How is this supporting the war first i believe since she was talking about bush as a lame duck she was not responding to Obama continued support of the war like your intro suggested. By the sounds of it, she would like to see these problems that we have gotten ourselves into handed through diplomacy and international pressure, only taking military action as a last resort, how is that a bad thing. As a liberal i do say bring the troops home and am disappoint Obama has not made moves towards that.
Disgusting. She and her fellow msnbc were so harshly critical of the Bush administrations handling of war. Now they're calling for an invasion of Pakistan since Obama has turned into as a war monger as Bush. These talking heads have no integrity, principle, or consistency. They just blindly follow whatever political party they get paid by.
Dems and repubs are both the War Party.
Maddow is a shallow no spine yellow journalist like the rest of them.
Rachel Maddow was reportedly found 'humping' a seat arm on the train while in New York for a brief holiday. She had taken XTC (witnesses said) and she found the movement of the train exciting-so much so in fact that she actually soiled her panty and uncontrollably had bowel movements while writhing back and forth on the seat edge.
This all became too clear when at one point she fell over due to the shifting of the care and the fecal matter smeared on her leg and the floor became visible.
It's sick that they can lobby members of congress to keep us at war.
The prison industry lobbies for stricter laws, and we imprison more people than anywhere else in the world--you are 7 times more likely to be imprisoned in the US than in Europe where prison is NOT an industry.
The food industry lobbies for GMO foods and other poisons and our rate of cancer and other food-related diseases skyrockets.
There can be no victory in Afghanistan, but defense contractors don't want victory--they want endless war--and endless profits, at the cost of American lives and dollars.
We have been working hard to make enemies of the people in Afghanistan ever since we invaded, bombing wedding parties and most recently, our troops attacked a popular mayor's home and murdered his cook and driver.
Watch "Taxi To The Dark Side" to see how our troops tortured an innocent taxi driver to death in medieval torture chamber style, making all residents of his village our enemies.
We had a brief moment after the invasion to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, but our commanders ordered actions which achieved precisely the opposite.
While the Australian government talks about confronting terrorism, a recent count undertaken by the Associated Press found that so far this year, foreign forces have been responsible for 100 civilian deaths, while those fighting the occupation who have been responsible for 60 civilian deaths.
More Afghans (36%) blame foreign forces for the violence that is occurring than those who blame the Taliban (27%). "
People who strike us should be struck back. People who did not strike us should not be struck. We should develop national self sufficiency so we don't go fucking with sovereign or autonomous regions in order to secure their supply of fossil fuels. I am a bleeding heart liberal but I love guns. I would gladly stand on the beach and pick off incoming invaders, but I will NOT stand for aggression or invasion. I think the left wing mantra was "Out of Iraq!" As I said...
I'm one of those liberals, I've alway held the position of action in Afghanistan and not Iraq, because the Afghanistan and Pakistan Border Region is where a Criminal is Hiding. and you'll note; "Not Afraid of Diplomacy"
We aren't Hawks, we aren't Doves, but what we certain are not are Ducks and Chickens.
Sadam was Iraq's Problem, The Enigmatic Bin Laden is everyone's. a Country at war can be talked down or Spanked, they tend to have interests other than killing, land/money.
Rachel may be a lesbian, but what does that have to do with anything? Is she the reason you are not getting laid? Oh, Maddow received the Rhodes Scholar award. Hannity dropped out of college... twice. You, Loyolajack(ov) and those like you, are a poison to this country. FUCK those who, like you, have a basic and instinctual aversion or hostility to measured thought & independent critical thinking. You just echo what you're told, and then project it onto others as if to hide your crime. Textbook.
Pakistan soldiers are training to take out the US drones:
"Pakistani soldiers practised shooting at pilotless "drone" aircraft on Friday, the military said a day after the government lodged a protest with the U.S. ambassador over drone missile strikes in Pakistani territory.
Anti-aircraft guns and short-range surface-to-air missiles were used during the exercise conducted at a desert range near the city of Muzaffargarh in the central Pubjab province.
Anti-aircraft guns and short-range surface-to-air missiles were used during the exercise conducted at a desert range near the city of Muzaffargarh in the central Pubjab province.
"The elements of Army Air Defence demonstrated their shooting skills by targeting the drones flying at different altitudes," the military said in a statement.
Air defence commander Lieutenant-General Ashraf Saleem praised the "precision and agility" of the gunners.
Wow. A total proxy war so far. The US can attack a country for months and not have it cover all of the major media, and only because it's with drones. The new Admin. doesn't want another Iraq, because they know that people have almost reach the breaking point, so Obama will wait until Afghanistan is wrapped up before we get the excuse to invade Pakistan with troops or PMCs. By then, most of the fighters will be dead, the rest can be killed by PMCs, no need to use US troops to stir up the media
As others have pointed out, no foreign power has ever won in Afghanistan.
Immediately after defeating the Taliban, we did have a chance to establish a strong democracy in Afghanistan, but we squandered that opportunity, perpetrated atrocities against the Afghani people, and now we can never win their hearts and minds.
We'll always have a military presence there, it would be un American to leave a country without having permanent military bases there. When I say "wrapped up," i mean in terms of what the Obama Administration will say and the corporate Media will present. The media mostly forgot about Afghanistan once we were well into the Iraq War, leading some to think that we had defeated the Taliban entirely. I shouldn't have used the phrase "wrapped up," I was fitting in as much as possible in one post.
How can you expect to win the hearts and minds of people who can't read anything except the Koran? What do they know except the the U.S. is an evil occupying force. If they were educated and less impoverished there would be hope to dilute their radicalism and their religious fanaticism. They live lives so spartan and harsh that they welcome the prospect of the afterlife.
They need to know that there is only one life and they don't get to spend a second life on a cloud screwing 72 virgins if they kill Americans. (I guess I am speaking about poor and radicalised Muslims generally here.) Muslim populations are growing at 6% annually while Christian populations are growing at only 1%. This is because Muslims are generally poorer and more ignorant and therefore have more babies who later stand a fair chance of becoming fodder for bin Laden and his ilk.
Why do you imply that Mddow is brainwashed? Maybe she believes in what she is saying. I think that the U.S. should be able to infiltrate Al-Qaeda and poison their leaders. The could be doing that right now. Infiltration is the best weapon against terrorist groups - not bombing with drones or pounding with artillery or bombs.
Attacks by the US inside Pakistan are almost daily now:
"Many Pakistanis argue that the American missile strikes are responsible for the suicide bomb attacks that have struck law enforcement targets, funerals and politicians in the North-West Frontier Province and in Islamabad, the capital.
After the strike on Saturday, a Taliban spokesman, Ahmadullah Ahmadi, said that no foreigners had been killed."
Americans have killed innocent people and none of them were foreigners, he said in a statement issued on behalf of a top militant commander, Hafiz Gul Bahadar, in Miram Shah, the main town in North Waziristan.
Mr. Ahmadi said the militants would seek revenge. We will avenge the death of innocent people by striking in settled areas against security forces, he said.
Btw Rachel, how do you know it was a "Taliban acid attack"?
Did you ask the perpetrator if he was in the Taliban?
We don't like the policies of funamentalists towards people, especially women--does that mean that we should send our friends and family to risk their lives stopping them?
There are far better ways to fight injustice in the world than with military force.
Last point -- after Obama is sworn in this coming January and he starts actually doing things, that's the proper time to start sniping at real issues of consequence.
Only an idiot believes in things which hasn't happened yet. And quite frankly, I'm no idiot -- if you all get my drift.
Only an idiot doesn't realize that Rahm Emanuel and Hillary Clinton, Cheif of Staff and Sec. of State, respectively, do not spell military aggression for the US. We're sending in drone air crafts to shoot missiles in Pakistan right now. Do you honestly think Obama is Anti war? Bush led the dumb population of the US to think he would not lead us into military aggression. The empire will only expand abroad while it collapses at home. If you voted for Obama or McCain, shame on you all the same.
You're talking about Obama's militarism when he isn't even president yet.
When it comes to how our foreign policy, I'm inclined to agree with a lot of Pat Buchanan's views.
And while I don't agree with Maddow on her social positions, she's surprisingly well informed on foreign policy. It might have something to do with the fact that both Maddow and Buchanan are both schooled in history, and are policy experts, which is interestingly enough, my area of expertise.
I'm just dismayed by so-called liberals so vigorously supporting Obama's militarism.
google: "obama's militarism"
"The costs of Obama's militarism will ensure that there will be no Marshal Plan for the cities, no universal health care, no social safety net."
Glen Ford, Black Agenda Radio
I would add that it will continue to cause inflation (dollar devaluation) as more dollars are created to finance it, driving us further into the economic abyss.
You know what's really lame about the posts here so far? You guys have devolved this discussion into something more about yourselves than about the issue at hand.
This is just about as fun as a cafeteria food fight -- great while it lasts, but really messy afterwards.
I was curious about what you wrote and read what you had to say. You sound a lot like George Bush. Tell a bunch of lies, say a bunch of really stupid things then declare yourself victorious. Fools and conspiracy theorists are everywhere LOL
You live in Detroit? That sucks. I'm like George Bush but I'm also like a conspiracy theorist? I've never thought of those things as being similar, it's quite a feet to simultaneously accomplish both. Comparing me to Bush 43 is a typical dumb liberal insult. Can't you do better. OH yeah, you're from Detroit. Try to point out where I lied so I can bury you like the last bitch.
You dont even know the difference between feet and feat then you want to pick on my handle? Easymike cleaned your clock and youre too stupid to know it. Go play with a grade school drop out you dumb fuck!
