Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/26/03 08:48 PM, implodinggoat wrote: Liberal would be a great improvement over raving communist. At least liberals generally respect civil rights.

Yeah, their OWN civil rights. Look at the ACLU for example. Protecting American civil rights my ass! More like protecting the Civil Rights of the American who line up with their agenda! However, I do agree it is better then the Communist complete Government Control.

At 3/26/03 05:28 PM, Kazuo_Kiriyama wrote: No, I'm NOT going to just shut my hole. It's a pathetic excuse made by people who just can't face the facts. Why does it always feel like I'm slamming my fist against a brick wall when I'm talking to these dogmatic liberals? Everyone is telling you the truth and all you people do is put on the "hear no evil" face and yell "I'M NOT LISTENING TO YOU LIARS!!!"

Kazuo Kiriyama

Oh but it's obvious media puppetry would exist. Democracy works the way it does because the government does not trust the state to make proper decisions. It only makes sense that you'll tell lies to get people to believe you. Sometimes lies are useful, like many other things that people think are pure evil.

It's a mix of shows wanting ratings, and the stupid restrictions put on what we see and show because of what is "politically correct". It exists, whether you're going to believe it or not. Just look at the last Gulf War. 'Dead Babies' Satelites confirming images of huge iraqi armies, later confirmed on commericial satelites to be false... propaganda exists, and it has some goodness to it. Not saying I believe in it.

two pics of soldiers helping Iraqis definetly proves something. It proves that two american soldiers care about the Iraqis.

I can gaurentee you that there are at least two kind racists in the world. Does this make all racists kind?

MarijuanaClock

Your ignorance and egotism is annoying. If you are not part of the solution, you are a part of the problem

At 3/26/03 09:49 PM, benisveryc00l wrote: two pics of soldiers helping Iraqis definetly proves something. It proves that two american soldiers care about the Iraqis.

I can gaurentee you that there are at least two kind racists in the world. Does this make all racists kind?

Racists are forced my penalty of law to do what the Commander says. Out in the field like these solders are, if they were taking the doing that under their own accord without the commanding officers orders and consent, their would be hell to pay! They would no doubt be court Marshaled and go to Prison if they are not discharged. Do you know what a military prison is like? They STILL haul in large boulders and force the solders to chip away at them with pick axes! Do you really think 2 solders would risk that fate to save an old man or a child? Trust me, this is the army doing it, not just a small group of solders!

There are more than two pictures of Americans helping Iraqi's but his point was that there are soldiers will help people even though they cant be sure if that person is out to kill them. You might want to read the post before you reply.

At 3/26/03 10:02 PM, jimsween wrote: There are more than two pictures of Americans helping Iraqi's but his point was that there are soldiers will help people even though they cant be sure if that person is out to kill them

and my point was that just because some soldiers are willing to do that does not mean that the majority of soldiers are, and that few good people within a group does not make the whole group good.

your stupidity amazes me... take some fucking reading comprehension courses retard

musclehed: funny typo... and your post states that the soldiers are not doing these great things out of their own free will... so much for the kind soldier arguements gtg now flame away

Maybe if you read the post you would know what I said. There are soldiers willing to risk thier life to help people. I didnt say all soldiers are I said there are soldiers who are. You debate like a 3rd grader.

Nobody wants to hear your idiotic namecalling, so go away.

At 3/26/03 09:54 PM, Dig_the_Man wrote: MarijuanaClock

Your ignorance and egotism is annoying. If you are not part of the solution, you are a part of the problem

your need for War is the problem MJC is trying not to be a part of - or are you saying he's a potential terrorist - an if so, why don't you just say so, instead of resorting to abstract cliches?

At 3/26/03 06:19 PM, MarijuanaClock wrote: They present all news in a profesional manner. They simply broadcast what happens. They have rebroadcasted iraqi state television to show civilian/american/iraqi casualties. However that does not make them biased.

