Your favourite Neo-con moments

[david dissadent]

The words that killed him for ever
" Brownie your doing a heck of a job"

 

[david dissadent]

Mind you yesterday was hysterical with his economic rescue package....

Within minutes of his announcement, an early gain of almost 180 points in the Dow Jones industrial average had been turned into a fresh wave of selling that left the Dow down by around 70 points at lunchtime. The more broadly based S&P 500 was down 0.5% at 1,326 - a new 16-month low.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jan/19/useconomy.mortgages

It would be funny were it not so fucking aweful how bad the next few years may be for us all.

 

[Brainaddict]

I always feel bemused when i read that america only became bad when these neo-cons took power.

I don't think anyone thinks the US was whiter than white before the neo-cons - particularly in terms of foreign policy. But no other administration since the second world war has - to my knowledge - openly declared that it doesn't care about multilateralism, and has actually sent representatives to multilateral institutions (Wolfowitz and Bolton) who themselves had said openly that they didn't believe in the international institutions. It's almost impossible to imagine a worse bunch of people in charge for the period when 9/11 happened and the climate change agenda became huge (at least in other countries). I know for a fact that the UK govt would like to accomplish certain positive things internationally but has resigned itself to sitting on its hands until a new US administration gets in - it is simply impossible to work with this bunch because they actually believe they can do whatever they want and they don't care what others think. They've been proven wrong since coming into office - time and time again - and that is a great source of pleasure to me

 

[nino_savatte]

Oh, and the other thing the neo-cons have done is expose the american media for their cowardice and supineness. Truly pathetic they are. Their role in the last eight years of neo-con murder and mayhem and plunder must be recognised. They have truly proven that the US is not run as a democracy, rather it is a plutocracy.

The US media hasn't always been cowardly and supine. Watergate? Vietnam?

 

[fela fan]

The US media hasn't always been cowardly and supine. Watergate? Vietnam?

That's why i talked about the US media's role in just the last eight years during the neo-con rule. You must have missed that bit.

I know full well about their more investigative courageous times, never mind many decent reporters they had. I was bemoaning how useless they have been during the neo-con years.

 

[Aldebaran]

People of this thread, you need this product of joy

A daily countdown calendar til Bush leaves with a different failure cited every day.

A collectioner's item, that.


My favorite is "Islamic fascists".

Betrays everything one needs to know about his insight in Islam, fascism and by extension the world's history.

salaam.

 

[nino_savatte]

That's why i talked about the US media's role in just the last eight years during the neo-con rule. You must have missed that bit.

I know full well about their more investigative courageous times, never mind many decent reporters they had. I was bemoaning how useless they have been during the neo-con years.

I didn't miss anything, you didn't make it clear. You left readers with the impression that the US media's lack of backbone was a universal.

 

[fela fan]

I didn't miss anything, you didn't make it clear. You left readers with the impression that the US media's lack of backbone was a universal.

This is total bollocks. If what i posted wasn't clear why didn't you ask for clarification?

Instead you just challenged what you thought i'd said.

And i'm afraid you can only speak for one reader, not 'readers'. I mean, how many of you are there?

Just admit that the line "Their role in the last eight years..." indicates that i'm actually talking about EIGHT years, and only a person who was unaware what neo-con rule was, nor that it had been going on for the last 8 years, could be unclear what i said.

And you're not that person.

 

[nino_savatte]

This is total bollocks. If what i posted wasn't clear why didn't you ask for clarification?

Instead you just challenged what you thought i'd said.

And i'm afraid you can only speak for one reader, not 'readers'. I mean, how many of you are there?

Just admit that the line "Their role in the last eight years..." indicates that i'm actually talking about EIGHT years, and only a person who was unaware what neo-con rule was, nor that it had been going on for the last 8 years, could be unclear what i said.

And you're not that person.

Fucks sake, you're tetchy. How about looking at your post again, instead of getting all hot and bothered over nothing? The phrase "eight years" didn;t appear in your original post. If it had, I'd have noticed it.

 

[poster342002]

It's fantastic how many leading neo-cons have actually failed miserably at the jobs they were given.

Rather ironic given their obsession with imposing nasty little "performance management" systems on the workers (that the cod-left do them the favour of not opposing. The twats).

 

[fela fan]

Fucks sake, you're tetchy. How about looking at your post again, instead of getting all hot and bothered over nothing? The phrase "eight years" didn;t appear in your original post. If it had, I'd have noticed it.

