[Rictor]

I always vote for the tallest one



He looks like a dork, so he must be worthless as a candidate. Right? As opposed to Bush, who always look very confused as if he's wondering why missing the Power Rangers is worth this - this stupid little speech to some backwards ass little town. Oh wait, thats Washington.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Rictor
I always vote for the tallest one



He looks like a dork, so he must be worthless as a candidate. Right? As opposed to Bush, who always look very confused as if he's wondering why missing the Power Rangers is worth this - this stupid little speech to some backwards ass little town. Oh wait, thats Washington.

apparently, the odd of getting elected in a US Presidental race always are in favour of the taller candidate.......

[SadisticSid]

He looks like a dork, so he must be worthless as a candidate.

There's that, but what makes Kerry most contemptible are his apparent feelings on the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland, on which he was quoted as saying "the DUP cannot be permitted to disenfranchise half the population of Northern Ireland by refusing to form a government with Sinn Fein".

Quite contrary to Bush's notion of a terror-free world, he appears to be advocating one where the views of terrorists and murderers come before those of decent people. Not a man I'd like to see in the White House.

[Rictor]

I suspect there are people here far more qualified to speak on the Irish/British issue than I am, but for my money, ignoring those with legitimate complaints and casting a huge dragnet labelling them all terrorists is even worse.

I don't want a man in the White House who simply labels anyone he wants as a terrorist and proceeds to **** hammer them out of existence. If nothing else, its the pinacle (sp?) of hypocricy.

[Gank]

Originally posted by SadisticSid
There's that, but what makes Kerry most contemptible are his apparent feelings on the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland, on which he was quoted as saying "the DUP cannot be permitted to disenfranchise half the population of Northern Ireland by refusing to form a government with Sinn Fein".

Quite contrary to Bush's notion of a terror-free world, he appears to be advocating one where the views of terrorists and murderers come before those of decent people. Not a man I'd like to see in the White House.

Sinn Fein represents a good proportion of the population of Northern Ireland, so regardless of what they do that is exactly what the DUP is doing. Its also worthwhile to note that the DUP is the political wing of Loyalist terrorists, and the British government itself was directly implicated in the Dublin and Monaghan terrorist bombs as well as colluding with loyalist terrorists on quite a number of occasions. So saying one party has no right to be part of the government because of their actions is hypocritical. Whether you like it or not, IRA have a considerable amount of political clout and following in the North, which is kinda understandable when you consider what your countrys done to mine over the last few centurys, so forcing them out of the peace process is not an option.

[mikhael]

pinnacle, Rictor.

I find it ironic that Liberator considers Colmes a "liberal". Fox calls him a liberal, but that's like sitting in Death Valley and calling the Mohave Desert 'cold'. Sure, by comparison to the immediate surroundings, perhaps.

I wonder, does Liberator also think that O'Reilly was a liberal democrat when he started his tenure at Fox?

[mikhael]

Oh, and Liberator, I'm still waiting for your list of 'journalists' who just report the news, without adding spin or their own opinions.

[an0n]

an0news[/i]: Just the facts, regardless of their relevance.[/color]

[Liberator]

To start with:
Drudge
Most of the Wall Street Journal

Most of your local Newsmen and Newswomen

The point is the sources that people get there news from, i.e. CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, ect., slant left and you can't deny it.  Fox only appears to slant right because they are unbiased.

Have any of you ever learned how to fly a high performance fighter jet?  I haven't but I would assume it takes longer than four months, which BTW is the amount of time Kerry spent in Vietnam.  When he got back to this country he basically stabbed his fellow servicemen in the back.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Liberator
To start with:
Drudge

Waiittamo - isn't that the same smug arsehole who was posted in a link up here blatantly lying his arse off about the Hutton report?

[SadisticSid]

Originally posted by Gank


Sinn Fein represents a good proportion of the population of Northern Ireland, so regardless of what they do that is exactly what the DUP is doing. Its also worthwhile to note that the DUP is the political wing of Loyalist terrorists, and the British government itself was directly implicated in the Dublin and Monaghan terrorist bombs as well as colluding with loyalist terrorists on quite a number of occasions. So saying one party has no right to be part of the government because of their actions is hypocritical. Whether you like it or not, IRA have a considerable amount of political clout and following in the North, which is kinda understandable when you consider what your countrys done to mine over the last few centurys, so forcing them out of the peace process is not an option.