Al Jazeera isn't limiting there content like the American media has,

Before you get all breathless about Al Jezeera I suggest you pay a bit more attention to them especially in areas where you are not emotionally involved. This will allow you to more objectively review what you are seeing. Al Jezeera is indeed the most free press the Arab world has ever seen, sometimes even criticizing their own government of Qua tar, a thing previously unheard of in the Arab world. But this is a free press with a definite aggenda, more akin to the infamous "yellow press" of the 19th century then a modern news organization. Perhaps it is the development curve, perhaps it is cultural, but that is a medium with is best taken with a larger than normal sized grain of salt.

On a related note, I obtained a copy of an Al Jezeera special on the Israel/Palestine situation or as they referred to it "the Zionist occupation". (Their words) Since I speak about 8 words of Arabic, I invited a friend of mine over (a Kuwaiti) to translate for me. At first I was worried about not getting the proper context relying on a translator but I soon learned that this was unnecessary. Their was no context, there were very little in the way of words at all. What we saw was a montage of pictures over foreboding music. Cut to Israeli holding a rifle, cut to brutally mangled Palestinian, back to Israeli tank, destroyed Palestinian home,Israeli aggressor, Palestinian victim. This went on like this over and over again never once showing the effects of a suicide bombing or a Palestinian protest showing masked men with mock explosive strapped to themselves. After about a half hour of this we got sick of it and ordered a pizza. (Do you have any idea how hard it is to get a good pizza without any pork on it :-)

At 3/27/03 01:24 AM, Raptorman wrote: Al Jezeera is indeed the most free press the Arab world has ever seen, sometimes even criticizing their own government of Qatar, a thing previously unheard of in the Arab world. But this is a free press with a definite aggenda..

Qatar built a massive airbase for American planes to launch against Iraq from, and then rely on the US-super-Power protection and raw currency for petrolium exports.. whilst broadcasting Al Jezeera ..so whats this (hidden) aggenda you speak of?

Sure! Breeding Arab terrorists for US forces to slaughter.

That's Selective Survival in the extreme!

At 3/26/03 08:48 PM, implodinggoat wrote:
Liberal would be a great improvement over raving communist. At least liberals generally respect civil rights.

Just call him a "hippie" and get on with completing the set, will you?

"two pics of soldiers helping Iraqis definetly proves something. It proves that two american soldiers care about the Iraqis.

I can gaurentee you that there are at least two kind racists in the world. Does this make all racists kind?"

where in there does it say that there are not soldiers who will help people even though they cant be sure if that person is out to kill them

fucking retard...

oh and is "you debate like a 3rd grader" what you call intelligent namecalling? in that case ur 1 year old, hahahah im so smart... right?

At 3/27/03 03:23 AM, Judge_DREDD wrote: Qatar built a massive airbase for American planes to launch against Iraq from, and then rely on the US-super-Power protection and raw currency for petrolium exports.. whilst broadcasting Al Jezeera ..so whats this (hidden) aggenda you speak of?

Al Jazeera is not run by the government of Qatar and has ruffled many feathers with their harsh commentary leading many countries to suggest that Qatar pull the reins on them. Qatar has thus far resisted.

Read this as the government of Qatar and the editorial staff of Al Jazeera often don't see eye to eye.

Their agenda is hardly a hidden one. They are a business and their job is to be seen. Al Jazeera is run by Arabs and speaks to it's auidance in Arabic, so it is more trusted then other news sources CNN, MSNSC et. al. This gives them considerable leeway of credibility. Operating in the Middle East leaves them with no real competitors or critics. With little in the way of review or oversight, they use sensationalism and bombast to get more viewers.

At 3/27/03 03:43 PM, benisveryc00l wrote: oh and is "you debate like a 3rd grader" what you call intelligent namecalling? in that case ur 1 year old, hahahah im so smart... right?

Ben do you have any pics of U.S. soldiers hurting Iraqi civilians? And I think me making fun of your debating style is alot better than you calling everyone retards and gay.

