Saudi Prince Calls Murdoch And Changes Fox News
By on Dec 12th, 2005 at 3:14 pm
Saudi Prince Calls Murdoch And Changes Fox News
During last month’s street riots in France, Fox News ran a banner during a news segment, reading: “Muslim riots.” Billionaire Saudi Prince al-Walid bin Talal, who owns 5.5% of Fox News, was unhappy with the tagline:
I picked up the phone and called Murdoch… (and told him) these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty. Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from Muslim riots to civil riots.
Talal gained notoriety after 9/11 when he blamed U.S. policies for the terrorist attacks.
Fox News spokeswoman Irena Briganti refused to confirm or deny that the call took place but “acknowledged the network changed the banner after receiving complaints.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
That photo is just begging for a caption contest…
December 12th, 2005 at 3:24 pmThe Prince is right in his correction, though I’m surprised he knows how to pronounce the word ‘poverty.’
December 12th, 2005 at 3:26 pmfox news - news according to its owners
December 12th, 2005 at 3:26 pmNEWS for sale…..and the winning bid is: da prince! Freedom of the press?…hmmm…does that mean freedom to BUY the news you like?….I DON’T THINK SO.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:27 pmI find it curious that I’d be supporting a member of the ruling Saudi clan but good for him.
Hell, if dumbya signed onto the Kyoto Protocols for greenhouse gasses, I’d support him in doing so. I’d also wonder which parallel universe I was in, but, I don’t think I’ll ever have to worry about that with this administration.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:27 pmCaption Contest: “You know we really like Mr Bean in my land, some even say I look like him”
December 12th, 2005 at 3:27 pmCaption Contest: “These riots are out of poverty. Now watch me score this high-class call-girl”
December 12th, 2005 at 3:29 pmInteresting. Faux can’t be bothered to report the truth, but apparently if you have enough money, and own some stock, you can get the news you prefer.
Caption: “Oh, you meant that Bush…”
December 12th, 2005 at 3:30 pmWell, we know that MONEY controls FAUX news, and now we have the Middle East calling the shots!
One can ONLY wonder how much they are calling the shots in the WH! Anything from Bandhar Bush???
December 12th, 2005 at 3:33 pmcaption contest: “There’s birdshit on my rolls royce again”
December 12th, 2005 at 3:37 pmThink Thats headline news, Look at this one. Roflmao
allthough it isnt so funny.
Bush: Iraqi democracy making progress; estimates 30,000 Iraqis killed.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:45 pmnext headline news should read something like this.
Bush: Iraqi democracy making progress; Annihilation of Iraq is Complete.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:48 pmThink Progress contest: What will be the next Major News headlines in your opinion?
December 12th, 2005 at 3:49 pmThe NEW Iraq Demon-o-cracy(According to Bush?):
an·ni·hi·la·tion ( É™-nÄ« ‘ É™-lÄ ‘ shÉ™n ) n. The act or process of annihilating.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:52 pmThe condition of having been annihilated; utter destruction.
Caption: “Can someone light a match, Bush or Cheney stunk up the place again”.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:52 pmIs this the same guy, along with his wife that helped finance alquida and BenLauden.? Are these the same people that paid Baker in his white house office to represent him against the 9/11 survivor famalies law suit.? Is this the same guy that was tip toeing hand in hand with evil in chief through the cowards garden.? Can any one fill me in, I’m old, I loose track of all these peoples names……..Blessings
December 12th, 2005 at 3:53 pmC’mon trolls, let’s discuss the liberal media. Or, better yet, the fair and the balanced. Yeah, we only see you on threads that you have talking points for. I would love to hear your spin on this.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:53 pmP&P,
The trolls don’t have the guts to face this reality, they’re all cowards.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:56 pmHay Ryan, can you answer those questions for me. Your memory and knoledge is better than mine by far….Thank’s…
December 12th, 2005 at 4:01 pmAs far as I’m concerned, the root of the riots were because the individuals were poor and not because they were Muslim … I agree with the Saudi on this one.
I would think that, in this case, Fox News chose the more “progressive” (and less inflamatory) tag line. If anything, this should make Fox look better, not worse.
The significance of this story is not the source of the complaint, but that the complaint had merit, and the title was changed.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:06 pmGiacomo,
The reason they chose it was not to be progressive or less inflamatory or because it was the right thing to do. Do you think if I had called them and said “I am Muslim. Change that tagline because it’s technically incorrect”, that they would have done a thing? News to the highest bidder is NOT the right thing to do.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:16 pmC’mon trolls, let’s discuss the liberal media. Or, better yet, the fair and the balanced. Yeah, we only see you on threads that you have talking points for. I would love to hear your spin on this.
Comment by progressive and proud
Your wish is granted. It’s fairly simple really and I don’t know why I have to tell you. There are two reasons. First and foremost Murdock is a practitioner of political correctness as is just about everyone on the planet who is in business and can’t afford to piss anyone off. It isn’t politically correct to point out that the riots are religiously based and not poverty based any more than it is to point out that blacks in this country riot because they like to not because they are making some kind of political statement about their relative poverty.
Secondly…the Saudi royal family is all that is standing between us and the radical fundamentalist terror prone clerics that rule over the day to day life of the people. If there clerics were to gain power in Saudi Arabia they would make us go to war against them. We will not allow 50% of the worlds oil supplies to fall directly into the hands of a Muslim thugocracy. That is why we are in Iraq and will maintain a large military presence somewhere in the Middle East for the next fifty years. You hear it hear first.
I’m not a big fan of Murdock, he’s not a conservative but in this case he did what he ought for the sake of the peace and the Saudi royal family.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:17 pmI follow this story closely. I email it to all the yahoo Fox watchers in my company. They deny it.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:18 pmCan any one fill me in, I’m old, I loose track of all these peoples names……..Blessings
Comment by Sharon Cox
You’re lazier than you are old. Look it up.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:20 pmIsn’t he the Prince that offered 10 mil to New York for 9-11 and got turned down because he said the attack was caused by US policy . And for the caption , if you could pan down you’d see him holding a Stratocaster , he’s doing what us guitarist call chewwing on a note .
December 12th, 2005 at 4:21 pm“Saudi royal family is all that is standing between us and the radical fundamentalist terror prone clerics that rule over the day to day life of the people.”
