Bernice Young Elementary School (Video): Children Obama Chant
by Jim Brogan
The B. Bernice Young Elementary School in New Jersey is under fire this morning after video surfaced of the school's children being taught to chant praises of US President Barack Hussein Obama.
Video has surfaced of school children being made to sing praises of President Barack Obama. The school's officials, who have been contacted by Fox News and others, have yet to respond to calls about the video and have not given any explanation.
The video's description reads: This was filmed around June 19, 2009 at the B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, NJ.
Lyrics -
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that all must lend a hand [?]
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be clear today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said Red, Yellow, Black or White
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
Yes
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
Segue to -
Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all [do? doth??] say "hooray!"
Hooray Mr. President! You're number one!
The first Black American to lead this great na-TION!
Hooray, Mr. President something-something-some
A-something-something-something-some economy is number one again!
Hooray Mr. President, we're really proud of you!
And the same for all Americans [in?] the great Red White and Blue!
So something Mr. President we all just something-some,
So here's a hearty hip-hooray a-something-something-some!
Hip, hip hooray! (3x)
The B. Bernice Young Elementary School is located at 1203 Neck Road in Burlington, NJ. It serves grades PK-2 in the Burlington Township School District. Their phone number is listed as (609)-386-3520. The video is below.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I on the other hand, welcome our new overlords and their gift of matching jacket and pantaloons for the populace, as all right thinking citizens will. Not only are they excellent, but they eliminate costly clothing purchases and essential time lost in picking out fashions. Plus they are environmentally friendly!
Get your new matching jacket and pantaloons today. Think of the children.
Yea this is likely going to be a media storm frenzy - excellent material for Comedy Central to turn into entertainment especially after the right wing shows do some work for 'em.
As for practices related to this - it somewhat bothered me that nearly everyday in class we had to recite the 'pledge of allegiance' and this is coming from a military brat that became an injured Marine.
Cane wrote:Yea this is likely going to be a media storm frenzy - excellent material for Comedy Central to turn into entertainment especially after the right wing shows do some work for 'em.
As for practices related to this - it somewhat bothered me that nearly everyday in class we had to recite the 'pledge of allegiance'
Agreed. Not that I think the pledge is bad, but everyday is a bit of overkill.
Frazzled wrote:The right wingers are going to go berserk now...
I think I know where you stand Frazzled.
I can't tell if this is a public school. I've never heard of a pre-Kindergarten through 2nd grade school with a .org domain that has so much parent involvement and fund raising events. Because it is in a township, perhaps it is harder to determine that status. The district apparently allows Sunday church services and a religious Fellowship night on school property on occasion.
I also note the district's High School graduation was on June 18, and the 17th had the middle school 'advancement'. Is it possible this video covered an event that was not a school activity because I don't see any evidence that it is.
If it isn't a tax-payer funded school, I'm not really concerned. I'm agnostic, but if private schools want to teach god is the center of the universe, who am I to complain? There's certainly plenty of ideological schools about the US and homeschooling for parents who want even more control over their kid's upbringing.
If it is a public school I see this song as no more indoctrination as the daily Pledge of Allegiance (with the added 'under god' phrase) I gave in grade school, especially if it was sung to the tune of a popular religious song.
Poking around the Post Chronicle's site doesn't exactly inspire confidence in its reporting. I wouldn't go so far as to claim it is a WorldNet daily level site, but it doesn't seem to be a great bastion of news reporting either. Take a look at the stories and disclaimer on the Original News page where this story is linked.
I don't see why US children shouldn't pledge allegiance to the flag in school. Why wouldn't any loyal US citizen want to support their constitution and such? It's a bit like British children singing the national anthem on Speech Day.
Once people grow up and can make up their own mind, anyone who disagrees can emigrate or become a subversive.
Kilkrazy wrote:I don't see why US children shouldn't pledge allegiance to the flag in school. Why wouldn't any loyal US citizen want to support their constitution and such? It's a bit like British children singing the national anthem on Speech Day.
Once people grow up and can make up their own mind, anyone who disagrees can emigrate or become a subversive.
Pledging everyday though? That's an awful lot. Again, not there's anything wrong with the pledge.
Frazzled wrote:Respectfully, WTF does that have to do with anything?
Because as I said before I see no proof that this was a school sponsored event. I see church services at this school districts' schools. I see that the middle school and high school graduations were before this event was alleged to occur (on or around the 19th of June - WTF kind of reporting is that?). I see the song performed to the tune of "Jesus Loves the Little Children" which I have NEVER seen performed in a public school event. Yet I'm told by you, a person who consistently posts anti-Obama links on this site, that this was a public school event.
Frazzled wrote:Respectfully, WTF does that have to do with anything?
Because as I said before I see no proof that this was a school sponsored event. I see church services at this school districts' schools. I see that the middle school and high school graduations were before this event was alleged to occur (on or around the 19th of June - WTF kind of reporting is that?). I see the song performed to the tune of "Jesus Loves the Little Children" which I have NEVER seen performed in a public school event. Yet I'm told by you, a person who consistently posts anti-Obama links on this site, that this was a public school event.
If this is an ordinary public school than some people are probably going to lose their jobs. If it's some wacko township bakesale funded deal then I don't really care that much. The song seemed fairly harmless by espousing equality, race blindness, and other nice traits. The original reporting is reeaaaaaallly suspect too.
Either way fox news is going to have a field day with it.
Frazzled wrote:Respectfully, WTF does that have to do with anything?
Because as I said before I see no proof that this was a school sponsored event. I see church services at this school districts' schools. I see that the middle school and high school graduations were before this event was alleged to occur (on or around the 19th of June - WTF kind of reporting is that?). I see the song performed to the tune of "Jesus Loves the Little Children" which I have NEVER seen performed in a public school event. Yet I'm told by you, a person who consistently posts anti-Obama links on this site, that this was a public school event.
The tune is actually a civil war tune written by George Root. Leave it to Fox News to make it a religious thing though. Ignorant sons of bitches.
Frazzled wrote:Respectfully, WTF does that have to do with anything?
Because as I said before I see no proof that this was a school sponsored event. I see church services at this school districts' schools. I see that the middle school and high school graduations were before this event was alleged to occur (on or around the 19th of June - WTF kind of reporting is that?). I see the song performed to the tune of "Jesus Loves the Little Children" which I have NEVER seen performed in a public school event. Yet I'm told by you, a person who consistently posts anti-Obama links on this site, that this was a public school event.