I made a typo, wippidy fuckin' do. Of course I know the difference between the feet of a human and the feat of me owning Easybitch. Once again, where are the lies? How did he clean my clock? You can't elaborate on that at all can you? You're obviously a waste of time, at least easymike had some content in his posts. It's you're, not youre, if you want to be an anal bitch about typing. You don't want to be an anal bitch, you can't help it.
Maybe Easymike was polite to you because he thought you had potential. I dont, you dont even know what a typographical error is. Using the wrong word is not a typo you sh*t for brains its just plain STUPID. Youre without the apostrophe is a typo. Maybe you should play in traffic without your helmet ... if your mother will let you out of the basement. No self respecting grade school student will play with an arrogant, ignorant asshole anyway.
Anal ... oh I get, it youre an asshole wannabe but for now youre just a dingleberry. Good luck! Ill leave you to continue your youtube education. Toodles! ###
As I thought, You have nothing to talk about and cannot point out any of the lies you accused me of. A real argument with real thinkers is not going to happen very often on youtube, I've come to find. Easymike appreciates your assistance in evading the truth: Neither of you bitches know what the hell you're talking about. Take notes, thanks for the gibberish.
From what little I can get from the video, Maddow is saying that there might be some common interest between the US and Iran to oppose terrorist actions in Pakistan, but Iran is currently shutting the door on the US of A's face.
Dunno, but if Iran and the US starts talking, there might be some lowering of tensions that can only be beneficial in the long term. But then again, I might be high and over-interpreting things.
Geeze, we have over-interpreted a simple 5-minute segment way beyond what it's actually saying.
All mass media is corporate -- we all have to live with that. I refuse to believe that there is no room for integrity nor principle in the medium, since it has become a market place where a lot of competing ideas (even Fox News, for heaven's sake) has its place.
The very process where we are even discussing this in YouTube shows how free we are, speech-wise.
As far as the video goes, there's nothing beyond the need for a certain diplomatic and military stance. All Maddow says is that it has to be "nuanced" - how much more vague can you get?
As long it goes along the lines of speaking softly and carrying a big stick, I don't see anything wrong with it.
Upon election in 2000 our new president ignored a looming terrorist threat in Afganistan. On 9/11 2001 our country was attacked by these terrorists. Our country then attacked these terrorists in Afganistan. After a while our president pulled a bait a switch routine on our country and moved the war to Iraq leaving the work to be done in Afganistan undone! I agree we should ignore made up threats and not use troops for social engeneering, but we can't continue to ignore the real ones.
I understand the nationality of the terrorists who attacked us who at the time were in Afganistan and are now holled up in Pakistan. This is the same problem which prevented Clinton from eliminating Bin Lauden pre 9/11.
I think it's safe to say that anything comming out of the Bush camp is probably untrue and at the very least uninformed. What I am saying is that if after good faith efforts the governments of Afganistanm or Pakistan are unwilling to cooperate in eliminating threats to the entire freakin world either covert or overt action is justified in order to prevent wars that will affect innocent people. I don't mean political threats, I mean like 9/11 type threats.
British troops must not be sent in support of US President-Elect Barack Obama's planned "surge" in Afghanistan, the head of the armed forces has said.
Obama has repeatedly said that tackling Afghanistan and Al Qaeda will be his prime focus. He claims this is the core of international terrorism and believes ...
First sign of no change: Obama chooses his chief of staff
International Middle East Media Center, Palestinian Territories - Nov 15, 2008
As long as America needs Middle Eastern oil, it will need to trade with the Middle East. Consequently, engagement with them in the form of diplomatic and military presence is a given. It is within this light -- that speaking softly still requires a big stick -- that one should try to understand what Maddow is saying. Anything less would just betray one's own ignorance.
Obama ... expanding the war in Afghanistan. And ... Attacking Pakistan. Is propaganda coming from you EchelonMonitor. You are extrapolating something that Obama never said. . Helping people in other countries by staying home is your unsupported opinion. Saying it without backing it up with facts is just another way of propagandizing. I understand your emotional reaction to war and interfering with other countries. It is much the same as mine. There is a dearth of facts backing your OPINIONS.
Its time to heed the call from General McKiernan and others for more troops. Thats why Id send at least two or three additional combat brigades to Afghanistan. We also need more training for Afghan Security forces, more non-military assistance to help Afghans develop alternatives to poppy farming, more safeguards to prevent corruption, and a new effort to crack down on cross-border terrorism.
Only a comprehensive strategy that prioritizes Afghanistan and the fight against al Qaeda will succeed, and thats the change Ill bring to the White House.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), in a speech Wednesday in Richmond, Virginia on national security policy.
"Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region."
More inaccurate and self serving extrapolation (propaganda) EchelonMonitor. Obama said he would go after Osama Bin Laden IF he had actionable intelligence and if the Pakistani Gov. did not or could not do it themselves.
I assume you think we should go after Osama because you think he is responsible for 9/11?
The FBI says there is no evidence connecting Osama Bin Ladin with 9/11. We should attack people inside Pakistan to go after someone based on pure speculation or Bush's conspiracy theories?
The orders came down, "We need stories that prove the need to wage attacks inside Pakistan," and she dutifully followed orders, as hard as they were, since it was hard to find any stories that fit that description. They had to make do with a real stretch--an attack on an Iranian diplomat and an aide worker are supposed to justify attacking inside Pakistan.
Meanwhile aide workers are attacked daily in Darfur and other parts of the world and we don't retaliate on their behalf.
Yeah, those crazy fickle liberals and their insistance on evaluating every threat and what measures each situation takes. Damn them and their care about the facts about the differences in the threats of Iraq and Afghanistan. They're just stupid sheep, everyone knows that the middle east is just one big blob of muslims that we need to go to war with, those terrorists.
Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Bush's chief chicken hawk Paul Wolfowitz share the same vision of sending young Americans to die for Israel.
The only difference between the two is that Rahm is not a chicken hawk--he actually served in the Israeli army, whereas Wolfowitz is too big a coward to serve himself--he wants your sons and daughters to do his fighting for him.
Because you can't win a national election in America without Jewish money and support.
Prior to his election, Dick Cheney, a Methodist, was on the board of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), the Israeli lobby in the US, as well as the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) Advisory Board.
Within 12 hours of winning the Dem nomination, Obama attended a meeting of AIPAC wearing a crossed US/Israeli Flags lapel pin.
Rahm Emmanuel, Dennis Ross, Hiaalry Clinton, Obamas support for illegal wirtapping, increased military budget support, increased troop levels in afghanistan, same rhetoric as bush towards Iran, etc.
Exactly. We said they were building permanent bases in Iraq, and they denied it for years until finally admitting it.
Kind of strange for them to deny mega-bases with everything from swimming pools and fitness centers to Pizza Huts.
Oil, reconstruction contracts, and Israel--that's what it was and is about, and the Bush family made out quite well on the deal--no wonder he wanted to hide the flag-draped coffins of the returning dead from public view.
I'm not sure whether I just heard Rachel advocate the use of military force here.
She might have made the argument a tad too fanciful...
I would be disappointed if she did... really.
Luckily there is no real problem with bringing the troops home. When the US loses its AAA rating, the Dollar subsequently tanks and US society collapses, the troops will come home as a matter of course.
It won't matter what they -want- to do, it'll be about what the still -can- do.
The implication for the use of force is insinuated in what is reported--"those evil people killed a diplomat and an aid worker, something needs to be done."
More people were murdered in LA, but that has nothing to do with their agenda, so it's not reported.
Bush has done a lot of things that should have been front-page stories, such as his presidential directive giving him dictatorial powers (NSPD-51) or his families profiting from the war, but the corporate media won't report them.
The corporate media usually gave good coverage when best-selling author Vincent Bugliosi came out with a new book, interviewing him on the Today show and many others.
But they won't talk to him about his recent best-seller "The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder," where he lays out in precise legal definition why Bush is guilty of murder and how he can be prosecuted for it.
Bugliosi is an experienced and respected prosecutor (he was the lead prosecutor in the Charles Manson trial).
These are the new media whores.. the liberal media.. we're being played... This retard is so annoying I listened to her radio show once and it was like a carnival.. lets say a festival of ignorance.. LOL ;)
why is this stupid bitch on the news? all the Obama supporters, the kool aid drinking idiots are going to find out that their lord obama dont really care about them. He doesnt give a shit. He's an a elite scum bag. He's a piece of shit. Obama's policys are no different than Bush's policys. They are puppets.
I'm ashamed to be surprised. Propaganda is the rule. Maddow and Olbermann, who I used to respect, are comfortable on their knees licking the balls of the new puppet Obama. Iraq is a permanent US base and oil reserve for OPEC. Pakistan is the new focus, we already are setting up military operations there. Things will continue to get worst, maybe not at the same rate as it was w/ the Bush admin., but Obama is nothing but an establishment tool. National socialism is here. This country is toast.
mike, you think because it's commentary it isn't being used to promote the establishment's agenda?
One of the things I'm trying to point out is that there isn't a "liberal" or "conservative" corporate media--they all have the same agenda under different names.
Look at how they all worked together to promote the bailout, which 99% of the American people didn't want.
The American propoganda machine is far more sinister and effective than the Soviet propoganda was because the American people BELIEVE their propoganda--the Soviet people knew they were being lied to.
I agree that we are plagued by a dysfunctional corporate media but I wouldnt call what Maddow does propaganda. In fact there is considerable garbage ranging from shallow newsertainment to sloppy, incompetent reporting polluting Americas MSM that does not connote propaganda.
Maddows commentary is based on discernable facts. You dont have to like what she says or agree with her opinion but if you listen and check out the facts you will usually learn something.
