Road to 911 and Dem's demand to censor

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by oddfellow4870, Sep 9, 2006.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Wowie69

    Wowie69

    Messages:
    788
    Well if we are going to use that kind of logic, it could be argued that Bush is in cahoots with Bin Laden. Bush's terror tactics against the US population have given Bin Laden exactly what he wanted - a frightened America. And a frightened America has given Bush exactly what he wanted - the ability to fool the public into thinking he is protecting us.

    Of course the sad reality is he is making it more dangerous for everyone by waging an immoral war that has given the terrorists a rallying point and a reason to grow their ranks.
  2. Rokin

    Rokin

    Messages:
    2,846
    Thank you for acknowledging that GW fucked up plenty.
    Clinton was no saint but he is way smarter and less arrogant than Bush and he didn't recklessly lead us into a quagmire, with no end in sight, which is now costing us countless lives and billions of dollars.

    History will be far better to Clinton than to Bush II
  3. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    CNN didn't shoot the video. ****nalists have talked to the enemy before without being accused of treason. According to your reasoning, any US networks airing AQ video clips, showing the planes flying into the towers, etc sshould have their broadcase license taken away.

    And I find it highly doubtful that CNN has any valuable information to give the US military anyway. The tape was received through conversations with an intermediary that most likely disappeared after it was delivered. I doubt the insurgents are so stupid to be giving reporters their home addresses.

    If it could be proven that CNN knew about the attack on the American soldier ahead of time and didn't warn the appropriate people because they wanted to get the story that'd be much different and I'd be calling for heads to roll. That does not seem to be the case however and the republicans are in an uproar because they are afraid the truth might cost them the elections. If you can prove something different, I'm listening.
  4. drobbins

    drobbins

    Messages:
    180
    In a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., wrote: “CNN has now served as the publicist for an enemy propaganda film featuring the killing of an American soldier.”


    Unfortunately this statement is 100% correct! The difference DaveNJ with us and Bin Laden is that WE ARE NOT IN CAHOOTS WITH THE MOFO! CNN IS IN CAHOOTS WITH A TERRORIST LEADER IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THIS FOOTAGE!

    Do you think for a second that CNN would reveal their contact info of this terrorist leader to the US military? NO WAY! That would jeapordize their own agenda, and safety. However, it could save the lives of American troops.

    It was very clear yesterday when Lynn Cheney asked Wolf Blitzer, "Do you want America to win the war?"

    It's a sad day when that question even needs to be asked.

    CNN is borderline traitorous.
  5. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    Easy. Don't get your balloon knot all clenched up over nothing. It is just a conversation.

    The point of my post, which you obviously missed, is that it is quite possible Clinton knew very well he couldn't do shit to prevent the show from airing,so he decided to get as much publicity as possible saying how inaccurate the show was, thats not how it went down, etc. None of those things qualify as attempted censorship.

    Besides, I've demonstrated that the republicans have done their share of BS when it comes to censorship, but I haven't seen any outrage over that.
  6. drobbins

    drobbins

    Messages:
    180

    Of course it's free speech you dope!

    No one is denying his right to write!

    But we are certainly questioning his motives, which are to keep off the air a documentary that damned his whole presidency, and rightfully so. Face it, Clinton wasn't the smooth, perfect little pretty boy you thought he was. He fucked up plenty, just like GW has and every other president has on various issues. Get over it!
  7. drobbins

    drobbins

    Messages:
    180

    Thirds.
  8. Rokin

    Rokin

    Messages:
    2,846
    Of course the answer is yes, but the problem is that the question is black and white and the anwer does not give you any real information.
    Everything is grey and the real question is the extent of the control.
  9. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    LOL, you're entitled. That is the beauty of it all.

    What about Hunter asking the Pentagon to dis-embed (is that even a word?) CNN? That is as much (if not more so) a form of attempted censorship than letters written about the whole 9/11 docudrama. It just proves that neither side should be throwing stones because we all live in glass houses.
  10. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    Do you think previous administrations that oversaw succesfull war efforts tried to control the flow of information. Yes or No?
  11. Wowie69

    Wowie69

    Messages:
    788
    Censorship?

    Our government is now censoring the web sites that our soldiers in Iraq are allowed to view. Our service people can no longer connect with sites that 'may disrupt the morale' of our fighting services. Or to put it another way, no more anti-war sites.

