By omniadeo, August 26 at 6:34 am

Oh for heaven’s sake, Cyrena. Who cares what you “remember?” I googled the speech and cut and pasted the text. I also listened to the speech. You can too if you go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cOJNC2EuJw&NR=1

At 25:11 you will hear the relevant portion. In the actual speach he says “I will do EVERYTHING in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons…” He repeats the phrase twice for emphasis. He repeats the word “EVERYTHING” three times! I think I am justified in capitalizing it.

•  “Stop quibbling and admit, he is talking about attacking Iran for the benefit of a powerful, wealthy pro-Israel lobby.”

~~~~

You can call it ‘quibbling’ if you want omniadeo, but you’d miserably fail, flunk out, be dismissed from any serious conversation or discussion about serious things. I’ve said this before, and I’m going to repeat it for your benefit, and hopefully the benefit of any others who will ‘get it’ because I don’t think you will. To quote a very distinguished professor and attorney of Human Rights and International Law, Professor Richard Falk, Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law and Practice and Emeritus at Princeton:

“LANGUAGE IS EVERYTHING!!”
“YOU HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE LANGUAGE!!’

If there was any breadth or depth to your analysis of anything, you would recognize this. But like most people, you’re into leaping interpretations. We’re all ‘guilty’ of that to an extent, because it’s human nature for us to make interpretations of anything, based on our own cultures/ideologies/personal experiences, blah, blah, blah. However, wars have been fought, and scores of humanity have perished, based on wrong interpretations of language taken out of context, or in an inappropriate context.

The LANGUAGE of the law is exceeding important, or there wouldn’t be bodies and bodies of people pouring over exactly that, spilling gallons and gallons of ink in setting up understandings and agreements for those committed to such organized existence, (the rule of law) to utilize in those endeavors.

So, while I will not ‘quibble’ as you say, (and that is a very dismissive term in relation to something so serious) with whether or not Obama said that he would do ANYTHING, (which is what you said the first time) or that he would do EVERYTHING (which is what you’re saying now, which is what I didn’t have time to confirm before) I totally REJECT *your* interpretation that either word in *that context* means that he’s prepared to ATTACK Iran. That is a very disingenuous leap, boarding on the ‘academically criminal’ and I take such things very personally.
So, what you call ‘quibbling’ is really argument, and it’s what people in my profession do. It’s what people doing ANY kind of serious communication should do. Relationships between people and nations are dependant on such communication.

The equally important thing about language is the CONTEXT, and the SUBCONTEXT. You leap from one stand-alone comment to some outrageous conclusion without any knowledge of the related context, and all of the stuff between points A and Z. I recommend a full read of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and all of the reports from the IAEA, (which is the UN’s watchdog for the enforcement of that treaty) and then maybe we can have a conversation.

http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/WMD/treaty/

II

Maybe THEN, you can come to a different set of interpretations, based on the LANGUAGE of that treaty, and the practice and implementation of that protocol. If you can figure that much out, and find the rest of the connecting dots, you might be able to ascertain that in doing EVERYTHING or ANYTHING to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, it could just as easily be interpreted as a reaffirmation of the US commitment to that very treaty, of which we are signatories. In short, he doesn’t have to do ANYTHING other than respect the conditions of that treaty, and to make sure that Iran does the same. Period. The conditions and terms of the NPT will prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but it ALSO requires that the US and all other nuclear armed states eliminate their own.
And, had you been paying closer attention, you would have heard/read Barack Obama commit to this portion of the treaty as well, on multiple occasions. Read his speech at Berlin, and check the information at this link for The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

http://www.wagingpeace.org/

Let me add what I’ve tried to explain to you before, obviously without success, but I’ll try again. Barack Obama is not a stupid man. In fact, he’s a highly intelligent man who knows the law, and thinks in terms of it. One does not advocate for the elimination of nuclear weapons and global peace by attacking other countries. You may think that, after 8 years of the Bush Doctrine, which advocates and practices exactly that, which is Pre-emptive Self-defense. However, that is NOT the law of the lands, and such interpretations have been soundly rejected by the world court, over and over, and over again.

There’s never been a better time to educate yourself omniadeo, and save yourself some embarrassment from making these grand leaps based on zero information, because INFORMATION (not hyperbole and bullshit rhetoric) is the only thing that we humans have at our disposal, to make such analysis. You don’t read minds, because none of us does. You cannot tell me what I’m thinking, so you have to rely on what I TELL you I’m thinking, and that depends on how well I’m able to articulate it, and how well you’re able to understand it.

We’ll use an example with which you might be more familiar. If I tell you that as a result of an unplanned pregnancy, I’m planning to have an abortion, for whatever the reasons. If you tell me, (or anyone) that you will do EVERYTHING in your power to prevent me from having that abortion, or terminating that pregnancy, exactly what does EVERYTHING in your power mean? Does that mean that you will try to ‘talk me out of it’ or otherwise discourage me from such a measure? Does it mean you’ll enact laws that would prevent me from doing that? Or does it mean that you’ll lock me up somewhere for the next nine months so that I can’t access the technology or medical services available to accomplish that? Or does it mean that you’ll just ATTACK me, and that’ll do it as well?  (if you terminate me, you’ll terminate the pregnancy, and the point will become moot).

And while I’m trying to interpret exactly what you mean by that, (you’ll do everything/anything to prevent me from terminating this pregnancy) suppose circumstances change. Let’s say my own health improves, so I don’t have to risk dying to give birth. Or let’s say that I win a lottery, so I have some reassurance that I’ll be able to house, feed, clothe the kid. Let’s say Barack Obama becomes president, and I take some hope in the fact that his platform promises of opportunities for all Americans to access education and jobs to support themselves and their families. Let’s say all of that happens, and I change my mind, and decide not to terminate the pregnancy after all, and I advise you of that. Will you still attack me? Will you still lock me up? Will you still implement some laws to prevent me from doing something that I’ve now decided I’m not going to do anyway?