Look up the school district.
By the way thats Battlehymn of the Republic. You know that US song.
Kilkrazy wrote:I don't see why US children shouldn't pledge allegiance to the flag in school. Why wouldn't any loyal US citizen want to support their constitution and such? It's a bit like British children singing the national anthem on Speech Day.
Once people grow up and can make up their own mind, anyone who disagrees can emigrate or become a subversive.
Pledging everyday though? That's an awful lot. Again, not there's anything wrong with the pledge.
Once a term should be enough, in my opinion. But then, I'm British, and compared to us Americans wear their patriotism on their sleeves.
Ha, I was private schooled and they made us say the Texas pledge of allegiance and sing the "Texas national anthem" from way on back. Dunno if that's any better
Oh god I remember that now. Yea we had to say both the pledge to the USA and the god damn Texan one - wtf kind of people do we have that made up such a silly practice and continue to sustain it?
And to risk derailing the thread further, once I got to an age of religious inquiry it pissed me off that we had to recite the words 'under god' so god damn much. Secular my ass!
youngblood wrote:I can't wait until glen beck comments on this. I can see the rage forming now...
I love the Glenn Beck show. Dont always agree with him, and personally think hes the poster child of crazy Christians, but I just like his show lol
OT that is a bit crazy. What is going on in our country? Also I want to ask, why are so many of you up in arms about having to pledge allegiance to the flag in school? I always wondered why we HAD to stop after... whatever grade it is you stop. Nothing wrong with showing a little national pride I think
I agree. What is so wrong about the Pledge every day in Elementary and Kindergarten? It's not as if it interfered with social time or nap time. It was 1 minute out of your life to honor this nations flag and it's founders. As adults we take a lot more out of our daily lives to do more trivial and stupider gak (like smoking a bowl or even smoking a cig).
I think the Pledge should be said all the way up through HS. If you are agnostic don't actually recite the "one Nation under God" part of it, but it won't kill a person to say the rest.
As to the topic....that's just scary and creepy and just plain wrong.
I too will welcome our new overlords once they fund me the money I need to build an Emperor-class titan, complete with jacuzzi and Olympic size swimming pool and relocate the Playboy mansion onto it. After a hard days work destroying cities and countries I don't much care for I can relax with a Bunny in the hot tub.
youngblood wrote:I can't wait until glen beck comments on this. I can see the rage forming now...
I love the Glenn Beck show. Dont always agree with him, and personally think hes the poster child of crazy Christians, but I just like his show lol
OT that is a bit crazy. What is going on in our country? Also I want to ask, why are so many of you up in arms about having to pledge allegiance to the flag in school? I always wondered why we HAD to stop after... whatever grade it is you stop. Nothing wrong with showing a little national pride I think
Agreed there's nothing wrong with national pride, but I would argue that recitation of words doesn't make them mean anything to the person.
Glen Beck has gone off the deep end as of late. I was a big fan until Obama came into office. Beck became a bit of conspiracy theorist after that.
I agree. What is so wrong about the Pledge every day in Elementary and Kindergarten? It's not as if it interfered with social time or nap time. It was 1 minute out of your life to honor this nations flag and it's founders. As adults we take a lot more out of our daily lives to do more trivial and stupider gak (like smoking a bowl or even smoking a cig).
I didn't understand concepts like patriotism or national loyalty when I was in kindergarten. The pledge was just kind of annoying. That said, it's pretty harmless. It's just a state funded bit of forced national loyalty, which is at worst harmlessly annoying.
That said, it's still a fairly recent practice, and doesn't actually do much to the demographic that has to do it. You can't force people to be patriotic by getting them to pledge in school. Coercion doesn't engender loyalty, even simple and harmless things like the pledge. I would much rather that minute be spent learning about a specific president, or a cool moment in US history.
Agreed there's nothing wrong with national pride, but I would argue that recitation of words doesn't make them mean anything to the person.
Glen Beck has gone off the deep end as of late. I was a big fan until Obama came into office. Beck became a bit of conspiracy theorist after that.
Beck was always an idiotic conspiracy theorist with no actual opinions or ideas of his own. He's just a television outlet for the dregs of free republic.
So... there is a crazy teacher out there eh? The odds of that are... A THOUSAND DOLLARS ON THERE BEING A CRAZY TEACHER!!! Man... I am going to be in the money on this one .
The whole pledge of allegiance argument is silly... very silly. If anything you should be complaining about the fact that you cannot do it outside as a school, before class; not a difficult proposition in any way.
Would that not solve all of these issues? People that do not want to do it, can just wait until class starts, and the fact that it is right before class means that teachers can take role early, then find out who the evil ones are . Nah, not really, but sing the words and make sure you are using the right hand. Heck, you could even take one of those football #1 fingers as a reminder which hand to use. That actually sound like a fantastic idea... much better than my idea to wear a ten gallon hat before class, so that I could make sure no one would invade my personal space.
Who would dare walk under a massive cartoon hat? Only those who wish to come face to face with the devil... beware.
Whatever happened to the pledge of allegence? I just want the 50s back. A real General as President, cheesy tv, polo, and Atom Bombs but it was so much more simple back then.
Pipboy101 wrote:Whatever happened to the pledge of allegence? I just want the 50s back. A real General as President, cheesy tv, polo, and Atom Bombs but it was so much more simple back then.
"Under god" was added to the pledge in 1954. You're going to have to go back farther if you don't want complication.
I plead alignment to the flakes of the untitled snakes of a merry cow. And to the Republicans for they scam, one nacho, underpants, with licorice, and jugs of wine for owls.
The point with the pledge is, from my PoV, that there is very little difference between pledging allegiance to the flag and the message from these kids' singing.
However, I'm sure some people will point out a difference between pledging allegiance to a flag (nationalistic pride) vs the quoted lyrics of the song (singling out an individual). After all, Hitler required the army to swear allegiance to him and not Germany, right? It is another comparison of Obama to Hitler that only seems to have happened since he became president.
Frankly, I don't think second graders know what the words to the pledge mean. I doubt the kids will remember the lyrics to the song in six months time. I suspect in 15 years these kids will have all kinds of different views. In short, I think this incident isn't the conspiracy some people make it out to be.
