, the reason for its downfall is that its acronymn should be “LNN” (lazy news network), or GNN (gossip news network) or RNN (repeat news network). It seems as though CNN has become so comfortable with its status as the “leader” of cable news that it has just stop trying to make a difference, be provacative, unique or relevant. All it gives is cookie cutter news and FOX does THAT better.
It’s LNN because its reporting is inexcusably lazy. It just trots out the same type of stale stories hour after hour after hour, day in day out , month after month, year after year. The teleprompter reading “anchors” just mouth the same text over and over again. No attempt to find a new or fresh angle for their stories or provide any depth to their reporting is made. Quality interviews are rare because CNN refuses to devote sufficient time to actual news segments due to its preference for entertainment and light (feel good) stories over hard news.
It is “GNN” because it relies on news “personalities” such as Carol Costello and Kelly (What’s her face) Arena whose “reporting” has all the professionalism of the conversations held over backyard fence or at the office water cooler. Even “ace journalist” Anderson Cooper leans heavily toward a gossipy/petty style of reporting. CNN has become so “influential” that it has all the “right contacts” and “inside sources” among the powerful elite and the timidity that produces shows in its reporting. If what’s going on at CNN is any indication, the era of journalistic independence is a thing of the distant past.
Did anyone check out the recent banquet in DC with all the reporters on stage goofing with Carl Rove? It was all just a little too chummy and I’m sure only a glimpse of what really goes on when the cameras aren’t filming. For all of its allegedly aggressive “investigative reporting”, CNN tends to focus on soft targets who can’t fight back or powerful targets who have already been brought low. Talk about taking fruit from the low hanging branches…
It is Repeat news network because it cycles the exact same stories. The main CNN network is obviously bad, but Headline News is especially bad. It appears that the first news cycle is taped with a live anchor and is just rerun. You can tell that the anchor is not live because all the gestures, stupid jokes and comments are the same hour after hour after hour. But it doesn’t stop there, the main CNN network doesn’t even pretend to have live news coverage between midnight and 6am as it just repeats Larry King “Live” and Anderson Cooper 360. Apparently, nothing of significance happens in the world during the late night hours worthy of a live anchored broadcast, so why bother.
Whatever independence and outsider edginess CNN had when it started is COMPLETELY gone. It’s now just a corporate hack tool of the establishment.
Gigi
Posted by Globalgal on Apr 1, 2007 at 7:38 AM Heh Heh. Holier than thou? Now Natalie, surely you remember Im an atheist. I notice as usual you didnt touch the pertinent question; what will happen in Iraq if we attack Iran? Do you think we have a
workable game plan for that? Now try and focus N, and answer that question first before trying to undermine the questioner. Betcha cant do it, and count on me to call you on it when you do!Well so am I, hence it becomes simply a figure of speech now doesn’t it? You come on and quite comically accuse me of peddling “snake oil”, and yet you are the one who was seduced by all the 9/11 hogwash. AND, it appears you’re STILL not completely over your virus yet:
“Yes some of the conspiracy arguments did seem worth looking into and Im still far from certain our government wasnt involved on some level.”
Perhaps you didn’t complete your antibiotic regimen.
Then you simply assume, without evidence, that I surely would like to see us invade Iran, simply because I, like Glenn Beck and many people, view Iran as a serious troublemaker, and a potentially devastating threat to free nations everywhere, and that we should recognize and understand the true ambitions of the leadership, and work to find ways, hopefully short of military action, of bringing about their demise.
Along with the demise of freedom-squelching tyrants everywhere.
I don’t think that ANYONE thinks that “invading” Iran would be a good idea, or is a desirable course of action. I don’t think that ANYONE doesn’t think that they could and would do a lot of (further) damage to our efforts in Iraq if we did.
However, the lay down and submit crowd would have us do nothing less than promise that we would never do it. I can’t think of a better way of emboldening and encouraging them to continue their destabilizing ways in Iraq, Lebanon, and even North Korea. Only a foolish and declining nation takes the possibility off the table.
As for our “saber”, there is no doubt we’ve stretched our military beyond what is comfortable. There’s also no doubt that the lay down and submit crowd is always eager to let everyone know the details of it, along with every other strategic secret we may have.
Consider the possibility however, that what you read in the paper may not necessarily be entirely true. We all know it wouldn’t be the first time. Iran knows better than to take American hostages, doesn’t it? At least under this President. Perhaps they know something the WaPo doesn’t.
Sleep with one eye open, Mr. Mullah.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 1, 2007 at 7:29 PM Natalie, you are the same LYING ugly old HOLOHOAX mongering whore and Israeli disinformation agent. Simply a repeat of your lying Iraq campaign. If you AIPAC traitors compound the Iraq fiasco with Iran you bastards better sleep with BOTH eyes open.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 2, 2007 at 7:19 PM Oh yes Natalie, I’m sure the Iranians are really frightened after seeing how well we made Iraq and Afghanistan bend to our will. Iran’s land area and population is only three times that of Iraq, and they have many Shiite pals not only in Iraq but throughout the gulf region. Heard anything about the price of oil lately?
CNN is like the rest of the media-it gives people the news they want to watch. People may not know who Alberto Gonzales is, but they all know Paris Hilton or Nicole Smith. Who’s responsibility is that?
Posted by Eric Blair on Apr 2, 2007 at 8:08 PM Who do you think is really responsible for bringing down the WTC towers on 9/11, Blondie?
I need to know this for my records.
TIA
Posted by Natalie on Apr 2, 2007 at 9:16 PM Just as soon as the Iranians take American hostages again I’ll agree with you Eric, that they really aren’t “frightened” of us.
My point is why work so hard to convince them that they shouldn’t be afraid. If they were reasonable, responsible leaders, that would be entirely appropriate. However, they’re brainwashed fundamentalist nut-cases and any show of weakness only emboldens them to carry out nuttier and more dangerous actions.
CNN being mostly populated by liberals, and having a mostly liberal audience, presents news that liberals mostly want to hear.
Fox does the opposite.
And of course we all apparently are interested in Paris, Anna, and Britney.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 2, 2007 at 9:27 PM Yo’ ugly mama, Natalie. CNN is no more “liberal” than Fox and most rightists like myself OPPOSE Bush and neocon blowjobers like you.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 2, 2007 at 9:49 PM Yo’ ugly mama, Natalie. CNN is no more “liberal” than Fox and most rightists like myself OPPOSE Bush and neocon blowjobers like you.
Uh huh, uh huh.
And the towers?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 3, 2007 at 12:44 AM Why does CNN suck? Because they don’t emulate the fair and unbiased practices of their fellow journalists in Iran, who manage to print news in defiance of any and all govt. and corporate influence.
British Marines Enjoying So-Called Captivity
TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- “The first independent news source of Iran.”While British Prime Minister Tony Blair still makes wrathful statements about the TV interviews of his country’s marines, the latest series of photographs released by FNA display that British troops are enjoying their ideal conditions in Iran.
Today’s photographs show that the British troops are having fruit and coffee, speaking to each other, playing chess and on the whole spending their desirable leisure time in Iran instead of serving missions in the cumbersome conditions of the Persian Gulf.
The 15 detainees, including 8 sailors and 7 British marines, were arrested by Iran’s boarder guards on 23 of March, 2007.
In interviews broadcast by Iran’s state-run TV, 4 of the said troops explicitly acknowledged that they had trespassed on Iran’s waters and apologized to the Iranian nation for their intrusion.
[wait guys….those waters are disputed…..how do you know you were in Iranian waters? They could have been Iraqi waters.]
Meantime, the data and information extracted from the Global Positioning System (GPS) of the British troops substantiate their illegal entry into Iranian waters.
[Oh, that’s how. GPS. But….the waters are still disputed, right? So….. never mind.]
Despite allegation by some western media that the marines had made the confessions under duress, photographs, specially those taken today, prove that the British troops have acknowledged to their guilt freely and under an open atmosphere.
[pictures don’t lie, ya know]
In the same interviews, the British marines said that they understand Iranian nation’s anger at the action, and advised London to give up unfounded claims and extend formal apology to Iran instead.
In clear reference to the improper statements of the British Prime Minister, Iranian First Vice-President Parviz Dawoodi Tuesday morning stressed that the issue of the marines would not be solved in the near future if Britain continues making hue and cry.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 3, 2007 at 7:40 PM Consider the treatment the British sailors and marines are receiving. Note the smiling faces and relaxed atmosphere with food and flowers and compare it to the way detainees are treated at Abu Ghraib Prison and Guantanamo Detainment Camp.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 3, 2007 at 8:32 PM I guess that would make sense if polite, tea-drinking law-abiding uniformed soldiers operating under UN mandate and illegally taken hostage were in the same category as non-uniformed, fascist wack-jobs taking pot-shots at, and blowing up into little pieces, Iraqi, U.S., British, and other nation’s soldiers, and innocent civilians all over the world.
But the point was really just how unbiased and independent the Iranian media is. Surely CNN would improve its standing if it could manage to do even half the job these intrepid writers and photographers do.
I think I’ve figured out the criteria the Iranians use for determining their maritime boundaries. They’re officially defined as running exactly 25’ the other side any foreign ship at any time Iranians choose to intervene.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 3, 2007 at 10:01 PM I guess that would make sense if ...
Treating people with respect and dignity always makes sense.
But the point was really just how unbiased and independent ...
I agree that the Iranian media is biased but I see the same bias from the media of any country.
For example, if CNN (or BBC) was less biased perhaps instead of repeating ad nauseum Tony Blair’s assertion that “they were in Iraqi waters” perhaps they could report that the waters are disputed. Instead of repeating ad nauseum that the soldiers were “under a UN mandate” they could report that the mandate does not extend into the territorial waters of Iran and as these boundaries are disputed it may not be so clear as to if they were “illegally” captured (by the way, Natalie, I think the use of “hostage” is an unfair characterization).
I think I’ve figured out the criteria ...
Yeah ... that sounds like the same type of half assed criteria the USA uses when it decides which country to shock and awe back to the stone age.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 3, 2007 at 11:33 PM Actually David, I believe that the vast majority of the Afghan and Iraqi populations were pretty damn happy to see their oppressors shocked and awed back to the stone age.
The problem arose when a relative few of those fascist wack-jobs I was talking about refused to share in that happiness.
The US bears responsibility for not sufficiently foreseeing and planning for this, but let’s not make like CNN and leave out this portion of the context.
“Treating people with respect and dignity always makes sense.”
Tell that to people who truly need to hear it. Sure, there are a few isolated instances of abuse by US and British forces, but it’s hardly their SOP.
Hundreds of millions of innocent people were murdered by totalitarian govts. in the twentieth century. Most committed by us, and you, were an unfortunate and necessary by-product of the effort to stop them.
You’ve got your demons out of order.
“Hostage” is entirely appropriate. They were taken illegally, and are being held against their will, until supposedly certain conditions are met by the British Govt.
“I agree that the Iranian media is biased but I see the same bias from the media of any country.”
The same bias? You continue to construct these ridiculous equivalencies. Ours and yours is truly an independent media, fluff and ratings aside. They are entirely free to publish and show whatever they want, within the bounds of common decency. I hope you know that the reports coming from Iranian media are a product of something much more influential than simple, relatively harmless bias.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 4, 2007 at 12:33 AM Nice of you sitting on your ass over here to decide which people thousands of miles away are happy to be bombed but the evidence doesn’t support you. The Iraqis are far worse off in every way because of our invasion and now we have alienated so many Afghanis that the Taliban controls much of the country again and will get even more. As far as the Brits in Iranian waters, they were properly arrested and they have no right to be in Iraqi waters either. Be careful of that hundreds of millions argument, we know the whole holocaust legend is a hoax unto its very name, Jews did not die en masse by fire and not by gas chambers & not systematically & not even a million, much less six million, have given numerous refs on this board elsewhere, and we do know that the US state killed four million in Indochina, millions more by proxy states from Indonesia to Guatemala to South Africa to Zaire, etc. William Blum’s CIA is a good work here. There were tens of millions killed by Mao and Stalin but then the US is responsible for tens of millions of black slave and Indian deaths. Nor was WW2 ever fought to stop any deaths, it made possible many more deaths because it cut off avenues of flight and we in fact turned back Jews from here. So don’t hand us the BS line about fighting to save lives, we never have nor has anyone else either. The “isolated” incidents of US-UK atrocities and lesser acts short of that ARE SOP as Guantanamo shows in spades and again as our history does for hundreds of years. Don’t bother trying to peddle that Made in Israel rat poison here but no one is buying it, including many of us who radically disagree with each other on many issues. Go back to the Mossad, your odor betrays you.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 4, 2007 at 12:50 AM I retract the word same and extend the word different .
So my words should read “a different bias” .
Thanks for the correction, Natalie.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 4, 2007 at 1:00 AM Different. As in completely fabricated and state-dictated as opposed to however a free media organization chooses to describe it and interpret it.
Different is accurate, but far from sufficiently descriptive.
Detainee is accurate, but far from conveying the full context.I made a correction too. The U.S. doesn’t “bare” responsibility, they “bear” responsibility. D’oh!
Go back to the Mossad, your odor betrays you.
not even a million, much less six million he says. Odor indeed.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 4, 2007 at 3:46 AM What is fabricated and state dictated , Natalie?
What is sufficiently descriptive ?
What is context ?The smiles (and smirks) on their faces?
Do you think after the photo opportunity that the evil Iranians took that bowl of fruit (I saw the bananas!) on the table and tortured the detainees in horrible and terrible ways?
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 4, 2007 at 4:18 AM This morning I was watching CNN (it does suck) and they announced that the 15 British sailors and marines are being released.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 4, 2007 at 3:34 PM Natalie-This will be my last reply on this or other topics to you, and I would strongly recommend other users here follow suit. Here’s why. Paid or not, Natalie is clearly a spokesperson for nearly all that the majority of users on ITT find offensive about the attitudes and body politic in this country. Like most of her ilk, she is weak on history and primarily a one-trick pony. Notice how she inevitably keeps bringing up 9/11 though that is not the subject here. She will also avoid responding when she can find no rationale for her position in reply.
Many click on ITT to read the articles, but I suspect not 100 people a day read any of these discussions. So what’s the point of responding to someone like Natalie? You know you will never change anything about her myopic world view or any of the tiny number of similar non-thinkers who come here by accident. These folks are not big readers. So if anyone can explain the point in engaging her here and creating a platform for more one sided propaganda from the right, please do so. She actually sees CNN as being a bastion of liberals, in the name of Allah. Natalie, there IS no real liberal media in the U.S. by international standards. The on-air debate here is between the extreme right and the lunatic fringe right, period.
