Support War? Support Bush? (country, Europe, cover, shows, quote)

DontRunMeOver · 10-17-2005, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat

As it was announced, the part where Kayne speaks will be cut out of later (not live) broadcasts. This means the media is controlling the information you are receiving. No they did not lie - but they did only tell you half of the truth in showing you only parts of the entire broadcast. This is where the danger lays - in the half truth we are being fed.

Damn right. Another problem is that we're brought up on these half-truths and they help to create our representations of reality. So that even when we're fighting against media biases we're mostly fighting against them from our own biased perspectives, which have already been greatly influence by previous media experiences.

IamAlejo · 10-17-2005, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat

Right - some people just disappear or have "accidents" - or if prominent enough - get shot.
(Just my take on this matter)

So you say it has to do with being able to criticize your government without consequnces to you ?
Is being not broadcasted not a consequence ?

As it was announced, the part where Kayne speaks will be cut out of later (not live) broadcasts. This means the media is controlling the information you are receiving. No they did not lie - but they did only tell you half of the truth in showing you only parts of the entire broadcast. This is where the danger lays - in the half truth we are being fed.

Not being broadcasted on a private broadcasting station is not a consequence. Kanye West has NO right to be broadcasted by that station, but instead was asked to come in and help for a fundraiser. His feelings which he stated were deemed inappropriate by that station which chose not to air them. It's a PRIVATE broadcast. They can chose what they want to air and what the don't want to air. It's not that hard to understand.

DontRunMeOver · 10-17-2005, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAlejo

Not being broadcasted on a private broadcasting station is not a consequence. Kanye West has NO right to be broadcasted by that station, but instead was asked to come in and help for a fundraiser. His feelings which he stated were deemed inappropriate by that station which chose not to air them. It's a PRIVATE broadcast. They can chose what they want to air and what they don't want to air. It's not that hard to understand.

Its still in the interest of the private broadcasters to suck up to the government at every possible opportunity. They choose which items would be of most benefit to them to air and which could cause problems. This is one of the reasons why little talks like Kanye's will be cut from broadcasts whereas the barefaced, outrageous lies which Bush's speeches are filled with and which are offensive to the lives and intelligences of most people around the world will be allowed to circulate.

Pat · 10-17-2005, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DontRunMeOver

Its still in the interest of the private broadcasters to suck up to the government at every possible opportunity. They choose which items would be of most benefit to them to air and which could cause problems. This is one of the reasons why little talks like Kanye's will be cut from broadcasts whereas the barefaced, outrageous lies which Bush's speeches are filled with and which are offensive to the lives and intelligences of most people around the world will be allowed to circulate.

My point, thank you.

Pat · 10-17-2005, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAlejo

Not being broadcasted on a private broadcasting station is not a consequence. Kanye West has NO right to be broadcasted by that station, but instead was asked to come in and help for a fundraiser. His feelings which he stated were deemed inappropriate by that station which chose not to air them. It's a PRIVATE broadcast. They can chose what they want to air and what the don't want to air. It's not that hard to understand.

No it is not hard to understand, you are correct. However....it is the half-truth I am talking about, which we came to used to. Regarding the later broadcast (and I don't know what was said) was it mentioned that this is a PART OF the fundraising program? Pobably it was aired as the program. Therefore viewers must believe that this is the entire thing and that all went nice and well. Nobody made comments which people might not like (regardless how close to the truth they might be).
This is where for me the danger lays. Getting served half of what was really going on.
Yes they can broadcast what they like - but then don't sell it to me as the news or information - when things are taken out. Tell me you are giving me an edited movie - and I will know what I get.

hookers with machineguns · 10-17-2005, 04:56 PM

Assuming, as you say, that they are giving us the half-truth. What would you do with the full-truth? Are you saying that all Americans are collectively ignorant on politics and current events because of the information our media and government is holding back? Some information has to be held back; that is the nature of central intelligence. And, media has always selectively presented their news; that is the nature of journalism.
In this case, you're being "inconvenienced" by the media presenting an edited version of a extremist political statement made by a Hollywood entertainer. It's a nonpolitical fundraiser, not a forum for people to promote their extremist politics. It was appropriately edited, because it politicized a nonpolitical event. Think of it as a fortunate thing that entertainers at least have the opportunities to make bold political statemnents. Think of it as a pathetic thing that Americans actually care and are eating it up.