III

Let’s take it a step further. Let’s suggest that even when I told you that I was going to terminate the pregnancy, I didn’t really mean it. I was just telling you that to see what you would do. Or, let’s say I’m not pregnant at all, and I really knew that I wasn’t pregnant, but I was reacting to your own hard fast position on abortion, based on the fact that maybe one day I might consider becoming pregnant. Are you still going to do everything in your power to prevent me from having an abortion, even though I’m not even pregnant?  And if so, just exactly what the hell would that be? How would you prevent me from terminating a pregnancy that doesn’t exist?

I ask because that’s the equivalent of what Obama was saying, at least IMO. Iran doesn’t have WMD. Iran is overseen by the IAEA to prevent them from acquiring WMD. And Iran has already indicated that they are not interested in acquiring WMD. (at least not unless the rest of the international community keeps harassing them) We saw what happened to Saddam’s Iraq when he did NOT have them, and the US isn’t seriously interested in attacking any nation that DOES! You don’t see ‘em f***ing with China do you? Even Dick Bush isn’t that crazy. (though I have to wonder why they’re provoking a global destruction by messing with nuclear – armed Russia.)

After you decide that, reassess your analysis of what Obama means when he says he’ll do everything in his power to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Keep all of the above in mind and keep in mind that Barack Obama is familiar with the terms and conditions of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, even if you aren’t, and even if Israel is ostensibly whining about such a possibility, even when THEY know it isn’t likely either.

If you just really need to ‘condemn’ the statement that Obama made *in context* with this statement, then condemn the preceding portion of the comment, when he obviously panders to Israel’s real or imagined paranoia by claiming that Iran is a ‘threat’. Iran is NOT a threat, and I suspect Obama knows that. Or, at the *least*, he knows that we do NOT know the full extent of Iran’s intentions, because he’s said that as well. That is why he continues to stress the need for direct dialogue with Iran. Because, in respect Iran’s WMD intentions, we can only go on what Iran has publicly stated, through their various representatives, (and yeah, they ‘could’ be lying but one cannot PROVE intent, which is why *you* cannot prove that Obama plans to ATTACK Iran on behalf of Israel or for any other reason) as well as what the International body of law entrusted with this information can tell us. So if you want to condemn Obama for a comment, condemn that he has allowed himself to suggest that Iran is a threat. And yeah, call it pandering if you want. But it does not automatically ‘follow’ that *HE* as president, would follow up on this 8 year old plan (to attack Iran) that was long ago instituted in the PNAC.

Keep all of that in mind before you decide to ‘read into’ any statement that anyone makes, whether they are potentially the next POTUS, or your next door neighbor.

Here’s another helpful book for those who actually do want to make correct connections about such serious things as war.

“War Law : Understanding International Law and Armed Conflict” by Michael Byers.

It is very readable, even for the amateur, novice, or non-professional. I highly recommend it.

In the interim, what thinking people ‘remember’ actually is important. So while *you* may not care what I or anyone else ‘remembers’, maybe you should. Maybe, (if you were a thinking person yourself) you’d be grateful that someone was actually willing to ‘remember’ and then *confirm* their memories from the facts, before making leaps of judgment. It might even help save the asses of those who don’t want to be so bothered with thinking and remembering.

Re: Later Taters

I’m guessing you weren’t a writer or journalist…is that correct.

Just for the record, I DO NOT LIKE Harleys.  They’re just overblown AMC Pacers in disguise.  Okay..that was mean, they’re more like… overblown 1977 Ford Mavericks.

I’d rather a completely refurbished 1975 Honda 175 on/off trail bike, RED. And my MPG’s will kick the ass of ANY harley.  And that’s the way it is August 27, 2008.  Enjoy.

By tburns60, August 26 at 10:41 am

***You see, Fox has very professional people behind that glass and on the floor…at least behind the cameras. Polio-tics aside, the talent did not get there just because they were pretty…but, yes it does help. Boy did I work with some ding bats, too!
****

I think you missed a word here “You see, Fox has very professionalLY BIASED people behind ...”

It isn’t fux that started it, it was a republican/neocon trick just as 1968. I mean doesn’t the neoconic think tanks that cropped up during the nixion years some 40 years ago not ring a bell? Most people just don’t see that span of years with the thinking up of an ideology and the ways and means to make it work, as more than a ‘bunch’ of people getting together for some BS sessions and drinking. That was a span of years that included not just developing the ideology but included 12 years of reagan, reagan, h.w.bush to put a lot of their ideas into practice. Then the next 8 years of clinton, clinton, they used to refine and rebuild their plans for when w would take office, which was a very big part of the republican/neocon tricks; they were going to take power no matter what. Now they have beome a very sophisticated and organized entity that is and will be very hard to counter by the people, hell, maybe nothing less than more extreme stuff than what this post is about, like revolution. And it is just the tip of the ole proverbial iceburg.
The biggest part of the whole scheme was to gain control of the media which they have done. Now, instead of the 50 or 60 owners of the media there are, what, 5 or 6 owners that not just own but control the media so that what news the ‘elites’ want you to have is dished out and what the don’t want you to have is just not reported, meaning it didn’t happen, in a way; and all the while flooding the channels with all kinds of junk, fluff, and foo foo information that has absolutely no relevance to what a person needs to know to live in a democracy. The added benefit of political apathy is a major success for them.