Fair comment over the tetchy. But you do make me laugh man. 'Eight years' was in my original post. You quoted it over 24 hours later, i never edited it, as can be seen by the absence of such information in the post.

It's a cracker mate. The 'eight years' was there alright, and you missed it. But you say because you didn't notice it, it wasn't there in the first place. Priceless!!

To be honest, i replied based on past communications. Fair comment. But to say it wasn't there because you hadn't noticed it is fair game too!

 

[nino_savatte]

Fair comment over the tetchy. But you do make me laugh man. 'Eight years' was in my original post. You quoted it over 24 hours later, i never edited it, as can be seen by the absence of such information in the post.

It's a cracker mate. The 'eight years' was there alright, and you missed it. But you say because you didn't notice it, it wasn't there in the first place. Priceless!!

To be honest, i replied based on past communications. Fair comment. But to say it wasn't there because you hadn't noticed it is fair game too!

In the first sentence of your post you say

Oh, and the other thing the neo-cons have done is expose the american media for their cowardice and supineness.

The "eight years" bit comes later. The neo cons didn't expose anything; they welcomed the lack of questions and they even set up their own media outlets to disseminate their propaganda.

You may have heard of WorldNetDaily or TownHall.com or Newsmax?

 

[fela fan]

In the first sentence of your post you say



The "eight years" bit comes later. The neo cons didn't expose anything; they welcomed the lack of questions and they even set up their own media outlets to disseminate their propaganda.

You may have heard of WorldNetDaily or TownHall.com or Newsmax?

I really take my hat off to you nino. You never ever give up, and i applaud it really.

So from the 'eight years' not being there in the first place because you didn't notice it, now you're saying it comes 'later', even though it was in the same paragraph meaning it was absolutely part of the related point.

From not being there, it now comes later! Oh well, at least that's tacit recognition that it was there in the first place.

 

[nino_savatte]

I really take my hat off to you nino. You never ever give up, and i applaud it really.

So from the 'eight years' not being there in the first place because you didn't notice it, now you're saying it comes 'later', even though it was in the same paragraph meaning it was absolutely part of the related point.

From not being there, it now comes later! Oh well, at least that's tacit recognition that it was there in the first place.

Whatever, sympathisers and supporters of the US right have been buying up media companies since Nixon was deposed in the 70's. Clear Channel Communications (they banned the Dixie Chicks from their stations because they were critical of Dubya) is but one example of how a sort of unofficial ministry of information has been created to serve a Republican President. It's there, in place for the next time. Should the Dems win, it will be there to serve as an attack dog.

Sure much of the US press has been supine, I wouldn't deny that; but one has to look at the work the right has done to create a legion of media companies and watchdogs (like AIM) too.

 

[Brainaddict]

Did you know that trying to prove you are absolutely and indisputably right on every point you've made, and that any perception you are wrong must be down to misinterpretation or stupidity from your opponent, is not actually a very good way to win a debate?

It's also very tiresome to read.

 

[fela fan]

Whatever, sympathisers and supporters of the US right have been buying up media companies since Nixon was deposed in the 70's. Clear Channel Communications (they banned the Dixie Chicks from their stations because they were critical of Dubya) is but one example of how a sort of unofficial ministry of information has been created to serve a Republican President. It's there, in place for the next time. Should the Dems win, it will be there to serve as an attack dog.

Sure much of the US press has been supine, I wouldn't deny that; but one has to look at the work the right has done to create a legion of media companies and watchdogs (like AIM) too.

You appear to have now gone the full circle and are now saying much the same thing as my original post!!

 

[CyberRose]

Did you know that trying to prove you are absolutely and indisputably right on every point you've made, and that any perception you are wrong must be down to misinterpretation or stupidity from your opponent, is not actually a very good way to win a debate?

It's also very tiresome to read.

Actually you're wrong. You didn't say that in your original post, at best, what you did write was misleading. There is no way whatsoever what you have written above is correct because if it was then I would have noticed it straight away. Therefore, you are a crotte de chien...

 

[Brainaddict]

:d

 

[nino_savatte]

You appear to have now gone the full circle and are now saying much the same thing as my original post!!

How?

 

[fela fan]

How?

I'm saying and was saying that during the office of these neo-cons the american mainstream media have become even more supine than before. Before we had good reporters, quite a few of them, we had proper investigations, we had war reporters before the term 'embedded' came about, we had investigations into government chicanery.

