lost&outofcontrol

Another great example of the media actually fabricating news.

Poisonous Gas dropped on villages by Israeli military in southern Lebanon

Idealist Get a clue...

link

Can you provide one single explanation as to how the same mechanisms can actually work WITHOUT capital???? Until then, your communism will continue to be a wonder. I'd rather not derail the thread more than I've already did.

As a capitalist, it is nice to see that saving and making more of the Almighty Dollar is what motivates it! As a communist, I wonder why money (stored capital) is required in the first place.

CNN link. Of course the story is under the caption - " Rockets strike Haifa, Israeli towns", you just have to forget that the civilian deaths on the Lebanese side outnumber the Israeli side by 20 to 1. bbc link If they are not targeting civilians then what, pray tell, are they doing?

DIGGING INTO GUANTANAMO: Kidnapping and deporting Civilians to Guantanamo Check your facts before spouting off. Shooting innocent people is a great idea!

School Officials Promote Fast Track to Incarceration

The Gaza/Lebanon Crises: Escalating Occupation & Danger of New Border Fighting

What was Anti-Semite in his post?! Stop calling everyone that disagrees with your views on the Middle East an Anti-Semite?!!?

Israel's monstrous legacy brings tumult a step closer. A partially accurate petty bourgeois liberal view the conflict.

Just being the devil's advocate here but given most fertility experts' views on life; I doubt they would regard commenting on the use of embryos as being something completely unrelated to them.

Wow, and I'm the one moving the goal post?!

Thank you for adding me to the map August1991.

Are you dismissing Charest's statement as having no substance? nor any political significance? From the same article: "Charest goes even further than his predecessor Bourassa, who stated in 1990 that it was up to Quebeckers alone to decide their future." For years, people have categorically dismissed Quebec independence as financially non-viable. The "No" side now has one less stupid weapon. Who knows why Charest said this. It may have been a trap. He may want to still be part of the action when Quebec separates. Nevertheless, his statement must open more ears (on both sides of the St. Lawrence seaway) to be more receptive to sovereignty. I hope and pray so. Couldn't not of said it better myself! One less bullet point the NO can use in the next referendum.

I agree but should we not reverse the question and ask what the Roman Catholic church is doing commenting on something completely unrelated to them.

The man is definitely not socialist. His party was originally a socialist party but in the past few years has radically moved towards the center to appeal to a wider voter base. Look at where that got Layton. For once I agree with you geoffrey. Marginalize your supporters for the possibility of gaining votes and you lose sight of your original goal. Obrador's party stabbed the Zapatista mouvment in the back and look where they're at now.

I never said this. They don't have too agree. If they want to stay in the position they find themselves now, they all end up acting the same way I'm not certain what you mean by this. Are you saying that the only source of news is a "news website"? That is simply incredible. The Internet started as a communications tool for research centres and academic reports still dominate. Many, many different organizations provide all kinds of information about virtually any subject imaginable.L&OC, I have the impression that you take an exceptionally narrow view of sources of information. Have you ever been to a library? Have you ever read a book? No I've never read a book, I'm illiterate.... I think you only see what you want to see in my post. The vast majority of news stories whether online or television originate from the major sources: AP, cnn, etc... A dominate group tries to maintain the structures in place which make them the dominate group. In this case, marketing is the structure. You do not need a cartel to accomplish this goal. If NBC was to pick up news stories highlighting human rights abuse by Coca-cola's Indian or Columbian plants where do you think Coca-cola will be spending its advertising dollars next time? You still don't get it.I am saying that people pay attention to news reports for information that is useful to them. In such reports, you can be reasonably certain that journalists will be careful to avoid errors. IOW, I am fairly certain that media reports about the finances of US auto makers (or Coke trade secrets) are as accurate as possible. I am fairly certain that media reports about Britney Spears (or human rights abuses in South America) are not. People pick and choose the information they want to know. People tend to know about things of direct interest to them. You don't buy peanut butter if you don't like peanuts. Journalist, editors, owners willfully ignore human rights issues. Many examples were presented to you by theloniusfleabag and myself and you've pushed them aside as being unimportant. What happens when peanut butter isn't offered in the first place? There you go again, just like Thelonious. You pick an example in Africa (but you provide an Internet link to a popular newspaper, undercutting your whole point.)If people want to know about the Congo or Nigeria, the information is easily available in Canada. In general though, individual Canadians don't care about Congo or Nigeria because it is far away and an individual Canadian can do absolutely nothing to change events there. Most Canadians wisely know this and as a result, most ignore articles about the Congo. Most people never hear about these news stories since most get there news from the major outlets who ignore or censor information hence the perception that they don't care. We have options available to us. We can stop supporting said companies; we can demand from our government to stop using our money as high interest loans to "underdeveloped" countries and stop SAP's. L&OC, your anti-Americanism seems to motivate your entire argument and that's unfortunate. In the process, you have lost sight of what information people choose to know and why they choose to know it. Oh please, I'm no more anti-American than I'm anti-Canadian. This goes back to what I said earlier. You see what you want to see in my post. Never did I say there's a bid mean conspiracy/cartel controlling what we hear. What I'm basically saying is that when reporting the news is in conflict with your main revenue stream, the consumer (you and me) lose.