However, what does concern me is the sheer hatred some people in this country have to our current government. Most of it, like this incident, seems to me to totally overblown and I shake my head when I hear people like Beck, Limbaugh and other ideologues espousing that our government is becoming fascist/communist/socialist insert your favorite bogeyman here.
Where were these people with guns when Bush was giving speeches? Were they in those 'free speech zones' blocks away? Where were the cries of fascism when it was discovered that warrantless wiretaps were happening? Where was the outrage when Monica Goodling was hiring attorneys based on partisan criteria? Where were the advocates of personal responsibility and determination when Congress was debating what to do about Schiavo?
Freedom means responsibility too and frankly I think most people don't want freedom, they want to feel safe and that they belong to something bigger than themselves. Incoherent ranting about "the other" is group identity. That kind of thinking is what leads to authoritarianism.
All this outrage is bunk. If you pay attention you'll learn that all elites, not just those in Hollywood, are dividing the US in order to keep their privatized profits and power while socializing their losses. It isn't anything new, but the brazenness is. Those people who don't stop to think for themselves end up hurting themselves, their communities and their country.
Edit: And Lord Loss proves my point before I completed this post
If school children were instructed to sing a song about how George Bush was so great, and how he saved America from the terrorists and made America great after Clinton, of course there would be a lot of opposition.
Dal'yth Dude wrote:The point with the pledge is, from my PoV, that there is very little difference between pledging allegiance to the flag and the message from these kids' singing.
However, I'm sure some people will point out a difference between pledging allegiance to a flag (nationalistic pride) vs the quoted lyrics of the song (singling out an individual). After all, Hitler required the army to swear allegiance to him and not Germany, right? It is another comparison of Obama to Hitler that only seems to have happened since he became president.
Frankly, I don't think second graders know what the words to the pledge mean. I doubt the kids will remember the lyrics to the song in six months time. I suspect in 15 years these kids will have all kinds of different views. In short, I think this incident isn't the conspiracy some people make it out to be.
However, what does concern me is the sheer hatred some people in this country have to our current government. Most of it, like this incident, seems to me to totally overblown and I shake my head when I hear people like Beck, Limbaugh and other ideologues espousing that our government is becoming fascist/communist/socialist insert your favorite bogeyman here.
Where were these people with guns when Bush was giving speeches? Were they in those 'free speech zones' blocks away? Where were the cries of fascism when it was discovered that warrantless wiretaps were happening? Where was the outrage when Monica Goodling was hiring attorneys based on partisan criteria? Where were the advocates of personal responsibility and determination when Congress was debating what to do about Schiavo?
Freedom means responsibility too and frankly I think most people don't want freedom, they want to feel safe and that they belong to something bigger than themselves. Incoherent ranting about "the other" is group identity. That kind of thinking is what leads to authoritarianism.
All this outrage is bunk. If you pay attention you'll learn that all elites, not just those in Hollywood, are dividing the US in order to keep their privatized profits and power while socializing their losses. It isn't anything new, but the brazenness is. Those people who don't stop to think for themselves end up hurting themselves, their communities and their country.
Edit: And Lord Loss proves my point before I completed this post
Wait wingnuts were calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years, but its just now an issue for you?
Pipboy101 wrote:Whatever happened to the pledge of allegence? I just want the 50s back. A real General as President, cheesy tv, polo, and Atom Bombs but it was so much more simple back then.
Yeah, back when those minorities knew their place and if someone got uppity about "civil rights" they would just disappear. Truly the best of times.
Wait wingnuts were calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years, but its just now an issue
The difference being Bush was a time traveling fascist, Nazi, murderer.
People flying off the handle is always a reality. You have to admit though, media attention to small details like this are getting totally overblown these days. The simple fact that glen beck actually has a job and viewership in the media shows just how large the right wing crazy population has become. There is no left wing equivalent. Jon Stuarts possibly the closest, almost, he's still closer to Ed Helms. Keep in mind, thats a comedy show on comedy central staffed by comedians.
Dal'yth Dude wrote:However, what does concern me is the sheer hatred some people in this country have to our current government. Most of it, like this incident, seems to me to totally overblown and I shake my head when I hear people like Beck, Limbaugh and other ideologues espousing that our government is becoming fascist/communist/socialist insert your favorite bogeyman here.
Where were these people with guns when Bush was giving speeches? Were they in those 'free speech zones' blocks away? Where were the cries of fascism when it was discovered that warrantless wiretaps were happening? Where was the outrage when Monica Goodling was hiring attorneys based on partisan criteria? Where were the advocates of personal responsibility and determination when Congress was debating what to do about Schiavo?
Personally, I think as the economy gets better, you'll see the craziness moderate. Not saying it'll end -- times were generally good under Clinton and there was much ugliness from the rightiest right back then too (remember "black helicopters") -- but once people start buying their new LED TVs, etc. again they'll be sated.
And you and I both know none of this has anything to do with principles or issues. It has everything to do with boorish cheering sections on both sides, rooting for their political parties like they're sports teams. Although (as I've said before) their behavior would get them thrown out of most stadiums.
The difference Frazzled is that I didn't post lots of threads of [edit] on Dakka calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years. I don't recall commenting here on Dakka on anything similar. In fact, I don't recall political threads on Dakka until this year. Maybe I just didn't see them.
There's always extremists on both sides. So if people calling Bush and Cheney fascists are wingnuts, does that mean you agree that those who call Obama a fascist are wingnuts too?
Dal'yth Dude wrote:The difference Frazzled is that I didn't post lots of threads of [edit] on Dakka calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years. I don't recall commenting here on Dakka on anything similar. In fact, I don't recall political threads on Dakka until this year. Maybe I just didn't see them.
There's always extremists on both sides. So if people calling Bush and Cheney fascists are wingnuts, does that mean you agree that those who call Obama a fascist are wingnuts too?
Yes. When extreme words are used, it makes the speaker a wingnut (am I now a wingnut?)
Dal'yth Dude wrote:If you want to be youngblood go ahead. Personally, I don't think just extreme words makes a wingnut, but that's me.
IMO words have loads of power. Again, look at Glen Beck or take a step up to Limbaugh. If you want to look at wingnuts, he's partly responsible for the republicans going crazy. Words have incredible power and when used in extreme ways, they illicit strong responses (the tea parties, the 9/12 march, etc.)
Meditation and ear plugs work wonders as well though... I would say that would be the strongest power any one person has at their disposal. You can get up and scream and shout in a crowd, you can rile up entire nations, but in the end no one has the last word. The last word is reserved for those who laugh last, and those who do so, probably lost a bit of their sanity along the way. Where am I going with this... hmmm.
