If Hillary was so evil, powerful, and connected to the illuminati she would not have been beat twice by a freshman senator with a Muslim name and this orange clown
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
Let me know when Canada steps up and solves it then. Or better yet, Israel seeing how it's on their border and just took delivery of F-35, 35, 35s. Barry and his base is sick of US blood and treasure going down the rat hole of the Middle East. I look forward to Trump, Trump, Trump solving it in his first 100 days, 35 days from now.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
Let me know when Canada steps up and solves it then. Or better yet, Israel seeing how it's on their border and just took delivery of F-35, 35, 35s. Barry and his base is sick of US blood and treasure going down the rat hole of the Middle East. I look forward to Trump, Trump, Trump solving it in his first 100 days, 35 days from now.
At some point you will have to come to grips with the genocide your preferred policy created.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
Let me know when Canada steps up and solves it then. Or better yet, Israel seeing how it's on their border and just took delivery of F-35, 35, 35s. Barry and his base is sick of US blood and treasure going down the rat hole of the Middle East. I look forward to Trump, Trump, Trump solving it in his first 100 days, 35 days from now.
At some point you will have to come to grips with the genocide your preferred policy created.
Funny, funny, funny that you claim to know what my preferred policy regarding Syria is.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Other then saying things in three's the man has no other cards
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Because there's a Canadian on these boards who harps on the failure of this US policy or that US policy and thinks the best policy is for the US to occupy Iraq for 50 years with170,000 troops and get involved in Syria and Yemen with failed neocon policy. All at my tax dollar's and nation's expense. When Canada, Canada, Canada ponies up and spends three trillion US dollars taming the Middle East, I'll stop harping.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Other then saying things in three's the man has no other cards
Care to explain what you mean, mean, mean by that? Or just more BS because you don't have anything to say because you know I'm right, right, right?
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Because there's a Canadian on these boards who harps on the failure of this US policy or that US policy and thinks the best policy is for the US to occupy Iraq for 50 years with170,000 troops and get involved in Syria and Yemen with failed neocon policy. All at my tax dollar's and nation's expense. When Canada, Canada, Canada ponies up and spends three trillion US dollars taming the Middle East, I'll stop harping.
so because canada doesn't get involved, his opinion is moot? does that mean I should just stroll on outta here and head off to AET too?
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Because there's a Canadian on these boards who harps on the failure of this US policy or that US policy and thinks the best policy is for the US to occupy Iraq for 50 years with170,000 troops and get involved in Syria and Yemen with failed neocon policy. All at my tax dollar's and nation's expense. When Canada, Canada, Canada ponies up and spends three trillion US dollars taming the Middle East, I'll stop harping.
so because canada doesn't get involved, his opinion is moot? does that mean I should just stroll on outta here and head off to AET too?
It does make me wonder if his opinions would be the same when its your country paying the price for failed policies. Does it make them moot? No, please express them. I'm just going to think they're wrong and call you out on it. Easier to say shit when you don't have any skin in the game. Go ahead, ask BS how that splendid little war in Yemen is going? The one he championed in the spring and thought it would be great for the US to get more involved with the Saudis and crush the rebellion. And I'll say, let Canada get involved. Please stick around and explain to me why failed neocon policy should be US foreign policy, please, please, please?
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Because there's a Canadian on these boards who harps on the failure of this US policy or that US policy and thinks the best policy is for the US to occupy Iraq for 50 years with170,000 troops and get involved in Syria and Yemen with failed neocon policy. All at my tax dollar's and nation's expense. When Canada, Canada, Canada ponies up and spends three trillion US dollars taming the Middle East, I'll stop harping.
If you invade a volatile country and tell the to-be-invaded population you're there to make it better, it's a safe assumption that there'll actually be an initial spike in aggression and volatility prior to the potential for stability (though in my opinion the better option is not to invade a volatile country, but that's another conversation). Once the country is invaded, it's the invaders' obligation to help keep that aggression in check to help the population decrease the level of volatility, and pursue that stability. If sufficient assistance doesn't come (or doesn't stay for long enough), nefarious actors will inevitably recognize an opportunity to seize power for themselves. This is the well-documented power vacuum which created groups like IS, and whether you're from Canada or Kazakstan doesn't change the fact that invading a country to bring stability should deliver you the moral obligation to see that through. Premature full or partial retreat can (and did) lead to the usurping of power by immoral opportunists and create situations more dire than the ones the invasion itself aspired to prevent. FWIW - this doesn't mean Bush gets a free pass in my books, just that with the cards that were dealt to Obama, I'm not certain he played the right hand.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Ha ha you finally get it as long as we support Israel there will never be peace in the region ever ! Did you really think Obama could bring peace to the region in only 8 yrs how long have they been feuding over there ? And only Carter was able to bring both sides to a negotiating table so tell us how long do you think it will take the Bafoon administration to bring total peace there ?
