News slant

[Bingo]

Originally posted by Claeren@Aug 14 2004, 02:52 PM
hhmm...

- "FAR more" does not mean everyone.

- There are billions of people out there, all i am saying is that there were millions that had a strong argument against Bush's post 9/11 policies and they, until recently, were not properly represented in AMERICAN media. The reason the American media had that predisposition? A strong emotional and illogical response premised, in my opinion, upon again, bigoted and racist notions of the world.

-As was stated earlier about O'Reilly, people on the right, IMHO, seem to have a habit of having a plan and are looking for a reason to put it into action. The reasoning is second to the action (Intertwined with the very definition of the "right" on the spectrum). There is, in my experience, a common feeling in the States that Arab's "only understand force" and that "America has a right to do what it need to do". Both, in my opinion, are premised upon elitist and subconsciously (or not) racist notions of the world.


I honestly commend you, being on the right and while maintaining the ideals and values of that position being able to separate race and revenge against an entire people, from what you perceive the issues to be. But i stand by my original assertion that the far right wing America, the same that Bill O'Reilly represents, and the same that pushed Bill Mahar off the air are in fact less likely to be able to do so, and are in fact far more likely to be racist or bigoted. I am SURE we have different ideas of what constitutes racism though so... whole can of worms there....

Sorry though, i did not mean to suggest that you fit into that category, just that many AMERICANS on the right of their spectrum do….

Of course you have argued/will argue/could argue that makes ME bigoted, but this is all for the sake of conversation and how does one make ANY assertion in a conversaton without making some sort of presumption.....

Claeren.

To be honest I don't appreciate the extreme on either side of the equation ... far left or far right. They're both nuts.

You, however seem to take the far worst of the right side and use them to paint a pretty broad stroke against people with differing views than you.

Trust me. It's very possible to be pro removing a brutal dictator from power while still not wearing a sheet over one's head. I do it every day. I have sheets, I just don't wear them except the time I went as a ghost for Halloween.

I'm not racist. I'm not sexist. I'm not elitist. I am however a person that believes in confronting problems head on, something that I feel is done much more often by politicians on the right side of the equation.

Trying to use the extreme on the right to prove a leftist point is dangerous. Only a matter of time until that extreme left gets pulled out of the closet.

[Claeren]

lol...

So what your saying is that they are racist, so it is okay for us to be racist... ?

I dunno.... To me, Western world dominance over the world has always been most successfully legitimized when premised upon taking the moral high ground, whether illusionary or not (depending on circumstance). The cold war was a tit-for-tat escalating situation, but there is simply no connection between terror attacks against America and Iraq, no escalation, just preemptive war.

I guess you believe (as is your right) G.W.Bush actually believed Iraq was a big threat to America worthy of a $300 billion dollar resource allocation in the war on terror, but i don't. SO many aspects of this entire war, and by default the entire American right wing agenda, fall WELL beyond the moral high ground and the entire international community (and increasingly Americans) know it.

Essentially, this war has now positioned the western world in direct conflict that never before existed, effectively legitimizing all terror efforts by a (in this case Arab/middle eastern) minority in the minds of (in this case Arab/middle eastern) majority against America. Basically everything Bush does internationally is messy, it p*sses off people it doesn't need to, involves people that never wanted to be, and touches people negatively in far to many ways. It has set the precedent that America plays dirty and i don't see that how that helps humanity in any way....

Bringing it back on topic, all of that is because people rushed into something and were sucked into something they shouldn't have been, and how did that happen? People on the right like O'Reilly playing on peoples fears, fears that are based in no small part on the racist roots of fear of the unknown and self elitism. You are saying i am left wing because i think Bush and the AMERICAN-right are buffoons? All i am saying is that they should have acted TRULY right wing. Being fiscally responsible, allocating their limited resources properly, and trying whenever possible to maintain the rights and freedoms of the (American in particular) individual. NONE of which seem very high on the Rights agenda....

In fact i COULD ALMOST go so far as to say that the fear borne of ingrained racism and ignorance are the only things left of the American right, on the American right.... yeah...

