PDA

View Full Version : Al-Jazeera reporter ejected for high school football game in texas



mrveggieman
09-12-2011, 04:03 PM
Here's a story that you are going to love:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/highschool/blog/prep_rally/post/Al-Jazeera-reporter-gets-boot-from-Texas-footbal?urn=highschool-wp5633

sanfran22
09-12-2011, 07:45 PM
Why would you want an anti-american network covering an american trajedy? Al jezeera is not a friend to America in case you didn't know that.

mrveggieman
09-12-2011, 08:05 PM
Why would you want an anti-american network covering an american trajedy? Al jezeera is not a friend to America in case you didn't know that.


And neither is the tea party but they have just as much right to be there. :kiss:

sanfran22
09-12-2011, 08:37 PM
And neither is the tea party but they have just as much right to be there. :kiss:
If you think the tea party and al jazeera are the same thing you need your head checked. Tell me you can't be that crazy?

texansrangerfan73
09-12-2011, 08:49 PM
And neither is the tea party but they have just as much right to be there. :kiss:

I'm pretty sure that the Tea Party :party0053:is a friend of the United States or America as you call it. We (the U.S.) does have every right to be cautious & vigilant after that September day!!

swib25
09-12-2011, 11:26 PM
What about Al Jezeera makes it anti-American?

duane1969
09-12-2011, 11:44 PM
What about Al Jezeera makes it anti-American?

They report on a bias that is anti-American and anti-Israel. Google some of their reports and find out. They are often a mouth-piece for extremist.

http://www.pri.org/stories/world/middle-east/is-al-jazeera-propaganda.html

They have been associated with pro-Hamas/anti-Israel propaganda in their reports.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=211633

Al Jazeera is not an inoccuous organization. They are not just a run-of-the-mill newsgroup.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 08:02 AM
They report on a bias that is anti-American and anti-Israel. Google some of their reports and find out. They are often a mouth-piece for extremist.

http://www.pri.org/stories/world/middle-east/is-al-jazeera-propaganda.html

They have been associated with pro-Hamas/anti-Israel propaganda in their reports.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=211633

Al Jazeera is not an inoccuous organization. They are not just a run-of-the-mill newsgroup.

They may have some unpopular and boderline offensive views to some people but so does fox news. If we start throwing reporters out of ball games just because we don't agree with their newspaper that is setting a dangerous precedent. Here in the united states we enjoy something called freedom of the press. If we start chipping away at one of our core principles of freedom where does it end? :confused0024:

duane1969
09-13-2011, 08:32 AM
They may have some unpopular and boderline offensive views to some people but so does fox news. If we start throwing reporters out of ball games just because we don't agree with their newspaper that is setting a dangerous precedent. Here in the united states we enjoy something called freedom of the press. If we start chipping away at one of our core principles of freedom where does it end? :confused0024:

So of all of the things that "chip away at our core principles" the one you are worried about protecting is freedom of the press?

The simple reality is that media people get kicked out of places all of the time. Just because this one is from the Al Jazeera does not make him special. He was on school property which is private government property and he was told to leave. Just like protestors can be arrested for protesting in front of the White House a reporter can be kicked off of school property.

If he really needs to talk to people at a Texas football game then there were about 3000 other games going on in the state that same night.

Also, Fox News may be conservative leaning but they still report based on facts. Al Jazeera is a propaganda driven media group. You need to be aware of the difference.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 08:55 AM
So of all of the things that "chip away at our core principles" the one you are worried about protecting is freedom of the press?

The simple reality is that media people get kicked out of places all of the time. Just because this one is from the Al Jazeera does not make him special. He was on school property which is private government property and he was told to leave. Just like protestors can be arrested for protesting in front of the White House a reporter can be kicked off of school property.

If he really needs to talk to people at a Texas football game then there were about 3000 other games going on in the state that same night.

Also, Fox News may be conservative leaning but they still report based on facts. Al Jazeera is a propaganda driven media group. You need to be aware of the difference.


Dude are you serious? Fox news reporting facts? You are starting to sound like some of our other readers on here duane. :sign0020:

duane1969
09-13-2011, 08:56 AM
Dude are you serious? Fox news reporting facts? You are starting to sound like some of our other readers on here duane. :sign0020:

Show me where they report based on lies. Link me to a report by them that is entirely falsehood and deception.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 09:11 AM
Show me where they report based on lies. Link me to a report by them that is entirely falsehood and deception.