It’s always something just on the verge of wrecking your frailed brittle existance, isn’t it IRI? C’mon over to my place, IRI. I’ll show you how to defend yourself like a man.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:21 pm#22
First and foremost Murdock is a practitioner of political correctness as is just about everyone on the planet who is in business and can’t afford to piss anyone off. It isn’t politically correct to point out that the riots are religiously based and not poverty based any more than it is to point out that blacks in this country riot because they like to not because they are making some kind of political statement about their relative poverty.
IRI, if that is the case, then why didn’t FOX do the right thing to begin with? Why did the Prince, the man with the money, the man with the power have to make a call to have it changed? Seriously…
December 12th, 2005 at 4:22 pmI follow this story closely. I email it to all the yahoo Fox watchers in my company. They deny it.
Comment by Average TV Viewer
No reason to deny it. Who cares? Like most “breaking earth shaking “news”" on this site the story is a dog.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:22 pm#9
Bandhar Bush was last seen boarding Air Force One bound for Riyadh.
http://www.storytimedolls.net/bushbeard.jpg
December 12th, 2005 at 4:23 pmAdmin,
Sorry about the size. You may erase it as I don’t know how.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:25 pmWe will not allow 50% of the worlds oil supplies to fall directly into the hands of a Muslim thugocracy.
Replace “Muslim” with “American Fundamentalist Evangelicals” and you’ve finally understood what we’re bitching about in here!
December 12th, 2005 at 4:26 pmIRI, if that is the case, then why didn’t FOX do the right thing to begin with? Why did the Prince, the man with the money, the man with the power have to make a call to have it changed? Seriously…
Comment by unbelievable
Not everybody is as politically savvy as Rupert. Some editor ran a story and a headline. My guess is that normally Murdock gets the news from Fox the same as everyone else; he sits down and watches it.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:27 pmPLEASE don’t erase the Bush composite.
Clyde, I think I love you…. ;)
December 12th, 2005 at 4:29 pmWho’s oil was that again?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:29 pmNow this is News, Right IwhichwayI?
Speaking Monday in the cradle of American democracy, Bush compared Iraq’s struggle to the plight of America’s founders and said that he still believed the March 2003 invasion was the right course of action.
Bush praised Iraqis as they began to go to the polls for the third time this year despite the threat of violence from an insurgency that hasn’t subsided. (Watch Bush tout the effects of democracy in Iraq — 5:11)
The birth of democracy is never easy, he told the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia, which bills itself as a nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating the public on important national and international issues.
“No nation in history has made the transition to a free society without facing challenges, setbacks and false starts,” he said. (Transcript)
December 12th, 2005 at 4:29 pmReplace “Muslim†with “American Fundamentalist Evangelicals†and you’ve finally understood what we’re bitching about in here!
Comment by unbelievable
Call me when a Christian straps on a bomb belt or hijacks a 767 will you?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:29 pmI’m not a big fan of Murdock, he’s not a conservative but in this case he did what he ought for the sake of the peace and the Saudi royal family.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 4:17 pm
Murdoch is not a conservative? Are we talking about the same Rupert Murdoch, the CEO and majority stockholder in News Corporation -the company that owns Fox News Channel?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:29 pmMurdoch is not a conservative? Are we talking about the same Rupert Murdoch, the CEO and majority stockholder in News Corporation -the company that owns Fox News Channel?
Comment by Gregor Samsa
That’s the one. Rupert is a businessman. He saw a need and filled it. End of story.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:30 pmI whichway I, Do you call this MAKING PROGRESS?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:31 pmBush: Iraqi democracy making progress; estimates 30,000 Iraqis killed
Who’s oil was that again?
Comment by TerrytheTurtle
Who’s asking?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:32 pmOK, so let me get this straight, Fox News being part owned by Mr Abdul Bean here, has its message set by aforementioned Mr Bean whenever he wants. Now, lets see, when I watch Fox News what am I watching, the composite message as is accetable to the aforementioned paragon-of-liberal-democracy-and-human-rights Mr Bean? Fair-and-balanced, just like our 14th century, feudal society is fair and balanced?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:33 pmMe, Adolf
December 12th, 2005 at 4:33 pmI R I what do you call all the goings ons down in South and Central America in the past , that was terrorism too , and so was the crusades . Do a little research and you’ll see who invented terrorism .
December 12th, 2005 at 4:35 pm#36
Okay, what’s your number… George Bush, Christian, dropped bombs on Iraq. Do you want me to bring up Hitler again? Timothy McVeigh was Christian, as was Eric Robert Rudolph.
Sometimes you and I get so close to a real conversation… and then, you assume things I don’t even think, much less mean. It’s not about ALL Christians. Some of them do do the wrong thing. Nothing is absolute. It’s the need for something to be 100% good or 100% evil that makes you so angry. There are people of all beliefs that are good and there are people of all beliefs that are bad. Just because he’s a Christian, Bush is not a good guy. And just because they are Muslims, they are not evil…
Oh, and I don’t consider anything you watch on television to be the news…
December 12th, 2005 at 4:41 pmIRI what about those people that blew up abortion clinics? Oh and that guy who blew up that federal building in oklahoma, they were all christians right? the abortion bombers even did it for religious reasons!
December 12th, 2005 at 4:43 pm#37, Gregor, I’d put Murdoch in the definition of ‘corporatist’ rather than ‘conservative’.
“According to various theorists, corporatism was an attempt to create a “modern” version of feudalism by merging the “corporate” interests with those of the state. (Also see neofeudalism.)”
There you have it. A corporation is simply put a big pile of money trying to become a bigger pile of money anyway anyhow, amorally
Now when corporatism fuses with government, then you have fascism.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:44 pmhttp://www.unfpa.org/swp/swpmain.htm
December 12th, 2005 at 4:44 pm#45, 1996 Olympics, 1973 Venezuelan airliner, Saaba-Shaila Massacres 1982…oh and most of the 12th, 13th and 14th Centuries…I think someone already got that one.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:45 pmIRI, American Fundamentalist Evangelicals, don’t strap on bomb belts or hijack 747’s, they make you WANT to strap on bomb belts and hijack 747’s. It’s the Born Againers like Bush that cause me the most angst. They typically live a life of debauchery until they are grown (in Bush’s case, overgrown) and then want to hide behind a bible as some type of magic elixir for all the dirt they’ve done in their past. Alcoholism has cut the mans attention span down to that of a tv remote control and we as a nation have suffered for it.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:46 pm#46
Terry, don’t you mean ‘we’ have fascism? :)
Well said!
