Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

More from the British media on the terror alerts...sm

Posted By: LVMT on 2006-08-15
In Reply to: What's more crazy than that? - Liberal

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/15/world_trade_center/

I wonder if Bush and Blair Force One are reading any of this. Would love it if Stewart and Colbert join in.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Time.com: Toying with Terror Alerts .... sm
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1211369,00.html
British Government Says Mothers With Babies New Terror Threat sm
British Government Says Mothers With Babies New Terror Threat
You're either with us, or you're with the babies.

British government security advisors and the national media are doing their level best to strike rampant irrational paranoid terror into the hearts of UK citizens by identifying the latest targets of the war on terror as pregnant women and toddlers.

Absurd delirious fearmongering continues in the British media with the Sun tabloid, Britain's most braindead and unfortunately also most popular newspaper screaming, HATE-filled mums willing to sacrifice themselves and their BABIES are being hunted in the war on terror.

Yes that's right you haven't slipped into an upside down parallel universe - pregnant women and mothers with young babies are the new Al-Qaeda.

The evidence?

The nightmare is that mums carrying tiny tots would provide “very good cover” and not raise suspicions among even the most alert security guards.

The Sun cited a senior Government security adviser as their source.

So let's ignore that guy with the turban who looks like Mohammed Atta and instead focus our magic screening wand on Mrs. Smith and her newborn infant.

Extra pat downs for young mums and making toddlers take their shoes off - boy do I feel safer now.

What's the next threat? Barney the purple dinosaur?

Of course we know what this is all designed to accomplish - it's about broadening the terrorist definition to the point where everyone's a suspect and everybody's behavior is under preposterous and suffocating scrutiny.

The implication that the most benign, harmless and innocent members of our society could in actuality be terrorist suicide bombers is a sick ploy crafted to ensure that absolutely no one is allowed to escape the self-regulating stench of being under suspicion.

It is also intended to brainwash the population that terrorists are potentially hiding under their beds, that they are everywhere and that only by a system of reporting suspicious behavior and unquestionably trusting the government will they too avoid the accusing finger.

This is classic Cold War style behavioral conditioning and the Neo-Fascist architects know exactly what they're doing.

Despite the status of alert returning to previous levels in both the US and the UK, ridiculous restrictions on travelers remain in place. Every time a new bout of fearmongering washes over a stupefied public, they are more pliable to new ways of being shoved around by government enforcers, even after the alleged plot has been foiled.

The fearmongering never subsides, it is always ratcheted up another peg in anticipation for future manufactured threats.
The future of airport security?

Why don't they just ban any luggage, clothing or personal accessories whatsoever and have done with it? Better yet - why not strap every passenger into a straight jacket from the moment they enter the airport?

In Knoxville, TSA officials are testing a biometric scanner device which interrogates passengers about their 'hostile intent' by asking a barrage of questions. If you thought the current delays and blanket 'everybody's a criminal terrorist' attitude were annoying enough, you ain't seen nothing yet.

In a similar example to the mothers and babies mindlessness, the London Guardian reports that located in the tranquil and peaceful rural surroundings of the British Lake District and Yorkshire Dales are terrorist training camps where Al-Qaeda devotees are preparing for their next big attack.

What's next? Bomb making factories under the Atlantic Ocean? Islamo Fascist brainwashing schools at the North Pole?

The sheer stupidity implicit in the Guardian article is bewildering. If the police haven't even questioned the alleged terrorists, allowing them to gather evidence of terrorist activity, because they're conducting covert surveillance of the group then why in God's name have they told a national newspaper, who in turn have splashed the story all over their front page?

If these supposed terrorists didn't know they were under surveillance before then they sure do now!

I live on the edge of the Peak District nearby the kind of areas being fingered as terrorist training areas. The closest thing to Al-Qaeda like activity up here is when a discourteous rambler leaves a farm gate open.

Again, it's about people who live in the country being smothered with the same raving paranoia and cockamamie fearmongering city-dwellers are subjected to. Woe betide anyone living in a converted barn house in the middle of miles and miles of wilderness think they can escape the war on terror - it applies to anything!