Claeren.

[Claeren]

Originally posted by Bingo+Aug 14 2004, 11:14 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bingo @ Aug 14 2004, 11:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Claeren@Aug 14 2004, 02:52 PM
hhmm...

- "FAR more" does not mean everyone.

- There are billions of people out there, all i am saying is that there were millions that had a strong argument against Bush's post 9/11 policies and they, until recently, were not properly represented in AMERICAN media. The reason the American media had that predisposition? A strong emotional and illogical response premised, in my opinion, upon again, bigoted and racist notions of the world.

-As was stated earlier about O'Reilly, people on the right, IMHO, seem to have a habit of having a plan and are looking for a reason to put it into action. The reasoning is second to the action (Intertwined with the very definition of the "right" on the spectrum). There is, in my experience, a common feeling in the States that Arab's "only understand force" and that "America has a right to do what it need to do". Both, in my opinion, are premised upon elitist and subconsciously (or not) racist notions of the world.


I honestly commend you, being on the right and while maintaining the ideals and values of that position being able to separate race and revenge against an entire people, from what you perceive the issues to be. But i stand by my original assertion that the far right wing America, the same that Bill O'Reilly represents, and the same that pushed Bill Mahar off the air are in fact less likely to be able to do so, and are in fact far more likely to be racist or bigoted. I am SURE we have different ideas of what constitutes racism though so... whole can of worms there....

Sorry though, i did not mean to suggest that you fit into that category, just that many AMERICANS on the right of their spectrum do….

Of course you have argued/will argue/could argue that makes ME bigoted, but this is all for the sake of conversation and how does one make ANY assertion in a conversaton without making some sort of presumption.....

Claeren.

To be honest I don't appreciate the extreme on either side of the equation ... far left or far right. They're both nuts.

You, however seem to take the far worst of the right side and use them to paint a pretty broad stroke against people with differing views than you.

Trust me. It's very possible to be pro removing a brutal dictator from power while still not wearing a sheet over one's head. I do it every day. I have sheets, I just don't wear them except the time I went as a ghost for Halloween.

I'm not racist. I'm not sexist. I'm not elitist. I am however a person that believes in confronting problems head on, something that I feel is done much more often by politicians on the right side of the equation.

Trying to use the extreme on the right to prove a leftist point is dangerous. Only a matter of time until that extreme left gets pulled out of the closet. [/b][/quote]
For sure!

I agree! But all i am arguing is against the rashness and ignorance i feel is present in the American right wing, in particular in their handling of post 9/11 period. There are 300 billion other ways to have taken on this problem "head on", as you say. All i am saying is that the way they chose, the way the people rallied around, reeks of racist undertones. hhmm... let me put it this way, is it not easier to sell a bunch of lies to people if they want to believe you in the first place and if they have no interest in second guessing you? What i am saying is that the reason people were so willing not to ask questions was because they didn't care about people in Iraq. To them, (I am generalizing here) they are just a bunch more Arabs, people they need to fear/destroy/control/punish. To me that is based on a underlying racist world view.

YOU obviously see the world in a broader light and i respect that. But you are not in any way the typical Rightwing-American-everyman whose sole source of international news is the Bible and the O'Reilly Factor. (No offence - i am stereotyping i know, but polls and study's on American habits support STRONGLY what i am saying in that sentence.)

Claeren.

[TheCommodoreAfro]

Originally posted by Bingo+Aug 15 2004, 05:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bingo @ Aug 15 2004, 05:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-TheCommodoreAfro@Aug 13 2004, 11:29 PM
O'Reilly has a nose for this crap. It sells. Sort of like Springer. Rolling Stone takes a look behind the program, how it works, and how he chooses his programs. An excerpt

One has to be very careful of the source on both sides of the fence ... I know I take a lot of care myself.

A left wing magazine (Rolling Stone is certainly one, though not in a political nature) ripping O'Reilly to shreads doesn't hold a lot of water to me - just like Newsmax destroying Janine Garafolo is almost predictable.