****I worked behind the scenes and held a nice comfy position that placed me in most every war, faminine****
This interests me very much as I have read Mike Davis’ book “Late Victorian Holocausts” and it makes me ask you what is your view of the political, economic and religious aspects of those faminines? I believe that that could be very pertinent in the near and far future.

pt 3. re: outraged
I’ll make this short, the sun is out & I wanta ride me bike to tha bar.
To make a short story long. The below, pt. 2. did not happen as it does 99% of the time, as I outlined. Say what you will of Faux News polio-tics. {& hell yes they are Republican. that is simply to clear}
Why? Again I really don’t know why. Again, I wasn’t there & don’t know who the producer was. That is why I made my earlier statement beginning with the second sentence;
“...I applaud whoever at that most biased big-business for not cutting back to the studio when he could have snapped his fingers at the T.D. And people in the Monster, I mean America, would never have had to see this most god-awful demonstration of the power of free speech.”

###You see, Fox has very professional people behind that glass and on the floor…at least behind the cameras. Polio-tics aside, the talent did not get there just because they were pretty…but, yes it does help. Boy did I work with some ding bats, too!
No names, most are not there now, they don’t last long & they don’t taste as good as they look unless you b-b-que ‘em & use a lotta sauce.
{Faux’s hiring company tried to hire me & several others away when they started up…just couldn’t move to New York for the same pay & bennies as I had in Hotlanta, a fellow worker in D.C. did take the position & I believe he’s in Denver rat now. I just talked to one there who’s controlling the signals at my old company yesterday & who’s reading this blog as I write.}
Anywho, it had to be a Producer at an event as big as this; the dirctor does call the shots to the TD but it’s the Producer who’s sitting next to him & will jump in in about 1/4 second if need be.
Usually there are about 400 to 600 worker bees from the Mother Ship on site for these events.
He knew what he was doing…and he did not do ‘A’ or ‘B’; he picked ‘C’. Stay with the pandimonium and just let the shit roll up hill. That takes guts, dear sir or madam, pure cojones. She/he could be on the carpet rat now. Or by now already on the street putting together a new resume.
Granted, one in this position at a network has immense power. But not if they piss off the wrong people. There is always someone above you and there is always someone behind you looking for your job. Lotsa pressure in that hot seat & everywhere else. Especially now when everything across this nation is in the crapper. But it’s tele-vision. All smoke & mirrors & no one {usually} dies…unless they were in the spots I usually worked in.
I wish I’d done what that Producer did. Just one damn time. Then got up after the show, dropped trou & bent over…and then quietly walked to my rental car & drove away.
Speaking o driving, me Harley is snapping at me heels & me throat’s dry.
Later taters.

pt. 2 re:outraged
I mispelled some words & forgot to ‘preview’ first. A good writer wouldn’t do that.
Where was I. My post is up there & I’m down here.
The little theatrical scene I wrote has & does happen like that in every TV station across many countries every single darn day; of that I know cause I used ta duck when things went wrong.
Not the wierd phone calls, though. I wanted to invent my own crap to set the stage first. The reason for this is from what I wrote at my earlier post mid-way down [att]. To wit:

“Where was Fox’s panic button that will take them to black…or a PSA? I applaud whoever at that most biased big-business for not cutting back to the studio when he could have snapped his fingers at the T.D. And people in the Monster, I mean America, would never have had to see this most god-awful demonstration of the power of free speech.”

###The first sentence is pretty much what is supposed to be done at any network [only they use a fader bar] and that usually happens, it is a judgement call & one has to be damn good to make the right one.
If the director or producer {ie, the ‘judgement maker’} in charge sees that things are getting out of hand, he may dawdle a moment to capture the kodak moment, it is his decision. At small stations it may be the TD, who is all three rolled into one. But usually if the ‘remote talent’ is losing control out there the experienced Prod. or DIR. hits the ‘McCurdy’[or Adams,whatever], to tell the studio ‘talent’ to stand by to take back over from their comfy seat until things are sorted[those people are usually looking in their mirror to see if their hair is OK; trust me on that].
They are constantly ‘fed’ by the IFB {Interrupt Fold-Back} piece squiggling out of their ear & there are a few other people behind the glass that can talk to ‘em over that tning, the less the better, though.
Anyway, This is all split second decision making, more a technical/professional thing than an agenda. The Pro./Dir. does not like to lose control of her/his own show. They could be looking for a new job if this happens. And believe me now, shit gets outta control all de time, boss-man.
Modern technology constantly breaks down right when you need it the most. Ever lose a cell call in the middle of something important? All the nets use those damn things all the time. Their are countless phone lines connected to the back of that McCurdy & hundreds of other circuits that have to work. Camera’s that go ‘bonk’. Video switchers that decide to take a dump.
Shit, I’ll finish with a part 3. I’m putting myself to sleep, yawn.
Retirement is hell.
end pt 2

@omniadeo

” At 25:11 you will hear the relevant portion. In the actual speach he says “I will do EVERYTHING in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons…” He repeats the phrase twice for emphasis. He repeats the word “EVERYTHING” three times! I think I am justified in capitalizing it.

Stop quibbling and admit, he is talking about attacking Iran for the benefit of a powerful, wealthy pro-Israel lobby.”

Why anybody would want to pay his income taxes for this is beyond me.

Re: outraged. pt. 1
I suppose you could view it as a ‘tirade’. I was trying to illustrate the point that no one here, including myself, really did know what actually went on before, during and after this funny, warped event.
I don’t know if you read further down but I did actually work for a major non-news international network for quite some time after being in the minors for a good many years.
I worked behind the scenes and held a nice comfy position that placed me in most every war, faminine, or revolution since the late 80’s. From Russia to Somolia to Kuwait to Palestine & back again [many more…about 60 countries I think].