“Sure, there are a few isolated instances of abuse by US and British forces, but it’s hardly their SOP.”-
Have you heard it mentioned in all the 15 sailors brouhaha about all the Iranians we have illegally detained in Iraq, including 5 diplomatic officials? Well, just before the release was announced this morning it appears we finally decided to allow the Iranian Embassy folks to see them. So maybe the Iranians had to break international law-assuming the sailors were in Iraqi waters-had to break international law in order to force us to marginally comply with it?
In 1953 we and the British orchestrated a coup to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and inserted the Shah-remember him?-into power. We have done this all over the world where popular leaders couldn’t be bribed or threatened to bow to our economic interests as opposed to those who elected them. This is certainly nothing new, and goes back to our dealings with Mexico, France, and leaders of the native tribes. This country was founded, as were nearly all others, through force and exploitation.“Only a foolish and declining nation takes the possibility off the table.”
You made our case here, Natalie. We were certainly foolish to Invade Iraq, and by any and all measurements we are in decline-or perhaps free-fall. Our economy could be shut down tomorrow by communist China not buying anymore of out increasing debt, and you think we are in a position NOW to threaten Iran? Ah yes, then there’s the matter of the only WMDs old Saddam ever had-the ones we gave him to use on Iran!
David-I know this is a position change for me, and I was previously delighted to see you refute Natalies illogical rants. But if you can see a reason to give her further time here in debate, I’d like to read it, and please address each of the points I made above. Dont you dare Nat me, heeheheh. Focus all your attention on the discussions with those from whom you can attain new insights and ideas. Nothing to be gained by taking her on. Leave her to Mike. If he cant dissuade her nobody can.-Arpie
Posted by recursive prophet on Apr 4, 2007 at 9:35 PM Arpie, although I respect your opinion I must disagree.
Natalie has as much right to participate in these discussions as anyone. If nothing else her commentary provides a contrast by which we develop and improve our own commentary. So, you see, having a discussion with Natalie does help me attain new insights and ideas.
Beyond that ... Natalie and I are old friends. If I ignored her I am afraid her feelings might be hurt. And out of my concern for her, and others like her, I feel compelled to encourage them to overcome a lifetime of patriotically pathologic indoctrination.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 5, 2007 at 12:03 AM Thanks David, you are truly a nice guy, although I don’t think the leadership in Iran deserves as much benefit of the doubt as you think they do.
I hope you are right, and that they don’t break their promise not to develop nuclear weapons, and that they’ll see fit to enable the world to verify this. Iran’s people are truly wonderful, as I’ve met a few of them who were engineering students of my dad, and it saddens me to hear about the oppression that apparently is regularly carried out by the leadership.
I’m glad the hostages er..uh… detainees have been freed, er…uh…had their status changed, and I hope that they will be free and/or willing to share exactly what went on with regards to exactly who’s idea it was to say what they said on Iranian TV. Unfortunately, it may be part of the agreement that they must stay quiet. (just a guess….Pres. A. seemed a bit uncomfortable about what they might say)
I guess I see things quite a bit differently than most of you. I see millions of peace-loving ordinary people and families being oppressed and denied modern standards of living by a very few power-hungry dictators, and religious extremist brain-washers. Although the situation in Iraq is not pretty as of late, I have a more long-term opinion that the era of Arab non-democracy is at the beginning of its end, and that the Iraq invasion will eventually be viewed as a turning point.
Perhaps I’m completely wrong, but in terms of the timeline necessary for nations to transform and develop, it’s still early in the game.
I believe in the empowerment of ordinary people to be able to vote for their leaders in truly fair elections, not like the unanimous one for Saddam Hussein or Yasser Arafat, and not like the one in Iran where the Mullahs have the power to select the candidates. I believe in the open flow of information, like what is happening now in Iraq between bombings, and like what has been trying to flower in Iran but is now unfortunately being restricted and destroyed. I believe that people will tend to vote for who is most likely to help bring peace and properity to their everyday, ordinary lives, if they are able to vote.
I understand that the U.S., Britain and others have done some things in the past that have worked to bring about some of the trouble we see today. However, there’s also been a heap of good done, without which the world would likely be an extremely dark and hopeless place today for millions upon millions of average, everyday, ordinary formerly American and Canadian Sneetches, both star-bellied and plain.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 5, 2007 at 4:32 AM David-You actually Nated me!! This is what happens when you hang with the wrong people. First, I never said or insinuated that Natalie didn’t have the right to participate here. Perish the thought. In fact, I will even still read her delusions just to see how the die hard my country right or wrongers are trying to spin things these days. I’m merely pointing out it’s a waste of time trying to engage her in logical debate, and self defeating.
Not only does this take away time you could be using to post more of your thoughts on faith in Human, we are affected by those we associate with. If you read my last reply again then look at yours, you will see similarities to how Natalie responds. Show me where I said she shoudnt be allowed or didnt have the right to post here? Show me where you answered my query as to the futility of creating-with your replies-a platform for her disinformation, or justify the time spent. Learn something? Old friends? Be real David. I thought it was intriguing she would keep responding to Joe’s rants in Faith. Now that I have seen her views on a wider range of issues its pretty clear Natalie is more than just misguided. She has sufficient intelligence to see beyond her right-eous blinders, but her hypocrisy will never let that happen. Being up north you may not be familiar with this type. I am. If she ever acknowledged the larger international reality it would destroy her with self loathing. She has no comprehension of what this country really stands for; unbridled self gratification and damn the consequences. That’s basically why humans form countries, and the most powerful are generally the most obnoxious.
Anyway, if you wish to waste time-go for it. Amusing to read. David doing his online rendition of the visiting orator at the asylum for the deaf and the dumb.
Posted by recursive prophet on Apr 5, 2007 at 5:59 AM You know Arpie, when you poked your nose into the conspiracy “discussion”, and were trying to find answers to all your questions, I was polite and directed you to where you could find the answers. You were still confused, didn’t know what side to take, and then started playing the referee between me and Joe. I continued to treat you with respect, I thought, pretty much, although I was starting to get annoyed with your jumping from one side to the other, declaring one round lost and one round won, and coming off like the smartest person in the room by finally declaring me the winner and that indeed, Steven Jones was a kook. Well, DUH. And you have the temerity to address me and my grasp of reality with words and phrases like “logical debate”, “delusion”, “disinformation”, “misguided”, “sufficient intelligence”, “blinders”, “dumb” and above all, “hypocrisy”?
Gosh, I even thanked you for calling the match in my favor.
Then you implored us to stop the discussion, shut it down, game over, listen the the Ref, darn it!!! Give it up Joe, stop responding, Natalie.
And now you start berating me here, simply for not agreeing that the U.S. is the root of all evil in the world, or that the Iranian leadership is on the same moral plane as us and the Brits, and then start appealing to others regarding how you think I should be responded to, or not at all.
What extraordinarily strange behavior.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 5, 2007 at 6:40 AM “I never said or insinuated that Natalie didn’t have the right to participate here.”
“Show me where I said she shouldn’t be allowed or didnt have the right to post here?”Arpie, maybe its just semantics then;
“This will be my last reply on this or other topics to you [Nat], and I would strongly recommend other users here follow suit.”
Sounds to me like you are trying to deny her participation by boycotting any dialogue with her and encouraging others to the same (much the same way that the USA treats Iran). Technically not denying the right to comment here but certainly seeking to leave Natalie talking to herself and feeling isolated. How does that help?
“Show me where you answered my query as to the futility of creating-with your replies-a platform for her disinformation, or justify the time spent.”
Natalie is on her soapbox and I am on mine. For the reasons I explained earlier I do not think it’s futile or a waste of time. Frankly, I think it is time spent in a worthwhile pursuit.
And don’t worry about me associating with the wrong people. Someone I admire spent a fair bit of his time with eating, drinking and talking with tax collectors and prostitutes so I am just following his example and breaking down barriers that separate us.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 5, 2007 at 4:56 PM “I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them”
—Baruch de Spinoza
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 5, 2007 at 4:58 PM Natalie, you are an imbecile recycling old, discredited arguments about some imaginary good the US and UK governments have done, well, they haven’t, neither at home or abroad. Abroad has been a total horror and whatever liberties we have left at home are in spite of the US & UK states. I have no respect for you or your arguments such as they are.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 5, 2007 at 5:12 PM Thank you for your comments, Blondie. I felt kind of bad and discouraged, until I remembered what you said before:
“not even a million, much less six million”
...and I was comforted by the realization that you are probably 180 degrees wrong on your above post as well, not to mention everything else you’ve ever said.
What an emotional roller-coaster.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 5, 2007 at 8:21 PM Someone I admire spent a fair bit of his time with eating, drinking and talking with tax collectors and prostitutes so I am just following his example and breaking down barriers that separate us.
He floats like a butterfly, stings like a bee!
Is that you, Muhammad Ali?;-)
Posted by Natalie on Apr 5, 2007 at 8:29 PM Mike-if she was another of the sites imbeciles I wouldnt have bothered trying to engage her in dialogue in the Faith forum. She is far from that. She has intelligence, but as David said she has a lifetime of patriotically pathologic indoctrination to overcome and the resulting hypocrisy is something I have encountered too often. Fact is, she represents a far higher level of the Rove/Cheney ideological sophistry than one would expect to encounter in a forum such as this and it truly does piss me off by association. That I allow myself to react that way pisses me off even more! You have the energy and verve to keep her in check, and are renowned for your ability to not let things become personal. Dont make my mistake and allow her to drag you into an ad-hom duel. Nail her on the way she uses semantics to skew any logical debate.
“Just when I thought I was getting out, they keep pullin me back in..” David-I agree that what I was suggesting was that she be isolated, as are most Americans-the one country that commandeers the entire hemisphere as its own-who post here within the larger society. Her views represent the vast majority nationwide. As a result they dont even realize how few others on this dying planet share their national self esteem. Note the underlined quote below regarding our moral superiority to the Iranians.
... simply for not agreeing that the U.S. is the root of all evil in the world, that Iran is on the same moral plane as us and the Brits..
You know Arpie, when you poked your nose into the conspiracy discussion
Please also consider her underlined remark above. Doesnt it imply I had no right to enter that thread? When I first posted on this site, I mentioned I wouldnt be doing it much as I didnt believe in singing to the choir. Yet what I have found is that even deferentially presented ideas to those who think like Natalie, on their own turf, can get you not only shunned but banned. Want to bet I couldnt get banned on her home site just through politely presented but well constructed contrary ideas? One of your guru’s many messages that falls short; he never mentions what action should be taken once the other cheek has been turned. At what point does this become not an example of tolerance but a Marx brothers dope slap? I will save that discussion for the Human thread.
I agree I may have been a tad harsh with Natalie encouraging users to shun her. You and others who dont have to live among those such as she perhaps will learn something about how to understand their indoctrinated perspectives via confronting them; as I said before-go for it. Not me. I will engage you and LB on issues of faith, but I am no longer willing to give Jehovah’s Witnesses any of my limited time. Get the connection? -Arpie
Posted by recursive prophet on Apr 5, 2007 at 8:48 PM Gosh Arpie,
I used to think you might be a somewhat open-minded guy, albeit suffering from a bite from the 9/11 conspiracy bug.
You eventually came to the correct conclusion, but the point is that you even considered it a possibility. It goes to your willingness to buy into anything that affirms your now obvious world-view, even though presented with all the quality of a supermarket tabloid. It goes to your ability to discern quality information from ridiculous propaganda and misguided fantasy.
Putting that aside, now you are anything but open-minded. Now you come off as intolerant and closed minded, someone who just can’t stand to even discuss things with someone who doesn’t happen to share his minority world-view.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 5, 2007 at 9:23 PM Natalie strikes me as a standard neoconman shill, RP. I defer to your greater experience with her but I’ve read nothing original or historically
accurate from her. Her weak comeback when I questioned her bogus
stats and made a passing ref to my dissent from standard “holocaust”
figures confirmed that she’s neocon. The old Right hated FedGov’s domestic and foreign policies. Natalie’s neocon to the core. I’ve never
had much interest in 9-11, chickens coming to roost as a result of 60 years of US foreign policy in the Near East but antiwar.com has had a great deal on the Israeli connection and I wouldn’t doubt it for a split-second.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 5, 2007 at 10:25 PM “Thanks David, you are truly a nice guy, although I don’t think the leadership in Iran deserves as much benefit of the doubt as you think they do.”
Thank you, Natalie. I think that everyone deserves the benfit of the doubt until all doubt is removed.
And even then there is mercy for mistakes and forgiveness for faults.“confronting them; as I said before-go for it. Not me. I will engage you and LB on issues of faith, but I am no longer willing to give Jehovah’s Witnesses any of my limited time. Get the connection?-Arpie”
Arpie, that’s funny because I do give Jehovah’s Witnesses my time. I have been talking with them for years and the last time I moved they arranged for a different neighbourhood disciple to knock on my door. They like me so much they have asked me to be a guest speaker down at the local Kingdom Hall.
But I do get the connection and understand your point.
See you at the Reclaiming What Makes Us Human thread.“antiwar.com”
Mike, good site with good information.
I couldn’t agree more when you said “Nice of you sitting on your ass over here to decide which people thousands of miles away are happy to be bombed but the evidence doesn’t support you. The Iraqis are far worse off in every way because of our invasion ...”.
Worth repeating!
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 5, 2007 at 10:59 PM My way of joking is to tell the truth. That’s the funniest joke in the world.
—Muhammad Ali
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 5, 2007 at 11:01 PM Mike-you just caught me before going to town. I agree with everything you stated last reply. Make an honest woman of her.
Going to break my vowel not to reply to you this one last time Nat-ocon. I was going to send links to polls showing the citizens of even our closest allies see us as major peace threat, but then remembered you just dismiss any evidence that doesnt support your position so why bother? You say Im closed minded yet continue to bring up my willingness to consider the possibilities regarding a 9/11 conspiracy with every reply.
Yes I have become intolerant of hypocrisy, and my world view regarding the international role of this country is only in a minority IN amerika. Worldwide it is you who are part of a very small and shrinking minority. I am always willing to discuss things with those who do not argue solely from a position of ideological ignorance, and have debated some on ITT. But unlike David I am too familiar with those who share your mindset to believe I have anything to gain by taking the time to write out replies. I will keep reading this thread though, just for chuckles. Perhaps I will make it a game; how many questions and rebuttals can Natalie ignore in one thread before others come to the same conclusion I have regarding the futility of taking the time to write them. Did you notice after a while it was just you and Joe on the 9/11 thread? I think I know why; do you?
If you wish to comment on this post address it to David as I’m really no longer interested.
David: Just caught your two posts-second one was inspired. I gotta google Ali quotes-he was great. Good luck with Nat-betcha will long for a chat with the JWs soon-they’re more open minded.-Arpie
Posted by recursive prophet on Apr 5, 2007 at 11:14 PM “Dont make my mistake and allow her to drag you into an ad-hom duel.”