Baby formula, lip gloss, mothers and toddlers included.




Bush speech on terror, followed by *surprise* terror alert. Whaaaaaaaaat?

Bush took to TV cameras again to try to sell his Brooklyn Bridge of a war, this time tossing around buzz words like *communism* and *fascism.*  (Yawn)


But wait!!


Within a couple hours, during a televised news conference with Mayor Bloomberg, it was announced that evidence of a bomb threat specific to place, time and method had been received and that the source was very credible. (First thought: *But I thought were were fighting them there so we don't have to fight them HERE.*  Second thought: *This is bad.  We've been warned in advance of this.  Look what happened when we were warned in advance about Katrina?!*)


Yikes!


But wait!


Shortly following that news conference with Mayor Bloomberg, the powers that be in Washington issued a statement that the  threat has doubtful credibility.


Oh.


Okay.  Just another terror warning in America......or not.



This was on my MSN alerts this morning. See link inside.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27430997


And I have to agree....if this were am effigy of Obama and Biden??? Those two guys would be hauled off to the darkest dungeons of wherever there are still dungeons, never to be heard from again. Tongue in cheek, but still true.


I have used the British and French healthcare

I have visited and used both the British and French national healthcare system and I must say I was treated very_well in both countries.....and I think it is a great idea for THIS country now, having had first-hand experiences in Europe.. 


JMHO, of course.


Just like it wasn't British land....(sm)
when Britian decided to give it to the Jews.
Just as the British did in India and the American missionaries in Indochina. SM

It has finally come to the point where those of us who are aware and know what is coming and what we face will have to leave the rest to their own devices.  The really funny thing is, the liberals and their philosophy are especially loathsome to the Muslims with their support of gay rights, abortion, etc.  It's quite a contrast. 


So you're saying the left controls the media? I thought the media produced the story.
I haven't seen or heard one thing blaming Obama's crew for this. Where can I read about the right aligning to attack the left? Where did you find this information? Or is this just your observation and opinion of things?
Speaking of the media, let's take a poll who thinks the media has run amuck sm

and which ones do you think are the most ridiculous?  Fox News, NYT, AP, Wash. Post, CNN, your choice.


 


The war on terror is a war without end
It can never be "won," and will not be effective without drastic revamping that will involve global cooperation among many countries, not some "bring 'em on" cowboy mentality.

If we want to regain ANY of the respect we have lost over these last 8 years, we must start with walking the walk and talking the talk...with consistency. Without that, there will be no credibility.
War on terror --

Am I the only one to find this statement absurd:


  • Terror: Asked in a TV interview why he hasn"t used the oft-repeated "war on terror" phrase coined by the Bush administration, President Barack Obama said he believes the United States can win over moderate Muslims if he chooses his words carefully.

  • He wants to make friends with people who have taken the lives of so many Americans without conscience? 


    I'm not pro-McCain or pro-Bush and I'm not pro-Obama.  I'm pro-American.  I can't believe this guy thinks we should be trying to "win over" terrorists. 


    War on terror
    I agree 100%. You can't make friends with these people. They are committed to killing all of us. That is part of their religion.
    May God help us all if we get another terror attack.

    This president has ignored every single thing ever suggested to him, even as it regards terrorism.  I wonder what the terrorists will be planning for us in the future and how much information and knowledge they've learned from this about our weak spots.  They must see American frustration with Bush's incompetence, and they must really be enjoying that.  This is AMERICA.  We're supposed to have our act together.


    Yes, they have acknowledged the war on terror,
    but the world has not declared war on terror.  Terror isn't coming from Iran alone.  I think the president is premature in even mentioning a world war.  I am fairly convinced that the most of the middle eastern countries, whether friendly to the US or not, already have the knowledge for building nuclear weapons, it just a matter of getting the material, which sounds like they may get from Russia before the end of Putin's term.
    terror is an emotion

    How do you have a war against an emotion.  We have a discrete group of enemies we need to contain - not "fight a war on terror."  Slogans are for advertising, not world relations.