Things in the US are so polar these days that it's getting harder and harder to find a true middle point without a clear bias in writing. [/b][/quote]
As much I agree with you, I think it's hard, if not impossible, to take a look at O'Reilly and not bring up a lot of what has painted his history. He's been a loud and obnoxious since day 1, and I don't see how that would change from a "middle of the road" source. I also don't know where a true "centrist" point of view lies anymore, what one is, and if it exists - almost anything written has bias (especially anonymous wire pieces)

I thought the article was pretty fair, and even-handed as it mentioned that he is just giving FOX what they want from him.

[TheCommodoreAfro]

Originally posted by Claeren+Aug 15 2004, 08:25 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Claeren @ Aug 15 2004, 08:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

To be honest I don't appreciate the extreme on either side of the equation ... far left or far right. They're both nuts.

You, however seem to take the far worst of the right side and use them to paint a pretty broad stroke against people with differing views than you.

Trust me. It's very possible to be pro removing a brutal dictator from power while still not wearing a sheet over one's head. I do it every day. I have sheets, I just don't wear them except the time I went as a ghost for Halloween.

I'm not racist. I'm not sexist. I'm not elitist. I am however a person that believes in confronting problems head on, something that I feel is done much more often by politicians on the right side of the equation.

Trying to use the extreme on the right to prove a leftist point is dangerous. Only a matter of time until that extreme left gets pulled out of the closet.

For sure!

I agree! But all i am arguing is against the rashness and ignorance i feel is present in the American right wing, in particular in their handling of post 9/11 period. There are 300 billion other ways to have taken on this problem "head on", as you say. All i am saying is that the way they chose, the way the people rallied around, reeks of racist undertones. hhmm... let me put it this way, is it not easier to sell a bunch of lies to people if they want to believe you in the first place and if they have no interest in second guessing you? What i am saying is that the reason people were so willing not to ask questions was because they didn't care about people in Iraq. To them, (I am generalizing here) they are just a bunch more Arabs, people they need to fear/destroy/control/punish. To me that is based on a underlying racist world view.

YOU obviously see the world in a broader light and i respect that. But you are not in any way the typical Rightwing-American-everyman whose sole source of international news is the Bible and the O'Reilly Factor. (No offence - i am stereotyping i know, but polls and study's on American habits support STRONGLY what i am saying in that sentence.)

Claeren. [/b][/quote]
This kind of racist rhetoric is not unusual. To this day, one would be hard-pressed to ignore the overt racism against Japan and subsequent decision to bomb Hiroshima.

An additional factor, often overlooked, is revealed by Truman’s first public announcement about the bombing of Hiroshima, when he pointed out that the Japanese had been "repaid many fold" for their attack on Pearl Harbor. Revenge (and racism) may well have played a subtle part in Truman’s willingness to go ahead with the atomic bombing of Japan. Throughout the war, many Americans viewed the Japanese as an inferior and barbarous race, deserving of annihilation. (On the home front, it should be noted, Japanese aliens and Americans of Japanese descent were singled out for confinement in "relocation camps" for the duration of the war.) Truman was a savvy politician with an innate sense of fairness, but he was not immune from wartime emotions and prejudice.

"Now is the time to exterminate the Yellow Peril for all time… Let the rats squeal."
—Congressman Charles A. Plumley, August 1945


One of the lingering questions of the war is about why nuclear bombs were not used in the German theatre, despite the fact they were actively trying to develop the weapons.

View on racism and the use of the bomb

[Bingo]

I honestly don't see a race issue in this at all.

Clearly there are racist people in all countries of the world - that will never change. There are Americans and Canadians that are anti-East Indian or Anti-Muslim because their parents were, and their parents before that.

But the bottom line in this is that they shot first.

From embassy bombings to the Cole to the first WTC attack to 911 ... it became clear to many (not all) that there was a serious issue in that part of the world, one that wasn't about to go away if you just turned your back and hoped it would (see Clinton).

