PDA

View Full Version : State Department: Carter Meeting With Terrorists 'Not in the Interest of Peace'


Jeremy
04-10-2008, 02:31 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,348989,00.html

NEW YORK ? Former President Jimmy Carter's upcoming meeting with senior officials of the Palestinian terror group Hamas is "not in the interest of peace," according to State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

FOX News confirmed on Thursday that Carter will travel to Syria next week for an unprecedented meeting with the senior leadership of Hamas. The State Department has designated Hamas a "foreign terrorist organization," a stance McCormack reiterated.

McCormack said that although the State Department would "provide support befitting a former president," Carter had been "counseled" earlier this week that such a meeting was not in the interest of U.S. foreign policy.

Carter originally was slated to travel throughout the Mideast with a group of statesmen and philanthropists including Kofi Annan, the former secretary-general of the United Nations, but Carter now will be traveling without the group.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Annan on Tuesday, according to the State Department, which would not confirm whether the Syria trip was discussed in the conversation; however, Annan pulled out of the trip after the call. A spokesman for Annan in Geneva could not be reached for comment.


McCormack once said of the prospect of meeting with Meshal, "That?s not something that we could possibly conceive of."

Earlier Thursday a senior Hamas official confirmed reports of the meeting, according to the Associated Press.

The official, Mohammed Nazzal, told the AP that Carter sent an envoy to Damascus requesting a meeting with Hamas leadership, including Meshal, and that Hamas "welcomed the request." The meeting will take place on April 18, he said.

Meshal, who lives in Syria to avoid being arrested by the Israeli government, leads Hamas from his seat in Damascus, where he is a guest of President Bashar al-Assad?s regime.

Carter would be the first Western leader of his stature to meet with Meshal. Though Meshal met with Clinton officials in the 1990s, the Bush administration has sought to isolate Hamas, enforcing rigid sanctions on its government in Gaza and refusing to meet with its leaders unless it recognizes Israel and abandons terror.

The two founders of Hamas, the cleric Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, were killed by Israeli air strikes in 2004.

FOX News' Nina Donaghy contributed to this report.

millwalldavey
04-10-2008, 02:39 PM
Ahhh Fox News. The Voice of the 4th Reich.

Dino 6 Rings
04-11-2008, 08:17 AM
Ahhh Fox News. The Voice of the 4th Reich.

Could just as easily be called the Voice of Anti-Communism.

millwalldavey
04-11-2008, 11:44 AM
Could just as easily be called the Voice of Anti-Communism.

Anti-communism and outright hate speech are two different things.

Fox news channel is very (c)overtly anti-gay, anti-anythingnotchristian. When it comes to race/ethnicity isues they are not as blatant on thier stance but if you observe closely they are very pro-white.

Mind you, I'm got giving any of the other news services a pass. There is no truly partial news service that does not spin to the right or the left.

revefsreleets
04-11-2008, 11:57 AM
I'm rethinking my position on this. Israel is considering opening talks with some terrorist backing nations, and we aren't saying or doing anything to stop them, so it seems odd for us not to consider all options. I'm not necessarily saying I agree with negotiating with terrorist regimes, but I think it's time to try new approaches to old problems.

millwalldavey
04-11-2008, 02:46 PM
I'm rethinking my position on this. Israel is considering opening talks with some terrorist backing nations, and we aren't saying or doing anything to stop them, so it seems odd for us not to consider all options. I'm not necessarily saying I agree with negotiating with terrorist regimes, but I think it's time to try new approaches to old problems.


I'd agree. The old ways do not work and are only making the problems in the world worse. Anger only runs deeper when people fight and men and women only end up dead, innocent or not.

Time to stop arguing over who is right and wrong. WE ARE ALL WRONG! Every country or group is guilty of provoking and prolonging all of these conflicts. Time to put it to rest.

Jeremy
04-11-2008, 03:19 PM
What a concept. Not doing something the Ivy Leaguers said how to do.

I just have to wonder how much longer we're going to let the "educated" folks who have no common sense run the country.

tony hipchest
04-11-2008, 03:37 PM
for some reason this current regime kinda pulled the same shit when bill richardson went to north korea to retrieve some bodies of our fallen servicemen.

while he was there he did some nuclear program shutdown negotiations that kinda "showed up" the current administration.

then again, richardson has been looked at much more favorably by hostile nations as opposed to those currently in power.

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=16226&highlight=Bill+Richardson

The Bush administration has made clear that the focus of the trip is on the expected transfer of U.S. remains, and Richardson says he is not planning to negotiate nuclear matters.

But analysts say Richardson's visit might still help ease tensions between the North and the United States.

millwalldavey
04-11-2008, 03:38 PM
What a concept. Not doing something the Ivy Leaguers said how to do.

I just have to wonder how much longer we're going to let the "educated" folks who have no common sense run the country.


Ahhh. 'common sense' Every time someone comes up with an idea that consrvatives do not agree with because it knocks thier feelings of superiority down a notch or two, they drop 'common sense' on the rest of the world. I'd pay to have one conservative explain common sense to me and to be able to express thier opinions without the posturing and insulting of those the do not agree with.

I dunno, I would consider ideas that have this mythical 'common sense' to be those that lend themselves toward discussion and negotiation rather than terror and conflict. I would say comon sense would lead toward finding a way to keep more people alove.
The 'common sense' that is preached on any side seems to me to be the one that causes the most problems and gets the most pepole killed.

I'm the last person to say to anyone to lay there and take what people dish out, but change starts with action and positive actions will have people follow them by the example before. Same as negative actions have been doing since the beginning of time.

Conservativism sucks as does liberalism. All it is is devisive, just like political party affiliations. Religions have been perverted to these ponts as well. Maybe we should all just try to appreciate each other and this world will be a better place. Utopian to say the least, but why can it not be possible?

Dino 6 Rings
04-11-2008, 04:36 PM
Utopia can not be possible because Humans have the power of Free Will.