I also was behind the scenes for that network during both primaries & conventions since 1992. I have many a good friend there still…& also at the other 3, the BBC, & a few others. [I prefer the BEEB].
There is a big collection box on a floor at cnn that contains all the phones that a friend & exec. Prod. has thrown against many walls over the years. Quite a collection I must say. But damn if he ain’t good!
Events are planned. The site, the logistics, the equipment, the power & distribution, the proper caterers, frigging everything down to the last detail.
I was not high enough up the ladder to be at the really big meetings, just the ones listed above & a little more I won’t go into.. But those people knew who I was & am. And they respected me as I respected them. That does not imply that I agreed with their politics or slanting of their news to fit their idealology. Many are just as honest as you are me. I just got in trouble for it from time to time cause I wasn’t there to write or deliver the baby. I had just had to make sure it didn’t die.
I could give a shit about politics. Especially now, in retirement with a big fat Harley parked outside waiting for me.We have a one party system with two candidates. What the hell is the debating and bickering about? It is about a dog & pony show. There is a sucker born every minute…I can tell you that. end pt. 1

Oh for heaven’s sake, Cyrena. Who cares what you “remember?” I googled the speech and cut and pasted the text. I also listened to the speech. You can too if you go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cOJNC2EuJw&NR=1

At 25:11 you will hear the relevant portion. In the actual speach he says “I will do EVERYTHING in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons…” He repeats the phrase twice for emphasis. He repeats the word “EVERYTHING” three times! I think I am justified in capitalizing it.

Stop quibbling and admit, he is talking about attacking Iran for the benefit of a powerful, wealthy pro-Israel lobby.

As for the words on the website, admit that too: he is talking about leaving troops in Iraq indefinitely. If you want to believe that it is to fight “Al Qaeda” instead of control oil and gas and pressure Iran and Syria, feel free. But for someone who knows that the WOT is phony, that would be an odd interpretaion.

As an overseas viewer, I do watch Faux quite often, as the CNN International is a garbage patch, not worth watching, except for an occasional USA retransmission…Wolf Blitzer, for example.

On Faux, they are trying like hell to play the GOP line, while at the same time claiming to be “fair and balanced.’ For example, I just watched Dick “toe sucker” Morris with his vendetta against the Clintons for trashing him. Then, the alleged “split in the Democratic party” is an hourly affair, presenting an alleged non-partisan person to verify the claim.

In sum, they want the viewers to think they are fair and balance, while being unfair and unbalanced at the same time!

By omniadeo, August 25 at 4:00 pm

“Under the Obama plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel.”

•  “..actually this is niot quite what he really meanns: Translation = “a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to protect US oil and gas interests and threaten Iran and Syria.”

This is too funny omniadeo. You post the quote, and then you say, ‘actually, this is niot (sic) quite what he really means.

OH KAYYYY! Whatever you say. If he said one thing, but you say it means something else, then of course…we’ll go with whatever you say. I mean, anything else would be preposterous, right?
Silly me.

Anyway, I’m glad I read down at least this far, before I went through the trouble to look up the AIPAC speech again. Yes. I did read it, a couple of times, and I did my own analysis of it, that many people didn’t appreciate. I don’t remember the exact words being “I’ll do ANYTHING to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, but it was something similar’. I don’t remember that there was a capitalization of the word ANYTHING either. Maybe he put extra linguistic influence on it in his real live voice?

I remember something more to the effect of “Yes, we know Iran is a threat.” (and that REALLY pissed me off when he said that..at least at the time) “but I’m not going to let that happen”, or something to that effect. (not a direct quote, because I’m not going to bother right now).

For what it’s worth, here’s my take. Obama knows as well as anybody else, that Iran doesn’t have any nuclear weapons, and that there is absolutely no indication that they are attempting to acquire any. He knows damn good and well that Iran has never attacked anyone, (since about Cyrus the Great) and that they are not GOING to, unless THEY are attacked.
He knows that as well as I know that the woman who cleans the house for my elderly parents, did NOT steal her bedspread. (every week, my mother accuses her of stealing something, because my mother has Alzheimer’s). And so I say, yes, ok..I’ll get it back.

BESIDES the fact that Iran isn’t inclined to attack anyone with nuclear weapons or any other kind of weapons, they aren’t stupid. THEY know, (as do we all) that Israel is sitting on that little sliver of sand, and is loaded to the gills with nukes and every other conceivable weapon available in the 21st Century available arsenal. If Israel blows its nose too hard, they’re gonna fucking blow themselves up! And if they do, they’ll take the rest of the area with them. Now why would Iran risk putting even MORE Palestinians at risk, then the millions that Israel has already genocided? If anybody attacks Israel, they’re all gonna blow, because Israel is so flippin’ neurotic, that they’ve backed themselves into a corner. (why else would they be on a 60 year mission of constant expansion?) The mentality of any person or group that has perpetrated the evil that they have STAYS paranoid. Of COURSE they expect to get retaliation. That’s why they keep building all of those walls and highways, and refusing to allow Gazans and Palestinians from the West Bank to even get medical care at a real hospital.

But, even Israel knows that Iran isn’t going to attack them. They just wanna be the only nuclear power in the area. And, since Obama isn’t stupid either, he knows it too.
So I’m sorry. I don’t buy you conclusion that Obama is planning to do ANYTHING, (hint, hint, attack Iran) to keep them from obtaining a nuclear weapon, especially since there is zero indication that they plan to.

II

As for anybody running Cynthia off of the reservation, (I didn’t know anyone had) I’m not buying that either.

I’ll be the first to admit that she was harassed by the DC mob, but she wasn’t ‘abandoned’ because Barabara Lee made the very determined effort to shame anyone else who wouldn’t support her, into doing the right thing.