December 12th, 2005 at 4:46 pmCaption
December 12th, 2005 at 4:47 pm“George are you finished waxing my Rolls yet” ?.
It’s nice to see Faux news give the news a “liberal” spin.
The vast and culturally diverse Asia and the Pacific region is home to 60 per cent of the world’s people. It encompasses the huge, rapidly industrializing economies of China and India, the remote, mountainous communities of Nepal and Bhutan and the small Pacific island countries. In the past two decades, spurred on by the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of Action and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the region has made great progress on both the social and economic fronts. But this overall progress marks wide disparities and stark contrasts. Hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty, yet hundreds of millions of others struggle to survive on less than $1 a day. Two out of every three people living in extreme poverty live in the Asia and the Pacific region.
December 12th, 2005 at 4:49 pmTerry,
Point taken -I agree with your post and that’s definitely my view.
I was trying to say that, since FoxNews is the conservative news source by excellence and Murdoch is at the helm, well, it would follow he is a conservative too.
Now I am interested in knowing how IRI defines conservative. What is a conservative, IRI?
December 12th, 2005 at 4:50 pmDigby, described IRI and other ‘troll’ definitions of ‘conservative’ quite nicely. It’s all ‘moral relativism’ and ‘political apology’ for the failures that are conservatism.
Digby says: “’Conservative’ is a magic word that applies to those who are in other conservatives’ good graces. Until they aren’t. At which point they are liberals.”
December 12th, 2005 at 4:59 pmYou’ll see it my may eventually:
http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/home.htm
December 12th, 2005 at 5:00 pmThe first recorded cases of ’suicide terrorism’ were in fact jewish. There were roman recorded cases of where jewish men would walk up to a roman centurian who was in a crowd of centurians and stab or slice his throat. His fellow soldiers reacting on instinct would of course kill the ‘terrorist’ out of a natural reaction. The point of these exercises was to make the soldiers feel uneasy and in danger - just as modern terrorism aims to do.
Ironic and sad isn’t it, considering modern day israel and who is ‘now’ playing the role of rome.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:02 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:03 pmHow interesting that the Saudi Royal family has that kind of influence over such a nationalis…..err….patriotic American entity. Wow, what with all that Christian freedom ringing over at FoxNews, I’m shocked they didn’t tell the Prince where to stick his opinions. Guess a 5.5% stake has its priveledges in the world of fairness and balance.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:03 pmI’m shocked — SHOCKED!! — that a billinaire would buy access to the media!
In a swipe at FOX News’s chairman and propaganda minister, my pal Gene Gaudette (who was talking about this nasty little story earlier today) quipped that “FOX News should change its name to ‘Ailes Jazeera!’”
December 12th, 2005 at 5:06 pmNow I am interested in knowing how IRI defines conservative. What is a conservative, IRI?
Comment by Gregor Samsa
This is in my briefcase right now. It’s an amazing piece of work….It tells you exactly why we win and exactly why we’re better than you. I am please to be able to share it with the Walking Dead. There is no reason why you shouldn’t know why you’re all losers.
The Conservative Mind: from Burke to Eliot (1953)
Any informed conservative is reluctant to condense profound and intricate intellectual systems to a few portentous phrases;
he prefers to leave that technique to the enthusiasm of radicals. Conservatism is not a fixed and immutable body of dogma,
and conservatives inherit from Burke a talent for re-expressing their convictions to fit the time. As a working premise,
nevertheless, one can observe here that the essence of social conservatism is preservation of the ancient moral traditions.
Conservatives respect the wisdom of their ancestors…; they are dubious of wholesale alteration. They think society is a
spiritual reality, possessing an eternal life but a delicate constitution: it cannot be scrapped and recast as if it were a machine.
[…] I think there are six canons of conservative thought–
(1) Belief that a divine intent rules society as well as conscience, forging an eternal chain of right and duty which links
great and obscure, living and dead. Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems. […]
(2) Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of traditional life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity,
egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems. […]
(3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes. The only true equality is moral equality; all other attempts
at levelling lead to despair, if enforced by positive legislation. […]
(4) Persuasion that property and freedom are inseparably connected, and that economic levelling is not economic progress.
Separate property from private possession and liberty is erased.
(5) Faith in prescription and distrust of ’sophisters and calculators.’ Man must put a control upon his will and his appetite,
for conservatives know man to be governed more by emotion than by reason. Tradition and sound prejudice provide
checks upon man’s anarchic impulse.
(6) Recognition that change and reform are not identical, and that innovation is a devouring conflagration more often than it
is a torch of progress. Society must alter, for slow change is the means of its conservation, like the human body’s perpetual
renewal; but Providence is the proper instrument for change, and the test of a statesman is his cognizance of the real tendency
of Providential social forces.
He contrasts these core beliefs with those of conservatism’s opponents on the Left, the radicals of all stripes, who believe in :
(1) The perfectibility of man and the illimitable progress of society: meliorism. Radicals believe that education, positive
legislation, and alteration of environment can produce men like gods; they deny that humanity has a natural proclivity
toward violence and sin.
(2) Contempt for tradition. Reason, impulse, and materialistic determinism are severally preferred as guides to social
welfare, trustier than the wisdom of our ancestors. Formal religion is rejected and a variety of anti-Christian systems
are offered as substitutes.
(3) Political levelling. Order and privilege are condemned; total democracy, as direct as practicable, is the professed
radical ideal. Allied with this spirit, generally, is a dislike of old parliamentary arrangements and an eagerness for
centralization and consolidation.
(4) Economic levelling. The ancient rights of property, especially property in land, are suspect to almost all radicals;
and collectivist radicals hack at the institution of private property root and branch.