And I quote The largest online "news" websites are either owned by these same media giants or get their news from these sources. And it's worst in the United States. You see Thelonious, according to August1991 nobody cares about human rights violation by the country that pertains to be the world police. All we want to hear about is if newspapers have a bias against US Auto producers or what our astrology has to say. I wonder what Britney Spears is doing today. If the media giants ignore a part of the world like the Congo for example, people won't ever know about it. Most people get their news from the major news sources. If the mass news outlets hide behind the “unbiased veil” then the majority of people won't ever hear about these stories. Why aren't we hearing from the mass media outlets about Nigerian Abuses by big oil. Coca-Cola's human rights Abuses in India or in Columbia (keep that in mind the next time you drink a can of coca cola ) and yet we hear about Coca-Cola's trade secrets being stolen. Which of the two stories would people want to hear? For the answer you must ask yourselves, how much a 30 second add cost.

Apparently your own people don't think so. http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm For the past 3 months, the only polls where the difference between approve/disaprove is lower than 15% are two Fox polls. All the other polls have it in the high teens/mid twenty.

This thread IS perspective. No need to worry, either can I. I'm not really sure what one has to do with the other. What I do know, is that this threat is a thousand times greater then any nut against abortion. There's no denying that fact. I apologize for making this thread veer a bit of course. What I'm trying to convey here is that while 3-4 billions dollars is lost to eco terrorism (which includes PETA members picketing in front of your local KFC by the way) every year over $200 billions dollars is lost due to while collar crime. I mentioned Patrick Parnaby's study on the squeegee kids of Toronto because in his study he demonstrates how a relatively harmless "problem" was turned into a threat to the very fabric of society by the media ignoring much bigger problems.

And I quote The largest online "news" websites are either owned by these same media giants or get their news from these sources. And it's worst in the United States. You see Thelonious, according to August1991 nobody cares about human rights violation by the country that pertains to be the world police. All we want to hear about is if newspapers have a bias against US Auto producers or what our astrology has to say. I wonder what Britney Spears is doing today. If the media giants ignore a part of the world like the Congo for example, people won't ever know about it. Most people get their news from the major news sources. If the mass news outlets hide behind the “unbiased veil” then the majority of people won't ever hear about these stories. Why aren't we hearing from the mass media outlets about Coca-Cola's human rights Abuses in India or in Columbia (keep that in mind the next time you drink a can of coca cola ). Nigerian Abuses by big oil. For the answer you must ask yourselves, how much a 30 second add cost.

We can't complain about the NSA's possible wrong doing because we as Canadians may do worst? Is that not your contention?

Ah yes, the right's best comeback; we should not not attemp to point out <insert targeted subject> flaws since <insert the other guy> is worst.