Chris Matthews Admits: MSNBC Bosses Were "Basically Pro-War" »

Posted by: TechnologyExpert 2 months, 2 weeks ago

75 Comments Reflect Report this Story

5.0

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 0

Propped: 104

Comments: 75

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

In a speech at Harvard's Institute of Politics on Monday, Chris Matthews admitted that MSNBC bosses were "basically pro-war during the war."

Read Full Story at huffingtonpost.com

Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 75

Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

walden3
May 7, 2008, 9:24 p.m.
You get a negative for not saying anything.
Rupert Murdoch's mother!?!?
Rupert Murdoch's mother "was born Elisabeth Joy Greene in Melbourne, the daughter of Marie Grace and Rupert Greene, who was a Melbourne merchant.[1] Murdoch's father was Irish and her mother was born in Warrnambool, Victoria and descended from an upper-class English family."
"Born in Warren, Ohio, Ailes attended the Warren City School. Ailes graduated in 1962 from Ohio University in Athens, Ohio, receiving a BA."
"Sumner Murray Redstone May 27, 1923) is majority owner and Chairman of the Board of the National Amusements theater chain. Through National Amusements, Sumner Redstone and his family are majority owners of CBS Corporation, Viacom, and Midway Games, MTV Networks, BET, and movie production and distribution Paramount Pictures and DreamWorks movie studios, and are equal partners in MovieTickets.com."
Do you have a point, because this is
getting awful boring?

34 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  TemplarScribe
  May 7, 2008, 10:18 p.m.
  Walden, his too-obvious point is that Israel is one of the few countries that benefits from us fighting in Iraq (although, calling it Persia makes this poster sound like a reject from Rise of Nations, IMHO).
  To be honest, the connection between 9/11 in New York and the Mossad is undeniable: two different groups of Mossad agents were arrested that day, one just after filming the plane crashes into the WTC buildings, while they cheered and jumped for joy.
  A second group was arrested in a white van, following anonymous reports of "Palestinians" in a white van preparing to blow up one of the tunnels.
  And they were all let go within days.
  This link has never been satisfactorily investigated. Without sounding anti-Semitic, we as a country should have rigorously investigated this connection.
  
  11 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    CRYMTYPHON
    May 7, 2008, 10:22 p.m.
    Sources? Links?
    And not to another web page with the same words.
    Arrest data? Names?
    Anything?
    
    4 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      obiefrommuskogee
      May 8, 2008, 1:40 p.m.
      I read the original story in two places: the Bergen County Record and the Jerusalem Post. The interesting thing about the article in the Jerusalem Post is that none of the facts were disputed, the whole article was more like a big whine that the Israelis were treated like criminals.
      The Jewish lobby and pro-Israelis supporters here in the US have WAYYYYYYYY too much influence in our political process and foreign policy. Only about 3% of the US population is Jewish, yet we have people like Harvey Weinstein trying to throw his weight around and threaten a member of the House. These people should move to Israel-- they are ruining America and it gets worse every day.
      Now that I have been critical of Israel, all those folks that have Megaphone loaded, which is a program designed to seek out anti-israeli comments anywhere on the Web and counter them, my post will probably disappear.
      
      Reply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      TemplarScribe
      May 8, 2008, 11:42 p.m.
      I'm gonna assume that the voluminous links provided by Walden3 and PoliticsIsCriminal will satisfy you.
      It's a recorded fact in numerous places (both electronic and print) that Mossad ran an intelligence network in new York out of a moving company front, and that those agents were arrested in multiple locations around the city on 9/11, including videotaping the crashes into the WTC and dancing in celebration..
      One of the best, most inclusive articles has the wry title, "The Five Dancing Mossad Agents:"
      http://wrhstore.com/fiveisraelis.html
      Notice the extensive links on every paragraph of the story, from the New Jersey moving company, to the FBI reports, to the transcripts of 911 calls notifying the authorities of suspicious people in moving vans in the tunnels.
      Do I also need to provide a link to the Neocon PNAC quote suggesting we needed "a new Pearl Harbor," the same organization that gave us Wolfowitz, Pearl, Feith and other influential Neocons?
      