What’s this about becoming “intolerant of hypocrisy”? Let’s review Arpie’s first post to me here:
Hi Natalie. What happened? Did Honest Joe go back to the asylum? I think you’ll find your snake oil is a much harder sell in most of the other forums but I hope you do try. Imagine the problems Iran could cause us in Iraq, just when we’ve got things going so well there. Better check the rust on our over used saber before suggesting more “rattling” anywhere.
Great post David. Make an honest woman of her - get her to confess she’s a paid hack for the 4 horsemen, betting on total devastation to win, place, and show.
So here you managed to call me a charlatan, dishonest, a warmonger and having ulterior financial motives—without me ever saying boo to you.
I dragged you into an ad-hom duel?
What’s up with that?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 5, 2007 at 11:23 PM Natalie, you must bring out the worst in other people to listen to your silly whining but the truth is you bring out the worst in yourself. In light of 60 years of terrible US Israel-dictated policy in the Near East and the current disastous war(s) and the next war you neoconmen are itching to get us in, no one has the patience for you. Your about as welcome around here as a case of liver cancer. Even though of us who don’t agree with each other oppose the war. Your shit is just boring at this point.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 6, 2007 at 12:39 AM I gotta agree with recursive prophet & blondemike, I originally was for the war with Afganistan (And I still am - they were harboring a scumbag and wouldn’t give him up - time to clean their clocks), and was sort of concerned when the current administration decided to open up a second front in Iraq.
Basic military strategy is: close one front before opening another - a lesson the Germans didn’t learn - twice. It would be pure stupidity to open a third front at this time, plus is it really a viable option to occupy what, like about 1/5 the land area occupied by Arbaic / Islamic people? Isn’t that what started this whole garbage for the last 6 years?
Is it going to take a plane smashing into a nuclear plant, or a car bomb in front of your kids’ school to get the point across to you Natalie? I agree, the boobs that caused all the ruckus in the first place should be hunted down and summarily tortured, but putting an entire country/region into chaos isn’t going to help anyone.
Posted by Kung Fu Zoo on Apr 6, 2007 at 1:14 AM I’m sorry Blondie, but I’m having trouble taking someone with your POV regarding the Holocaust seriously on anything.
You’re the silly one, in actuality, and your rude and inacurate accusations are boring as well.
I find it interesting how quickly I get labeled a “neoconwoman”, simply because I, like a majority of the country and the congress at least at the outset, supported the invasion of Iraq. Are 60-70 some percent of the country neocons?
No, I don’t support invading Iran, and yes, I’m starting to sour on the Iraq war, as are many.
But….I still hold out hope. I guess that’s not allowed here.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 6, 2007 at 3:42 AM Well shiver me timbers! Hide the good silverware lads-weve just been boarded by a pirate. He likely got confused by all the ‘raven’ going on in this thread. Welcome aboard, KFZ. Bet I know how you found your way to this hidden little nook in the metaverse. Glad you did.
Sadly you have arrived at the scene of my first hissy fit on ITT, and I still am amazed I let the lady who just called us all ‘hopeless’ arouse my ire. I think its mostly her sanctimonious style and the way she cherry picks her issues in such a similar way to the Prez, who she obviously admires. The only thing Ive read by her that surprises me is that shes starting sour on the war. And just when the surge-good name for more of the same-was going so well.
Meanwhile, most here would agree-if not on much else-that Bush is probably the worst president this country has EVER had. You can certainly verify my claim that those with views contrary to the establishment can be quickly banned on sites where they are in the minority. And often the ones who rant about tolerance have little of it for any who disagree with them, as we both well know.
There are several other posters on this site who also buy into a lot of the right wing propaganda without employing its mindless techniques in making their case. They will respond in full to points made by others, and at least know the history even if IMHO they misinterpret it. Natalie, on the other hand, has only done the required reading on the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Now that she outlasted-and I do give her points for tenacity-all those who challenged her in a long series of diatribes, she has apparently decided to broaden her horizons. I have no problem reading her misinformed tripe, but long ago saw the futility of writing out replies to it. Had you not showed up tonight I doubt I would have sent any further comments here. I would have kept reading it just to see at what point David-a bright lad-gives up in despair. He is one of those rare, intelligent Christians and I hope to soon have time to debate him on the big myth further on the thread which you’ll find on the first link below. The second was my favorite thread so far here, which you should check out as you are mentioned there.
A final off-topic remark: This topic should have been about Why Does the Media Suck? CNN is certainly not alone in its miserable failure to keep the public informed; and there are certainly worse. Natalie, for example, gets her news mostly from FOX, so she likely still believes Saddam planned 9/11 and that we are winning hearts and minds in Iraq and Afghanistan. One thing I have never heard mentioned in any of the media-including NPR or the BBC-is the fact that these folks have much more patience than we do and think in terms of decades, not 2 year election cycles. None challenge Ws insane claims about not setting a withdrawal date, when who in their right mind would argue that our occupation of Iraq will continue after the next election? And if it doesn’t stop then, what? 20 more years? Does anyone think we could even afford to PAY for such madness? Of course we arent really paying for it; the Chinese and Japanese are. But our credit will be gone long before the religious fundamentalist in Iraq embrace a system of government they neither sought nor understand. Thats the big flaw in our golden rule. The others may want something worlds apart done unto them then we would chose for ourselves.
So lets see if you gotten rusty without me around to keep your sword sharp, Z. Show the gathered how its done. They dont ban people here for expressing their views, so you dont have to hold back. A few can be rather brusque though, so bring your flame retardant and do check out the 2 threads below.-Arpie
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/discuss/3060/
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/discuss/3003/in_you_more_than_yourself/
Posted by recursive prophet on Apr 6, 2007 at 8:09 AM 60-70% of the country are morons at any given time as their support for both Gulf Wars shows. Now most are wising up. Frankly if I have disturbed your “holocaust” religion, tough, because that’s all it is.
As the saying goes, if it looks, smells, walks and quacks like a duck or a neocon, then it must be one. As far as “boring” goes take a look in the mirror.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 6, 2007 at 4:57 PM No, it’s not a religion, it’s just one of the most studied and well-documented events in history. People who attempt to revise history, and/or to revise engineering and physics, simply have another agenda that this revisionism serves to (falsely) support.
It would be highly instructive to see how many other posters here support your statement:
“not even a million, much less six million”
Posted by Natalie on Apr 6, 2007 at 8:37 PM UK sailors tell of execution fears
By Christopher Adams in London
April 6 2007 20:45The British sailors and marines held captive in Iran told on Friday how they had been subjected to blindfolding, isolation and threats that led them to fear they would be executed.
The revelations came as the UK moved to show that their detention was not the civilised affair depicted on Iranian television.
Their dramatic account of almost two weeks in detention – and insistence that they had been ambushed by Iranian forces 3.1km inside Iraqi waters in an “illegal” operation – were dismissed by Tehran.
Iranian state television said the UK Ministry of Defence had “dictated” what the sailors should say and called the press conference at a Royal Marine base at Chivenor in south-west England “a show”.
The sailors and marines told reporters of the moment when they feared they could be executed. At a detention centre in Tehran, blindfolded, handcuffed and forced against a wall, they heard the sound of guns cocking.
Joe Tindell, a 21-year-old marine from London, told the BBC: “Someone, I’m not sure who, someone said, I quote: ‘Lads, lads, I think we’re going to get executed.’ After that comment someone was sick and, as far as I was concerned, he had just had his throat cut.”
It emerged that the only woman, Leading Seaman Faye Turney, 26 and married with a three-year-old daughter, had been kept isolated from the others for several days and told within hours of her arrival that the rest had been sent home.......
.......The accounts contradicted Tehran’s assurances that they had been treated well and contrasted with TV pictures that showed them smiling and relaxing. Chris Air, a marine captain, called the broadcasts, including several in which members of the group admitted straying into Iranian waters, “a media stunt”.
Throughout their detention, they were kept in isolation, were interrogated regularly and “faced constant psychological pressure”.
The sailors said in a prepared statement: “We were interrogated most nights and given two options. If we admitted that we had strayed, we would be back on a plane to the UK pretty soon. If we didn’t, we faced up to seven years in prison.”........
Those wacky schizophrenic tea lovers. I’m just not sure what account to believe now. After all, the Iranian media story sounded much nicer, much more cheerful, and said that the pictures “proved” the soldiers weren’t under duress. And indeed, they were smiling. And that map was so well-drawn, and looked extremely reliable and accurate. Could it possibly be that the Iranian media was deliberately misportraying the story, and if they’d printed anything else they would have been seriously killed?
No, that’s silly. More likely the cameras at the British press conference had guns implanted in them, and the soldiers were made acutely aware of this fact. Yes, the moral plane of the British is certainly in steep decline, as anyone but the most “delusional” and “misguided” can almost intuitively see.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 6, 2007 at 10:47 PM It’s not documented at all and the works of Arthur Butz, Paul Rassinier, Germar Rudolf, Robert Faurisson, David Hoggan, Walter Sanning and several other have totally discredited it. Even the very name “holocaust” meaning death by fire is a big lie, the Jews of Europe who did die, probably well less than a million died of typhus largely and shooting secondarily. Go to the IHR.org and VHO.org websites, you can download many books and many essays. The whole thesis of six million dead, gas chambers, mass extermination program or plot, Frank’s “diary” etc., doesn’t stand up. Finally the truth of something does not depend on the quantity of its adherents as you demonstrated in your earlier support for Iraq war example. The “holocaust” is now the main tenet of the Jewish religion along with Israel and this shows the total intellectual & moral bankruptcy of same. Anyway, Natalie, your postings are getting to be the most boring event in world history since your wedding night so get your stinky behind elsewhere.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 6, 2007 at 11:07 PM RP, what a surprise to see you here! I was just out stumbling around on different sites, I think I saw somebody else’s name from L3 that was banned shortly before you also, but I just can’t remember who it was…?
Well, folks as it appears that I am the lone Libertarian ‘round these parts, lemmie put in my two cents, so I can be labeled “closet Democrat” and “closet Republican”.
First of all, I still support the war in Afganistan, and if we had focused more troops there (like for instance, all of the troops that are now in Iraq), I believe that sneaky bearded SOB wouldn’t have escaped to a safer areas.
Second, Iraq is a fiasco. Generals forgot the sting that Vietnam gave us, and the supposed solid info that we got from our “intelligence” is just another reason to distrust big government. One more reason to scrap our “intelligence” services.
Third, anyone that actually believes these BS 9/11 theories out there better hit the books regarding engineering and physics or get therapy. It’s okay to hate the party in power since that is protected by the 1st Amendment (Ask me how - my party is never in power), but coming up with stupid theories just makes whoever is posing them look like jerks. Those theories have been debunked by Popular Mechanics (which we all know is part of the secret plan to dominate the Earth), Scientific American (a blanket organization that is secretly controlled by Dr. Evil), Der Spiegel (Europe’s most widely circulated magazine, edited by Hitler’s disembodied brain), and a South Park episode “Mystery of the Urinal Duece” (directed by a kiniving Libertarian that is also looking to take over the world). Grow up, folks. Isn’t it strange that every time a world-shaking event happens in modern history, everyone and their cousin/wife rolls out of their wooden shack claiming it was all part of a conspiracy? How many people are commonly in a conspiracy? Any more than five and the conspiracy is in danger of being let out of the bag. Frankly, it is part of human nature to want to blame some other group/family/secret organization/known organization/religion/race/political party/alien beings/and-or trained monkeys, rather than to believe a sociopath/psychopath and his circle of minions was responsible.
A friend of mine once mentioned he read “The Naked Ape”. I think Desmond Morris should re-release that book and expand a bit more on the human condition regarding conspiracy theories and rampant environmentalism as he did in the naked ape with man’s relation to “god”. It would make a fun read funner.. and funnier.
Posted by Kung Fu Zoo on Apr 7, 2007 at 1:34 AM “The whole thesis of six million dead, gas chambers, mass extermination program or plot, Frank’s “diary” etc., doesn’t stand up.”
You’re a sad joke, little mikey, [at least regarding the subject of the Holocaust] and you’re apparently so deep in denial that you can’t cry or laugh. Your silly sources have all the credibility of the Globe, the Star or a text book on intelligent design.
You should consider yourself lucky to live in the country you do, (you know, the one with all its freedoms being taken away?) because you’d be arrested in many for even expressing such views.
It’s actually shocking that you’re apparently not a 9/11 conspiracy nut. That group is brimming with little Shoah-shirkers, or “revisionists”, as they prefer to be called.
Check ‘em out!
Posted by Natalie on Apr 7, 2007 at 2:58 AM Natalie, check out the refs that I gave, they totally debunk the conventional fairy tales of the misnamed “holocaust.” Since you are scared to do so and never have, how can you vouch for the credibility one way or the other ? And the very fact that people go to jail for doubting this horseshit PROVES my point. If they were mere flatearthers you could laugh them off, this is the only historical controversy where disbelief is punishable by prison. I’m not “little” or “sad” little Natalie. Nor am I in the least impressed by a piece of neoconwoman asswipe like yourself. As far as “denial” goes it’s like “denying” god, there’s nothing to deny, the whole thing is preposterous. The stated Jewish death toll at Auschwitz-Birkenau has gone down from 9 million to 4 million to 900,000 and will eventually go down the30,000 Jews actually detained there from the exact German figures and not all of those died. But so far all you can do is argumentum ad hominem and argument from authority, both logical fallacies. The revisionists are winning the argument, these Stalinophile laws only prove how desperate the Exterminationists are. As far as 9-11 goes, I don’t care. They came over here IN RESPONSE TO 60 YEARS OF THE USA BEING OVER THERE. CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROOST. I DON’T DOUBT THAT THERE ARE CONSPIRACIES ALL THE TIME AND NOT ALL OF THEM ARE BAD THINGS EITHER. Sorry about the innocents killed but that wouldn’t include the Pentagon. As Jacobo Timmerman wrote, “There’s no business like Shoah Business !”
Posted by blondemike on Apr 9, 2007 at 6:48 PM Ironically, as I recall, leftist Ward Churchill very much shares your opinion regarding chickens coming home. I believe the reason we were attacked has more to do with the fact that the stubborn and non-compromising tenets of radical Islam are simply incompatible with the non-Islamic world, and indeed even so with the vast majority of Islam itself.
However, I can agree that technically you are both correct to a point, which is that something we have done has pissed these guys off enough to kill innocents along with themselves in order to prove their (IMHO) misguided and sick points, and in their brainwashed minds advance their bigoted, fascist-like, and universally unpopular agenda. Not that large swaths of Islam don’t feel joy at the thought of Americans or Israelis getting slapped down, but when the true intent of their temporary heros becomes obvious in their own communities, suddenly the admiration ends.
