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.

 

Fox News really is unbelievable.

page: 5
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
This argument over who watches what news sources is just another transparent attempt to divide us. Personally, I think people who don't view all news sources are not to bright. They let one point of view control them, which is of course what the bad guys want you to do. It makes people easier to brainwash.

Those who are wise enough to consider all sides and who have the intelligence to separate out the useful information from the garbage, are the wise ones.

Since I watch them all, the news reporting is nearly identical on all of them. It's a shame so many here on ATS don't seem to know the difference between the Opinion and entertainment shows and the actual news reports.

Keep making this part of the argument and you are a part of the problem. They want us divided over senseless stuff and you are all enabling them to do that. With us all divided over Political Parties, Religions and information sources, they win. It's that simple and they know it. They know most of us are dumb enough to buy into it.

If you were not part of the problem, you would be having a discussion about which stories are accurate and which are propaganda. You will find ample examples of propaganda on all news sources.

It's no accident that all news sources, Right, Left or in the middle, report on the same stories every day. They are just playing to their market; the huge percentage of people who are willing stooges.

It permeates all of society, even here at ATS. Look how much of what makes the front page here is meaningless bickering and arguing orchestrated by those we pretend to be against. The answer is to unite, not divide. United, we control the world; divided the bad guys always control us. We deserve it in fact.




posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Chevalerous
 


It's not a joke, in America. We have real people, lots of them, who take this stuff very seriously. And if you think Fox news is bad, you should hear our AM radio.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by humbleseeker
I like Fox News, they have the hottest news woman on tv.


Maybe that's why

Fox News: DEAD LAST In Online Ratings

Most of Fox News viewers can't read. Reading online requires that skill. This is the result when there are no cheerleaders online.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

marshal law sucks.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]


Kind of a "nit" I suppose ...

But the word is "martial" law, not "marshall" law.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chevalerous

I guess they can't lie the same way to the International audience


And sometimes the reports and the reporting of same events (often Iraq & Afghanistan) was totally different and you could almost touch the propaganda because it was so thick.

If they needed to report something and the street's or their background were too quiet, they actually paid Iraqis to make a hell of a brawl and shout in the background.


And sometimes they apparently even reported from totally different more safe places than they said they were, when they were broadcasting home!


People from the International press must have had a blast at these American fabricated news segments - which were later sent home "as real news" to the Americans back home who were none the wiser.


you are not lying.

i was stationed at Tallil Air Base in Iraq in November of 2003. We were in our tent at the fire department watching CNN Europe, they were reporting and showing the bombing and military assaults of An Nasiriyah.

we walked outside and looked out over the river.

what was being reported as live, with explosions and chaos in An Nasiriyah
with huge plumes of smoke ... we couldn't see it, and we had a perfect view of that city.

what CNN Europe said was happening, and what was happening, were two totally different realities.

either CNN was correct, and our eyes were lying to us....

or our eyes were correct, and our CNN was lying to us.


news flash:
if they do not need to declare war in order to conduct military operations if foriegn countries, then they don't need to tell us we are under martial law, either.


honestly, does anyone here think that they would announce we are under martial law overtly to hundreds of millions of people simultaneously?



if so, you may be under-informed.


[edit on 24-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by damwel
Ah Jenna, now you show your true colors. [...] They even have you so brainwashed that you believe that Liberals CONTROL all the media but Fox.


Ah, so you didn't read my other posts in this very thread where I said I've watched them all before, but don't watch any of them at all anymore. Nice try, but I'm not brainwashed. Kinda hard to do that if I'm not tuned in, isn't it?


___________________



Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
don't get me wrong. i have nothing against whales. i have never personally met one. it just seems that more than 5 minutes on this story, repeating the same informaion about it more than a dozen times in that five minutes, is not "fair and balanced".


