Ok folks, as everyone here is intitled to their opinion. What do you think of this.

Please note without talking to you person to person I could not possibly convey all of my emotions and detailed thoughts here about the US's stance on Iraq, terrorist, and all the other BS going on right now.

The general mood of this forum to me has been to bash the US and our leader George W. Bush. Okay fine.

But everyone seems to be baseing their opinions of America from the Information seen on TV, such places as CNN, ABC, ect ect.

The simple matter of it all is you that are anti US and anti war can you for sure say that you know better than the US who has spent untold of dollars and man hours to research and profile the situations going on that have led up to the conflict in IRAQ?

Have you personally monitored and skeptisized the information recieved from intelligence agencies that are not available to the public and expecially the f-in journalist. I think not.

The simple fact of the matter is that all news tv whomever they may be, will quickly jump to the best story going and whore it whether it is truth heresay or whatever.

For instance ALJazzera has stated that after the shock&awe bombing wave all the US and Britain managed to do was kill innocent ppl, do you really believe this? This is exactly the kind of headline that makes money and good protest of the conflict at hand and an attempt to steer favor of the US away from them and to Iraq.

Seems on the news today that we never hear much about the good things we have done. I won't get into an argument here, but the point I am trying to make is that most of the world formulates their opinion from the press and what they see on tv and read in newspapers. Hell they want everyone to clash over it because they will make more money selling the semi factful information to us.

The other point I wish to get across is that we should not allow the media to guide us in whether or not we should be for this or that, because they could give a shit less about what is really at stake here, they are just going to produce what is selling.

Would you rather buy a paper that says:
Massive Protest in US (1000's arrested and hundreds injured) and around the Globe over senseless war in Iraq.
or
would you buy the one that says:
Nations ban together for mass pro war demonstration.
Yes in small print and probably on the 10th page too.


All I am trying to say is that we as humans should give this a chance and then make our opinions, not because of what the tabloids are saying but because of the truth that will come out when this is over.

We let the media influence us to much and there is way to much specualtion out there in the media these days.

Sorry if this makes no sense(there is so much more I could say but, I rather dislike typing at the moment so I am stopping here). Like I said if I were speaking to you in person I could make it sound better, I suck at conveying my point by typing it out.

STFU if you don't like it:D :finger:
http://files.automotiveforums.com/uploads/465777peace.jpg

i've changed........im a bush supported but just to tell you................cnn basically gets all its info from the american government and they are a all american news station so i think its safe to belive that wat they tell us is basically all tru...............

Originally posted by De$i Gank$ta
i've changed........im a bush supported but just to tell you................cnn basically gets all its info from the american government and they are a all american news station so i think its safe to belive that wat they tell us is basically all tru...............

Yes I know about that but it is the things they can not tell us or do not know... the things they merely speculate on to be YOUR number one conflict coverage source.

Isn't the general consensus that CNN is BS? ie biased almost to the point of propaganda? That's how I feel when I watch it.

Saddam watches the same news the people see so some things are withheld in order to protect the troops. Other things are withheld for the simple fact they are so horrible, it may be hard for people to watch. If Bush didnt want news coverage, there wouldnt be any. This war has the highest media coverage then any war ever. Bush has nothing to hide, Saddam is the liar.

Toksin despite my feelings on those opposed to war I do not display their flags upside down or at all. I may oppose a governments view but not the entire people

Originally posted by Toksin
Isn't the general consensus that CNN is BS? ie biased almost to the point of propaganda? That's how I feel when I watch it.

CNN is extremely left of center.

Communist (spelling)
News
Network

cnn sucks ass

Originally posted by John
But everyone seems to be baseing their opinions of America from the Information seen on TV, such places as CNN, ABC, ect ect.


The problem with this, John, is that CNN, MSNBC, ABC, etc. are all propaganda right now :) They are being great tools for the American gov't.

Let me give you an example -
All I've been hearing on TV is how many thousands of Iraqis are surrendering to US troops without a fight. Yet, the city of Basra next to Kuwait border has not yet been taken after 4 days of fighting (as far as I am aware.. situation might have changed very recently). We don't hear about that on the news, do we?
If you think that the news are broadcasting anti-war propaganda, you are terribly wrong, it is the exact opposite since the war was declared.

The best place to get news on the war is Fox News. Mainly b/c they are unbiased in reporting. ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN are all biased against Bush and try to report anything that they hope to hurt his support. And don't even bother watching MTV to get news, they don't know shit.

