Two sets of video clips from today.

[JazzManJim]

I got to see within the space of about 15 minutes two sets of video clips. One set of clips was from the Coalition troops in southern Iraq of cheering, smiling, crying townspeople hugging the soldiers who have given them their lives. The other set of clips was of anti-war protests in San Francisco and Washington showing angry screaming people blocking traffic and defacing police cars.

I found myself in that time very gratified to have supported the actions that produced the first set of clips and not the second.

 

[Mountain Man]

I can't say that I am fully for what is happening in the deserts of Iraq right now...

But I agree with you. I find what is happening in the cities of this country is sickening me right now.

We all nee to support those that have put their lives on the line.

 

[patient1]

I haven't been following the San Francisco protests. I do know that there is a complicating factor with regard to the police, because of a scandal of some officers ( including the chief's son) beating up people while off duty. There was a an exposed cover-up & charges brought against many people in the department.

 

[TWB]

I can't support the acts of people when it involves killing other people.

 

[Worm]

I can't support the acts of people when it involves killing other people.

Good thing you weren't President when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

 

[teddybear4play]

Good thing he's not President now.

TB4p

 

[miles]

I can't support the acts of people when it involves killing other people.

What if someone was breaking into your house armed with an automatic weapon, swearing to kill you and your family?

If killing him is the only way to stop him, I hope your family would support you.

No, it isn't different.

 

[Spinaroonie]

They never show the peaceful protests.

 

[Guest]

 

[patient1]

I can't support the acts of people when it involves killing other people.

Zmey! Is that you?

 

[morninggirl5]

They never show the peaceful protests.

They've shown practically every protest.

Interesting that a rally in support of our troops that had 10 times as many people as the largest protest here in Atlanta never made it past the local news.

 

[Zmey]

Zmey! Is that you?

I thought I was ignored damn it!

 

[Linedrive]

They've shown practically every protest.

Interesting that a rally in support of our troops that had 10 times as many people as the largest protest here in Atlanta never made it past the local news.

Same thing here, the anti-war protests have taken most of the coverage. We heard nothing of the Atlanta support protest, had to find it buried away as a blip in the news.

 

[patient1]

There being no such thing as media bias, how can we reconcile these facts?

 

[teddybear4play]

They never show the peaceful protests.

What news do you watch?

TB4p

 

[Spinaroonie]

What news do you watch?

TB4p

I rotate around. Some days I'll watch one, some days I'll watch another.

The local ones here even covered the planning of the troop support ralleys.

 

[Linedrive]

Newsmax.com


From the establishment media's astonishing lack of coverage of the patriotic rallies and obsessive devotion to the appeasement demonstrations, you can't prove whether they're biased or just inexcusably ignorant. Now the Chicago Tribune has inadvertantly admitted they do know what's going on but just don't feel like covering the news.

"Some of the biggest rallies this month have endorsed President Bush's strategy against Saddam Hussein, and the common thread linking most of them is Clear Channel Worldwide Inc., the nation's largest owner of radio stations," the Tribune complained Thursday.

"In a move that has raised eyebrows in some legal and journalistic circles, Clear Channel radio stations in Atlanta, Cleveland, San Antonio, Cincinnati and other cities have sponsored rallies attended by up to 20,000 people. The events have served as a loud rebuttal to the more numerous but generally smaller anti-war rallies."

Check out what's going on here. The only reason the Tribune can stomach admitting the popularity of the patriotic gatherings is to criticize Clear Channel. Otherwise there'd be no mention that the pro-U.S. rallies of up to 20,000 people dwarfed the smaller appeasement demonstrations.

And why does the Tribune fail to raise its eyebrows over who's backing the appeasement rallies? After NewsMax helped break the story of the movement's Marxist backers, Fox News Channel confirmed this with its own report. Why won't the Tribune, New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, etc. admit this reality?

 

[celiaKitten]

Welcome, everyone! Watch, while history repeats itself.

 

[MechaBlade]

I can't support the acts of people when it involves killing other people.