How much power can words have over you, when you are the one to interpret those words, and incorporate those words into your perception? I suppose you could say that no personal responsibility exists, but then what qualms would you have with these hate-mongers out to make a buck?
Wrexasaur wrote:Meditation and ear plugs work wonders as well though... I would say that would be the strongest power any one person has at their disposal. You can get up and scream and shout in a crowd, you can rile up entire nations, but in the end no one has the last word. The last word is reserved for those who laugh last, and those who do so, probably lost a bit of their sanity along the way. Where am I going with this... hmmm.
How much power can words have over you, when you are the one to interpret those words, and incorporate those words into your perception? I suppose you could say that no personal responsibility exists, but then what qualms would you have with these hate-mongers out to make a buck?
Words can have pooploads of power over people who want to appear informed but put little time into becoming informed.
Frazzled wrote:Thats very true and it may be. However its clearly at the school so the burden now shifts to those saying its not to prove otherwise.
Assumed guilty until proved innocent.
Simple shift of burden of proof.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dal'yth Dude wrote:
does that mean you agree that those who call Obama a fascist are wingnuts too?
Of course. Obama is no more a fascist than I am a yankee.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dal'yth Dude wrote:The difference Frazzled is that I didn't post lots of threads of [edit] on Dakka calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years. I don't recall commenting here on Dakka on anything similar. In fact, I don't recall political threads on Dakka until this year. Maybe I just didn't see them.
youngblood wrote:Words can have pooploads of power over people who want to appear informed but put little time into becoming informed.
Yes, that is true, but how often do you run into these people? Having attended a fair amount of anti-war rallies myself, I can honestly say that the only problems were with the fringe elements. No one like to be yelled at by a Truther, but the real problems were with the "Anarchists" running around throwing bottles and snap like that. They know that kind of thing pisses cops of quite a bit, and they hide in the crowd so it looks like there is a lot of them.
All in all, these problem makers compose a very small majority of the actual protests on either side. Every so often you will get fringe rallies, but that is usually not the case at all. The Teabagger rally was not full of those hate-signs, they were just publicized to make it look really bad. I will say that I do not agree with the people at that rally, but I most definitely respect their right to do so. I simply cannot imagine the bulk of that protest being particularly happy about some of the more offensive signage.
The author of the songs is unknown, but a woman -- possibly a teacher -- can be heard in the beginning of the video correcting and helping a student who has forgotten the words. Another woman, the person holding the camera, cheers the students on: "All right," she says. "I like that."
"Alteredbeat," the YouTube user who posted the video on the Internet, told FOXNews.com that the video was first put online by Charisse Carney-Nunes, an activist and author of the children's book "I Am Barack Obama," which her Web site says "allows children to see themselves through the inspirational story of President Obama." Carney-Nunes has been promoting the book during visits to schools on the east coast.
A poster for the book can been seen near the stage of the auditorium in the video of Bernice Young Elementary, but it is unclear whether Carney-Nunes had visited the school or was present during the filming.
"Alteredbeat" told FOXNews.com that he reached out to Carney-Nunes, who insisted that the program had been filmed in June as part of a Father's Day tribute to President Obama. "The kids made up the songs on their own," she wrote, according to the YouTube user.
"Alteredbeat" originally posted the video Sept. 6, two days before Obama made an address to the nation's schoolchildren in which he praised the American education system as the best in the world and urged students to stay in school.
arents of students at a New Jersey elementary school are up in arms after a class of young kids was videotaped being "brainwashed" into singing the praises of President Obama.
B. Bernice Young Elementary School was placed on lockdown Thursday after the school's principal received death threats over a YouTube video that showed nearly 20 children being taught songs lauding the president. Back to school night events at the school scheduled for Thursday night may be canceled, and Principal Denise King is unlikely to attend if they are held.
Brainwashed. Reporting at it's best. Good job fox.
First, this is one instance in one school in NJ of all places. Hardly the heart and soul of the entire country.
Second, one crazy teacher is probably responsible for this and made her class rehearse it.
Third, how can anyone take a report seriously when its generated by a "paper" that has a section called "Tittle-Tattle Too"? Come on now, seriously?
There are so many more strange and frightening things we can report and comment on in this country alone. Go find out what happened to bat-boy or the elephant child or something more constructive than pandering to the stupid masses of ignorant donkey-caves who are hell bent on ruining the image, and making the job harder, of the president of our country.
First, this is one instance in one school in NJ of all places. Hardly the heart and soul of the entire country.
Second, one crazy teacher is probably responsible for this and made her class rehearse it.
Third, how can anyone take a report seriously when its generated by a "paper" that has a section called "Tittle-Tattle Too"? Come on now, seriously?
There are so many more strange and frightening things we can report and comment on in this country alone. Go find out what happened to bat-boy or the elephant child or something more constructive than pandering to the stupid masses of ignorant donkey-caves who are hell bent on ruining the image, and making the job harder, of the president of our country.
Cheers
I won't keep you from discussing the merits of waxing techniques.
Wrexasaur wrote:So... there is a crazy teacher out there eh? The odds of that are... A THOUSAND DOLLARS ON THERE BEING A CRAZY TEACHER!!! Man... I am going to be in the money on this one .
I know this is, like, 'our side', but it's alright to say that this isn't cool. Like, Orkeosaurus said, if it was kids pledging to GW I think there'd be a lot of outrage, but the people talking about how bad this is would be minimising it, while the people minimising now would be talking about horrible it is.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:Wait wingnuts were calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years, but its just now an issue for you?
Overblown political rhetoric is always a bad thing, but there's a massive point of difference between calling someone a Nazi/fascist/socialist/whatever when he's taking a country to war for very dubious reasons, and when he's reforming healthcare. Both are silly, one is considerably sillier than the other.
There is also a significant difference in the hostility of the rhetoric of the two situations, and I think that deep down you're objective to know which one has been worse.
Just yesterday a census worker was found dead with the word 'fed' scrawled on his chest.
I think that this situation speaks for itself. If I am not mistaken this was a single teacher, who took action of their own accord, and right before they were going to retire. I can totally understand why parents would be upset, but the situation is not that bad at all.
If schools were teaching this stuff as curriculum, their would be problem either way. If a district were to okay curriculum like this, while knowing full well the scope of action... well, then, that would be particularly bad.