Originally posted by igor@af
If you think that the news are broadcasting anti-war propaganda, you are terribly wrong, it is the exact opposite since the war was declared.

I don't think that..

I just think there has been to much emphasis on the anti war rallys.

We are just going to half to set this one out until the end.

No amount of arguing between pro and anti war ppl will change what is done.

:D Peace:D

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Toksin despite my feelings on those opposed to war I do not display their flags upside down or at all. I may oppose a governments view but not the entire people

I oppose the government's view which is why I put the flag up there. I also have my feelings about American society as a whole (as I know it from research and also from a very good American friend of mine).

An inverted flag is a sign of distress. I am merely saying that freedom is at risk, however, feel free to interpret it however you want.

Originally posted by TexasF355F1
The best place to get news on the war is Fox News. Mainly b/c they are unbiased in reporting. ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN are all biased against Bush and try to report anything that they hope to hurt his support. And don't even bother watching MTV to get news, they don't know shit.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

fox news ubiased is like saying iraqi tv is the straight shit no lying in it. fox is the offical conservative news channel lol

-GTi-VR6_A3

With the exception of Igor, you're all very misinformed.

All major US media outlets are spewing propaganda. The Washington Post is almost honest, surprisingly. For the last 8 months, the US media has been stirring up sentiment against Iraq, I don't know how you can not see this.

Even the BBC is more honest about the current events, and they are owned by the British government, who are pushing for war as well.

i resent that i know that i am not misinformed. all media is biased one way or another. people usually just watch what they like to hear. just as american media is biased al jazeera is doing the same shit. i hate media but i just watch it and take from it fact and leave most of the commentary alone. i still wihs there was a robot news source that stated only fact. i would watch that. too bad if it was ever started every country in the world would want it dead.

-GTi-VR6_A3

Originally posted by Cbass
With the exception of Igor, you're all very misinformed.

All major US media outlets are spewing propaganda. The Washington Post is almost honest, surprisingly. For the last 8 months, the US media has been stirring up sentiment against Iraq, I don't know how you can not see this.

Even the BBC is more honest about the current events, and they are owned by the British government, who are pushing for war as well.
What AMERICAN newspapers are you reading? The Washington Post and The New York Tmes are the most liberal newspapers in the country. The only thing these newspapers stir up is anti-war shit.

Originally posted by Cbass
With the exception of Igor, you're all very misinformed.

All major US media outlets are spewing propaganda. The Washington Post is almost honest, surprisingly. For the last 8 months, the US media has been stirring up sentiment against Iraq, I don't know how you can not see this.

Even the BBC is more honest about the current events, and they are owned by the British government, who are pushing for war as well.

Yeah way to suck ass:rolleyes:

I simply asked for opinions to my thread not to pick a fight.

Great theory, but most of my information comes from all you pro-war people. I formulate my opinion against what I'm given and show that what they think isn't always right. The few times I bother to watch the news, it is often CNN only because I can be sure that the coverage is on.

Originally posted by De$i Gank$ta
i've changed........im a bush supported but just to tell you................cnn basically gets all its info from the american government and they are a all american news station so i think its safe to belive that wat they tell us is basically all tru............... THat is a HUGE assumption.:eek:

Originally posted by T4 Primera
THat is a HUGE assumption.:eek:

very true

-GTi-VR6_A3

Most people push to one side. To say that a station is conservative, is because you pick out everything that is conservative, and vice versa. It's like viewing the glass as half empty.

Why don't you just take everything as it comes to you, watch all stations, read all papers, and then make an informed decision using your own mind? Because it's nearly impossible.

This whole thing is confusing in itself.. Some people see the sense in it, some people do not. To make this personal, I do, but I wont go on and on as to stray from topic.

I do have to say one thing to Toksin, you don't know what it's like here until you have lived here. It's like riding a bike.. You can read about riding a bike, and interview people that have rode bikes, but does that mean you know how to ride a bike? Not likely, until you get on one and ride it yourself. You say you talked to your friend, who lives here, or has lived here.. That's one person.. talk to the other 300 million, and see what they think.

I'm sorry,I don't think I'll live long enough to talk to 300 million people, but I'll try. I was merely stating that since they are people I know in real life. Many people I have emailed to or chatted to are Americans still living in the US who feel the same way as I do. Many of them are from AF even. But then again, since they are against the war,I guess that means that they're not real Americans :rolleyes:.

Doesn't make them unamerican, it makes them more american because they can voice their opinion freely. I have however talked to many people that think that the USA is a great country.