     


    Or another terror attack. Or a

    biological attack.  Or a flu pandemic.  Lots of scenarios available for his use. 


    I share your fears 100%.


    Wish I could move out of terror country
    Sweetheart, if I knew I could move to another country and get a job, even minimum wage, live in peace without knowing I live in the major terrorist country of the world with the most low IQ dufus president America  has ever had..you bet I would be out of here in a NY heart beat..
    Foiled Terror Attacks...sm
    http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/britain-thwarts-plot-to-bomb-us-bound/20060810015209990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
    Wounded Knee/Reign of Terror

     I think you are confusing The Siege at Wounded Knee beginning in February 1973 with the Reign of Terror as it was called by the indians the following three years. During those 3 years 64 tribal members were unsolved murders, 300 harassed and beaten and 562 arrests made of which only 15 were convicted. The seige ended after 71 days. In 1975 the FBI was following a red pickup truck to the Jumping Bull ranch where many AIM members as well as nonmembers were present..AIM having been asked there by the family for protection. What ensued ended in the death of 2 Federal Agents and 1 indian man. The red pickup truck was never seen nor heard of again. What happened is sketchy at best. Three indian men were tried in the deaths of the Feds. Two were acquitted and Leonard Peltier has been in prison for 27 years, although there is little evidence to support his incarceration...or I guess I should say, there was evidence at the time of the trial but at least 4 of the witnesses have recanted their testimonies. They state they testified out of fear. If nothing else, Peltier deserves a new trial and that has been proven and reproven, yet he does not get it.  During the 1973 Wounded Knee, 2 AIM members were killed and 12 others disappeared. There is quite a bit of information on this topic available for your perusal. Aho.


     


    P.S. The reason indians (traditional) would rather be called indians than Native Americans is because the land we lived on was not America until the white man came. Indians called this place Turtle Island. The Native Americans were, in fact, the first Europeans to arrive and name this place America, ergo, they were the first or Native Americans. We are the indigenous peoples, the indians.


    Admin...we have someone codoning terror on this board


    US attack on Iran may prompt terror













      MSNBC.com

    U.S. attack on Iran may prompt terror
    Experts say strikes on nuclear facilities could spark worldwide retaliation


    By Dana Priest


    Updated: 12:16 a.m. ET April 2, 2006



    As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.


    Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said.


    U.S. officials would not discuss what evidence they have indicating Iran would undertake terrorist action, but the matter is consuming a lot of time throughout the U.S. intelligence apparatus, one senior official said. It's a huge issue, another said.


    Citing prohibitions against discussing classified information, U.S. intelligence officials declined to say whether they have detected preparatory measures, such as increased surveillance, counter-surveillance or message traffic, on the part of Iran's foreign-based intelligence operatives.


    Bigger threat than al-Qaeda?
    But terrorism experts considered Iranian-backed or controlled groups -- namely the country's Ministry of Intelligence and Security operatives, its Revolutionary Guards and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah -- to be better organized, trained and equipped than the al-Qaeda network that carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.


    The Iranian government views the Islamic Jihad, the name of Hezbollah's terrorist organization, as an extension of their state. . . . operational teams could be deployed without a long period of preparation, said Ambassador Henry A. Crumpton, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism.



    The possibility of a military confrontation has been raised only obliquely in recent months by President Bush and Iran's government. Bush says he is pursuing a diplomatic solution to the crisis, but he has added that all options are on the table for stopping Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.


    Speaking in Vienna last month, Javad Vaeedi, a senior Iranian nuclear negotiator, warned the United States that it may have the power to cause harm and pain, but it is also susceptible to harm and pain. So if the United States wants to pursue that path, let the ball roll, although he did not specify what type of harm he was talking about.


    Rise in tension raises stakes
    Government officials said their interest in Iran's intelligence services is not an indication that a military confrontation is imminent or likely, but rather a reflection of a decades-long adversarial relationship in which Iran's agents have worked secretly against U.S. interests, most recently in Iraq and Pakistan. As confrontation over Iran's nuclear program has escalated, so has the effort to assess the threat from Iran's covert operatives.