With the amount of information and perspectives available on the internet, and the amount of pro-Obama support throughout the liberal media; I can imagine this being the final straw for many right-wing parents. The same would be true most likely for left-wing parents if the tables were turned (as you said).
Dal'yth Dude wrote:The point with the pledge is, from my PoV, that there is very little difference between pledging allegiance to the flag and the message from these kids' singing.
So the fact that the children are being forced to swear allegiance and support to a person, not an idea or a nation, isn't disturbing to you? This cult of personality style is only found in systems of government where power is centralized in one mainly one person's hands. This also sets up the president for greater disappointment if his policies fail, which is still bad.
Dal'yth Dude wrote:However, what does concern me is the sheer hatred some people in this country have to our current government. Most of it, like this incident, seems to me to totally overblown and I shake my head when I hear people like Beck, Limbaugh and other ideologues espousing that our government is becoming fascist/communist/socialist insert your favorite bogeyman here.
Where were these people with guns when Bush was giving speeches?
Supporting him because they agreed with his policies. Do not delude yourself into thinking that the Obama administration has received so much hate while others have dodge it. People seem to forget that protesters were lambasting President Bush, not only with humiliating insults, but horrifying comparisons to Hitler, Stalin, etc. There were just as many people who hated the Bush administration, just from a different side of the aisle. I don't care if you have a problem with protesters, but do not pretend that this is the first time this has happened, or that this case is so unique and filled with hypocrisy.
Dal'yth Dude wrote:Were they in those 'free speech zones' blocks away?
Being corralled into pens outside the DNC in Denver last summer, or did you forget that?
Dal'yth Dude wrote:Where were the cries of fascism when it was discovered that warrantless wiretaps were happening? Where was the outrage when Monica Goodling was hiring attorneys based on partisan criteria?
You mean those wiretaps that were authorized by the insidious PATRIOT Act, that was passed with overwhelming support from both major parties? I don't know how the Democrats didn't take any heat for helping to pass that as well....
Dal'yth Dude wrote:Where were the advocates of personal responsibility and determination when Congress was debating what to do about Schiavo?
They were called the voters at the next general election, and it resulted in the Republicans getting routed in Congress.
Dal'yth Dude wrote:Freedom means responsibility too and frankly I think most people don't want freedom, they want to feel safe and that they belong to something bigger than themselves. Incoherent ranting about "the other" is group identity. That kind of thinking is what leads to authoritarianism.
Like people wanting the government to pay for their health care? The left is all about bigger government in our economic sphere, in order to take care of us. The neocons are all about bigger government in our personal lives to protect us from everyone, including ourselves. Not saying I agree with either, but it definitely goes both ways.
ShumaGorath wrote:
Wait wingnuts were calling Bush and Cheney Fascists, Nazis, and killers for years, but its just now an issue
The difference being Bush was a time traveling fascist, Nazi, murderer.
People flying off the handle is always a reality. You have to admit though, media attention to small details like this are getting totally overblown these days. The simple fact that glen beck actually has a job and viewership in the media shows just how large the right wing crazy population has become. There is no left wing equivalent. Jon Stuarts possibly the closest, almost, he's still closer to Ed Helms. Keep in mind, thats a comedy show on comedy central staffed by comedians.
It's actually kind of concerning.
So you don't count the idiots on MSNBC like Rachel Madcow or Keith Olbermann, or the nuts on the View, Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Baher and former Rosie O'Donnell? Or even NPR as a counterpoint to talk radio? This seems to me that the standard you set for the right isn't the same as for the left. There are idiots and commentators on both sides, but to say that one is worse then the other is just plain wrong. Also, people who watch Glen Beck aren't always part of the "right wing crazy population". I watch the show because I like to argue with the TV, but I also find him to be entertaining. You ever think that people watch it for the entertainment factor? I know plenty of other people who do.
So you don't count the idiots on MSNBC like Rachel Madcow or Keith Olbermann.
No major media outlet has an equivalent to Beck. Olberman is at worst a much more accurate and factual O'rielly, and Maddow is MSNBCs Hannity (I don't like her at all, she's too fething smug.)
Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Baher and former Rosie O'Donnell?
I'm not talking about celebrities. I'm talking about major news outlets. I could just as easily site Mel Gibson, Ben stein, and a hundred others. But no one takes them seriously anyway.
Or even NPR as a counterpoint to talk radio?
NPR, despite conservative bitching is fairly balanced in presentation of it's news. It's op-ed pieces can often times be fairly skewed, but they at least try to represent the populace at large. Its public radio, if you want to you can get on it, liberal or conservative. Only one side of the spectrum seems to try. NPR has standards, and is not beholden to ratings. It is publicly funded, and is held accountable for it's content. Conservative talk radio is a wall of retardation used to sell sponsored books, tickets, and whatever else is being shilled at the local level. The fact that Limbaugh is often times cited as the voice of the conservative movement, despite being an insane, racist, drug addicted, douchebag, should show well how broken the media structure the conservative spectrum uses is.
This seems to me that the standard you set for the right isn't the same as for the left. There are idiots and commentators on both sides, but to say that one is worse then the other is just plain wrong.
Actually it isn't. But when you compare Beck to Olberman, you show a total lack of perspective. Which is likely how you can actually think thus.
Also, people who watch Glen Beck aren't always part of the "right wing crazy population". I watch the show because I like to argue with the TV, but I also find him to be entertaining. You ever think that people watch it for the entertainment factor? I know plenty of other people who do.
Then he shouldn't be on the most heavily watched fething news network in the country. He has no place there. He is not a journalist. He has no integrity. He is not intellegent. he has no unique perspective.
He's a shill, a tool, a moron, and an obvious ploy to absorb the viewership of the disaffected extreme right. MSNBC doesn't have Micheal Moore doing a show, Fox shouldn't have Beck. It's an insult to the idea of American journalism.
ShumaGorath wrote:No major media outlet has an equivalent to Beck. Olberman is at worst a much more accurate and factual O'rielly, and Maddow is MSNBCs Hannity (I don't like her at all, she's too fething smug.)
Olbermann is not more accurate, he has just as much bolshevik as Beck. He is a fething sports broadcaster, not a respectable pundit. Madcow is just as bad, if not worse. I am not justifying Beck at all, but he does have counterparts on other networks.
