Well personally I would choose Gerry Adans as being the scumbag father of terrorism, but thats my opinion. I am not trying to be patronising, so forgive me if it comes across as so, but you are wrong on your last point.............it's the rest of the world share a different opinion than the US. The rest of the world having vastly different media outlets, completly different ways of reporting - against one countries reporting which is known throughout the world to be self-serving, bias and insular. No disrespect, but your media does your people a great dis-service. It treats you as being stupid and then when many Americans do get into Political discusions with foreigners, generally it's realised after a while that your media doesn't exactly give the whole story. Im know Im not the first to say it and I certainly won't be the last.
That's fine and dandy Rick, but if you think the coverage in the UK is a panacea, I have news for you. Its not even close. Not to mention that, when discussing "the Jewish question", I'll side with the US every single time for very good reasons of historical nature.
Which is why it won't happen. No. Iran has no plans for nuking Israel. What Iran wants is leverage. Nobody has anything to gain from nuking Israel. Setting up a nuclear program just like that wouldn't be wise if you actually want to nuke someone. It's 'wise' in a political sense though.
I know that Nice, but it certainly isn't at the level of lies and hidden agenda's of the US media. I get news channels from all over the world on Sky Digital, so I am able to see different views on many different subjects. I also get quite a few news e-mails from Southern Africa for obvious reasons which have another slant entirely on many issues. The "Jewish Question" or the "Israeli Question".............. ? Rick 1 Nice 0
In international politics that difference barely exists for many countries. And given that I get all sorts of interesting news channels as well, I call GIANT shenanigans on your "hidden agenda" assumption. FOX news is pretty bad - CNN is no different from the BBC. After the BBC bungs expose (the greatest thing ever since sliced bread!) I'm more convinced than ever that there's absolutely no superiority to UK news. The only reasons for the attitude is to dismiss US sources as "biased" because they happen to disagree and because the English feel more sophisticated than the "Yanks". The notion that you somehow have better information in the UK is rubbish. Utter, utter rubbish. Especially considering the newspaper with the highest circulation in the UK.
Oh come on, I could of easily said Fox News is the most watched News in the States. It may well be, but I know that Americans who know something about the world take it with a pinch of salt. the Sun newspaper is not different. It's a daily National Enquirer (I think I got the name right?) which is more of a celebrity comic book than anything else. The BBC bungs enquiry was a joke, but the news content is generally better than CNN. Just look at the 2 websites online and you can see the difference straight away. Our broadsheets (Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independant) also give a far higher news coverage than your respective papers in the States. I get Al-Jeezera at home, as well as French, German, Spanish, Indian, Dubai and Chinese based news channels. That gives a far wider coverage of events than you can get in the States where if I am correct Al-Jeezera is banned.........?
Do you consider Al-Jazeera a fair and balanced news channel? Guardian - 90% of the thing I read there about ME are very anti-Israel, while Telegraph is much more balanced. As for the original point - right now I am very critical of Israeli government, especially about the way they handled Lebanon and Hezbollah (however, my dissatisfaction with them is probably for an entirely different reason than your dissatisfaction ), but it is all too easy for many closet anti-semites to jump on this band-wagon of criticizing Israel as their true agenda is much deeper than that. When you single out one nation for most of the wrongs in the world or in ME, to me, that's border line ignorance or worse...hatred, which is based on, you can guess here...
As much as Fox is. But the point being that there is more than one side to a issue or news story. I have the very good fortune to have a South American news translated to me by my girlfriend. Many stories provide a 90-180 degree view on a story or incedent. It provides me with a different perspective to think about - which is what Al-Jazeera would do if I received it. But, the problem is not necessarily with the news reporting. It is the level of critical thinking in the general population in the US. Living close to and interacting with many of the student at a large University as well as teaching high school, there is a severe lack of critical thinking occuring...and I don't think of myself as a great critical thinker.
At least Fox news is not a spokesmouth for Al-Qaeda... I have watched Al-Jazeera and they are truly biased, where Fox news might have slight conservative agenda, they are nothing like a station which shows beheadings. As for college students - they are brainwashed, but not in the way you think, more liberal and anti-American than one can guess.
Oh come on. Fox News is a spokesmouth for Bush and his agenda's Al-Jazeera is a spokesmouth for the anti-Bush Arabic countries. Neither is better than the other. As soccernutter said sometimes you need to have both sides of the story. Unfortunatky I believe you are only getting one (as most do in the States) where as we get the other side of the story which shows "reality" in a completly different light.