However, Mr. Churchill, to his credit and my surprise actually, doesn’t share your theories regarding the Holocaust. In this article, he makes that perfectly clear, and highlights a book that you, I think, really should read.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 10, 2007 at 7:38 PM I have read his views on holocaust revisionism, totally disagree and wrote him a rebuttal at length. I’ve read the article you reference and was not impressed at all. Nor do I agree with his idiotic views on “little Eichmanns” since I know 90% of the stuff printed on the big Eichmann was bullshit, see the Real Eichmann Trial by Paul Rassinier. At this point you can either check out my refs or not but don’t bother writing me that you disagree. I could care less. And Ward is a white guy posing as an Injun to peddle his own inflated holohoax claims. He justs resents the Jews for monopolizing the racket. Hardly a principled thinker. I contributed half a dozen pieces to the same magazine, Z, where he published his dreck. Three of them with my Jewish wife.
I can’t imagine why you would think I’d give the slightest credence to your ref when you dismiss mine out of hand. God, are you this narcissistic ? Only a coincidence I read the stupid piece he wrote that impressed you and his shitty book based on same.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 11, 2007 at 12:31 AM I contributed half a dozen pieces to the same magazine, Z, where he published his dreck. Three of them with my Jewish wife.
Are these available online, or would you mind reproducing them here?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 11, 2007 at 7:30 AM Only the more recent ones for the most part. The only earlier one online is a 93 piece I did for The Washington Post.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 11, 2007 at 6:14 PM Would some links or some further clues be too much to ask?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 11, 2007 at 6:40 PM WHY do you care ? I only mentioned it in passing. And why do I have to your research for you ? And to what end is it for anyway ?
Posted by blondemike on Apr 11, 2007 at 9:00 PM Because I’m trying to better understand your POV. I’m genuinely interested in what you and/or your wife wrote.
I’m fascinated by people such as yourself who go against the grain of what is considered settled history.
Your confidence in your position makes me curious whether there could possibly be something to it.
Please post the links to your work; I can’t seem to find anything at Z mag by “blondemike”, although I understand that this would likely not be the name you would have used there.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 11, 2007 at 9:20 PM What we wrote about in Z and The Progressive and what I did for the Washington Post & the Guardian (NY) has nothing to do with what has been debated about here. I stand by it all but it’s irrelevant to the topics we agreed to disagree on.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 11, 2007 at 11:12 PM Mike, your posts directed at me included the following, and the first two were absent me having said anything to you:
Prez of Iran is refreshing, his holocaust revisionist conference was the best thing to happen in that region for 30 years. Many neoconwomen like Natalie are still trying the old anti-A-Rab line even though Iran is Persian, not Arab. Natalie, if AIPAC gets us into a war with Iran you are not going to believe the reaction against yo’ peepul that will happen here. Maybe they are not foreskinned but they better be forewarned.
Natalie, you are the same LYING ugly old HOLOHOAX mongering whore and Israeli disinformation agent. Simply a repeat of your lying Iraq campaign. If you AIPAC traitors compound the Iraq fiasco with Iran you bastards better sleep with BOTH eyes open.
we know the whole holocaust legend is a hoax unto its very name, Jews did not die en masse by fire and not by gas chambers & not systematically & not even a million, much less six million…..
......Go back to the Mossad, your odor betrays you.
So, I hardly think what I am asking for is somehow irrelevant to the topics being debated here, in fact you are the one who seemed to want to bring up the Holocaust at every turn.
And I don’t recall agreeing to disagree about something, but my memory is far from perfect.
If you’re not willing to provide links to your work, fine, but I can’t help but suspect that you are either not willing to stand by them, or are not willing to connect yourself to them here, for whatever reason.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 12, 2007 at 1:17 AM You can’t read any straighter than you can think, Natalie. The pieces that we did together and the ones that I did solo were not about holocaust revisionism nor 9-11 nor the other topics brought up here. So they are well written and interesting and we stand by them but totally irrelevant to the topics here on this thread. I only brought up holocaust revisionism in response to some wild statements you made about foreign governments causing hundreds of millions of deaths which came from Professor Rummy at Surfboard U in Honululu. I was giving one notorious example where your claim was wrong though it is possible that between US support for dictatorships since the 20s and the massive Chinese & Soviet murders there could be tens of millions of victims. I also properly provided sources to back up my assertions here, you indicated that you were too frightened to read them because it would destroy your belief in the holohoax religion. Fine. I politely referred to that as agreeing to disagree. That’s euphemistic on my part. Finally, you are an agent provocateur and I wish no further dialogue with you. I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT ANYTHING. And I will ignore any further stupid responses from you. Capice ?
Posted by blondemike on Apr 12, 2007 at 3:40 PM OK, Mike, my apologies. I apparently misinterpreted your post about rebutting Ward Churchill on the Holocaust, and your later statement in the same post about writing several articles for Zmag and others to mean that the subject of those writings was the Holocaust, and that the rebuttal was probably what you were talking about being in Z.
Apparently your rebuttal to Churchill was personal, and your public articles were on another subject.
However, the irony of your bringing up Holocaust revisionism to somehow rebut other well documented acts of genocide by murderous govts. is truly something to marvel at.
I’ll leave you to your fantastical and baffling ideas about the Holocaust. Baffling because IMHO you are right on regarding several other issues.
Why not be “right” on everything?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 12, 2007 at 7:37 PM I am right on everything. The creators of the Gulag and Mao also created the legend of the “holocaust.” That is an assertion so I earlier gave refs to back up that assertion. I brought up the “holocaust’ which is a lie even in its very name, meaning death by fire. I don’t dispute the concentration camps or the Nazi anti-semitism. I know a certain number of Jews died by typhus towards to the end of the war in the camps, NOT the fault of the Nazis, but the US-UK bombing & blockade of food & medicine, and a certain number were executed by the Einsatzgruppen on the eastern front. I doubt it reached a million but if it was, say, two million, it wouldn’t alter my basic thesis, there were no gas chambers, no systematic conspiracy or central plan to exterminate Jews, nowhere near six million perished and while Anne Frank was a lovely girl her “diary’ is a fraud. Now, I’m not asking anyone to take my word for this but to check out Arthur Butz, Germar Rudolf, Walter Danning, Paul Rassinier, Robert Faurisson, Jurgen Graf, J.C. Burg, Carlo Mattogno and innumerable other scholar-historian-researchers who give the case in detail. To paraphrase Galt in Atlas Shrugged, If you want to pretend that I haven’t given the refs, should I pretend that I haven’t ? These ideas are only baffling and fantastical because you haven’t taken the time to actually check them out. Sorry, I didn’t make it clearer that my rebuttal to Churchill was private and our Z pieces were on other subjects.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 12, 2007 at 8:55 PM So, Natalie, tell us about the Stern Gang and the Irgun Gang. Has CNN ever done a story on them? If not, would they ever? Mr. Bruce
Posted by mrbruce on Apr 14, 2007 at 8:46 AM Obviously you’re talking about Howard K. Stern and his gang of creepy lawyers. Yes, they’ve done hundreds of stories on them.
This Irgun guy. Does he have a myspace page?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 15, 2007 at 3:45 AM The Stern Gang that terrorized Palestine in the 40s killing hundreds of civilians and some Brit soldiers too.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 15, 2007 at 9:16 PM Not hundreds, no way!! Probably not even 10, I’d say more like 8, and some of those just got sick and died on their own.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 17, 2007 at 12:50 AM Several hundred at the King David Hotel alone in just one incident, 269 alone at just Deir Yassein and there were many more like that. See The Zionist Connection by Alfred M. Lilienthal and if I have to I can come up with at least one dozen more titles, the Stern Gang was the first major modern terrorist outfit and they played a big role in KILLING many hundreds if not thousands if you count their paramilitary allies and in helping to expel up to onemillion Palestinians in 1947-48. UNWRRA was housing and feeding over 970,000 Palestinian Arabs by early 1949. Natalie, are you trying a little of your holocaust denial here ?Don’t even try to pass off that lying Israeli horseshit, you’d flunk out in any university in Israel if you tried to use the above preposterous figures. Benny Morris, Tom Segev, Avi Schlaim, Israel Shahak are just some of the Israelis who have documented the massive crimes of the Zionist miltary goons, including the Stern Gang, who also assassinated Count Bernadotte of the UN. And Natalie, are you really Joan Peters the totally discredited Israeli Amercian apologist ? Thanks for revealing your real colors, swine.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 17, 2007 at 4:08 PM The Stern Gang was an elaborate hoax, designed to gain sympathy for the Palestinian people, and make Israel look bad. Don’t buy into all the crap you read in history books!!
Wake up!!
Posted by Natalie on Apr 17, 2007 at 4:41 PM Sure, whatever you say. If this is your way of spoofing holocaust revisionism it fails. You still can’t come to grasp with revisionist questioning of the holohoax religion. Too bad but not my problem.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 17, 2007 at 5:44 PM Shame on you, Natalie, for indulging in what the late Palestinian intellectual Edward Said labeled it (sarcasm) as the lowest form of humour. Well, an affliction of inferior minds.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 17, 2007 at 5:53 PM No, you’re not the one who can’t grasp the obvious fabrication and exaggeration which was the Stern Gang. The anti-Israel bias of historians world-wide is well known. You can’t believe a damn thing any mainstream historian has written about the Stern Gang. It’s just crap!!
Posted by Natalie on Apr 17, 2007 at 5:55 PM Your wholeassed analogy would only work IF the revisionists denied the Nazi anti-semitism which they do not, the concentration camps which they do not, the deaths of large numbers of Jews by typhus in the last year of the war which they do not and the shooting of numbers of Jews by the Einsatzgruppen on the eastern front which they do not. Most think anywhere from 500,000 to maybe a million Jews perished and it was awful BUT it was a WORLD WAR and tens of millions of others perished too.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 17, 2007 at 9:38 PM I’m not saying that Stern wasn’t a bad guy, or that some people didn’t die due to him. I’m just saying that he and his gang were misunderstood, and that most of their actions were actually done out of love. I know that’s difficult for you to accept, but it’s true!!
/sarcasm
OK, yes, obviously I’m joking. Not meant to be a perfect analogy, really, with every criteria needing to be met, but merely an illustration of your rather selective embracing of the historical record.
If you want to cite the mainstream historical record regarding the Stern Gang, which indeed identifies them as killing hundreds of innocents in terroristic fashion, then you must do the same regarding the Holocaust. No, I guess you don’t have to, but not doing so doesn’t make you look very credible or consistent.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 18, 2007 at 12:12 AM Hey Natalie, Seen any stories on CNN lately about the 400 plus NUCLEAR weapons (WMD’s) that ISRAEL has. ISRAEL has not signed the Non Proliferation Treaty….... IRAN HAS.
Posted by mrbruce on Apr 18, 2007 at 11:20 AM Natalie, are you as dense and stupid as you appear to be ? I have studied the “holocaust” in great detail and it is a big lie in all of its essentials, starting from its very name meaning death by fire, which is how millions of Germans and Japanese died but not Jews. All the major claims are in error, no mass extermination orders or plot or program or conspiracy, no gas chambers, nowhere near six million Jews under German control during the war and nowhere near six million died, the lampshades & bars of soap a proven hoax, Auschwitz numbers reduced from 9 million to 4 million to 1.25 million to 750,000 and we haven’t seen the final reductions yet, the 200,000 at Dachau shrunk to 30,000 and not of all them died, since 1960 The Jewish Agency admitted no death camps on German soil, they CLAIM Poland but that is being hotly disputed and discredited daily. It’s time for you to get off your stinky tush and EITHER check it out or just shut up. As far as the Stern Gang goes this HAS been documented and your assertion that if I believe one “mainstream” account I must believe another !!!!!!!!! is a total failure in logic. One “mainstream” account might be true and another might be false. Recently I read that the average IQ in Israel is 99. I’d say among Israel’s apologists here it’s more like 88. Goodbye, Natalie.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 18, 2007 at 3:43 PM Uh huh, like I said….not very credible or consistent.
This Holocaust doubting phenomenon surely reminds me of the 9/11 “truth” movement.
We are asked to take the word of theologians, computer programmers and various other “researchers” over that of respected and accomplished engineers and related scientists, who are responsible for designing and building things like the World Trade Center towers in the first place. We’re asked to ignore the testimony of dozens of people who actually saw an American Airlines jet crash into the Pentagon, and focus on one person who described it as screaming toward its target “like a missile”, and believe that this means it must have been a missile.
In the case of Holocaust denial/revisionism/minimization, we’re asked to reject the overwhelming consensus of the same caliber of professionals in the field of history. We’re asked to ignore the voluminous testimony of Holocaust survivors and SS guards, and even the documentation coming from the Nazi archives. It’s all tainted, unreliable or meaningless for one reason or another.
I’m not a structural engineer or a historian, and I don’t think you are either, Mike. Neither of us are personally qualified to accurately evaluate the evidence relating to the WTC collapses or the Holocaust. However, unike you, I find it prudent and wise to accept the findings of those who genuinely are, over that of largely unqualified, biased and ulterior-motivated individuals and groups.
Goodbye, blindmike. Here’s hoping you someday see the light regarding the history of the Holocaust. It will help your credibility on a variety of other subjects.
And for heaven’s sake, don’t ever move, that is if you want to stay out of jail! ;-)
Posted by Natalie on Apr 18, 2007 at 8:36 PM
Posted by Natalie on Apr 18, 2007 at 8:47 PM Well, I just listed multiple references on the top Israel/Hamas thread that totally dedunk the standard view of the holohoax. Actually no guards really testified because the court starting at Nuremberg never allowed the extermination thesis to be challenged so every person was just trying to get off by saying that they were following orders. And the testimony of the “holocaust” witnesses has been totally shredded just at the DemJanJuk Stalinist Show Trial in Israel alone where the Judges had to acquit because HUNDREDS of “witnesses” were proven to be liars. Read the chapter on German justice by Claud Jordan in Dissecting The Holocaust. By the way, I am totally consistent in rejecting all the central premises of the holohoax lie and recognizing it for its Soviet origins. What Princess needs to do is go to www.historiography-project.com and download about 600 pages of the revisionist writings of Professor Robert Faurisson, which totally demolish every tenet of the holohoax from the “gas chambers” to Frank’s “Diary” to the actual figures to you name it. Then if you are really ambitious you download all the prosecution and defense witneses’ testimony at the Ernst Zundel holocaust heresy trial in Toronto in 1988. I have to tell you Princess Natalie that I am very unimpressed with the logical fallacy known as the Argument From Authority and I’m even less impressed when a Stalinist stinkpussy like you threatens me with the Argument From Intimidation a la the Stalinist laws in Europe. If you had half a fucking brain you would realize that people who resort to the goon tactic of coercion are admitting they have no reason or logic or truth on their. By the way, recognizing the truth of the stern Gang and recognizing the lie of the holohoax are perfectly consistent because the same crowd is behind BOTH. No anomaly here.As the old saying goes 50 million Frenchmen can be wrong and often ARE. I have no interest in 9-11 but I could evaluate perfectly well if I did and I definitely KNOW enough about the holohoax to know that it has been debunked thoroughly. Now take that stinky twat back to Mossad Central and start using feminine hygiene, PLEASE.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 18, 2007 at 10:19 PM Well, at least you didn’t call me a nappy-headed ho. That would have been over the line.