Thus, the playing field. He then goes on to an erudite, idiosyncratic and altogether beguiling discussion of the chain of men who have defended conservative ideas and resisted radical impulses from Edmund Burke, the sine qua non of the Right, to T.S. Eliot, the great poet and critic. Among the others whose thought he surveys are : John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Sir Walter Scott, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, John Randolph, John Calhoun, James Fenimore Cooper, Alexis de Tocqueville, Orsestes Brownson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Benjamin Disraeli, Cardinal Newman, Henry Adams, Irving Babbitt, Paul Elmer More, and George Santayana. Their styles, their particular concerns, their errors, their failures, their successes all vary widely, but the core principles that they seek to vindicate remain, unchanging. Pluck Edmund Burke from the mists of time and plop him down on Meet the Press this Sunday and he’d voice the same concerns about our society as he voiced about his own in the 18th Century. On the other hand, put Karl Marx on the Today Show and even Katie Couric would tear him apart. The enemies and the fetid ideologies that the conservative mind had to contend with were ever changing, a vast array of utopian daydreams discarded one after another by a Left that never admits the error of its ways, but merely moves on to the next destructive iteration of radicalism, secure in the delusion that this next attempt will achieve a “perfect” society, right here on Earth, while instead leaving piles of corpses in its blood-soaked wake.
It seems certain that the Left will never bring itself to reckon with the conservative critique of the whole liberal impulse, but after Russell Kirk’s book, no one can honestly argue that such a critique does not exist. The very endurance and continuing relevance of conservative ideas suggests that, in fact, when the intellectual history of the West is written, it will be conservatism that is found to have been the most powerful philosophical tradition that our culture created. Whether that history is written by a free and decent human being may well depend though on the ultimate success of the conservative mind.
http://www.brothersjudd.com/ index.cfm/ fuseaction/ reviews.detail/ book_id/ 1008
December 12th, 2005 at 5:06 pmI bet the Prince gets to say “Happy Holidays” without any flack from O’Reilly…
December 12th, 2005 at 5:07 pmYou’ll see it my Way eventually:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/recenteqs/
16 And he gathered them together into a place called N.America17 ¶ And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:07 pm18 And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.
19 And the great N.America was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nation fell: and great AMERICA came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.
20 And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found.
21 And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and Bush blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.
You’ll see it my Way eventually:
December 12th, 2005 at 5:09 pmhttp://earthquake.usgs.gov/ recenteqsww/ Maps/ region/ N_America.html
Wow! What a large POST you have, IRI! You ain’t ‘fraid o nothin’!
December 12th, 2005 at 5:10 pm#60 IRI
As a working premise, nevertheless, one can observe here that the essence of social conservatism is preservation of the ancient moral traditions. Conservatives respect the wisdom of their ancestors…; they are dubious of wholesale alteration.
So, you still think the earth is flat, then?
December 12th, 2005 at 5:11 pmBush is
December 12th, 2005 at 5:11 pmBah! Humbug! Ebenezer Scrooge
December 12th, 2005 at 5:12 pmI haven’t had a decent bowel movement since 9/11/2001.
http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/
December 12th, 2005 at 5:13 pmWow! What a large POST you have, IRI! You ain’t ‘fraid o nothin’!
Comment by Average TV Viewer
I’ve just given a few of you something to think about. Try to not hurt yourselves.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:14 pmhttp://www.cedmagic.com/ featured/ christmas-carol/ 1971-toon-humbug-scrooge.html
December 12th, 2005 at 5:14 pmIRI,
December 12th, 2005 at 5:14 pmPlease stop with the National Review garbage, will you? Are you just given to shiney prose or what?!
#69
I hurt myself laughing… does that count?
December 12th, 2005 at 5:15 pmSo, you still think the earth is flat, then?
Comment by unbelievable
I think you’d have been flat if it weren’t for silicone.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:15 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:16 pm“social conservatism is preservation of the ancient moral traditions.” Which ancient moral traditions are you protecting here I-R-I?
“There’s nothing wrong with the South that a few thousand dangling from the nearest light pole Leftists wouldn’t cure.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — September 4, 2005 @ 1:08 pm”
Acknowledgments to Gregor.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:16 pmChina stocks nukes as anti-U.S. tactic
China is building up its nuclear forces as part of a secret strategy targeting the United States, according to a former Chinese diplomat. China’s strategy calls for “proactive defense,” and senior Chinese Communist Party leaders think that building nuclear arms is the key to countering U.S. power in Asia and other parts of the world, said Chen Yonglin, a diplomat who defected to Australia two months ago. A recent comment by a Chinese general shows that Beijing’s leaders are prepared to launch “a pre-emptive attack on the country considered a huge threat to China,” Mr. Chen said. Chinese Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu told reporters two weeks ago that China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against “hundreds” of U.S. cities if a conflict breaks out over Taiwan.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:17 pmI whichwaynow I
I’ve just given a few of you something to think about. Try to not hurt yourselves.
FOX NEWS - all the news special-interest money can buy?
!
December 12th, 2005 at 5:17 pmTrust me, everyday you give us something to think about, IRI. But through it all one thing is clear:
You are a first rate chickenhawk yellow bellied punk. You claim to be some super patriot but when it comes time to fight in the streets I hope it ain’t you that’s got MY back.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:18 pmI whichwaynow I
http://www.cedmagic.com/ featured/ christmas-carol/ 1971-toon-humbug-scrooge.html
This You?
December 12th, 2005 at 5:19 pm“(3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes. The only true equality is moral equality; all other attempts
at levelling lead to despair, if enforced by positive legislation. […]” MizzWrong
This ‘thinking’ (or lack of it) lead to over a thousand years of abject poverty and the dark ages. It wasn’t until we broke from the idiocy and ignorance that modern and civil society sprang forth. You talk about ‘despair’, but history has PROVEN that this approach contains the greatest measure of despair for the greatest number of people.
So once again your ‘delusion’ is ungrounded by history or intellect, but merely the feable rantings of a man locked into an ignorant and disproven dogma of Opus Dei (or as I like to call it OPUS penDEIho).
You are an even more retarded fool than most could have imagined could possibly share the same country as ours. And your ‘ignorance’ would be interesting for a clinical pyschologist if you were in a padded room somewhere, where you belong…
December 12th, 2005 at 5:20 pmIRI,
Please stop with the National Review garbage, will you? Are you just given to shiney prose or what?!