Be very careful of what you ask for duane:

http://foxnewslies.net/

duane1969
09-13-2011, 09:28 AM
I don't see any proof on that site that FoxNews reports are based on lies or falsehood. All I see is a bunch of comments being proven as incorrect. Whether or not Hannity called Obama unAmerican is not Al Jazeera caliber stuff. Show me a report that they made that is based on lies and not factual data.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 09:33 AM
I don't see any proof on that site that FoxNews reports are based on lies or falsehood. All I see is a bunch of comments being proven as incorrect. Whether or not Hannity called Obama unAmerican is not Al Jazeera caliber stuff. Show me a report that they made that is based on lies and not factual data.


Here's some more news sites regarding fox noise distortion of facts:

http://www.newshounds.us/

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2011/08/31/308650/fox-news-lies-about-islamophobia-report-by-making-up-false-quote/

http://www.spitefulcritic.com/home/10-most-ridiculous-fox-news-lies-creative-edits-and-half-truths

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rqdtZlec0s

Star_Cards
09-13-2011, 09:43 AM
anyone find this quote ironic where they seemingly accidentally call Al Jazeera, Al Queda right after they say they have no ties.


After all, Al Jazeera has absolutely nothing to do with Al Queda. Yes, the network aired messages from Osama Bin Laden. So did CBS, ABC and a handful of other networks. That Al Queda has a market stronghold in the middle east is no more surprising than the fact that CNN and Sky News have market strongholds in North American and Europe, respectively.


I'm not sure why the school administrators decided not to let him try to interview fans at the football game. Seems to me that it's a bit odd to reject his request.

duane1969
09-13-2011, 09:51 AM
I'm not sure why the school administrators decided not to let him try to interview fans at the football game. Seems to me that it's a bit odd to reject his request.

Perhaps there was a disruption when people began to find out who he was. Michael Moore was run off from lots of places while making his movies. If a reporter is creating a disruption or disturbance they can be asked to leave just like any other citizen. The key point to remember here is that schools are not public property.

And they didn't reject his request. He was already there. They just asked him to leave. So my guess is that they had no idea he was coming. I know that in our school district the media has to get county board of ed approval to film on school property. In most TV reports about schools you see them reporting from the public street in front of the school, not actually on the school property.

Star_Cards
09-13-2011, 09:59 AM
ah, I thought that convo that was posted was a telephone conversation. I don't think that article was very well written.

Maybe they thought he was Borat. lol

ensbergcollector
09-13-2011, 11:47 AM
veggieman - i'm sorry bro, but comparing fox news to al-jazeera? really? I know you are extremely bias but that is ridiculous even for you.

theonedru
09-13-2011, 12:44 PM
People just hate Al-Jazeera because it is an Arab based news media source.

From wikipedia

On 4 March 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Al Jazeera provided more informative news coverage than the opinion-driven coverage of American mass media.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 01:20 PM
People just hate Al-Jazeera because it is an Arab based news media source.

From wikipedia

On 4 March 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Al Jazeera provided more informative news coverage than the opinion-driven coverage of American mass media.

Or maybe they are an arm of the muslim brotherhood? Maybe they don't report the news unless favorable? Are a state owned, propoganda machine? Did you see anything about the protests in England on 9/11? Probably not.

theonedru
09-13-2011, 01:30 PM
Or maybe they are an arm of the muslim brotherhood? Maybe they don't report the news unless favorable? Are a state owned, propoganda machine? Did you see anything about the protests in England on 9/11? Probably not.

ok...... We know your disdain for anything Arab and your outbursts against them are becoming tiresome....

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 01:34 PM
ok...... We know your disdain for anything Arab and your outbursts against them are becoming tiresome....

Can I get an amen!! :cheer2:

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 01:37 PM
ok...... We know your disdain for anything Arab and your outbursts against them are becoming tiresome....

Just like the garbage you post? Do some research before you comment please...thanks....

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 01:38 PM
Can I get an amen!! :cheer2:

Can I get a Hot tub? Is this all you can post?? Can you debate?

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 01:44 PM
Can I get a Hot tub? Is this all you can post?? Can you debate?

I would love to. Come to me with an objective and unbiased view on any of the issues and lets talk. :winking0071:

pghin08
09-13-2011, 01:49 PM
I'm a bit torn on al-Jazeera. I don't buy their anti-American bias. I think their reporting is outstanding, for the most part (though my only relationship with them is through print media). They seem to have feet on the ground everywhere, and I thought they did a great job reporting the protests in Libya and Egypt, and that good reporting continues.