You've kinda missed the point there. The whole reason behind the Unionists' rejection of Sinn Fein is because they failed to live up to their side of the agreement to stop their 'associated' paramilitaries' actions. Whatever blame can be apportioned to either side, it is the republicans who have violated and continue to violate the peace process and unionists have every right to cry foul of Sinn Fein. The Irish PM himself asserts that republican violence is to blame for the deadlock. It's quite understandable why the DUP isn't cosy to the idea of power sharing with a group of people who care less about the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement than they do.

So Kerry's vision of a Northern Ireland where republican paramilitaries can get away with whatever they want without the unionists being able to do anything but sit idly by shows how committed to the 'war on terror' he really is. And let's not start on the myriad defense bills Kerry has voted against...

[mikhael]

YEs, Aldo, it is.

The Wall Street Journal's articles tend to be unbiased, but the entire paper picks its stories very carefully with a conservative slant. That's okay, because its a primarily financial publication, and its their job to be conservative.

Drudge is hugely slanted to the right. This is evidenced in the strong preponderance of 'reporting' (if you can call repeating rumors reporting) in the Drudge Report being critical of the left side of a debate, with very little critical examination of the left. In cases where the Drudge Report has been wrong, its failed utterly to report its mistakes (A famous example: witness the 'vanalism' in the White House, which the Bush Administration said was fabricated. The Drudge Report reported these rumors as fact and never reported its mistake.) I'm surprised though, that one can refer to a "Report" that admits to basing most everything it reprints on rumor and second hand information, with little more no actual investigation 'journalism'. I suppose that the Weekly World News counts as 'journalism' by that standard.

I still notice that you didn't name names, Liberator. You named publications and networks. I asked for journalists, not their journals.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Liberator
Fox only appears to slant right because they are unbiased.

You owe me a new spine. I broke my last one when I fell of my chair laughing at that!

[vyper]

[q]IIRC, the reason that the Iranians released the hostages on the day of Reagan's inauguration was basically designed to be an insult to Carter.[/q]

You lot should learn from us Brits about Iranian-related (read: Embassy) hostage situations.

[q]I suspect there are people here far more qualified to speak on the Irish/British issue than I am, but for my money, ignoring those with legitimate complaints and casting a huge dragnet labelling them all terrorists is even worse.
[/q]

I think he was meaning that the British Govt. allowing in a group who had known links to the IRA wasn't exactly... sane. From a Brit perspective at least.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by vyper
You lot should learn from us Brits about Iranian-related (read: Embassy) hostage situations.

They did try. It's just that they failed miserably.  They managed to lose 8 people before they even encountered any hostile Iranian forces and decided to give up and return to base.

[vyper]

[q]It's just that they failed miserably. [/q]

Or the US could just get us to send in the SAS then.

[SadisticSid]

Originally posted by Liberator
To start with:
Drudge
Most of the Wall Street Journal

Most of your local Newsmen and Newswomen

The point is the sources that people get there news from, i.e. CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, ect., slant left and you can't deny it.  Fox only appears to slant right because they are unbiased.

Have any of you ever learned how to fly a high performance fighter jet?  I haven't but I would assume it takes longer than four months, which BTW is the amount of time Kerry spent in Vietnam.  When he got back to this country he basically stabbed his fellow servicemen in the back.

No way is Fox unbiased. Not even I as a moderate conservative can deny that Fox anchors are often on the verge of foaming at the mouth, and I've only watched about a half hour of it in total in my life. Personally I'd rather watch the BBC and cut my own way through its somewhat more subtle leftist agenda.

You're right about Kerry though. From townhall.com (emphasis mine):

The Kerry campaign insists on keeping his Vietnam record front-and-center. According to his website, "When John Kerry returned home from Vietnam, he joined his fellow veterans in vowing never to abandon future veterans of America's wars. Kerry's commitment to veterans has never wavered and stands strong to this day."

...

Upon his return home, however, Kerry abandoned each and every one of his fellow Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines on the ground in Vietnam -- not to mention the people of South Vietnam -- by fomenting wartime discord. In his now infamous 1971 testimony before Congress, Kerry said American soldiers were war criminals, claiming they "raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs ... poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam."

Kerry went on: "I personally didn't see personal atrocities in the sense I saw somebody cut a head off or something like that. However, I did take part in free-fire zones, I did take part in harassment and interdiction fire, I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground, and all of these acts, I find out later on, are contrary to The Hague and Geneva conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the application of the Nuremberg Principles, is in fact guilty."