ShumaGorath wrote:I'm not talking about celebrities. I'm talking about major news outlets. I could just as easily site Mel Gibson, Ben stein, and a hundred others. But no one takes them seriously anyway.
Difference is they don't have a TV program, watched by millions, from which they can spout their political views. If Rosie O'Donnell was able to get up and say that 9/11 was an inside job, that makes it on the list. I don't know how you can justify this any other way, but its not possible.
ShumaGorath wrote:NPR, despite conservative bitching is fairly balanced in presentation of it's news. It's op-ed pieces can often times be fairly skewed, but they at least try to represent the populace at large. Its public radio, if you want to you can get on it, liberal or conservative. Only one side of the spectrum seems to try. NPR has standards, and is not beholden to ratings. It is publicly funded, and is held accountable for it's content. Conservative talk radio is a wall of retardation used to sell sponsored books, tickets, and whatever else is being shilled at the local level. The fact that Limbaugh is often times cited as the voice of the conservative movement, despite being an insane, racist, drug addicted, douchebag, should show well how broken the media structure the conservative spectrum uses is.
No its not representative at all. The country is at least regarded as center right, and NPR is decidedly not. Just last week NPR was saying racism is driving protests against Obama....which even the President knows and says isn't true. That doesn't sound at all representative. I am not going to lie, I have plenty of problems with the conservatives on the radio, but its a proven fact: conservatives dominate radiowaves and liberals control more television. Air America crashed and burned, it really did suck, and the only reason NPR is on the air is because it is publicly funded. Fox is the only conservative network, in a world of 5 major news networks.
ShumaGorath wrote:Actually it isn't. But when you compare Beck to Olberman, you show a total lack of perspective. Which is likely how you can actually think thus
As a professional and trained journalist I can assure you that I have perspective, and am definitely much more qualified than most people to comment on this. Your willingness to disregard Olbermann's inaccuracies, which there are many, and idiocies is reflective of the bias you cling to. Do not presume to lecture me on my lack of perspective when you gloss over the major shortcomings of the left wing commentators.
ShumaGorath wrote:He is not a journalist.
You're right. But Beck has repeatedly declared that he is not a journalist, just like Matt Drudge.
ShumaGorath wrote:He's a shill, a tool, a moron, and an obvious ploy to absorb the viewership of the disaffected extreme right. MSNBC doesn't have Micheal Moore doing a show, Fox shouldn't have Beck. It's an insult to the idea of American journalism.
Why don't you tell us how you really feel. And see previous comment.
JEB_Stuart wrote:So the fact that the children are being forced to swear allegiance and support to a person, not an idea or a nation, isn't disturbing to you? This cult of personality style is only found in systems of government where power is centralized in one mainly one person's hands.
Except they're not being forced to sear allegiance to a person. They're being forced to praise him, vaguely, in song. Its still a stupid thing to do in a public school district, but its not outright indoctrination.
JEB_Stuart wrote:Being corralled into pens outside the DNC in Denver last summer, or did you forget that?
Happened at the RNC in Minneapolis too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JEB_Stuart wrote:No its not representative at all. The country is at least regarded as center right, and NPR is decidedly not.
The nation's collective political leaning is essentially whatever you want it to be. Its also irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the average America identifies as center-right, center-left, or top-down. What matters is how they feel about issues, and the stance taken by candidates on those issues. Branding doesn't mean as much as it used to; mostly because of the internet.
JEB_Stuart wrote:
Just last week NPR was saying racism is driving protests against Obama....which even the President knows and says isn't true.
Of course he does. How much traction do you think the race card would grant to a black President? Racism is a component of the protests, not necessarily a large component, but a component none the less. It will be overrepresented in the media because its:
A) Easy to explain.
B) Widely regarded as objectionable.
C) Not immediately apparent from a healthcare protest.
JEB_Stuart wrote:
I am not going to lie, I have plenty of problems with the conservatives on the radio, but its a proven fact: conservatives dominate radiowaves and liberals control more television. Air America crashed and burned, it really did suck, and the only reason NPR is on the air is because it is publicly funded. Fox is the only conservative network, in a world of 5 major news networks.
MSNBC is the only demonstrably liberal network. At least in the sense that Fox is demonstrably conservative. The others waffle around the middle; leaning one way or the other depending on the political climate.
Olbermann is not more accurate, he has just as much bolshevik as Beck. He is a fething sports broadcaster, not a respectable pundit. Madcow is just as bad, if not worse. I am not justifying Beck at all, but he does have counterparts on other networks.
Hardly, he's never cut anyones mic, called the president a racist then 15 seconds later disagreed with himself, he doesn't have a section of his show where he goes over theoretical futures where socialist communist democrats destroy the universe, he is in every way a counterpoint to O'rielly, only with less yelling and actual information backing his assertions. Dubious though you may think that information is, he actually uses it, rather than glossing over it entirely to simply use buzzwords and namecalling.
Difference is they don't have a TV program, watched by millions, from which they can spout their political views. If Rosie O'Donnell was able to get up and say that 9/11 was an inside job, that makes it on the list. I don't know how you can justify this any other way, but its not possible.
2) "I just wish Katrina had only hit the United Nations building, nothing else, just had flooded them out, and I wouldn't have rescued them."
Bill O'rielly on his radio show. O'rielly gets more viewers than O'Donnel ever did.
No its not representative at all. The country is at least regarded as center right, and NPR is decidedly not.
Site something to prove that. The left wing controls the house, senate, and congress. Given the near perfect divide in the 2000 and 2004 elections, and the obvious shift since then where are you getting that statistic?
Just last week NPR was saying racism is driving protests against Obama....which even the President knows and says isn't true.
Were they saying that, or were they covering the fact that an ex president was saying that? Because one of the two is an understandable recourse for a news outlet. Everyone was covering that.
That doesn't sound at all representative. I am not going to lie, I have plenty of problems with the conservatives on the radio, but its a proven fact: conservatives dominate radiowaves and liberals control more television.
That was true before murdoch came along and reinvented televised new (for the worse). The television spectrum has always been at best split, with the news largely slanting center left (though actually historically it found a middle ground, with its endearment of reagan and hatred of the communist witch hunts), while economics tended to slant right. Murdoch polarized the news and reduced it's breadth and meaning immensely with fox news. The other networks have fallen in line quickly.
Air America crashed and burned, it really did suck, and the only reason NPR is on the air is because it is publicly funded. Fox is the only conservative network, in a world of 5 major news networks.