DRMO- I also wouldn't give too much credit to GWB for constructing these "outrageous lies" you speak of. His writing team does more face-saving and exaggeration than lying (nothing that is unique to just this adminstration). Bush merely stumbles through what his staff is telling him to say. Just out of curiosity, how do you know that his speeches are full of lies? Are you in Homeland Security? FBI? CIA? Armed Forces? I think you are telling me the half-truth.

From what I can see, his team doesn't even give him much opportunities for him to lie or even tell the truth about policy specifics.

Btw, anyone see the theatrical, rehearsed video Q & A between Bush and the troops? Terrible.

Pat · 10-18-2005, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hookers with machineguns

Assuming, as you say, that they are giving us the half-truth. What would you do with the full-truth? Are you saying that all Americans are collectively ignorant on politics and current events because of the information our media and government is holding back? Some information has to be held back; that is the nature of central intelligence. And, media has always selectively presented their news; that is the nature of journalism.
In this case, you're being "inconvenienced" by the media presenting an edited version of a extremist political statement made by a Hollywood entertainer. It's a nonpolitical fundraiser, not a forum for people to promote their extremist politics. It was appropriately edited, because it politicized a nonpolitical event. Think of it as a fortunate thing that entertainers at least have the opportunities to make bold political statemnents. Think of it as a pathetic thing that Americans actually care and are eating it up.

.

What I would do with the full truth ?
Are you serious with this question? I would have the possibility and all necessary information to make a concious decision.
In an earlier post there is the expample about the information regarding Iraks weapons of mass distruction - and the fairy tale that they can see by satellite that a truck came and the weapons were moved to another location - but they don't know where they were moved to. Do you remember these news?
There are so many satellites up there - there is not even space for new ones. And we will not be told, that they can see all very detailed - so nobody can tell me, that they "did not know where the weapons were taken to". Always assume that there were weapons of mass distruction. So if I have to base my decision regarding who I vote for or what I can and will support or not on the stories I am being told - the full truth would be defenitely better. Don't you agree?

It's like you have an employee which accuses another of wrong doing. What makes a good and fair boss ? The one who listens to one and makes a decision based on one story of one person, or the one who will hear both sides of the story and try to come as close to the truth as possible and then make a decision ?

I am not saying that anyone is collectively anything. It is strange to me that you are the second person here, which has as location USA and feels personally attacked. When I talk about media and governments I do not exclude any government or any media.
No country, race, nationality - or any group has a monopoly on either inteligence or stupidity, on being good people or being bad people.
We are all that - human beings and the planet earth should be ours to live. I have travelled too much and worked all over the world with up to 52 different nationalities in the same place, working together in peace - to believe in seperation by borders, colour, religion, gender etc.

Yes media has always done this - being controlled what to say and how to say it - to get people to believe what they are fed. So you can control everyone. (But it must be true and like this - because it was in the news)
If it is not in the mainstream news - well it probably is not true. This is the idea of most people, which is simply scary.

I have not been inconvenienced - i have not been told the truth. As simple as that. Kayne West has a right to his opinion, I would like to hear it and then think about it and come to my own conclusion.
But I don't want to be told what to think or believe.

I'll throw something else at you: If I tell you, that there was a plane crash, there was a lot of fuel in the tanks and the plane exploded. Due to the heat generated all was burned, passenger can not be identified by remains and also the blackbox was burned into ashes, which is designed to withstand extreme heat. But - one piece of paper did not burn and was found some meters away from the wreck - or what was left of it.
You tell me, do you believe me?

hookers with machineguns · 10-18-2005, 04:47 PM

Your prior participations in elections is a total waste. After all, you've never been able to make a 'conscious' decision on politics, because you've never been told the full-truth. Yet at the same time, you have bold statements about Iraq's pre-war WMD controversy.