This is the same kind of crap I heard from the 9/11 chowder-heads. “Argument from authority” is always invoked when faced with the unpleasant fact that every genuine expert on the planet disagrees with their theories. What the hell do they know? I saw the collapse on YouTube and any idiot can tell that’s a controlled demolition! Those engineers are all scared to come out with the truth, they’re all dependent on govt. money. What about all the foreign engineers? Oh, well, those guys don’t count.
Your conflating my pointing out how lucky you are to live in a country that allows your nonsense with “threats”, “intimidation”, and “coercion” is illustrative of your penchant for paranoid misinterpretation.
Yeah, right Mike. You’ve personally debunked every reputable historian, and every Holocaust survivor on Earth. It’s all so obvious, yet nobody except you and the fine experts from IHR are smart enough to figure it all out, and brave enough to expose it. What’s next, time travel?
I don’t see many folks chiming in with support for your bent Holocaust theories here on ITT even. Of course, you’re smarter than all them too, right?
Hygiene indeed.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 19, 2007 at 8:10 AM Natalie, I am of a ‘‘particular type’‘, If I had a nuclear weapon I would drop it on Israel. The USA never had enemies in the middle east until Israel came into existence. Israel won’t even admit it has nuclear weapons. All that CNN does is regurgitate Zionist propoganda. Mordacai Vanunu tells the truth and what does he get?: TRUTH is what the Zionists FEAR. According to the latest statistics more JEWS are moving to Germay than to Israel, what does that tell you? Also, recently Israel told Jews to leave 40 countries, what does that tell you. The shit is going to hit the fan soon and ‘‘the CHOSEN ONES’’ will get what they deserve. Any people who call themselves ‘‘the CHOSEN ONES’’ deserve exactly what they are going to get. Before you start labelling me ‘‘antisemite’’ etc., etc. tell me what percentage of JEWS moving to Israel are SEMITE?
Posted by mrbruce on Apr 19, 2007 at 9:36 AM Natalie, again why are you so scared to check out the revisionist literature ? We saw in the Demjanjuk Stalinist show trial in Israel how hundreds of “holocaust survivors” were willing to lie their heads off. Two of the leading early revisionists were concentration camp survivors,
Paul Rassinier and Joseph Burg. The Argument From Authority is a classic logical fallacy because it is a circular argument, you are simply reiterating your contested assertion. The Argument From Analogy is not per se invalid but depends strictly on how accurate the analogy. I don’t have enough knowledge of the 9-11 controversy that you keep irrelevantly bringing up to know if you are even properly characterizing the opposition there correctly. But I DO on the “holocaust’” a Big Lie starting with its very name. So let’s cut out the shadow boxing and either you check out the literature or you don’t. But in any case I have nothing more to discuss with you. Now as far as the opposition which I would expect on a leftist venue as this one or really most ones since any time you question a sacred cow you expect a massively emotional and largely irrational response, anyone can see that I have wiped the floor with these critics. I mean they have been embarrassingly stupid and hysterical. If I wanted to create a stereotype oppositon these goons here including yourself would be it. I’ll end with a great quote from Ayn Rand’s We The Living, a long line of zeroes is still a zero. That’s I think of your vaunted authorities and frankly of you too.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 19, 2007 at 4:07 PM Sorry mrbruce, I was unclear.
I didn’t mean are you of a particular type, I meant I hope you aren’t so particular that 2004 is not “lately” enough for you.
You asked if CNN had done any stories about Israel’s nuclear weapons, apparently implying that they’re trying to cover up for them, and I produced an article that proves that they’re not. Gosh, CNN rarely misses a chance to portray the Palestinians as victims; I think they’re really on your side. Does the name Christiane Arafat-Amanpour ring any bells?
Do you agree with Mike when he says:
“not six million, not even a million”
????
Posted by Natalie on Apr 19, 2007 at 4:28 PM antiwar.com has a book out by the editor justin raimondo on the israeli connection to 9-11. surprises never cease. hot stuff !
Posted by bart on Apr 20, 2007 at 5:12 PM Funny, Natalie, over on another thread I was just responding to a high school student about the controversy over the “holocaust.” In 1960 that term was not in use but I recall making some mild criticism of one of those propaganda films at the time. I was in my early teens. My parents reacted by pulling my pajama pants down and giving my behind the hardest spanking I ever got ! Right in front of my siblings too. It was at least 10 years before I ever ventured into that area again. I thought about this because this kid just related what happened to a classmate of his when his folks caught him looking at revisionist sites. Given your own ferocity on this subject I wonder if you’d react the same way ?
Posted by blondemike on Apr 20, 2007 at 8:46 PM Gosh you know what, I’d be highly concerned and mightily pissed. My reaction would be based upon my reading of the respective accounts which gives little if any legitimacy to the revisionist view. I might even turn into an Alec Baldwin.
I would be mightily worried about my son getting seduced by what I consider to be vile propaganda, and what doors might be rightly closed on him as a result.
I would also be disappointed and angry if he started falling for all the 9/11 denial nonsense. This view, if held and espoused by him, would likely result in lost opportunities in areas of science, engineering, or any other field that required good critical thinking skills.
A parent’s got to draw some lines and set some standards. You get angry and reactionary if they start doing drugs, start stealing things, or start adopting unacceptable and unsupportable (IMHO) social and historical views.
However, learning from your experience, the best approach might not be to lose control and lash out, but to arrange a meeting with a Holocaust survivor, or a structural engineer.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 21, 2007 at 12:34 AM Natalie, I’ve met many of these “holocaust” survivors and they are invariable liars. But since you never bothered to do any honest reseach ere into what holocaust (the very term a lie since Jews did not die en masse by fire in WW2) you really wouldn’t know what’s “unsupportable.” Engineers and chemists are featured in the revisionist literature quite substantially. As far as dissident views being in the same category as doing drugs or stealing this is insane ! Not even worth responding to. You need to read the revisionist view as revisionists state it to be even capable of making a judgment. Whether you agreed or not would irrelevant. You don’t even know the actual arguments, in a space like this one is limited to giving conclusions and references, I’ve done this. I don’t understand your obsession with 9-11 but I haven’t looked into that. I don’t doubt the structural collapse, not sure I know all the players, often like in the JFK thing the official explanations are too pat, politically motivated and bullshit to boot. Whether it is in 9-11 I don’t know and it’s not at the topof my plate. I never “lashed out” here, usually in the course of rebutting Israeli fanatics or apologists I decided to bring up because the holocaust simply never happened as described. That there was Nazi antisemitism and Jews died during the war is not in doubt. In 1960 I never really knew much except the propaganda films I’d already seen for five years. I don’t hold my parents kneejerk reaction against them. And from what this kid told me a couple of his classmates got their behinds tanned but good for looking at these sites. I am not saying this in criticism of you but I gather that you would spank the behind of any of your kids you caught looking at this stuff. Right ? Maybe it is a good deterent too. If I had been your kid my bottom would be tanned but good ! Admit it.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 21, 2007 at 1:07 AM Natalie, I’ve met many of these “holocaust” survivors and they are invariable liars.
That’s a jaw-dropping statement—and one of the most insulting things I’ve ever heard. It makes Alec Baldwin come across as warm and fuzzy. I wonder if you’d like to run that line by the family of the Holocaust survivor who sacrificed his life saving all those kids at VT.
I didn’t mean it was you that lashed out, I was talking about your parents who gave you the “hardest spanking” of your life, even though you have indeed lashed out at me with vile insults* without restraint. (*which of course, only amuse me)
Actually, I’m not a spanker, beyond a rare mostly ceremonial moderate whack on the butt in extreme circumstances. I certainly don’t think that physical punishment would be appropriate for some kid simply naturally curious about things like the Holocaust or the events of 9/11. I was expressing my personal anguish and distress that would result, but that would not (I hope) translate to spanking the child.
It would seem that your spanking was counterproductive, even though your parents were well-intentioned, because it just confused you. A better approach would have been some effective education at the time, but you see now it’s too late for you.
There’s no point in me trying to do some personal research regarding the Holocaust, because it’s already been done by hundreds of others far more qualified who have had access to far more information and testimony than I could ever have. It would be like me trying to debunk the Federal report on the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers without the benefit of advanced knowledge of engineering and physics, and without the benefit of the stacks and stacks of evidence and testimony which was exclusive to them.
Yes, I’ll go with the experts on this and the Holocaust, and I reject the all too easy out of claiming they’re all scared, or cowed, or ignorant. “Invariable liars” doesn’t wash. You’ve got to provide some kind of rational reason why the vast majority of experts and so many witnesses flatly and vehemently reject your view.
Sorry to keep bringing up 9/11, but there are so many parallels, and indeed Holocaust denial and hatred of Israel is often intertwined within their nutty arguments, as the above post by bart demonstrates. Holocaust deniers/revisioinists are well represented among the ranks of those responsible for the genesis of the “movement”.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 21, 2007 at 10:55 AM Your nonargument by misanalogy fails. If I knew nothing else and say was a visitor from Mars, and saw the respective postings here just by you and me there would be no question as to who was making a serious argument backed by references and who was simply evading coming to grips with the dissident perspective. Unfortunately all of these experts that you defer have been found wanting. In the case of the racist and fascist “Jewish” state of Israel it would not be justified if the holocaust was true but it is the big lie of our time starting with its very name. Imagine a Jewish State where 25% of the population is NonJewish, by that logic the USA should be an official Christian State. Your tactic of trying to totally ignore the unwelcome message by defaming the messenger is a major logical fallacy. Indeed hundreds of holocaust survivors were willing to commit perjury at the Demjanjuk trial in Israel as the court there was forced to recognize. There were a number of heroic people at Virginia Tech, the fact that one person was a camp (not “holocaust”) survivor WAS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. MORE MEDIA HYPE. Bart just mentioned something on the Israeli connection to 9-11 and never made an argument, “nutty” or otherwise. He is not even a revisionist, he’s simply looking at the literature which is a much more responsible thing than you are doing. Now how can anyone provide reasons if you won’t look at the reasons but invent strawman nonarguments instead ? I could just as easily say it is all too easy to go along with the crowd here.If you read even a couple of the books I recommend you will find out that all these experts and witnesses, so-called, base their claims on a very few simple premises which have been thrown into serious doubt or entirely discredited. I never wrote that they were all scared or ignorant, I believe they are wrong and you’ll have to read it to find out why. I never lashed out at you with vile insults, I did call you one vulgar name but that was after putting up with your insufferable, lying evasions. Which I have no further intention of doing so. Your nonsequiturs about 9-11 and Alec Baldwin are absurd. I never met or heard of anyone who doubted that 9-11 happened. The only question is cui bono ? Israel has totally, not the Saudis who did it. This doesn’t prove Israel had a hand in it, I haven’t read the Raimondo book so I withhold judgment. And, NO, I am not impressed by experts over the years who have been proven wrong in everything from psychoanalysis to Keynesian economics. At this point I am very tired of repeating myself and I leave you to your basic intellectual dishonesty and lifelong career of evasion of any views you dislike.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 21, 2007 at 6:44 PM One thing there’s no denying:
We’re at an impasse.
But I think I see an indication of your tendency to deny the undeniable.
<u>I never lashed out at you with vile insults</u>, I did call you <u>one vulgar name</u> but that was after putting up with your insufferable, lying evasions.
This of course is demonstrably false. Before I even addressed you personally:
Natalie, you are the same <u>LYING ugly old HOLOHOAX mongering whore</u> and Israeli disinformation agent. Simply a repeat of your lying Iraq campaign. If you AIPAC traitors compound the Iraq fiasco with Iran <u>you bastards</u> better sleep with BOTH eyes open.
<u>Yo’ ugly mama</u>, Natalie. CNN is no more “liberal” than Fox and most rightists like myself OPPOSE Bush and <u>neocon blowjobers</u> like you.
Then later…..
Natalie, <u>you are an imbecile</u>
<u>Your about as welcome around here as a case of liver cancer.</u> Even though of us who don’t agree with each other oppose the war. <u>Your shit</u> is just boring at this point.
Anyway, Natalie, your postings are getting to be the most boring event in world history since your wedding night so get <u>your stinky behind</u> elsewhere.
a piece of <u>neoconwoman asswipe</u> like yourself.
Is this an indication of your ability to discern reality, or admit to a truth? Does your denial of insulting me really reflect reality in your mind?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 22, 2007 at 8:58 PM Natalie, I never denied your ugly existence, on the contrary I reaffirmed the truth about you more times than I thought it worth remembering. Nor did I deny speaking the truth about you to you, I just forgot how many times that I did. But after rereading the postings, of course like all stink pussy smear artists taken out of their larger context, I STAND BY THEM. YOU ARE A PIECE OF LYING, AGENT PROVOCATEUR, DISSEMBLING, LOWLIFE, FOUL SMELLING LUMP OF HUMAN EXCREMENT. OK NOW WE HAVE WHAT YOU ARE ON THE RECORD. I never post here to persuade congenital liars like yourself but only to correct the record in case some intelligent life happens to be browsing.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 22, 2007 at 9:16 PM Just found out what happened on 9-11. Natalie walked by the WTC, let out a gigantic fart that was heard as far away as Newfoundland, her poisonous gas seeped through the structural engineered materials
and the foul odor caused the total collapse of WTC.
Well, since it was a Rockefeller engineered urban renewal scam in the first place, no great loss. But Bush is declaring you an enemy combatant and the Feds are seizing control of your bowels. In fact, that’s those black heliocopters outside your place right now, and by the way, don’t worry about your son not getting admitted to engineering school because of unorthodox political theories, with his IQ of 38 he wasn’t getting in anyway.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 23, 2007 at 1:22 AM LOL Michael P.!!! You’re funny when you start shouting.