Please enlighten me as to what was unstable about Iraq prior to 2003. And for how long is the US now committed to Iraq? Forever?
And sorry, I'm not buying it and I don't own it as I was against it from well before it started. Canada can pick up where we left off. Consider it as the US having softened it up for you to make it easier. Your welcome.
“All signs point to leaking, not hacking. If hacking were involved, the National Security Agency would know it – and know both sender and recipient.
In short, since leaking requires physically removing data – on a thumb drive, for example …
NSA is able to identify both the sender and recipient when hacking is involved….The bottom line is that the NSA would know where and how any “hacked” emails from the DNC, HRC or any other servers were routed through the network…
The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating – saying things like “our best guess” or “our opinion” or “our estimate” etc. – shows that the emails alleged to have been “hacked” cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA’s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.
The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider – as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.” (“US Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims“, Consortium News)
Bottom line: Leaked not hacked. Thus, the MSM “Putin did it” version = Bullshit.
...and part of the goal here was to make sure that we did not do the work of the leakers for them by raising more and more questions about the integrity of the election...
Please enlighten me as to what was unstable about Iraq prior to 2003. And for how long is the US now committed to Iraq? Forever?
And sorry, I'm not buying it and I don't own it as I was against it from well before it started. Canada can pick up where we left off. Consider it as the US having softened it up for you to make it easier. Your welcome.
Was this to me or BS?
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
First part to you and second part to both you and BS, BS, BS. The WaPo link below, if it works, has an article on why the US should have stayed out of Iraq. If it doesn't work, try to find the WaPo article on the CIA interrogation of Sadam Hussein.
Dick Cheney sold the US' soul to the devil and forever ruined what little prestige and decency the US had left. Dick Cheney made pre-emptive regime change the US' foreign policy doctrine and the unjustified invasion of Iraq has lead to the US losing all of its so called moral authority. Ain't no President putting that genie back in the bottle. Someone should ask Trump how well he thinks GWB sleeps at night.
I think Obama played the hand that was dealt to him just as well as he could have. Some other member of the "coalition of the willing" can go all in for the pot. We've wasted enough on this boondoggle.
^^^ Excellent point jv. The libs/radlibs are getting so scattered w/ their thoughts they even attack their own. Liberal thoughts cause nasty people.
What's never ever mentioned by the sanctity of the vote hypocritical democrats: 100% verifiable proof and multiple examples of the DNC and Clinton campaign undermining democracy in the primaries and sabotaging primary opponents, but funny there were ZERO calls for protests, ZERO calls for recounts and ZERO calls for delegates to flip and vote their conscience. Interesting.
First part to you and second part to both you and BS, BS, BS. The WaPo link below, if it works, has an article on why the US should have stayed out of Iraq. If it doesn't work, try to find the WaPo article on the CIA interrogation of Sadam Hussein.
Dick Cheney sold the US' soul to the devil and forever ruined what little prestige and decency the US had left. Dick Cheney made pre-emptive regime change the US' foreign policy doctrine and the unjustified invasion of Iraq has lead to the US losing all of its so called moral authority. Ain't no President putting that genie back in the bottle. Someone should ask Trump how well he thinks GWB sleeps at night.
I think Obama played the hand that was dealt to him just as well as he could have. Some other member of the "coalition of the willing" can go all in for the pot. We've wasted enough on this boondoggle.
I don't know where you got the impression that I was in favour of entering Iraq. I believe in judging a president's legacy not only by what they create, but also how they action what they inherit. I agree that the US should have stayed out of Iraq, and shame on Bush for that. His scorecard reads poorly for that. As for Obama, he inherited a mess and if you ask the Iraqis about the last eight years, they may not have such nice things to say.
I'll readily admit my choice of words was flawed by saying "an initially volatile country should not be invaded" - America either created or exacerbated that scenario by entering the country.
