Steve:

Remember when the rats, DemocRats, got in a huff over a supposed, camera close up of Rat in DemocRat in 2000?

What do you expect of the slime MSM, non political and balanced in their reporting.

Scum, Scum, here Scum, scatter dog treats.

Bill

Little Bill is gayer than a tree full of parakeets.

And the survey says...

There's a second message, under the X, written in black. You can't make it out using photoshop, because the image has been compressed using streaming video. If you had a cleaner copy of the image you might be able to make out what it says. It ends in "of black" or something of the sort. You can see it with your naked eye if you look closey at the white caption. Notice the second line of the caption is slightly broken looking.

Good, UY says nothing. Where's the defense of this...ahem...unbiased source? Or is it so indefensible that it's just time to make jokes until the next time the lib-MSM is pointed out? Yeah, yeah....it was "satire."

Hah. Good. I hope they did it on purpose and got away with it. I can't stand Cheney. I wish he would just resign.

So, it's good to have an unabashed bias in the media, so long as it fits your ideology? Got it.

1/15th of a second. And according to sabots post it was nothiung but a technical error?

And you right wing losers actually think this is worth commenting and getting upset about.

There's something just a little fucked up about cable television (especially a major news outlet) sending subliminal messages of ANY kind.

I'm sure you would all be shitting yourselves if this was done to Hillary or Michael Moore. You'd be calling for Bush and Rumsfeld to resign. And maybe Ms. Rice while we're at it.

Or, God forbid, if Fox News flashed "SHOP AT WALMART" across the screen for 1/15th of a second. It would be a corporate conspiracy.

Ah, but Cheney is an idiot or a dumbass or a war mongerer so it's OK, we're sending a good message here.

Once again, it's OK as long as the left agrees with it. Nothing new.

BTW... Technical error my ass. You're even more stupid than you look if you believe that.

Oh, right, it's that thing with the left again. The blatently illogical becomes logical when it suits their best interest.

Sarge, Re: "So, it's good to have an unabashed bias in the media, so long as it fits your ideology? Got it."

Correct. I deny nothing. I have dropped my principles regarding media fair play when it comes to the treatment of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, et all. They are unprincipled and deserve to be treated like the trash they are (my opinion) for SCREWING UP OUR COUNTRY.

Yeah, you were duped by the chimp, too, huh?

Delicate: See other thread for response.

DT it is a black X read into what you will.

Hopefully Walmart will have a special on tin foil hats.

>>I'm sure you would all be shitting yourselves if this was done to Hillary or Michael Moore.

No, I have a life. Your average Liberal is much less of a snot nosed whiner than your average con. >>You'd be calling for Bush and Rumsfeld to resign. And maybe Ms. Rice

Well that goes without saying but not for something like this.

Just saw the update.

Fuck, maybe I really am Omniscient.

Or I could just be rational.

Who knows?

1/15th of a second. And according to sabots post it was nothiung but a technical error?

Nice strawman. Sabot's post said nothing of the sort.

...and getting upset about.

No, there's no upset at pointing at the norm. Only asses like you need to ascribe emotions to everything.

Andy, I never have and never will support any of the MSM when they become nothing but propaganda shills for a particular party/ideology. I'd rather they actually report the news as it is and let the People make up their minds instead of them making up your mind FOR you. Ever wonder how a population gets brainwashed?

If you selectively drop your principles concerning the media, they're not principles. Sad to see that some actually want and defend a biased media. BUT, I'm glad that at least you have the balls to admit it. None of your compatriots here will do that.

>>Sabot's post said nothing of the sort.

He said the writing says "in black". Using Logic that leads one to believe that its not a poltical message.

Go ahead and use your own non logic which you are well known for Marge.

Sarge you lick the boots of the Right Wing.

Spare me your self-aggrandizing bullshit.

P.s. Who is Norm?

CNN best watch out... their next guest could be a bunker buster.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16397937%26method=full%26siteid=94762%26headline=exclusive--bush-plot-to-bomb-his-arab-ally-name_page.html

>>Andy, I never have and never will support any of the MSM when they become nothing but propaganda shills for a particular party/ideology.

They're not shills. They're simply a profit seeking entity of the type the right is constantly praising. Capitalists. If the viewers don't place value on truth then it has no value for them.

Unfortunately the state of politics seems to be a YELLING MATCH where you simply cheer for your side. You're not going to arrive at truth that way. (wait, i forgot - you already know what truth is and everyone else is too dumb to listen)

>>I'd rather they actually report the news as it is and let the People make up their minds instead of them making up your mind FOR you.