I'm sure Vietnam wasn't the most clean war waged, but Kerry's barbaric assumptions - assumptions by his own admission - say wonders about his views on his fellow soldiers. May Bush stay comfortable in the Oval Office, if only to keep this idiot out.

[Gank]

Originally posted by SadisticSid
You've kinda missed the point there. The whole reason behind the Unionists' rejection of Sinn Fein is because they failed to live up to their side of the agreement to stop their 'associated' paramilitaries' actions. Whatever blame can be apportioned to either side, it is the republicans who have violated and continue to violate the peace process and unionists have every right to cry foul of Sinn Fein. The Irish PM himself asserts that republican violence is to blame for the deadlock. It's quite understandable why the DUP isn't cosy to the idea of power sharing with a group of people who care less about the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement than they do.

So Kerry's vision of a Northern Ireland where republican paramilitaries can get away with whatever they want without the unionists being able to do anything but sit idly by shows how committed to the 'war on terror' he really is. And let's not start on the myriad defense bills Kerry has voted against...

Tell you what, you go atually read the good friday agreement and come back and tell me what part of it the provos arent adhering too. You obviously dont have a clue what it actually says. Its actually the British government who havent lived up to their side, the IRA has gone above and beyond its side of the agreement with decommisioning, which originally wasnt a pre-requisite. And Bertie Ahern is a bollix, the only reason hes still in power is because theres nobody to replace him with.

Ian Paisley the DUP have fought against the good friday agreement tooth and nail since it came in so dont spout ****e about them being worried about the "spirit" of it being violated. The DUP is looking for any excuse to try and prevent the good friday agreement from being realised, because it means they will have to share power equally with nationalists, something they've never done and never will if they can help it.

Anyways I get the feeling I'm wasting my time even discussing this with you.

[Gank]

Originally posted by vyper
I think he was meaning that the British Govt. allowing in a group who had known links to the IRA wasn't exactly... sane. From a Brit perspective at least.

British government itself was linked to loyalist paramilitarys, financing them, supplying them intel and using them as death squads so they couldnt really say much about it. Besides you cant have peace talks with only one side of the conflict now can you?

Originally posted by vyper
You lot should learn from us Brits about Iranian-related (read: Embassy) hostage situations.

Bit of a difference rescueing hostages from an embassy under siege in London with an army of freindly surrounding it and rescueing hostages from an embassy under siege in Tehran with a country of hostiles surrounding it. Its probably just as well the deltas hit that sandstorm, the operation was a bit ambitious to say the least

[SadisticSid]

Gank said:

Tell you what, you go atually read the good friday agreement and come back and tell me what part of it the provos arent adhering too. You obviously dont have a clue what it actually says. Its actually the British government who havent lived up to their side, the IRA has gone above and beyond its side of the agreement with decommisioning, which originally wasnt a pre-requisite. And Bertie Ahern is a bollix, the only reason hes still in power is because theres nobody to replace him with.

Ian Paisley the DUP have fought against the good friday agreement tooth and nail since it came in so dont spout ****e about them being worried about the "spirit" of it being violated. The DUP is looking for any excuse to try and prevent the good friday agreement from being realised, because it means they will have to share power equally with nationalists, something they've never done and never will if they can help it.

Anyways I get the feeling I'm wasting my time even discussing this with you.

From this summary of the Good Friday Agreement

...

Security issues

All participants to work for paramilitary disarmament by May 2000 (!)
British government commits to reform policing and criminal justice system
Both governments commit to release prisoners

And yeah, you're probably wasting your time 'discussing' this, if you can call your convenient little circumvention of the facts that. The IRA and its splinter groups were supposed to be rid of arms 4 years ago. (Not that the prospect of 'guns for governance' is a prospect at all appealing to me, but it's what we're stuck with now.) THERE's your violation of the GFA by the provos. Get a clue.

The GFA was, nay, IS a tragedy. It hasn't worked just as every sensible opponent to it predicted. Terrorist arms are still as rife as ever. Paramilitary activity has not ceased. Tension and hatred is still rife between the two communities. And if the British governments that brought it in and supported it (under John Major and Tony Blair) had not been so feeble-minded a more practical solution might've been in place by now. And worst of all, for nothing in return the government has released an assortment of evil murderers and thugs back on to the streets, the most morally repugnant 'detail' of the Agreement.

And don't blither on about links from government to paramilitary forces when the leader and deputy leader of Sinn Fein were both IRA commanders during the height of violence and who by right should be rotting to death in prison right now.