Propaganda SpinMasters At Work?

[mike777]

"I've got a modest proposal, Mike. You'll love it. It's totally your style, dude:"

 

 

 

Hmm dude I must admit my favorite movie from last year was a little seen movie called the Matador about an aging Hitman,,,,hmmmm /Greg Kinnear movie.

 

United 93 was second.

 

Speaking of Greg Kinnear, I rented a movie for tonight with him in it. I may be the only human being to see this one....it is called "Unknown" It also has the actor who played Jesus in Mel Gibson's movie in it.

[Winstonm]

Boy you liberals love to bomb and invade everyone.

 

Heck just love and can't we just give peace a chance and can we pull out of asia, germany, korea and japan please and send our boys and girls home.

 

 

James Carville was speaking near my home last night. He thinks it may be Jeb Bush and Gore. He did not really say how Hillary may implode but he did discuss everyone else. As for Iraq he said 3 people know how to solve that issue.

The Father

The Son

The Holy Ghost

Unfortunately, they caught the last train for the coast, the day the music died.

 

Probably on their way to San Francisco to save it from Peter's bombs.

 

Has anyone ever been to Albequerque, New Mexico? I think we ought to bomb them for just for GP.

 

And Mike, there is much more to the hippie movement - there's smoke pot, smoke pot, everybody smoke pot and I'd really love to turn you on and imagine yourself on a boat on a river with tangerine trees and marmelade skies or I'll get buy with a little help from my friends.

 

Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, dude.

[pbleighton]

"...Heck just love and can't we just give peace a chance..."

 

Hell no, kill a commie for christ.

 

Peter

[Winstonm]

"...Heck just love and can't we just give peace a chance..."

 

Hell no, kill a commie for christ.

 

Peter

I think that slogan has changed now Peter.

Now its, "Torture a Muslim just for the hell of it".

[pbleighton]

"Now its, "Torture a Muslim just for the hell of it". "

 

From what I hear, Cheney likes to do it for the smell of it.

 

Peter

[Winstonm]

"Now its, "Torture a Muslim just for the hell of it". "

 

From what I hear, Cheney likes to do it for the smell of it.

 

Peter

I have it on the best of sources that Cheney is not an olfactory kind of guy - he prefers shooting his friends in the face in order to hear the screams.

[Winstonm]

Now we have Tony Snow declaring that before Iran can be taken seriously as wanting peace they have to stop supporting terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah.

 

Here is what Wikpedia says about Hezbollah:

 

Hezbollah is one of two main political parties representing the Shiites, Lebanon's largest religious bloc. In the elections for Parliament, it won over 10% of the seats (14 out of 128) and the bloc it forms with others, the Resistance and Development Bloc, 27.3%.

 

Hezbollah organizes an extensive social development program and runs hospitals, news services, and educational facilities.[19] Its Reconstruction Campaign ('Jihad Al Binna') is responsible for numerous economic and infrastructure development projects in Lebanon

 

1) Hezbollah is a political party - does this mean democrats are terrorists, too?

2) They won 14 seats in elections - elections? Not as in.....democratic elections?

3) Runs hospitals, news services, and educational facilities - responsible for numerous economic and infrastructure.... that's pretty terrible, all right.

 

Funny, but the EU does not classify Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. Neither does Russia. In fact, only 6 countries do so - The Axis of Drivel, brought to you by the U.S.A., Canada, and Brittain.

[mike777]

Do you classify Hezbollah as terrorists?

 

 

You seem to imply that they are not? When did the USA say they were? Just in the last 6 years? Do you think the intelligience is just shoddy or made up again?

Do you think Europe is just plain wrong or is this just another shoddy Usa thingy?

[hrothgar]

Do you classify Hezbollah as terrorists?

 

 

You seem to imply that they are not? When did the USA say they were? Just in the last 6 years? Do you think the intelligience is just shoddy or made up again?

Do you think Europe is just plain wrong or is this just another shoddy Usa thingy?

Complicated question:

 

Hezbollah is a political organization that has multiple different "wings" to it. Some parts of the organization focus on military action. Others focus on providing social services.

 

This organizational structure is nothing new: The IRA has military and civilian wings, as does the PLO.

 

I'm not sure if there is an issue with either the labels or the people making these judgement. Rather, the granularity of what we're labelling is too large.

[Winstonm]

Do you classify Hezbollah as terrorists?

 

 

You seem to imply that they are not?  When did the USA say they were? Just in the last 6 years? Do you think the intelligience is just shoddy or made up again?