Propaganda does exist but so do lazy emotional thinkers who are most susceptible to it. The bail out is an interesting example. Theres no doubt that MSM instinctually supported it to save their own asses. They also reported what a bunch of self-serving politicians said. There are also many equally self-serving politicians who are against it.
None of this alters the driving force, which is corporatism. Corporatism has no conscience or intellect and is blindly driven by greed. The propaganda comes from the minions who think they have, are loosing or want to hold power in the wake of corporatism. I doubt that Maddow is doing the bidding of corporate masters all of a sudden.
Oh Really? As I remember it, Maddow was doing her thing on Air America and on the internets developing quite a following long before she visited Olbermann and made other appearances on MSNBC. Her internet and radio audience was instrumental in getting he hired at MSNBC and making her the most popular woman on cable. She does now much of what she did then. Your statement is ignorant Bullsh*t daniel987878 .
Yeah but now she has the job and she has to follow company directives like any employee. Maybe before she was a top journalist but now she's on the MSNBC and she has to do what she gets told. MSNBC wouldnt hire her if she was of no use.
Maddow has never claimed to be a journalist. She is a Brand with an audience as are Olbermann, OReily, Hannity, etc. What you are saying is that she was so desperate when she signed her contract to provide material for MSNBC that she and her lawyers said MSNBC could order her to say anything ... NOT. Maybe youre beginning to see how little you understand about corporate media and how ridiculous your idea is daniel98787..
WTF are you babbling about dummy. That's not how I feel, Those are facts, Powell and Biden did say that. You're the herd animal that fell into the Obama trance, and now you're here defending Maddow for talking about a military confrontation w/ Pakistan like it's acceptable. Do you remember the news during the Iraq War? Bush says there will be a seamless transition for Obama. Patriot act will stay, homeland sec. will stay, police state will increase. You got played like a bitch, because u r 1.
Check what I was responding to then consider who is the babbling dummy. What I responded to came from you only and not from Biden or Powell.
I dont subscribe to our dysfunctional foreign policy, corporatism or bullsh*t from anyone and that includes the BS thats emanating from some on this thread.
This thread is about Propaganda but some of those defending the premise are only spreading more.
Im sure that I was played ... in your neophyte dreams.
Okay, my dreams? your the one who just imagined what my dreams are about. I'm not spreading propaganda. Answer me this: did you vote for Obama? If so, then you probably were played, because he's not what the majority has been led to believe. Do you know who Zbigniew Brzezinski is? He's one of Obama's top advisors, research him. His ideology speaks for itself. Rahm Emanuel is also a questionable character. Obama will bring forth an agenda that has already been written for him just like Bush did.
Do I know who Brzezinski is? Silly goose, I have witnessed and opposed the development of the military industrial complex. I also opposed the installation of the Shah of Iran. I have never approved of our expansionist foreign policy or corporatism. I was an activist before you were a thought. Thats why I dont tolerate your half-baked accusations. Ive seen too many. You might even be useful to a meaningful movement one day but youll have to clean up your style if you hope to be successful.
Sad to see your experience amounts to nothing when you don't realize that Maddow and the the corporate media will sell Obama's agenda, which will be nothing like his campaign promises. This country is toast, your participation in the past amounts to nothing. This is youtube, I can have any style I want. You just called me a silly goose, which makes me think you're style is gay. Which isn't a bad thing, just kind of gay. Just watch, Obama will take us off a new cliff and the media will sell it.
You are what we call a fundamentalist. You have decided actions and behavior based on what you believe disregarding the absence of verifiable facts.
As gobikat said: Geeze, we have over-interpreted a simple 5-minute segment way beyond what it's actually saying.
One of the reasons that the corporate media is dysfunctional is because they have replaced competent reporters researching and presenting facts with pundits expressing their opinions. This post is no better UNCERNTROPY.
Please remember that you started with the ad hominem stuff UNCERNTROPY(babbling dummy). I referred to you as a silly goose because your question seemed thoughtless. Gay? Now thats assuming facts not in evidence. But it does follow a pattern in your communication.
The media will no doubt try to sell tons of crap before the people are organized enough to correct it. When you play the same game as the dysfunctional media youre not being very helpful.
Ever heard of the character Big Gay Al from Southpark? He calls people a silly goose. That's where the gay joke came in. Never mind, you're too old to know about that. Okay, this is youtube dumb fuck, not a major media outlet. People do not look at these posts to get their daily info. I'm letting you know that Maddow will shill for decisions made by Obama because it's very predictable. You're defending her because you like getting news fed to you through bias. I feel good knowing I'm right.
Do you think that calling me a dumb fuck adds credibility to your baseless assertions? Your behavior only dramatizes your ineptness and immaturity UNCERNTROPY. In your ever-expanding ignorance and bigotry you think that people get to old to know about things. Pathetic!
I do know about South Park but I have other more gratifying interests. Youre free to extrapolate and believe anything you like about Maddows intentions. Your beliefs alone will not prove or change anything. Easymike out.
I am not defending anyone. I appose your inadequate methods and baseless assertions as I have with anyone. You leap from telling me what you think Maddow thinks to telling me what you think I think. Ridiculous!
Someone's comment posted on one of the pages for one video is not a major news contribution. Nice try with the spin, you should work for Fox News. Okay, if you can't see Maddow's clear bias, then you are a herd animal. I don't know what she thinks, but I do know that as a pundit she does not try to be unbiased. You can't argue against that. People guess what others think all the time, stop whining like a bitch. That's one thing about a lot of liberals, they bitch a lot, except for a few like me.
Try to stay focused UNCERNTROPY. Media does not necessarily connote major news. Also, bias is not the issue. This thread incorrectly attempted to conflate commentary into propaganda. Your defense of it has been dismally unsuccessful.
Whining like a bitch? So you are a sexist as well as an ageist? Your bigotry proves that youre not much of a liberal either. Dont hurt your arm patting yourself on the back.
Thanks professor ass kiss for keeping me focused on your spin. I said "major news contribution," not "media." Nice try. Media extends to anything on the internet. You know you're talking out of your ass now. There is no way for news to be unbiased because the people who receive the news will always have their bias, being human beings. Maddow dips into propaganda here by flipping her war stance to suck Obama's lib. balls. You're on youtube, insults are open game, there are no consequences for it.
UNCERNTROPY you obviously dont even know the meaning of the word focus. I am the one who said that Youtube was a major media outlet. Major news was never part of the discussion. You keep pretending that Maddows commentary is propaganda by displaying your FEELINGS without presenting evidence. More empty rhetoric wont help you.
Insults are the last refuge of the puerile on Youtube or anywhere else. The only thing you own is your own ignorance.
Haha, were those last two senetences in the last comment not an insult of some sort. Classic hypocrite. This must be a joke. I was trying to explain that I know this is media dumb fuck, BUT NOT A MAJOR NEWS SOURCE. reread what I said. Your last post solidifies that this is utterly pointless. The evidence is the video above. We're running in a circular argument now. You've taken a nose dive right into Maddow's butt hole. My 'empty rhetoric' are responses to empty claims that you make.
Were those last two sentences not insults. Classic hypocrite. Try self reflection, I know your brain doesn't work like it used to, but come on. I differentiated between what you call propaganda, some comments on a youtube page, to actual propaganda. My God (and there isn't one), you realize you are expressing FEELINGS too. Your last post demonstrates that this it utterly pointless. Ultimately, I know more than you and my brain still functions properly.
I accidentally posted two similar comments back to back because I thought the first one didn't post. But maybe I need to repeat myself for this vegetable with Alzheimer's. See, I know how to make a real insults, not smug insults while saying you have to resort to insults. This is so easy. I'm proud knowing people will read this and know what many liberals lack the skepticism they try to flaunt. Let me guess, this is more 'empty rhetoric?' Fine, it's just as empty as your skull.
There are multiple definitions for liberal. The common nomenclature has liberal associated with the left. The greater scholarly understanding for liberal is the general US ideology of free market, limited government, and rights. The latter is now called libertarian. I'm a mix between a democrat and a libertarian. I don't care if I'm labeled a sexist or an ageist on youtube, it doesn't matter. I'm patting myself on the back right now for owning another herd animal. And it doesn't hurt one bit.
Maddow has never claimed to be a journalist. She is a Brand with an audience as are Olbermann, OReily, Hannity, etc. What you are saying is that she was so desperate when she signed her contract to provide material for MSNBC that she and her lawyers said MSNBC could order her to say anything ... NOT. Maybe youre beginning to see how little you understand about corporate media and how ridiculous your idea is daniel987878. Her Brand has a has a contract you have a job.
Maddow's commentary is her attempt to not appear like a far-left liberal. Propaganda can happen without the person saying the propaganda even knowing they are spreading it. example: Fox News, where the reporters repeat an agenda written for them by higher-ups. MSNBC is not as bad as Fox, but now Maddow will shill for decisions made by Obama to make him appear tough, not knowing that she is part of the political theater. Obama will be received as a hero by design after the disaster of Bush 43.
Just what is a far left liberal UNCERNTROPY? I, like most Americans, am tired of partisan rhetoric from folks who dont have a clue.
The difference between Fox and Maddow is facts. Something you are having trouble presenting. When you finish reading Maddows mind you might try presenting a couple of facts.
I have nothing against liberals, because I am one. Maddow does not have 100% complete control over the material on her show. I made clear in my last statement that Maddow is not on the same level of Fox News, which gets direct talking points from the Bush admin., textbook propaganda. MSNBC does not. she is part of the corporate media though, the same media that beat the war drums for the Iraq War. What people on the left need to figure out is the empire will not end because Obama is pres.
