Let’s go fightin’ now
Everybody’s learning how
Come on and go to war with me (Come on and go to war with…)
At Karbala and Al Kut they’ll shoot you real soon
At Tehran they’re walking the sand
We’re going a fightin in the deserts this year
So if you’re coming get ready to go
Come on buddy (fightin’) Come along buddy (fightin’)
wait and see (figtin’ safari) wait and see (fightin’ safari)
Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’) Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’)
take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari) take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari)
with me with me
[quote]vroom wrote:
Let’s go fightin’ now
Everybody’s learning how
Come on and go to war with me (Come on and go to war with…)
At Karbala and Al Kut they’ll shoot you real soon
At Tehran they’re walking the sand
We’re going a fightin in the deserts this year
So if you’re coming get ready to go
Come on buddy (fightin’) Come along buddy (fightin’)
wait and see (figtin’ safari) wait and see (fightin’ safari)
Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’) Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’)
take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari) take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari)
with me with me
[/quote]
??? Soooooo, your point is?
OK Vroomy, back away from the shrooms man…
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
USA + Largest Military on Planet + Stupid warmongering neocons in power == Perpetual Warfare
Who will you blame when Bush and his crew are out of office?
You think warmongering neocons are limited to the Republican party only?
Guess again.[/quote]
I like the term “mongering”, it’s a fun word really. I think I think I’ll start refering to Hillary as a “government program mongerer”. What do you think? or maybe “taxmongering”. I like it.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Let’s go fightin’ now
Everybody’s learning how
Come on and go to war with me (Come on and go to war with…)
At Karbala and Al Kut they’ll shoot you real soon
At Tehran they’re walking the sand
We’re going a fightin in the deserts this year
So if you’re coming get ready to go
Come on buddy (fightin’) Come along buddy (fightin’)
wait and see (figtin’ safari) wait and see (fightin’ safari)
Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’) Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’)
take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari) take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari)
with me with me
[/quote]
If yer happy and you know it, bomb Iran, bomb Iran.
If yer happy and you know it, bomb Iran, bomb Iran.
If yer happy and you know it,
then your bombs will surely show it.
If yer happy and you know it, bomb Iran.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
lixy, that was a HORRIBLE retort.
Come on, don’t you have SOMETHING in that manual of yours to deal with a situation like this?
I know, I didn’t make it very easy for you. Headed your usual scapegoats off.
For you, lixy, I’ll give you a list of “Murdoch” sites:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1898490/posts?page=101
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTM2NzMyMjk5Mw==
Check the countries reporting.[/quote]
I really don’t get your logic. Do you judge a story’s authenticity by the number of media outlets carrying it?
I’ll break it down for you: All of the above cite Jane’s Magazine as their source. This is textbook propaganda.
He most certainly is. But that’s besides the point…
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
I like the term “mongering”, it’s a fun word really. I think I think I’ll start refering to Hillary as a “government program mongerer”. What do you think? or maybe “taxmongering”. I like it.
[/quote]
If the shoe fits…
Some way or another our taxes are funding government; whether it is going to the nanny state or the police state is irrelevant. It still sucks donkey-balls.
welfare-mongering – yeah that has a nice ring to it.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Let’s go fightin’ now
Everybody’s learning how
Come on and go to war with me (Come on and go to war with…)
At Karbala and Al Kut they’ll shoot you real soon
At Tehran they’re walking the sand
We’re going a fightin in the deserts this year
So if you’re coming get ready to go
Come on buddy (fightin’) Come along buddy (fightin’)
wait and see (figtin’ safari) wait and see (fightin’ safari)
Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’) Yes, I’m gonna (fightin’)
take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari) take you fightin’ (fightin’ safari)
with me with me
[/quote]
hmmm…I am not sure these are the lyrics Brian Wilson had in mind.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
I like the term “mongering”, it’s a fun word really. I think I think I’ll start refering to Hillary as a “government program mongerer”. What do you think? or maybe “taxmongering”. I like it.
If the shoe fits…
Some way or another our taxes are funding government; whether it is going to the nanny state or the police state is irrelevant. It still sucks donkey-balls.
welfare-mongering – yeah that has a nice ring to it.[/quote]
This site is all about muscle mongering.
Look at the source, it’s like taking most of the stuff on Fox News seriously.
[quote]Fitnessdiva wrote:
Look at the source, it’s like taking most of the stuff on Fox News seriously.[/quote]
99% of the shit on Fox is the same shit that is shown on all the cable news channels.
Same shit different mouth.
[quote]lixy wrote:
JeffR wrote:
lixy, that was a HORRIBLE retort.
Come on, don’t you have SOMETHING in that manual of yours to deal with a situation like this?
I know, I didn’t make it very easy for you. Headed your usual scapegoats off.
For you, lixy, I’ll give you a list of “Murdoch” sites:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1898490/posts?page=101
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTM2NzMyMjk5Mw==
Check the countries reporting.
