Bush 'Plans Iran Air Strike by August'

"Jeffrey Hamilton" wrote in message
...

"PaPaPeng" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 04:45:07 GMT, "La N"
wrote:

This anonymous coward, "Wiley Post", is yet another who hit my killfile
from
the get go. Anonymous cowards who get sh*tcanned from post 1 include
those
who post from anonymous remailers or those who usurp the names of
deceased
celebrities.

- nilita

But you and the rest of your gang still read all my (and Wiley's, et
al) posts and get your ire up. That's power because I/we can still
mess up your minds. I am less interested in winning any particular
argument than in forcing you to re-examine your presumptions. An
unavoidable consequence of arguing with me is that over time you will
have to refine your arguments if you don't want to pop a blood vessel
first. Pointless anger directed at anonymous cowardly provokers is to
say the least pointless. Your remedy is to come up with a better
argument the next time, one where I cannot poke holes into or turn
around to bite you.

You flatter yourself, Post is killfiled, you would be too, if it wasn't
for the fact your an Chinese alien living in Canada, but support a
communist doctrine. You caught my attention with your constant bleating
about communist China and her successes, so now I'm keeping tab's on you,
as it were.
Congratulate yourself on that.

cheers....Jeff


Ummm ... there is something wrong in what PaPaPeng wrote. He implied that I
read him. I don't. I read some other people's responses to him.

- nilita, whose killfile overfloweth ...

On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 03:29:51 -0400, "Jeffrey Hamilton"
wrote:

Say what you like sport, I'm repeating what was broadcast on CNN.

cheers....Jeff


I was going to quote an authoritative source (a close friend in
acedemia and industry) on how mainstream US media mangles the news and
led the country into its current disaster and the ensuing lack of
viable alternatives to get the country out of the quagmire. But I am
sure he will not appreciate my identifying him as would be necessary
to give credence to him as the source. My reply was yes that's how
the game is being played, the US establishment demonizing China
regardless of the evidence and the facts. The only effective response
is to for China to continue doing what it believes is right for
herself and let the results speak for themselves. The results have
been consistent and darm good for the past 60 years. Proof-can you
cite any accusation that the US made over the past 60 years that
stuck? That you are still rehashing the same stuff doesn't count
since you haven't scored a goal yet.

For a good inside view of the US mainstream media and how they have
fallen do read the articles in Tom Dispatch
http://www.tomdispatch.com/ [Tomdispatch.com is for anyone seeking a
deeper understanding of our post-9/11 world and a clear sense of how
our imperial globe actually works. Read more about the site's founder
and editor Tom Engelhardt and his guest authors. ]

There are lots of other authoritative US articles that bemoan the
current state of the US Fourth Estate. But it is something you will
have to be interested enough yourself to read them up and notice the
demise of objectivity and accuracy in US reporting. CNN? Pshaw. Its
going down the drain in the direction of FOX News. Its all about
advertising revenues and not offending those who pay the bills,
objectivity be damned.

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:00:39 GMT, "La N"
wrote:


Ummm ... there is something wrong in what PaPaPeng wrote. He implied that I
read him. I don't. I read some other people's responses to him.

- nilita, whose killfile overfloweth ...



Ummm. Didn't you just read my post in order to respond?

That's really too bad. You let your judgement be predeterimned by
others and then jump into the fray based on inadequate and biased
knowledge. That's what makes cannon fodder cannon fodder.

I agree with your short cut regarding posts to read. My method is to
1. Is the subject header of interest to me? 2. How many responses are
there to the post? 3. Pick a responder known to be a reasonably
objective one and see what he says. 4. If his comments are
interesting (I learnt something) I read the original post to see where
everything is coming from. 5. I read a few more posts and get a feel
of the general mood. 6. Go from there.

Another of my practices is when I come across an interesting article I
post it in full and with the URL and date. I don't make any comments,
meaning I agree with the main body of the writer's arguments. Most of
the articles will be written by Western writers for that skips a lot
of racial prejudice that have nothing to do with the importance of
the subject. I do this is because a majority of you guys don't read.

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:01:34 GMT, PaPaPeng wrote:

CNN? Pshaw. Its
going down the drain in the direction of FOX News. Its all about
advertising revenues and not offending those who pay the bills,
objectivity be damned.