Do you think Europe is just plain wrong or is this just another shoddy Usa thingy?

Here is what I think, Mike.

 

I think the current U.S. administration is quick to judge and likes to use generalized slogans instead of thought.

 

In their infancy, many organizations are terror-based, such as the PLO and IRA; however, their actions are politically driven. Over time, these groups either die out or morph into more of a political than terrorist organization and even abandon terror tactics altogether.

 

Hezbollah is one of these - less a terror organization now and more political in nature. There is no doubt that Hezbollah is an enemy of Israel; but Hezbollah is no direct threat to the U.S. Hezbollah's primary concern is no longer simply terrorist actions.

 

Hezbollah is a shia organization and an enemy of Israel, so it is no surprise that Iran supports and funds them. By placing groups like Hezbollah on the terrorist organization list, the U.S. seems to be saying that if you do not agree with our world view you are a terrorist. One more example of the black and white mentality of our current leadership.

 

I do not think the answers to these serious questions can be answered by creating sophomoric lists, overblown slogans, and catchphrases - everything the U.S. does in the area of labeling seems geared to creating sound bites - It is a Jerry Springer mindset in a Carl Sagan world.

[mike777]

"....the U.S. seems to be saying that if you do not agree with our world view you are a terrorist. One more example of the black and white mentality of our current leadership....."

 

 

 

I could not agree with your conclusion more. If your premise is correct and the reason groups or people are put or stay on the USA terrorist list is simply because they do not agree with our world view, that is NUTS. What are these so called experts doing, this is insane.

[luke warm]

isn't hezbollah a terrorist organization per the u.n.?

[hrothgar]

isn't hezbollah a terrorist organization per the u.n.?

To my knowledge, the UN doesn't maintain a list of "terrorist" organizations. This places it in sharp contrasts with others like the EU which do main these types of lists. For example, the most recent EU list of known tterrorists and terrorist organizations is available at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriSer...0en00410045.pdf

 

Its worth noting that the EU doesn't consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization. As is oft the case, the Wikipedia contains some useful information.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah#_note-144

 

Their entry on Hezbollah contains a listing of different countries and organizations that do/do not designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

[Winstonm]

Hey, at one time the colonialists in pre-U.S.A. might have been considered terrorists. They didn't wear uniforms and fired on unsuspecting Briitish soldiers passing by. Whether terrorist or freedom fighter depends on your point of view.

 

I agree strongly with Richard that terrorism is a tactic. That tactic has proven to be successful for organizations like the IRA, the PLO, Hezbollah, and others; however, once the goal is reached the terror deceases or even ends. Of course, it's handy to put people like Hezbollah on the terrorist list as you then have a built-in reason to ingnore diplomacy with them or listen to their views.

 

One of the most troubling aspects of this administration to me has been its method of relying on innuendo, generalities, and repetition to make its case. But I can't really blame them for this as they are relying on the mindset shown by the public - that is I'll listen to an explantaion of the middle east turmoil as long as you can do it in under 2 mintues on the nightly news. Give me a slogan I can paste on my bumber sticker or print on my shirt. Instant gratification.

 

We have indeed met the enemy - and indeed he is us - all of us.

[Winstonm]

Here's something I hadn't heard - call it the New and Improved Domino Theory:

 

Republican allies of the president are battling against the resolution sponsored by Democrats against the war.

 

“This battle is the most visible part of a global war” against terrorists, countered the House Republican leader, Rep. John Boehner. “If we leave, they will follow us home. It’s that simple.”

 

I see. And your proof of that assertion is......????

[mike777]

Here's something I hadn't heard - call it the New and Improved Domino Theory:

 

Republican allies of the president are battling against the resolution sponsored by Democrats against the war.

 

“This battle is the most visible part of a global war” against terrorists, countered the House Republican leader, Rep. John Boehner. “If we leave, they will follow us home. It’s that simple.”

 

I see. And your proof of that assertion is......????

Well that is the argument and debate.

 

Some argue that 9-11 was proof of that. They attacked us many times oversees, we did not nothing so they took the next step and followed us home.

 

The argument is we show lack of will in Iraq or Iran or Afganistan again and they will follow us home.

 

I am only trying to show the other side of the debate, not that I agee with it.

[luke warm]

Here's something I hadn't heard - call it the New and Improved Domino Theory:

 

Republican allies of the president are battling against the resolution sponsored by Democrats against the war.