Comment by Average TV Viewer
The book is a work of art. The fact is, there ARE NO great works of literature that do not contain conservative overtones.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:20 pm#73 IRI
I’m all natural, baby. Told you’d that YOU would be the one to be enamored with me… now you know why. Smart and sexy. No wonder you can’t handle me.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:22 pm“(2) Contempt for tradition. Reason, impulse, and materialistic determinism are severally preferred as guides to social
welfare, trustier than the wisdom of our ancestors. Formal religion is rejected and a variety of anti-Christian systems
are offered as substitutes.”
IRI longs for the grand old traditions, “the the wisdom of our ancestors”; like witchhunts!
December 12th, 2005 at 5:22 pmIt tells you exactly why we win and exactly why we’re better than you. (…)
“Man must put a control upon his will and his appetite,
for conservatives know man to be governed more by emotion than by reason. Tradition and sound prejudice provide
checks upon man’s anarchic impulse.”
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 5:06 pm
Emotion, tradition, and “sound” prejudice rather than reason.
I guess that explains everything.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:22 pm“This ‘thinking’ (or lack of it) lead to over a thousand years of abject poverty and the dark ages.”
No it didn’t. It lead the founding of the greatest nation the world has ever seen. Your philosophy led to France.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:23 pm#53, I think that the hinge point between Murdoch and the conservative movement is defined more or less as to where Murdoch can make the most money. In the UK, Murdoch openly backs the Labor government which is supposedly left-of-center. He had backed Margaret Thatcher, the first British neoliberal, but abandoned her party opportunistically when he sensed her successors running out of steam. He does this through his media network, like The Sun, which nakedly (pun intended) panders to latent English Xenophobia. This makes money for him, so who cares about the impact of the stuff he peddles? You would recognise the same pandering at Fox News: Bill O’Reilly exhibit A.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:24 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:25 pmEmotion, tradition, and “sound†prejudice rather than reason.
I guess that explains everything.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
It would if you knew what the work prejudice meant before the liberals turned it into something that meant bigotry and racism.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:25 pmhttp://www.cedmagic.com/ featured/ christmas-carol/ 1971-toon-humbug-scrooge.html
I WHICHWAYTOHELL I
December 12th, 2005 at 5:25 pmIf You ARE RICH, Then This is what you have waiting for You.
H.E.L.L.
“No it didn’t. It lead the founding of the greatest nation the world has ever seen. Your philosophy led to France.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I ”
You’re wrong, I posted the proof from Adams, I can go on if you like - but a fool like you is too delusional and clinically insane to process facts or history - so I know only others are mentally fit enough to benefit from my wisdom, and the exposure of your utter ignorance.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:26 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:27 pmthere ARE NO great works of literature that do not contain conservative overtones.
What the hell does THAT mean? WOW! Dude, you’re OFF THE CHARTS, man!
Little pecker like you shuffling through other people’s work trying to justify killing to suit your fears and your thirst for oil. I can tell by every word you write you have NEVER successfully defended yourself, or have had to.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:27 pmTo Ryan and Angry midget and et el:
You all do not understand Islam. It is not the poverty that drives these people to rioting. It is their thinking that all non-mulims are no good and everybody should behave per Islamist traditions. There are lot of poor immigrants in France who are not muslims. Why are they not riotong? Because they are busy working hard at making their lives better not and complaining about the society of the host country.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:28 pmIt would if you knew what the work prejudice meant before the liberals turned it into something that meant bigotry and racism.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 5:25 pm
This is what I think prejudice in that context means:
Main Entry: 1prej·u·dice
Pronunciation: ‘pre-j&-d&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion
Prejudice cannot be “sound” since, by its very definition, it implies insufficient knowledge.
And yes, it does explain -if not everything- a whole lot.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:29 pmConservatism at its core is about intolerance, greed, selfishness, inequality, bigotry, fear, ignorance (or the ability to manipulate the fear and ignorance of others) and a healthy dose of arrogance and a lust for power. Nothing about the current “conservative” movement is conducive to democratic ideals, freedom, love, peace…..anything worth believing in. Conservatives aim to keep the power, the priveledge and the wealth in the hands of the few at the cost of the many. Justice cannot tolerate the fundamental goals of conservatism. Conservatism is sickening and I’ll keep fighting it until I’m dead.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:31 pmRyan, let me save IRI the trouble of differentiating between Catholicism and the brand he espouses:
“[Mexican corruption] is a problem but nothing a little Puritan Fundamentalist Christianity couldn’t cure. Ever notice that everything the Catholics touch turns to shit?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — September 22, 2005 @ 2:17 pm ”
There you go… on with the next bit.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:33 pmThanks trolls, I knew you would take the bait. You do understand that what you do here actually works to our advantage, don’t you? Ah well, it’s your time to waste on us.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:33 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:34 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:34 pm#76 - US vs China won’t happen. there is too much commerce between the two.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:35 pmMizzWrong lists John Adams as one of his ‘christian heroes of conservatism’, so lets hear what Mr. Adams had to say about whackos like MizzWrong.
Comment by Ryan “Bareback” Neat
I’m sure most of those quotes are false and made up by your friends at infidel.org. Adams was a puritan in the beginning and later in life probably due to his on again off again friendship with Jefferson turned more toward Unitarianism, which by the way is not Christian.
I’m not interested in trading quotations with you about the religion of the founders because they are meaningless to someone like you without the background or vocabulary to understand them properly but I will say the fact that many of the founders did not care for Roman Catholics and mistrusted the Anglican Church is no great revelation. Those of us that think like them still don’t care for those institutions and history has born out our apprehension.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:35 pmHey, now there’s conservatism I can relate to:
1. Catholics - check
2. Minorities - check
3. Jews - check
Got your pillowcase I-R-I? Yeehah, lets ride!
December 12th, 2005 at 5:36 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:37 pmThanks trolls, I knew you would take the bait. You do understand that what you do here actually works to our advantage, don’t you? Ah well, it’s your time to waste on us.
Comment by progressive and proud
It has worked out to your advantage. Some of you are stepping out of the darkness that is Progressive and Terminal Radicalism. You can thank me later.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:38 pm#101
What you don’t like is false and made up… but the Bible, that’s all real, right??? Because what, you were there when it was written?