However, I do think there is anti-Israeli sentiment there. I feel like 90% of the reporting from Israel is tainted. But sometimes I wonder if I'm too inundated with pro-Israel news. I think it's probably somewhere in between. There's no doubt to me that the US media is decidedly pro-Israel, so it's hard to tell how bad al-Jazeera's bias is. But I definitely think it exists.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 01:50 PM
I would love to. Come to me with an objective and unbiased view on any of the issues and lets talk. :winking0071:

Lol, really? And let you come at me biased? Is that how a debate works??

theonedru
09-13-2011, 01:56 PM
Just like the garbage you post? Do some research before you comment please...thanks....

One can learn from ones own comments.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 01:58 PM
Lol, really? And let you come at me biased? Is that how a debate works??


Remember I'm not the one who has been accused of having an anti arab, anti muslim and overall anti minority view.

duane1969
09-13-2011, 02:17 PM
People just hate Al-Jazeera because it is an Arab based news media source.

From wikipedia

On 4 March 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Al Jazeera provided more informative news coverage than the opinion-driven coverage of American mass media.

I don't hate them, I am just not gullible. They are the #1 source that groups like Hamas, al Queda and the Taliban go to because they know that when no other news agency will play their propaganda they can count on Al Jazeera to do it.

As for Clinton, she is an Obama talking head and carries a fraction of the clout that she used to. There are dozens if not hundreds of people in power who have identified Al Jazeera as being a propaganda clearinghouse. If you want to take Clinton's word for it, go ahead. I seriously doubt that she was allowed access to the intricate workings of Al Jazeera and has no more knowledge of how they operate than how a McDonald's operates, in fact, I bet $20 she couldn't even spell Al Jazeera if put on the spot.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 02:20 PM
Remember I'm not the one who has been accused of having an anti arab, anti muslim and overall anti minority view.
I know what you're accused of......
The people that accuse me of that don't deserve my time personally. They have no idea what they are talking about. They have issues that need to be addressed. I ask them everytime to prove me wrong and haven't seen it. When they have a clue and can learn to debate, they may have an audience.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 02:21 PM
One can learn from ones own comments.

I hope you did.....:winking0071:

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 02:22 PM
I don't hate them, I am just not gullible. They are the #1 source that groups like Hamas, al Queda and the Taliban go to because they know that when no other news agency will play their propaganda they can count on Al Jazeera to do it.

As for Clinton, she is an Obama talking head and carries a fraction of the clout that she used to. There are dozens if not hundreds of people in power who have identified Al Jazeera as being a propaganda clearinghouse. If you want to take Clinton's word for it, go ahead. I seriously doubt that she was allowed access to the intricate workings of Al Jazeera and has no more knowledge of how they operate than how a McDonald's operates, in fact, I bet $20 she couldn't even spell Al Jazeera if put on the spot.

Exactly, some on here need to wake up. It's not that difficult.

DaClyde
09-13-2011, 02:26 PM
I find it interesting that al-Jazeera and FoxNews seem to be sliding in opposite directions in their programming. In al-Jazeera's early days, and as they were capitalizing on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, their coverage was very inflammatory and very sensationalized. This was obviously just how they managed to gain the attention of the world and expand their audience. In the past few years, they have grown in to a more more "mainstream" news outlet, almost becoming the CNN for the Middle East.

FoxNews, on the other hand, started out much closer to their "Fair and Balanced" tagline, and have steadily slipped down the right side of the hill, airing less and less actual news, and loading their programming almost entirely with right-leaning opinion shows. And as their programming has become more and more partisan, and less and less about actual current events, but about their opinions on current events, unfortunately, all the other networks have seen the ratings being attained and have followed suit, by watering down their own coverage and pandering to social media (instead of making any actual constructive use of it).

So now, somehow, with three 24-hour news networks, we only get maybe 1 hour a day of actual news, and even then, all three networks cover the exact same topics!