      2 RepliesReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        TemplarScribe
        May 8, 2008, 11:47 p.m.
        But then, if I didn't provide it, you'd simply ignore the truth. So here's a representative link:
        http://tvnewslies.org/html/kristol_clear.html
        FTA:
        "A subsequent PNAC plan written in 2000, was entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century," The treatise clearly showed that members of the Bush administration had planned to take military control of the Gulf region one way or another, long before the attacks of 9/11...."
        "The PNAC plan openly called for a transformation of the US military into an imperialistic force of global domination. That was more easily said than done. The American people would have to go along with the idea, and that was a problem, but not an insurmountable one...
        " 'The process of transformation," the plan said, "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing eventâ;;like a new Pearl Harbor.' "
        The prosecution rests.
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        CRYMTYPHON
        May 9, 2008, 12:32 p.m.
        I asked for sources to facts, not another web page repeating the rumour, with links to other web pages repeating the rumour.
        You specificly say these Israelis were arrested with a van full of explosives on 911. This is news to most Americans.
        Where is the arrest report? FBI report? Who interviewed the suspects? When was the arraignment? Was there a trial? Who was prosecutor? What happened to the van?
        If you are going to say it was all hushed up and there is no 'official data', but everyone on the web knows it, then what can you expect if no one takes it seriously?
        The prosecution rests?
        They haven't done any work yet.
        
        Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    walden3
    May 7, 2008, 10:25 p.m.
    I agree 9/11 was not investigated adequately. I don't believe that Israel trained the 20 hijackers and put them up to crashing planes into the towers. I'm more of the school of thought that says we knew about it and allowed it to happen. If I'm not mistaken wasn't Israel one of the countries, along with Russia and Germany, that told us that something was going to happen?
    
    Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    TemplarScribe
    May 7, 2008, 10:29 p.m.
    And before we get too far off the subject, Matthews should be congratulated for going public with this admission.
    But I have to wonder: where was his honesty five years ago? Why didn't he come forward and shre his opinion then? Was he blind to the rhetoric, was he himself wrapped up in the runup to war, or was he just unwilling to point out the obvious, for fear of being punished by his bosses?
    For those of you who still believe the media has a liberal bias, that certainly isn't true to any objective observer.
    
    4 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      Candida
      May 7, 2008, 11:39 p.m.
      TemplarScribe: "was he himself wrapped up in the runup to war"
      Everybody seemed to be wrapped up in the run-up to war in 2003. I remember thinking: Is everybody blind and deaf in the US? Nobody seemed to notice anything and nobody listened to anybody other than the administration. Do you remember "freedom fries" and Champagne down the drain? Nobody made a sound when the administration refused to go back to the Security Council for authorization of the war. I don't remember a peep out of anyone.
      No, that's not entirely true. There were thousands of people on the streets protesting against the war, but they were mostly ignored by the media and the majority of the population.
      
      3 RepliesReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 7:01 a.m.
        "There were thousands of people on the streets protesting against the war..."
        And we were getting spit on, called names, given the finger and had profanities hurled at us.
        
        Reply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        GHOSTWHOWALKS
        May 8, 2008, 11:11 a.m.
        They are still there; still ignored; and still powerless. There are however, some within the power structure that are trying to educate the people of this country, but like those lonesome protesters, largely ignored.
        
        Reply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        djn3nunez3
        May 8, 2008, 11:53 a.m.
        Not entirely true at all. Mostly those oppose were ignored or as Walden points out severly denigrated publicly.
        http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3014
        
        Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  libsRfunny
  May 7, 2008, 11:43 p.m.
  On the one hand walden, you get a positive for taking the obvious, baseless anti-Semitic rant to task. How m0oronis like that get away with their constant racial hatred is beyond me.
  On the other hand, you gotta be nuts to suggest we "allowed" 9/11 to happen. True, Clinton had lots of chances to take out Osama and balked at every turn. But to suggest the U.S. gov't allowed a cadre of known terrorists to take over civilian four jetliners and fly them into the World Trade Centers, Pentagon and a Pennsylvania farm field is purely nutso.
  I used to think FDR let Pearl Harbor happen. Then I grew up and got smarter.
  