You can never give everyone everything they need or want to create a Utopian society as long as people have a free will to take their own path.

99 people out of 100 might want to go down the right path, but that 1 person, wants to go left...if you do anything at all, to thwart his personal decision to go left, you by design and definition, end the Utopian society by imposing the majority's will upon the minorty.

millwalldavey
04-11-2008, 05:28 PM
Utopia can not be possible because Humans have the power of Free Will.

You can never give everyone everything they need or want to create a Utopian society as long as people have a free will to take their own path.

99 people out of 100 might want to go down the right path, but that 1 person, wants to go left...if you do anything at all, to thwart his personal decision to go left, you by design and definition, end the Utopian society by imposing the majority's will upon the minorty.

Well stated!

Do we think Humans are capable of a society at least where we can live and let live?

tony hipchest
04-11-2008, 05:37 PM
Well stated!

Do we think Humans are capable of a society at least where we can live and let live?

nah, if all else fails we will have to start killing eachother off for food and water.

TheWarDen86
04-11-2008, 05:41 PM
nah, if all else fails we will have to start killing eachother off for food and water.

I'm an advocate for arming EVERYONE. It will be a bloodbath at first. I, myself may not survive, but after a while I believe the population and crime issues will be resolved for the most part. I forget who said it, but I'm inclined to agree that, "A well armed society is a polite society."

Of course I say this TIC, but only slightly. :wink02:

Preacher
04-11-2008, 05:42 PM
Well stated!

Do we think Humans are capable of a society at least where we can live and let live?

In short?

No.

Every society has seen a need for laws and rules because humans have a marked capacity for evil which they cannot deny. Some fulfill that capacity with small actions (selfishness at a low-level, such as not letting people in a lane at a traffic jam because of egoism) some fulfill it at a moderate level, which is where many of our crimes are at, and some at major levels, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Saddam, etc etc.

That is the essence of human nature. Yet, we are dichotomized because we also have the ability to reach for and produce such beauty. Unfortunately, either we, or someone else will always work to mar the beauty.

Thus, we must have a society that is alway prepared to meet evil head on. Force must be dealt with by force. One can not rationalize with the base human evilness when it has been allowed to manifest. That, in essence, is why we must meet terrorism with force, instead of words. Words will only serve to embolden those who resort to the evil base instinct. There is a common sense phrase for that, "give them an inch and they will take a mile."

What needs to happen instead, is an ultimatum. If this happens, we will give this. However, if that happens, we will give that. Then, the person has the CHOICE to put away the baser instincts or to live in them. When they choose to put them away, they then re-enter the community (international community in this aspect). That is EXACTLY what happened to Libya. When they choose not to, then we deal with them in their base instincts (Saddam).

Jeremy
04-11-2008, 06:52 PM
Ahhh. 'common sense' Every time someone comes up with an idea that consrvatives do not agree with because it knocks thier feelings of superiority down a notch or two, they drop 'common sense' on the rest of the world. I'd pay to have one conservative explain common sense to me and to be able to express thier opinions without the posturing and insulting of those the do not agree with.

I dunno, I would consider ideas that have this mythical 'common sense' to be those that lend themselves toward discussion and negotiation rather than terror and conflict. I would say comon sense would lead toward finding a way to keep more people alove.
The 'common sense' that is preached on any side seems to me to be the one that causes the most problems and gets the most pepole killed.

I'm the last person to say to anyone to lay there and take what people dish out, but change starts with action and positive actions will have people follow them by the example before. Same as negative actions have been doing since the beginning of time.

Conservativism sucks as does liberalism. All it is is devisive, just like political party affiliations. Religions have been perverted to these ponts as well. Maybe we should all just try to appreciate each other and this world will be a better place. Utopian to say the least, but why can it not be possible?

Congrats! You're the first person on this board to call me a conservative.

Preacher
04-11-2008, 07:26 PM
Congrats! You're the first person on this board to call me a conservative.


:sofunny::sofunny:

millwalldavey
04-11-2008, 09:41 PM
Congrats! You're the first person on this board to call me a conservative.

Jeremy... hopefully you are not offended, this was not an attack on you, just a comment on some of the things you chose to say and the way i construed them. This is some of the best conversation I've had in a while and I appreciate it!

millwalldavey
04-11-2008, 09:47 PM
Every society has seen a need for laws and rules because humans have a marked capacity for evil which they cannot deny. Some fulfill that capacity with small actions (selfishness at a low-level, such as not letting people in a lane at a traffic jam because of egoism) some fulfill it at a moderate level, which is where many of our crimes are at, and some at major levels, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Saddam, etc etc.


Interesting. But what is 'evil'? Who is to construe what is evil and what isnt, or who is being evil or not? Perspective I guess. You mention some people above who based on their actions could be evil, but so can some of the moves made by our country, especially the corporate interests in 3rd world countries. Just like we generally consider many of the things we do and 'good' because we are doing them, so did the populations of some of the nations ruled by these despots above.

GBMelBlount
04-12-2008, 06:52 AM
Ahhh Fox News. The Voice of the 4th Reich.

LOL. Fox is more fair and balanced imo than any of the other major news networks. I would imagine it may just be due to your perspective that it appears otherwise.

GBMelBlount
04-12-2008, 06:56 AM
Fox news channel is very (c)overtly anti-gay, anti-anythingnotchristian. When it comes to race/ethnicity isues they are not as blatant on thier stance but if you observe closely they are very pro-white.



Please give me some examples and we'll see how this common sense theory of yours applies. Also, if they are "very-pro-white", why would you have to observe so closely, wouldn't it be obvious?

GBMelBlount
04-12-2008, 07:11 AM
Ahhh. 'common sense' Every time someone comes up with an idea that consrvatives do not agree with because it knocks thier feelings of superiority down a notch or two, they drop 'common sense' on the rest of the world. I'd pay to have one conservative explain common sense to me and to be able to express thier opinions without the posturing and insulting of those the do not agree with......