It would be foolish to think that MSNBC has not enjoyed the ride on the Obama train. That's how corporate media works. It's not just about reporting facts, it's what you choose to report out of the endless information that a news source could report. I gaurantee that Obama will lead a military campaign into Pakistan. There will be mass support for it because an event will happen, just like Biden and Powell have promised. Obama will change things, like Bush changed things, for the worst.
Nice of you to share how you FEEL with everyone. Beyond expressing your feelings publicly you have done very little to provide any actionable intelligence.
What is foolish is to say that something is foolish without presenting ANY support for that foolishness other than how it appears to you UNCERNTROPY.
When Bush was running in 2000, he promoted his platform as non interventionist. Obama fooled the masses the same way. I'm proud to say I didn't vote for Bush, McCain, or Obama. You should be ashamed of yourself, defending Maddow's blind allegiance to the new puppet. But we know you are incapable of that, so stick to your partisan ball licking and pretend that I don't know what I'm talking about. Just because she's not as bad as Fox News does not make her blind partisanship acceptable.
Partisan ball licking? Your incompetent frustration is showing.
Name one partisan statement that I have made.
You have yet to prove Maddows allegiance to anyone blind or otherwise. Do you think blind allegiance is in her contract? Or did you just pull it out of your butt?
As I said I dont accept bullsh*t from anyone. That includes Bush, Obama and you UNCERNTROPY .
The frustration part might be true. Your partisanship is expressed in your adherence to Maddow, who is very partisan. It's okay to like Maddow, I like her too, but do realize she has a clear biased agenda. She's in the tank for Obama. Are you going to deny that? By defending the above video you are being partisan and not skeptical about the implications of what Maddow is saying. You know I'm competent, you're just mad because your old ass is being worked by someone 1/3 your age. take notes.
Just as I thought, you have no clue as to what a partisan statement is. You are also proving to be a bigoted ageist. You are 1/3 my age but couldnt keep up with me mentally or physically on your best day. I also know more about the industry in discussion since I have been in it twice as long as you are old. I am skeptical of everything out of habit and that includes your baseless accusations. The only thing that youve established is that you dont like how Maddow expresses herself. So what?
Ive already said that corporate media is dysfunctional. It is riddled with a lack of professionalism, incompetence, greed and propaganda. One way that it is being affected is through the internets. But theres BS on the internet as well as in the MSM. I know that this post is well meaning but it doesnt have a very tight grip on reality. It takes more that a few words like partisan or in the tank for Obama to connote propaganda. (It would also be nice if the word were spelled correctly)
Quote on this from HeavyHebrew at forum . prisonplanet . com:
"It's like people are hypnotized. Now Republicans will go back to non interventionist politics and limited government and the Democrats will take the place of military interventionism and big government. Smoke and mirrors. Bread and circuses. Divide and conquer."
She doesn't believe there's a military solution to fixing everything.. but her skit didn't support or denounce Obama unknown solution... If anything, she poked fun at how irrational our current president's attack on Pakistan was.. considering we're not at war with them.
PandaBoy, this isn't about Bush, this is how all the previously anti-war liberals are suddenly pro-war because Obama is pro-war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
They're covering for his war mongering, and deluding you and the rest of the nation into buying it.
Anything to keep profits up in the defense industry.
Yes, it is complex. The people in the tribal areas have been waging a long fight for independence and justice from Pakistan, and our attacks on their areas increases their strength, and that's what Pakistan doesn't want.
The Taliban offered to cut off Bin Ladin's head themselves if we gave them evidence connecting him to 9/11. There was no evidence, and they rightfully refused to turn him over.
We brought Taliban representatives to the US to try to convince them to allow an oil pipeline.
I'm not ignorant.. I know what has been happening in Afghanistan under our name. But when you try to connect Obama to this, you're grasping at straws.
you are bang on - top news story on the BBC website today is how Bin Laden is suspected to be in Pakistan (and cut off from Al Queada). Another two terror related stories also on the front page. I even saw an IBM ad on TV last night with the slogan something like 'Stop talking, It's time to Prepare'.
So what if it's true. The man is still wanted in the U.S. And Pakistan agreed to help this country get him. Could it be it's more complex than "for war or against war"?
The Pakistan leadership and bush previously made a deal.. They're suppose to help hunt for Osama in their area, though information suggest Osama is there..
Why would they want to catch Osama? In fact, they need to make sure they don't catch him--he's their poster boy boogie man for the very profitable in many ways "War On Terror."
Just yesterday the CIA director said Osama was the greatest threat America faces.
If Osama is the greatest threat, we have nothing to worry about.
In fact, the greatest threat America faces is destruction by its own government.
The Bush family got rich on the war too through their ownership in Halliburton and the Carlyle Group, yet not one "liberal" reporter has dared ask "Mr. President, how much money has your family made on the war in Iraq?"
How is this supporting the war first i believe since she was talking about bush as a lame duck she was not responding to Obama continued support of the war like your intro suggested. By the sounds of it, she would like to see these problems that we have gotten ourselves into handed through diplomacy and international pressure, only taking military action as a last resort, how is that a bad thing. As a liberal i do say bring the troops home and am disappoint Obama has not made moves towards that.
Fireflygamer 5 months ago
Disgusting. She and her fellow msnbc were so harshly critical of the Bush administrations handling of war. Now they're calling for an invasion of Pakistan since Obama has turned into as a war monger as Bush. These talking heads have no integrity, principle, or consistency. They just blindly follow whatever political party they get paid by.
Dems and repubs are both the War Party.
Maddow is a shallow no spine yellow journalist like the rest of them.
bschou 8 months ago
the cia is al qaida..its all homegrown.9.11 ,the wars,the financial crisis..its all homemade.
there is no enemie its only the u.s war machine
wegaify 1 year ago
@wegaify do you have anything at all to back up the claim that "the cia is al qaida?"
mich9fan3 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Rachel Maddow was reportedly found 'humping' a seat arm on the train while in New York for a brief holiday. She had taken XTC (witnesses said) and she found the movement of the train exciting-so much so in fact that she actually soiled her panty and uncontrollably had bowel movements while writhing back and forth on the seat edge.
This all became too clear when at one point she fell over due to the shifting of the care and the fecal matter smeared on her leg and the floor became visible.
ASentinel2 2 years ago
wasn't Vietnam a disaster, too
oh, and Iraq - that didn't work either
;)
MikePhilbin 2 years ago
The only winner is the defense industry.
Without continuous war, they're out of business.
It's sick that they can lobby members of congress to keep us at war.
The prison industry lobbies for stricter laws, and we imprison more people than anywhere else in the world--you are 7 times more likely to be imprisoned in the US than in Europe where prison is NOT an industry.
The food industry lobbies for GMO foods and other poisons and our rate of cancer and other food-related diseases skyrockets.
EchelonMonitor 2 years ago 4
As long as corporations control congress and the agencies which are supposed to regulate them, we're screwed.
EchelonMonitor 2 years ago
There can be no victory in Afghanistan, but defense contractors don't want victory--they want endless war--and endless profits, at the cost of American lives and dollars.
We have been working hard to make enemies of the people in Afghanistan ever since we invaded, bombing wedding parties and most recently, our troops attacked a popular mayor's home and murdered his cook and driver.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Watch "Taxi To The Dark Side" to see how our troops tortured an innocent taxi driver to death in medieval torture chamber style, making all residents of his village our enemies.
We had a brief moment after the invasion to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, but our commanders ordered actions which achieved precisely the opposite.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
While the Australian government talks about confronting terrorism, a recent count undertaken by the Associated Press found that so far this year, foreign forces have been responsible for 100 civilian deaths, while those fighting the occupation who have been responsible for 60 civilian deaths.
More Afghans (36%) blame foreign forces for the violence that is occurring than those who blame the Taliban (27%). "
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Now Obama has ordered a missile strike which killed 3 children in Pakistan.
Proud of yourself Rachel? Are you proud of the fact that you're supporting this warmonger?
Those deaths are on your soul, too, Rachel.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
People who strike us should be struck back. People who did not strike us should not be struck. We should develop national self sufficiency so we don't go fucking with sovereign or autonomous regions in order to secure their supply of fossil fuels. I am a bleeding heart liberal but I love guns. I would gladly stand on the beach and pick off incoming invaders, but I will NOT stand for aggression or invasion. I think the left wing mantra was "Out of Iraq!" As I said...
therealBombenhagel 3 years ago
I'm one of those liberals, I've alway held the position of action in Afghanistan and not Iraq, because the Afghanistan and Pakistan Border Region is where a Criminal is Hiding. and you'll note; "Not Afraid of Diplomacy"
We aren't Hawks, we aren't Doves, but what we certain are not are Ducks and Chickens.
Sadam was Iraq's Problem, The Enigmatic Bin Laden is everyone's. a Country at war can be talked down or Spanked, they tend to have interests other than killing, land/money.
Nerdylation 3 years ago
Serial Killers, want Blood.
Terrorists, want Fear.
Countries want money, land and resources.
Nerdylation 3 years ago
The only terrorists in America govern it.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Jesus Christ.. what the hell.. she sound like a normale republican :x ^^
Benny1642 3 years ago
Why should I take this woman serious? She is horrid! There is a reason why she has been fired so many times.
gravyfury 3 years ago
Rachael needs to go back to stalking the Lesbian bars and stop pretending to be a journalist. She is a joke!
Loyolajack 3 years ago
You are right on.
gravyfury 3 years ago
Rachel may be a lesbian, but what does that have to do with anything? Is she the reason you are not getting laid? Oh, Maddow received the Rhodes Scholar award. Hannity dropped out of college... twice. You, Loyolajack(ov) and those like you, are a poison to this country. FUCK those who, like you, have a basic and instinctual aversion or hostility to measured thought & independent critical thinking. You just echo what you're told, and then project it onto others as if to hide your crime. Textbook.
therealBombenhagel 3 years ago 11
I'm disappointed in Rachel Maddow. She's become all yap and no substance.
jbadyna 3 years ago 2
Pakistan soldiers are training to take out the US drones:
"Pakistani soldiers practised shooting at pilotless "drone" aircraft on Friday, the military said a day after the government lodged a protest with the U.S. ambassador over drone missile strikes in Pakistani territory.