The thought just crossed my mind. Its not about greed chasing the
almighty (ads) dollar. It is about desperation. The Internet is
indeed an instrument that freed mankind from the bonds of many old
conventions. People get their information from the Internet these days
- very current, free, uncensored, in any color or form, etc. though
often lacking in depth. The unintended consequence is nobody reads
newspapers anymore. Print media is dying. So is broadcast news.
These are very high cost establishments chasing ever decreasing
advertising dollars. Their product has to be as uncontroversial as
possible (aka bland and unoffensive). The media has to pander to
popular prejudices when that arises (more advert income or die)rather
than its traditional role to lead and form public opinion. This has
changed your landscape more than you realize - how come with more than
60 per cent of the people disapproving where the US is heading you
still can't change direction?? It has also changed the rest of the
world. The white guys aren't that formidable. What they can do
(development in a modern world)we also can.

"PaPaPeng" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 03:29:51 -0400, "Jeffrey Hamilton"
wrote:

Say what you like sport, I'm repeating what was broadcast on CNN.

cheers....Jeff


snippage of rant about news coverage

Listen fool, spout what you like, pictures tell a thousand words.

They were holding up a piece of concrete, supposedly reinforced. What the
builder had used for reinforcement was a joke.
Instead of rebar, it looked like he had used that very light steel-mesh
material (approx. 6"x6" square) that we use to support a concrete slab in a
garage floor that is laid over 6" of compacted gravel.
Instead of using rebar, which you or I wouldn't be able to bend with our
bare hands, he used material a four year old could twist out of shape.
Don't tell me what I saw fool, I'll tell you.

cheers....Jeff

"PaPaPeng" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:01:34 GMT, PaPaPeng wrote:

CNN? Pshaw. Its
going down the drain in the direction of FOX News. Its all about
advertising revenues and not offending those who pay the bills,
objectivity be damned.


The thought just crossed my mind. Its not about greed chasing the
almighty (ads) dollar. It is about desperation.

blah, blah, blah

Desperation is correct.
Your desperation, to put a spin on what is not only a national tragedy, but
also a national disgrace.
Noone is saying buildings won't fall with a strong earth quake. What people
are pointing out, is a large percentage of the demolished buildings were
school's, seemingly built to shoddy standards.

cheers.....Jeff

In article ,
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:01:34 GMT, PaPaPeng wrote:

CNN? Pshaw. Its
going down the drain in the direction of FOX News. Its all about
advertising revenues and not offending those who pay the bills,
objectivity be damned.


The thought just crossed my mind. Its not about greed chasing the
almighty (ads) dollar. It is about desperation. The Internet is
indeed an instrument that freed mankind from the bonds of many old
conventions. People get their information from the Internet these days
- very current, free, uncensored, in any color or form, etc. though
often lacking in depth.

True and it is a shame that the Chinese don't have this "uncensored"
access to the internet wouldn't you say? ;^)

The unintended consequence is nobody reads
newspapers anymore. Print media is dying. So is broadcast news.


Broadcast news is simply moving to the internet. Same
people different playing field.


These are very high cost establishments chasing ever decreasing
advertising dollars. Their product has to be as uncontroversial as
possible (aka bland and unoffensive).


The problem with this is that controversy generates interest,
which translates to increase in your audience.


The media has to pander to
popular prejudices when that arises (more advert income or die)rather
than its traditional role to lead and form public opinion.
This has
changed your landscape more than you realize

Several decades ago the News department was not expected to
generate income for the three television networks, ABC,NBC and CBS.
Since these networks were the only show in town they could use
the revenue from their entertainment programs to pay for their
news coverage. This has changed and they now are no longer
immune to the need to generate money. This has changed the
landscape of TV news.


- how come with more than
60 per cent of the people disapproving where the US is heading you
still can't change direction??


Because of the system we have you can't "change directions" without
an election. In the last election the democrats grabbed the legislative
branch of the government but they need the executive branch to
really change things. Of course what change really means is
open to interpretation.


It has also changed the rest of the
world. The white guys aren't that formidable. What they can do
(development in a modern world)we also can.

I know is looks like the Chinese have adopted the "white man's burden".
You know bringing civilization to the less fortunate whether they
want it or not e.g. Tibet.

Joe

"PaPaPeng" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 03:39:56 -0400, "Jeffrey Hamilton"
wrote:


"PaPaPeng" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 04:45:07 GMT, "La N"
wrote:

This anonymous coward, "Wiley Post", is yet another who hit my killfile
from
the get go. Anonymous cowards who get sh*tcanned from post 1 include
those
who post from anonymous remailers or those who usurp the names of
deceased
celebrities.

