killing cyclists is fun

Mon, 26 Apr 2004 09:40:34 -0400, <[email hidden]>,

Stephen Harding said:

Wonder why we're not all thinking alike now, given the same
mind control news media?

Some of us less invested in tin-foil beanies still value
critical thought. It's not hard to spot the [censored] but it
gets tiresome hearing it repeated ad nauseum until the
cloned dolts start believing it's the truth.
--
zk

Stephen Harding said:

Wonder why we're not all thinking alike now, given the
same mind control news media?

Some of us gave up on TV years ago, don't take a
corporate daily newspaper, and don't listen to commercial
radio either.

Some of us have found that we must sample the foreign
and alternative press online to have some inkling of
what's going on.

To cite a recent example, during the siege of Falluja
recently, while the Pentagon was claiming that a "fragile
truce" was holding, foreign and local accounts reported that
U.S. Marines were slaughtering civilians in numbers that
exceeded 600, including over 200 women and 100 children,
with over 2000 wounded. The mainstream press said nothing
while this was happening-- they just parroted what the
Pentagon was saying at their press briefings.

If the [censored] repeat a lie often enough, you might come
to believe
it. But if you never hear the truth in the first place,
then you have no chance of getting the picture.

Chalo Colina

(Chalo) said:

Stephen Harding said:

Wonder why we're not all thinking alike now, given the
same mind control news media?

Some of us gave up on TV years ago, don't take a
corporate daily newspaper, and don't listen to commercial
radio either.

Some of us have found that we must sample the foreign and
alternative press online to have some inkling of what's
going on.

To cite a recent example, during the siege of Falluja
recently, while the Pentagon was claiming that a "fragile
truce" was holding, foreign and local accounts reported
that U.S. Marines were slaughtering civilians in numbers
that exceeded 600, including over 200 women and 100
children, with over 2000 wounded. The mainstream press said
nothing while this was happening-- they just parroted what
the Pentagon was saying at their press briefings.

If the [censored] repeat a lie often enough, you might come
to believe
it. But if you never hear the truth in the first place,
then you have no chance of getting the picture.

I'll bite - what makes you think the one alternate source
was the one source of truth when all the others (and common
sense since there are embedded reporters with many units in
the area) dictated otherwise? Just curious...

I read (OK, saw it on the cover of the tabloid while I was
checking out) where the US military had also killed an angel
in Iraq. Oh my. Why wasn't THAT carried on CNN? Heh.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.comOpen ↗ Home of
the $695 ti frame

Chalo said:

Stephen Harding said:

Wonder why we're not all thinking alike now, given the
same mind control news media?

Some of us gave up on TV years ago, don't take a
corporate daily newspaper, and don't listen to commercial
radio either.

Some of us have found that we must sample the foreign and
alternative press online to have some inkling of what's
going on.

To cite a recent example, during the siege of Falluja
recently, while the Pentagon was claiming that a "fragile
truce" was holding, foreign and local accounts reported
that U.S. Marines were slaughtering civilians in numbers
that exceeded 600, including over 200 women and 100
children, with over 2000 wounded. The mainstream press
said nothing while this was happening-- they just parroted
what the Pentagon was saying at their press briefings.

Crapola! The people in Fallujah have shown themselves to be
liars of the highest quality. You want to use Al Jazeera as
your news source (or whatever) simply because it's more in
line with your political POV. It feels good to have news the
way you like it.

The sole attribute of these "alternative news" sources
tends to be their anti-American or anti-Bush nature, which
makes them appealing to people who wish to feel more
comfortable with their marginally accepted
political/social/economic views.

Quoted message said:

If the [censored] repeat a lie often enough, you might come
to believe
it. But if you never hear the truth in the first place,
then you have no chance of getting the picture.

So absolutely true. Unfortunately, you seem to be defining
"truth" in political terms, which then makes your news
sources much more comforting.

SMH

Chalo said:

If the [censored] repeat a lie often enough, you might come
to believe
it. But if you never hear the truth in the first place,
then you have no chance of getting the picture.

Of course, you have some magical way of knowing which
side is lying?

Austin

Mark Hickey <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

(Chalo) said:

Stephen Harding said:

Wonder why we're not all thinking alike now, given the
same mind control news media?

Some of us have found that we must sample the foreign and
alternative press online to have some inkling of what's
going on.

I'll bite - what makes you think the one alternate source
was the one source of truth when all the others (and
common sense since there are embedded reporters with many
units in the area) dictated otherwise? Just curious...

Because the Pentagon distributes and provides protection
for embedded reporters, it should be obvious that they
have significant control over what gets reported and in
what tone.

You won't hear an accurate description of events from the
principal combatants or their proxies. There are many
credible news sources between CNN and Al Jazeera.

Dietrich

Tue, 27 Apr 2004 06:47:11 -0400, <[email hidden]>,

Stephen Harding said:

So absolutely true. Unfortunately, you seem to be defining
"truth" in political terms, which then makes your news
sources much more comforting.

“God told me to strike at Al Qa’ida and I struck them." "And
then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."

Do you buy this [censored] in religious or political terms? Do
you even think it's true?
--
zk

"AustinMN" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Chalo said:

If the [censored] repeat a lie often enough, you might
come to believe
it. But if you never hear the truth in the first place,
then you have no chance of getting the picture.

Of course, you have some magical way of knowing which side
is lying?

In this case, my current signature line answers the question
nicely (see below) People who disagree with you might be
lying. There's little reason to suspect that those who agree
with you are lying.