 

“This battle is the most visible part of a global war” against terrorists, countered the House Republican leader, Rep. John Boehner. “If we leave, they will follow us home. It’s that simple.”

 

I see. And your proof of that assertion is......????

i think he's just voicing something that's been bandied about for awhile now, and the only proof if a negative one - that since 9/11 (and since we started taking the war to the terrorists), we've had no attacks..

[Winstonm]

Here's something I hadn't heard - call it the New and Improved Domino Theory:

 

Republican allies of the president are battling against the resolution sponsored by Democrats against the war.

 

“This battle is the most visible part of a global war” against terrorists, countered the House Republican leader, Rep. John Boehner. “If we leave, they will follow us home. It’s that simple.”

 

I see. And your proof of that assertion is......????

i think he's just voicing something that's been bandied about for awhile now, and the only proof if a negative one - that since 9/11 (and since we started taking the war to the terrorists), we've had no attacks..

Well, that's all fine and dandy and may even have some bit of merit to it until you stop and remember that......... Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 9-11 - there were no close ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

 

To keep insinuating that Iraq has someting to do with terrorists - which the statement asserts, is simply to keep alive refudiated claims. It used to be terrorists were people who killed innocents in terror attacks - but now we have redefined that word to include militias using military hardware against an invading force in their country and to armies opposed to the U.S. occupation. Are we fearful that leaving Iraq will bring the Mehdi army marching into Sacremento?

 

If we were actually going after terrorists it would be a different matter. In that case if we cut and run the terrorists could claim a victory or lack of determination. But Iraq was never about terrorists. It still is not.

[Impact]

Hey, at one time the colonialists in pre-U.S.A. might have been considered terrorists. They didn't wear uniforms and fired on unsuspecting Briitish soldiers passing by. Whether terrorist or freedom fighter depends on your point of view.

 

I agree strongly with Richard that terrorism is a tactic. That tactic has proven to be successful for organizations like the IRA, the PLO, Hezbollah, and others; however, once the goal is reached the terror deceases or even ends. Of course, it's handy to put people like Hezbollah on the terrorist list as you then have a built-in reason to ingnore diplomacy with them or listen to their views.

 

One of the most troubling aspects of this administration to me has been its method of relying on innuendo, generalities, and repetition to make its case. But I can't really blame them for this as they are relying on the mindset shown by the public - that is I'll listen to an explantaion of the middle east turmoil as long as you can do it in under 2 mintues on the nightly news. Give me a slogan I can paste on my bumber sticker or print on my shirt. Instant gratification.

 

We have indeed met the enemy - and indeed he is us - all of us.

Attacking civilian population (and visitors) of a state with intent to kill, where you disagree with the state's policy is the relevant point of distinction rahter than wearing uniforms (albeit I accept the historical allusion as likely to be accurate in 1776).

 

It is not even as if there is any attempt to find out the views on any issue of the particular unfortunates targeted. It is an attempt to destroy a society by hte very randomness of the "terror". Hence : terrorism.

 

In the case of Hezbollah the contiuing denial of the right of existence of the state of Israel suggests that "the goal" represented is somewhat more extreme than a mere state of their own. The only state that has been acceptable for years on an official basis by the PLO/Hamas/Hezbollah has been the complete destruction of Israel and absorbtion by others...

 

Also, the not so slight suggestion that may not be mere rhetoric, to "kill all the Jews" does tend to engender some qualms if you happen to fall into the relevant ethnic (for want of a better description) group!

 

Sure "terrorist" is an emotive word but that is precisely their objective: to strike terror into Israeli hearts (and indeed tourists so that they are discouraged from going to Israel).

 

Why bend over backwards being PC about potential motives when the term actually accords with their (short-term) objective ?

[luke warm]

Well, that's all fine and dandy and may even have some bit of merit to it until you stop and remember that......... Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 9-11 - there were no close ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

even if that's true, how does it follow? unless you think it's coincidental, the fact is that since we've begun fighting 'over there' we've had no attacks here...

[Winstonm]

Well, that's all fine and dandy and may even have some bit of merit to it until you stop and remember that......... Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 9-11 - there were no close ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

even if that's true, how does it follow? unless you think it's coincidental, the fact is that since we've begun fighting 'over there' we've had no attacks here...

Why attack here when we keep sending them targets? They don't have to worry about silly things like passports, visas, money.....