But your 9/11 theory actually makes more sense than what your friends theorize.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 23, 2007 at 8:28 AM I never shout. I very calmly albeit forcefully tell you what you are. I just figured out your 9-11 game. It has to do with Israel, Antiwar.com published several pieces documenting an Israeli connection to 9-11. Had to do with bogus Israeli “art students” several of whom lived on the same block in Florida as one of the 9-11 Saudis. None of this has anything to do with structural engineering or the rest of that flat earth nonsense. Apparently Israel either knew of the attack in advance and didn’t warn DC or they were even involved as they agents all over the Arab world. Unfortunately the “holocaust” legend is disintegrating before our very eyes. The 200,000 at Dachau get reduced to 30,000 and many of them survived. The nine million of Soviet lore at Nuremberg allegedly in Auschwitz get reduced to four million, then after the Commies it gets reduced to a mil, now the Polish Historical Society estimates 700,000. In time it will reduced much below that figure. Vad Vashem is forced to admit no gas chambers at any of the German camps. The lampshades and bars of soap of human skin are total frauds as even the top holohoaxer historian Hilberg admits. Mengele was a very minor player in the Third Reich even assuming the tales about him are true. And after reviewing perjured “testimony” from Nuremberg to Malmedy to Frankfurt to Eichmann to Demjanjuk show trials these “survivors” do not have credibility. Now the whole Auschwitz-Birkenau complex legend is under the most serious attack. Coming after the USS Liberty, the Pollard traitors, Tom Lantos’ s lying about “stolen baby incubators” in Kuwait and if the US actually suspected an Israeli hand in 9-11, some apologists like “Natalie” may find themselves in very hot water. Justin Raimondo’s book may just turn things around.NOW I understand your 9-11 obsession, before it made no sense. Goodbye, Natalie.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 23, 2007 at 3:29 PM It looks like our resident princess doth protest
too much. Go to Amazon and order the monograph
Terror Enigma:9/11 and the Israeli Connection by
Justin Raimondo. Alex Cockburn of The Nation has
highly recommended this small book on his
Counterpunch.org website. In fact that site is a
fount of great information on Israel and her lobby
over here.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 23, 2007 at 4:24 PM Of course it’s easy to understand why holo-deniers and Israel haters soak up and adopt as gospel anything that supports their demented world-view.
The “Israeli art student” story fits in with that. As does the nonsense about the USS Liberty being targeted with the knowledge that it was a U.S. ship. These are agenda-driven conspiracy theories that have been found to be untrue or dubious at best.
A well written yarn by an agenda driven ideological chameleon is sufficient to fascinate and hypnotize the anti-jewish zombies.
But there are many problems with his intriguing little struggle and stretch to blame. If anyone reading this has NOT been visited by someone peddling the old “buy this beautiful art so I can go to college” scam, he or she hasn’t been alive very long.
Seems like there’s always an intrepid investigator/writer/researcher out there easily able to publish something on his own website, or some other cheesy tabloid venue. However, for some reason these blockbuster exposes never seem to get picked up by any legitimate journalistic entity.
You know, one that actually checks facts and doesn’t indict entire groups of people or countries based on wild assumptions?
Posted by Natalie on Apr 23, 2007 at 11:12 PM Israel knowingly targeted the Liberty and even
admitted it by some measly reparations.
See the James Ennes book on this and
Seymour Hersch has also confirmed the
deliberate targeting. Let’s see, The American
Conservative is legitimate as is the Chronicles
from the Rockford Institute as is The London
Independent as is Al Jazeera and they all have
picked up on the Israeli connection to 9-11.
Fox News actually did a multipart series before they
were pressured out of it. Carl Cameron was the
reporter. The rapidly declining Times and Post
haven’t but you know who owns both of them.
As far as entire groups of people goes, Israel’s
agents over here have spread anti-Arab hatred far
and wide and long before 9-11. See The Fateful
Triangle by Chomsky and two massive works by
Robert Fisk, highly respected reporter for the London
Independent.
Schwartz is a notorious crackpot going from Maoism
to Trotskyism to neoconism to even Sufi Islamism !
Raimondo had a point by point rebuttal to his smear.
Somehow you “forgot” to link that. Raimondo has also
rebutted your other ref too. Guess you forgot about that
too, eh ? Your tactics here are on a par with giving the
Stormtrooper as a source ! People have caught onto
you here, Princess Stinky Bottom. Your through on this
site.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 23, 2007 at 11:45 PM Princess Stinky’s attempt to whitewash the
Israeli atrocity in June 1967 is not only very
revealing but it confirms previous suspicions
raised here about her true motives. Only a
far right Likudnik nut would even try to whitewash
this and it was deliberate because the US Navy had
documented Israel’s own aggression in that war
which was falsely portrayed as “defensive” over
here. Lilienthal’s The Zionist Connection rebuts
the Israeli Party line here but what is more revealing
is that the Princess equates criticism of a vicious
Israeli state policy with attacking the whole Jewish
people ! Innumerable Jewish authors from Finkelstein
to Chomsky to Lilienthal to Elmer Berger to Moshe
Menuhin (father of Yehudi) to Avi Schlaim to Philip
Green to Seymour Hersch have relentlessly exposed
and attacked Israeli policies. No, Princess Stinky
Bottom, this smear won’t work, the Walt-Mersheimer
paper from Harvard blew this apart and now people
all over the place are talking about AIPAC’s total
stranglehold over US foreign policy. That you are
forced to recycle a discredited madman like Stephen
Schwartz is a total indictment of you.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 24, 2007 at 12:06 AM These “art students” from Israel was able
to get into the most highly secret US state
offices. Read Raimondo and ignore this
thing here. I was warned by Arpie that our
stinky arse Princess actually got someone
to engage her for 20 pages on this site (!)
on her 9-11 crapola. You will have to go
back to wherever your paymaster is and tell
them we wouldn’t even consider you for a BJ
in a pinch. I pity you very much.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 24, 2007 at 12:16 AM I kinda pity holo-minimizers and people who jump to unwarranted conclusions for the sole purpose of blaming people they don’t like for something. And it’s not some small thing, but things like murdering 3000 people, or keeping secret the knowledge of a plan to murder 3000 people, or deliberately attacking an ally’s boat for no apparent reason.
But, that’s just me.
Of course you’ve got it all wrong on “my” 9/11 “crapola”. Many people “engaged” the ITT articles which poo-pooed the 9/11 conspiracy theories. I simply politely voiced my opinion agreeing with ITT and the rest of the sane world, and was then savagely attacked from numerous quarters.
It’s not MY 9/11 crapola, it’s theirs. I simply identified the crap as crap, and had the audacity not to just go away after doing so.
I didn’t “get someone to engage me”, MANY people chose to engage me, including luminous beauty, David from Canuckistan and many others. I know David has since realized it was all nonsense, and I suspect others have as well.
I also hope David has realized that the treatment the British hostages recieved was anything but accurately portrayed by state-run Iranian TV.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 24, 2007 at 10:28 PM Princess, not even a BJ in a pinch.
The attack was for the very good reason
of trying to keep the Navy from exposing
Israel’s aggressive war against Syria.
Any one who thinks Israel is a US ally should
consult Seymour Hersch’s research into the
two American Jewish traitors known as the Pollards.
These bastards not only gave Israel top secret info
but also gave it to the East Germans who passed it
on to the Soviets. Every CIA agent behind the Iron
Curtain was killed and the quid pro quo was the
Soviet release of a million Jews to Israel.
Natalie is obviously an Israeli agent which by
definition is treason to the USA.
See the James Ennes book on the USS Liberty.
The rest of your sad little performance is one long nonsequitur.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 24, 2007 at 10:46 PM I know David has since realized it was all nonsense, and I suspect others have as well.
I also hope David has realized that the treatment the British hostages recieved was anything but accurately portrayed by state-run Iranian TV.
Yes, Natalie.
The official government approved story of what happened on 9/11 is quite likely nonsense.No, Natalie.
The treatment of the British detainees as portrayed on Iranian television was mostly accurate.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 24, 2007 at 11:02 PM Natalie is a Jewish racist-supremacist
whose goal is to further Israel’s dirty work
by whatever lies she can invent or spread
about Arabs, Persians or anyone else not
in sympathy with Zionist racism and fascism.
Nothing more complicated than that.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 24, 2007 at 11:54 PM Oh, so David’s still apparently suffering from the virus. I guess I completely misinterpreted your statement on the other thread:
“I am very well, thank you, Natalie, and hope you are the same.
It’s likely the bug was a healthy touch of paranoia.”
—David from Canuckistan on Feb 17, 2007
I asked you to elaborate, but you didn’t respond.
And on exactly what basis do you come to your conclusion that the British hostages were somehow telling the truth while in captivity, and lying after they got safely home??? I was under the assumption that you were a logical person.
Is there more than one strain of virus going around?
No, bostonblackie, or Hardesty as I suspect, I’m not jewish and I have no interest in furthering anyone’s dirty work. I’m perfectly fine exposing yours, however.
There have been numerous investigations that have all concluded that the USS Liberty was attacked by mistake by the Israelis. I know that doesn’t fit in with your warped view of Israel, but I’m afraid that’s the boring truth.
Ennes is sincere and I’m sure well-meaning, but he is operating largely out of emotion and anger. When one examines the facts in detail from an unattached perspective, there is little reason to suspect what some continue to desperately cling to.
I really have no particular love for Israel, beyond the fact that its innocent civilians are constantly and deliberately being targeted for destruction, and that their country is constantly being wished out of existence. To that, I’m somewhat sympathetic. ;-)
But, that’s just me, and around here, apparently only me.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 25, 2007 at 1:12 AM Yes, Natalie, you did misinterpret my statement. As I said ... a healthy touch of paranoia - defined as a suspicion of the motives of others. Well deserved skepticism.
“And on exactly what basis do you come to your conclusion that the British hostages were somehow telling the truth while in captivity, and lying after they got safely home???”
Detainees. But this question isn’t exactly what you mentioned earlier ...
”... the treatment the British hostages recieved ...”
... was what I was responding to in your previous post. Not the so called confessions the British soldiers were coerced into giving.
But first let’s get back to the treatment the British detainees received. They were fed, clothed in a civilian manner, allowed recreation and released in a very short time. Please consider and compare the treatment of many more detainees at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Orange jump suits, torture, rape, and many imprisoned for years with no trial. And forced confessions no doubt too.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 25, 2007 at 4:47 AM Racist Natalie’s selective indignation over Israeli
victims is so touching but when one considers
that Palestinian civilians have been killed by Israel
at a rate of 10 to 1 for every Israeli killed it merely
seals the case on her avowed racism. As far as
obliteration of people out of existence Israel and
her uber alles over here have been doing that to
the Palestinians for over 60 years. Why Israel’s
highly armed and militarized “civilians” would be
more “innocent” than the largely unarmed Palestinian
civilians the little Princess has yet to explain.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 25, 2007 at 5:30 PM A “healthy” touch of paranoia?
paranoia:
1) a mental condition characterized by delusions of persecution, unwarranted jealousy, or exaggerated self-importance, typically elaborated into an organized system. It may be an aspect of chronic personality disorder, of drug abuse, or of a serious condition such as schizophrenia in which the person loses touch with reality.
2) suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without evidence or justification.
I guess I assumed you were using the definition of healthy thus:
healthy:
of a satisfactory size or amount
Regardless, you still appear to be evading the central question. Do you still harbor 9/11 conspiracy theories? You said that it was a “healthy touch of paranoia”. Does “was” mean that you have changed your opinions regarding 9/11, or not?
Yes, on the surface it appears my question did change a little bit regarding the hostages, but not really. The treatment they received bears directly on the question of when they were speaking the truth, since their testimony is what we largely relied upon both in Iran and at home. I don’t think any clear thinking person would assume they were telling the truth in Iran, and lying at home.
Yes, let’s do get back to the treatment the hostages received. Nobody is saying they were physically abused to the point of being visibly damaged, but their treatment was far from civilized and far from what is expected under rules of the Geneva Convention:
UK sailors tell of execution fears
By Christopher Adams in London
April 6 2007 20:45The British sailors and marines held captive in Iran told on Friday how they had been subjected to blindfolding, isolation and threats that led them to fear they would be executed.
The revelations came as the UK moved to show that their detention was not the civilized affair depicted on Iranian television.
Their dramatic account of almost two weeks in detention – and insistence that they had been ambushed by Iranian forces 3.1km inside Iraqi waters in an “illegal” operation – were dismissed by Tehran.
Iranian state television said the UK Ministry of Defence had “dictated” what the sailors should say and called the press conference at a Royal Marine base at Chivenor in south-west England “a show”.
The sailors and marines told reporters of the moment when they feared they could be executed. At a detention centre in Tehran, blindfolded, handcuffed and forced against a wall, they heard the sound of guns cocking.
Joe Tindell, a 21-year-old marine from London, told the BBC: “Someone, I’m not sure who, someone said, I quote: ‘Lads, lads, I think we’re going to get executed.’ After that comment someone was sick and, as far as I was concerned, he had just had his throat cut.”
It emerged that the only woman, Leading Seaman Faye Turney, 26 and married with a three-year-old daughter, had been kept isolated from the others for several days and told within hours of her arrival that the rest had been sent home.......
.......The accounts contradicted Tehran’s assurances that they had been treated well and contrasted with TV pictures that showed them smiling and relaxing. Chris Air, a marine captain, called the broadcasts, including several in which members of the group admitted straying into Iranian waters, “a media stunt”.
Throughout their detention, they were kept in isolation, were interrogated regularly and “faced constant psychological pressure”.
The sailors said in a prepared statement: “We were interrogated most nights and given two options. If we admitted that we had strayed, we would be back on a plane to the UK pretty soon. If we didn’t, we faced up to seven years in prison.”........
Posted by Natalie on Apr 25, 2007 at 10:12 PM So it’s obvious the British hostages were mentally tortured, and were illegally coerced and paraded against international law, not to mention being detained in the first place against international law. None of this of course was even speculated upon by the Iranian so called “media”.
They were uniformed soldiers of a sovereign nation operating under UN mandate in Iraqi waters. The Iranians seem absolutely sure where their waters were, so the argument about disputed boundaries really doesn’t apply, now does it?
By contrast, prisoners @ A/G and in Cuba are un-uniformed terrorists, who have very different rights under the Geneva Convention. A/G was blown completely out of proportion by those Bush-loving conservatives in the media for months. It was an isolated problem that had already been discovered and was being remedied when the story broke.
You simply can’t compare these situations in an attempt to say that Iran didn’t do anything worse than America does, and your pained defense of the Iranian govt and media is evidence of that.
I think the basic problem here goes back to your word paranoia. “without evidence or justification”. Unwarranted equivalencies. The truth is that America’s and I’m sure Canada’s military is composed of good and decent men and women, who have no desire to torture or mistreat anyone, beyond of course a handful of unfortunate exceptions.
Their opposition on the other hand are brainwashed maniacs, who do not hesitate to sacrifice themselves in their quest to blow innocent civilians to pieces, or take hostages illegally, threaten them with 7 yrs in jail, and use them for internal and world propaganda purposes.
Apples and oranges, David.