But Cynthia shamed her own self whacking the DC policeman with her cell phone. So spare me the rhetoric. If one wants to be a controversial voice, or a voice of dissension, there’s a way to do it, and do it with class. Cynthia doesn’t have it, and so she’s played right into their hands.

It was her constituency that didn’t invite her back. Don’t put that on anybody else. If she had any backbone bone or integrity, she wouldn’t be trying to put it on anybody else, and so neither should you.
Politics are ugly. If you can’t take the heat, you need to stay the hell out of the kitchen, and not be prepared to hide behind anybody else’s skirt tails.
There’s a heavy price attached to independence, and the ability to say whatever you wanna say, whenever you wanna say it, and to whomever you wanna say it to. If it’s worth the price, then we pay it without whining or crying foul, because we already KNOW that the ‘foul’ is built-in!

Cynthia should have taken some lessons, got her ducks in a row, and maybe she could have accomplished something, Instead she’s just coming across as some sort of a drama queen, and at this time in our political history, nobody has the patience.

This ain’t ‘church’ and Cynthia ain’t Naomi Campbell. (not that anybody should wanna be). I’m sorry she’s been ‘picked on’, but that’s life for a black female in the USA. Especially one who speaks out. I know from personal experience. If she had any sense, she’s see it as a blessing in disguise, and find a better way.

If you can’t get in the front door, (and you really think you just ‘have’ to be in the house) then you go through the side or the back, and you keep your mouth shut while you’re doing it.

Re: tburns60

So…what was the point of your tirade..?  I’m guessing here of course, but is it that you feel fox news is “truthful”?  Or, that there was “no ill intent”..?  Is it possible for you to enlighten me..?

I will admit, I PARTIALLY agree with you when you claim;

“Every one of you have not one damn clue what really happened behind the scenes; not you, not me, only ‘them’ & they’re not saying”

In that context….what was your point…?  That you have no clue…?  I definitely KNOW and it has been PROVEN that FOX NEWS has propagandized the coverage of the war in Iraq.  So to imply that FOX NEWS doesn’t lie….is..well…disingenious.  Wouldn’t you say?

Of course! That’s it! Fox ‘planned’ it…cause that suits your own biased ideas [& I am certainly no fan of Faux News]. And I doubt any of you have ever done ‘the news’ anywhere, anyway, anyhow.
If the news reported things the way you people do we would really be in shits-ville! Judging what they did, how they planned it, how it was such a set-up. An ‘inside ’ job. Gimma a fucking break! Sounds like you know how WW-4 started already.
Every one of you have not one damn clue what really happened behind the scenes; not you, not me, only ‘them’ & they’re not saying, they have more ‘news’ to plan & execute…BANG!
Wait, I do know! ‘They’ just called me on my secret McCurdy. It all went like this: [cause I know]
The Exec. Prod. got a call on his McCurdy from Rupert who was down under hunting Kangaroos. Murdoctor was on a crypto phone linked to another c. phone buried deep under the W.H. which linked to a DOD system in Colorado & then looped out to San Jose via a new military Sat system. Right into the hands of a nameless Trillionaire on the top floor of the pyramid in the Bohemian Grove.
The Exec hit his Button on the McCurdy that went directly into the Line Prod’s ear. He in-turn yelled to the Show Prod…that ‘all was set-up & ready’.
Cue On-Air glossy lip girl to throw to remote 5 Talent ‘Griff’ after 10 sec. intro on Cam 2. Audio Tech cues leftist crowd to start moving and cussing into remote cam-5.
“Live in 3, 2…GO!
Griff holds his spincter muscle tight to keep from laughing & peeing as leftest crowd gets ‘out of control’; shooting birds into cam & shouting “fuck fox” [when all they wanted to say was ‘fuck everybody, we’re commies & we’re taking over’...but somebody paid ‘em a lotta money to do it Rup’s way & they need some dope real bad].
Producers at the other 4 watch monitors on wall in disbelief as they are scooped. “Damn, Fox beat us on that one! How’d they do that shit?” All 4 Producers exclaim in unison in their A.C. trailers. 
Post show comments at Faux: “That was a great fucking Live Demo. Bet our ratings hit the fucking ceiling with that shit! Let’s all go to the hotel bar, beers on me everybody.”
“Hey dude, did anyone release the crew yet?”
“Hell, I don’t know…they’ll figure it out sooner or later.”

It doesn’t matter HOW any of the corporate news networks attempt to display THE PEOPLE.  We already KNOW they are the TRUE dissenters of a democratic government in America.  In my book, that makes them traitors to our democracy.

Nader speaking in Oregon.

Note: This video is about an hour long but catch at least the first 15-16 minutes, if you don’t have time for it’s entirety.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3075069510252607038&hl=en

Look for the neocon operatives to wreck the dem convention just as they did in 1968. Pity, fux news will most likely become as influencial and believable for a lot of the ignos that just cannot make up their mind on their own with the information given them.

Tried this on another post. Since this deals with our ineffective MSM, I am putting this here as I don’t see any other relevant post to put it:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26385413/

This is the type of information that always surprises me when I read it on any of the major ‘disinformation’ sites. Of course, msnbc may be the only one reporting this but it just about shows me that someone slipped this through or someone slipped in letting it get through.
And if Daniel Estulin is correct in his ‘The Bilderberg Group’ book, I can’t even imagine how the masses could ever be enlightened as to the true events going on in this world and why the effects these numb nuts feel are so arcane and uncanny. The handlers have truly done an impressive job of ‘Orwellian’ control.

Ha ha ha ha! So funny that “reporter” getting separated from his camera-man.

It’s interesting though, this Right-wing obsession with mildly not-unattractive, fake-blonde women.