Anti-aircraft guns and short-range surface-to-air missiles were used during the exercise conducted at a desert range near the city of Muzaffargarh in the central Pubjab province.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Anti-aircraft guns and short-range surface-to-air missiles were used during the exercise conducted at a desert range near the city of Muzaffargarh in the central Pubjab province.
"The elements of Army Air Defence demonstrated their shooting skills by targeting the drones flying at different altitudes," the military said in a statement.
Air defence commander Lieutenant-General Ashraf Saleem praised the "precision and agility" of the gunners.
By Zeeshan Haider
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Wow. A total proxy war so far. The US can attack a country for months and not have it cover all of the major media, and only because it's with drones. The new Admin. doesn't want another Iraq, because they know that people have almost reach the breaking point, so Obama will wait until Afghanistan is wrapped up before we get the excuse to invade Pakistan with troops or PMCs. By then, most of the fighters will be dead, the rest can be killed by PMCs, no need to use US troops to stir up the media
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Actually, Afghanistan will never be "wrapped up."
As others have pointed out, no foreign power has ever won in Afghanistan.
Immediately after defeating the Taliban, we did have a chance to establish a strong democracy in Afghanistan, but we squandered that opportunity, perpetrated atrocities against the Afghani people, and now we can never win their hearts and minds.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
We'll always have a military presence there, it would be un American to leave a country without having permanent military bases there. When I say "wrapped up," i mean in terms of what the Obama Administration will say and the corporate Media will present. The media mostly forgot about Afghanistan once we were well into the Iraq War, leading some to think that we had defeated the Taliban entirely. I shouldn't have used the phrase "wrapped up," I was fitting in as much as possible in one post.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
How can you expect to win the hearts and minds of people who can't read anything except the Koran? What do they know except the the U.S. is an evil occupying force. If they were educated and less impoverished there would be hope to dilute their radicalism and their religious fanaticism. They live lives so spartan and harsh that they welcome the prospect of the afterlife.
badger5079 3 years ago
They need to know that there is only one life and they don't get to spend a second life on a cloud screwing 72 virgins if they kill Americans. (I guess I am speaking about poor and radicalised Muslims generally here.) Muslim populations are growing at 6% annually while Christian populations are growing at only 1%. This is because Muslims are generally poorer and more ignorant and therefore have more babies who later stand a fair chance of becoming fodder for bin Laden and his ilk.
badger5079 3 years ago
Why do you imply that Mddow is brainwashed? Maybe she believes in what she is saying. I think that the U.S. should be able to infiltrate Al-Qaeda and poison their leaders. The could be doing that right now. Infiltration is the best weapon against terrorist groups - not bombing with drones or pounding with artillery or bombs.
badger5079 3 years ago
Attacks by the US inside Pakistan are almost daily now:
"Many Pakistanis argue that the American missile strikes are responsible for the suicide bomb attacks that have struck law enforcement targets, funerals and politicians in the North-West Frontier Province and in Islamabad, the capital.
After the strike on Saturday, a Taliban spokesman, Ahmadullah Ahmadi, said that no foreigners had been killed."
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Americans have killed innocent people and none of them were foreigners, he said in a statement issued on behalf of a top militant commander, Hafiz Gul Bahadar, in Miram Shah, the main town in North Waziristan.
Mr. Ahmadi said the militants would seek revenge. We will avenge the death of innocent people by striking in settled areas against security forces, he said.
By ISMAIL KHAN and JANE PERLEZ
Published: November 22, 2008
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
If this is supposed to get people used to war with Pakistan... well she failed pretty badly. But then, I don't think she was at all.
TonkarzOfSolSystem 3 years ago
Tonkarz, if she wasn't, then she was just following the script she was given--either way, passive or active, she's a guilty participant.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Btw Rachel, how do you know it was a "Taliban acid attack"?
Did you ask the perpetrator if he was in the Taliban?
We don't like the policies of funamentalists towards people, especially women--does that mean that we should send our friends and family to risk their lives stopping them?
There are far better ways to fight injustice in the world than with military force.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Last point -- after Obama is sworn in this coming January and he starts actually doing things, that's the proper time to start sniping at real issues of consequence.
Only an idiot believes in things which hasn't happened yet. And quite frankly, I'm no idiot -- if you all get my drift.
FYI, this is my last post on this matter. Ciao!
gobikat 3 years ago
Only an idiot doesn't realize that Rahm Emanuel and Hillary Clinton, Cheif of Staff and Sec. of State, respectively, do not spell military aggression for the US. We're sending in drone air crafts to shoot missiles in Pakistan right now. Do you honestly think Obama is Anti war? Bush led the dumb population of the US to think he would not lead us into military aggression. The empire will only expand abroad while it collapses at home. If you voted for Obama or McCain, shame on you all the same.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
So gobikat, we're supposed to ignore what Obama says he is going to do because he hasn't been inaugerated yet?
gmafb
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
You're talking about Obama's militarism when he isn't even president yet.
When it comes to how our foreign policy, I'm inclined to agree with a lot of Pat Buchanan's views.
And while I don't agree with Maddow on her social positions, she's surprisingly well informed on foreign policy. It might have something to do with the fact that both Maddow and Buchanan are both schooled in history, and are policy experts, which is interestingly enough, my area of expertise.
gobikat 3 years ago
I'm just dismayed by so-called liberals so vigorously supporting Obama's militarism.
google: "obama's militarism"
"The costs of Obama's militarism will ensure that there will be no Marshal Plan for the cities, no universal health care, no social safety net."
Glen Ford, Black Agenda Radio
I would add that it will continue to cause inflation (dollar devaluation) as more dollars are created to finance it, driving us further into the economic abyss.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
You know what's really lame about the posts here so far? You guys have devolved this discussion into something more about yourselves than about the issue at hand.
This is just about as fun as a cafeteria food fight -- great while it lasts, but really messy afterwards.
gobikat 3 years ago
Whatever, your post isn't about the issue either. I stand victorious over the Maddow ass kisser named easymike.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
I was curious about what you wrote and read what you had to say. You sound a lot like George Bush. Tell a bunch of lies, say a bunch of really stupid things then declare yourself victorious. Fools and conspiracy theorists are everywhere LOL
thedetroiter313 3 years ago
You live in Detroit? That sucks. I'm like George Bush but I'm also like a conspiracy theorist? I've never thought of those things as being similar, it's quite a feet to simultaneously accomplish both. Comparing me to Bush 43 is a typical dumb liberal insult. Can't you do better. OH yeah, you're from Detroit. Try to point out where I lied so I can bury you like the last bitch.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
You dont even know the difference between feet and feat then you want to pick on my handle? Easymike cleaned your clock and youre too stupid to know it. Go play with a grade school drop out you dumb fuck!
thedetroiter313 3 years ago
I made a typo, wippidy fuckin' do. Of course I know the difference between the feet of a human and the feat of me owning Easybitch. Once again, where are the lies? How did he clean my clock? You can't elaborate on that at all can you? You're obviously a waste of time, at least easymike had some content in his posts. It's you're, not youre, if you want to be an anal bitch about typing. You don't want to be an anal bitch, you can't help it.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Maybe Easymike was polite to you because he thought you had potential. I dont, you dont even know what a typographical error is. Using the wrong word is not a typo you sh*t for brains its just plain STUPID. Youre without the apostrophe is a typo. Maybe you should play in traffic without your helmet ... if your mother will let you out of the basement. No self respecting grade school student will play with an arrogant, ignorant asshole anyway.
thedetroiter313 3 years ago
Anal ... oh I get, it youre an asshole wannabe but for now youre just a dingleberry. Good luck! Ill leave you to continue your youtube education. Toodles! ###
thedetroiter313 3 years ago
As I thought, You have nothing to talk about and cannot point out any of the lies you accused me of. A real argument with real thinkers is not going to happen very often on youtube, I've come to find. Easymike appreciates your assistance in evading the truth: Neither of you bitches know what the hell you're talking about. Take notes, thanks for the gibberish.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
We got fooled again.
wvoutlaw2002 3 years ago
We've been exposing fake conservatives for eight years and now it's time to expose all of the fake liberals.
Nice video.
vidmanx0 3 years ago
If this is the best you conspiracy theorists can come up with, though, it might be you guys who are high or something.
gobikat 3 years ago
From what little I can get from the video, Maddow is saying that there might be some common interest between the US and Iran to oppose terrorist actions in Pakistan, but Iran is currently shutting the door on the US of A's face.
Dunno, but if Iran and the US starts talking, there might be some lowering of tensions that can only be beneficial in the long term. But then again, I might be high and over-interpreting things.
gobikat 3 years ago
Geeze, we have over-interpreted a simple 5-minute segment way beyond what it's actually saying.
All mass media is corporate -- we all have to live with that. I refuse to believe that there is no room for integrity nor principle in the medium, since it has become a market place where a lot of competing ideas (even Fox News, for heaven's sake) has its place.
The very process where we are even discussing this in YouTube shows how free we are, speech-wise.
gobikat 3 years ago
As far as the video goes, there's nothing beyond the need for a certain diplomatic and military stance. All Maddow says is that it has to be "nuanced" - how much more vague can you get?
As long it goes along the lines of speaking softly and carrying a big stick, I don't see anything wrong with it.
gobikat 3 years ago
Couldn't agree more, but painting these countries as a "safe zone" for terrorists puts them smack dab in the middle of it.