I'm not a huge George Bush fan but I was really glad he was in the chair when 911 happened and not Al Gore. If Kerry wins the chair and continues an action based stance towrards the problems of the world I'll be on board with the Democratic party.

If he pulls out and just blows into a Sax with Hollywood friends then I think the world becomes a very, very dangerous place again.

Extremists of any colour - Islamic terrorists, IRA, militia in the US ... have to be confronted. Serious change has to happen in that region of the world or the whole thing will just go around and around again.

Should Bush have gone into Iraq? A very good debate in the light of the fact that no WMD were found. If they were there wouldn't be an argument.

If you believe the 911 Commission however, Bush was told that WMD were there, and I for one would have done the same thing. bin Laden, Hussein both hated the United States. If Iraq had these weapons (which they were actually proven to have at one point) it was only a matter of time until something bad could happen, and he just couldn't take that chance.

I just wish they had a plan to clean things up when the toppling was done. That was a huge mistake, one they are still trying to remedy.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by Claeren@Aug 14 2004, 11:25 PM

. But you are not in any way the typical Rightwing-American-everyman whose sole source of international news is the Bible and the O'Reilly Factor. (No offence - i am stereotyping i know, but polls and study's on American habits support STRONGLY what i am saying in that sentence.)

Claeren.

Prove it.

I'm so sick of being stereotyped by non-Americans.

If you're a conservative American, you're viewed as a bible thumping illiterate who doesn't know a lick about anything outside of the US and spends 12 hours a day listening to Rush Limbaugh and watching FOX news.

It's a big load of BS.

I guess it's cool to not like Americans these days. It, frankly, makes me sick watching people in other countries embrace that kind of stereotyping.

[I_H8_Crawford]

I suscribe to Maddox:

Bill O'Reilly is a big...

[FlamesAllTheWay]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Aug 14 2004, 08:58 PM
I guess it's cool to not like Americans these days. It, frankly, makes me sick watching people in other countries embrace that kind of stereotyping.

Well, some of your administration's descisions are what fuel alot of this growing anti-Americanism. After September 11th, America had the sympathy and empathy of many people around the world. But now, the opposite is true as anti-Americanism is on the rise. A percieved imperial war with Iraq, justified using evidence that has yet to be revealed a year later doesn't help. Bush's foreign policy of "**** you, we can do whatever we want" doesn't help matters either.

However, what alot of these anti-American people fail to grasp is that very, very few Americans are the imperialist, arrogant, exploiting individuals that they believe all Americans to be. Alot of the anti-Americanism comes from uneducated and uninformed viewpoints. Lots of people thinking America is out to take over the world (propoganda) or are high on their soapbox looking down at America, type of thing.

Personally, I don't agree with much of anything the Bush admin has done at all and I didn't support the war in Iraq but that doesn't mean I hate America or Americans.

Anyways, those are just my thoughts on the issue of anti-Americanism...

[Displaced Flames fan]

Great post FATW.

You're clearly able to do what most people in the world are incapable of. The Greeks seem to share your thoughts. Kudos to you and the Greeks.

[FlamesAllTheWay]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Aug 14 2004, 09:22 PM
Great post FATW.

You're clearly able to do what most people in the world are incapable of. The Greeks seem to share your thoughts. Kudos to you and the Greeks.

Heheh, thanks. You're one of the last people i'd expect to say that about one of my posts. The anti-Americanism definitely bothers me too, even though i'm not from America. Criticize away if you want, but at least make sure you got your facts straight first.

Anyways, let the Maher vs. O'Reilly debate continue...

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by FlamesAllTheWay@Aug 15 2004, 03:17 AM
However, what alot of these anti-American people fail to grasp is that very, very few Americans are the imperialist, arrogant, exploiting individuals that they believe all Americans to be. Alot of the anti-Americanism comes from uneducated and uninformed viewpoints. Lots of people thinking America is out to take over the world (propoganda) or are high on their soapbox looking down at America, type of thing.

Personally, I don't agree with much of anything the Bush admin has done at all and I didn't support the war in Iraq but that doesn't mean I hate America or Americans.