Maybe we should all just try to appreciate each other and this world will be a better place. Utopian to say the least, but why can it not be possible?

First you say that conservatives have no common sense...then you suggest appreciating each other may create a utopian world..... :tap:

revefsreleets
04-12-2008, 08:19 AM
Shifting gears (but only slightly), I am reading a fascinating book: "Leaderless Jihad" by Marc Sagemen. The guy takes a very scientific approach to the problem of international terrorists, how they become "radicalized, and, most importantly, he has developed strategies to combat and redirect the process. It's probably the most informative book I've ever read concerning terrorism. He debunks almost all the myths about who these people are and how they become terrorists. HIGHLY recommended!

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 08:39 AM
LOL. Fox is more fair and balanced imo than any of the other major news networks. I would imagine it may just be due to your perspective that it appears otherwise.

Hmmm? someone bought the Fox News tagline. Their work is complete. Check your own perspective before you comment on mine please, because this comment reveals yours. There is no such thing as fair and balanced news coverage. Watch the commercials and consider the companies that run them during the news broadcasts and you will see who frames the outlook of a particular news channel, be it Fox, CNN, WhateverNBC.

Please give me some examples and we'll see how this common sense theory of yours applies. Also, if they are "very-pro-white", why would you have to observe so closely, wouldn't it be obvious?

The pro-white sentiment is very covert on Fox News. It is very difficult to be openly pro-white on a major network. Observe the stories run by Bill O. and listen to his comments. And think about them (mostly the stories the way and order they are presented). I have refused to watch Fox since I moved out of my Father?s house, so I can?t pull anything directly from memory.

As for anti-gay and anti-Christian stances? they waste no time in trying to paint Gays as degenerates. They run the most negative and over-the-top stories about them. And who is the network who turned all Muslim fighters into ?terrorists?? This network contributes more to anti-Muslim sentiment than ANY media outlet in the world. Sorry to tell you, but all Muslims are not out to get Israel or the United States. Granted, there are some very bad people among their ranks, but the majority are good people like you and I who just want to live their lives. Where are those stories?

First you say that conservatives have no common sense...then you suggest appreciating each other may create a utopian world..... :tap:

I never said anything about Conservatives not having common sense. Good spin there! I said that every time that a group they do not like does something they do not agree with they criticize them by saying they have no or are not using ?common sense?. Rather than come up with any actual stance with why they do not agree, they paint it with an amorphous lack of ?common sense?. Most of them could not even tell you what common sense is. It?s an easy cop-out.

As for a utopian world? I know it isn?t possible. But it?s a nice thought. Perhaps you are alluding to the fact that I do not appreciate conservatives? My father who I love dearly is a hard line conservative. My future wife is a devout Catholic who is more conservative than anything. I appreciate all people. I know we are flawed, no matter what your feelings are. I just think it is possible to be civil to one another and not force our agendas down one another?s throat. That would make this a better world. I hope I don?t com off as forcing an agenda, which some people may think I am. I just like to call people out on their BS, especially the media. I am neither Liberal nor Conservative. Show me some Liberal crap, and I?ll call them out on it too!

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 08:42 AM
Shifting gears (but only slightly), I am reading a fascinating book: "Leaderless Jihad" by Marc Sagemen. The guy takes a very scientific approach to the problem of international terrorists, how they become "radicalized, and, most importantly, he has developed strategies to combat and redirect the process. It's probably the most informative book I've ever read concerning terrorism. He debunks almost all the myths about who these people are and how they become terrorists. HIGHLY recommended!

Interesting. Where did you find this? Does he focus on Muslims only or all terrorist groups?

Jeremy
04-12-2008, 08:47 AM
LOL. Fox is more fair and balanced imo than any of the other major news networks. I would imagine it may just be due to your perspective that it appears otherwise.

Wow....no. Not even close. Rupert Murdoch has come out and admitted that FOX News caters to their conservative viewers. When the owner of the the network says that, it totally destroys the ability of that network to create a "far and balanced" news program.

But anyway.....

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 08:55 AM
Exactly Jeremy. Same thing with CNN and Turner.

silver & black
04-12-2008, 09:19 AM
Anti-communism and outright hate speech are two different things.

Fox news channel is very (c)overtly anti-gay, anti-anythingnotchristian. When it comes to race/ethnicity isues they are not as blatant on thier stance but if you observe closely they are very pro-white.
Mind you, I'm got giving any of the other news services a pass. There is no truly partial news service that does not spin to the right or the left.

Yeah, and all the print media are 180 deg. the other way.... so what?

silver & black
04-12-2008, 09:25 AM
Ahhh. 'common sense' Every time someone comes up with an idea that consrvatives do not agree with because it knocks thier feelings of superiority down a notch or two, they drop 'common sense' on the rest of the world. I'd pay to have one conservative explain common sense to me and to be able to express thier opinions without the posturing and insulting of those the do not agree with.

I dunno, I would consider ideas that have this mythical 'common sense' to be those that lend themselves toward discussion and negotiation rather than terror and conflict. I would say comon sense would lead toward finding a way to keep more people alove.
The 'common sense' that is preached on any side seems to me to be the one that causes the most problems and gets the most pepole killed.

I'm the last person to say to anyone to lay there and take what people dish out, but change starts with action and positive actions will have people follow them by the example before. Same as negative actions have been doing since the beginning of time.

Conservativism sucks as does liberalism. All it is is devisive, just like political party affiliations. Religions have been perverted to these ponts as well. Maybe we should all just try to appreciate each other and this world will be a better place. Utopian to say the least, but why can it not be possible?

It isn't possible for the simple fact that humans suck.

I hate political parties and all the BS and red tape that goes with them, but what is the alternative?... Anarchy?