L8nitedave 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'll tell you what, pimp, YOU go into Pakistan and look for Osama, I just don't want any of my friends or family having to do it.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Upon election in 2000 our new president ignored a looming terrorist threat in Afganistan. On 9/11 2001 our country was attacked by these terrorists. Our country then attacked these terrorists in Afganistan. After a while our president pulled a bait a switch routine on our country and moved the war to Iraq leaving the work to be done in Afganistan undone! I agree we should ignore made up threats and not use troops for social engeneering, but we can't continue to ignore the real ones.
L8nitedave 3 years ago
Even if you believe the Bush conspiracy theory about 9/11, Afghans didn't attack us.
According to Bush, it was Saudi Arabians who attacked us.
So now you want to attack Afghanistan?
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I understand the nationality of the terrorists who attacked us who at the time were in Afganistan and are now holled up in Pakistan. This is the same problem which prevented Clinton from eliminating Bin Lauden pre 9/11.
L8nitedave 3 years ago
You're saying the guys who are responsible for 9/11 are in Pakistan?
That's a Bush conspiracy theory--or do you have hard evidence?
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I think it's safe to say that anything comming out of the Bush camp is probably untrue and at the very least uninformed. What I am saying is that if after good faith efforts the governments of Afganistanm or Pakistan are unwilling to cooperate in eliminating threats to the entire freakin world either covert or overt action is justified in order to prevent wars that will affect innocent people. I don't mean political threats, I mean like 9/11 type threats.
L8nitedave 3 years ago
Headlines from around the world:
Afghanistan abyss awaits Obama
Asia Times Online, Hong Kong - Nov 14, 2008
British troops must not be sent in support of US President-Elect Barack Obama's planned "surge" in Afghanistan, the head of the armed forces has said.
Telegraph . co . uk, United Kingdom - Nov 9, 2008
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Obama or Oh bummer?
Hindustan Times, India - 23 hours ago
Obama has repeatedly said that tackling Afghanistan and Al Qaeda will be his prime focus. He claims this is the core of international terrorism and believes ...
First sign of no change: Obama chooses his chief of staff
International Middle East Media Center, Palestinian Territories - Nov 15, 2008
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
As long as America needs Middle Eastern oil, it will need to trade with the Middle East. Consequently, engagement with them in the form of diplomatic and military presence is a given. It is within this light -- that speaking softly still requires a big stick -- that one should try to understand what Maddow is saying. Anything less would just betray one's own ignorance.
gobikat 3 years ago
Obama ... expanding the war in Afghanistan. And ... Attacking Pakistan. Is propaganda coming from you EchelonMonitor. You are extrapolating something that Obama never said. . Helping people in other countries by staying home is your unsupported opinion. Saying it without backing it up with facts is just another way of propagandizing. I understand your emotional reaction to war and interfering with other countries. It is much the same as mine. There is a dearth of facts backing your OPINIONS.
easymike 3 years ago
From the Council on Foreign Relations website:
Its time to heed the call from General McKiernan and others for more troops. Thats why Id send at least two or three additional combat brigades to Afghanistan. We also need more training for Afghan Security forces, more non-military assistance to help Afghans develop alternatives to poppy farming, more safeguards to prevent corruption, and a new effort to crack down on cross-border terrorism.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Only a comprehensive strategy that prioritizes Afghanistan and the fight against al Qaeda will succeed, and thats the change Ill bring to the White House.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), in a speech Wednesday in Richmond, Virginia on national security policy.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Interesting bit of copy EchelonMonitor. What do you think it means?
Where does it say anything about expanding war or attacking anyone?
easymike 3 years ago
Reuters August 1, 2007:
"Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region."
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Below Obama's quote at cfr . org was posted:
john problem Says:
October 24th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
"But the lesson of history is that no nation has ever conquered the Afghans.
The 19th. century Brits were sent off with only one survivor to tell the news, and the poor old Russkies couldnt hack it with 200,000 men.
Should we really care about it? Is it not a frontier too far?
Do we have the right to be there?
Do we want to go on expending our blood and
treasure?"
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
john problem continues:
"Could it be that Obama was wanting to sound tough on this to balance his view on Iraqi withdrawal, so as not to displease the six-pack folk?
The Brits there now say they cant hold the enemy down. The trick is to know when to fold."
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
More inaccurate and self serving extrapolation (propaganda) EchelonMonitor. Obama said he would go after Osama Bin Laden IF he had actionable intelligence and if the Pakistani Gov. did not or could not do it themselves.
easymike 3 years ago
Funny, that's similar to what the Taliban said--that they would cut off Osama's head if we presented evidence that he was responsible for 9/11.
There was no evidence, and they rightfully refused to turn him over.
The FBI says there is no evidence connecting Osama Bin Ladin to 9/11.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I assume you think we should go after Osama because you think he is responsible for 9/11?
The FBI says there is no evidence connecting Osama Bin Ladin with 9/11. We should attack people inside Pakistan to go after someone based on pure speculation or Bush's conspiracy theories?
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I used to respect her.
Zobree 3 years ago
Me too.
The orders came down, "We need stories that prove the need to wage attacks inside Pakistan," and she dutifully followed orders, as hard as they were, since it was hard to find any stories that fit that description. They had to make do with a real stretch--an attack on an Iranian diplomat and an aide worker are supposed to justify attacking inside Pakistan.
Meanwhile aide workers are attacked daily in Darfur and other parts of the world and we don't retaliate on their behalf.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
And since when are we supposed to retaliate for an attack on an Iranian diplomat?
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
Chippuh 3 years ago
Yeah, those crazy fickle liberals and their insistance on evaluating every threat and what measures each situation takes. Damn them and their care about the facts about the differences in the threats of Iraq and Afghanistan. They're just stupid sheep, everyone knows that the middle east is just one big blob of muslims that we need to go to war with, those terrorists.
HotSoup19 3 years ago
Republicans and democrats are just neocons.
daniel987878 3 years ago
Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Bush's chief chicken hawk Paul Wolfowitz share the same vision of sending young Americans to die for Israel.
The only difference between the two is that Rahm is not a chicken hawk--he actually served in the Israeli army, whereas Wolfowitz is too big a coward to serve himself--he wants your sons and daughters to do his fighting for him.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
The Western Establishment is so bent on defending Israel, they created it in 48 too. I wanna know why. I think it goes beyond geopolitics.
daniel987878 3 years ago
Because you can't win a national election in America without Jewish money and support.
Prior to his election, Dick Cheney, a Methodist, was on the board of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), the Israeli lobby in the US, as well as the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) Advisory Board.
Within 12 hours of winning the Dem nomination, Obama attended a meeting of AIPAC wearing a crossed US/Israeli Flags lapel pin.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Bold statement daniel987878, where is your evidence to back it up. Or is this anothe one of thos gut feelings I've seen so much of on this thread?
easymike 3 years ago
Rahm Emmanuel, Dennis Ross, Hiaalry Clinton, Obamas support for illegal wirtapping, increased military budget support, increased troop levels in afghanistan, same rhetoric as bush towards Iran, etc.
daniel987878 3 years ago
beach
HeweHaarlemmer 3 years ago
In the next few months we will bomb Iran,
and the troops will not be going anywhere.
If we leave Iraq, it will create a power
vacuum that will be filled by Iran, but of
course we knew that when we took out Saddam.
It gives us the "moral cover" we need to
stay in the region and control the oil
reserves. Never forget! Its all about the oil.
sonnyridoc 3 years ago
Exactly. We said they were building permanent bases in Iraq, and they denied it for years until finally admitting it.
Kind of strange for them to deny mega-bases with everything from swimming pools and fitness centers to Pizza Huts.
Oil, reconstruction contracts, and Israel--that's what it was and is about, and the Bush family made out quite well on the deal--no wonder he wanted to hide the flag-draped coffins of the returning dead from public view.
Google: Iraq Israel pipeline
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I'm not sure whether I just heard Rachel advocate the use of military force here.
She might have made the argument a tad too fanciful...
I would be disappointed if she did... really.
Luckily there is no real problem with bringing the troops home. When the US loses its AAA rating, the Dollar subsequently tanks and US society collapses, the troops will come home as a matter of course.
It won't matter what they -want- to do, it'll be about what the still -can- do.
wowthungsten 3 years ago
The implication for the use of force is insinuated in what is reported--"those evil people killed a diplomat and an aid worker, something needs to be done."
More people were murdered in LA, but that has nothing to do with their agenda, so it's not reported.
Bush has done a lot of things that should have been front-page stories, such as his presidential directive giving him dictatorial powers (NSPD-51) or his families profiting from the war, but the corporate media won't report them.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The corporate media usually gave good coverage when best-selling author Vincent Bugliosi came out with a new book, interviewing him on the Today show and many others.
But they won't talk to him about his recent best-seller "The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder," where he lays out in precise legal definition why Bush is guilty of murder and how he can be prosecuted for it.
Bugliosi is an experienced and respected prosecutor (he was the lead prosecutor in the Charles Manson trial).
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I actually agree with you right wing guys on this. Although Obama clearly stated withdraw from Iraq and ramp up Afghanistan to get Bin Ladin.
The problem with your guys arguments is they are full of hate spite and insult so you would never get support from the centre (us)
but yes the USA should withdraw troops and use more diplomacy to get things done
mendizim 3 years ago
Just like Bush and Kerry are members of skull and bones, Obama and McCain are members of the council on foreign relations. All DOUCHE BAGS!
derek8182 3 years ago 2
Is that supposed to say Ms. Information or Misinformation?
derek8182 3 years ago
These are the new media whores.. the liberal media.. we're being played... This retard is so annoying I listened to her radio show once and it was like a carnival.. lets say a festival of ignorance.. LOL ;)
jerbear420 3 years ago
Don't blame me, I voted for Ron Paul.
brad3378 3 years ago 5
110% with you bro. This bitch is a more dangerous chicken hawk because they do it more craftily. BRING HOME THE DAMN TROOPS!