Back to the topic at hand, though, al-Jazeera is kind of screwed in the US due to the reputation put on them by the American media. The American media will only ever refer to them based on their coverage from the beginning of the Iraq war, and will never revise their information, so the American sheep that believe everything that is put in front of them will never learn any different. al-Jazeera had an opportunity to present their viewers with the "average Texan's" viewpoint on 9-11, but was denied that opportunity. Possibly a good thing, too, both for the reporter's physical safety, and for the reputation of Americans everywhere.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 02:37 PM
I find it interesting that al-Jazeera and FoxNews seem to be sliding in opposite directions in their programming. In al-Jazeera's early days, and as they were capitalizing on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, their coverage was very inflammatory and very sensationalized. This was obviously just how they managed to gain the attention of the world and expand their audience. In the past few years, they have grown in to a more more "mainstream" news outlet, almost becoming the CNN for the Middle East.

FoxNews, on the other hand, started out much closer to their "Fair and Balanced" tagline, and have steadily slipped down the right side of the hill, airing less and less actual news, and loading their programming almost entirely with right-leaning opinion shows. And as their programming has become more and more partisan, and less and less about actual current events, but about their opinions on current events, unfortunately, all the other networks have seen the ratings being attained and have followed suit, by watering down their own coverage and pandering to social media (instead of making any actual constructive use of it).

So now, somehow, with three 24-hour news networks, we only get maybe 1 hour a day of actual news, and even then, all three networks cover the exact same topics!

Back to the topic at hand, though, al-Jazeera is kind of screwed in the US due to the reputation put on them by the American media. The American media will only ever refer to them based on their coverage from the beginning of the Iraq war, and will never revise their information, so the American sheep that believe everything that is put in front of them will never learn any different. al-Jazeera had an opportunity to present their viewers with the "average Texan's" viewpoint on 9-11, but was denied that opportunity. Possibly a good thing, too, both for the reporter's physical safety, and for the reputation of Americans everywhere.

Sad but true. :confused0024:

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 02:43 PM
I find it interesting that al-Jazeera and FoxNews seem to be sliding in opposite directions in their programming. In al-Jazeera's early days, and as they were capitalizing on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, their coverage was very inflammatory and very sensationalized. This was obviously just how they managed to gain the attention of the world and expand their audience. In the past few years, they have grown in to a more more "mainstream" news outlet, almost becoming the CNN for the Middle East.

FoxNews, on the other hand, started out much closer to their "Fair and Balanced" tagline, and have steadily slipped down the right side of the hill, airing less and less actual news, and loading their programming almost entirely with right-leaning opinion shows. And as their programming has become more and more partisan, and less and less about actual current events, but about their opinions on current events, unfortunately, all the other networks have seen the ratings being attained and have followed suit, by watering down their own coverage and pandering to social media (instead of making any actual constructive use of it).

So now, somehow, with three 24-hour news networks, we only get maybe 1 hour a day of actual news, and even then, all three networks cover the exact same topics!

Back to the topic at hand, though, al-Jazeera is kind of screwed in the US due to the reputation put on them by the American media. The American media will only ever refer to them based on their coverage from the beginning of the Iraq war, and will never revise their information, so the American sheep that believe everything that is put in front of them will never learn any different. al-Jazeera had an opportunity to present their viewers with the "average Texan's" viewpoint on 9-11, but was denied that opportunity. Possibly a good thing, too, both for the reporter's physical safety, and for the reputation of Americans everywhere.
When was the last time you checked out anything from Al Jazeera? Did you look into the way they covered the Egyptian uproar? They were not really neutral from what I've seen.

pghin08
09-13-2011, 02:46 PM
When was the last time you checked out anything from Al Jazeera? Did you look into the way they covered the Egyptian uproar? They were not really neutral from what I've seen.

I thought it was great.

lloydr04
09-13-2011, 02:47 PM
Sad but true. :confused0024:

man its sad how a few certain posters on here are quick to downplay something they know absolutely nothing about, credit to you bro for arguing with these people and not :smash: doing that a couple times...oh yeah, you're right... you can clearly tell who the bigots are on here

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 02:50 PM
I thought it was great.

No muslim brother hood slant in your opinion? I also head that they ran a stronger version in on their arabic channel then the english one. That they fueled the riots more.....