The US needs a lot of target practice...(just not on civilians)

An excerpt taken from a newspaper article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Iraqis leave Jordan to fight back home

"The US military warned Iraqi civilians Tuesday against using roads. A US warplane intending to destroy a bridge dropped a bomb Monday that also hit a bus filled with Syrians evacuating Iraq. The Pentagon expressed regret."

At 3/27/03 03:43 PM, benisveryc00l wrote: "two pics of soldiers helping Iraqis definetly proves something. It proves that two american soldiers care about the Iraqis.

I can gaurentee you that there are at least two kind racists in the world. Does this make all racists kind?"

where in there does it say that there are not soldiers who will help people even though they cant be sure if that person is out to kill them

fucking retard...

oh and is "you debate like a 3rd grader" what you call intelligent namecalling? in that case ur 1 year old, hahahah im so smart... right?

So your saying that only two american soldiers in Iraq care about their mission. You obviously don't know anybody from the military then again you are a 33 year old dfgdfg from fdgdf (see his profile). Be gone the council has spoken and I'm sure you will recive quite a tounge lashing from The Regulars and Political Crew. GO get 'em boys and girls( house of leaves). ::lites his trench of oil on fire::: cant get me back now.

BenIsNotCool
Also do you have to use "fucking retard" in every one of your posts. I work with the disabled and we don't use the term "retard". They are challenged and most of them have a much better personality then the one you portray and they see to have a much larger intelligence as well.

At 3/27/03 07:59 PM, panik wrote: BenIsNotCool
Also do you have to use "fucking retard" in every one of your posts.

Will "incompetent" or "incapable of mature reasoning" do? ;)

At 3/27/03 07:41 PM, Nightshadeplus wrote:
"The US military warned Iraqi civilians Tuesday against using roads. A US warplane intending to destroy a bridge dropped a bomb Monday that also hit a bus filled with Syrians evacuating Iraq. The Pentagon expressed regret."

Thats sad but what I heard happened was he dropped the bomb then he spotted a bus trying to pass the bridge so he attempted to redirect the bomb but it was already too far. It's not like he just did it out of cold heart.

At 3/27/03 03:27 PM, D2KVirus wrote:

At 3/26/03 08:48 PM, implodinggoat wrote:
Liberal would be a great improvement over raving communist. At least liberals generally respect civil rights.

Just call him a "hippie" and get on with completing the set, will you?

Talk to him dumb ass he is a communist. I'm not just claiming it, ask him!

Don't you understand that most Americans, and most soldiers, have a decent respect for human life? I mean, they're not bloodthirsty savages. They are human. Sure, there may be the odd crazy soldier, but I'm saying why would US troops wantonly kill civilians? They have no reason to. Even in pragmatic terms, killing civilians would only turn popular opinion against the war, so why do it?

it's ironic that despite centuries of advancement, both sides still consider the other barbarians

At 3/27/03 07:54 PM, panik wrote:

At 3/27/03 03:43 PM, benisveryc00l wrote: "two pics of soldiers helping Iraqis definetly proves something. It proves that two american soldiers care about the Iraqis.

I can gaurentee you that there are at least two kind racists in the world. Does this make all racists kind?"

where in there does it say that there are not soldiers who will help people even though they cant be sure if that person is out to kill them

fucking retard...

oh and is "you debate like a 3rd grader" what you call intelligent namecalling? in that case ur 1 year old, hahahah im so smart... right?

So your saying that only two american soldiers in Iraq care about their mission. You obviously don't know anybody from the military

um dumbass i said thats all the pics prove i never said there were only 2

then again you are a 33 year old dfgdfg from fdgdf (see his profile).

Yup thats my real name and age, just call me dfg for short.

Be gone the council has spoken

you arent the council (thank god)

and I'm sure you will recive quite a tounge lashing from The Regulars and Political Crew. GO get 'em boys and girls( house of leaves). ::lites his trench of oil on fire::: cant get me back now.

already have, i enjoy it

and to jimsween...