WTC7WasPulled 3 years ago 3
why is this stupid bitch on the news? all the Obama supporters, the kool aid drinking idiots are going to find out that their lord obama dont really care about them. He doesnt give a shit. He's an a elite scum bag. He's a piece of shit. Obama's policys are no different than Bush's policys. They are puppets.
DestroyedByDesign 3 years ago
Great J. Stewart impressions. Slavish past the wince threshold.
CACBCCCU 3 years ago
I'm ashamed to be surprised. Propaganda is the rule. Maddow and Olbermann, who I used to respect, are comfortable on their knees licking the balls of the new puppet Obama. Iraq is a permanent US base and oil reserve for OPEC. Pakistan is the new focus, we already are setting up military operations there. Things will continue to get worst, maybe not at the same rate as it was w/ the Bush admin., but Obama is nothing but an establishment tool. National socialism is here. This country is toast.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
prop·a·gan·da n
1.information or publicity put out by an organization or government to spread and promote a policy, idea, doctrine, or cause
2.deceptive or distorted information that is systematically spread
Since when is satire and political commentary propaganda UNCERNTROPY?
easymike 3 years ago
mike, you think because it's commentary it isn't being used to promote the establishment's agenda?
One of the things I'm trying to point out is that there isn't a "liberal" or "conservative" corporate media--they all have the same agenda under different names.
Look at how they all worked together to promote the bailout, which 99% of the American people didn't want.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
The American propoganda machine is far more sinister and effective than the Soviet propoganda was because the American people BELIEVE their propoganda--the Soviet people knew they were being lied to.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I agree that we are plagued by a dysfunctional corporate media but I wouldnt call what Maddow does propaganda. In fact there is considerable garbage ranging from shallow newsertainment to sloppy, incompetent reporting polluting Americas MSM that does not connote propaganda.
Maddows commentary is based on discernable facts. You dont have to like what she says or agree with her opinion but if you listen and check out the facts you will usually learn something.
easymike 3 years ago
Propaganda does exist but so do lazy emotional thinkers who are most susceptible to it. The bail out is an interesting example. Theres no doubt that MSM instinctually supported it to save their own asses. They also reported what a bunch of self-serving politicians said. There are also many equally self-serving politicians who are against it.
easymike 3 years ago
None of this alters the driving force, which is corporatism. Corporatism has no conscience or intellect and is blindly driven by greed. The propaganda comes from the minions who think they have, are loosing or want to hold power in the wake of corporatism. I doubt that Maddow is doing the bidding of corporate masters all of a sudden.
easymike 3 years ago
Maddow is just doing what she gets told so she can have a nice job. Therefore she is doing the bidding of her corporate masters.
daniel987878 3 years ago
Oh Really? As I remember it, Maddow was doing her thing on Air America and on the internets developing quite a following long before she visited Olbermann and made other appearances on MSNBC. Her internet and radio audience was instrumental in getting he hired at MSNBC and making her the most popular woman on cable. She does now much of what she did then. Your statement is ignorant Bullsh*t daniel987878 .
easymike 3 years ago
Yeah but now she has the job and she has to follow company directives like any employee. Maybe before she was a top journalist but now she's on the MSNBC and she has to do what she gets told. MSNBC wouldnt hire her if she was of no use.
daniel987878 3 years ago
Exactly. There's a big difference in running your own show at Air America and being a news reader at MSNBC.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Maddow has never claimed to be a journalist. She is a Brand with an audience as are Olbermann, OReily, Hannity, etc. What you are saying is that she was so desperate when she signed her contract to provide material for MSNBC that she and her lawyers said MSNBC could order her to say anything ... NOT. Maybe youre beginning to see how little you understand about corporate media and how ridiculous your idea is daniel98787..
easymike 3 years ago
WTF are you babbling about dummy. That's not how I feel, Those are facts, Powell and Biden did say that. You're the herd animal that fell into the Obama trance, and now you're here defending Maddow for talking about a military confrontation w/ Pakistan like it's acceptable. Do you remember the news during the Iraq War? Bush says there will be a seamless transition for Obama. Patriot act will stay, homeland sec. will stay, police state will increase. You got played like a bitch, because u r 1.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Check what I was responding to then consider who is the babbling dummy. What I responded to came from you only and not from Biden or Powell.
I dont subscribe to our dysfunctional foreign policy, corporatism or bullsh*t from anyone and that includes the BS thats emanating from some on this thread.
This thread is about Propaganda but some of those defending the premise are only spreading more.
Im sure that I was played ... in your neophyte dreams.
easymike 3 years ago
Okay, my dreams? your the one who just imagined what my dreams are about. I'm not spreading propaganda. Answer me this: did you vote for Obama? If so, then you probably were played, because he's not what the majority has been led to believe. Do you know who Zbigniew Brzezinski is? He's one of Obama's top advisors, research him. His ideology speaks for itself. Rahm Emanuel is also a questionable character. Obama will bring forth an agenda that has already been written for him just like Bush did.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Do I know who Brzezinski is? Silly goose, I have witnessed and opposed the development of the military industrial complex. I also opposed the installation of the Shah of Iran. I have never approved of our expansionist foreign policy or corporatism. I was an activist before you were a thought. Thats why I dont tolerate your half-baked accusations. Ive seen too many. You might even be useful to a meaningful movement one day but youll have to clean up your style if you hope to be successful.
easymike 3 years ago
Easy mike, go easy.
daniel987878 3 years ago
I give as easy as I get daniel987878. BTW easymike was my call sign in the military. It doesnt mean that I am easy.
easymike 3 years ago
Sad to see your experience amounts to nothing when you don't realize that Maddow and the the corporate media will sell Obama's agenda, which will be nothing like his campaign promises. This country is toast, your participation in the past amounts to nothing. This is youtube, I can have any style I want. You just called me a silly goose, which makes me think you're style is gay. Which isn't a bad thing, just kind of gay. Just watch, Obama will take us off a new cliff and the media will sell it.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
You are what we call a fundamentalist. You have decided actions and behavior based on what you believe disregarding the absence of verifiable facts.
As gobikat said: Geeze, we have over-interpreted a simple 5-minute segment way beyond what it's actually saying.
One of the reasons that the corporate media is dysfunctional is because they have replaced competent reporters researching and presenting facts with pundits expressing their opinions. This post is no better UNCERNTROPY.
easymike 3 years ago
Please remember that you started with the ad hominem stuff UNCERNTROPY(babbling dummy). I referred to you as a silly goose because your question seemed thoughtless. Gay? Now thats assuming facts not in evidence. But it does follow a pattern in your communication.
The media will no doubt try to sell tons of crap before the people are organized enough to correct it. When you play the same game as the dysfunctional media youre not being very helpful.
easymike 3 years ago
Ever heard of the character Big Gay Al from Southpark? He calls people a silly goose. That's where the gay joke came in. Never mind, you're too old to know about that. Okay, this is youtube dumb fuck, not a major media outlet. People do not look at these posts to get their daily info. I'm letting you know that Maddow will shill for decisions made by Obama because it's very predictable. You're defending her because you like getting news fed to you through bias. I feel good knowing I'm right.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Do you think that calling me a dumb fuck adds credibility to your baseless assertions? Your behavior only dramatizes your ineptness and immaturity UNCERNTROPY. In your ever-expanding ignorance and bigotry you think that people get to old to know about things. Pathetic!
I do know about South Park but I have other more gratifying interests. Youre free to extrapolate and believe anything you like about Maddows intentions. Your beliefs alone will not prove or change anything. Easymike out.
easymike 3 years ago
BTW youtube IS a major media outlet.
I am not defending anyone. I appose your inadequate methods and baseless assertions as I have with anyone. You leap from telling me what you think Maddow thinks to telling me what you think I think. Ridiculous!
easymike 3 years ago
Someone's comment posted on one of the pages for one video is not a major news contribution. Nice try with the spin, you should work for Fox News. Okay, if you can't see Maddow's clear bias, then you are a herd animal. I don't know what she thinks, but I do know that as a pundit she does not try to be unbiased. You can't argue against that. People guess what others think all the time, stop whining like a bitch. That's one thing about a lot of liberals, they bitch a lot, except for a few like me.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Try to stay focused UNCERNTROPY. Media does not necessarily connote major news. Also, bias is not the issue. This thread incorrectly attempted to conflate commentary into propaganda. Your defense of it has been dismally unsuccessful.
Whining like a bitch? So you are a sexist as well as an ageist? Your bigotry proves that youre not much of a liberal either. Dont hurt your arm patting yourself on the back.
easymike 3 years ago
Thanks professor ass kiss for keeping me focused on your spin. I said "major news contribution," not "media." Nice try. Media extends to anything on the internet. You know you're talking out of your ass now. There is no way for news to be unbiased because the people who receive the news will always have their bias, being human beings. Maddow dips into propaganda here by flipping her war stance to suck Obama's lib. balls. You're on youtube, insults are open game, there are no consequences for it.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
UNCERNTROPY you obviously dont even know the meaning of the word focus. I am the one who said that Youtube was a major media outlet. Major news was never part of the discussion. You keep pretending that Maddows commentary is propaganda by displaying your FEELINGS without presenting evidence. More empty rhetoric wont help you.
