Hijacking Catastrophe

[c| Spetsnaz.]

Order this http://www.mediaed.org/videos/CommercialismPoliticsAndMedia/Hijacking_Catastrophe right now. Ghostsniper, I challenge you to watch this movie. You don't have to like it, just watch it. It's non-partisan, and produced by the very reputable Media Education Foundation.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

"Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire examines how a radical fringe of the Republican Party has used the trauma of the 9/11 terror attacks to advance a pre-existing agenda to radically transform American foreign policy while rolling back civil liberties and social programs at home."[/size][/i]

lol....you call that non-partisan???[/size]

[c| Spetsnaz.]

Yes, it's called reality.

[Mr. Lothario]

     Last I checked, "non-partisan" didn't mean "in favor of the Republican party", despite what Republicans seem to think.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

    Last I checked, "non-partisan" didn't mean "in favor of the Republican party", despite what Republicans seem to think.

But it also doesn't mean "specifically against the Republican party" either.  A statement of a "pre-existing agenda" is a bunch of crap which isn't true.[/size]

[*DAMN Bondo]

GS, half Bush's DoD bigwigs are right from Project of a New America Century which states this agenda fairly specifically, it even basically wishes for a big crisis that would allow them to get popular support to enact it.

As for this content disqualifying it from non-partisanship...that is the sad truth of the Fox Effect and subsequent conservative shift of the mainstream media. No longer is truth the important factor, but "balance." Although Fox doesn't to, most of the other networks are so frightened of being called liberally biased (something you wouldn't hear about if it was true) that they overbalance to the conservatives. But proper, neutral journalism isn't about giving both sides equal weight and consideration, it is giving accurate and true information weight over inaccurate politiking.

So yeah, this is just real journalism, unincumbered by the Fox Effect, and is not politically biased, but rather factual...and the facts happen to not be favorable to the Republicans.

[c| Spetsnaz.]

Project for a New American Century mission statement http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm and their letter to Pres. Clinton in 97' http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm  Do the names at the bottom look familiar? Just another example of how this war has nothing to do with terrorism, and more to do with the will of greedy power hungry lunatics.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Am I to take it that you people actually DISAGREE with that mission statement?

We will no longer be a nation if people like you, and people like John Kerry are running this nation.

There was nothing innacurate or wrong with that statement.  If you think there is, you are in the MINORITY of opinion in this country.

[BFG]

I wonder, did you listen to or hear any of Konfi Anans (bad sp)  speech at the UN the other day?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

I wonder, did you listen to or hear any of Konfi Anans (bad sp)  speech at the UN the other day?

Why would I EVER listen to the speech of a person who has personally pocketed money from Saddam during the Oil for Food scandal???

[BFG]

Give me one single shred of evidence that backs that claim up.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Give me one single shred of evidence that backs that claim up.

Oh please.  Half of the UN was taking money, including some top French diplomats.  How the hell do you think Saddam was getting away with murder for 12 years under UN Sanctions?  Please, you people are living in a dream world over there in Europe.  Or worse, you know damn well what is happening and are covering up for your own actions.

[BFG]

Sorry i thought i posted somthing... but everytime most of us post somthing you seem to ignore it if it dosn't meet somthing you want to address or reply to, its like talking to a politician - they will argue about everything and answer everything apart from the question you ask them.

Give me one single shred of evidence that backs that claim up.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Sorry i thought i posted somthing... but everytime most of us post somthing you seem to ignore it if it dosn't meet somthing you want to address or reply to, its like talking to a politician - they will argue about everything and answer everything apart from the question you ask them.

Give me one single shred of evidence that backs that claim up.

Sorry, my sources don't give me written testimonials to show you on this forum.  And since I am not into forging documents myself, unlike the Democrats, you will just have to take my word on it.  

People, the reach of my influence goes all the way up to the highest levels of government.  I talk on occasion with people who are in the know all the way up to the White House, the Congress, the Pentagon, the State Department, the Dept of Homeland Security, the Dept of Justice, as well as friends of mine who were former Rangers now in the FBI, CIA, NSA, and some who are still serving in various Special Forces units around the world and at our Embassies in 20 different countries.  Doesn't really matter to me if you believe it or not, but I get information that the news media either doesn't provide, or is unwilling to report.