    U.N. Security Council members continue to debate how best to pressure Iran to prove that its nuclear program is not meant for weapons. The United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to threaten Iran with economic sanctions if it does not end its uranium enrichment activities. Russia and China, however, have declined to endorse such action and insist on continued negotiations. Security Council diplomats are meeting this weekend to try to break the impasse. Iran says it seeks nuclear power but not nuclear weapons.


    Former CIA terrorism analyst Paul R. Pillar said that any U.S. or Israeli airstrike on Iranian territory would be regarded as an act of war by Tehran, and that Iran would strike back with its terrorist groups. There's no doubt in my mind about that. . . . Whether it's overseas at the hands of Hezbollah, in Iraq or possibly Europe, within the regime there would be pressure to take violent action.


    History of reprisals
    Before Sept. 11, the armed wing of Hezbollah, often working on behalf of Iran, was responsible for more American deaths than in any other terrorist attacks. In 1983 Hezbollah truck-bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 truck-bombed Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. service members.


    Iran's intelligence service, operating out of its embassies around the world, assassinated dozens of monarchists and political dissidents in Europe, Pakistan, Turkey and the Middle East in the two decades after the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought to power a religious Shiite government. Argentine officials also believe Iranian agents bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, killing 86 people. Iran has denied involvement in that attack.


    Iran's intelligence services are well trained, fairly sophisticated and have been doing this for decades, said Crumpton, a former deputy of operations at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. They are still very capable. I don't see their capabilities as having diminished.


    Both sides have increased their activities against the other. The Bush administration is spending $75 million to step up pressure on the Iranian government, including funding non-governmental organizations and alternative media broadcasts. Iran's parliament then approved $13.6 million to counter what it calls plots and acts of meddling by the United States.


    Given the uptick in interest in Iran on the part of the United States, it would be a very logical assumption that we have both ratcheted up [intelligence] collection, absolutely, said Fred Barton, a former counterterrorism official who is now vice president of counterterrorism for Stratfor, a security consulting and forecasting firm. It would be a more fevered pitch on the Iranian side because they have fewer options.



    Agencies mum on true threat
    The office of the director of national intelligence, which recently began to manage the U.S. intelligence agencies, declined to allow its analysts to discuss their assessment of Iran's intelligence services and Hezbollah and their capabilities to retaliate against U.S. interests.


    We are unable to address your questions in an unclassified manner, a spokesman for the office, Carl Kropf, wrote in response to a Washington Post query.


    The current state of Iran's intelligence apparatus is the subject of debate among experts. Some experts who spent their careers tracking the intelligence ministry's operatives describe them as deployed worldwide and easier to monitor than Hezbollah cells because they operate out of embassies and behave more like a traditional spy service such as the Soviet KGB.


    Other experts believe the Iranian service has become bogged down in intense, regional concerns: attacks on Shiites in Pakistan, the Iraq war and efforts to combat drug trafficking in Iran.


    As a result, said Bahman Baktiari, an Iran expert at the University of Maine, the intelligence service has downsized its operations in Europe and the United States. But, said Baktiari, I think the U.S. government doesn't have a handle on this.


    Facilities make difficult targets
    Because Iran's nuclear facilities are scattered around the country, some military specialists doubt a strike could effectively end the program and would require hundreds of strikes beforehand to disable Iran's vast air defenses. They say airstrikes would most likely inflame the Muslim world, alienate reformers within Iran and could serve to unite Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, which have only limited contact currently.


    A report by the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks cited al-Qaeda's long-standing cooperation with the Iranian-back Hezbollah on certain operations and said Osama bin Laden may have had a previously undisclosed role in the Khobar attack. Several al-Qaeda figures are reportedly under house arrest in Iran.


    Others in the law enforcement and intelligence circles have been more dubious about cooperation between al-Qaeda and Hezbollah, largely because of the rivalries between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Al-Qaeda adherents are Sunni Muslims; Hezbollah's are Shiites.