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 09:28 AM
[/B]

It isn't possible for the simple fact that humans suck.

I hate political parties and all the BS and red tape that goes with them, but what is the alternative?... Anarchy?

If one understands the true reasoning of anarchy, and understands that it does nt simply mean 'chaos', it is an interesting idea. Human nature at present prevents this from being possible on a large scale.

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 09:29 AM
Yeah, and all the print media are 180 deg. the other way.... so what?

This is why I said the things I said. I did not exclude print media from my reasoning.

Jeremy
04-12-2008, 09:37 AM
[/B]

It isn't possible for the simple fact that humans suck.

I hate political parties and all the BS and red tape that goes with them, but what is the alternative?... Anarchy?

No, power corrupts. Politicians have taken what the philosophies are suppossed to represent, and with the help of hacks like Glenn Beck and Al Franken, and twisted them to fit their need to acquire and keep power in this country.

Haven't you ever wondered why rural areas don't elect farmers and steel workers?

silver & black
04-12-2008, 09:44 AM
If one understands the true reasoning of anarchy, and understands that it does nt simply mean 'chaos', it is an interesting idea. Human nature at present prevents this from being possible on a large scale.

Anarchy, for whatever, reason is not the solution to anything. It may start out as a great idea, but it quickly becomes the strong vs. the weak. Once the weak have been erradicated, it evolves into a world of warring factions that have no purpose but to gain the upper hand so that their faction can reign supreme. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

Communism was supposed to be a great idea too.

silver & black
04-12-2008, 09:51 AM
No, power corrupts. Politicians have taken what the philosophies are suppossed to represent, and with the help of hacks like Glenn Beck and Al Franken, and twisted them to fit their need to acquire and keep power in this country.

Haven't you ever wondered why rural areas don't elect farmers and steel workers?

That was kind of what I was getting at with the "anarchy" comment.

There is no perfect political system that will allow for everyone to "just get along". Someone is always going to be left out in the cold.

Given the choice... I'll keep what we have... as imperfect as it is.

revefsreleets
04-12-2008, 12:43 PM
Interesting. Where did you find this? Does he focus on Muslims only or all terrorist groups?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/0812240650/ref=dp_proddesc_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 01:13 PM
Thanks for the link! I may make a Borders run later and I'll see what I can find.

revefsreleets
04-12-2008, 01:45 PM
Word of warning: The author is a forensic psychologist, and he applies the scientific method to his work. It's a bit dry and informational, not a potboiler by any stretch. Still, if you want to learn what makes an international jihadist, I doubt there is a better work out there.

GBMelBlount
04-12-2008, 07:07 PM
GBMelBlount
LOL. Fox is more fair and balanced imo than any of the other major news networks. I would imagine it may just be due to your perspective that it appears otherwise.

Jeremy
Wow....no. Not even close. Rupert Murdoch has come out and admitted that FOX News caters to their conservative viewers. When the owner of the the network says that, it totally destroys the ability of that network to create a "far and balanced" news program.

But anyway.....

Actually Jeremy you may very well be wrong & I may very well be right. Even though Fox may cater to the conservatives, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC etc. are so far to the left that FOX can lean right and still be the most fair and balanced. To say I'm not even close is your simple opinion you are trying to pass off as fact. If you can show me a study to support your accusations of me not even close I'd be glad to see it.........

GBMelBlount
04-12-2008, 07:24 PM
Hmmm… someone bought the Fox News tagline. Their work is complete. Check your own perspective before you comment on mine please, because this comment reveals yours.

I told you that was my opinion. Take it or leave it. I am conservative and I freely admit it and at least I am coming in the front door. You on the other hand make it sound like you are unbiased and open minded by your earlier statement trashing both conservatives and liberals. It was vague and general. But when it came down to really dishing it out, you only trash Fox and not the left wing media? I don't have a problem with a differing opinion, I just like to see facts to back it up, none of which you've provided and this is my second request. It is only "common sense" for one to want examples to back up spew. You've shown your hand and I called your bluff. I asked you for some specific examples about Fox and you haven't responded. Get some examples and then maybe we can have an intelligent discussion.

Borski
04-12-2008, 08:46 PM
Actually Jeremy you may very well be wrong & I may very well be right. Even though Fox may cater to the conservatives, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC etc. are so far to the left that FOX can lean right and still be the most fair and balanced. To say I'm not even close is your simple opinion you are trying to pass off as fact. If you can show me a study to support your accusations of me not even close I'd be glad to see it.........

I agree completely. FOX is conservative but they are less conservative then the other networks are liberal.

millwalldavey
04-12-2008, 09:22 PM
I told you that was my opinion. Take it or leave it. I am conservative and I freely admit it and at least I am coming in the front door. You on the other hand make it sound like you are unbiased and open minded by your earlier statement trashing both conservatives and liberals. It was vague and general. But when it came down to really dishing it out, you only trash Fox and not the left wing media? I don't have a problem with a differing opinion, I just like to see facts to back it up, none of which you've provided and this is my second request. It is only "common sense" for one to want examples to back up spew. You've shown your hand and I called your bluff. I asked you for some specific examples about Fox and you haven't responded. Get some examples and then maybe we can have an intelligent discussion.

I'd be fully well happy to trash the 'Left Wing' media. After all, CNN as the first to come along and the first to move news covergae away from actual news storys to sensationalistic ratings based news coverage. (OJ simpson trial?) All these other new networks popped up around that time and began the same process, from whatever angle they chose. CNN is a republican/bush bashing network which supported the last regime and libeals wholeheartedly. I can bash them just as well.