People don't have time for that. Not everyone can spend their working hours surfing blogs.

He said the writing says "in black". Using Logic that leads one to believe that its not a poltical message.

Only with UY non-logic. Using Russ logic sabot's post clearly shows he's a racist, having mentioned "black". However, in no logical manner can you EVER say that sabot's post claimed the "error" to be a technical one as you claimed and then backpeddled to mean "not political". Good job being an illogically twisted fuck as usual. Only an idiot with nothing to say will make shit up like that and then try to defend it with such non-logic and then follow it with a few ad hominems and then follow it with "Who's Norm" when I clearly did not capitalize "norm" nor refer to an individual named "Norm". Stupid fuck with nothing to say is all you are. Spare me your nothingness...

Wow, all Tom can say to defend the bias is to make a joke and point fingers elsewhere in classic red herring form.

They're not shills. They're simply a profit seeking entity of the type the right is constantly praising. Capitalists. If the viewers don't place value on truth then it has no value for them.

Go on matt. Try to turn the conversation away from the blatant bias at the hands of CNN and try to refute the notion that they are shills by pointing out that they're a business. Red herring matt, because the fact that they are shills still remains standing. So they're capitalist shills. Oooooo...got me there. What's their "business" matt? Hmmm? What do they get paid to produce? Hmmm? Seems that Andy has the only intellectual balls in the entire "left" here.

Unfortunately the state of politics seems to be a YELLING MATCH where you simply cheer for your side. You're not going to arrive at truth that way. (wait, i forgot - you already know what truth is and everyone else is too dumb to listen)

Nice red herring. The state of "politics" is not the issue here....CNN's bias is. Try to keep up.

People don't have time for that. Not everyone can spend their working hours surfing blogs.

Bullshit. Anyone can pick up one of Tom's favorite newspapers and get the "news" without being spoonfed CNNs obvious bias....but glad you support the media brainwashing the populace. However, I'd venture to guess that you wouldn't agree if the bias was the other way. Fucking hypocrites....every single one of you, minus Andy.

Sarge,

personally, I don't think CNN is doing any subliminal message campaign against the cheney and the white house.

There's an investigation into why this happened. Right now they say it was a glitch. If evidence comes out that this was intentional, then we can talk.

Sarge cant handle the fact that I was correct and him and his ilk were (as always) wrong.

http://thedanreport.blogspot.com/2005/11/cheney-x-revealed.html

>>but would also serve as a great cover up by making it appear like a glitch.

You are one sad sack of crap.

I feel sorry for your family.

"So, it's good to have an unabashed bias in the media, so long as it fits your ideology? Got it."

I almost laughed as loud at this as when the guilded wonder screamed "SUCK MY BALLS RUUUSSSSS!"

You emasculated whining baby, do you really expect anyone to "respect you after a response like this!

Sarge, I don't think Andy would be offended by you including him with your categorized hypocrites. Tom's joke was on topic, because the topic is a joke.

I made the joke as a way to be able to post a link to that story. If it's true, it's the best evidence to date that Bush isn't fit to run the texas rangers, much less the United States of America.

Yes, and I shouldn't laugh at his ignorance. My god, when a president needs to be told what is or isn't appropriate. To top that, he doesn't understand why?

If it's true, Bush wanted to bomb a news organization because of what they covered. That in an of itself is dumbfounding.

But also factor in that Bush doesn't realize the al-jazeera is good for the middle east, as was shown with their coverage of iraqi elections and the lebanese demonstrations, is equally dumbfounding.

It's just all-around dumbfounding (if true).

"Bring 'em on," President Bush declared, when asked about guerrilla attacks on US troops in Iraq. Well, by Geo. they did!

Ari Fleisher, stated the "W" didn't understand the problem with the comment. Well, since then Ari has gone on to spend more time with the family.

His mentallity around this matter matches his mentality on going to Iraq.

BTW; Anyone know if Sarge is related to "W"? I've never heard either apologize or admit a mistake. Show me a link!

Sorry Tom, wayyyyyy too much of a coincidence for me to buy into the "glitch" excuse. Just by coincidence, this "glitch" appears during the V-POTUS giving a speech. Riiiiiiight. You may not buy it, but your a liberal that agrees with bias so long as it's liberal bias anyway. Nope, no bias there...all I see is sand.

Sarge cant handle the fact that I was correct and him and his ilk were (as always) wrong.