NPR is on the air because it's not a news network, and it's not a liberal soap box. It's public news. It carries local issues, left or right, and its a source for world news and american/international culture. It slants left in op/ed pieces because it's demographic is largely left of center. It wouldn't if conservatives listened to it and participated in more than a moderate fashion. It's easy to get on public radio, no matter your political identity.
Even if it is one of five, it's got such a commanding market share that it contends well. The financial networks also slant very right wing. Which is amusing considering the fact that even in the face of global economic meltdown due to deregulation they still parrot the invisible hand of capitalism, Keynes is rolling over in his grave, even now when all of the most powerful nations on the planet are using his theories to recover the global economy.
As a professional and trained journalist I can assure you that I have perspective, and am definitely much more qualified than most people to comment on this. Your willingness to disregard Olbermann's inaccuracies, which there are many, and idiocies is reflective of the bias you cling to. Do not presume to lecture me on my lack of perspective when you gloss over the major shortcomings of the left wing commentators.
As a fourth year New Media and Mass Communications major (I focus on graphic design, but they reeaaaallly want me to take a lot of classes on mass media sciences) I take umbrage to that. Olberman is not perfect, which is why from the beginning I compared him to O'rielly. The same methodology and obvious political slant, but without the sheer agression and self assuredness in the "gut" that O'rielly clings too. They do the same thing from opposite sides of the fense, O'rielly is just a MUCH bigger douche, and has danced to the beat of a notoriously shady and unlawful/truthful administration for too long for Olberman to be his equal.
You're right. But Beck has repeatedly declared that he is not a journalist, just like Matt Drudge.
Then what the feth is he doing having a show on the largest news network in America? I would say the largest in the world, but the chinese government network kicks the hell out of them.
Why don't you tell us how you really feel. And see previous comment.
Get opinion and editorial pieces out of the news. Period. Thats my opinion. Yellow journalism is going to tear this democracy to pieces and the populace isn't educated enough to be able to discern fact from rambling idiocy.
Shuma wrote:The same methodology and obvious political slant, but without the sheer agression and self assuredness in the "gut" that O'rielly clings too. They do the same thing from opposite sides of the fense, O'rielly is just a MUCH bigger douche, and has danced to the beat of a notoriously shady and unlawful/truthful administration for too long for Olberman to be his equal.
I.E. taking nut shots at a statue is a no win situation Jeb... just saying.
Let me see here... Glenn Obermann... No... doesn't work. Kieth Beck... ummm... most definitely not.
Here we go then. Bill Olbermann... yes, that works just fine; as does Kieth Orielly.... THE PUDDING MAN, THE FRAKKING PUDDING!!!
Yellow journalism is going to tear this democracy to pieces and the populace isn't educated enough to be able to discern fact from rambling idiocy.
This part though... man, if people believe this snap... let the lemmings fall. It sounds like you may learn something from that experience. I am also not sure how such a small viewership would constitute massive fail amongst the people by direct action. Point a to b, has nothing to do with the fall of Rome mate.
If we are what we are, then we shall be what we do. And so forth, on and on with the sickness, and the ill banana. Yes, the crazy tomato will eat you, straight up diggity.
Here we go... neat. Glenn Beck has nothing on this... absolutely frakking nothing; go boil some more frogs, and receive thank you letters from PETA for it Glenn...
dogma wrote:Of course he does. How much traction do you think the race card would grant to a black President? Racism is a component of the protests, not necessarily a large component, but a component none the less.
This reminds me of when I accidentally locked myself out (because that is how awesome I am) and walked to the Tea Party protest to kill time since it was going on a few blocks away and I just needed to wait an hour. There were a few hundred people there maybe, including a small group of neo-nazis/white supremacists. They are indeed not a large component but they are there.
dogma wrote:Except they're not being forced to sear allegiance to a person. They're being forced to praise him, vaguely, in song. Its still a stupid thing to do in a public school district, but its not outright indoctrination.
Yeah their not swearing allegiance per se, but they are promising to help Obama however they can. That is pretty darn close. Never said it was indoctrination, I just think it is in poor taste and shouldn't be done. This has never been done for an sitting American president before, and it really is just ridiculous. Hero worship on the worst scale.
dogma wrote:Happened at the RNC in Minneapolis too.
Yep, I know. I was just pointing out the fact that Shuma was attributing the abuses against protesters to only the right wing.
dogma wrote:MSNBC is the only demonstrably liberal network. At least in the sense that Fox is demonstrably conservative. The others waffle around the middle; leaning one way or the other depending on the political climate.
CNN is arguably not a moderate network. They have consistently demonstrated a slant to the left. They are called the Clinton News Network for a reason...
ShumaGorath wrote:Hardly, he's never cut anyones mic, called the president a racist then 15 seconds later disagreed with himself, he doesn't have a section of his show where he goes over theoretical futures where socialist communist democrats destroy the universe, he is in every way a counterpoint to O'rielly, only with less yelling and actual information backing his assertions. Dubious though you may think that information is, he actually uses it, rather than glossing over it entirely to simply use buzzwords and namecalling.
So when he compares protesters to Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists, that isn't name calling or using a buzzword? Olbermann is just as bad, just saying....
ShumaGorath wrote:Bill O'rielly on his radio show. O'rielly gets more viewers than O'Donnel ever did.
So saying he wished something bad would happen vs our government plotted against its own people and killed them are equal in your mind? That is really stunted.
ShumaGorath wrote:Site something to prove that. The left wing controls the house, senate, and congress. Given the near perfect divide in the 2000 and 2004 elections, and the obvious shift since then where are you getting that statistic?
ShumaGorath wrote:Were they saying that, or were they covering the fact that an ex president was saying that? Because one of the two is an understandable recourse for a news outlet. Everyone was covering that.
They were saying that. They didn't even bring up Carter...
ShumaGorath wrote:Then what the feth is he doing having a show on the largest news network in America? I would say the largest in the world, but the chinese government network kicks the hell out of them.
Because that is what pundits do. They get a huge program to make money for themselves and the network.
ShumaGorath wrote:Get opinion and editorial pieces out of the news. Period. Thats my opinion. Yellow journalism is going to tear this democracy to pieces and the populace isn't educated enough to be able to discern fact from rambling idiocy.
Thats my opinion.