But what if someone broke in your house and started threatening to kill you and your family? And his name was Osama bin Laden? Wouldn't that make you want to kill Saddam Hussein for some reason? Because they... um... are the same person or something...

I find myself immensely satisfied to have supported the action of the second group of people while still supporting our troops in the way that I hope that they don't get a single scar (those who have died aside, of course, because it's too late).

 

[MechaBlade]

Welcome, everyone! Watch, while history repeats itself.

History? You read too many books. You need to watch more TV. That will tell you whether we're doing the right thing or not.

 

[celiaKitten]

History? You read too many books. You need to watch more TV. That will tell you whether we're doing the right thing or not.

There are so many things wrong with that statement I don't even know where to begin.

As far as the protests go, history is certainly repeating itself as this is the normal outcry against them. It's nothing new.

Television is not the way to find out about right and wrong. You need to read, learn, meet people outside of your bubble, put yourself in other's shoes - even the ones you disagree with so violently, you need to be humble, you need to be strong.. so many more things than watching television coverage to know right and wrong.

The world is not black and white.

 

[Ange1icflowers]

I mean...think about it....the rallys for peace have been signifigantly MORE violent than the war really! C'mon...if you are gonna protest war...especially because (and from what I can see this is one of the biggest reasons) of the human toll (# of casulties...both civilian and Military)...why are you gonna a)block the roads and cause accidents and huge traffic jams....b) forbid ambulances from getting to people who need help and c) keep police dragging their sorry asses from out in front of a federal building when they could be out securing bridges and buildings from terrorists....and one more thing...Where do these people come from? Don't they have jobs or anything??? I mean..c'mon there has GOT to be something better in your life for you to do other than stand in the middle of the road, carrying signs...yelling at the top of your lungs..and getting your asses kicked by police. Eh....it makes no sense to me...but that's just me.

Angel

 

[MechaBlade]

There are so many things wrong with that statement I don't even know where to begin.

As far as the protests go, history is certainly repeating itself as this is the normal outcry against them. It's nothing new.

Television is not the way to find out about right and wrong. You need to read, learn, meet people outside of your bubble, put yourself in other's shoes - even the ones you disagree with so violently, you need to be humble, you need to be strong.. so many more things than watching television coverage to know right and wrong.

The world is not black and white.

It was sarcasm. Nobody should get their opinions from TV. However, 65% of Americans do, evidently.

 

[Linedrive]

It was sarcasm. Nobody should get their opinions from TV. However, 65% of Americans do, evidently.

You basically assume anyone who is supporting the President is a sheep, which shows your true colors. This may be a hard concept for you to grasp, but there isn't a conspiracy and hidden adjenda behind every intention the US government ever puts foward. Who could deny the Administration has much more information about the situation at hand than anyone else.

Instead of throwing out insinuations that people supporting this action are only led by the tv, post something meaningful that strengthens your viewpoints.

 

[sweet soft kiss]

I mean...think about it....the rallys for peace have been signifigantly MORE violent than the war really! C'mon...if you are gonna protest war...especially because (and from what I can see this is one of the biggest reasons) of the human toll (# of casulties...both civilian and Military)...why are you gonna a)block the roads and cause accidents and huge traffic jams....b) forbid ambulances from getting to people who need help and c) keep police dragging their sorry asses from out in front of a federal building when they could be out securing bridges and buildings from terrorists....and one more thing...Where do these people come from? Don't they have jobs or anything??? I mean..c'mon there has GOT to be something better in your life for you to do other than stand in the middle of the road, carrying signs...yelling at the top of your lungs..and getting your asses kicked by police. Eh....it makes no sense to me...but that's just me.

Angel

I think everyone should have the right to protest. I don't believe in using violence to protest violence. However I certainly wasn't in San Francisco, and I do remember Chicago in 68. While the protesters may have been provacative, the police and national guard took it too far there. I am not sure that there wasn't some of that same type of dynamic going on there.

On a lighter note. Did anyone catch the video of the Marine pulling down a poster of Saddam? A native garbed gentleman came up and starting beating the nose portion of the poster with a shoe. He looked happy. Nothing like showing the folks at home that we are winning hearts and minds...