    Yep, our soldiers are allowed to give up their life for us, but apparently we don't think they are smart enough to decide for themselves what is right and wrong.
  12. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    Of course they have a right. No question. And CNN has a right to make friends with terrorists so they can get exclusive coverage of them killing our guys. And I have a right to my opinion that Bush has done far less to restrain freedom of speech and thought than the Clintons did or will do if they get back in power. These are all just opinions. Under Clinton, we had 8 years of him trying to dominate coverage. It didn't always work out for him, but Clinton knows how to get noticed, stay in spoltlight and make it all about him. The scandals only raised his ratings because Clinton knows how to envoke sympathy and be one of the guys. So many people just love a soap opera. They don't give a flying fig about morals or even leadership from their president. They want good TV. Dead americans is not good TV.

    If Hillary wins and the Clintons get back in power they will be making deals with terrorists and world leaders right and left. They will do anything they can to delay bad news, avoid casualties, put off dealing with hard issues, engender good feelings, etc. The good thing about Clinton is that he is a pure politican who is truly not an idealouge. He just wants folks to love him. That's also the bad thing about him. He will avoid things that should be dealt with...

    Sheesh.. what a ramble.....
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2006
  13. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    Now this is a demand to censor

    brought to you by Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.


    http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2305033.php

    [SNIP]

    Oust CNN embeds, HASC chief says

    Associated Press


    SAN DIEGO — The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee asked the Pentagon on Friday to remove CNN reporters embedded with U.S. combat troops, saying the network’s broadcast of a video showing insurgent snipers targeting U.S. soldiers was tantamount to airing an enemy propaganda film.

    The tape, which came to the network through contact with an insurgent leader, was aired Wednesday night on “Anderson Cooper 360” and repeated Thursday.

    In a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., wrote: “CNN has now served as the publicist for an enemy propaganda film featuring the killing of an American soldier.”

    The letter was also signed by San Diego-area Republican congressmen Darrell Issa and Brian Bilbray.

    “This is nothing short of a terrorist snuff film,” Bilbray said at a press conference in San Diego

    [SNIP]

    Yet it is considered acceptable for Republicans to use images of Bin Laden/Zawahari to scare the public into voting for them.

    It is the model of inconsistency I tell you.
  14. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    Did you ever think that the Senators, Clinton, etc. raised such a stink because that's how they wanted to counter the PR bonanza they feared the repubs would get from that miniseries because of its influence on the upcoming elections. Their intent may have been to raise public awareness to the docudramas historical inaccuracies and nothing more. Writing the letters was very likely just a PR stunt.

    I'll ask again, doesn't Clinton, the senators, or anyone for that matter have the right under the Constitution to write letters expressing their displeasure? Isn't that what free speech is? The fact that you claim republicans have not done similiar has no bearing on your arguement. The point is don't they have the right to do so?
  15. seeker6591

    seeker6591 banned

    Messages:
    14,013

    yes indeed.


    this same nonsense is going on in the gas and dangerous threads.


    flaming, assinine remarks, off topic, constant repetition AND STALKING !!!!!!!
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2006
  16. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    Both the pot and the kettle are rife with scumbags, dirty tricksters, etc. that do nothing to further the best interests of our country.

    I've never indicated that I believe otherwise.
  17. Best1

    Best1

    Messages:
    206
    There you go. The pot has been calling the kettle black.
  18. Best1

    Best1

    Messages:
    206
    LMAO!
  19. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    Another question that should be asked is if the website example is the only example of republican attempts at censorship. The hunt continues.

    I'll give republicans credit though, they are very good at burying their sordid deeds. Must come from years of practice. The democrats are no slouches either when it comes to misdeeds but for some reason their efforts to hide it aren't usually as sophisticated.

    By the way, Cheney's letter was in defense of his wife, not his daughter.
  20. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    So now we have to ask if trying to pressure a parody website that is making fun of one of your relatives is the equivalent of trying to pressure a major entertainment network that is releasing a major docudrama that might influence the outcome of the upcoming election ?

    Personally, I think the former is being a good father and the latter is the equivalent of fairly high level manipulation of an important public debate.

    But I admit this is fairly subjective.