Do you speak Arabic? Just curious because you say you watch Al-Jazeera. I have been trying to learn for a year or so, and its a beeyatch to learn. (I assume your not a native Arabic speaker, for obvious reasons). And Al-Jazeera isn't a mouthpiece for Al-Qaida. They get criticised and even banned by Arab countries as well as being criticised by Western governments. And they offer a view on the Arab streets, which might be distasteful to some but its still news. Western media outlets bandy that accusation about mouthpieces because their jealous that Al-Jazeera get all the scoops
Do I really need to see the other side to know what is going on, especially knowing that it's biased in the opposite view? I watch BBC and CNN and MSNBC - they all have a bias or a slant, but I also read news, internet bloggers, etc, so I feel that not watching Al-Jazeera is not the end of the world for my knowedge. P.S. I also watch Russian, Ukranian, Israeli (both left and right) and French news as well. Satelite Dish is a wonderful thing.
Oh come on, you really think that FOX is pro BUSH. You obviously dont watch FOX news. No one on there thinks the ME issues are going well. They report the news, not like the rest of the US media which bash anything that the GOP do. Instead of listen to what others say about FOX and spending so much time reading all the news of the world, on all the papers of the world, (in your 56 hour day) why dont you watch FOX a full day. You will se its not partisan. Its just not right to think that FOX supports the Bush admin. they report the news and always have a Republican and a Democrat point of view. TRUTH. Anyone that thinks other wise just cant watch FOX because they dont spend all day trying to sh!t on Bush.
I have Fox News here. I also have seen in a studio in London which does the Fox News overlay from the Middle East a Fox News broadcast of a reportr wearing a bullet proof vest and a helmet doing a report. Once not on Live, but with the camera's still rolling they took off the stuff as they walked away from the camera and you could see them going to a bar on the right hand side of the shot as the camera stayed in place for their next take. Very realistic.........
As for Fox v. Al-Jazeer, Rick B covered that. As for college students/high school students, I am assuming you don't live in the US or interact with them if you do. If you meet them, I think you'll be surprised at how conservitive they are thinking and voting. I was recently in a college prep class for high school seniors. They all though Bushes domestic wire tapping was 100% fine. There was no analysis. And these were the best of the best in high school.
have you been to schools in California? You are so way way off about thinking they are conservative. Maybe in Texas, but all East coast schools are fairly liberal.
I didn't say the schools, I said the student voting and thinking. While there may be a "liberal" (I use that term very loosly, specially considering that Californians have a tendency to be socially "liberal" and fiscally "conservative") schools, many more students think and vote in a "conservative" manner than when I went to university 10-15 years ago. Let alone high school. In high school, this is also noticed by many teachers I have spoken with, as well. btw - where did I go to school? From where do I pull my experience?
I went to UC Berkeley and have lived in the Bay Area for the past 15 years - don't assume things please. I have no effing clue where you lived, but I traveled through at least 30+ states and as an athlete played on many college campuses and interacted with many students and professors - THEY ARE NOWHERE NEAR to being conservative.
Being around college students here in NYC quite a lot, I can assure you that most are liberals. There are rare cases of conservative minded voters but for the most part, they are liberals. Now, thats not to say they are democrats but due to recent events, they are more against the bush administration than they are for the democratic opposition. Most of the professors I've had did seem pretty moderate though, with a few leaning left. I haven't really encountered any conservative professors yet.
The wire taping is fine with most Americans because they are listing to conversations with terrorist in and out of the US. With supporters or sympathizers it's all the same. Do you think there listening for your call with grandma? So what analysis do you want? Catch the murderers before they kill innocent people. The best of the best in high school would most likely see it like this. The other side which has far greater numbers are all the hippies wanting to legalize pot and would not be in the best of the best category.
You are wrong, the first airline hijacking was in 1931 in Peru, followed by a hijacking in 1948 in Macao, then one in Bulgaria in 1948, and then one in Greece in 1949. None of these were Israeli initiatives. Furthermore, the Palestinians are the international leaders of hijacking. I guess that makes up for the fact that they trail the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in suicide bombings, but hey, I always knew Palestine would be first in something.
I think you are all being very unfair to Iran. To understand their support of terrorism, you have to consider their history. Iran did try their best to engage in conventional warfare. They once invaded Greece in great numbers, only to get their asses handed to them by the Athenians at Marathon. Over two thousand years later, they tried again, this time against Iraq, only to have their asses handed to them by Saddam Hussein. So, obviously Iran had to conclude that conventional warfare is not an option for them. In light of that, their support of terrorism is understandable. How else are they going to engage in warmongering?