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 03:00 PM
man its sad how a few certain posters on here are quick to downplay something they know absolutely nothing about, credit to you bro for arguing with these people and not :smash: doing that a couple times...oh yeah, you're right... you can clearly tell who the bigots are on here

Care to defend your comments? What do you know? Not alot it seems. You think there is no radical element in Al jazeera? Please do tell how you came to that conclusion instead of posting stupid comments.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 03:01 PM
Here's an interesting piece. I ask any of the detractors to please pick apart the article. I'm sure you'll all be great at that with your wealth of information..........

http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=2971

lloydr04
09-13-2011, 03:08 PM
Care to defend your comments? What do you know? Not alot it seems. You think there is no radical element in Al jazeera? Please do tell how you came to that conclusion instead of posting stupid comments.

ah my comments must of got to you, feeling guilty? Like i told you , stop speaking on what you know nothing of ... and just for your info the muslim brotherhood you speak on.. the sunni vs shi'a war .. look it up .. what kind of "muslim brothers" own al jazeera , and are they "defending" just their "own kind"? Riddle me that one mr smart guy , and just because they report most of their news through a different point of view (which i would take as they are LOCATED CLOSER TO MOST THE ACTUAL NEWS THEY SPEAK OF) .. makes them biased?

lloydr04
09-13-2011, 03:10 PM
Here's an interesting piece. I ask any of the detractors to please pick apart the article. I'm sure you'll all be great at that with your wealth of information..........

http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=2971

How convenient you get your article from the Muslim peoples BIGGEST enemy to support your already weak argument , give it up buddy .. its getting pathetic

pghin08
09-13-2011, 03:12 PM
No muslim brother hood slant in your opinion?

Nope. Most of what I read was focused on the youth movement, with only a few mentions of the Muslim brotherhood. If there was ANY bias, it was against Mubarak and Gaddhafi. I guess you could spin that towards a Muslim Brotherhood slant, but it's a real reach. They were just critical of both regimes.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 03:16 PM
ah my comments must of got to you, feeling guilty? Like i told you , stop speaking on what you know nothing of ... and just for your info the muslim brotherhood you speak on.. the sunni vs shi'a war .. look it up .. what kind of "muslim brothers" own al jazeera , and are they "defending" just their "own kind"? Riddle me that one mr smart guy , and just because they report most of their news through a different point of view (which i would take as they are LOCATED CLOSER TO MOST THE ACTUAL NEWS THEY SPEAK OF) .. makes them biased?

No, you're just clueless to the issues apparently. Just look at who runs the programming. I guess there's no bias though. I guess you think the brotherhood are a peaceful organization no doubt.

lloydr04
09-13-2011, 03:29 PM
Thanks for making my point...move on please.

you have no point , just an article from a biased view based on the war they had with each other.. you didnt care to argue the sunni vs shi'a and whos on whos side but instead tried to put that article in place to prove your point , but i don't have to take that bait, come with something better instead of whining because i didn't listen to the people who have something against them.

http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/al-jazeera-demands-israel-releases-detained-journalist/s2/a545931/

oh you mean to tell me the government holding this man has nothing against the news company .. lol , WHERES THEIR PROOF... just like everything put in that article HOLDS NO WATER.

mrveggieman
09-13-2011, 04:25 PM
Fox news minority owner = Prince Al-waleed bin Talal
Watch as SanFran's head explodes


Oh no not the conservative's bible fox news. I can't believe that. They will be heart broken. :confused0024:

ensbergcollector
09-13-2011, 04:39 PM
Remember I'm not the one who has been accused of having an anti arab, anti muslim and overall anti minority view.

no, you are the one accused of the anti-christian, anti-conservative, anti-republican view.



and lloydr04 - if we don't listen to any articles posted by bias sources then we can't look at anything. we get articles from huffington post, websites whose sole intention is to attack certain groups, etc. Not to mention everyone here seems to think that any source other than there own is biased so we pretty much have to allow all sources and try and find the truth in the bias.

sanfran22
09-13-2011, 05:58 PM
Fox news minority owner = Prince Al-waleed bin Talal
Watch as SanFran's head explodes
Ahh the magic of the stock market....he appears to know where to make money....You'd be wise to follow suit.

INTIMADATOR2007
09-13-2011, 06:06 PM
Fox news minority owner = Prince Al-waleed bin Talal
Watch as SanFran's head explodes


Just goes to show exactly how fair and balanced they truly are ..:winking0071:

mrveggieman
09-14-2011, 09:41 AM
no, you are the one accused of the anti-christian, anti-conservative, anti-republican view.



and lloydr04 - if we don't listen to any articles posted by bias sources then we can't look at anything. we get articles from huffington post, websites whose sole intention is to attack certain groups, etc. Not to mention everyone here seems to think that any source other than there own is biased so we pretty much have to allow all sources and try and find the truth in the bias.


