"No one with any real concern for the outcome takes that nonsense seriously, ('war-for-oil', 'daddy's revenge').."
Yes I do!
"Then don't expect to be taken seriously by people that are paying attention. That's stuff is just hysterical anti-bush rhetoric."
It all depends on what you call 'nonsense'.
"Giving you the benefit of the doubt about your English, when I say "I suspect..", that means I'm guessing based on what I know; I'm not proclaiming a fact, so relax."
I know you were just guessing, I know your language. But don't you think it is very easy to simply guess about other peoples' opinions when it's for your arguements' sake?
"Riiiiiight. Propaganda. Is that how you explain all opinions that differ from yours? Give it a rest. Get rid of your America-loathing left-wing wackos and let's see who's left. Then we can talk about that."
Well, over the past couple of weeks I've read some very interesting posts from you guys telling me what kind of people attended the protest I attended. These were socialists, communists, tree-huggers, cowards, activists, anarchists and some more interesting people. I saw none of them among the protest I attended.
"Americans don't have government-controlled news sources.
Well, maybe you can explain me why two different news sources, one the BBC and the other one The Washington Post/AP, on the same day and time brought two very different views on the events taking place. First, the BBC at their website said:
"Millions join anti-war protests worldwide"
and The Washington Post/AP informed their readers on their site:
"Thousands Worldwide Protest War In Iraq".
Here's another one:
On Friday the 14th of February, both the BBC as CNN put the transcript of Hans Blix report to the UN Security Council on their respective websites. Now CNN somehow made a 'mistake' and didn't publish the full report, but leave out some 750 words of Mr Blix's statement. These words just happen to be the ones where Blix refutes Colin Powell's 'smoking gun' presentation from earlier that week.
Coincidence? Don't think so! Thank God CNN discovered their 'mistake' and have added the missing text. To compare the original text, here the links to the facts: CNN's cached transript http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/14/sprj.irq.un.transcript.1/index.html
and BBC FULL transcript http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2763653.stm
Like I stated already in another thread, there is a large number of groups in the US, like the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI), the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Middle East Forum, the American Enterprise Institute, all with close ties to the Pentagon and White House. As British journalist Brian Whitaker has stated in a recent article "Although the last three are privately-funded organizations which promote views from only one end of the political spectrum, the amount of exposure that they get with their books, articles and TV
appearances is extraordinary."
My recent post on board about Iran taking the US to the International Court of Justice is another good example. I've just checked again with some 'news search browsers' but appearantly, the news hasn't reached the American media yet! I wonder why.