Originally posted by T4 Primera
THat is a HUGE assumption.:eek:

sorry i forgot one word.......it was supposed to be "so i think its safe to believe that wat they tell us is not basically all tru........." sorry i musta forgot......and i aint been checkin this thread for a long time.......so sorry

Originally posted by Toksin
I'm sorry,I don't think I'll live long enough to talk to 300 million people, but I'll try. I was merely stating that since they are people I know in real life. Many people I have emailed to or chatted to are Americans still living in the US who feel the same way as I do. Many of them are from AF even. But then again, since they are against the war,I guess that means that they're not real Americans :rolleyes:.

what about all of the people you tlak to on af that are either for the war. or people like me who are just not against it?

-GTi-VR6_A3

In order to effectively lead your country to war,you must first demonise the opposition.Geoge Bush and his advisors have certainly done a good job of that.I am a cynic.Whether it be international affairs or the weather forecast,I will usually say to myself."O.K.,that presenter has just made an a statement.Is it a fact or is it an assertion.What evidence has been put forward to support this claim?Can I trust the source of the information to be impartial?


Unfortunately,most of the information reaching us has been heavily managed either by the pro- war authorities,or by the anti-war lobby.There is very little in the way of neutral coverage.Reporters like to boast that they are'embedded' in the front line alongside the troops,but I'd be far more impressed if they were watching from both sides,or a separate perspective.The reporters who tag along wiith the invaders are completely compromised.They are told what to report,and what to omit.If they don't do as they are told,they lose their information sources.

Originally posted by taranaki
In order to effectively lead your country to war,you must first demonise the opposition.Geoge Bush and his advisors have certainly done a good job of that.I am a cynic.Whether it be international affairs or the weather forecast,I will usually say to myself."O.K.,that presenter has just made an a statement.Is it a fact or is it an assertion.What evidence has been put forward to support this claim?Can I trust the source of the information to be impartial?


Unfortunately,most of the information reaching us has been heavily managed either by the pro- war authorities,or by the anti-war lobby.There is very little in the way of neutral coverage.Reporters like to boast that they are'embedded' in the front line alongside the troops,but I'd be far more impressed if they were watching from both sides,or a separate perspective.The reporters who tag along wiith the invaders are completely compromised.They are told what to report,and what to omit.If they don't do as they are told,they lose their information sources.

There is no such thing as neutral opinions because they don't exist. It is up to you to take what you hear, decipher it, and then decide if you trust it. Humans will always have emotion, bias, and opinions on every little situation, so it would be impossible to have a neutral news broadcast.
Somehow, reporters think they are important by saying, "This is Dipshit Dan imbedded with the 3rd Company, Karbala, Iraq". They act like they are actually risking something. Here is what they are: morons. It is absolutely hilarious watching them report with the full military gear and the helmet on the WRONG WAY like they went through boot camp and the military actually cares about them. Especially Ted Koppel, that guy is an ass.

Originally posted by Pick


There is no such thing as neutral opinions because they don't exist.

The term that I used was neutral coverage.There was a time not that long ago when a few of the better news organisations were capable of assembling a story without putting an opinion into it.


How things have changed.Every night we are bombarded with talking heads on the 'news',coming up with potential strategies,bar-room analysis of the day's events,and commentary that makes the war sound like a hockey match.Even George Bush is apparently getting tired of it......[but then this story from CNN is about the president's relationship with the press,so don't expect it to be neutral!


http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/28/sprj.irq.bush.media/index.html

Originally posted by taranaki


The term that I used was neutral coverage.There was a time not that long ago when a few of the better news organisations were capable of assembling a story without putting an opinion into it.





Okay, well there is no such thing as neutral coverage. I also am getting frustrated with the dumbass questions posed by the White House reporters. Its almost as if they want this war to go bad.

No such thing as netual coverage?bah.It takes a damn good journalist to write it,but it does exist.Journalism used to be about recording the truth.Now it would seem that journalism is more about challenging the fiction without actually getting the facts on paper first.

Originally posted by taranaki
No such thing as netual coverage?bah.It takes a damn good journalist to write it,but it does exist.Journalism used to be about recording the truth.Now it would seem that journalism is more about challenging the fiction without actually getting the facts on paper first.

Agreed. Now it is all about money and shoving crap in people's ears.

Yep, agreed.

im telling you guys. i wana news agency run by friggin un biased robots that would rock. too bad every country would get pissed when some fact was revealed to the world by em and eventually the un would vote unanimously to kick robot news' ass...

-GTi-VR6_A3