I think that the media is allowed to be biased, even when I disagree with it, because it can have a moral imperative. To compare this to yellow journalism is incredibly baffling. I haven't even seen anything even coming close to approaching that level.
Out of tens of thousands of schools in the USA, one class in one school were led by one teacher to sing a couple of slightly dodgy songs during a festival to celebrate black American achievement.
There is no suggestion that the teacher's actions were condoned by the school governors, let alone encouraged by them, or sponsored by the local authority, or mandated by the Praise Obama Czar.
There must be some less insignificant issue for Republicans to pick on. What about when Mrs Obama went shopping? Maybe a White House intern used her ID card to avoid a parking ticket, something like that.
JEB_Stuart wrote:CNN is arguably not a moderate network. They have consistently demonstrated a slant to the left. They are called the Clinton News Network for a reason...
I can't post the left-wing nicknames the network had during the Bush administration; especially the first term.
I think its one of those things that people generally feel is biased away from their chosen side of the political spectrum; especially when the other side is in power. Honestly, I think the notion of a leftward slant is built almost entirely on the last few years of the Bush Administration. At which point the President was under fire from everyone but Fox, and his approval ratings were so low that even basic fact was often taken as an indictment; particularly with respect to Iraq.
I think that the media is allowed to be biased, even when I disagree with it, because it can have a moral imperative. To compare this to yellow journalism is incredibly baffling. I haven't even seen anything even coming close to approaching that level.
The run up to the war in Iraq didn't smack of yellow journalism to you? parroting the party line? Doing little investigative journalism, little exploratory journalism, and in general very little of their actual job. It was like the spanish American war all over again. Not as bad, but still pretty awful.
I think that the media is allowed to be biased, even when I disagree with it, because it can have a moral imperative. To compare this to yellow journalism is incredibly baffling. I haven't even seen anything even coming close to approaching that level.
The run up to the war in Iraq didn't smack of yellow journalism to you? parroting the party line? Doing little investigative journalism, little exploratory journalism, and in general very little of their actual job. It was like the spanish American war all over again. Not as bad, but still pretty awful.
While I am not a big fan of the Iraq War, I don't think that it was even close to yellow journalism. The focus was mostly on WMDs, which everyone, including the Clinton Administration and the UN thought Iraq had. And in all actuality they did have WMDs, just not on the scale that we thought. It was a total intelligence SNAFU, which should have and could have been avoided. The only reason I would claim that Iraq had WMDs was because we sold them those weapons in the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s and because my uncle told me about several thousand tons of chemical weapons they found while he was stationed in Fallujah. Nasty things too, like mustard gas, chlorine gas, and even some nerve gas. But no, not on the scale we thought there was. Its pretty hard to do research on a country and its situation when it is controlled very tightly.
It's not true that everyone including the UN thought Saddam had WMDs.
Dr Hans Blix, head of the UN WMD inestigation commission, didn't think they had them. Various weapons experts said the weapons they had in the 80s would have decayed through lack of maintenance.
The pro-WMD evidence was very weak. Much of it had been fabricated.
All the post-war inspections never turned up a single active, useable WMD. It would have been shouted to the heavens in order to retroactively justify the invasion.
It was indeed a total intellgence SNAFU. The manner in which things played out convinced huge numbers of people that the whole affair had been got up by Bush and Blair to try to scare and railroad the US and UK into war. Which worked to some extent.
BURN THEM!!!!!!!!! BURN THEM OUT COMPLETELY BEFORE IT SPREADS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously, this is slippery slope/Domino theory territory if I ever heard of it.
warpcrafter wrote:BURN THEM!!!!!!!!! BURN THEM OUT COMPLETELY BEFORE IT SPREADS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously, this is slippery slope/Domino theory territory if I ever heard of it.
You need to quote what you're referencing, because I have no idea.
Kilkrazy wrote:It's not true that everyone including the UN thought Saddam had WMDs.
The UN initially believed that Iraq had in fact maintained some WMDs and that it was developing more. If they didn't they wouldn't have ordered an investigation by weapons inspectors.
Kilkrazy wrote:Hans Blix, head of the UN WMD inestigation commission, didn't think they had them. Various weapons experts said the weapons they had in the 80s would have decayed through lack of maintenance.
Hans Brix, oh no!
On a serious note though, Mr. Blix did say he didn't think they had them, but he also said it would take many more months to find out for sure, and that the Iraqis weren't being exactly cooperative when it came to inspections.
Kilkrazy wrote:The pro-WMD evidence was very weak. Much of it had been fabricated.
It was deteriorating near the beginning of the war, but fabrication? That is just a bit outlandish. It was based on inferior and outdated intelligence, but to call it an outright lie would be a bit extreme. Don't forget, military force was authorized by the UN Security Council under Res. 678, and it was ultimately allowed by the permanent members of the Security Council.
Kilkrazy wrote:All the post-war inspections never turned up a single active, useable WMD. It would have been shouted to the heavens in order to retroactively justify the invasion.
Except for the various chemical weapons that Coalition soldiers, like my uncle found. I hate the idea of war just as much as the next person, but he did find them. And the ISG, a post-invasion investigation, stated that while it did not believe that Iraq had WMDs it did have the capability to restart WMD programs and Biological Warfare programs after the lifting of international sanctions, which it was actively lobbying to do. Again, I do not like the Iraq war, I am just trying to have a balanced view of what happened.
Kilkrazy wrote:It was indeed a total intellgence SNAFU. The manner in which things played out convinced huge numbers of people that the whole affair had been got up by Bush and Blair to try to scare and railroad the US and UK into war. Which worked to some extent.
Can't say it enough, total SNAFU. It was a big result of a weak CIA, especially in human intelligence programs, an overly zealous administration, and a frightened public.
Now that we are totally OT in the OT, back the the OP.
I was wrong after all, go figure... DAMMIT!!!
This story is very strange, but it still sounds like the school did not really do anything wrong. Information on the song was handed out before the kids even learned the words. Could this be a case of... well a case of angry Reps jumping on a story like dogs... LIKE DOGS!!! Rawr... /
The 'dodgy dossier' was plagiarised off the internet from a student project.
The Nigerian Yellowcake story was basically fabricated.
The 45 minutes claim was bull gak, straight lies.
The surviving gas shells found in Iraq months after the invasion were deteriorated and ineffective.
Any developed country in the world has the capability to start WMD programmes. That wasn't the basis of the war, or we would be in North Korea right now. They really do have WMDs.
/