AS for examples, I beleieve I stated to you that I have not watched Fox since leaving my Father's house about a year or so ago. I vowed never to watch that "spew" ever again. I stated as well that in that time I cannot point to specific news stories that I found offensive. I do remember (sorry no dates or episode information) vehemently anti-gay stories presented by Bill OReilly about outings to places like Disney world where they decided to show only the truly public displays put on by people in the vicinity of the park itself. (mostly at night mind you when the kiddeis were in bed) The looped the same 3 minutes of footage over and over for the entirety of the segement, which shows me they did not have enough film for an 8 minute or so story. Basically, Bill suggested that the only reason they came to the park was for gay sex and alluded tot he fact that they were looking for children as well. I'd like to know where the rest of the footage of the surely hundreds of other people who did not participate in these actions displayed by Fox was. I'm sure the majority of the people there for that particular day in the park were as well behaved as any family there. Again, Fox also and frequently (as I mentioned in the previous posting) paints all Muslims as "terrorists" You could Turn Fox on and I'm sure you would find them using the term in the next 10 minutes. They make little effort to distignuish good Muslims from bad ones. Any person who is a Muslim fighting against armies in thier OWN LANDS are branded "terrorists". By definition ANY invading or defending army can be considered a terrorist. How we brand them just depends on what side you look at. I think people trying to defend their lands, no matter where they are from cannot be considered terrorists. But not according to Fox as evidenced by their frequent use of the term and who they use it to describe. When fighting Iraqi army forces they would report back that (for example... nto a specific here) "25 Iraqi terrorists were killed today..." Terrorists? These were members of a military force. Mind you there are many outside fighters there who can be construed as 'terrorist' in nature. But Not all Muslims are.

In addition to that I do not watch any of the "spew" the other networks produce. Advertisers control the news stories and networks want ratings. They will dumb the news down to whatever audience they are trying to cater to and give us endless stories about car chases an celebreties. I could care less about these things. I want to know what is happening in the world with no spin attached. Thats not too much to ask.

By all means, trying to be civil here, but are these examples good enough? Am I being vague still? I have a feeling you'll never be satisfied no matter what but I hope at least we can keep discussing matters.

Remember my sig!

GBMelBlount
04-13-2008, 08:17 AM
By all means, trying to be civil here, but are these examples good enough? Am I being vague still? I have a feeling you'll never be satisfied no matter what but I hope at least we can keep discussing matters.

Remember my sig!

I agree with you and tend to expect that from commentators like O'Reilly. The other point I agree with is that the news reporting isn't objective either. Although I hate to use the word "spin" I generally feel like the news stories are often spun to create a specific view or opinion from the audience. It is so obvious that I find it insulting. I agree with alot of what you are saying MWD, but what I tend to take issue with is ripping on things that are considered conservative like Fox without specific examples (or generalizing)and saying it in a way that I construe as combative.

I tend to agree with O'Reilly & Coulter the majority of the time on their positions, just not on their delivery. So when you give a specific example on a commentator like O'Reilly, I can say "Yeah, you're probably right on that one." But that is why when someone rips on O'Reilly or Coulter I tend to want more specifics: what issue, what they disagree with and why.

I really like your sig MWD. We pretty much all bleed black and gold here, But when it comes to things like politics, SF'ers have VERY DIVERSE beliefs and opinions that are too strongly worded (like Coulter or O'Reilly do) may be construed as offensive or combative to other SF brethren.

I also hope to continue discussing these things with you :drink:

Jeremy
04-13-2008, 08:53 AM
I agree completely. FOX is conservative but they are less conservative then the other networks are liberal.

Just because one of them is less full of crap than the others doesn't make them better.

They're still full of crap.

Get out there and discover some news sources that aren't trying to creat ratings with everything they do. Until you can find one of those, you're still going to be led around by your nose by these big news companies.

GBMelBlount
04-13-2008, 09:19 AM
Just because one of them is less full of crap than the others doesn't make them better.

They're still full of crap.

Get out there and discover some news sources that aren't trying to creat ratings with everything they do. Until you can find one of those, you're still going to be led around by your nose by these big news companies.

Less crap is better. :thumbsup: I actually don't watch network news any more. What news sources do you consider most objective?

Borski
04-13-2008, 11:25 AM
Just because one of them is less full of crap than the others doesn't make them better.

They're still full of crap.

Get out there and discover some news sources that aren't trying to create ratings with everything they do. Until you can find one of those, you're still going to be led around by your nose by these big news companies.

I get most of my news from online sources like the associated press and online newspapers. when I watch it on TV its FOX news or BBC World News

Jeremy
04-13-2008, 12:42 PM
Less crap is better. :thumbsup: I actually don't watch network news any more. What news sources do you consider most objective?

The BBC. BBC America has a nightly show that I reccomend everybody watch at least once. It will really open your eyes to how the rest of the world sees America.

millwalldavey
04-13-2008, 01:28 PM
The BBC. BBC America has a nightly show that I reccomend everybody watch at least once. It will really open your eyes to how the rest of the world sees America.

I like the BBC. As with anything like we have been talking about, you have to take it with a grain of salt, but an outside source reporting on affairs in the US is going to be a bit more objective methinks. Not as much of a stake in the goings on.

Again, with all news services, one must be careful.

millwalldavey
04-13-2008, 01:37 PM
I agree with you and tend to expect that from commentators like O'Reilly. The other point I agree with is that the news reporting isn't objective either. Although I hate to use the word "spin" I generally feel like the news stories are often spun to create a specific view or opinion from the audience. It is so obvious that I find it insulting. I agree with alot of what you are saying MWD, but what I tend to take issue with is ripping on things that are considered conservative like Fox without specific examples (or generalizing)and saying it in a way that I construe as combative.

I tend to agree with O'Reilly & Coulter the majority of the time on their positions, just not on their delivery. So when you give a specific example on a commentator like O'Reilly, I can say "Yeah, you're probably right on that one." But that is why when someone rips on O'Reilly or Coulter I tend to want more specifics: what issue, what they disagree with and why.

I really like your sig MWD. We pretty much all bleed black and gold here, But when it comes to things like politics, SF'ers have VERY DIVERSE beliefs and opinions that are too strongly worded (like Coulter or O'Reilly do) may be construed as offensive or combative to other SF brethren.