Cyrena,

You are too much. Again you lecture me about actual quotes. I gave you actual quotes. They are in quotes. Read them. They are from Obama’s speech to AIPAC. It’s easy to find. I am sure you have read it. Again he said he will do “ANYTHING in my power” as President to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. He had already mentioned negotiations, so this was not a reference to negotiations. Okay, call it implicit, not explicit, fine: It’s still what he is saying. As President he will have the power to attack Iran and he just promised to do it, if Iran builds a nuclear weapon—which Iran is probably not doing, but has as much right to do as Israel. If he didn’t mean that, tell me what was the purpose of saying it? Don’t lecture me, just tell me what you think he meant by the word ANYTHING.(*Hint: the purpose was to get Rahm Emmanuel and other strong pro Israel big-money AIPAC Dems to endorse him. Emmanuel did endorse him the next day. That’s the same guy who ruined Cynthia McKinney for going off the reservation, God bless her.)

2) You are on slightly stronger ground when you talk about bases. Technically, Obama is on record against “permananent” bases. I never used the word “permananet, which is meaningless because it is undefined. His website makes clear what he REALLY means:

“Under the Obama plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel.”

actually this is niot quite what he really meanns: Translation = “a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to protect US oil and gas interests and threaten Iran and Syria.”

It goes on: “He will not build PERMANENT bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.”

This is b.s. and you know it. If the troops stay to “train” the Iraqi military that is the way we continue to run another country. A non-permanent base could still be there hundred years. Even the Sun is not permanent.

Obama is not stupid at all. I know that. He is actually a wonderful brilliant man with an artistic flair. (His autobiography is beautifully written and as far as I know he wrote it himself.) He is also a realist. He pretends to believe in the War on Terror because he knows a viable candidate cannot question it (or Israel) and run for office and he thinks he can do more good in than out. When you refuse to criticize him for telling lies, you help to trap him in the limited options hbe has been provided by the corporate rulers who control him.

2 of 2
No, I have no issues with dissent. I just have issues with stupidity.

I also don’t ‘defend’ Obama anymore than I do the *dogs* of the blue party. He’s said some things that on the surface at least, seem pretty damn foolish at best and hypocritical at worst. But my issues with Obama, (the few that I have) aren’t the same as the superficial stuff that is concerning these folks. My issue with Obama is that he at least appears to buy into this war on terrorism thing, unless he’s got me really fooled. And the reason THAT pisses me off is because I know he’s smarter than that. The rest of these folks aren’t.

On this, I beg to differ:

•  “…Obama has never, ever expressed willingness to remove the bases, which are there under agreements forced on the Iraqi people using US military might. Just try suggesting to Obama or any other major dem that the Iraqis should be able to vote directly on the presence of US bases, or the terms of the oil leases. See what happens.”

I already know why the bases are there. And I also know perfectly well that Obama has condemned (on numerous occasions) the prospect of those bases remaining as they were originally intended. When I have more time, I’ll find the citations. An Iraqi direct vote on the issue is a distraction, and has nothing to do with Obama. There’s nothing to vote on. The bases need to be shut down, or given to the Iraqis to do whatever they want with them. Either way, that’s a Dick Bush thing. Has nothing to do with Obama. Remember? He didn’t think any of it was a good idea.

But I WILL agree that he hasn’t been willing to come right out (like Bill Richardson did) and say that we need to leave EVERYTHING behind, including that multi-jillion dollar Green Zone, because he knows that most greedy Americans and ALL repugs will shit their pants at the very thought. Dick Bush has turned Baghdad into the US Capitol of the Middle East, and that was ALWAYS the plan, and only for starters. As it is, Dick Cheney is foaming at the mouth because it took so long to force the Profit Sharing Agreements on them to steal their oil, and even worse, he hasn’t been able to attack Iran yet…ALSO part of the original plan. *IF* Obama is naïve to that, then it would be another reason for me to criticize him. I’m just not sure that he is.

I’ll look for his remarks on the permanent bases. At this point, I’m still willing to take his word over what he says he’s thinking than I am the word about what somebody else says he’s thinking. And, I’ll get to the other stuff that you’ve ‘pointed out to me before’ even though I read and hear pretty well, so I was already aware of it before you ‘pointed it out’.
For the most part, everything you say here is a very passionate essay on your interpretation of what he’s said, and I’m a real stickler for the actual words.
One example is here:

•  “He is explicitly promising to attack Iran… if that is what it takes to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon”

You get carried away with the “explicitly promising to attack Iran” part, because I know for a fact that’s bullshit. That may be your chosen interpretation, based on what he has NOT said, but he specifically has NOT ‘explicitly promised to attack Iran”. That’s where people like you go wrong, because you go overboard with the propaganda and rhetoric. You do much better if you try to keep with exactly what he HAS said, (and throw in a direct quote from time to time) then to make your own interpretations based on what he has NOT said. Otherwise, it just sounds like a bunch of hysterical hyperbole.
That’s just a suggestion that comes from experience on advising students on how to defend their own positions, and make valid arguments. It CAN be done, even in the example that you’re using. You just fail to do it.

I guess young people are smarter than they look.

(Same thing my generation suffered)

Paracelsus, I don’t know about Gladio, but how about this?

http://www.citypages.com/2008-05-21/news/moles-wanted/

I loved this one. I don’t watch TV much anymore after leaving a major news network after fourteen years [it starts with Cable and replaces the word ‘major’ in this sentence}. My last wonderful adventure was Palistine, Afghanny, and Kuwait.
I is not a reporter but I could play one on TV. And I have a few years with NBC and PBS affil’s. I have a few friends over at Foxy-Lady World, too, so I will pull a few punches here. {I used ta get in trouble for stating my opinion at that ‘C’ company.}
I have been to every convention since ‘92, missing the ‘88 by a few months. This stuff goes on every where and every day people. Yes, there are plants
out there. Also staged demonstrations and egger-on-ers.