Since the neo-cons came along and upped normal USG corruption and injustices to a higher degree, and in doing so were pretty overt about it all, the media fell silent. What good there was fell silent. I didn't overly analyse the reasons beyond what i stated, but i recorded my opinion that they have failed in their duty to act as check and balance against those in authority on behalf of the general public who have no direct method of stopping such abuses of power.

In doing so they were culpable for today's US, because they allowed the neo-cons to go on their rampage against humanity and freedom unchecked. Has there been a more arrogant thick idiot as president than this bush man? Has a president been given more leeway for his illegal actions than this one?

The media must take much of the blame for the current neo-conness of the US of A. It's ugly as fuck too.

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm saying and was saying that during the office of these neo-cons the american mainstream media have become even more supine than before. Before we had good reporters, quite a few of them, we had proper investigations, we had war reporters before the term 'embedded' came about, we had investigations into government chicanery.

Since the neo-cons came along and upped normal USG corruption and injustices to a higher degree, and in doing so were pretty overt about it all, the media fell silent. What good there was fell silent. I didn't overly analyse the reasons beyond what i stated, but i recorded my opinion that they have failed in their duty to act as check and balance against those in authority on behalf of the general public who have no direct method of stopping such abuses of power.

In doing so they were culpable for today's US, because they allowed the neo-cons to go on their rampage against humanity and freedom unchecked. Has there been a more arrogant thick idiot as president than this bush man? Has a president been given more leeway for his illegal actions than this one?

The media must take much of the blame for the current neo-conness of the US of A. It's ugly as fuck too.

You never actually mentioned the media of the US right but it would be unwise to write the whole thing off as "the US media is behaving in a supine fashion" since some media outlets have been created by the right.

You should have a look at WorldNetDaily or Newsmax. They're already gearing themselves for the arrival of a Democratic President in the White House.

 

[fela fan]

You never actually mentioned the media of the US right but it would be unwise to write the whole thing off as "the US media is behaving in a supine fashion" since some media outlets have been created by the right.

You should have a look at WorldNetDaily or Newsmax. They're already gearing themselves for the arrival of a Democratic President in the White House.

From what i can see after these years of the neo-con rule, the media IS the US right now. Just about the whole dammed lot of it. I see the odd provincial reporting on places like commondreams, but that's probably even less biting than say the independent in britain.

I really called the media supine relative to bygone years, as you originally pointed out when mentioning watergate and vietnam to me. In particular, and as not a few american commentators have shown their bafflement, what's been amazing is the particular supineness shown by the new york times and the main rag from california - can't think of the name just now, la times?.

I think the answer lies somewhere in the fact that these are the same people that succumbed to mcarthyism. It seems that in times of national panic, any american who manages to retain their faculties decides it's in their own interests to keep quiet.

I think there is a psychological dependence on the flag and the office of the president. And that's why the US were a danger to the world before these neo-cons came to power, and why i hold out no hope that the country will willingly come round after the neo-cons walk off the stage.

We may cheer the probable end of the neo-cons, but this country remains the greatest threat to humanity and peace for our species. The only possible positive outcome from neo-con rule is that they were so overt about what they do that many millions of westerners have woken up to the true reality of the US do in this world of ours.

 

[Brainaddict]

*weeps at the demise of a happy, feelgood thread at the hands of a pair of oversized egos, one of whom, comically, claims to have learned something from buddhism*

 

[Jografer]

*weeps at the demise of a happy, feelgood thread at the hands of a pair of oversized egos, one of whom, comically, claims to have learned something from buddhism*

.... you're suprised...

 

[kyser_soze]

From what i can see after these years of the neo-con rule, the media IS the US right now. Just about the whole dammed lot of it. I see the odd provincial reporting on places like commondreams, but that's probably even less biting than say the independent in britain.

FF, when will you cease with the criticisms of the press and media? You've demonstrated on countless occassions that your sweeping generalisations rarely actuall match anything in reality...

 

[nino_savatte]

From what i can see after these years of the neo-con rule, the media IS the US right now. Just about the whole dammed lot of it. I see the odd provincial reporting on places like commondreams, but that's probably even less biting than say the independent in britain.

I really called the media supine relative to bygone years, as you originally pointed out when mentioning watergate and vietnam to me. In particular, and as not a few american commentators have shown their bafflement, what's been amazing is the particular supineness shown by the new york times and the main rag from california - can't think of the name just now, la times?.