I also hope to continue discussing these things with you :drink:


Thats one thing I really do not like is O'Reilly's threatening and combative tone with guests. Although, a few years back I praised him for speaking out against a segregated prom in GA I think. HE was livid about the fact that it was segregated and I really did not expect the reation he had. Ann Coulter. Ugh. I think she is much worse than B.O. I did not agree with her comment (and cannot fathom how she got away with it) about forcing people to convert to christianity in the Middle East.

I always liked Neil Cavuto. I dunno if his manner is more apealing but I always like the way he puts the email on where the composers make fun of him. I'll listen to him for the business news now and again.

Thanks for the continued discussion! It's nice to be able to write down what I feel and be challenged to make myself better! Sometimes the teacher needs a bit of schooling himself! :tt:

TroysBadDawg
04-13-2008, 03:26 PM
Just because one of them is less full of crap than the others doesn't make them better.

They're still full of crap.

Get out there and discover some news sources that aren't trying to creat ratings with everything they do. Until you can find one of those, you're still going to be led around by your nose by these big news companies.

Whooly crap for once I agree with Jeremy, I can't believe it.

They are all trying to do one thing sell advertising and get viewer ship. if that is sensationalism they go for it. Whether the left or the right. The left has been doing it for years with through the media. Try and find one just one pro gun article in any major paper but you would be hard pressed to go a day with out finding one against guns and showing how they are ruining the country.

As I see it the problem is people trying to keep up with the Jones' and not accepting responsibility for their or the actions of their children

People now use excuses that the person had a bad childhood, they are ADD or ADHD, they were abused when they were kids, to mention a few commonly used now.If you care to remember the ADD defense started when the kid was caned in Korea, for vandalizing property of others. What happened to him? HE came here and did the same with the same defense but here he got off the hook and the people were stuck with the damages. What ever happened to your break it you replace it. You borrow it and lose it you replace it. You are responsible for your actions.

Forget how the media will play it up, for get they are selling papers and telling you just what they want you to know. The people have a right to know, yes the entire story not just the part they want to tell you.

I was taught believe none of what you read and 1/5 of what you see. Forget what you hear if it comes from a politician because they will change the story tomorrow.

GBMelBlount
04-13-2008, 04:34 PM
Ann Coulter. Ugh. I think she is much worse than B.O. I did not agree with her comment (and cannot fathom how she got away with it) about forcing people to convert to christianity in the Middle East.



Yes, she is over the top and frequently extreme but I think she does that to be controversial and entertaining. In fact when I have seen her talk about issues on TV I actually laugh sometimes at how absurd and extreme she is.

millwalldavey
04-13-2008, 05:18 PM
Yes, she is over the top and frequently extreme but I think she does that to be controversial and entertaining. In fact when I have seen her talk about issues on TV I actually laugh sometimes at how absurd and extreme she is.

Almost like a caricature of herself. Like someone like Geraldo is... well, kinda. Sometimes I think she is giving the people what she thinks they expect from her.

millwalldavey
04-13-2008, 05:21 PM
[QUOTE=TroysBadDawg;385772]
People now use excuses that the person had a bad childhood, they are ADD or ADHD, they were abused when they were kids, to mention a few commonly used now.If you care to remember the ADD defense started when the kid was caned in Korea, for vandalizing property of others. What happened to him? HE came here and did the same with the same defense but here he got off the hook and the people were stuck with the damages. What ever happened to your break it you replace it. You borrow it and lose it you replace it. You are responsible for your actions.
[QUOTE]

How true. As a teacher I see this EVERY day. EVERY DAY! There is no responsibility, just things to blame what happened on.

fansince'76
04-13-2008, 06:09 PM
How true. As a teacher I see this EVERY day. EVERY DAY! There is no responsibility, just things to blame what happened on.

I'm sure as a teacher you have probably had more than a couple of run-ins with the parents of spoiled brats that are convinced their kid walks on water and could do no wrong.

millwalldavey
04-13-2008, 07:35 PM
I'm sure as a teacher you have probably had more than a couple of run-ins with the parents of spoiled brats that are convinced their kid walks on water and could do no wrong.

LOL. Indeed.

Parent: "How could he have failed?"
Me: "Well I see he did 4 out of 20 homework assignments, thats a big problem"
Parent: "How do you explain that?"
Me: "I can't. They were HOMEwork assignments. Do you have any ideas?"

True stuff.

TroysBadDawg
04-13-2008, 07:49 PM
My wife had a parent come to our house and threaten her for shaking her finger at her child when she did none of her homework. She told my wife that school was for learning not home and it is the teachers fault the child is in the 3rd grade but can not read at first grade level. But these are the same parents that refused to have their precious child retained.

Another example a parent told me the only thing school is good for is football and basketball, the kids learn all they need at home. this family for three generation have been on welfare and food stamps. The boys did tell my wife how to steal phone service and cable television service. Not to mention how long you can stay in a house once you have been evicted for never paying rent. Oh yes how to get a big screen television with out ever paying for it.

Sure they are learning good things at home.

Not to mention the family whose father tried to head butt a moving train and lost. And they all vote.

To go back to the original subject it was Fox television that was voted as the most even handed in dealing with news stories, it was by a media watchdog group, I am trying to remember the name. For myself I watch only the local news then go to the barber shop for the real story and 90% of the time what you get at the barber shop is accurate.

For national I l use the Internet and try to cross reference stories then try to find middle ground for the truth. Not to muddle the discussion to much, but I have seen to many BS stories released by both parties and also our Government , both sides of the isle. I honestly believe that politics is the second oldest profession if not the oldest.

The talking heads have me turned off and I look for the truth where I can find it.