You know me and you are cool but remember when you assume you make an..... But anyway responding back to what some of ya'll feel about me I am not anti christian since I am a christian despite the fact I am not racist, do not hate muslims or gays and do believe in freedom of religion for all people not just christians. As far as being anti republican I do not agree with a lot of the things that the republican party stands for and I have noticed that a lot of so called republicans have racist, anti muslim, anti gay and over hateful views. Even though the republican party of today is clearly not the party of lincoln they do serve a useful purpose. That is being the primary competition for the dems they help them keep their game on point and believe it or not come up with a useful idea every 20 years or so. :sign0020:. As far as me being anti conservative, I do think that gov't should be more conservative as far as spending but most republicans seem to throw their conservative roots out the window when it comes to war spending so shouldn't ya'll be called the anti-conservative group and not us? :confused0024:

ensbergcollector
09-14-2011, 11:44 AM
You know me and you are cool but remember when you assume you make an..... But anyway responding back to what some of ya'll feel about me I am not anti christian since I am a christian despite the fact I am not racist, do not hate muslims or gays and do believe in freedom of religion for all people not just christians. As far as being anti republican I do not agree with a lot of the things that the republican party stands for and I have noticed that a lot of so called republicans have racist, anti muslim, anti gay and over hateful views. Even though the republican party of today is clearly not the party of lincoln they do serve a useful purpose. That is being the primary competition for the dems they help them keep their game on point and believe it or not come up with a useful idea every 20 years or so. :sign0020:. As far as me being anti conservative, I do think that gov't should be more conservative as far as spending but most republicans seem to throw their conservative roots out the window when it comes to war spending so shouldn't ya'll be called the anti-conservative group and not us? :confused0024:

it isn't much of an assumption when it is based on months of public posts. I feel that I know your opinions pretty clearly. And being a christian doesn't mean you can't be anti-christian.

mrveggieman
09-14-2011, 11:55 AM
it isn't much of an assumption when it is based on months of public posts. I feel that I know your opinions pretty clearly. And being a christian doesn't mean you can't be anti-christian.


Just like some people on here can claim to be christians but still be just as racist as the devil himself. This is also based on months of reading some of our viewers posts.

ensbergcollector
09-14-2011, 12:06 PM
Just like some people on here can claim to be christians but still be just as racist as the devil himself. This is also based on months of reading some of our viewers posts.

i agree completely. Hopefully reading months of my posts will show that while I am an outspoken christian I am not racist or anti-anything.

mrveggieman
09-14-2011, 12:40 PM
i agree completely. Hopefully reading months of my posts will show that while I am an outspoken christian I am not racist or anti-anything.


I never got that impression of racism from you so far. Also to follow up on my previous posts there is a guy on another website that I used to chat with (I can't as much now b/c my job blocked out that particular site) about God. He was what one may consider an extreme atheist. Yes atheists can be extremists as well. He pretty much said that anyone who follows an abrahamic faith (islam, christanity, judiasm or any of their offshoots) is a religious extremist and has hateful views. I was the only one who believed in any form of God whatsoever and went at it with a bunch of atheists. Most of them were respectful even though some of them had some real extreme views. Religions or non-religious extremism can come from all spectrums and I am totally against it no matter who is doing it and who is the victim. I hope that clears a lot of things up.

sanfran22
09-15-2011, 10:24 AM
it isn't much of an assumption when it is based on months of public posts. I feel that I know your opinions pretty clearly. And being a christian doesn't mean you can't be anti-christian.

Can you explain that statement? Just curious.....

ensbergcollector
09-15-2011, 01:03 PM
Can you explain that statement? Just curious.....

It makes sense in my head, i will try and type it so it makes sense. there are a lot of people who if asked would classify themselves as christians. However, some haven't been to church in 20 years and in fact, while they like the idea of christianity, actually despise the church and anything it stands for. It is the people who check the box on a survey but do not actually care to live as a christian.
You also have christians who, in response to the "church's" stances over the years, feel the need to bash christianity almost to make amends for past mistakes and failures.

Now, I am not claiming this about anyone here. I am simply saying it is very possible to be a christian and still be very anti.

sanfran22
09-15-2011, 01:09 PM
It makes sense in my head, i will try and type it so it makes sense. there are a lot of people who if asked would classify themselves as christians. However, some haven't been to church in 20 years and in fact, while they like the idea of christianity, actually despise the church and anything it stands for. It is the people who check the box on a survey but do not actually care to live as a christian.
You also have christians who, in response to the "church's" stances over the years, feel the need to bash christianity almost to make amends for past mistakes and failures.