People are fully capable of forming conscious decisions based on the information that is given to them. Even with all the body of information at your fingertips, I doubt you would change your main ideologies. Most people are already biased towards a generic political position and selectively choose what information they perceive as credible and real, and what they perceive as lies and political jargon. Looking at both sides of an issue seems like a pretty obvious thing in making a strong decision about an issue. Still, I'm not sure if you do such a good job of this, because it seems pretty obvious you're a liberal. I apologize if this is not true or you are offended by this. It is just my observation, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

In this particular example, you yearn for the full-truth of an entertainer's opinion. Not an underlying conspiracy behind a criminal investigation, not an element of war/pre-war/post-war politics, not a terrorism or counterterrorism operation. I bet if Kanye was praising Bush, you wouldn't be here talking about it. You know, I've said things that are analogous to Kanye's remarks before, in passing, with friends, at parties, etc. However, I would never take advantage of a nationwide media outlet and make an unintelligent extremist remark like he did, especially in a nonpolitical climate, trying to raise money for a good cause.

In terms of the full-truth behind major current event issues, most of the "full-truths" are available to you. They are selectively and editorially presented by any given media outlet. Just like how the audience will selectively choose what they want to hear and believe. But, most of the information pertaining to hot topic current event issues like the Bush administrations domestic and foreign policy, Iraq history and culture, WMD and terrorism fact sheets, al Qaeda, Hurricane Katrina, etc. are all widely available in literature, the Internet, etc. Enough info for you or anyone else to disect and pick apart what you will consciously believe and take on as your own platforms.

Taking a break from things, I get personally attacked by bigoted closet-case racists on a daily basis, not by intelligent political back-n-forths on a music message board.

In terms of your last paragraph, no you cannot believe the paper tidbit because you are not presented enough information. That doesn't sound tactical, it just sounds like bad journalism. It has no significance, you can still make a political opinion of the disaster itself. This happened on 9/11, the use of fuel as an instrument of chemical terrorism. There's a lot of half-truths with that event. This would have been a better example for you to use. However, there is enough information presented in literature to know what happened, why it happened, and what can be done in the future. That is all. No matter how politicized it is, the 9/11 commission reports is a good source for such information, enough at least to make a 'conscious decision'. If you wanna know about every detail as to what piece of paper went missing that day, or how many people were stuck in the bathroom on the 57th floor, then you're asking for a body of information that is physically impossible and ideologically irrelevant.

Pat · 10-18-2005, 06:34 PM

Stopped voting a long time ago - not for reasons of information or non-information - simply to the fact that I left my "official" home country a long time ago and at that time internet and satellite TV was not an option.
I was in the US at the time of "reasons given to go for war", found the "campaign" very extreme and watched news from different parts of the world - which tell the same - yet in a different way. (Besides that I have worked with people in the Satellite business)

I do not say that people are not capable of forming their opinions - especially with all information on our fingertips by now. What I am saying is that still many people choose not to - and simply follow the herd.
And yes, you are correct, that people are biased towards a generic political position - and other generic views, from racism to religious ideas and everything else. And this is going on for generation.
You are calling me a liberal. What is a Liberal ? If you are talking about a "political liberal" - then I have to feel offended. If you talk about the meaning of the word and pick a certain definition - here it is: 5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
If so, then I am not offended and can say full hearted - Yes.
What would I want ?
What every human being wants. Peace, a roof over our head, clothes to wear (it is to cold here without) food, water and to be with the one I love.
i don't want to be in "war" with my neighbour or with another country. I don't want to run from gunshots and bombs. Don't want to starve or have no water to drink.
These are my simple needs. I have no problem if my neighbour is white, black red, yellow or puple (or whatever color), what religion or what believes one has. I just want my peace and not be told by others how I should live, what I should believe and with who I should hang out with.