- nilita

But you and the rest of your gang still read all my (and Wiley's, et
al) posts and get your ire up. That's power because I/we can still
mess up your minds. I am less interested in winning any particular
argument than in forcing you to re-examine your presumptions. An
unavoidable consequence of arguing with me is that over time you will
have to refine your arguments if you don't want to pop a blood vessel
first. Pointless anger directed at anonymous cowardly provokers is to
say the least pointless. Your remedy is to come up with a better
argument the next time, one where I cannot poke holes into or turn
around to bite you.

You flatter yourself, Post is killfiled, you would be too, if it wasn't
for
the fact your an Chinese alien living in Canada, but support a communist
doctrine. You caught my attention with your constant bleating about
communist China and her successes, so now I'm keeping tab's on you, as it
were.
Congratulate yourself on that.

cheers....Jeff


Hah. Gotcha.

No you didn't

You did read this thread.

Fix your comprehension problem's fool.
I stated above I keep track of your posting's and I told you why.

Okay. I normally don't keep
track of who SMN personalities are,
..But I'll make a exception for you and check if you (Jeff) do still respond
to my
posts.

Occasionally I respond, that's all. I'm not part of a tag-team, fool.
As often as not someone else is tearing a strip of your hide, so there is no
need for me to do anything other than read and laugh.

I'll assume that you read at least ten of my post before you
jump in to respond to one.

Alway's remember 'assume', makes an ass of u and me.
If your post comes through I read it.
Not for it's intrinsic value, merely to keep track of the thought patterns
of a Chinese communist shill.
No more, no less.

SMN is the only newsgroup where people say the'll killfile me.

Many probably have. They aren't interested in a Chinese communist shill.
I have a vested interest, you are _in_ my country !

If I get paid a buck (even a buck doesn't have the impact of a penny from
not that long ago) I'd soon have enough to go for a celebratory steak
dinner. Amassing enough penny enemies to become the metaphoric
millionaire is possible only in China. Aw heck. I pay myself a buck
per killfile mention anyway. I am a noodles restaurant guy with only
an occasional yen for a steak dinner. The estimated timing for one
per filling a killfile quota sounds about right.

Pay yourself whatever you like, hell, give yourself a raise, who cares?

cheers....Jeff

"La N" wrote in message
news:Hna1k.620$7B3.258@edtnps91...

"Jeffrey Hamilton" wrote in message
...

"PaPaPeng" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 04:45:07 GMT, "La N"
wrote:

This anonymous coward, "Wiley Post", is yet another who hit my killfile
from
the get go. Anonymous cowards who get sh*tcanned from post 1 include
those
who post from anonymous remailers or those who usurp the names of
deceased
celebrities.

- nilita

But you and the rest of your gang still read all my (and Wiley's, et
al) posts and get your ire up. That's power because I/we can still
mess up your minds. I am less interested in winning any particular
argument than in forcing you to re-examine your presumptions. An
unavoidable consequence of arguing with me is that over time you will
have to refine your arguments if you don't want to pop a blood vessel
first. Pointless anger directed at anonymous cowardly provokers is to
say the least pointless. Your remedy is to come up with a better
argument the next time, one where I cannot poke holes into or turn
around to bite you.

You flatter yourself, Post is killfiled, you would be too, if it wasn't
for the fact your an Chinese alien living in Canada, but support a
communist doctrine. You caught my attention with your constant bleating
about communist China and her successes, so now I'm keeping tab's on you,
as it were.
Congratulate yourself on that.

cheers....Jeff


Ummm ... there is something wrong in what PaPaPeng wrote. He implied that
I read him. I don't. I read some other people's responses to him.


Yes nilita I copy, that happens alot doesn't it?
Annoying, but it seem's to be the price of addmission to USENET usage.

cheers....Jeff

- nilita, whose killfile overfloweth ...

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 08:28:30 -0700, (JJS)
wrote:

I know is looks like the Chinese have adopted the "white man's burden".
You know bringing civilization to the less fortunate whether they
want it or not e.g. Tibet.

Joe


On the contrary. Tibet is being developed for China's benefit as
Tibet's resources and vast space is needed. Development will not wait
for Tibetans slow to get into the game. Tibetans are in the best
position to benefit from this investment as the rules are already in
place to let them have first pick. But the Tibetans must also have
the attitude, aptitude and the ability to take advantage of these
opportunities. To quit with barely a grade 6 education with no
(Chinese majority or foreign) language skills dooms one to making a
living off equally disadvantaged fellow Tibetans. (Being a monk
inures one to life's hardships but is quite useless for making a
living.) Your Afro-American experience is an excellent parallel.
Providing barely earned advantages to all 2.5 million Tibetans in a
population of 1.3 billion Chinese is no problem at all. But these
advantages must still be earned regardless of at how low a level.