Sarge can't handle the fact that you've not been correct as of yet on much of anything in 3 years. You lied about someone's post to try to prove a non-point. That's the extent of your addition to this thread. Well, that and claiming some sort of mythical victory yet again.

Oooooo....poor widdle Russy is so full of......well, nothing. UY tutelage at its best. No Russ, I don't expect "respect" from ignorant assholes like you that like to manufacture racism to incorrectly label people with when it's just not there, nor would I ever want it from you.....and the quote was for you to show it, prove it, or suck my balls. Well, as ALWAYS, you failed to show it or prove it and were shown to be nothing but an asshole that manufactures racism claims for no other reason than you have nothing to say.

If it's true, Bush wanted to bomb a news organization because of what they covered. That in an of itself is dumbfounding.

No, Tom...not just "because of what they covered", because of their obvious ties to terrorism and need to air terrorist propaganda every chance they get across the ME region. Just because they also cover good things that happend over there....as do the other media agencies that are not terrorist propaganda tools, doesn't negate the fact that they air every bit of terrorist propaganda that comes their way over the entire region. However, this never happened and you have only one side of a story to go on. Guess that's enough for you.

"Oooooo....poor widdle Russy is so full of......well, nothing. UY tutelage at its best. No Russ, I don't expect "respect" from ignorant assholes like you that like to manufacture racism to incorrectly label people with when it's just not there, nor would I ever want it from you.....and the quote was for you to show it, prove it, or suck my balls. Well, as ALWAYS, you failed to show it or prove it and were shown to be nothing but an asshole that manufactures racism claims for no other reason than you have nothing to say."

Actually I have shown proof and you deny anything that shows your vote was a lie. It seems based on your constant requests for someone to suck on you, that you are finally coming out. It's OK if you take widdle baby steps.

In "always" claiming that everyone you disagree with has nothing to say, you end up saying a lot of nothing. You are starting to echo McJohnson.

In not expecting respect, you're on the right track. Respect is earned, and it's directly connected to the truth.

Yes, sarge, exactly for what they covered. al-jazeera is predominatey staffed by western born or at least western-trained reporters. Ideologically, al-jazeera workers are pro-democracy. Their policy is to air al qaeda and insurgent tapes if they come into possesion of them.

US news organizations also air these tapes, though not in entirety. al-jazeera views al-qaeda tapes as information the the public has a right to hear. They in no way endorse the content of these tapes.

It's notable that some arab governments and arab people condemn al-jazeera as a mouth piece for israel. though, to my knowledge, none have called for the bombing of al-jazeera facilities (though some may have).

Actually I have shown proof

You have shown exactly ZERO proof to bolster your continuing asshole claims of racism on my part. None. Go on, manufacture some more "proof."

you deny anything that shows your vote was a lie.

Really? My vote was a lie? I recall going in to vote. I recall giving my name. I recall getting a ballot. I recall marking my nunerous choices for candidates. I recall my vote going into a ballot box. you telling me that the Democrats in my area that run the polls screwed me out of my vote?

It seems based on your constant requests for someone to suck on you, that you are finally coming out.

Good to see yoiu still have not provided a shred of proof that isn't a manufactured lie. Yay...Russ is still a lying sack of shit in true UY-style. Liar. How's the balls taste fucker?

In "always" claiming that everyone you disagree with has nothing to say, you end up saying a lot of nothing. You are starting to echo McJohnson.

Well, I don't always claim YOU have nothing to say. I do't always claim the Tom has nothing to say. I don't always claim that Andy has nothing to say. So, you're just lying again a la UY? Fuck off Russ. You are a liar.

In not expecting respect, you're on the right track. Respect is earned, and it's directly connected to the truth.

So start telling the truth...rather...stop lying aboiut me you fudcking asshole.

Their policy is to air al qaeda and insurgent tapes if they come into possesion of them.

EXACTLY the point Tom. They SHOULD be providing information as to "how" they get their terrorist propaganda so that those terrorists that they are used by can be found and killed. Yes, that goes with ANY agency that regularly receives and airs terrorist propaganda.

Their policy is to air al qaeda and insurgent tapes if they come into possesion of them.

If that policy helps terrorism and harms the United States armed forces, I don't give a shit about them. War isn't a game played on your bedroom computer and enemies come in many stripes and I see them as an enemy of my country's military. You disagree. Noted.

Sarge:

Most of these commie trash that post here know nothing of the military nor would they put their sorry asses on the line for any reason save a hand out from the Gov.