And of course, the same concept applies to the Israeli/Palestinian situation.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 25, 2007 at 10:13 PM Princess Stinky Bottom, the US military
has a long history of atrocities against
civilians that go back to the 1898 invasion
of the Philippines where the US soldiers
literally killed hundreds of thousands of
Filipinos, I knew people in my grandfather’s
army unit who bragged of the atrocities they
frequently committed against German civilians
in 1945 in Germany. My Lai was not atypical
but merely more publicized than a million other
US strocities in Indochina where we killed over
four million people. US atrocities in Iraq are well
known as are our atrocious interrogation techniques
at Guantanamo and many secret US concentration
camps in East Europe since 9-11.
Israel is the only country in the world that OPENLY
endorses legalized torture. Their Supreme Court put
a few mild brakes on it but it is legal in Israel and the
Occupied Territories. The ONLY reason the occupied
throw bombs, suicide or otherwise, is because they
are occupied. They were occupied for 35 years BEFORE
they did suicide bombs and what bombs they used
before that are very small potatoes compared to
what Israel has routinely done since 1948 and 1967.
There is no evidence that the Brits were
at all tortured in Iran and there is every evidence
that they were illegally spying in Iranian waters.
In fact, they have no legal rights in Iraq since they
are an occupying military power. Apples and oranges,
yes, except the US & Israel are the two leading rogue
terrorist states as Noam Chomsky and William Blum
have documented in books by that name.
The UN “Mandate” has long since expired and
is a fig leaf for illegal US-UK aggression.
As for Guatanamo thr Cuban has asked us for almost
half a century to get out. We are illegally occupying part
of Cuba. Does a little stink hussey like you actually think
that David or anyone here other than a few rightist nuts
would buy your incredible spin ? By the way, Abu Ghraib
was NOT being remedied until the media exposed it.
The Bush Admin was doing everything possible to cover
it up as even Rummy was forced to admit and that was
the tip of the iceberg. Finally by 9-11 “conspiracy theories”
you anything that doesn’t comport with US-Israeli propaganda.
We had the Watergate Conspiracy, we had the Iran Contra Conspiracy
and any number of other events from Pearl Harbor “surprise”
to the Warren Commission Report have been doubted by huge
numbers of people. When the Govt wants to get you they will
charge “conspiracy” without a second thought and we are supposed
to believe they never conspire ?? Pollard never conspired ?
Why are two top AIPAC employees on trial in Federal
Court now if they never conspired ? I was not interested
in 9-11 but Raimondo has a good track on this and
the war, unlike you. Israel coverup is your only interest here.
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 25, 2007 at 11:34 PM Ok, I just took care of Princess Stinky
Bottom here. Notice how she was forced
to fall back on the lame “mental torture” bit
precisely because there was no physical torture ?
Posted by bostonblackie on Apr 25, 2007 at 11:45 PM Natalie, enough games.
I still harbor doubts about all of the theories presented for what happened on 9/11 and have made no absolute judgements or claims of knowing the truth of the matter is. I have answered the same in different ways to your similar questions on previous occasions.
My previous statement shouldn’t have read “was” but should correctly read “is” . Thanks for the correction.
We should put this topic away now, Natalie, as I think you have become obsessed with it.
Here is a story for you ...
Obsessed
Two traveling monks reached a river where they met a young woman. Wary of the current, she asked if they could carry her across. One of the monks hesitated, but the other quickly picked her up onto his shoulders, transported her across the water, and put her down on the other bank. She thanked him and departed.
As the monks continued on their way, the one was brooding and preoccupied. Unable to hold his silence, he spoke out. “Brother, our spiritual training teaches us to avoid any contact with women, but you picked that one up on your shoulders and carried her!”
“Brother,” the second monk replied, “I set her down on the other side, while you are still carrying her.”
On to the Britsh detainees ...
“You simply can’t compare these situations in an attempt to say that Iran didn’t do anything worse than America does, and your pained defense of the Iranian govt and media is evidence of that. “
I can and do.
I am not defending the Iranian government but am simply comparing the Iranian treatment of detainees and the American treatment of detainees. Apples and apples.
“By contrast, prisoners @ A/G and in Cuba are un-uniformed terrorists, who have very different rights under the Geneva Convention.”
Says who? Some of these people have been found innocent (or not guilty if you like) and released after months and even years of detention. Their rights were trampled on and many of them tortured as well. You say we can’t compare them because they are apples and oranges but yet compare them you do.
“I think the basic problem here goes back to your word paranoia. “without evidence or justification”.”
The basic problem here is that I played with the words healthy and paranoia and subsequently clarified my meaning for you but you still insist on trying to misrepresent and redefine my words to suit your argument.
The truth is ...
The truth, Natalie, is that while it would be nice if everyone were good and decent ... the reality is that there are some people who are evil and indecent.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 25, 2007 at 11:47 PM You know why I try to hold people accountable for their 9/11 kook theories? Because it’s an extremely good barometer with which to measure their ability to separate manufactured biased nonsense from simple and obvious reality.
Your continued confusion on the matter reflects extremely poorly on you, and I would urge you to wise up, as I mistakenly thought you had.
No, you didn’t clarify, you continued to evade, and only now you have finally made clear you still don’t have a clue what to believe regarding 9/11—I would guess that’s due to your “paranoid” beliefs regarding the American govt. and/or Israel. (see definitions above) No wonder you don’t want to talk about it.
You still don’t seem to grasp the difference between the behavior of for instance, the Iranian govt. and the American govt. One is in good faith trying to isolate murderous brainwashed terrorists, and the other is a terrorist sponsor, whose clients deliberately murder and blow to pieces innocent Americans, Britons, Israelis, Iraqis and frankly anyone who dares oppose their bigoted, oppressive and apparently apocalyptic ambitions.
“The truth, Natalie, is that while it would be nice if everyone were good and decent ... the reality is that there are some people who are evil and indecent.”
Truer words were never spoken. Just try to get the players in their proper columns.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 26, 2007 at 2:18 AM “Your continued confusion on the matter reflects extremely poorly on you, and I would urge you to wise up ... “
Awww, Natalie, your ridicule has hurt my feelings =(
But remembering this old saying ...“Bring me into the company of those who seek the truth,
and deliver me from those who have found it.”... has cheered me up =)
“You still don’t seem to grasp the difference between the behavior of for instance, the Iranian govt. and the American govt.”
I do, Natalie. We have discussed it at length. They have differences and similarities. That we judge some of those things differently doesn’t surprise me but don’t you see the similarities in our judgement as well?
“Truer words were never spoken. Just try to get the players in their proper columns.”
Thank you, Natalie. I agree that deciding which column the players should be in is difficult.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 26, 2007 at 2:57 AM Hi,y’all!
May I venture an opinion?
I remember when CNN debuted. The station gained a reputation for up to the minute news which was broadcast every hour. One could tune in and be just as well-informed as those who had watched Walter Cronkite.
However, there is a disturbing, and self-perpetuating, trend to focus upon glitz and ignore real news. I blame Fox News. Set the bar down low enough that everyone will get it and everyone will tune in—and love it. After all, everyone can understand world news, no matter how simple the message, and pretend to be in formed. The result: a pack of ignorant fascist reprobates pretending to understand international politics because of a thirty-second sound bite. People who are led and willing to further those who’ve led them.As well,a dumbed-down system of news and followers too stupid to realize the deception and ask for better, or even ask the right questions.
Look at what happened to"Crossfire”. It was a once reasonably intelligent show. By it’s end it was nothing more than a bunch of sound bites and taunts that belong on Jerry Springer.
I dreadfully sorry Anna Nicole Smith died. Poor girl, and so pretty. Yet, I say enough when a former centerfold dominates the news and eclipses trluy important events which are are overshadowed by executive-imposed time constraints.
By the way,Robert Novak, why did you feel the urge to out the head of our department of counter-proliferation and undermine the person who helps ensure that there are no stray nuclear warheads that couild be used against us? Speaking of outing… No, I’d better not voice that opinion.
Then again, this a man whose column is the political equivalent of the Society Page, or the gossip page. tabloid journalism masquerading as insight because we’re told so.
We are being fed slop and will continue to get more if that’s what we agree to consume.
Ta-Ta!
Posted by Aunty Rightwing on Apr 26, 2007 at 7:01 AM Funny that in a post complaining about the quality of media reporting, that you’d so badly misrepresent the Plame case.
“head of our department of counter-proliferation”? Wow, that’s a new one.Of course the true responsibility for her “outing”, if you can even call it that, lies with she and her husband, not Novak, who was simply doing his job by asking perfectly legitimate and pertinent questions regarding the reasoning and responsibility for choosing Joe Wilson for a mission he obviously turned out not to be qualified for.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 26, 2007 at 8:49 AM Hi, y’all!
Natalie,
I believe that’s what I’d heard. Do you know different or better? Since you tend to argue in favor of this government and corporatism, as you have in the past(DU anyone?) I’m sure you’ll minimize her importance to that of emptying wastebaskets. Still, if I’m wrong, tell me what she did. Unqualified? Only because he came back with news that Georgie Jr. didn’t want to hear!
I defy the right-wing to show us one WMD! Why? Because there were none. If one had existed, or even evidence that they had been moved to another country, FOX news would have trumpeted that news with a fervor and volume that would make the Divine Clarion sound like a kazoo! Sean Hannity would have babbled about it like Rain Man, and still be babbling"see I told you so”.
At any rate, Novak outed a CIA agent to settle a score, during wartime, I might add. Where is the fury of the patriot act ? Why is Novak not sharing a cell with Jose Padilla? Oh,that’s right! He’s an apparatus of the BU**SH** administration. Silly me! I forgot !
By the way, I’m a private citizen not a public news organization. I do make slips from time to time.
Ta-Ta!
Posted by Aunty Rightwing on Apr 26, 2007 at 4:43 PM Hi Aunty,
Valerie Plame worked in the nonproliferation division at the CIA, but I’ve never heard she was the “head” of it. I guess that’s possible, given all the secrecy of the CIA, but let’s just say a lot of people would consider that big news. But then again, I too am just a private citizen and not a public news organization, so who knows what I might have missed.
Novak was against the war from the start, so it doesn’t really make much sense that he’d be searching for ways to defend it. What’s curious to me about the media, and you talked about their shallowness, is their total lack of interest regarding the Joe Wilson timeline, not to mention Wilson himself. They were too busy treating him like a hero, who was the convenient enemy of their enemies. They’ve since come to realize he was no hero, evidenced by the WaPo editorial I linked in my previous post.
Yes, we know, there’s apparently no WMD over there, contrary to what pretty much the whole world thought, and to what even the Clinton admin. thought, up through their last days in office. Just as the blame properly goes to Plame and Wilson for their careless behavior which they surely should have known would jeopardize their questionably charactherized secret, the blame properly belongs to Saddam Hussein for all the mind games he played with the world, and with even his own generals regarding WMD.
However, here’s an interesting story that hasn’t gotten much attention in our fluff-obsessed media.
I’m certainly not presenting this as any kind of solid proof that there were WMDs hidden. However, along with the collective suspicions of the world, it seems at least as credible as your theory about a rather independent minded and very conservative journalist—who was critical of a not-all-that conservative Bush admin. seemingly more often than not, and who was against the Iraq war—somehow acting in concert with the admin. to purposefully retaliate against that war’s critics. It just doesn’t make any sense that a veteran reporter like Novak would risk his career and reputation by knowingly exposing sensitive, classified information.
Of course, the New York Times seldom has a problem with doing just that, so hmmmm…....
Just as Hardesty has no problem minimizing the holorific events of the 1940’s, I have no problem minimizing the so called effects of depleted uranium. There is precious little evidence that anyone has ever been harmed, much less killed by the effects of DU, other than of course by being directly hit by it. But there is abundant evidence that people with fuzzy credentials and insufficient and/or irrelevant expertise have been presenting unfounded and ridiculously exaggerated claims of hideous birth defects and apocalyptic long-term consequences.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 28, 2007 at 7:41 AM David said:
“Thank you, Natalie. I agree that deciding which column the players should be in is difficult.”
No, I certainly don’t agree that it’s all that difficult. It is for some people, like yourself apparently, but most of the civilized world readily understands the difference between nations like Iran and the US, in terms of human rights, individual freedom and opportunity, and little things like compliance with the Geneva Conventions.
I don’t see many people clamoring to get into Iran, except terrorists of course, and I notice that any fences that are built on US borders are designed to keep people out—not from leaving.
Posted by Natalie on Apr 30, 2007 at 9:55 PM Natalie, it is difficult! I wish the good guys wore white hats and the bad guys wore black ones but that’s not the case. And most of the civilized world agrees that the USA is a bigger threat to peace, which one hopes would include human rights, individual freedom and opportunity , than any other nation. Didn’t I offer a link further up page that said the same?
It would be nice to visit Iran and meet some Iranian people. I am certain that they are no different than you or I. Except they are the ones who are unfortunate enough to have real cause to be worried that the USA is getting ready to “shock and awe” Iran to show them what human rights, individual freedom and opportunity really means. Just like they did for Iraqis!
Fences schmences, pudding and pie! Fences work both ways, Natalie my dear, and if you can be made to fear what’s on the other side of that fence, so much better for the (bad?) shepherds who are your guides.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on May 1, 2007 at 12:09 AM David you’re amazing. Iran (and as I’ve repeatedly stressed, the govt., NOT the people) wears black hats openly and proudly. We get report after report from inside Iran about crackdowns by the govt. on people’s freedoms, whether it’s expression, dress, or the ability to vote for a candidate that is not necessarily approved by the Mullahs. They unabashedly take hostages against international law, including Americans for 444 days. These completely innocent men DID get tortured BOTH physically and psychologically. We have open defiance of the U.N. and the world community with regards to nuclear issues, and we have daily yellings urging DEATH to America and the west. They’ve once again attained top billing as a terrorism sponsor.
And the vast majority of Iran’s population doesn’t agree with this behavior, which makes it all the more vile.
There is nothing close to this going on in the U.S., Canada, Australia, and other truly free nations. (White hats—easy)
Now the fact that a lot of people have come to have a negative opinion of the U.S. of late is not very surprising. But who is really at fault? Is it really the U.S. and those nations who have helped to depose the Taliban and Saddam, or is it the propagandists and the bombers who have misused their new freedom to spread false and vile propaganda, travel around with suicide jackets and work to deny freedom and peace to the vast majority who desperately want it?
If you offered these same people who talk stink about America a free U.S. passport and perhaps a little start-up money, I suspect that a HUGE number of them would accept.
Actions speak louder than words. Sean Penn et al threaten to leave the U.S. if certain people win elections, but they never actually leave. It’s all just talk.
Obviously the U.S., Britain and others bear responsibility for unleashing the chaos in Afghanistan and Iraq, and not having adequate man-power and planning to deal with it, but that doesn’t translate into countries like yours and mine belonging in the black hat column.
Here’s another example of a country’s leadership choosing the black hat. This regime may soon have to erect fences as well, but their purpose won’t be to keep people out.
