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.
Originally posted by marg6043
I have come to the conclusion that the "war on terror" is a hoax and a power grab for oil control in the middle east.
Originally posted by Astygia
You seem to believe that Bush and Co. being scumbags somehow equate to terrorists not being real.
I suppose you would have us believe that Hezbollah don't really exist and are all CIA plants, yes? And the Sons of Saddam? Holy Islamic Army? All video footage of these groups advocating violence during demonstrations, recruitment videos, and so on are fake, is that it?
My country's administration are a sick joke. This doesn't mean that there's no such thing as terrorists. While I highly doubt you've actually been to Iraq, I know for a fact we're not targeting civilians.
Originally posted by marg6043
I have come to the conclusion that the "war on terror" is a hoax and a power grab for oil control in the middle east.
Ted Rall
In 1996, he was one of three Finalists for the Pulitzer Prize. He was the New York Times’ most reprinted cartoonist in 1997 and 1999, and began doing color strips for both Time Magazine and Fortune Magazine in 1998. He was awarded the 1998 Deadline Club Award by the Society of Professional Journalists for his cartoons.
Rall received first place in both the 1995 and 2000 Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Awards for Cartoons. The award, founded in 1968, recognizes distinguished work on behalf of disadvantaged Americans.
Ted’s searing prose manifesto of generational angst, Revenge of the Latchkey Kids (Workman Publishing, 1998), received widespread critical acclaim and established him as one of America’s leading spokespeople for his age group.
I do know for a fact, because in the time spent there, my orders were never to kill civilians. But the 99/100 number is an interesting statistic, I'd like to see your reference. I don't rely on the media to tell me what to think; you said it yourself, "everything in the media is not real". Or does that only apply when it helps your case?
And you totally ignore the point where terrorists trained and supported by the Taliban flew planes into buildings on 9/11.
Originally posted by Astygia
My credibility can be verified easily; if attempting to disprove my identity is the only way you can fight my knowledge, let's take it to the next level, I will gladly send a copy of my DD-214 to any of the ATS staff so they can verify my identity.
Originally posted by Astygia
But if you get your take on the world from Mehr or al-Jazeera, I alone cannot convince you of this.
Originally posted by Astygia
So it's the US's fault that one tribe can't stop blowing the other one up now that Saddam's out of power. Convenient.
Originally posted by Astygia
I do know for a fact, because in the time spent there, my orders were never to kill civilians. But the 99/100 number is an interesting statistic, I'd like to see your reference. I don't rely on the media to tell me what to think; you said it yourself, "everything in the media is not real". Or does that only apply when it helps your case?
Originally posted by Astygia
Again, removing all responsibility from the parties involved. There is no debate as to whether or not subversive elements of US policy create "movements", but the responsibility also lies with those whom actually carry the plans out.
Originally posted by Astygia
I don't. Apparently the only parts of my posts you comprehend are those that show you to be wrong.
Originally posted by Astygia
Voices are being raised. The difference is we in America are convinced that using the democratic process, even it's been fouled, is the only way for reform. The only other option is the route of the extremist, which is dishonorable and dirty.
Originally posted by Astygia
Ask Bush, he's the "decider".
Originally posted by half_minded
I will not believe any NEWS after this!!!!!
Originally posted by DYepes
half, I suggest you try and ignore comments that will sidetrack the topic at hand, as hard as it may be.
Originally posted by yanchek
About the author
Ted Rall
In 1996, he was one of three Finalists for the Pulitzer Prize. He was the New York Times’ most reprinted cartoonist in 1997 and 1999, and began doing color strips for both Time Magazine and Fortune Magazine in 1998. He was awarded the 1998 Deadline Club Award by the Society of Professional Journalists for his cartoons.
Rall received first place in both the 1995 and 2000 Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Awards for Cartoons. The award, founded in 1968, recognizes distinguished work on behalf of disadvantaged Americans.
Ted’s searing prose manifesto of generational angst, Revenge of the Latchkey Kids (Workman Publishing, 1998), received widespread critical acclaim and established him as one of America’s leading spokespeople for his age group.
Look credible enough to me.
PS. Political cartoonists are quite often good journalists.
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
Originally posted by half_minded
I will not believe any NEWS after this!!!!!
err - OK , why did you believe this ???
you seem very easliy swayed -- basing your opinion of the entire media on one self agrandising account
BTW are you going to believe mr randall`s future output ? or has he hoisted himself by his own petard [/quote
That was there only to get people's attention. No one would click on a boring title and read through something that sounds boring.
I always make my title 'controversial' or interesting and also add some comments which would spark an argument.
I definitely dont mean that I literally wont belive any NEWS. I simply mean that I would question the credibility of the news and the truthfullness of it.
Originally posted by kojac
The entire American led WAR ON TERROR, has been nothing short of a disaster..
..its like using a flamethrower to fight a forest fire.
From this we are to conclude that the WOT is a joke. Also woven into this conclusion are the theories that the American gov't was responsible for bringing down the twin towers, and Iraqi casualty figures are vastly under-reported.
Rall should have titled his article "Why I am so much more believable than the green network weenies - my own opinion". Then he could have been called honest, if only for this one article.
Originally posted by Blarney
I've read Mr. Rall's story and found it interesting but it definitely did not shock me or tend to convince me to "not believe any news" as the title of the post suggests (which would also require one to "not believe" Mr. Rall's news).
Originally posted by Blarney
His story sounds credible and he appears to have adequate credentials. Taken as true, his story describes his personal view and experiences in Afghanistan. It certainly does not, however, stand for the proposition that all reporters in Afghanistan are not that competent, that all editors are editing out real news, or that the "real" news is still not getting out. It pays to get news from as many sources as possible.
Originally posted by Blarney
On the ABC News website, of which I am truly no great fan, I easily found stories about civilians being killed in a U.S. attack, how members of an attacked village were burying women and children, that U.S. bombing hit a school and surrounding homes, that the Taliban were never rooted out that they are "better armed and organized into large-scale units" and how most women in Afghanistan still wear Burqas.
Originally posted by Blarney
The use of Daisycutters in Afghanistan is no secret.
Originally posted by Blarney
Mr. Rall is human and appears to have his own biases as all other reporters do. He mentions in his story how he chooses not to go to press conferences and asks why would he go to the organized press conferences just to get lies. It is his personal choice -- but why not go? He cannot possibly know whether lies will or will not be told unless he first listens. Perhaps he can report what is being said at the press conferences and point out what appears to be true and not true according to what he is personally perceiving.
Originally posted by Blarney
The point of the post appears biased too. It seems the crux of the post was to argue that America's official version of what is going on should not be listened to, that we should side with America's opponents. I prefer to listen to as much information as I can obtain and make up my own mind.
Originally posted by Blarney
It seems like those that think Al-Jazeera's reporting is all true are biased. It likewise seems that those that think the 11:00 news on T.V. in America is all true are biased. I suspect in both cases that some things are true, some false, and some facts omitted.
In the end, the conclusion, I believe, is not to summarily dismiss all news but to eagerly search out as much news as one can find.