Samuel Dravis Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 It's Cindy Sheehan after she saw her son's face on a poster being used by protesters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 Guess whats sadistic? Britains getting blown up and the Islamic community telling the government they should change their foreign policy. Have fun living under Sharia toms. 1) Er. No. 2) ?? Re sheenan: I'd suspect GSK quite enjoys having that avatar, as he seems to take some sort of twisted delight in the pain and suffering of others. Not healthy imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 Lets try to avoid the ad hominem comments, guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 On the topic of the Red Cross visiting Guántanamo, I stand corrected. They are allowed to visit, and do so every few months or so, according to the ICRC's web site: ICRC in Guantanamo Bay - May 2006 The ICRC has been visiting detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba since January 2002. There are currently about 480 detainees from roughly 40 countries. As of December 2005, the ICRC had facilitated the exchange of nearly 20,800 Red Cross messages between the detainees and their families in more than 30 countries. Just something I came across when I wrote my response to this thread. Why they don't visit more often, I don't know. Perhaps they aren't allowed to, perhaps they don't have the resources, or perhaps they for sme reason don't feel the need. It's Cindy Sheehan after she saw her son's face on a poster being used by protesters.Which brings me to the obvious question #2... What the Heck is she doing in GSK's avatar? PS: While browsing the ICRC site, I also found this: If civilians directly engage in hostilities, they are considered "unlawful" or "unprivileged" combatants or belligerents (the treaties of humanitarian law do not expressly contain these terms). They may be prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action. Both lawful and unlawful combatants (...) are entitled to humane treatment in the hands of the enemy. The whole page is a very interesting read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 FOX news is about as "fair and balanced" as NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN are, with reversed polarity. I wish I could check out the BBC; it would be refreshing to see a truly neutral newscast. @JMAC: You are quite correct-Bill O'Reilly is a f***in' moron. Did anyone see the Late Show where Dave Letterman calmly told him that a lot of what he says is "just a bunch of crap"? What an ambush! O'Reilly had no real answer and was clearly caught off gaurd. A classic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 FOX news is about as "fair and balanced" as NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN are, with reversed polarity. I wish I could check out the BBC; it would be refreshing to see a truly neutral newscast. @JMAC: You are quite correct-Bill O'Reilly is a f***in' moron. O'Reilly's entertaining if nothing else. If I want 'fair and balanced', I watch a little Fox, a little CNN, and after sifting through the right/left rhetoric, I get enough facts to figure out for myself what's really going on. BBC's not neutral. It does, however, present a non-American approach and it's useful to see the world through non-American eyes sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 Oh well. . The first part would be my favourite: 1st: "We hope you'll depend on us for the truth, 'cause we'll report without an agenda". 2nd: "Either support the military or shut up". OK, so the first one was apparently a news broadcast/ad of sorts, while the second was most likely an opinion show, but still: I also liked how they told this guy whose father was killed on 9/11 to "shut up":rolleyes:. (...) it's useful to see the world through non-American eyes sometimes.Goes for all countries, doesn't it:)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 Did anyone else catch that "mistake" by FOX that labeled Mark Foley as a Democrat at the bottom of the screen? Gee, I wonder how that happened. Did the person writing for FOX just automatically assume that hey, if it's a gay sex scandal, SURELY it's a Democrat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted October 7, 2006 Author Share Posted October 7, 2006 Oh well. . The first part would be my favourite: 1st: "We hope you'll depend on us for the truth, 'cause we'll report without an agenda". 2nd: "Either support the military or shut up". OK, so the first one was apparently a news broadcast/ad of sorts, while the second was most likely an opinion show, but still: Goes for all countries, doesn't it:)? "CUT HIS MIC!" > * Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 (...) it's useful to see the world through non-American eyes sometimes. Goes for all countries, doesn't it:)? Yes, but since Fox/CNN are American companies and BBC is 'non-American', the grammar/vocabulary choice just kind of worked out that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 Did anyone else catch that "mistake" by FOX that labeled Mark Foley as a Democrat at the bottom of the screen? Gee, I wonder how that happened. Did the person writing for FOX just automatically assume that hey, if it's a gay sex scandal, SURELY it's a Democrat! Either that or just wishful thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.