Insults are the last refuge of the puerile on Youtube or anywhere else. The only thing you own is your own ignorance.
easymike 3 years ago
Haha, were those last two senetences in the last comment not an insult of some sort. Classic hypocrite. This must be a joke. I was trying to explain that I know this is media dumb fuck, BUT NOT A MAJOR NEWS SOURCE. reread what I said. Your last post solidifies that this is utterly pointless. The evidence is the video above. We're running in a circular argument now. You've taken a nose dive right into Maddow's butt hole. My 'empty rhetoric' are responses to empty claims that you make.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Were those last two sentences not insults. Classic hypocrite. Try self reflection, I know your brain doesn't work like it used to, but come on. I differentiated between what you call propaganda, some comments on a youtube page, to actual propaganda. My God (and there isn't one), you realize you are expressing FEELINGS too. Your last post demonstrates that this it utterly pointless. Ultimately, I know more than you and my brain still functions properly.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
I accidentally posted two similar comments back to back because I thought the first one didn't post. But maybe I need to repeat myself for this vegetable with Alzheimer's. See, I know how to make a real insults, not smug insults while saying you have to resort to insults. This is so easy. I'm proud knowing people will read this and know what many liberals lack the skepticism they try to flaunt. Let me guess, this is more 'empty rhetoric?' Fine, it's just as empty as your skull.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
There are multiple definitions for liberal. The common nomenclature has liberal associated with the left. The greater scholarly understanding for liberal is the general US ideology of free market, limited government, and rights. The latter is now called libertarian. I'm a mix between a democrat and a libertarian. I don't care if I'm labeled a sexist or an ageist on youtube, it doesn't matter. I'm patting myself on the back right now for owning another herd animal. And it doesn't hurt one bit.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Your not going to convince me the corporate media have any real integrity. They serve the interests of the establishment.
daniel987878 3 years ago
Maddow has never claimed to be a journalist. She is a Brand with an audience as are Olbermann, OReily, Hannity, etc. What you are saying is that she was so desperate when she signed her contract to provide material for MSNBC that she and her lawyers said MSNBC could order her to say anything ... NOT. Maybe youre beginning to see how little you understand about corporate media and how ridiculous your idea is daniel987878. Her Brand has a has a contract you have a job.
easymike 3 years ago
Maddow's commentary is her attempt to not appear like a far-left liberal. Propaganda can happen without the person saying the propaganda even knowing they are spreading it. example: Fox News, where the reporters repeat an agenda written for them by higher-ups. MSNBC is not as bad as Fox, but now Maddow will shill for decisions made by Obama to make him appear tough, not knowing that she is part of the political theater. Obama will be received as a hero by design after the disaster of Bush 43.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Just what is a far left liberal UNCERNTROPY? I, like most Americans, am tired of partisan rhetoric from folks who dont have a clue.
The difference between Fox and Maddow is facts. Something you are having trouble presenting. When you finish reading Maddows mind you might try presenting a couple of facts.
easymike 3 years ago
I have nothing against liberals, because I am one. Maddow does not have 100% complete control over the material on her show. I made clear in my last statement that Maddow is not on the same level of Fox News, which gets direct talking points from the Bush admin., textbook propaganda. MSNBC does not. she is part of the corporate media though, the same media that beat the war drums for the Iraq War. What people on the left need to figure out is the empire will not end because Obama is pres.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
It would be foolish to think that MSNBC has not enjoyed the ride on the Obama train. That's how corporate media works. It's not just about reporting facts, it's what you choose to report out of the endless information that a news source could report. I gaurantee that Obama will lead a military campaign into Pakistan. There will be mass support for it because an event will happen, just like Biden and Powell have promised. Obama will change things, like Bush changed things, for the worst.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Nice of you to share how you FEEL with everyone. Beyond expressing your feelings publicly you have done very little to provide any actionable intelligence.
What is foolish is to say that something is foolish without presenting ANY support for that foolishness other than how it appears to you UNCERNTROPY.
easymike 3 years ago
When Bush was running in 2000, he promoted his platform as non interventionist. Obama fooled the masses the same way. I'm proud to say I didn't vote for Bush, McCain, or Obama. You should be ashamed of yourself, defending Maddow's blind allegiance to the new puppet. But we know you are incapable of that, so stick to your partisan ball licking and pretend that I don't know what I'm talking about. Just because she's not as bad as Fox News does not make her blind partisanship acceptable.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Partisan ball licking? Your incompetent frustration is showing.
Name one partisan statement that I have made.
You have yet to prove Maddows allegiance to anyone blind or otherwise. Do you think blind allegiance is in her contract? Or did you just pull it out of your butt?
As I said I dont accept bullsh*t from anyone. That includes Bush, Obama and you UNCERNTROPY .
easymike 3 years ago
The frustration part might be true. Your partisanship is expressed in your adherence to Maddow, who is very partisan. It's okay to like Maddow, I like her too, but do realize she has a clear biased agenda. She's in the tank for Obama. Are you going to deny that? By defending the above video you are being partisan and not skeptical about the implications of what Maddow is saying. You know I'm competent, you're just mad because your old ass is being worked by someone 1/3 your age. take notes.
UNCERNTROPY 3 years ago
Just as I thought, you have no clue as to what a partisan statement is. You are also proving to be a bigoted ageist. You are 1/3 my age but couldnt keep up with me mentally or physically on your best day. I also know more about the industry in discussion since I have been in it twice as long as you are old. I am skeptical of everything out of habit and that includes your baseless accusations. The only thing that youve established is that you dont like how Maddow expresses herself. So what?
easymike 3 years ago
Ive already said that corporate media is dysfunctional. It is riddled with a lack of professionalism, incompetence, greed and propaganda. One way that it is being affected is through the internets. But theres BS on the internet as well as in the MSM. I know that this post is well meaning but it doesnt have a very tight grip on reality. It takes more that a few words like partisan or in the tank for Obama to connote propaganda. (It would also be nice if the word were spelled correctly)
easymike 3 years ago
Quote on this from HeavyHebrew at forum . prisonplanet . com:
"It's like people are hypnotized. Now Republicans will go back to non interventionist politics and limited government and the Democrats will take the place of military interventionism and big government. Smoke and mirrors. Bread and circuses. Divide and conquer."
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
Sigh.. here we go again.
roflcopter2006 3 years ago
war is the health of the state
atvfreelife 3 years ago
Rachel Maddow is a shill for the Military-Industrial Complex. The controlling party always turn out to be warmongering scum.
darthchaosofrspw 3 years ago
She doesn't believe there's a military solution to fixing everything.. but her skit didn't support or denounce Obama unknown solution... If anything, she poked fun at how irrational our current president's attack on Pakistan was.. considering we're not at war with them.
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
PandaBoy, this isn't about Bush, this is how all the previously anti-war liberals are suddenly pro-war because Obama is pro-war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
They're covering for his war mongering, and deluding you and the rest of the nation into buying it.
Anything to keep profits up in the defense industry.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
yeah... though he already made promises to cut wasteful spending in the defense budget.
You do know the Afghanistan government 'do' support our efforts there... when we're not killing innocent lives.
Honestly, military power isn't really the answer... but i know the situation is more complex than 'war' and 'no war'
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
Yes, it is complex. The people in the tribal areas have been waging a long fight for independence and justice from Pakistan, and our attacks on their areas increases their strength, and that's what Pakistan doesn't want.
The Taliban offered to cut off Bin Ladin's head themselves if we gave them evidence connecting him to 9/11. There was no evidence, and they rightfully refused to turn him over.
We brought Taliban representatives to the US to try to convince them to allow an oil pipeline.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
They refused and that's when our government chose to make them our enemies.
Watch "Taxi To The Dark Side." Our soldiers captured innocent Afghanis and tortured them to death.
And we seem to be very good at bombing wedding parties.
What we've achieved in Afghanistan is making a lot of new enemies, and Obama wants to expand that effort to Pakistan.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
I'm not ignorant.. I know what has been happening in Afghanistan under our name. But when you try to connect Obama to this, you're grasping at straws.
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
I'm not trying to connect Obama to an expanded war effort in Afghanistan--he did that himself.
Are you calling Obama a liar?
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
That depend, what are you refering to that Obama said that I disagree with?
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
The Afghanistan government supports our effort? lol, we OWN the Afghanistan government and put the President in power.
In fact, the guy would be dead now if it wasn't for us. Of course he supports our being there--he has no choice.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
you are bang on - top news story on the BBC website today is how Bin Laden is suspected to be in Pakistan (and cut off from Al Queada). Another two terror related stories also on the front page. I even saw an IBM ad on TV last night with the slogan something like 'Stop talking, It's time to Prepare'.
5starrater1 3 years ago
So what if it's true. The man is still wanted in the U.S. And Pakistan agreed to help this country get him. Could it be it's more complex than "for war or against war"?
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
What man?
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
The Pakistan leadership and bush previously made a deal.. They're suppose to help hunt for Osama in their area, though information suggest Osama is there..
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
Why would they want to catch Osama? In fact, they need to make sure they don't catch him--he's their poster boy boogie man for the very profitable in many ways "War On Terror."
Just yesterday the CIA director said Osama was the greatest threat America faces.
If Osama is the greatest threat, we have nothing to worry about.
In fact, the greatest threat America faces is destruction by its own government.
EchelonMonitor 3 years ago
you seem to be big with the conspiracy theory...
With the Bush Administration.. yes, they made a profit, because dick cheney's old company went into Iraq and charged us with the bill..
Obama has no connection or profit in continuing the war..
RedPandaBoy 3 years ago
The Bush family got rich on the war too through their ownership in Halliburton and the Carlyle Group, yet not one "liberal" reporter has dared ask "Mr. President, how much money has your family made on the war in Iraq?"
Are you sure about Obama'