December 12th, 2005 at 5:39 pm[Comment deleted by admin]
December 12th, 2005 at 5:39 pmClearly IRI comes here for the attention… look at how much he gets… what ever would he do if we ignored him for a week?
Comment by unbelievable
Get more of my own work done? Find a girlfriend? Write the next new great American novel. The mind boggles.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:41 pm“I’m not interested in trading quotations with you about the religion of the founders because they are meaningless to someone like you without the background or vocabulary to understand them properly but I will say the fact that many of the founders did not care for Roman Catholics and mistrusted the Anglican Church is no great revelation. Those of us that think like them still don’t care for those institutions and history has born out our apprehension.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I ”
I’ve studied the christian religion formally, you clearly haven’t. Your own limited ‘vocabulary’ is in fact the problem, coupled with your arrogance that clearly comes with the accompanying ignorance.
The founding fathers were generally deists and children of the enlightment. If they had believed as you do, GW would have been appointed as King (as you’re trying to do with GWB) instead of forming a democracy.
You’re a sad and pathetic little lunatic. If ignorance were TNT, you would be able to restart the big bang by yourself.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:42 pm“Get more of my own work done? Find a girlfriend? Write the next new great American novel. The mind boggles.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I ”
You got dumped AGAIN? You were claiming a couple of weeks ago about an early 20s girlfriend - has she dumped you like your wife? Of course she has - either that or your girlfriend deflated under usage.
Poor little loser worm - I’d feel sorry for you if you weren’t such a hateful idiot.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:43 pm#103
Thanks for the insight. I feel sorry for him at times, like the slow boys at school that I have to stop the stronger, smarter boys from picking on. But then, he says something dangerous, and I find myself in here with you guys pointing to his open fly and laughing at it…
Well, at least we use words and not bombs laden with phosphorus…
December 12th, 2005 at 5:44 pmMizzWrong,
It has worked out to your advantage. Some of you are stepping out of the darkness that is Conserviate and Terminal Radicalism. You can thank me later.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:44 pm#101
What you don’t like is false and made up… but the Bible, that’s all real, right??? Because what, you were there when it was written?
Comment by unbelievable
It’s real to me because I have the gift of faith. It’s real to historians because it bears up under the rigors of their inquiry. You losers have been trying to destroy the Christian faith for over 2000 years. The best minds on the Devil’s side have failed to convince any but the lowest of men. I imagine it will always be that way.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:45 pm#101. NocturN .
Yes it will.
Jesus said”Let he who is WITHOUT SIN” Cast the FIRST STONE!
When China Trys to take Back Taiwan,OR, America Attacks N Korea.
America IS With SIN, Not, Without.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:47 pmhttp://www.cedmagic.com/ featured/ christmas-carol/ 1971-toon-humbug-scrooge.html
#107 IRI
“Get more of my own work done”
Didn’t know shoe shining requires that much focus
“Find a girlfriend”
What, the blow-up doll dump you already :)
“Write the next new great American novel”
Fabio would be on the cover of it, no doubt…
December 12th, 2005 at 5:47 pmCaption contest: Bush; hmmm smells like fish!
December 12th, 2005 at 5:48 pmAnother Proof it WILL Happen. No Body in their Mind will FREELY Give up thier FREEDOMS.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:49 pmThats how I know it WILL Happen.
#112 IRI
It’s real to me because I have the gift of sight. It’s real to historians because it bears up under the rigors of their inquiry. You losers have been trying to destroy freethinking for over 2000 years. The best minds on the zealot’s side have failed to convince any but the lowest of men. I imagine it will always be that way.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:51 pm“It’s real to me because I have the gift of faith.” MizzWrong
James 2:14:
“What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?”
Like I said, you not only don’t have the ‘vocabulary’ of christianity, you don’t even understand what it means…
You are a lost soul, with a hateful and evil temperment. You are everything that is NOT spiritual or good in nature.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:56 pmCaption Contest: “I’m a shoe-in for “The Sheik” in the next Cannonball Run movie.”
December 12th, 2005 at 5:57 pm” It’s real to historians because it bears up under the rigors of their inquiry. “MizzWrong
Bahaha, that’s really funny.
You mean like how historians discovered that the 4 books of the apostles were randomly chosen by Augustine even though they were unauthenticated, unsigned, written in greek and clearly not even from the 1st century after Jesus was born?
You’re such a moron.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:58 pmI-Right-I
If you have the gift of faith, why would you call other’s “losers?” Name-calling is usually associated with insecurity and bitterness. Did Christ commend name-calling?
December 12th, 2005 at 6:04 pm#33
Unbelievable.
Just click on Clyde for your very own picture.
Thanks for the compliment.
December 12th, 2005 at 6:16 pm119
Genius!
Or Father Guido Sarducci!
December 12th, 2005 at 6:20 pm#96 “[Mexican corruption] is a problem but nothing a little Puritan Fundamentalist Christianity couldn’t cure. Ever notice that everything the Catholics touch turns to shit?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — September 22, 2005 @ 2:17 pm â€
Well, I’m from a theorethically catholic country, and I find that in yours exists a far worser violence, IRI, and there are lots of Puritan Fundamentalist Christianity, especially in the states origin of the KKK. Any relation?
And, btw, I think too that crime rate in your federal capital, Washington, is of the highest in your country. Why?
December 12th, 2005 at 6:48 pm124
December 12th, 2005 at 6:59 pmThe crime rate in washington DC reflects decades of urban neglect which plagues many of our urban areas. poverty, underfunded schools and crime are something that our leaders should be fighting instead of foreign wars.
#112
What you don’t like is false and made up… but the Bible, that’s all real, right??? Because what, you were there when it was written?
Comment by unbelievable
It’s real to me because I have the gift of faith. It’s real to historians because it bears up under the rigors of their inquiry. You losers have been trying to destroy the Christian faith for over 2000 years. The best minds on the Devil’s side have failed to convince any but the lowest of men. I imagine it will always be that way.