    Iran certainly wants to remind governments that they can create a lot of difficulty if strikes were to occur, said a senior European counterterrorism official interviewed recently. That they might react with all means, Hezbollah inside Lebanon and outside Lebanon, this is certain. Al-Qaeda could become a tactical alliance.


    Researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.


    © 2006 The Washington Post Company




    src=http://c.msn.com/c.gif?NC=1255&NA=1154&PS=69717&PI=7329&DI=305&TP=http%3a%2f%2fmsnbc.msn.com%2fid%2f12114512%2f

    src=http://msnbcom.112.2o7.net/b/ss/msnbcom/1/G.9-Pd-R/s53651515372730?[AQB]&ndh=1&t=2/3/2006%2011%3A47%3A43%200%20360&pageName=Story%7CWorld%20News%7Cwashington%7C12114512%7CU.S.%20attack%20on%20Iran%20may%20prompt%20terror%7C&g=http%3A//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12114512/from/ET/print/1/displaymode/1098/&ch=World%20News&v1=12114512%7Cfrom%7CET&c3=Dana%20Priest&c4=World%20News&c5=washingtonpost.com%20Highlights&v5=12114512%7Cfrom%7CET&c7=handheld&c8=N&c15=12114512&c16=Story&c18=00&c20=12114512%7Cfrom%7CET&c24=12114512%7Cfrom%7CET&c39=ON&pid=Story%7CWorld%20News%7Cwashington%7C12114512%7CU.S.%20attack%20on%20Iran%20may%20prompt%20terror%7Cp1&pidt=1&oid=javascript%3AprintThis%28%2712114512%27%29&ot=A&oi=631&s=1024x768&c=32&j=1.3&v=Y&k=Y&bw=644&bh=484&ct=lan&hp=N&[AQE]

    © 2006 MSNBC.com




    URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12114512/from/ET/


    Don't close Guantanamo until terror war ends
    We DO NOT want to give terrorists the same rights as American citizens......


    Excerpt from this article:

    "Once you go out and capture a bunch of terrorists, as we did in Afghanistan and elsewhere, then you've got to have some place to put them," he said. "If you bring them here to the U.S. and put them in our local court system, then they are entitled to all kinds of rights that we extend only to American citizens. Remember, these are unlawful combatants.



    http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4BE6T120081215
    They lie to perpetuate the war on false terror, and control with fear.nm
    z
    He wants to talk to Ahmadinejad....state sponsor of terror.
    He said so. Has he changed his mind?
    But, the war on terror concerns all countries. Other countries
    acknowledge the war on terror as concerning the world, so it is essentially a World War. 
    I think the media....

    often creates more questions and issues than politics in general.  I think all politicians are crooks and only out to line their own pockets with money, as evident by all the promises made during election year that never came into play during their actual term. 


    I go through spurts.  I get mad and then I stop watching and then I calm down and I start watching again and then I get mad again.  It is a vicious cycle. 


    Media

    not going to be timid this election about the deceptive way the RNC wants to paint them as liberal and pro-Obama.. They are openly discussing it as a divisive tactic that has been used over and over by the RNC.  Chris Matthews heatedly faced down Pat Buchanan last night over Pat's attempt to be Mr. Women's Rights regarding SP.  Chris noted that with this election, no one is supposed to look into McC or SP's activities or views.  If the media rightly investigates McC, they throw up the POW story.  With Palin, it is going to be Sexist story.  The media's job is to bring us information so we can decide.  Free press is essential to our country.  For this reason we must tolerate all extremes of opinion, as we must on this board. See MediaMatters.org for facts on media misstatements.


     


    The media is doing its best
    to make sure Obama is elected.  It is sickening how one-sided they all are, CNN, ABC, NBC, etc.  They totally overlook anything that might reflect negatively on Obama/Biden, and jump with glee on anything having to do with McCain/Palin.  What that CNN reporter did to Palin was a disgrace.
    I wish I could believe everything the media
    I have family that live in Arizona and Texas who are democrats. They said it was a known fact that illegals were voting left and right, all with fake SS#s and fake IDs. It hasn't been a secret that illegals are acquiring fake SS#s.