  18 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    earthlingerer
    May 8, 2008, 5:26 a.m.
    If FDR didn't let Pearl Harbor happen, who did? Are you saying that the Honolulu Advertiser had better intelligence the week before when the headline read "Japanese May Strike Over Weekend"?
    When you say "we" in the "allowed 9/11 to happen" thing, please, be assured that YOU are NOT among the "WE", which should read "THEY".
    I'll let the increasingly murkier, yet emerging evidence surrounding 9/11 speak for itself...
    Maybe you grew up...
    
    1 ReplyReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      libsRfunny
      May 8, 2008, 12:56 p.m.
      "If FDR didn't let Pearl Harbor happen, who did?"
      The Japanese. Yes, Propeller has a lot of conspiracy goofs on board.
      
      Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    walden3
    May 8, 2008, 7:22 a.m.
    LRF -
    CIA flight schools, prior warnings, secret meetings, Connie Rice ignoring warnings, President's daily briefing, informant roommates with hijacker, ignoring FBI counsel in MN. You figure it out.
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/09/attac...
    http://www.madcowprod.com/09192005.html
    http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/flight-schools...
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD08Aa0...
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD07Aa0...
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=...
    http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Report_France_war...
    http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-0...
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/24/usa...
    http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/augus...
    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/1...
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
    
    9 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      libsRfunny
      May 8, 2008, 12:52 p.m.
      Anyone saying a president let a disaster like Pearl Harbor or 9/11 happen is nutso. THe line of thought is: they let it happen to get their policy (war on Japan/terror) rolling.
      In either event, if either knew exactly what was being planned, they could have had the military on alert and obliterated the attacks and STILL manage to gain overwhelming political support.
      Only a fool suggests either event was intentional.
      
      8 RepliesReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 1:04 p.m.
        Did you look at any of my many links?
        "These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake "Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington," including "sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated)," faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a "Remember the Maine" incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods "may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government."
        http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/
        Who'd imagine our government would stage terror attacks?
        I saw the author, Bamford, speak one time. He also wrote the Puzzle Palace and others about the NSA.
        
        Reply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        miklkit
        May 8, 2008, 1:34 p.m.
        Could you please explain why dead eyes dick cheney was in the NORAD bunker controlling several war games involving airplanes flying into buildings on 911? For the first time ever?
        
        6 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        obiefrommuskogee
        May 8, 2008, 1:46 p.m.
        Yes, way to many discrepancies in the 9-11 timeline to ignore the fact that something was amiss.
        Then there is the rumor that no Israelis died on 9-11. I researched this rumor in the 9-11 database and despite the fact that Israelis had offices in the twin towers, not one Israeli died in the twin towers. American jews died though, and you will see these in the database.
        
        5 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 2:10 p.m.
        Let's see the source of your info then.
        I wonder why you would be so willing to believe that of the 100, 500 or 1,000 Israelis working in the Towers that they were warned and yet so cold hearted no to alert any of their friends or co-workers. It would have had to have been an enormous conspiracy by just regular folks.
        
        4 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 5:30 p.m.
        I got tired of waiting for a reply that would never come.
        Here's a list of other countries that didn't lose anyone in the towers: China, Russia, Ireland, Italy, France, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon, Scotland, Greece, Sweden, Switzerland, India, Spain and then I got tired of typing names in.
        http://www.september11victims.com/september11vi...
        BTW an Israeli did die on the plane that was crashed into the South Tower.
        Now how do you explain the absence of any killed from these other countries?
        
        3 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        obiefrommuskogee
        May 8, 2008, 8:11 p.m.
        Yes, right, one israeli died on a plane, but that's it.
        The difference is that the no Swedes or Irish were seen watching and celebrating the destruction of the towers in Liberty State National Park. I am quite sure the Israelis knew of the attack in advance.
        Also, the Irish had nothing to benefit from an attack on Iraq. Israel was the only state to benefit from such an attack. In fact, the Israelis were begging the US to take of Iraq for many years. I read one such editorial to that effect in the Village Voice. It's called motivation, friend. You know, that thing required in crime.
        I think it had something to do with the fact the Iraq had the largest standing army in the ME and a few months before 9-11 Sadam Hussein publicly offered his support of Palestine by offering suicide bombers $30,000.
        