As a famious English Author said when asked, applying for draft dodger status, "What would you do if you saw a Hun raping your sister?"

His Reply; " I would insert myself between them!"

Bill

News organizations, for them to function best, work independently of government and military. On occassions when lives are at stake or military operations could be tipped off, news organizations will cooperate with military/goverments.

If al jazeera won't help US military track an al qaeda gopher, I hardly think that's harming US armed forces. If it's airing al qaeda tapes that harms US armed forces, then Fox, ABC, CBS, CNN, et al are also enemies of your country.

Maybe I missed it, but I haven't heard of al queda targeting al jazeera, like they target other reporters and news organizations. They must not feel they're Israel's mouth piece.

CNN's already admitted that they were a propaganda tool for Saddam Hussien in the past. The few people who still trust it for the are brainwashed already.

>>wayyyyyy too much of a coincidence for me to buy into the "glitch" excuse.

No one gives a fuck what you think.

Believe what you want dumbshit.

Thanks for the unnecessary lesson on "news organizations" that you bring up every time the "news" is discussed. However, AJ will not cooperate with anyone before they air their terrorism videos. They just air them.

AND, since AJ doesn't assist the world in catching the terrorists whose videos they're eager to air, they ARE endangering our troops, Americans, Europeans, and, as the arab world is finding out....even thsoe in the Middle East. Sorry, American news organizations do not receive videos from terrorists....only their friends at AJ do. Nice try.

Maybe I missed it, but I haven't heard of al queda targeting al jazeera, like they target other reporters and news organizations. They must not feel they're Israel's mouth piece.

No, no...American troops target reporters, the "insurgents" onloy target those evil American forces in Iraq. Didn't you get the points memo?

Poor UY...nothing to say again.

Sarge, you have a complete ignorance of al-jazeera and their motives. I'm not going to change that, it's obvious.

But let me just ask you this, do you think AJ should be bombed?

Right now...no. But I'm glad you're an expert on AJ and the effect what they broadcast and how they broadcast it in the ME has on the people of the ME.....and how that affects those terrorists that're killijng civilians in the ME and elsewhere. I only wonder how close their ties to terrorism really are.

Sarge what do you base your opinion on?

Short answer.

Nada.

In comparing AJ to the US and GWB, which do you believe have the most affect on the insurgents?

UY what do you base ANYTHING on. No answer...nada....nil...zilch.

Comparing apples, volkswagons, and Clostridium difficile I think C. difficile would have the most effect on the terrorists you kindly refer to as insurgents.

Hint....GWB and the US are red herrings to any affect AJ has in the region.

>>UY what do you base ANYTHING on

My opinion is based on the truth.

The truth has been pointed out to you and you choose not to believe it.

Yeah....because you said so. DO point out the "truth" so I can fully refute it and show it for the lies it is. Lemme know when yoiu have something to say. You've already said something once today, maybe 2 times in one day is asking for too much.

Truth is it was a technical error.

Why is Sarge such an ignorant spiteful lying bastard?

Why does he choose to live a life full of lies and hatred?

Scum:

From what I have seen of Sarge, he is a gentilman and well spoken, defends his arguenents bounded by facts, a rather good debater.

Your Ad Hominum attacks show what trash you are, come to Boston, I have invited you before, and debate one on one.

Bill

>>he is a gentilman and well spoken

So he is a gentileman. Well thats great, because from where im sitting he is nothing but a lying sack of moldly crap.

Good day.

Truth is it was a technical error.

Yeah...a "glitch"....riiiiiiiight.....

Why is Sarge such an ignorant spiteful lying bastard?

Why can't UY say anything but baseless ad hominems?

Why does he choose to live a life full of lies and hatred?

Why does UY resort to pathetic and baseless ad hominems and ascribe emotions that aren't there?

So he is a gentileman. Well thats great, because from where im sitting he is nothing but a lying sack of moldly crap.

No, I am no gentleman to asshole punks, gender nonspecific....but if all you've got is a pathetic baseless ad hominem....

Believe whatever you want Sarge.

You obviously have an aversion to truth.

Its like holy water to you.

And my insults arent baseless. They are true.

Hmmmmm.....nothing but more BASELESS ad hominems?

My insults arent baseless. They are true.

Baseless....until PROVEN true. Stupid fuck....

Dammit...forgot the "UY said so, therefore is must be true" non-logic.

>>Baseless....until PROVEN true.

Well the you being a liar thing, Ive proved that many times.

You've falsely CLAIMED it many times, you've never PROVEN it.