I don't think I said that I agree with Kayne's remarks or if I found them appropriate. I just don't like the cutting off part of what he had to say.
Yet, if this is his opinion - so he shall be able to speak. I think we do not speak up often enough "because it is not appropriate". We always try to be politically correct - because we were told and taught so for generations. How nice it is to watch a child when they just speak their mind (and at times embarrasing) but they say what we would never say.
And I am including myself in this. (But working on it- of course)

You are correct regarding some information, which is impossible to find (people in the bathroom on the 57th floor) - yet you got my hint. I have a very different opinion on this entire thing - yet prefer not to go as far as posting it in a public forum. (Besides that I am aware that nothing done on the internet is a secret.....it might would hurt some people and I would prefer not to do that - even without knowing if it did or would hurt them)
If you like, you are very welcome to PM me.

I am sorry to hear that you get attacked on a daily basis by bigoted closet-case racists. This is something I never understood, why people give other people a hard time because of how they look. As I mentioned I come from a multinational environment and I know it does work and is possible. Yet I am not unfamiliar with this issue. We all are human beings and that is all there is to it. At least for me.

TheBig3 · 10-18-2005, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAlejo

It's not that hard to understand.

No its not. But you are blantantly avoiding the point. His comments weren't untrue. (cept perhaps the final one) and people put them away because it made people uncomfortable.

We shouldn't ignore the facts. Kanye said what millions were thinking.

View Poll Results: DO YOU SUPPORT BUSH AND THE WAR?
I DO SUPPORT BUSH AND THE WAR.	4	9.30%
I DO NOT SUPPORT BUSH AND THE WAR	39	90.70%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

10-17-2005, 04:56 PM	#146 (permalink)
hookers with machineguns Music Addict Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,753	Assuming, as you say, that they are giving us the half-truth. What would you do with the full-truth? Are you saying that all Americans are collectively ignorant on politics and current events because of the information our media and government is holding back? Some information has to be held back; that is the nature of central intelligence. And, media has always selectively presented their news; that is the nature of journalism. In this case, you're being "inconvenienced" by the media presenting an edited version of a extremist political statement made by a Hollywood entertainer. It's a nonpolitical fundraiser, not a forum for people to promote their extremist politics. It was appropriately edited, because it politicized a nonpolitical event. Think of it as a fortunate thing that entertainers at least have the opportunities to make bold political statemnents. Think of it as a pathetic thing that Americans actually care and are eating it up. DRMO- I also wouldn't give too much credit to GWB for constructing these "outrageous lies" you speak of. His writing team does more face-saving and exaggeration than lying (nothing that is unique to just this adminstration). Bush merely stumbles through what his staff is telling him to say. Just out of curiosity, how do you know that his speeches are full of lies? Are you in Homeland Security? FBI? CIA? Armed Forces? I think you are telling me the half-truth. From what I can see, his team doesn't even give him much opportunities for him to lie or even tell the truth about policy specifics. Btw, anyone see the theatrical, rehearsed video Q & A between Bush and the troops? Terrible. __________________ LASTFM