Emmmm… Which part of the christian tradition is “rigorous” from the point of view of a (nonpartisan) historian? The one where bread and fish and wine appeared from nowhere, the one where the dead Lazarus came to life, the one where one burning bush (no, not THAT one) talked, or the one about walking over the water?
In the other hand, if true christians must not have fear of losing his faith, why this “war on christmas” issue? Aren’t you falling in a Devil’s trick?
December 12th, 2005 at 7:00 pm#126 I’m quoting IRI, of course.
December 12th, 2005 at 7:05 pm#125 Yes, I know. Is a sadly typical problem of today’s cities form all the world, a great lack of social planning.
December 12th, 2005 at 7:07 pmFrom Burke, a talent for re-expressing their convictions to fit the time. man that is beautiful. Nothing more mysterious than a fact clearly stated.
December 12th, 2005 at 7:19 pmTo 1right1, I think the bowel movement you didn’t have, as mentioned in comment #68, occurred in comment #60.
December 12th, 2005 at 8:18 pmwhat ever would he do if we ignored him for a week?
Comment by unbelievable
To which I-RIGHT-I replied:
Get more of my own work done?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 5:41 pm
Please do. Don’t let us stop you.
Find a girlfriend?
Gasp! Given your low opinion of women I already pity the woman. Wait, didn’t you have a 19 year old East German illegal immigrant as a girlfriend?
Write the next new great American novel.
Sorry, I-RIGHT-I, “The Birth Of A Nation” has already been done. You are… hhmmm… a hundred years late.
The mind boggles.
Indeed.
December 12th, 2005 at 8:36 pmComing very soon.
The Debtonator Radio Show will air a segment with Mrs. Debtonator commenting on this article and your comments.
Stay tuned. To listen to segments already airing, click on my name.
December 12th, 2005 at 8:53 pmMoney Money Money
December 12th, 2005 at 9:10 pmMoney Money Money
Money makes Fox happy.
Money makes Saudi Arabia happy.
That’s been the Dems problem — they haven’t paid Fox enough money.
Caption: Who cut the cheese?
It was hard for me to tell from the tenor of your reporting whether you printed this story to a) criticize Fox for such an obviously wrong and inflammatory headline, or b) criticizing Fox for bowing to a complaint from a Saudi prince. I’d like to think it was the former, but I didn’t see anything in your story to support that view.
December 12th, 2005 at 9:20 pmIRI,your not a conservative. Your a knee-jerk replublican partisian. I don’t think george will would stay in the same room with you, and I am sure he would look down his nose at you. There must be a giant whole in your life to be a mindless moonie of a group of greedy non-conservative hate mongers. In other words I know and respect conservatives and you are not one.
December 12th, 2005 at 9:39 pmI-Right-I: “Any informed conservative is reluctant to condense profound and intricate intellectual systems to a few portentous phrases;” He is not ‘reluctant’, I-right-I, he is ‘incapable of’.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:20 pmI-Right-I :”Conservatism is not a fixed and immutable body of dogma, and conservatives inherit from Burke a talent for re-expressing their convictions to fit the time.”
By ‘re-expressing’ you really mean ‘rehasing bad ideas over and over and over again’. Or are you saying that’s it’s real hard to pin down exactly what conservatism is?
December 12th, 2005 at 10:24 pmI-Right-I: “Conservatives respect the wisdom of their ancestors…; they are dubious of wholesale alteration.”
So conservatives are essentially scared of change. ‘No, no, no, no and no agian, you must not cure any desease using stem cells.’ Hmmmm, sounds familiar.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:29 pmI-Right-I : “Belief that a divine intent rules society as well as conscience, forging an eternal chain of right and duty which links great and obscure, living and dead.”
Wow! Does that not sound exactly like it could have come from some Muslim extremist propoganda! Bloody scary is that.
“Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems.”
So when Bush’s friends and ally’s are being indicted, how can you possibly be for him. Your self professed ‘Canon of conservative thought’ seems to fly in the face of your defending Bush and his friends.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:36 pmI-Right-I Conservatives do not want to change the Constution. I can’t even keep track of your current list.
Can’t burn the flag
One man one women
English is our languge
Just because you are born here you are not a citizen
Ten commandments every where
abolition of abortion
O.K to torture
You are not a conservative…just a knee-jerk replublican.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:45 pmThat’s brutally honest!
FAITH, n.
Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.
Ambrose Bierce
December 12th, 2005 at 10:47 pmYou are not a conservative…just a knee-jerk replublican.
Comment by Joefriday — December 12, 2005 @ 10:45 pm
Maybe just a jerk.
Jesus loves him. Everyone else thinks he’s an asshole.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:49 pmJefferson Bible? Looks like the founding fathers were “losers trying to destroy the Christian faith”. Oh dear!
December 12th, 2005 at 10:51 pm“Conservatives respect the wisdom of their ancestors…; they are dubious of wholesale alteration.â€
Jeebus! I guess Jefferson was no conservative, huh? None of the framers or founders were. They were more like progressives, and very “liberal” for their time.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:55 pmYou notice that I-Wrong-I has no come back for that..A pitifull moonie who can’t think for itself and has to read off a “talking points” sheet for ideas. No original ideas or beliefs, no independent thought–just right wing garbage. A poor excuse for a human, deviod of spirit humping a PC and linked to Nexuslexus. Most likely fantasing licking Ann Coulters shoes.
December 12th, 2005 at 11:39 pmIn POST 36 I-AMNEVERRIGHTAM-I said;
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 4:29 pm
So I-AMWRONGAGAIN-I, we are to assume Timothy McVeigh, who was a self confessed Christian and had ties to the radical fundamentalist group, Elohim City, I suppose what he did down there in Oklahoma City was what you would call, spreading democracy?
December 13th, 2005 at 1:01 amMan! That’s wierd. I use Firefox and MSIE and Firefox says this is going to be post #148 but MSIE says it will be #149 .
December 13th, 2005 at 5:21 am#149
That’s weird.