    One family member, who runs a large company out there, said he stood in line with many he knew were illegal while he watched them vote and pull out so-called IDs. He knew some of the companies (through the grapevine) some of these illegals work for and knew they were hiring illegals and yet there they stood, voting as if they had the right. Even standing in line bragging about how Obama would help their families. It's not a secret if you live in these areas where you see it happening all the time. Now, if you want to believe all the hundreds of thousands of illegals voting were somehow "legal" that's your business, but I do transcription every day from Texas with doctors questioning how a patient got on disability when they aren't even legal residents of this country, so it's no surprise to me how O got in there. Factor in all the illegals in California, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and it was a done deal.
    Media would be ALL over it if
    --
    when it happens, the media has been sm
    all over it! I don't know where you have been. Do I need to send you examples? My goodness they have even taken some of the more publicized cases and made movies out of them.

    Open your eyes!
    Considering that the media

    is so liberally biased....I'm sure there is a lot that we aren't being told the truth about. 


    Treating captive terrorists like dinner guests will not make them like us.  It will not stop attempts on American lives by terrorists.  All that will accomplish is letting them know that they can blow us up and kill thousands of Americans and all they have to do is sit in a prison until released and that is all they get out of it. 


    Terrorists that we have released from Gitmo have gone right back.  We didn't waterboard them.  They were released and joined back up with their terrorist pals again.  Gee....I guess they sure learned their lesson, huh?  Another free terrorist who can come back again and try to kill more Americans in the name of Allah.


    It seriously amazes me how you people defend these guys.


    Actually, the way I am reading it is the media is DOING it. SM
    Looking for some dirt.  That's the way I read the article.  Time will tell I guess. 
    Did the media jump all over...
    the horrible HORRIBLE things that Charlie Rangel said about Bush the other day.  Only O'Reilly.  The rest of the media has given it a pass, as usual. 
    It's clearly the LIBERAL media
    It's okay to trash Clinton but don't touch St. Ronnie. Besides, the producer is a friend of Rush,
    so clearly it's fact based....uh huh.

    http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2006/09/liberal-media-strikes-again.html
    Not so funny when it comes to the media
    doing the same thing to Repubs as they do to Dems?

    I do think it's wrong. Sound byte politics is wrong, wrong, wrong, no matter who it's directed toward.

    try Media Matters

    They go after both sides for inaccuracies.  They back up their points with facts.


     


    Media bias...

    Have you seen the two US Weekly covers, the one for Obama and the one for Palin?


    I just love this email sent by former Clinton operative and Us Weekly employee, Mark Neschis, that went out to all media in St. Paul:


    Thought I would send over our Us Weekly/Sarah Palin cover story, on stands Friday, if helpful in your coverage. Might be useful as an illustration of how the news is playing out.(Us Weekly has 12 million, mostly female readers)


    Mark Neschis
    Corporate Communications Director
    Wenner Media
    Us Weekly | Rolling Stone | Men’s Journal


    A former Clinton operative....smearing another woman in politics.  What a double standard!   Whatever respect I EVER had for the Democratic party...is gone.  Party before country, party before decency....party BEFORE.  NO thanks.


    What Obama needs to do now is put his money where is mouth is, and tell all his operatives to tell all their buddies on the blogs and media to cease and desist...if indeed he was sincere in his objection to this treatment.


    You got that right. Point is that media
    nm
    Media breakdown
    Sticking this here in case it's relative, not as a reply to above post. Have LOTS more if you want newspapers and radio too. Sorry, but this is a driveby for the night. I'm tired, irritated and incapable of human interaction today. *Disclaimer: Informational only, not interested in arguing.