10-18-2005, 04:47 PM	#148 (permalink)
hookers with machineguns Music Addict Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,753	Your prior participations in elections is a total waste. After all, you've never been able to make a 'conscious' decision on politics, because you've never been told the full-truth. Yet at the same time, you have bold statements about Iraq's pre-war WMD controversy. People are fully capable of forming conscious decisions based on the information that is given to them. Even with all the body of information at your fingertips, I doubt you would change your main ideologies. Most people are already biased towards a generic political position and selectively choose what information they perceive as credible and real, and what they perceive as lies and political jargon. Looking at both sides of an issue seems like a pretty obvious thing in making a strong decision about an issue. Still, I'm not sure if you do such a good job of this, because it seems pretty obvious you're a liberal. I apologize if this is not true or you are offended by this. It is just my observation, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. In this particular example, you yearn for the full-truth of an entertainer's opinion. Not an underlying conspiracy behind a criminal investigation, not an element of war/pre-war/post-war politics, not a terrorism or counterterrorism operation. I bet if Kanye was praising Bush, you wouldn't be here talking about it. You know, I've said things that are analogous to Kanye's remarks before, in passing, with friends, at parties, etc. However, I would never take advantage of a nationwide media outlet and make an unintelligent extremist remark like he did, especially in a nonpolitical climate, trying to raise money for a good cause. In terms of the full-truth behind major current event issues, most of the "full-truths" are available to you. They are selectively and editorially presented by any given media outlet. Just like how the audience will selectively choose what they want to hear and believe. But, most of the information pertaining to hot topic current event issues like the Bush administrations domestic and foreign policy, Iraq history and culture, WMD and terrorism fact sheets, al Qaeda, Hurricane Katrina, etc. are all widely available in literature, the Internet, etc. Enough info for you or anyone else to disect and pick apart what you will consciously believe and take on as your own platforms. Taking a break from things, I get personally attacked by bigoted closet-case racists on a daily basis, not by intelligent political back-n-forths on a music message board. In terms of your last paragraph, no you cannot believe the paper tidbit because you are not presented enough information. That doesn't sound tactical, it just sounds like bad journalism. It has no significance, you can still make a political opinion of the disaster itself. This happened on 9/11, the use of fuel as an instrument of chemical terrorism. There's a lot of half-truths with that event. This would have been a better example for you to use. However, there is enough information presented in literature to know what happened, why it happened, and what can be done in the future. That is all. No matter how politicized it is, the 9/11 commission reports is a good source for such information, enough at least to make a 'conscious decision'. If you wanna know about every detail as to what piece of paper went missing that day, or how many people were stuck in the bathroom on the 57th floor, then you're asking for a body of information that is physically impossible and ideologically irrelevant. __________________ LASTFM

10-18-2005, 06:34 PM	#149 (permalink)
Pat Groupie Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: The World Posts: 1	Stopped voting a long time ago - not for reasons of information or non-information - simply to the fact that I left my "official" home country a long time ago and at that time internet and satellite TV was not an option. I was in the US at the time of "reasons given to go for war", found the "campaign" very extreme and watched news from different parts of the world - which tell the same - yet in a different way. (Besides that I have worked with people in the Satellite business) I do not say that people are not capable of forming their opinions - especially with all information on our fingertips by now. What I am saying is that still many people choose not to - and simply follow the herd. And yes, you are correct, that people are biased towards a generic political position - and other generic views, from racism to religious ideas and everything else. And this is going on for generation. You are calling me a liberal. What is a Liberal ? If you are talking about a "political liberal" - then I have to feel offended. If you talk about the meaning of the word and pick a certain definition - here it is: 5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms If so, then I am not offended and can say full hearted - Yes. What would I want ? What every human being wants. Peace, a roof over our head, clothes to wear (it is to cold here without) food, water and to be with the one I love. i don't want to be in "war" with my neighbour or with another country. I don't want to run from gunshots and bombs. Don't want to starve or have no water to drink. These are my simple needs. I have no problem if my neighbour is white, black red, yellow or puple (or whatever color), what religion or what believes one has. I just want my peace and not be told by others how I should live, what I should believe and with who I should hang out with. I don't think I said that I agree with Kayne's remarks or if I found them appropriate. I just don't like the cutting off part of what he had to say. Yet, if this is his opinion - so he shall be able to speak. I think we do not speak up often enough "because it is not appropriate". We always try to be politically correct - because we were told and taught so for generations. How nice it is to watch a child when they just speak their mind (and at times embarrasing) but they say what we would never say. And I am including myself in this. (But working on it- of course) You are correct regarding some information, which is impossible to find (people in the bathroom on the 57th floor) - yet you got my hint. I have a very different opinion on this entire thing - yet prefer not to go as far as posting it in a public forum. (Besides that I am aware that nothing done on the internet is a secret.....it might would hurt some people and I would prefer not to do that - even without knowing if it did or would hurt them) If you like, you are very welcome to PM me. I am sorry to hear that you get attacked on a daily basis by bigoted closet-case racists. This is something I never understood, why people give other people a hard time because of how they look. As I mentioned I come from a multinational environment and I know it does work and is possible. Yet I am not unfamiliar with this issue. We all are human beings and that is all there is to it. At least for me. __________________ Distance to love is like wind to fire. It extinguishes the small and enhances the big.