Perhaps nothing else was happening right that very second for them to report on? Spending 5-10 minutes reporting on a whale doesn't automatically negate their 'fair and balanced' slogan. There are plenty of people who care a great deal if a whale gets injured by man-made objects. After all, we are encroaching on their homes.


i haven't seen anything about the the wars all day on fox. i have not seen any coverage about iran all day. i have not seen any coverage about afghanistan all day. i have not seen any coverage of iran all day.


You said Iran twice.


Seriously though, after nine years of war there isn't much left to say about them other than to update us when another suicide bomber blows people up or when more people get killed. Can't exactly report on nothing but death all day though. As for Iran, it's been all over the news (in news articles anyway, don't know about on TV) for weeks now. Surely taking a break from Iran isn't a bad thing either.


if my tax dollars are paying for hundreds of military bases worldwide, i would like to be informed about what is transpiring worldwide with our military troops.


No need for headline tags. I can read it better without the text super-sized.


When something changes, it's on the news. If nothing is changing, what exactly would they report about it? "It's four o'clock, and all is well." "Five o'clock and no changes reported."
Do you really want to be updated if they buy new tables for the mess hall? Or re-paint the walls?



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


thank you for correcting my spelling error. i will correct that.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


see? watching fox makes me stupidererer

great, glenn beck is on...



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


I like how you not only attack Fox news , you also attack the people AND their intelligence that might watch Fox news. As if people who watch the particular news channel cant make educated decisions......

Sounds to me that people who fight so hard against channels like this, and will do ANYTHING to slander them, have something to fear........

Much like the White Houses all out war on Fox News.....

Of course they are biased, but ive watched all the news channels and at least Fox isnt afraid to report on things the other news channels wont even TOUCH.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Back on topic, the point really isn't about whether or not the Imam can make decisions or not. It's about how a couple of people on Fox always talk about the money trail and then make loose connects based on them. Well tracing the money trail of Fox leads to this Imam who supports his religion and apparently, according to Fox, has ties to terrorism. Applying Fox's logic to this situation, one can assume that Fox supports terrorism. This is joke more than an accusation meant to show the stupidity of some of the things Fox does. And personally,I think that if Fox would cancel Fox and Friends, it would make Fox a better network.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
You said Iran twice.



are you picking on me? that's ok.



No need for headline tags. I can read it better without the text super-sized.


ok. i can take constructive criticism.




When something changes, it's on the news. If nothing is changing, what exactly would they report about it? "It's four o'clock, and all is well." "Five o'clock and no changes reported."
Do you really want to be updated if they buy new tables for the mess hall? Or re-paint the walls?


my humor aside, being serious:

after eleven years in the military (98-09) with friends in postions, and my brother who held a position at the pentagon from 02 to 07, i have justifiable doubts as to how much truth is being made available to the general public via the msm. be it fox, cnn, msnbc, or even our ats.

there are alot of things going on that we are not being informed of, in my professional opinion, in all earnest, sincere, and genuine honesty.

and like you i only have pieces to a puzzle, and i don't know what the end puzzle is suppose to look like. i'm thinking the puzzle is not inches across, but rather light years across.

i take what i can stomach, and even as i type these words now i am watching Glenn Beck, whom i have difficulty listening to. but i do still help fox with their ratings at least twice a week, and have been for approximatley four years.

hope this helps,
et



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
reply to post by centurion1211
 


thank you for correcting my spelling error. i will correct that.


You're welcome. Except - like the member that wanted to put people up on a "pedal stool" instead of a "pedestal" - rather than being a simple misspelling, it denotes a lack of understanding of what the words really mean. It means people are just throwing words around here. Similar to the people here that throw the racist card at people that don't like a particular religion that includes people of all races.

Accurate communication is very important - especially when we're not face to face and so all we have to go on are the actual words (with no modifying expressions and inflections) that we type.

Thanks for your understanding.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


I like how you not only attack Fox news , you also attack the people AND their intelligence that might watch Fox news.


i watch fox news.