--
Mike Kruger "we are more likely to "know" what we want to
know than what we don't want to know. That human flaw is
built into the very process of making intelligence
estimates." -Richard Goodwin, NYTimes, 2/8/04

Zoot Katz said:

Tue, 27 Apr 2004 06:47:11 -0400, <408e3a35@news-
1.oit.umass.edu>, Stephen Harding

Quoted message said:

So absolutely true. Unfortunately, you seem to be defining
"truth" in political terms, which then makes your news
sources much more comforting.

“God told me to strike at Al Qa’ida and I struck
them." "And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam,
which I did."

Do you buy this [censored] in religious or political terms?
Do you even think it's true?

No on both counts, depending of course on who is supposed
to have said
it.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.comOpen ↗ Home of
the $695 ti frame

Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:06:56 -0700,
<[email hidden]>,

Mark Hickey said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So absolutely true. Unfortunately, you seem to be
defining "truth" in political terms, which then makes
your news sources much more comforting.

“God told me to strike at Al Qa’ida and I struck
them." "And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam,
which I did."

Do you buy this [censored] in religious or political terms?
Do you even think it's true?

No on both counts, depending of course on who is supposed
to have said
it.

That's the weasel point of the right wing - who said it? The
left wing treats it as an out of context direct quote.

washingtonpost.comA37944Open ↗
2003Jun26?language=printer

I don't buy it, but I don't hesitate believing Bush
hears voices.

Sadly, it's obvious that he still regularly says
unbelievably dumb things and has kept his twisted sense of
humour*, so who knows?

* "Bring 'em on."
--
zk

Zoot Katz said:

Tue, 27 Apr 2004 06:47:11 -0400, <408e3a35@news-
1.oit.umass.edu>, Stephen Harding

Quoted message said:

So absolutely true. Unfortunately, you seem to be defining
"truth" in political terms, which then makes your news
sources much more comforting.

“God told me to strike at Al Qa’ida and I struck
them." "And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam,
which I did."

Do you buy this [censored] in religious or political terms?
Do you even think it's true?

Don't know. If you don't believe in an activist God, then
it's entirely false, just as if you don't believe in a
God at all.

If you do believe in a God, then who knows.

Always risky bringing God into the political debate. It's
caused all sorts of problems for people throughout history.
That's why the US constitution attempts to separate religion
from state.

Osama Bin Laden and the various shades of Islamists are
doing the same thing of course. Maybe it's all God's plan to
effect some outcome through round about, human actions, like
WWII, and the huge scale persecution of Jews was largely
responsible for the rebirth of Israel. Yaweh can be a tough
character at times, even to those "on his side".

All I know is that these quotes were reported by a large
number of news agencies, some of which are considered "main
stream", and therefor "propaganda outlets" of the
administration, which seems a weird way to go about
propagandizing.

SMH

Stephen Harding said:

Yaweh can be a tough character at times, even to those "on
his side".

boy, ain't that the truth!

2 Sam. 6:6-7

6:6 And when they came to Nachon's threshingfloor, Uzzah
put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of
it; for the oxen shook it.
7:7 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah;
and God smote him there for his error; and there he died
by the ark of God.

and woe to any children who happen to be around.

II Kings 2: 23-25

8:23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was
going up by the way, there came forth little children out
of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up,
thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
9:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed
them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two
she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two
children of them.
10:25 And he went from thence to mount Carmel, and from
thence he returned to Samaria.

cforc.comkjvOpen ↗
--
david reuteler [email hidden]

Wed, 28 Apr 2004 06:12:24 -0400, <[email hidden]>,

Stephen Harding said:

All I know is that these quotes were reported by a large
number of news agencies, some of which are considered "main
stream", and therefor "propaganda outlets" of the
administration, which seems a weird way to go about
propagandizing.

Faux News' correspondent Wendell Goler, said Ari
Fleischer told him the story was "an invention". That's
good enough for me!
--
zk

"Zoot Katz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sadly, it's obvious that he still regularly says
unbelievably dumb things and has kept his twisted sense of
humour*, so who knows?

* "Bring 'em on."
--

From "The Onion" today, this news [1]

Bush To Iraqi Militants: 'Please Stop Bringing It On'
WASHINGTON, DC-In an internationally televised statement
Monday, President Bush modified a July 2003 challenge to
Iraqi militants attacking U.S. forces. "Terrorists, Saddam
loyalists, and anti-American insurgents: Please stop
bringing it on now," Bush said at a Monday press conference.
"Nine months and 500 U.S. casualties ago, I may have invited
y'all to bring it on, but as of today, I formally rescind
that statement. I would officially like for you to step
back." The president added that the "it" Iraqis should stop
bringing includes gunfire, bombings, grenade attacks, and
suicide missions of all types.

[1] The Onion is a satirical newspaper.

Thu, 29 Apr 2004 03:27:41 GMT,
<[email hidden]>,

Mike Kruger said:

[1] The Onion is a satirical newspaper.

Since when?
--
zk

Zoot Katz said:

Thu, 29 Apr 2004 03:27:41 GMT,
<[email hidden]>, "Mike

Kruger said:

[1] The Onion is a satirical newspaper.

Since when?

Intentional or not, that is one of the funniest things I've
read lately. ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.comOpen ↗ Home of
the $695 ti frame

David Reuteler said:

Just zis Guy said:

Rupert Murdoch also owns an appreciable proportion of our
news media (both print and broadcast).

just fyi, the australians have disowned him. he's
officially an american now. he became a US citizen in 1985
to comply with FCC regulations (awww!). can we give him
back to australia? by force if required.

No thanks.

--
Regards. Richard.