But this one was so Funny! Fox with their bloomers down. Oh, I am a vietnam-era vet, also. We supposedly lost that one for freedom and to stop the Domino effect. Fats wuz my favorite musician in the fifties why did we fight to stop him? I still worry about that one.
And just what is freedom, people. If our boys and girls fight and die [needlessly] for it? Would Jefferson [the statesman, not the dry cleaner owner] have called himself a leftist because he believed in the right for one to express herself [well, he did exclude blacks and females, didn’t he]? And for the right to overthrow an evil government that lies it’s way to the top in a coup-de-tat and lies it’s way to stay there? By killing more innocent people?
I’m out of the main loop now and I intend to stay that way as our country is now quickly grinding its way into oblivion. I have my Harley & that’s my freedom choice.
My father fought at Iwo Jima for what he and I believed were just principles; I still believe that but he is dead & can’t defend himself. What are the principle’s behind nuking a country back into the stone ages? [although those were much more civilized people then]
Where have the wise men all gone?
Where was Fox’s panic button that will take them to black…or a PSA? I applaud whoever at that most biased big-business for not cutting back to the studio when he could have snapped his fingers at the T.D. And people in the Monster, I mean America, would never have had to see this most god-awful demonstration of the power of free speech.
I gotta go watch it again and turn the volumn up!
Wheres my pampers when you need them most?
‘America, where are you now? Don’t you care about your sons and daughters?’

If Fox News would start acting like real reporters they might get more respect. These marchers are very savvy and not your typical Fox viewer know nothings. But I would not be surprised to find out that Republican’s have infiltrated the radical’s ranks, just as tricky dick Nixon did in 1968 to inflame an already tense situation, and make middle America turn away from the radicals even though in the light of day (Pentagon Papers), they were proven right. Similar situation today. Everyone who has read at least one book pretty much knows the Iraq war was fraudulent from day one. Bush and Cheney should have been brought up on charges of treason not just impeached.  Nixon escaped his fate because of Ford, but Bush and Cheney will be judged harshly by historians as will Fox News. They are not to be taken seriously.

Would it matter if some of Recreators were infiltrated with cops posing as anarchists? Why is it these guys always do something nasty when there are lots of women and children nearby? If these masked avengers want to destroy property, then why don’t they do it at least a 1000 feet away from peaceful protesters, not right up close to a civil demonstration with old folks, disabled, and young mothers in the crowd? Also why is it some of them have the first impulse to beat up on cops right near the peaceful protesters. This whole Recreate 68, has that Gladio smell to it.

Before we dismiss the liberal “moon bats” protesting in denver, we should consider that maybe, just maybe, they are right! The time for radicals to resurface is now! One could say that we have tried to change the system “from within”. One could also say that that idea has been an abject failure.
“Power concedes nothing without a demand, it never did and it never will!” (Frederick Douglas)
Read those words carefully. And ask yourself, if radicals had not stood up to be heard and counted, how much longer would slavery have gone on? Would women have the right to vote? Would have a FUCKING COUNTRY? It’s a damn good thing Madison, and Jefferson and Payne didn’t think of radicalism as passe.

Cyrena,

I apprecate your impatience with the protesters in Denver, but at the same time I think you are way too ready to defend the Dems and Obama. Don’t worry, I will vote for him, but that’s only because the alternative is much worse, not because what you say is true. Let’s take your first two:

1) IRAQ: It is NOT true that Obama wants to “get out of Iraq.” Obama only wants to remove “combat troops.” The republicans are already negotiating the same agreement as an October surprise. This is not happening because of any commitment to peace or to curbing US military might. This is happening because everyone now knows that tying down the groundforce US military in Iraq is not the best way to continue the stranglehold on the the Mideast and Central Asia that is the larger plan. We will have bases in Iraq—whether Iraqis want them or not—for John McCain’s 100 years. Obama has never, ever expressed willingness to remove the bases, which are there under agreements forced on the Iraqi people using US military might. Just try suggesting to Obama or any other major dem that the Iraqis should be able to vote directly on the presence of US bases, or the terms of the oil leases. See what happens.

2) IRAN. Obama (as I pointed out to you before) has explicitly refused to take military force off the table. He repeats well known MSM half truths and outright lies about Iran (“dangerous…wipe Israel off the map…pursuing nuclear capability”).  He twice emphasized in front of AIPAC, “I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon…We cannot unconditionally rule out an approach that could prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.” He never explains that Iran is in the main adhering to a treaty that Israel, Pakistan and India—all US Allies—refuse to sign. He never explains why we are not upset about Israel stealing our nuclear secrets. He is explicitly promising to attack Iran (certainly “within his power” as President, under the un-constitutional doctrine of Presidential power that the Democrats refuse to challenge) if that is what it takes to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. He said this in front of an organization with well-known ties to major spying scandals and neo-con war intrigue.

Now let’s take a few items not on your list:

1) ISRAEL. Obama said that defending Israel is a “sacred duty.” Why is it a sacred duty to defend a foreign nation? Why should my son fight and die for Israel? Why should you take the money of, say, a lower middle class black woman in the US and send it to Israel? There is no other nation he would have said this about and this statement epitomizes one of the biggest problems with trying to come up with a rational foreign policy for the United States. He also said that Israel should never be forced to the negotiating table. For God’s sake why not?