        2 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        obiefrommuskogee
        May 8, 2008, 8:25 p.m.
        BTW, that's not the database I used. I used an actual news DB not one put out by some marketing company from Brooklyn.
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 10:14 p.m.
        "WASHINGTON, Aug 28 (IPS) - Israeli officials warned the George W. Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilising to the region and urged the United States to instead target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former administration official Lawrence Wilkerson."
        http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39051
        Israel was quite happy to allow Iraq and Iran have at each other.
        "NEW YORK - Most American Jews disapprove of the war in Iraq and the way the United States is handling the campaign against terrorism, according to a new study."
        http://www.jewishaz.com/issues/story.mv?051223 poll
        But yet Evangelicals put Bush in office and Christians favored attacking Iraq.
        Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Card, Garner, Powell, Petraeus hmmm not one Jew among them.
        And how many pastors and preachers sang the praises of GWB, how many worked to get him elected and re-elected, but yet you blame the Jews.
        Greatest beneficiaries - Iran and oil producers.
        
        Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    Will1313
    May 8, 2008, 9:52 a.m.
    True, Clinton had lots of chances to take out Osama and balked at every turn.
    ---
    possibly... but if Clinton had opportunities.. in the time Bush was in office if didn't seem to be a priority either..
    
    3 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      libsRfunny
      May 8, 2008, 12:54 p.m.
      "possibly... but if Clinton had opportunities.. in the time Bush was in office if didn't seem to be a priority either.."
      You mean in the 7 or 8 months he was in office versus 8 years? Seven months barely is enough time to get settled in the White House.
      
      2 RepliesReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        djn3nunez3
        May 8, 2008, 1:40 p.m.
        They knew an attack was coming...
        http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/they-knew-but-...
        It would later be revealed by the 9/11 commission into the September 11 attacks that more than 40 presidential briefings presented to Bush from January 2001 through to September 10, 2001, included references to bin Laden.
        
        Reply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Will1313
        May 8, 2008, 4:13 p.m.
        i know Bush and Laura were replacing the china that Hillary stole..
        
        Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    PoliticsIsCriminal
    May 8, 2008, 10:13 a.m.
    "Then I grew up and got smarter."
    Then stop Growing and start Learning.
    It wasn't the U.S. Government which 'allowed' 9/11, it was a faction within it.
    Since you are in dire need of education, I'd start here:
    What is PNAC?
    Who are it's Members?
    How does a Michael Chertoff, a New Jersey Lawyer who defended MOSSAD agents caught with Box Cutters, Bomb residue in their vans, close to 4500 dollars in cash in socks and dressed as PALESTINIANS on 9/11, caught dancing for joy as they filmed the burning towers ON 9/11, become head of the Department of Homeland Security in just a few years?
    libsRfunny, possibly, but your stupidity is the most laughable joke all by itself.
    
    Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    djn3nunez3
    May 8, 2008, 12:40 p.m.
    "True, Clinton had lots of chances to take out Osama and balked at every turn."
    That is simply not true.
    The Truth About Clinton and Bin Laden: Another Right-Wing Talking Point Exposed
    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/57128/...
    "...to suggest the U.S. gov't allowed a cadre of known terrorists to take over civilian four jetliners and fly them into the World Trade Centers, Pentagon and a Pennsylvania farm field is purely nutso."
    They knew an attack was coming...
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/they-knew-but-...
    It would later be revealed by the 9/11 commission into the September 11 attacks that more than 40 presidential briefings presented to Bush from January 2001 through to September 10, 2001, included references to bin Laden.
    
    Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Goppy
  May 8, 2008, 7:41 a.m.
  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, walden.
  Hes REALLY shoobie shoobie nuts!!
  But as far as the story ... it makes sense to me.
  Media LOVES war!!
  Aint yall ever heard the truism ... 'IF IT BLEEDS, IT LEADS'?
  In America ... Murder, War, Car Wreacks, Scandal ... THAT is the mind-set of American Media.
  Thats why I always smirk when we Christian Conservatives do our fake whine bout LIBURAL Media!! Mainstream Media HAS no allegience other than advertising profits. They will join forces with any political party that ensures those profits.
  