 

Do you think it is simple to create a terrorist attack on American soil? From the 1993 bombing of the WTC until 2000 there were also no terrorist attacks - what did that prove? Maybe that the Bill of Rights stops terrorists attacks - cause we had those rights back then.

 

Or it may be that it's simply damned hard to organize a terrorist attack in a foreign country from halfway around the world sitting in a cave.

 

I also find this a disturbing tone:

even if that's true

 

I realize that even today 75% of Bush supporters still believe Saddam had WMD and chemical stockpiles, but to still hold out hope that the entire Bushian story will someday be vindicated is to me like hoping the tooth fairy will appear. So let's try to be as clear as possible about Bush reported claims of an Iraq-al Qaeda connection - it was a claim used to start a war, after all.

 

The intelligence community (CIA, NSA, DIA, etc) view, confirmed by the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission Report and the Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq, is that there was not a cooperative effort between the two and that Saddam did not support the 9/11 attacks. According to this view, the difference in ideology between Saddam and al-Qaeda made cooperation in any terrorist attacks very unlikely.[4] The Senate Report discussed the possibility of Saddam offering al-Qaeda training and safe-haven, but confirmed the CIA's conclusion that there was no evidence of operational cooperation between the two

 

I don't see the word "if" in there.

[jtfanclub]

even if that's true, how does it follow? unless you think it's coincidental, the fact is that since we've begun fighting 'over there' we've had no attacks here...

That's....ummm...laughable.

 

How do you explain that for almost 8 years after the attacks in 1993 we didn't have any attacks here? Coincidence?

 

How do I explain it? How do I explain how we failed to catch the terrorists in 2001? I mean, we had one of the terrorists in custody. Several of them were on the FBI's Most Wanted list and using their real names. They used BOX KNIVES, for goodness sake! If I had written a movie where five guys with box knives took over an airplane prior to 9/11, they'd have laughed me out of the studio.

 

How about this? We didn't have any terrorist attacks from '93 through 2000 because we caught them all, including the 'Millenium bombers'. In 2000 and 2001, we stopped trying hard, for whatever reason. Now, we're trying hard again. If we get so lazy that we stop checking people coming into this country against the Most Wanted lists, allow people to take over a plane with box knives, and have reports from the FBI Denver and Minneapolis screaming about terrorists learning how to fly planes into buildings sitting on higher-ups' desks, it won't take the terrorists too long to take advantage.

 

If Iraq has made us so gosh darned safe, why are security measures now so much heavier than they were before we invaded? Anybody want to seriously argue that if we took away the TSA, the FBI/Customs cross-checking, the secured doors in aircraft, the new subway and port checking, that we'd be safer now than we were prior to 9/11?

 

Anybody?

[Al_U_Card]

You can only disarm a person, you can't disarm an idea.

 

As long as the U.S. insists on making itself a target.....they will get hammered or they will have to complete the "bunker-mentality" that they started after 9-11.

 

How not to be a target? Stop interfering and start encouraging. Foreign aid based on peaceful principles and developmental aid based on sustainable resources. Starting at home would be ideal. Demonstrate the principles that created the nation. Welcome those huddled masses. Reach out to those in need. A happy neighbour is a friendly neighbour and in this day and age, every country in the world now lives right next door.

[jtfanclub]

You can only disarm a person, you can't disarm an idea.

 

As long as the U.S. insists on making itself a target.....they will get hammered or they will have to complete the "bunker-mentality" that they started after 9-11.

 

How not to be a target? Stop interfering and start encouraging. Foreign aid based on peaceful principles and developmental aid based on sustainable resources. Starting at home would be ideal.

Tell that to Spain and Indonesia.

 

It's like telling a rich businessman who travels through a low-rent district how to not get mugged.

 

You can give money to beggars on the street and be nice to everybody....and everybody will feel sorry for you when you get mugged.

 

Or you can carry a gun and have the cops crack down in your neighborhood. Now you're less likely to get mugged, but if you are mugged you're more likely to get killed.

 

Or you can carry a 'spare' wallet with $20-$50 buck in it to give the mugger. Now you're more likely to get mugged, but it won't hurt any.

 

But the only way to guarantee you won't get mugged is to leave the scene entirely, look yourself in your house, and refuse all visitors.

 

 

We're rich. We're a target. Playing nice won't change that.

[mike777]

Maybe we can appease them by being nicer and giving them more money.

 

I see Bush is sending more troops not only to Iraq but today to Afghanistan, another civil war or tribal war.

 

Where is Congress, are they working this week?