"Ben do you have any pics of U.S. soldiers hurting Iraqi civilians? And I think me making fun of your debating style is alot better than you calling everyone retards and gay."

of course i have picture of Americans hurting Iraqis, i obtained them from my unbiast American newspaper. (next line) in that case your debating style is fucked up... that better? cuz i couldnt live without having my insults be aproved of by you, retard

and panik, your a freaking person who is special in his own way, that better?

also, riding the same bus as them doesnt count as working with them, sorry

At 3/28/03 04:33 PM, benisveryc00l wrote:

of course i have picture of Americans hurting Iraqis, i obtained them from my unbiast American newspaper. (next line) in that case your debating style is fucked up... that better? cuz i couldnt live without having my insults be aproved of by you, retard

Sure, the reason you couldnt find any pictures is becasue the American newspaper is bias. When there is no pictures of them hurting Iraqi's and there are pictures of them helping Iraqi's Its common sense to assume there is much more helping than hurting.

At 3/28/03 04:50 PM, jimsween wrote: Sure, the reason you couldnt find any pictures is becasue the American newspaper is bias. When there is no pictures of them hurting Iraqi's and there are pictures of them helping Iraqi's Its common sense to assume there is much more helping than hurting.

you think american newspapers would show pictures of us hurting Iraqis? yes! that would help make more americans pro-war! great stratagey.

It's comon ignorance, not sence, to assume that there are many more helping than hurting.

because your a retard without any reading comprehension skills... (SARCASM)
Soldier: alright im gonna go on a killing spree on those civilians over there, make sure you videotape all the action!
camra man: okee dokee!
(SARCASM OFF)

the above doesnt happen

At 3/28/03 04:58 PM, benisveryc00l wrote:

you think american newspapers would show pictures of us hurting Iraqis? yes! that would help make more americans pro-war! great stratagey.

The government doesnt control the newspapers.

It's comon ignorance, not sence, to assume that there are many more helping than hurting.

No, If you have evidence of something with not evidence to the contrary you have to assume It is correct.

because your a retard without any reading comprehension skills... (SARCASM)
Soldier: alright im gonna go on a killing spree on those civilians over there, make sure you videotape all the action!
camra man: okee dokee!
(SARCASM OFF)

the above doesnt happen

There is Iraqi TV.

You just don't know when to quit, do you, benis?

Please quit calling the media bias (unless you're watching 20/20 or something). I've read the newspapers and I've watched the news and, from what I can CLEARLY see, they are reporting the war equally. They speak of the civilians getting killed just as much as they speak of us helping them. It's silly to think that just because you see a soldier treating an Iraqi for burns that suddenly the media is bias against you. That's just what they caught on camera and that's also what the people want to know. They want to know the people who are protesting the war and they deliver and they want to know those who are supporting it. They show these people. Hell, they interview them sometimes! Michael Moore was on CNN the other night and I didn't hear ONE degenerate comment directed to him from any reporter! The newspaper and the news are not bias. They are reporting all that they can. The only thing I can tell that they are holding from us is (at certain times) their location in Iraq (for protection reasons) so just stop with the nonsense.

Kazuo Kiriyama

PS: "benisveryc00l", quit calling people "gay" and "retarded". It makes you look bad and it proves NOTHING in this forum.

At 3/28/03 05:09 PM, jimsween wrote:

At 3/28/03 04:58 PM, benisveryc00l wrote:

you think american newspapers would show pictures of us hurting Iraqis? yes! that would help make more americans pro-war! great stratagey.

The government doesnt control the newspapers.

It's comon ignorance, not sence, to assume that there are many more helping than hurting.

No, If you have evidence of something with not evidence to the contrary you have to assume It is correct.

actualy you don't... your overly guillable

There is Iraqi TV.

i happen not to have Iraqi TV, and if they saw anyone videotaping them they would KILL them.