    GENERAL ELECTRIC --(donated 1.1 million to GW Bush for his 2000 election campaign)

    Television Holdings:
    * NBC: includes 13 stations, 28% of US households.
    * NBC Network News: The Today Show, Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, Meet the Press, Dateline NBC, NBC News at Sunrise.
    * CNBC business television; MSNBC 24-hour cable and Internet news service (co-owned by NBC and Microsoft); Court TV (co-owned with Time Warner), Bravo (50%), A&E (25%), History Channel (25%).

    Other Holdings:
    * GE Consumer Electronics.
    * GE Power Systems: produces turbines for nuclear reactors and power plants.
    * GE Plastics: produces military hardware and nuclear power equipment.
    * GE Transportation Systems: runs diesel and electric trains.
    ==================================================

    WESTINGHOUSE / CBS INC.
    Westinghouse Electric Company, part of the Nuclear Utilities Business Group of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL)
    whos #1 on the Board of Directors? None other than:
    Frank Carlucci (of the Carlyle Group)

    Television Holdings:
    * CBS: includes 14 stations and over 200 affiliates in the US.
    * CBS Network News: 60 minutes, 48 hours, CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, CBS Morning News, Up to the Minute.
    * Country Music Television, The Nashville Network, 2 regional sports networks.
    * Group W Satellite Communications.
    Other Holdings:
    * Westinghouse Electric Company: provides services to the nuclear power industry.
    * Westinghouse Government Environmental Services Company: disposes of nuclear and hazardous wastes. Also operates 4 government-owned nuclear power plants in the US.
    * Energy Systems: provides nuclear power plant design and maintenance.
    ================================================================
    VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC.
    Television Holdings:
    * Paramount Television, Spelling Television, MTV, VH-1, Showtime, The Movie Channel, UPN (joint owner), Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, Sundance Channel (joint owner), Flix.
    * 20 major market US stations.
    Media Holdings:
    * Paramount Pictures, Paramount Home Video, Blockbuster Video, Famous Players Theatres, Paramount Parks.
    * Simon & Schuster Publishing.
    =============================================
    DISNEY / ABC / CAP (donated 640,000 to GW's 2000 campaign)
    Television Holdings:
    * ABC: includes 10 stations, 24% of US households.
    * ABC Network News: Prime Time Live, Nightline, 20/20, Good Morning America.
    * ESPN, Lifetime Television (50%), as well as minority holdings in A&E, History Channel and E!
    * Disney Channel/Disney Television, Touchtone Television.

    Media Holdings:
    * Miramax, Touchtone Pictures.
    * Magazines: Jane, Los Angeles Magazine, W, Discover.
    * 3 music labels, 11 major local newspapers.
    * Hyperion book publishers.
    * Infoseek Internet search engine (43%).

    Other Holdings:
    * Sid R. Bass (major shares) crude oil and gas.
    * All Disney Theme Parks, Walt Disney Cruise Lines.
    ======================================================

    TIME-WARNER TBS - AOL (donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign)
    America Online (AOL) acquired Time Warner–the largest merger in corporate history.
    Television Holdings:
    * CNN, HBO, Cinemax, TBS Superstation, Turner Network Television, Turner Classic Movies, Warner Brothers Television, Cartoon Network, Sega Channel, TNT, Comedy Central (50%), E! (49%), Court TV (50%).
    * Largest owner of cable systems in the US with an estimated 13 million subscribers.
    Media Holdings:
    * HBO Independent Productions, Warner Home Video, New Line Cinema, Castle Rock, Looney Tunes, Hanna-Barbera.
    * Music: Atlantic, Elektra, Rhino, Sire, Warner Bros. Records, EMI, WEA, Sub Pop (distribution) = the world’s largest music company.
    * 33 magazines including Time, Sports Illustrated, People, In Style, Fortune, Book of the Month Club, Entertainment Weekly, Life, DC Comics (50%), and MAD Magazine.
    Other Holdings:
    * Sports: The Atlanta Braves, The Atlanta Hawks, World Championship Wrestling.
    =======================================================
    NEWS CORPORATION LTD. / FOX NETWORKS (Rupert Murdoch) (donations see bottom note)
    Television Holdings:
    * Fox Television: includes 22 stations, 50% of US households.
    * Fox International: extensive worldwide cable and satellite networks include British Sky Broadcasting (40%); VOX, Germany (49.9%); Canal Fox, Latin America; FOXTEL, Australia (50%); STAR TV, Asia; IskyB, India; Bahasa Programming Ltd., Indonesia (50%); and News Broadcasting, Japan (80%).
    * The Golf Channel (33%).