Jeremy
04-13-2008, 07:58 PM
My wife had a parent come to our house and threaten her for shaking her finger at her child when she did none of her homework. She told my wife that school was for learning not home and it is the teachers fault the child is in the 3rd grade but can not read at first grade level. But these are the same parents that refused to have their precious child retained.

Another example a parent told me the only thing school is good for is football and basketball, the kids learn all they need at home. this family for three generation have been on welfare and food stamps. The boys did tell my wife how to steal phone service and cable television service. Not to mention how long you can stay in a house once you have been evicted for never paying rent. Oh yes how to get a big screen television with out ever paying for it.

Sure they are learning good things at home.

Not to mention the family whose father tried to head butt a moving train and lost. And they all vote.

So do the people who believe in creationism and support the killing of planned parenthood clinics workers. Then you have the parents who home school their children yet feel their children have a right to play sports on school sports teams.

There are nuts in every direction. Calling attention to one set of them doesn't mean another set isn't as dangerous or crazy.

GBMelBlount
04-13-2008, 10:09 PM
Then you have the parents who home school their children yet feel their children have a right to play sports on school sports teams.

There are nuts in every direction. Calling attention to one set of them doesn't mean another set isn't as dangerous or crazy.

What is wrong with home schooling if you feel you can do a better job than the public schools and still wanting your child to have access to the organized sports at the public school?

Jeremy
04-14-2008, 08:38 AM
What is wrong with home schooling if you feel you can do a better job than the public schools and still wanting your child to have access to the organized sports at the public school?

Because those activities were created for the children who attend those schools.

Allowing home schoolers to play in organzied sports sends the wrong message to kids who attend those schools.

GBMelBlount
04-14-2008, 02:26 PM
Because those activities were created for the children who attend those schools.

Allowing home schoolers to play in organzied sports sends the wrong message to kids who attend those schools.

What would that message be? Even though you paid thousands of dollars in school taxes last year and our school isn't very good, if your child doesn't go to our classes they can't participate in our organized sports? That doesn't make any sense to me. That is discouraging freedom of choice and trying to force parents into a virtual monopoly that in some cases is marginal at best.

Jeremy
04-14-2008, 02:31 PM
What would that message be? Even though you paid $3,200 in school taxes last year and our school isn't very good, if your child doesn't go to our classes they can't participate in our organized sports? That doesn't make any sense to me.

You pay federal taxes right? Does that give you the right to go a US Army base and drive a tank?

Three arguments I've always used with this subject: legal, logistical, and social.

1. Legal: In the majority of court decisions, the courts have held that if you withdraw your child from school for the purpose of home schooling, you lose the right to participate in the extra-ciricular activities that school offers.

2. Logistical: Most schools maintain a grades and/or attendance policy to play sports. You can't enforce that policy on kids who don't have a formal attendance and who's grades can't be verified by an independent authority.

3. Social: Sports are a social function. Teams extend beyond the playing field. By introducing a group of kids from outside, you run the risk of ruining the team concept that sports tries to teach.

These reasons can be argued away, but they're still my reasons. This is just one more reason why I think organized sports need to be taken away from the schools and given to a third party to run.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 03:39 PM
Interesting. But what is 'evil'? Who is to construe what is evil and what isnt, or who is being evil or not? Perspective I guess. You mention some people above who based on their actions could be evil, but so can some of the moves made by our country, especially the corporate interests in 3rd world countries. Just like we generally consider many of the things we do and 'good' because we are doing them, so did the populations of some of the nations ruled by these despots above.

Excellent question. . . and foray into metaphysics.

I personally believe there are absolutes which can and must be applied on an even scale the world over, regardless of culture. Those absolutes are based on certain elements of humanity.

One such absolute is the protection of life. In short, Hamas does not go after military bases and patrols. Those are legitimate targets of war. They go after innocent civilians, which is terrorism at its finest. The fact of the matter is that anyone who supports the random killing of civilians are to be equated with the governments and organizations that cause the action. Thus, I have no problem castigating Hamas as evil and those who support the government which is Hamas as evil.

And before you or anyone else jumps to Iraq. . . the difference is vast. In Iraq, the targets are military. Civilian casualties happen in war, but the goal is to limit those casualties, which has always been the broad belief of the modern American military. We lost a whole lot of bombers and pilots in WWII because they refused to bomb in the dark and thus couldn't identify the targets.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 03:42 PM
Because those activities were created for the children who attend those schools.

Allowing home schoolers to play in organzied sports sends the wrong message to kids who attend those schools.

Absolutely not.

As long as those parents still have to send money in form of taxes, they are paying for those schools to have the sports, thus, the sports teams should be open to them. Give the parents the opportunity to opt out of paying school board taxes, then you can shut the opportunity for the kids to play in the schools sports.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 03:49 PM
People now use excuses that the person had a bad childhood, they are ADD or ADHD, they were abused when they were kids, to mention a few commonly used now.If you care to remember the ADD defense started when the kid was caned in Korea, for vandalizing property of others. What happened to him? HE came here and did the same with the same defense but here he got off the hook and the people were stuck with the damages. What ever happened to your break it you replace it. You borrow it and lose it you replace it. You are responsible for your actions.


How true. As a teacher I see this EVERY day. EVERY DAY! There is no responsibility, just things to blame what happened on.

Funny... I am ADD. I can only spend about 5 to 10 minutes on a task before I get this internal drive to walk away. It creates physical difficulty until I do. Even to the point where I sometimes physically start shutting down (getting tired, cannot keep a thought in my head, re-read the same paragraph 5 time and cannot tie the words together, etc. etc.).

Interestingly, I also hold a doctorate and am taking some coursework right now to prep myself to get into a second doctoral program. I have learned HOW to work through those issues. Matter of fact, I am on doing this right now because I am having to ease myself into writing my paper. I will come back here a number of times this week SPECIFICALLY because I am having ADD moments. Then I go back to do the work.