I think the answer lies somewhere in the fact that these are the same people that succumbed to mcarthyism. It seems that in times of national panic, any american who manages to retain their faculties decides it's in their own interests to keep quiet.

I think there is a psychological dependence on the flag and the office of the president. And that's why the US were a danger to the world before these neo-cons came to power, and why i hold out no hope that the country will willingly come round after the neo-cons walk off the stage.

We may cheer the probable end of the neo-cons, but this country remains the greatest threat to humanity and peace for our species. The only possible positive outcome from neo-con rule is that they were so overt about what they do that many millions of westerners have woken up to the true reality of the US do in this world of ours.

Newspapers are in the business of making money - it's that simple. But the examples that I gave have a slightly wider remit: that is to say, they actively serve a partisan cause.

 

[fela fan]

*weeps at the demise of a happy, feelgood thread at the hands of a pair of oversized egos, one of whom, comically, claims to have learned something from buddhism*

I would remind you that those people sitting on their thrones judging others say more about themselves than those they deign to judge. Your judgment of me says more about you yourself than me, who you cannot possibly know enough of to make such sweeping judgments.

And therefore it is the case that you are the one with the inflated ego. And you are the one who makes claims.

Yet again an urban poster succumbs to rubbishing the poster rather than the post, succumbs to rubbishing the messenger not the message.

It's a surefire sign of weak debating, not that your inflated ego will be able to accept this.

 

[fela fan]

FF, when will you cease with the criticisms of the press and media? You've demonstrated on countless occassions that your sweeping generalisations rarely actuall match anything in reality...

Only when they do the job a democracy demands of them. Not until then though mate.

And i think you'll find the second half of your post is merely a reflection of what you think has happened, not necessarily reality apart from your own.

Would you care to argue that the american media has done any kind of job in stopping the grave abuses that the USG has carried out in the last eight years of neo-con office? Would you care to explain why they allowed illegal wars in iraq an afghanistan to occur with not only no whimper of protest, but rather with actual support?

Or why they allowed the various bills severely curtailing domestic freedom and increasing state powers over the public to be passed by the neo-cons under the guise of a new 'terrorist era' with barely any protest?

The american media of now is a disgrace on the whole.

 

[kyser_soze]

And i think you'll find the second half of your post is merely a reflection of what you think has happened, not necessarily reality apart from your own.

Ah, so all the times you've posted 'I bet the UK press hasn't covered this story' only to be shown that it's been covered in detail, in depth about 4 months previously are figments are they? Or that your knowledge of the US media extends to Time, Fox and anything else you've heard of on another media channel as opposed to a deep look at the 52,000 different magazines, websites, newspapers and TV shows that are classified as 'news' in the US, or the fact that no one news source is actually consumed by more than about 5% of the total US population?

Yeah, right.

 

[fela fan]

Ah, so all the times you've posted 'I bet the UK press hasn't covered this story' only to be shown that it's been covered in detail, in depth about 4 months previously are figments are they? Or that your knowledge of the US media extends to Time, Fox and anything else you've heard of on another media channel as opposed to a deep look at the 52,000 different magazines, websites, newspapers and TV shows that are classified as 'news' in the US, or the fact that no one news source is actually consumed by more than about 5% of the total US population?

Yeah, right.

Y'see mate, you consistently undermine what you say about me when you come out with assertions i've done this or that when i've not.

I've probably read time once, and that would be well over a decade ago. And i've never seen one minute of fox in my life. I closely follow commondreams which is a collection of articles mainly from american media, with a few bits and pieces from british media. I have a good feel for what's going on in the american media, much more so that you seem to be able to accept. Furthermore i've done a fair whack of reading of relevant books on the american and british media and how they work.

You have a very simplistic belief of what i know about this topic, and that is your prerogative. But it is also mine to keep on attempting to relieve you of your erroneous beliefs.

There may well be about 50,000 media outlets, but there are only about eight owners of the whole damned lot of them.

This is the country that came up with embedded reporting in its latest 'wars' to better manage the newsflow as the state wished. I see how easily western outlets manage to fuck up their reporting in the little bit of the world i live in, so here is another string to the bow that i play that says the american media are a complete failure these days in living up to the role allotted it by functioning democracies.

But of course, if the US is not actually a democracy which we are constantly urged to believe it is, then that easily explains away the miserable supine shit that this nation serves up in its media. There are honorable exceptions as there always are, but the vast majority of americans are unaware of the world outside of their borders, precisely because their media never ever mention this world they live in. America IS the world innit.