Anyways, those are just my thoughts on the issue of anti-Americanism...

As a foreigner in a foreign land allow me to comment on the subject of "Americans".

I really like Americans for the most part. They are kind, gracious people that are a fun to be around. They are also extremely paranoid, self-rightous, uninformed (nee uneducated) and place themselves above the crowd. That's right, they are a swell bunch of people, but they have a massive superiority complex and allow it to prevent them from seeing the world as it is and understanding WHY the majority of the world hates them. Most Americans feel that it is because "the rest of the world envies the US". That the US is so superior to other parts of the world that the foreigners are driven insane by their envy off all things that America has. Every other person on the planet, who is not American, wants to be American and wants to embrace the American dream! This is a core value of the average American and one that is consistently trotted out when the discussion of motivations it brought up. Now to me, that is just more proof of the idiocy of the average American and the over-inflated image they have of their own country.

The average American just doesn't get it. They just don't understand that there are cultural differences that affect motivations. Money and material gain is not the driving factor for many cultures. Having a McDonalds on every corner does not mean you have it good. Values differ from country to country and what Americans hold as having great value likely does not hold true in Iraq or Afghanistan or Angola or Kenya or Luxembourg. Each country is different, the people are different and the culture is different. But this is a very difficult concept for the average American to understand. They believe that everyone wants to emulate America and wants to be just like them. The fact of the matter is that this is what all Americans WISH the world do, that way they would indeed be the master of all and not have to worry about looking like dolts because they don't understand another culture and have no motivation to learn about another culture.

There perfect examples are on America's own soil. In Florida the Cubans are viewed as a problem. The hope is that Castro will die and all the Cubans will go flocking back to their god forsaken island and Florida will be rid of the scourage. The only thing that America has embraced from the Cuban culture is the sandwich. Beyond that they are viewed as third class citizens that are not worth the time of day. In Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California the Mexicans (nee Spanish) are the problem. All the ills these states are the problems of the damn Mexicans. If they could only ship the lazy bas**rds back where they came from the country would be better for it. They've even bas**rdized Mexican food and tried to take credit for that (Tex-Mex) away from the Mexicans (tongue in cheek here). And lets not forget the Cajuns of Louisiana, who have been oppressed for decades. These aren't really race issues, but cultural issues.

America, for all it has to offer the world and all the great things it does, it culturally ######ed. They don't know much about other countries and I feel that that scares them. They yak on and on about other countries wanting to be like America, but this is where they are dead wrong and what is a prime motivator for the immediate dislike for the country itself. Foreign nations are each unique. They have their own ways of doing things, their own culture and traditions, and their own lifestyle that they have become accustomed to. No one likes having someone come into their home and be told that their decorating is ugly, the music they listen to is horrible and that they dress funny. The comment I keep hearing is that the people in the Middle East live like they are from the stoneage. Hey, maybe they do, but they do so because they choose to. They have decided that this is culturally the way to live. But Americans can't accept this because it is foreign to them and they fear differences. They want to be comfortable where ever they go, and that means having indoor plumbing they know how to use, having housing that is in the American tradition, having food that is familiar (that McDonalds on every corner is so comforting to them) and have everyone speak english.

America is confused by many as being multi-cultural. This is as far from the truth as you can get. America is exactly what it advertises itself to be. A mixing pot. Everyone is tossed into the soup and the differences melt away and the broth envolps you until you become part of a homogenous liquid that America. Differences are not embraced except in areas where the like minded live together. Canada and many of the European nations are truely multi-cultural, embracing (begrudgingly at times) the differences between races, but not the United States. The US is a meat grinder that does its best to get its citizens to conform to that national standard. That standard is believing that you live in the greatest country in the world, that you are cradle of invention and that you are better than anyone else.

That's the way I see it as someone who has lived in quite a few different locations in the United States. I love the country (it really is beautiful) and the people can be awesome (I have a lot of friends down here that I would give my life defending), but I sometimes wish that America would take a big step back, take a look at itself, get educated about the rest of the world and try to walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. I think the world would be a much better (and safer) place to be.