ADD shouldn't be an excuse, it is only an understanding that different methodologies have to be put into place to achieve the goals set before me.

tony hipchest
04-14-2008, 03:53 PM
I will come back here a number of times this week SPECIFICALLY because I am having ADD moments. Then I go back to do the work.

.it all makes so much sense now. :sofunny:

theres a joke in here somewhere... "what do you call a preacher with ADD?" i'll let you know when i come up with a punchline.

j/k seriously, have you read terry bradshaws 1st book? good stuff. he really gets into his diagnoses with ADD and is a bigtime advocate of awareness, especially amongst adults who were never diagnosed as youth.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 04:01 PM
it all makes so much sense now. :sofunny:

theres a joke in here somewhere... "what do you call a preacher with ADD?" i'll let you know when i come up with a punchline.

j/k seriously, have you read terry bradshaws 1st book? good stuff. he really gets into his diagnoses with ADD and is a bigtime advocate of awareness, especially amongst adults who were never diagnosed as youth.

What do you call a preacher with ADD? a VERY long service... And Jesus said, ohhh... look at those little birdies... wow we need our ceiling fixed... why did.......

millwalldavey
04-14-2008, 04:04 PM
Funny... I am ADD. I can only spend about 5 to 10 minutes on a task before I get this internal drive to walk away. It creates physical difficulty until I do. Even to the point where I sometimes physically start shutting down (getting tired, cannot keep a thought in my head, re-read the same paragraph 5 time and cannot tie the words together, etc. etc.).

Interestingly, I also hold a doctorate and am taking some coursework right now to prep myself to get into a second doctoral program. I have learned HOW to work through those issues. Matter of fact, I am on doing this right now because I am having to ease myself into writing my paper. I will come back here a number of times this week SPECIFICALLY because I am having ADD moments. Then I go back to do the work.

ADD shouldn't be an excuse, it is only an understanding that different methodologies have to be put into place to achieve the goals set before me.

Kudos Preacher! Sometimes I joke Im ADD, but sometimes I think I may be. I know there are some kids with issues and I do my best to try to reach everyone across the board. I'm kinda dynamic and visual. I have on kid for certain who uses it as an excuse and it really shows. One big thing that is stressed now is differentiated learning and methods to keep everyone focused.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 04:09 PM
Kudos Preacher! Sometimes I joke Im ADD, but sometimes I think I may be. I know there are some kids with issues and I do my best to try to reach everyone across the board. I'm kinda dynamic and visual. I have on kid for certain who uses it as an excuse and it really shows. One big thing that is stressed now is differentiated learning and methods to keep everyone focused.

Exactly.

I am dynamic and visual as well... do a lot of walking around, arm movements, etc. etc.

it really does.. wow it is windy today. I wonder why... the sky is just SO blue...

:chuckle:

Jeremy
04-14-2008, 06:06 PM
Absolutely not.

As long as those parents still have to send money in form of taxes, they are paying for those schools to have the sports, thus, the sports teams should be open to them. Give the parents the opportunity to opt out of paying school board taxes, then you can shut the opportunity for the kids to play in the schools sports.

Same argument...you pay federal taxes but that doesn't mean you can fly on Air Force One.

Home schooled kids don't belong in school sports.....period.

MasterOfPuppets
04-14-2008, 06:10 PM
i'm not collecting social security, but i don't have the option of not paying it....:wink02:

Jeremy
04-14-2008, 06:23 PM
We can on like this for days.

The bottom line is that the courts have sided with the school districts more often than not when the schools ban home schoolers for playing on their teams.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 07:41 PM
We can on like this for days.

The bottom line is that the courts have sided with the school districts more often than not when the schools ban home schoolers for playing on their teams.

Probably so...

and public schools will become more jealous and more adamant against homeschooling as home-schooled students continue to outperform others (except private schools).

In short, public school program is showing itself to be a failure, fraught with teachers that should have been fired years ago, but are protected by their unions, which care more about their own power than actually training the kids.

I am always amazed how almost ALL the private christian schooled kids I have known, met, and seen come out of the schools end up doing pretty well in academic life... when the schools operate on a MUCH SMALLER per child/per classroom budget.

I guess it is a matter of priorities.

Oh yeah... and the way around the sports system... take a couple classes at the high school. I have friends whose children did that... worked wonders. They got to be involved in school activities. . . and got a MUCH BETTER EDUCATION at home than they EVER would at school.

Yes. I am painting with a broad brush. . . large generalities. BUt those generalities are based in reality.

GBMelBlount
04-14-2008, 08:02 PM
Yes. I am painting with a broad brush. . . large generalities. BUt those generalities are based in reality.

I agree. But I can tell you I had some fantastic teachers in public school and there are still many today. I also think it is possible that some teachers start out with great optimism as to how they can positively impact childrens lives only to see how difficult it is to do that with the way the system is set up these days. I wonder if some teachers eventually just shake their heads, throw up their hands and just give up. You can only beat your head against a wall so long.

millwalldavey
04-14-2008, 08:36 PM
I agree. But I can tell you I had some fantastic teachers in public school and there are still many today. I also think it is possible that some teachers start out with great optimism as to how they can positively impact childrens lives only to see how difficult it is to do that with the way the system is set up these days. I wonder if some teachers eventually just shake their heads, throw up their hands and just give up. You can only beat your head against a wall so long.

3 years in and I'm feeling like this as well :banging:

I got some kids that still make it worth getting up for in the am... if i can benefit them in any positive way, I'll be there.

Preacher
04-14-2008, 09:23 PM
3 years in and I'm feeling like this as well :banging:

I got some kids that still make it worth getting up for in the am... if i can benefit them in any positive way, I'll be there.

See...

It is people like you that can lead the change in public schools. DEMAND that they give you to power to discipline in your classrooms again. Demand bad teachers get fired and screw the union. Demand that most of the money stops going to the inflated bureaucracy know as administration and school boards.

Of course, if you do that, you will be called an evil conservative and lose your own job.