  2 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    walden3
    May 8, 2008, 9:43 a.m.
    More name calling.
    "Roger Eugene Ailes (born May 15, 1940) is the president of Fox News Channel and chairman of the Fox Television Stations Group. He was a media consultant for Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush, as well as Rudy Giuliani's first mayoral campaign in 1989."
    Now what's your point?
    I'm really starting to think that you're way too far over your head that you can't swim and have no floaties on your arms.
    
    1 ReplyReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      walden3
      May 8, 2008, 12:21 p.m.
      Goppy - behindthecurtain was disappeared. My comment obviously wasn't directed at you.
      
      Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

walden3
May 7, 2008, 9:25 p.m.
The shareholders own publicly traded companies. Another negative for not saying anything.

2 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  earthlingerer
  May 8, 2008, 5:27 a.m.
  Wal-Mart is publicly traded. Guess what family owns Wal-Mart.
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    walden3
    May 8, 2008, 8:09 a.m.
    The Waltons are the majority shareholders? What's behindthecurtain's point?
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

Goppy
May 8, 2008, 7:30 a.m.
I LIEK behindcuttain.
He is one in a long line of ATTENTION DIVERTERS! We got lotsa ATTENTION DIVERTERS among us Christian Conservatives.
To behind the curtain ... his 'tool' is his obvious hatred of Jews.
To us Christian Conservatives ... we use tools liek positionin ourselfs to bein the ones with 'Christian Values' ... which turn out to be simply code for standin strong against Abortion and Gays.
To us Regular Righties ... we use tools liek callin everthing we dont liek 'Socialism' - even stuff liek any solution to the Health Care mess.
This has been REALL effective for the Regular Righties! Even though every other industrial nation has health care ... this 'Socialist' Attention Diverter has kept us from joinin the club.
And of course, theres the Military Righties. Their mantra is ... if we dont fight em there ... we will fer shure fight em here. This is a good Attention Diverter - its been real effective ... in spite of the fact this aint happened to other nations.

6 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Goppy
  May 8, 2008, 7:36 a.m.
  So see?
  behinds curtain hatred of Jews is just another act in Americas ongoing political drama.
  Attention Diverters are liek magicians! We can be LOOKIN RIGHT AT A PROBLEM ... say helpin OTHER AMERICANS WITH HEALTH CARE ... and the Attention Diverters show up and say ... NO NO NO ... thats SOCIALISM ... or NO NO NO ... we gotta go invade Iraq and spend A TRILLION dollors THERE cause them muslims MIGHT have a bomb!
  Attention diverters such as behind the curtan, liek others who exploit fear and suspicion are great at keepin our nation from actin responsible and with intellegence to our national problems.
  
  3 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    walden3
    May 8, 2008, 9:45 a.m.
    You are no one to be complaining about ad hominem. look in the mirror.
    Do you have anything to add about Chris Matthews and MSNBC?
    
    2 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      antibrainwasher
      May 8, 2008, 12:19 p.m.
      Well, I'm not sure who you're talking to, but I can venture that Chris Mathhews and MSNBC, owned and operated by people loyal to Isreal, slanted the investigation into the rational for war, and published pro-war disinformation in order to benifit those who profit from the war.
      
      1 ReplyReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 1:11 p.m.
        MSNBC is owned by GE. GE is loyal to Israel?
        The investigation into the rationale for war, do you mean the 9/11 Kean Commission?
        I disagree that the war was solely about profits. I think it had to do also do with projecting American force, establishing a FOB, strengthening the GOP's hold and maybe securing oil.
        I'm having kind of a tough time following your comment, so those loyal to Israel published pro-war info to benefit defense contractors?
        
        Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  dunkirk
  May 8, 2008, 11:40 a.m.
  "if we dont fight em there ... we will fer shure fight em here"
  I can't believe it Im waiting for Alpha to post an article that exposes Saddam booking the Iraq first armored division on a Carribean cruise and when they landed in Miami, pow, they woulda had us. The only technical diffoculty was mnaking all those tanks look like luggage.
  
  Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  antibrainwasher
  May 8, 2008, 12:19 p.m.
  Hey Goppy, I read your articles in American Atheist, and I suscribe to the land over babtist church.
  So you seem like an intelligent guy. So tell me, who owns ABC? What is his political alliance?
  
  Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

CRYMTYPHON
May 7, 2008, 4:47 p.m.
Behindcurtain: Midleft: hyperbola:
This is a serious article.
It has nothing to do with the ethnicity of the people involved. It is about politics and money.
You distract from the seriousness with your anti-semitic rants.
One suspects you do so deliberately.

4 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  SonOfTheMask
  May 7, 2008, 5:14 p.m.
  Crymtyphon, I'm positive you are correct on the midleft=behindcurtain assertion, but hyperbola is a completely different cat, I believe.
  Both do, however, share a similar view.
  
  3 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    CRYMTYPHON
    May 7, 2008, 5:23 p.m.
    Oh. Thanks.
    Wait a second; how do I know you aren't behindcurtain?
    
    2 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      SonOfTheMask
      May 7, 2008, 7:33 p.m.
      You don't. But then again, how do I know YOU'RE not behindcurtain?! You clever devil, you...
      
      1 ReplyReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        GHOSTWHOWALKS
        May 8, 2008, 11:18 a.m.
        Not how but why. Now that's the question that needs asking. WHY would they throw out any semblance of honesty? Money? Ideology?
        
        Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

walden3
May 7, 2008, 9:28 p.m.
The build up to the war was a big hype. It was sold to us like a new car. I remember seeing embedded reporters riding with the cavalry with their wrap around sunglasses like grand conquerors. The whole thing made me sick, really.

1 ReplyReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  walden3
  May 8, 2008, 9:51 a.m.
  Jeesh, man. You never have anything to say. This is truly getting boring!
  Who benefits - the defense contractors, the imperial presidency, Iran, the media benefited through higher ratings and revenues, the Republicans benefited because Bush was a one-termer until he became a war time president because of that he was able to jam his platform down our throats, commodities traders, those who have oil.
  I feel like I'm having a conversation with myself.
  "WASHINGTON, Aug 28 (IPS) - Israeli officials warned the George W. Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilising to the region and urged the United States to instead target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former administration official Lawrence Wilkerson."
  http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39051
  You must think Israel is in a better spot now then before we attacked Iraq. I disagree. Israel is far worse off.
  
  Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

mamasan
May 7, 2008, 10:47 p.m.
I wonder if Chris or any of his Boss's feel any guilt over all the soldiers that have died because of thier War Cheerleading?

6 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Candida
  May 7, 2008, 11:45 p.m.
  I doubt it. They probably rationalize it one way or another, like saving the Iraqis from cruel Saddam, or building democracy, or stabilizing the ME, which will be a good thing in a century, or something like that.
  The stupid ones probably say that if we don't fight them there, we'll have to fight them here.
  
  5 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    libsRfunny
    May 7, 2008, 11:46 p.m.
    No, the stupid ones want to let them bring it to us here yet again. What size is your dunce cap?
    
    3 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      Goppy
      May 8, 2008, 7:18 a.m.
      Im real glad you are with us stoopid ones libsR.
      HEY! We Christian Conservatives must STAY STRONG in our beliefe that IRAQ was bout 'the mushroom cloud'.
      Cause, if it evera got out that the rust to war was to prevent Saddam Hussein turnin over all oil contracts to the Russions ... well, the proverbial scat would hit the fan.
      To oil folk liek GW and Dick, watchin those oil contracts dissappear was worse than diggin a dry hole in west Texas.
      
      2 RepliesReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        walden3
        May 8, 2008, 9:54 a.m.
        MSNBC is owned by NBC and Microsoft. NBC is owned by GE. GE is one of the largest US defense contractors.
        Your point name caller?
        
        Reply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Goppy
        May 8, 2008, 12:26 p.m.
        Ooops.
        I meant to say RUSH to war .... not Rust to war.
        
        Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    Will1313
    May 8, 2008, 10:01 a.m.
    I had one of the apologists.. state that a cell already in North Carolina was sending money to hezbolla(sp) and we need to be Iraq to stop other terrorist cells already here. I pointed out that wouldn't it be better to root out and arrest the ones that are here instead of spreading our resourses such as personal and MONEY in Iraq and he called ME naive..
    WOW..
    terrorist cells ARE already here.. fight in Iraq does nothing to deter them or their plans..
    as for terrorists in Iraq.. they have no Navy, no Air Force, and camels don't swim that far.. let them kill each other.. hand EVERY Iraqi a weapon and let the last man standing rule.. get the American men and women OUT OF THERE NOW..
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

BoxMonkey
May 8, 2008, 7:21 a.m.
I can't see this being written in past tense . The war is still going on .

