It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Real Truth

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Not-for-profit media? Never in this nation's history has any media been such a creature. Whatever crosssed your mind to cause you to think a company should be not-for-profit? I believe you meant to imply that they should be un-biased.
You know what gets me? Newpapers endorsing a candidate. Why should they endorse a candidate? They should just report the news as it becomes the news.




posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 02:14 PM
link   
A mouth piece, boys! Name req, you know? Thanks for the spell check, you must be a fan of his work!



posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Nope, not a fan of the Baldwin boys. All their movies suck, with the exception of Red October, but then, even Alec couldn't f*ck up that great a story, or Sean Connery's mastery of the art of acting. However, I'm glad he's a "mouth piece" for YOUR side, as everybody I know laughs thier azz off every time he opens that "piece". He's a blithering idiot, and a hypocrite of the worst proportion...HEY!!! You Brits should take him...he's free today!!! NO charge!!! Please! Take him!!!



posted on Nov, 6 2002 @ 03:48 AM
link   
gosh AR, are you blind or simply dense.

If you want to stand up and affirm that there are no people on this board who like to turn round and suggest that any anti war argument is due to the person proposing it being a "left wing liberal" then go ahead.

personally I think you need to stay away from the wacky backy, its making your memory and perception highly selective.



posted on Nov, 6 2002 @ 04:51 AM
link   
Originally posted by Bob88:

"qo, did you happen to see the 'pro war' rallies on Washington? Watching muslims speak in favor of removing Saddam was enlightening. BT, the Baldwins? C'mon!"

i did see some of it. sadly the british news services tend to center rather too much on local problems. in any case, of course their are muslims that support the war, that does not lessen the suggestion i made to MDS.

the real trouble is that - i think i can speak for lupe here as well - is that i would like to see saddam removed from power. i don't think anyone here likes saddam (anyone can feel free to say they do) but the question is one of HOW and WHY he is removed. i don't like GWB. i think he's a prick. a wanker. a tosser. an idiot. a bumbling incompetent. a puppet for his father. and many other things. doesn't mean i think that the SAS should storm the white house and double-tap him.

- qo.



posted on Nov, 6 2002 @ 05:22 AM
link   
yup thats the crux.

Private eye ran a nice piece of satire yesterday which I'll attempt to paraphrase

"BLAIR DECLARES WAR ON PUTIN!"

today tony blair announced plans for the swift military removal of president Putin.

"Putin is an oppressive Dictator, people who claim that his election was democratic are clearly unaware of the facts concerning the russian political system, which is rife with corruption and extortion.

We have known for many years that Russia has been producing weapons of mass destruction explicitly for use against the west, and recent events have shown that this evil man thinks nothing of gassing his own people, he must be removed"

just because I don't like saddam doesn't mean I'm willing to throw a hundred years of democracy down the drain and have the west labled a hypocrite.



posted on Nov, 6 2002 @ 10:17 AM
link   
ME blind or dense? Dood, take a look in the mirror. Your crap is, well, crap! You sit there typing anti-everything, left wing bull#, and have the gall to say that to me? Get a clue, clueless. Go back and actually read the posts instead of skimming and replying without getting your brain in gear. You know, I think you might just be my 14 year old sitting at his computer writing this clap-trap. He's just as good at twisting people's words as you are.

How about an intelligent, on point response from you for once?



posted on Nov, 6 2002 @ 10:43 AM
link   
you know, for somone who is seemingly trying to demonstrate that my contention that certain members of this board cannot cope with an argument that doesn't polarise into left / right Black / white is false, you certainly spend a lot of time demonstrating the trait:

"ME blind or dense? Dood, take a look in the mirror. Your crap is, well, crap! You sit there typing anti-everything, left wing bull#, and have the gall to say that to me?"

I don't need Gall deary.
just carry on your little "your bad because your a liberal" rant, your just adding credence to the argument.

How about an intelligent, on point response from you for once?

You got one, in fact you got two including a relevant piece of political satire. Unfortunately, you seem incapable of reading between the lines.
I can't really help with that I'm afraid but it is my sincere hope that one day concepts such as political irony and satire become recognisable to you.

they're great.
*nod*



posted on Nov, 6 2002 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Damn, Loopy, you are one funny M F'er!!!

First of all, if you would read my original post in this thread, that is, if you CAN read, you would notice that I took the middle road, putting forth the point that BOTH SIDES, left and right wingers, engage in propaganda, and the media is their mouth piece. Now, where, praytell, do you get "your bad because your a liberal" out of that? I have never siad that one side has more creedence than the other, as 90% of what is written here are people's opinions, and you know what the say about opinions. Just because your's deosn't agree with mine doesn't mean you are bad. I think you have a guilt complex going there, fella.

As far as an intelligent, on point response, I have posted many. All you are doing is twisting people's words to try to make your rediculous points hold water, which most don't. You really need to take your own advice there, bud.

Here, I'll challenge you back: Post a comment that has a basis in fact that you can back up from a reliable, unbiased source. And no, page 3 of your Brit tabloids are not a reliable source.

Now, your little parody could be characterized as satire, but it deserved no comment, as it was utterly absurd.

Again, you ask us all to "read between the lines" of your posts. How idiotic can you be? Are we to be mind readers? I, for one, cannot fathom the mental process that causes you to write what you DO write here. How on Gods green earth do you expect me to surmise what you DON'T write??? And if we all DID read between the lines, you would scream bloody murder that we were misquoting you! That's what I call a no win situation. Hence, I will stick to taking issue with what you DO write. At least there I havel your own words to use against you.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join