The United Nations is one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen.  It's a pitty everyone wants to go to them with their problems.

[BFG]

Ok so you can't back it up. Thanks for clearing that up. Its nothing more than an opinion and what you say people you know who might or might not have a clue what their talking about.

Doesn't really matter to me if you believe it or not, but I get information that the news media either doesn't provide, or is unwilling to report.

Amazing, i didn't realise they could do that for you. Whats it called " The Extreame Fanatical Religouse Republican News Network - we give you the news you want to hear"??

SO what exactly do they tell you Ghostsniper? rather reeling of how great and inportant your list of contacts are, what do these people actually know and where do they base these claims from?

[*DAMN Bondo]

GS, answer yes or no, do you agree with this statement (not from them): "If something is in the best interest of America, we can and should do it regardless of opposition."

I love how they say one of the tenets is that they will cooperate with democratic allies...apparently that was just talk when those allies didn't agree.

Oddly, one of my Republican friends, who has none of your sources, parrots the Kofi Annan claim just as you do...must be in the "liberal" media afterall. Too bad he can't support the claim with any proof either. You definitely have a Bush Administration debating style...the whole I can't tell you why I'm right, but trust me, I'm right. That isn't democracy though, democracy is based on informed citizens.

I really want to know why you think the US should be a dictatorship of foreign politics, why we should be able to do as we wish. You are extremely shortsighted, only through a comprehensive international diplomatic organization, the UN, can greater peace ever be attained. Certainly it could use with some modifications, but it is dangerous to suggest it serves no purpose. WWII was a direct result of the League of Nations not being implemented to Wilson's desire (and the reparations being too punative.)

[BTs_GhostSniper]

GS, answer yes or no, do you agree with this statement (not from them): "If something is in the best interest of America, we can and should do it regardless of opposition."

Yes, I agree with that statement.

I really want to know why you think the US should be a dictatorship of foreign politics, why we should be able to do as we wish. You are extremely shortsighted, only through a comprehensive international diplomatic organization, the UN, can greater peace ever be attained.

You are reading something into it that isn't there.  We don't want to be a "dictatorship" of foreign politics....we simply want to conduct our foreign affairs in a way which is benificial to OUR interests.  I don't see anything wrong with that.  And maybe the UN was a great idea right after WWII, but it was screwed up in its implementation from the start.  We should never have fought the Korean War as we did, letting the United Nations dictate how it would be fought.  The reason we have the mess with North Korea now is that we didn't do things the way MacArthur said to do them in 1951.  Sure, we would have gone to war with China, but today we wouldn't be looking at how to deal with the problem of nukes in both China and North Korea, would we?

P.S.  I really think Bondo is secretly |MP| Buccaneer.  They act just alike, seem to come from the same moderate mold, and argue nearly the same.  Is it just me, or does anyone else see this in Bondo's posts?

[*DAMN Bondo]

P.S.  I really think Bondo is secretly |MP| Buccaneer.  They act just alike, seem to come from the same moderate mold, and argue nearly the same.  Is it just me, or does anyone else see this in Bondo's posts?

I guess I'll take that as a compliment.

[BFG]

ure, we would have gone to war with China, but today we wouldn't be looking at how to deal with the problem of nukes in both China and North Korea, would we?

Why worry about Nukes in places like china? you have them, we have them, there are a lot of countrys that have them.  - surely it would be much more relevant to worry that there are countrys like Israel that have them.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

ure, we would have gone to war with China, but today we wouldn't be looking at how to deal with the problem of nukes in both China and North Korea, would we?

Why worry about Nukes in places like china? you have them, we have them, there are a lot of countrys that have them.  - surely it would be much more relevant to worry that there are countrys like Israel that have them.

Why is that?  Israel would only use them if they were ATTACKED.  Places like China and North Korea....who knows.