When people up and move in large numbers out of fear and/or loathing of their own govt., that is a clear and unmistakable indicator of hat color.
Posted by Natalie on May 1, 2007 at 9:06 PM Natalie, thank you. You are amazing too.
Just about everything you said about Iran in your first paragraph can be said about the USA (govt.) as well. For example;
“crackdowns by the govt. on people’s freedoms”
Many Americans are worried about effects the USA Patriot Acts and the recent suspension of habeas corpus have on their freedoms. I think it was Ben Franklin who said “those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither.”
“completely innocent men DID get tortured BOTH physically and psychologically.”
Yes. And the prisons at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are full of people who are being tortured and denied their rights. What about them, Natalie?
“We have open defiance of the U.N. and the world community with regards to nuclear issues”
Haven’t we been over this before? Iran is not violating the NNPT and is not defying anyone including the UN. There is no resolution forbidding Iran enrichment rights because they know that Iran has every right to produce nuclear fuel as granted by the NNPT.
And remember that the USA is modernizing it’s nuclear capability and threatening to use nuclear weapons (in addition to the depleted uranium nuclear munitions already in use) like nuclear bunker busters. Which brings us to the next point ...
“DEATH to America”
Actually, death from America is far more likely. Iran chants death to America and the USA chants death to Iran . Warmongers all. Which country actually has the ability, or preponderance thereof, to rain death down upon the other? The USA of course. As I have said before, I , and many others, are far more worried about the USA’s weapons of mass destruction and the penchant for using them than feeble threats from Iran.
“And the vast majority of Iran’s population doesn’t agree with this behavior, which makes it all the more vile.”
The majority of Americans, and their senators and congressmen, want the troops to come home from the occupation in Iraq yet today President Bush vetoed the bill that would begin the withdrawal. Vile!
“negative opinion of the U.S. of late is not very surprising. But who is really at fault?”
I would answer that the USA is primarily responsible. As you admit ...
“Obviously the U.S., Britain and others bear responsibility for unleashing the chaos in Afghanistan and Iraq”
Truer words were never spoken!
And they will bear the responsibilty for the same if they attack Iran.
Fences and hats. Polite metaphors. But I grow tired of them, Natalie. While it is interesting talking with you it is time for us to end our little discussion as we are beginning to repeat ourselves (and strayed from the topic). Farewell for now, Natalie. Parting is such sweet sorrow.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on May 2, 2007 at 3:05 AM Another example of the black hatness that is so obvious and evident, simply by listening:
Top Hamas official: Kill all Americans
JPost.com Staff, THE JERUSALEM POST May. 1, 2007
Sheik Ahmad Bahr, acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, declared during a Friday sermon at a Sudan mosque that America and Israel will be annihilated and called upon Allah to kill Jews and Americans “to the very Last One”. Following are excerpts from the sermon that took place last month, courtesy of MEMRI.
Ahmad Bahr began: “You will be victorious” on the face of this planet. You are the masters of the world on the face of this planet. Yes, [the Koran says that] “you will be victorious,” but only “if you are believers.” Allah willing, “you will be victorious,” while America and Israel will be annihilated. I guarantee you that the power of belief and faith is greater than the power of America and Israel. They are cowards, who are eager for life, while we are eager for death for the sake of Allah. That is why America’s nose was rubbed in the mud in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Somalia, and everywhere.
Bahr continued and said that America will be annihilated, while Islam will remain. The Muslims “will be victorious, if you are believers.” Oh Muslims, I guarantee you that the power of Allah is greater than America, by whom many are blinded today. Some people are blinded by the power of America. We say to them that with the might of Allah, with the might of His Messenger, and with the power of Allah, we are stronger than America and Israel.
The Hamas spokesperson concluded with a prayer, saying: “Oh Allah, vanquish the Jews and their supporters. Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them all, down to the very last one. Oh Allah, show them a day of darkness. Oh Allah, who sent down His Book, the mover of the clouds, who defeated the enemies of the Prophet defeat the Jews and the Americans, and bring us victory over them.”
Posted by Natalie on May 2, 2007 at 3:14 AM Whew! Is she gone? Is it safe? Glad you finally saw the light David. Been fun to follow, but at what point does tenacity become a handicap? I wiki-ed the words-futile debates-and found Herr Doktor Helbig’s picture at the top.
Don’t you remember that line you liked? “Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level then beat you with experience every time.” Remember?
If you want to know who she is and what she is about, Check it out! And here is a more recent one yet has the same picture. Some dont age well I guess. Maybe shes really 40.
Anyway, she never answers questions put to her-just keeps spitting out more lame propaganda. Have you not noticed? Makes more sense to argue with Mike. He makes a few points here and there, and has only his own agenda. Give it up for real and maybe this thread can be revived. Look at all the places she has driven everbody off.
My regards to the Colonel Natalie. Keep bettin on those 4 horses. Eventually you might get to de-humanize all who oppose U.S. arrogance and Davie and I can share a Tiger-cage at Gitmo where we belong. A happy thought for you as I say farewell.
Posted by Eric Blair on May 2, 2007 at 4:22 AM Frankly I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Blondemike says not even a half a million jews were murdered in the Holocaust, and nobody here sees fit to join me in denouncing him for holding such vile and ridiculous views.
David ties himself into knots trying to construct a moral equivalency between radical Islam and the U.S., and Eric here apparently agrees with this unsupportable and truly silly position, which is barely distinguishable from that of Osama himself.
Eric has done some crack research and showed us all an easy way to identify people. Simply google a name, pick a picture, and oop, there it is!! That was easy!
And I’m an idiot?
LOL
sob
Posted by Natalie on May 2, 2007 at 5:01 PM No Natalie, not an idiot; a government disinformation specialist. You might not even be the Natalie from the links I posted here, but I note you didn’t in fact deny this is who you are. I recall another-Rabbit?-bringing this up only much better documented. Your reply was similar; sarcasm but no denial.
So why does everybody think you’re a shill? Because your world view and methods of defending it are right out of the Ministry of Truth handbook. You are the perfect mirror image of those who hate us. They also see themselves as morally superior, and within the parameters of such moral absolutism-inherent in the belief in an omnipotent God-I would say Islam could definitely make a better case.
So while I may not be addressing Frau Helbig, I feel certain your path/background is quite similar. The Lincoln Group perhaps? Such a strange venture for a morally superior culture. When the truth doesnt suit the purpose, change it, right?
Think most here are weary of your rants on 9/11 and obfuscations on behalf of a corrupt system. We have to deal with Big Brother quite enough in these times without having Big Sister coming at us with Newspeak online. You do Goebbels proud.
Posted by Eric Blair on May 3, 2007 at 9:42 PM My goodness gracious, Eric. Actually, you remind me a LOT of Arpie; are you perhaps two socks of a kind? Heck, you can throw wild speculations out there, why not me? If I’m correct, just stick to one identity, as I always have, won’t you? Did you participate in the 9/11/Rabbit discussions? If so, under what name? Was it Eric Blair? I don’t know, I don’t remember.
Let me make this perfectly clear, as I indeed DID specifically and categorically to Rabbit. I am NOT the Natalie Helbig that Rabbit pulled out of his hat. (or any Helbig for that matter) I am flattered, however, because she is likely an extremely educated, intelligent and accomplished individual. I only wish I could claim the same.
But give me a break…. You seem to imply that my views are somewhere to the right of oh..let’s say….blondemike. (Even though most of the anti-semitism these days is coming from the fringe left) I simply believe, as do large majorities of average Americans and others that:
Capitalism is vastly superior to socialism, and is indeed the far superior vehicle to cure social inequities and problems. State-controlled health care can’t even pass in Oregon. People trust and rely on UPS or Fedex over the Post Office every time.
Depleted Uranium is very nearly harmless, as evidenced by the consensus opinion of most every genuine expert in the relevant fields, and every comprehensive and properly conducted study on the subject. There has never been an illness properly attributable to depleted uranium, much less a death.
9/11 was planned and executed by radical Islam, and there is no merit to wild theories about the towers and the Pentagon.
The U.S.A., and dozens of other like-minded free democratic nations are vastly superior, both morally and otherwise, to those controlled by elements of radical Islam, or other tyrannical dictators. (NOT talking about the average citizenry, but the leadership.) And no, I don’t make these judgments on the basis of religion, as I’m not even a religious person, but simply by listening to what people say and observing the actions they take. But it’s not like it’s some secret that Christianity in general preaches love and respects life, and that radical Islam preaches hate and adores death. (see my post above documenting the words and wishes of Sheik Ahmad Bahr) If you think this constitutes moral superiority or even equivalency, then consider my mouth agape in utter amazement.
I actually WANT us to succeed in Iraq, and as did some 80% of Americans and most of the congress shortly after the invasion, I approve of the decision to invade. I’m currently discouraged by the situation there, and have my doubts as well regarding the ultimate wisdom, but I am hopeful that we will eventually succeed in doing what al Qaeda desperately doesn’t want us to do—turn Iraq into a functioning democracy that won’t be hospitable to their twisted world-view, and isn’t ruled by someone like Saddam, who was starting to be.
These are not positions that require “shilling” or a “Ministry of Truth”. These are not radical or unreasonable or unsupportable positions, they are simply those quite often held by people who DON’T think that the U.S. is the root of all evil in the world, but pretty much the opposite.
BTW, whatever happened to Rabbit????
Posted by Natalie on May 4, 2007 at 12:28 AM Many things have happened to the rabbit since last you saw or spoke with him, beloved Bat, with the handle of Nat. He has scaled the heights of glory and greatness, and tasted the bitter seeds of defeat loss by cheat and deceit. In short the rabbit has been living, experiencing all that which a capricious and unforgiving life throw his way.
Of course being a superior being, rabbits see and hear all, that is relevant, which is why I heard your cry dear Nat, I thought to come and see the flapping Bat. Not An American says hi.
Hi Dave and Hi to Kuya.
Like the words of a magic spell
The Nat did mumble incantations
By merely asking where its at
She pulled a rabbit from out of the hat.How’s that my baby bat? Rabbit is back and he is cooler than a cat…................^^.....................
The USA isn’t the root of all evil.
It is simply the main shopfront for those who would qualify for that title.
Posted by Rabbit on May 4, 2007 at 5:01 AM @Natalie
We get report after report from inside Iran about crackdowns by the govt. on people’s freedoms, whether it’s expression, dress, or the ability to vote for a candidate that is not necessarily approved by the Mullahs.
Still selling that snake oil you crazy baby. What we get is fabricated reports from OUTSIDE Iran, via Neocon/Zionist con artists and people of similar reputation and reliability, and fakery role to Ahmed Chalabi in his turn. Such increble dribble as the report still bandied about to this day by such quaint thinkers as Natalie, that Jews in Iran were soon to be made to wear a gold star. That was refuted the next day by of all people a JEWISH Iranian member of Parliament. How many Muslims in the Israeli government dear Nat? Considerinmg Jews in Iran are a tiny minority yet they have at least one representative, how many reps do the majority Muslims in Israel have in the government? Just wondering if you could help me with that comparison. Maybe the reports that Ahmadi Nejad has threatened to wipe Israel off the Map, perhaps this is the sort of bull story? You do hopefully know by now that was a lie, I am sure someone will have pointed to the reports by even the BBC who first mis-translated that speech, for your benefit by now. I recall well how much help you often needed in gathering relevant verifiable information about anything. Maybe you are talking about political arrests? Oh no of course that is the USA with more than 100 political prisoners of its own citizens. Maybe you mean the high rate of incarceration for minor crimes or crimes of dunious morality? Oh no, of course not, that is the USA with the highest prison population in the world, many for dubious crimes or none at all. THE HIGHEST PRISON POPULATION IN THE WORLD. More even than countries like China and India! Iran does not even rate in the top ten my dear. The USA is the top one! Are you sure you feel entitled to point that batty little finger my dear one in this regard? Perhaps it was state executions? Surely not mthough since once again Iran is not very high up on the list in this regard, while the USA is not only the only Western nation which practices state murder (One in twenty are later proven innocent according to an official study), it also indulges in the ‘blood sport’ more than anyone else, I think. China may execute more, but until I am shown stats to say otherwise I’ll go with the USA as tops, just to annoy Nat. I guess that the fact the USA is listed as the number one or two after israel, of Human rights violators these days. The fact that it has a world wide network of torture and secret detention facilities, which don’t even come into the above statistics, but comprise a whole new universe of human rights abuse. These facts, and its habitual unjust wars of conquest and pillage, makes the USA nothing short of the Great and Abominable Whore of Biblical fame. You as one of the current evil empire’s foremost slobbering cheerleaders, have NO moral right to comment the human rights practices of a country which enjoys more support and respect among the world’s nations than the increasingly isolated crumbling evil empire.
Ha ha. Death to the Empire!
Iran is a victim of past and present US supported terror attacks. The USA and Britain and of course the bloodsucking zionists are inside Iran’s borders and also helping terror groups to cause trouble. Brazen acts of terror support which if Iran did even once would have muts like you barking like junkyard dogs. But it is OK and you will now proceed to defend these incursions as if they are not direct support of and of themselves terrorism. The Iranians are VICTIMS, not an aggressor or danger to anyone. They are being forced into a corner by you nasty pitbulls, such that they have basically got no choice but to seriously consider developing or buying Nuclear weapons. They have none, and there is no evidence they have or want any. YET you persist in threatening them with your own growing and already enormouys stockpile, not to mention Israel which is a proven wild animal nation, ready to bite anyone at a mo0ment’s notice. Israel will be gone in about five years. That is a prediction. It will be gone, They have sown the seeds of their own destructionm. They have watered it with the blood of their countless victims. The light of their blinding arrogance has accelerated it’s growth of late. The end is near for them. It is and will be to the last, self inflicted. They will attack Iran, Iran will retaliate, as any self respecting nation with an unbroken history of self defense would. Iran can absorb all Israel and the USA can muster, before they collapse under their own weight. Israel is fragile, and will be gone in a blink. The USA is weak, and stupid, with historically poor leadership and a gutted officer corps since all dissenters have been purged and morale is very low. Frankly since it is not Iran’s choice and there is no stopping such a vicious and top heavy machine as your empire is, I look forward to the conflict in one way. It is going to be good to see you hubris filled slogan spouting flag humpers getting a very severe mauling, from the biggest and best prepared of the victims you have ever chosen for your special process of democratisation. ala Iraq. The new democratic model for the ME. Thanks George, that is a fancy model. Any takers? Who would like to be next to have US style democracy brought to your poor backward brown race?
Oops maybe I should be nicer? ...........I saw a bumper sticker today.
Be nice to America, or they will bring democracy to you!
Posted by Rabbit on May 4, 2007 at 5:24 AM -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Susan J. Douglas
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2007 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