I really don’t get your logic. Do you judge a story’s authenticity by the number of media outlets carrying it?
I’ll break it down for you: All of the above cite Jane’s Magazine as their source. This is textbook propaganda.
Murdoch MUST be a very powerful man.
He most certainly is. But that’s besides the point…[/quote]
lixy,
Does Murdoch own Janes?
Does Murdoch decide who runs with the story?
Yes or no will do.
JeffR
[quote]Fitnessdiva wrote:
Look at the source, it’s like taking most of the stuff on Fox News seriously.[/quote]
Does Fox News own Janes?
Seriously, this is pathetically easy.
JeffR
[quote]rainjack wrote:
99% of the shit on Fox is the same shit that is shown on all the cable news channels. [/quote]
While I agree in essence, I’ll say that the 99% is an exaggeration. Fox is notorious for shamelessly spinning stories and misinforming its audience, and for good reasons.
I tried to fetch an account of JeffR’s story on the BBC but failed to find anything about it. It’s about standards.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Does Fox News own Janes? [/quote]
No.
Here’s one question for you though: Does Janes lack of association with Fox lend credibility to their story?
The spin machine at Fox tells totally different stories much of the time when compared to the moderate news sources.
[quote]lixy wrote:
rainjack wrote:
99% of the shit on Fox is the same shit that is shown on all the cable news channels.
While I agree in essence, I’ll say that the 99% is an exaggeration. Fox is notorious for shamelessly spinning stories and misinforming its audience, and for good reasons.
Same shit different mouth.
I tried to fetch an account of JeffR’s story on the BBC but failed to find anything about it. It’s about standards.[/quote]
Read closer - I specifically said cable news channels. I don’t think the BBC has one in the US.
Fox is notorious for it’s opinion/entertainment. The news is all the same. I’m not going to get into a Fox News debate here - if you watch it instead of reading what people say about it - you will see that the news is the exact same shit.
Look at the OJ goat screw, or the fucking Brittany Spears crap - seeing as how that’s what passes for news these days.
[quote]Fitnessdiva wrote:
The spin machine at Fox tells totally different stories much of the time when compared to the moderate news sources.[/quote]
Bullshit. I watch CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. The news is the news. Not being able to tell the difference between news and Bill O’Riley (sp) is the fault of the viewer.
But please - I know you are new - maybe go back and read some older threads so you will stop regurgitating shit that has been discussed already.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Fitnessdiva wrote:
The spin machine at Fox tells totally different stories much of the time when compared to the moderate news sources.
Bullshit. I watch CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. The news is the news. Not being able to tell the difference between news and Bill O’Riley (sp) is the fault of the viewer.
But please - I know you are new - maybe go back and read some older threads so you will stop regurgitating shit that has been discussed already.
[/quote]
No.
There is a huge difference in the way thing are presented on Fox.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Look at the OJ goat screw, or the fucking Brittany Spears crap - seeing as how that’s what passes for news these days. [/quote]
Not to be technical, but celebrity gossip crap is what made Murdoch the media mogul he is today.
News sources don’t pick you. You pick them, and if you’d rather watch something about OJ or Spears than a lively and educational debate on a political hot potato, it’s your choice. The current trend is a testimony to the complacency and intellectual laziness of people today.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Bullshit. I watch CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. The news is the news. Not being able to tell the difference between news and Bill O’Riley (sp) is the fault of the viewer.
But please - I know you are new - maybe go back and read some older threads so you will stop regurgitating shit that has been discussed already. [/quote]
Bully tactics now?
[i]A study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes,[30] in the Winter 03-04 issue of Political Science Quarterly, reported that viewers of the Fox Network local affiliates or Fox News were more likely than viewers of other news networks to hold three misperceptions:
- 67% of Fox viewers believed that the “U.S. has found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization” (Compared with 56% for CBS, 49% for NBC, 48% for CNN, 45% for ABC, 16% for NPR/PBS). However, the belief that “Iraq was directly involved in September 11” was held by 33% of CBS viewers and only 24% of Fox viewers, 23% for ABC, 22% for NBC, 21% for CNN and 10% for NPR/PBS
- 33% of Fox viewers believed that the “U.S. has found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction” “since the war ended”. (Compared with 23% for CBS, 20% for both CNN and NBC, 19% for ABC and 11% for both NPR/PBS)
- 35% of Fox viewers believed that “the majority of people [in the world] favor the U.S. having gone to war” with Iraq. (Compared with 28% for CBS, 27% for ABC, 24% for CNN, 20% for NBC, 5% for NPR/PBS)[/i]
I dare you to tell me this isn’t proof of the blatant distortion of facts on Fox.
I’m not vouching for CNN/NBC/CBS or any other media as an unbiased source, but had the polls been taken outside the US (say Sweden for example) you’d get something around 1-2% in the above questions. Why Americans don’t diversify their news sources is a mystery to me.