Now, I am not claiming this about anyone here. I am simply saying it is very possible to be a christian and still be very anti.
That's pretty much what I thought. The majority of this country probably calls themselves Christians but when asked what it means to be one, they don't know, or think being good is being a Christian, or being baptized = Christianity, or Christians are supposed to be perfect and if you are not, how can you possibly be one...ect, ect. Just out of curiosity, what church do you pastor at? You don't have to answer that if you really don't want to.

ensbergcollector
09-15-2011, 01:21 PM
That's pretty much what I thought. The majority of this country probably calls themselves Christians but when asked what it means to be one, they don't know, or think being good is being a Christian, or being baptized = Christianity, or Christians are supposed to be perfect and if you are not, how can you possibly be one...ect, ect. Just out of curiosity, what church do you pastor at? You don't have to answer that if you really don't want to.

i am a youth minister at a church of christ in dallas

sanfran22
09-15-2011, 01:24 PM
i am a youth minister at a church of christ in dallas
Very cool.......Keep up the good work.

swib25
09-15-2011, 03:32 PM
They report on a bias that is anti-American and anti-Israel. Google some of their reports and find out. They are often a mouth-piece for extremist.

http://www.pri.org/stories/world/middle-east/is-al-jazeera-propaganda.html

They have been associated with pro-Hamas/anti-Israel propaganda in their reports.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=211633

Al Jazeera is not an inoccuous organization. They are not just a run-of-the-mill newsgroup.

C'mon bro, you can't claim one news organization is bias and use another bias news organization like WorldNetDaily as your proof. That's ridiculous.

pantherfan82
09-19-2011, 09:21 AM
Personally I find fox news more offensive than al jazeer

mrveggieman
09-19-2011, 11:02 AM
Personally I find fox news more offensive than al jazeer


:love0030:

duane1969
09-19-2011, 12:15 PM
Personally I find fox news more offensive than al jazeer

So you have watched FoxNews and Al Jazeera?

Hairylemon
09-19-2011, 11:07 PM
One is a pro right wing news channel with a right wing bias, the other is an Arab news channel with an Arab bias. Hardly a shocking revelation. That being said Al Jazeeras coverage of the Egypt crisis was second to none, mainly due to the fact they have an office there and did not need to rush reporters to the scene.

swib25
09-20-2011, 05:11 PM
Here is something interesting in the news today regarding Al Jazeera. Hard to say they are anti-American considering this little revelation.

http://www.startribune.com/world/130213428.html

duane1969
09-20-2011, 06:26 PM
Here is something interesting in the news today regarding Al Jazeera. Hard to say they are anti-American considering this little revelation.

http://www.startribune.com/world/130213428.html

That article confirms that Al-Jazerra, as an organization, is anti-American. If not then why would he have to step down for doing a special favor for the American government?

*censored*
09-20-2011, 08:52 PM
I did a study on Al-Jazeera and the American media as a senior in college. Al-Jazeera is actually far more balanced than the American media. The only reason people here see it as a "mouthpiece for Al-Qaeda" or whatever term is in vogue now is because the American media wouldn't dare let EVERY viewpoint get airtime.

duane1969
09-21-2011, 11:22 AM
I did a study on Al-Jazeera and the American media as a senior in college. Al-Jazeera is actually far more balanced than the American media. The only reason people here see it as a "mouthpiece for Al-Qaeda" or whatever term is in vogue now is because the American media wouldn't dare let EVERY viewpoint get airtime.

I see them as a mouthpiece for extremism because that is what they have been doing. When other news agencies refused to show beheadings anymore, Al Jazeera still showed them (I think they have since stopped). When a group like Hamas or Al Queda wants to get a propaganda recording out to the media, they go through Al-Jazeera. When Palestine and Israel have a conflict Al Jazeera always comes down on the side of whatever is anti-Israel.

I consider that "being a mouthpiece."

swib25
09-21-2011, 05:08 PM
That article confirms that Al-Jazerra, as an organization, is anti-American. If not then why would he have to step down for doing a special favor for the American government?

Bwahahaha. Good spin. You must work in PR. It proves that Al-Jazerra wasn't pro-American enough. He is stepping down because he violated a code of ethics to report the news objectively, and actually doing the US favors by showing them in a positive (bias) light.