2) PAKISTAN. Obama believes we have the right to put troops inside another sovereign nation. Your long-winded lectures to me elsewhere notwithstanding, everyone who really studies this issue knows that troops in Pakistan have nothing to do with “terrorism” and everything to do with Central Asian oil and gas supply routes and pipelines, and a desire to contain China and weaken Russia by the usual players in the geo-political chess game. Neither Obama nor any mainstream Dem will sopeak the truth frankly about these issues, knowing that people won’t give up their children or their money to go fight for energy pipelines.

By Outraged, August 25 at 8:31 am #
•  “Aren’t people marching in the streets an expression of free speech..? “

Yep. It is an expression of free speech. But for those demonstrating, this turned out to be anti-climatic. They were planning on being caged-up for their demonstration. I preferred the one at the 2004 Repiglican Convention. THAT one meant something, even though the press didn’t bother showing or reporting that over 1,000 peaceful demonstrators, (who didn’t feel the need to cover their faces) were blasted by the police and thrown in jail. We never see that on Fox Noise or any other MSM reports.

In fact, we haven’t seen ANY of the hundreds or thousands of demonstrations undertaken by various groups over the years, including the Feb 15th, 2003 global demonstration against this Iraq war before it was ‘officially’ launched. So, why are they covering THIS one?

•  “Then ol’ Griff says, “they want out of Iraq, they want no war in Iran, and THAT’S THE MESSAGE.” He then walks AGAINST the crowd as if oblivious to the HUGE banners and signs all around him, asking the question, “What’s your message?” Is Griff Jenkins a yutz or what!? “

Of course he’s a yutz, and again…the crowd provided something for him to yutz about. If this gang was really intent on anything smart, they would have all read, “The Spook Who Sat By the Door.” Now THAT might give them a clue on how to get things accomplished.

Meantime, I’m still waiting to see what happens at the Repug Convention, which is where these people need to be.

The Republickers probably organized them and paid their way to Denver.

Aren’t people marching in the streets an expression of free speech..?

Then ol’ Griff says, “they want out of Iraq, they want no war in Iran, and THAT’S THE MESSAGE.”  He then walks AGAINST the crowd as if oblivious to the HUGE banners and signs all around him, asking the question, “What’s your message?”  Is Griff Jenkins a yutz or what!?

Of course, FOX framed it the way they did.  But they were going to anyway….weren’t they…?

I’d like to see ol’ Griff in an ACTUAL “raucous” crowd.  How fast do you think he’d be running for cover?  He’d probably leave his shoes behind him.

Oh…and for the record Fox News, the side message there was everyone thinks Fox News is a full of shit propaganda machine.  In case you didn’t “catch that”, just trying to be helpful.

I’m with thomthumb…

This group makes the 1968 group look like my heros.(actually, they were at the time).

And, if fox news has an agenda, (they always do) this group played right into it.

Yeah, poor Griff, he was almost tranpled by the 1968-like crowd of far left agitators.

The one big sign read, No War In Iran. Wow! How FAR LEFT is that? Don’t you hate these FAR LEFT crowds? And the reporter asking, “Don’t you want freedom? Don’t you want freedom?” Now that’s entertainment. 

I am very pleased to see citizens in public yelling “Fuck FOX News!” Even more pleased FOX ran it. 
But then again, I’m FAR LEFT….far left…far left.

...Fox didn’t report a story here—they created one, as usual.  Did you pick up on all the sideways rhetoric the “reporter” and the talking head used?  “Far leftists,” “Crowd getting out of control,” “We hope Griff is okay…”  Are ya kiddin’ me?  This is tripe.  Fox “News” has an agenda, and anyone who takes them seriously even for a moment has made the conscious decision to put their brains in neutral.

that group makes the 1968 hippies look enlightened, organized, serious, and well bathed…at least they have suitable accommodations for them in Denver…

Well, these are the anti-Democratic party, anti-Obama crowd that we’ve been hearing from on TD for several weeks now.

And…how or why are they being called ‘leftist’ instead of just no-directionist? I don’t get it.

As much as I despise Fox Noise, I actually have to agree with the point here. They’ve assembled to apparently deliver a message, (or probably not) and when given the opportunity, they don’t. Supposedly they planned to be “caged”..except that this group apparently, was not.

From what I could pick up from the ‘clues’ in signs and the occasional ‘proclamation’, they don’t want anything different than the rest of us:

Out of Iraq – check. We know that. (or at least all of the democrats I know want this…including Obama. There’s already a plan.

No War on Iran. – check. Nobody wants war on Iran aside from the Neocons, and they’re repuglicans. Why is this happening at the Democratic Convention?

No Torture. – check. We’ve been (or at least my own environment has) addressing THIS issue emphatically and passionately for at least 5 years, and spending countless unpaid hours on addressing it. Obama has addressed it multiple times, citing the obvious..TORTURE IS *NEVER* ACCEPTABLE!! Again, why is this taking place at the Democratic Convention, when it’s the repugs that have been perpetrating the torture?

FISA…We’ve been through that. Yep, we can hold the Dems accountable for allowing the compromise that so many people are enraged by. But do we really believe the repugs (still an evenly divided senate folks) were actually gonna do anything more than what they did?

I still don’t get it. None of these are new complaints, but none of them have been initiated by Democrats, unless we’d like to isolate the DLC’ers, (like the Clinton’s) who went along with them.

So, my same question…why is this happening at the Democratic Convention, and being accomplished by (presumably) former democrats like Cynthia McKinney? (I had no idea she was involved, but I should have expected that I suppose).

Oh well, recreating 68, (if anyone remembers the outcome of that) is probably the most stupidly fucked-up idea yet. The repugs have gotta be loving this. If there is an operational point, (besides providing the mechanics for the continuation of ‘divide and rule’) I don’t get it.

Fox News (god, it hurt to type that) needs to understand the difference between “free speech” and the “abuse of free speech”.