    MEDIA HOLDINGS:
    * Twentieth Century Fox, Fox Searchlight.
    * 132 newspapers (113 in Australia alone) including the New York Post, the London Times and The Australian.
    * 25 magazines including TV Guide and The Weekly Standard.
    * HarperCollins books.

    OTHER HOLDINGS:
    * Sports: LA Dodgers, LA Kings, LA Lakers, National Rugby League.
    * Ansett Australia airlines, Ansett New Zealand airlines.
    * Rupert Murdoch: Board of Directors, Philip Morris (USA).

    *(Phillip Morris donated 2.9 million to George W Bush in 2000)*




    about Media Matters....
    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150
    That is how most of the media is showing it....
    McCain speaks at every rally also. Same with Obama and Biden. Biden speaks first, then Obama. That is the way they have done it for years. The VP candidate speaks first, then the Pres. candidate when they are at the same venue.
    No wonder they don't let her loose with the media.
    coached, rehearsed, restrictive and repetitive responses. It's like one of five answers fits all or is interchangeable between questions. How many times did she call him "Charlie?" So watch. Instead of "my friends," she's a first-namer. Did I hear the word nookuler, or am I just imagining that? Shallow. No suprise there.
    try not to believe everything the media tells you to....
    x
    because of lopsided media

    nm


     


    But the media, the dems, and

    all these Obama supporters just sweep that under a rug.  They continue to point fingers and blame others and yet they will take no responsibility at all for what they did.  They will not give McCain credit for his warning.  They will not admit that they ignored that warning.  I'm tired of the media having their nose up Obama's ars.  They call McCain a coward for wanting to postpone the debate when it was McCain who was pushing for the debate before until this and now he wants to be in Washington to help find a solution.  He wants to put the country first instead of his own personal campaign.  To me...this says a lot about McCain and yet the dems and the media can do nothing but downgrade.  How in the world are we to have a fair election when the media is so obviously one-sided?


    At this point, I really don't know that any candidate can get us out of this mess.  I guess I've just lost hope all around.  As for all those so-called plans Barry Obama promised.....he can't do a one of them....not that they would have worked in the first place but now it is impossible for him to even try.  So now what, Barry?  What else are you going to promise you will do that you can't deliver on?


    How can she be swayed by the media

    when she says she is picking McCain and the media is so far up Uhhhbama's butt that if they opened their mouth, you could see the top of his head.


    As for McCain disrespecting woman....that makes no sense.  He picks a woman as his VP and that is disrespectful to women?  McCain pays his women employees more than Uhhhbama does AND employs more women than Uhhhbama. 


    media brainwashing
    You want to buy a car that costs $45,000 and gets 11 miles to the gallon? You want a $100,000 loan for your kid's college. You want to buy a house that costs $350,000. Because if they don't pass this bill, all of these things will be cheaper and more affordable. And if they pass this bill they will keep house prices the same, the 401Ks the same, gas prices the same, food prices the same, college expenses the same, car prices the same..... Are you getting paid the same or less?
    You have to look at who owns the media. sm
    All the media is basically owned by 3 huge corporations. They have monopolized everything. The owners are part of the establishment (rich elites). Naturally, they want candidates who will fulfill their agendas so the establishment candidates get all the face time on TV. They marginalize and ignore the rest.
    I don't believe everything the media tells me to...

    Media causes trouble
    I think half the time it is the broadcasting of such statements that prompt people to react in such a way. It's almost like they feel it is expected, so they then act out.

    Plus the whole group mentality is freaky. Look at what people do sometimes after big sports events (like college games) ... even the winners. Like a pack of dogs!