As if people who watch the particular news channel cant make educated decisions......


people can not make their own decisions, peoples' opinions are malleable.
malleable in this context meaning capable of being altered or controlled by outside forces or influences. utilizing neuro-linguistical psyops' tactics someones' priorities, actions and behaviors, and their opinions can be controlled and influenced without them consciously knowing it has occurred.

i do make note of your recalcitrant Magniloquence. thank you for your informed opinion.



Sounds to me that people who fight so hard against channels like this, and will do ANYTHING to slander them, have something to fear........


fear? not sure what that is.



Much like the White Houses all out war on Fox News.....


fox news did not wage war on the white house first?


Of course they are biased, but ive watched all the news channels and at least Fox isnt afraid to report on things the other news channels wont even TOUCH.


i've seen stories on all three networks i have not seen on the others.
i switch news channels every day, and watch them equally as much as i can.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
reply to post by centurion1211
 


thank you for correcting my spelling error. i will correct that.


You're welcome.


i don't like it when people do not correct my mistakes. i honestly appreciate it when i am corrected for my spelling errors, please feel free to correct this anytime if you see me do it.


Except - like the member that wanted to put people up on a "pedal stool" instead of a "pedestal" - rather than being a simple misspelling, it denotes a lack of understanding of what the words really mean.


don't get me started on what the words really mean. i'll say this, literacy is more than just left to right. one brief example:
stood [mirror] boots

anagrams.
usama bin laden
same letters as:
abuse mainland

back on topic...


Accurate communication is very important - especially when we're not face to face and so all we have to go on are the actual words (with no modifying expressions and inflections) that we type.

Thanks for your understanding.


i agree. well stated.

thanks for correcting my spelling error. yes, the teacher is always a student.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


Yeah, I think all the different CNN editions streamline and modify their news-segments depending on which audience who are the receivers.

And sometimes they screw up to seperate the propaganda to different editions, so they screw up totally


And if you're lucky you can actually watch this when it happens live in real time!

I have been lucky a few times, and it's always fun to see them screw up their agenda live.

Too many lies and propaganda for the producers to keep track on perhaps?



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
By popular demand:

Prince Waleed bin Talal and how we know the amount of News corp he owns.

1.

Google Video Link

You'll find the initial statement at about 46 sec during Rose's intro of him.

2. Also there is an article in the Financial Times (you have to register for access), for the greater good of ats I have registered, and will copy in the article.


Alwaleed backs James Murdoch By Kenneth Li in New York Published: January 22 2010 02:00 | Last updated: January 22 2010 02:00 Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia will back James Murdoch as Rupert Murdoch's successor at News Corp when the elder media tycoon is ready to retire. "If he [Rupert Murdoch] doesn't appoint him, I'll be the first one to nominate him to be the successor of Mr Rupert Murdoch, God forbid if something happens to him," Prince Alwaleed said on the Charlie Rose show this week. Mr Murdoch, 78, has shown no willingness to hand over the reins of the global media conglomerate he built from a pair of Australian newspapers. Today it spans book publishing and satellite television providers, TV networks and pay TV channels. Guessing Mr Murdoch's successor has been a favourite parlour game among media executives inside and outside of the empire. Prince Alwaleed's Kingdom Holdings owns a 7 per cent



stake, or 56m shares, of News Corp and is the largest shareholder outside the Murdoch family. The prince is not on News Corp's board of directors. "I have full confidence in him, full trust in him, and he's capable," the prince said. "He's really Rupert Murdoch in the making, and he's almost there now." James, 37, returned to News Corp in 2007 and is the chairman and chief executive of the Europe and Asia divisions, which include Asia's Star TV and the company's UK newspapers. Although he is viewed as the likeliest successor at News Corp, it is not a foregone conclusion that he will take over, as the elder Mr Murdoch has expressed publicly. Lachlan Murdoch, the eldest brother, was viewed as a likely successor until he resigned as deputy chief operating officer of News Corp in 2005. Late last year, he sold off his remaining non-voting stake in News Corp to fund his own media investments. Prince Alwaleed's backing of Mr Murdoch's youngest son