To say "we've made enough of a mess, let's walk away" is like creating a lethal weapon, recognizing the danger, and feeling that it's best left on the street for someone to grab. You've created the potential danger, and accepted a lack of control of said potential for danger. I truly can't comprehend why people find it so hard to be anti-initial Iraqi invasion, yet anti-sufficiently-useful Iraqi invasion given that the invasion took place. I feel that for all undue harm you apply on a person, you are the owner of his or her misery until you aspire and act to correct the dangerous direction. I feel this extends to one government (not administration) inducing misery on a population as well.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Because there's a Canadian on these boards who harps on the failure of this US policy or that US policy and thinks the best policy is for the US to occupy Iraq for 50 years with170,000 troops and get involved in Syria and Yemen with failed neocon policy. All at my tax dollar's and nation's expense. When Canada, Canada, Canada ponies up and spends three trillion US dollars taming the Middle East, I'll stop harping.
so because canada doesn't get involved, his opinion is moot? does that mean I should just stroll on outta here and head off to AET too?
It does make me wonder if his opinions would be the same when its your country paying the price for failed policies. Does it make them moot? No, please express them. I'm just going to think they're wrong and call you out on it. Easier to say shit when you don't have any skin in the game. Go ahead, ask BS how that splendid little war in Yemen is going? The one he championed in the spring and thought it would be great for the US to get more involved with the Saudis and crush the rebellion. And I'll say, let Canada get involved. Please stick around and explain to me why failed neocon policy should be US foreign policy, please, please, please?
Please link where I "championed" a war in Yemen or advocated for 170,000 troops in Iraq. You couldn't do it the last time I asked but if you have new evidence please share it. You seem to think that if your repeat something often enough then it magically becomes true...how Trumpian of you.
I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum: ...thoughts?
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...
High standards: -The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization -The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas: -Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price? -NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization. -BBC is a British public service broadcaster -AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything?
since 1917
it's interesting that i write all that stuff about syria and there's not a lick of a response ...
this is the thing with the mainstream media ... sometimes they don't know they are being played ... that these propaganda campaigns put forth by western countries uses them as tools ... folks have to understand that the primary reason these media outlets are in place is to make money ... sell advertising and make profits ... profiteering doesn't necessarily translate to lying ... it just means that they are less likely to send independent investigators to cover a story when they can get it bulk from a lot of places ... especially in a conflict like syria ... currently, the UN reporting on syria is based on organizations that are tied to the US who is undergoing a regime change campaign ...
it's the same reasons why most americans think of fidel castro as some evil tyrannical dictator ... it works when people aren't interested in figuring things out themselves ...
I think most of us are aware of what is happening in Syria and the medias coverage of it. My guess is we all have differing opinions of what is going on. I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole here, because this thread isn't supposed to be about that. Were going way off into the weeds.
i'm pretty sure most people are not aware of what is happening in syria ... judging by the lack of discussion on that thread ... but you're right in that this isn't the thread for it ... I just wanted to show that those supposed unbiased sources of media do not always report the truth ...
The AMT is aware...they just don't want to confront this administration's utter failure in dealing with it. This is Hope and Change, the light footprint, the consequences of the Cairo speech on full display. Heckuva job Barry.
consequences of the cairo speech??
It was titled A New Beginning. It was applauded by the globalist elite and certainly gave comfort to the liberal forces that participated in the Arab Spring and the Green Revolution. In of itself it was not a bad speech but the major defect is that Obama believed his own rhetoric was powerful enough to usher in a new era of freedom through words and a draw down of the American presence. This was horribly naive and it resulted in the crushing of moderates across the region. Be it the Green Revolution, the overthrow of Mubarak, the overthrow of Gaddafi, Turkey, Iraq, you name it the absence of western power and support allowed the worst actors to further tighten their grips on their oppressed populations. The Cairo speech lit the fuse for great hope but the absence of resolve turned that hope into genocide.
Whatever happened to allowing people to choose their destiny rather than have it provided for them? Democracy is messy. But you're okay with continued support of corrupt dictators and governments as long as it serves Israel's purpose. I get, get, get that. Let me know when the first waves of Canadian troops land to stop the genocide. I'll be sure to thank you for your contribution.
ahhh...I get it now...it's about Israel.
Anything having to do with the Middle East has to do with Israel. But nothing 170,000 Canadian troops couldn't solve, solve, solve.
why do you keep harping on canadian involvment/non-involvment in foreign conflicts? my government's refusal to participate does not negate the opinion of the people.