2 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Will1313
  May 8, 2008, 10:02 a.m.
  no the WAR was won.. all objectives accomplished.. we are now OCCUPIERS..
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    BoxMonkey
    May 10, 2008, 5:28 a.m.
    True . And I've said that before only to recieve a whole lot of flack .
    Although we are occupiers , I recently saw two young men go for thier First and Third rally over there . And they will be fighting for thier lives . So I do feel we are still fighting a war of sorts .
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

wildman6557
May 8, 2008, 10:25 a.m.
Although it is often cast as the "liberal media", we can see with this article and comments that it is actually more complex.... The reality is that the media reflects the opinions of the rich who tend to be liberal socially (pro abortion, etc) but very conservative in foreign and economic policy.

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

Will1313
May 8, 2008, 11:15 a.m.
but very conservative in foreign and economic policy
---
being apologists for an administration that is running HUGE deficits and sending their troops all over the world to bring democracy.. of whatever the reason is today
IS IN NO WAY CONSERVATIVE..

2 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Goppy
  May 8, 2008, 12:28 p.m.
  Nicely done Will.
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    Will1313
    May 8, 2008, 12:44 p.m.
    thanks.. really most of the CONSERVATIVE posters on these boards.. especially the administration apologists ...
    HAVEN'T A CLUE WHAT A CONSERVATIVE IS.. OR BELIEVES IN ..
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

winstonsmithredux
May 8, 2008, 11:50 a.m.
To read that Chris Matthews confirmed the pro-war bent of network bias in favor of the war is closely akin to walking in the rain while listening to a radio weather report forecasting a 60% probability of, yes, rain.

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

walden3
May 8, 2008, 11:57 a.m.
Wow. That's weird. Behindthecurtain was disappeared. Every comment of his/hers is gone. Maybe there is a conspiracy.

5 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  antibrainwasher
  May 8, 2008, 12:23 p.m.
  You think? Maybe it's dangereous to report facts, if the facts are in any way sheding light on the media ownership of America.
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    walden3
    May 8, 2008, 1:15 p.m.
    I'd say it's dangerous in this forum to violate the Terms of Use. I told Behindonthecurtain on more than one occasion that he/she made a lot of sense and had some good points, but would do better and have stronger arguments by not calling people names or stoking religious hatred.
    
    Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Goppy
  May 8, 2008, 12:45 p.m.
  Weird, I posted a comment earlier sayin that 'He wont be missed ... he dint have a sense of humor'.
  I left, and when I came back, my comment was not there ... AND ... behind the curtain came back as 'antibrainwasher' (above this comment)!
  Now THAT is one dedicated Hate-Monger!!
  
  2 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    GWHayduke
    May 8, 2008, 4:16 p.m.
    Maybe he's just trapped in some kind of space-time continuum.
    What with all of the name changing, posts disappearing, and obvious knowledge of both the future and past events, he must be time travelling.
    
    Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    antibrainwasher
    May 14, 2008, 3:49 p.m.
    Yeah, if you say so Chris.
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

unome2
May 8, 2008, 12:16 p.m.
Chris Matthews is just scratching the surface of a desease that is eroding our constitution and destroying the American people's power to control their own government.
The government should fear the people, not the other way around. Without a free and fair press we are left with corporate elite spin and misinformation.

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

markmawn2
May 8, 2008, 2:11 p.m.
Matthews is padding his chances of staying employed after the change of command. Nothing to see here.

Reply | Report!

Next 25 comments

Submitted By:

TechnologyExpert

I am Editor-in-Chief at Alice Hill's RealTechNews (http://www.realtechnews.com). I also have my own blog (Tech-Ex) at http://TechnologyExpert.Blogspot.com. Finally ...

Also submitted:

Related Articles:

Why not submit a story?

Also Propping This Article

Groups Watching This

No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?

Got a Story?

Advertisement