December 13th, 2005 at 5:21 am#101 I’m not interested in trading quotations with you about the religion of the founders because they are meaningless to someone like you without the background or vocabulary to understand them properly but I will say the fact that many of the founders did not care for Roman Catholics and mistrusted the Anglican Church is no great revelation. Those of us that think like them still don’t care for those institutions and history has born out our apprehension.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 5:35 pm
What about the Catholic Church has born out your apprehension, huh buddy? Perhaps you’ve heard of Pope John Paul II? Helped bring down communism? Brought hope and the light of faith to millions? That’s my upbringing and my people your talking about mister. When you talk about the Catholic Church, do so with a prayer of thanks on your lips you ungrateful demogogue! And after the prayer of thanks, pray that God never sees fit to put us in each others’ path.
December 13th, 2005 at 6:20 am#101 I’m not interested in trading quotations with you about the religion of the founders because they are meaningless to someone like you without the background or vocabulary to understand them properly but I will say the fact that many of the founders did not care for Roman Catholics and mistrusted the Anglican Church is no great revelation. Those of us that think like them still don’t care for those institutions and history has born out our apprehension.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 12, 2005 @ 5:35 pm
Of course you aren’t interested. It would require you to re-examine everything false that you believe. That’s pretty much your entire distorted world view whish based entirely on lies, you poor man.
John Adams:
Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?
The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity.
Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 states:
December 13th, 2005 at 9:02 amThe Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.
I think we can safely say that IRI is a crypto-dominionist and write him off as a cultist. Hopefully he will find true peace in a Koresh like burning martyrdom someday. Sad, I know and that used to bother me, but no longer. I realize it’s inevitable and best for all concerned. There is no place for these people in this world and if they truly believe there is the “next world”, they will be much happier in the next, wherever or whatever that may be.
December 13th, 2005 at 9:07 amCall me when a Christian straps on a bomb belt or hijacks a 767 will you?
He’s never heard of Mark Rudolph, Timothy McViegh… on and on. Hey! Why don’t you read about it! True, most Christians try not to be around when the bombs go off. Maybe they don’t really believe in the “next world” after all. There are links to the specifics at the original site.
Christianity and Violence
December 13th, 2005 at 9:13 amIRI, we thank you for wasting your time here instead of spouting your propaganda to those who may be influenced. We would rather you be here spinning your wheels.
December 13th, 2005 at 10:07 amTrolls, I would like to know your thoughts about #151.
December 13th, 2005 at 10:08 amI wrongagain I, I guess you forgot your Imfamous Cristian “David Koreash”.
December 13th, 2005 at 10:46 amDosnt surprise my how much you tend to forget.
And Jim Jones occult?
just to name a couple.
There is a name for those that use Christianity as a tool to oppress others. Thy name is troll.
December 13th, 2005 at 11:17 amIs that a spot of lamb gravy on your chin Walid?, or just a bit of blood and oil.
December 13th, 2005 at 11:44 amWell of course they were riots due to poverty. It just so happens that the rioters were muslims since no other group in France is poor. How silly of anyone to believe that islam had anything to do with it.
December 13th, 2005 at 12:28 pmGiacomo could you be more gullible and clueless?
December 13th, 2005 at 12:32 pmYou know it’s funny to watch as I-GOTCREAMEDAGAINDIDNT-I gets his clock cleaned on post after post, with no response.
Everytime someone stomps his post, he just sort of slithers away.
In 151 and 153, Killcon literally nailed in the last nails of that coffin, and yet hours pass with no retort. In fact, I in my own meager way helped clarify him on his “christiannobomby” theory back in post 147 last night, and not a peep.
Man truth stings, don’t it I-MIGHTASWELLGIVEUPNOWSHOULDNT-I, don’t it?
December 13th, 2005 at 12:36 pm#160 - No.
December 13th, 2005 at 12:51 pm#161 It happens over and over again. They always slither away and start fresh on a new thread with the same few phrases they have learned on Fox. So pathetic, but very empowering for us.
December 13th, 2005 at 12:54 pmThose who shout from the rooftops how smart they are, are almost certainly the dumbest. Too bad they don’t get it and too bad America seems to be getting dumber.
December 13th, 2005 at 12:55 pmamen :|
December 13th, 2005 at 3:02 pmBandar Bush and Frank Luntz must be working for the PR dept. for Faux News.
Did anyone catch tonight’s Frontline? A repeat about the advertising business and how it’s manipulating America.
Frank Luntz, who engineered the Republican victory last year and in 2000 was on. The news media never even mentioned that he was a Republican pollster.
He may look all-American, but deep down , he’s a sleaze.
December 13th, 2005 at 11:34 pm[…] Hannity conveniently forgot to mention that his own employer, Fox News, also accepts money from Talal; he owns 5.5% of Fox News. Not only is Talal “rewarding them [Fox News] financially for views they already have,” he’s also changing their views. […]
December 14th, 2005 at 11:43 amthis is hysterical…IRI refuses to answer anything he can’t…i.e. post 56, 54, 49, 41…etc etc etc..just completely ignores them and denies the info exists, for it will shatter his fragile little world, where jesus will one day walk the earth to wash him of his incestuous and wife-beating sins, and unicorns prance alongside him in the forests…
December 14th, 2005 at 4:11 pm[…] Think Progress brilliantly exposes Hannity and Fox News with this gem: "Hannity conveniently forgot to mention that his own employer, Fox News, also accepts money from Talal; he owns 5.5% of Fox News. Not only is Talal “rewarding them [Fox News] financially for views they already have,†he’s also changing their views." […]
December 16th, 2005 at 3:38 amI have never understood why it is wrong to publically blame US uncritical and unswerving support of Israel for much of our problems in the Middle East. The Palestine issue loomed large in the grievances of the 9/11 hijackers after the far greater issues of the siege of Iraq which took countless innocent lives (including a half million children) and the US military presence in Saudi Arabia. This must be open for discussion instead of sidelined.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:18 pmMaybe because Moslems were killing Jews before the new Strate of Israel was formed and before the myth of the palestinian was established in 1967.
August 24th, 2006 at 9:35 amIf this man has the direct ability to change the bibles that are made today, then what can’t he do?
December 21st, 2006 at 6:14 amGirls Boarding Schools: The only Solution
July 24th, 2006 ,Teenage rebellion can be a sign of health, especially in girls. In an essay contributed to Catching a Wave: Reclaiming Feminism for the 21st Century, Nancy Gruver has written that girls are understandably outraged by injustices. Howeve…
March 21st, 2008 at 7:40 pm