from his second marriage comes as he explores deeper alliances with News Corp. Last week, the Saudi billionaire met Mr Murdoch senior in New York to discuss "economic and investment issues, especially in the media sector" and a "future potential alliance with News Corp", according to a statement on the Kingdom Holdings website. News Corp struck a deal last year to distribute more programming to the Middle East and North Africa through Rotana Media, which is owned by Prince Alwaleed. The meeting with Mr Murdoch was part of the prince's visit to the US and Canada to review his investments and explore possible expansions. He also met Vikram Pandit, chief executive of Citigroup, and Richard Parsons, its chairman; Michael Larson of Cascade, Bill Gates's private investment company; and the heads of Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, Colony Capital and Fairmont Hotels. Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

Actually, I don't know if I should have posted that, well I'll put a summary in the event it needs to be removed. True, al Waleed is not on the board of director. He is however involved enough to to have his opinion heard as to who will inherit the company as well as to have worked out a deal with Murdoch to expand News Corp into the Middle East. What this proves is that these two men are not strangers, as some would hope, the shares were not randomly purchased on the open market without the knowledge of Murdoch, such as how if I had shares of News corp.

These two to have a personal business relationship. I don't personally care as indicated by my previous postings. However, the fact remains that they are "buddies" and you'd think the dumb ass commentators on Fox might want to be aware of that.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by searching4truth]

[edit on 24-8-2010 by searching4truth]

I removed the direct link, when I used it through the thread I saw my personal email and setting at the top of the page.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by searching4truth]



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
Regardless of who owns Fox or their parent companies shares, these are the people who actually control the parent company. As you can see Alwaleed is nowhere on the list and makes none of the decisions. From what I can find, he only owns 7% compared to Murdoch's 29% (not including his kids shares) but I can't find an actual original source for that percentage. Just sources that refer to other sources that are either unavailable due to requiring a subscription or don't exist anymore and I lack the time and inclination to use the wayback machine on them.




(note the flag that says "FOX" on the left)

Alawaleed holds meeting


Published: Aug 24, 2010 00:05 Updated: Aug 24, 2010 00:05

RIYADH: Rotana Holding Chairman Prince Alwaleed headed recently a board of directors meeting attended by News Corporation executives.

The meeting focused on the latest developments at Rotana and News Corporation, and ways to further strengthen the strategic corporate alliance between Rotana and News Corp. Alwaleed holds a strong presence in the media industry throughout the Arab world. Rotana Group recently won the third FM radio license bid in the Kingdom at a cost of SR67 million.


He's not on the board...but board members go to see HIM.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
If you were not part of the problem, you would be having a discussion about which stories are accurate and which are propaganda. You will find ample examples of propaganda on all news sources.


On this level? Hardly.

Fox News is reporting on Alwaleed's funding of the Cordoba Center...but never mentions his name, because they're protecting him. If he wasn't closely associated with News Corp, do you honestly think they'd pass on the opportunity to say "Al-Waleed bin Talal" as many times as possible? I mean, his name has "bin" in it - just like Osama BIN Laden!

But, since he's a crony of Murdoch, they avoid mentioning his name.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by searching4truth
These two to have a personal business relationship. I don't personally care as indicated by my previous postings. However, the fact remains that they are "buddies" and you'd think the dumb ass commentators on Fox might want to be aware of that.


They absolutely know - that's why they don't say his name.

It's a damn shame that the Daily Show is a more legitimate news source than Fox News.



posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


Well, I used the search function on foxnews.com the exact type was Prince Waleed bin Talal this discusses money he gave to Georgetown University and discusses the need for transparency into the donation and what the Saudi government endorses.

You do seem to have a point, this is the only thing I found before getting into bin Laden territory and quit looking. I even used the search on Beck's website and had no success.


Edit: There is also a one line mention of him here

[edit on 24-8-2010 by searching4truth]



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join