Because there's a Canadian on these boards who harps on the failure of this US policy or that US policy and thinks the best policy is for the US to occupy Iraq for 50 years with170,000 troops and get involved in Syria and Yemen with failed neocon policy. All at my tax dollar's and nation's expense. When Canada, Canada, Canada ponies up and spends three trillion US dollars taming the Middle East, I'll stop harping.
so because canada doesn't get involved, his opinion is moot? does that mean I should just stroll on outta here and head off to AET too?
It does make me wonder if his opinions would be the same when its your country paying the price for failed policies. Does it make them moot? No, please express them. I'm just going to think they're wrong and call you out on it. Easier to say shit when you don't have any skin in the game. Go ahead, ask BS how that splendid little war in Yemen is going? The one he championed in the spring and thought it would be great for the US to get more involved with the Saudis and crush the rebellion. And I'll say, let Canada get involved. Please stick around and explain to me why failed neocon policy should be US foreign policy, please, please, please?
Please link where I "championed" a war in Yemen or advocated for 170,000 troops in Iraq. You couldn't do it the last time I asked but if you have new evidence please share it. You seem to think that if your repeat something often enough then it magically becomes true...how Trumpian of you.
What should Americas role in Syria be in your opinion?
^^^ Excellent point jv. The libs/radlibs are getting so scattered w/ their thoughts they even attack their own. Liberal thoughts cause nasty people.
What's never ever mentioned by the sanctity of the vote hypocritical democrats: 100% verifiable proof and multiple examples of the DNC and Clinton campaign undermining democracy in the primaries and sabotaging primary opponents, but funny there were ZERO calls for protests, ZERO calls for recounts and ZERO calls for delegates to flip and vote their conscience. Interesting.
I hack that to be very very odd.
OK, where are all those Patriots with their constant raging hard-ons for overthrowing the government over any perceived some slight against the will of the American people?
Or does that only count when they're asked to please not hunt raccoons with a grenade launcher on the elementary school playground, or worse yet, when the First Lady has the gall to suggest taking an occasional brisk walk and not eating fried Snickers bars for dinner?
Comments
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
And sorry, I'm not buying it and I don't own it as I was against it from well before it started. Canada can pick up where we left off. Consider it as the US having softened it up for you to make it easier. Your welcome.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Link:
...and part of the goal here was to make sure that we did not do the work of the leakers for them by raising more and more questions about the integrity of the election...
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
Dick Cheney sold the US' soul to the devil and forever ruined what little prestige and decency the US had left. Dick Cheney made pre-emptive regime change the US' foreign policy doctrine and the unjustified invasion of Iraq has lead to the US losing all of its so called moral authority. Ain't no President putting that genie back in the bottle. Someone should ask Trump how well he thinks GWB sleeps at night.
I think Obama played the hand that was dealt to him just as well as he could have. Some other member of the "coalition of the willing" can go all in for the pot. We've wasted enough on this boondoggle.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/16/trump-raises-specter-treason/zdwgXRuJBMChEXmX5kchhP/story.html?s_campaign=bdc:globewell:trending&s_campaign=bdc:globewell:trending
Follow the money, money, money!!!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Excellent point jv.
The libs/radlibs are getting so scattered w/ their thoughts they even attack their own.
Liberal thoughts cause nasty people.
100% verifiable proof and multiple examples of the DNC and Clinton campaign undermining democracy in the primaries and sabotaging primary opponents, but funny there were ZERO calls for protests, ZERO calls for recounts and ZERO calls for delegates to flip and vote their conscience. Interesting.
I hack that to be very very odd.
I'll readily admit my choice of words was flawed by saying "an initially volatile country should not be invaded" - America either created or exacerbated that scenario by entering the country.
To say "we've made enough of a mess, let's walk away" is like creating a lethal weapon, recognizing the danger, and feeling that it's best left on the street for someone to grab. You've created the potential danger, and accepted a lack of control of said potential for danger. I truly can't comprehend why people find it so hard to be anti-initial Iraqi invasion, yet anti-sufficiently-useful Iraqi invasion given that the invasion took place. I feel that for all undue harm you apply on a person, you are the owner of his or her misery until you aspire and act to correct the dangerous direction. I feel this extends to one government (not administration) inducing misery on a population as well.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Or does that only count when they're asked to please not hunt raccoons with a grenade launcher on the elementary school playground, or worse yet, when the First Lady has the gall to suggest taking an occasional brisk walk and not eating fried Snickers bars for dinner?