Now we finally see who really controls the news

hiddengardener84 said:Who even broke this news in America? Nobody.
In Canada? Nobody.
In Italy? Nobody.
In Scandinavia? Nobody. In Belgium? Nobody.
A friend of mine in France tells me he hasn't even heard a whisper about this.
In Germany, nobody reported it except for maybe some tiny local stations—probably those regional ones where the censors haven't stuck their noses in yet.

Now this is interesting. This story was posted by BHTV1, but obviously just as a text crawl; they didn't say a single word about it on the actual news broadcasts. And get this—their text feed was actually down for almost a full 24 hours, which almost never happens. 😬 It’s gotta be that meddling bureaucrat (I'm talking about one certain guy who holds about five different positions, initials JF).

But it was reported in Australia, which is an American and Israeli ally. Maybe those other countries just aren't as interested, or perhaps you just haven't checked? You're letting paranoia take over again.🤣

hiddengardener84 said:It’s honestly pathetic. Now, why don't you try to guess which TV network broke the story? And the worst part? The news is actually true.

Proof that it's true? Do you actually have someone on the ground, or did you just make this up? Or do you simply want to believe everything the Syrians say? Give us some proof, hiddengardener84. Just once.👎

rowdytinker said:But it was reported in Australia, which is an American and Israeli ally. Maybe those other countries just aren't as interested, or perhaps you just haven't checked? You're letting paranoia take over again.🤣

Proof that it's true? Do you actually have someone on the ground, or did you just make this up? Or do you simply want to believe everything the Syrians say? Give us some proof, hiddengardener84. Just once.👎

Don't give me that crap. "Proof it's true." 😕 Why don't you prove to me that Arabs attacked the Twin Towers and the Pentagon if you're such a big shot. One by one, let's see it.
You won't succeed because they don't exist.🤣

hiddengardener84 said:Don't give me that crap. "Proof it's true." 😕 Why don't you prove to me that Arabs attacked the Twin Towers and the Pentagon if you're such a big shot. One by one, let's see it.
You won't succeed because they don't exist.🤣

The real question is who was actually flying those planes. Was it CIA agents? Or maybe the planes weren't even real—just some massive setup where missiles actually took down the skyscrapers.

hiddengardener84 said:Don't give me that crap. "Proof it's true." 😕 Why don't you prove to me that Arabs attacked the Twin Towers and the Pentagon if you're such a big shot. One by one, let's see it.
You won't succeed because they don't exist.🤣

If I can't back it up with facts, I don't bother writing about it. But you? You just insist it's the absolute truth when you're clearly making it all up.👎 Pathetic.

rowdytinker said:If I can't back it up with facts, I don't bother writing about it. But you? You just insist it's the absolute truth when you're clearly making it all up.👎 Pathetic.

Yeah, honestly, just pathetic and sad as hell.

rapidskipper14 said:The real question is who was actually flying those planes. Was it CIA agents? Or maybe the planes weren't even real—just some massive setup where missiles actually took down the skyscrapers.

What did the black boxes tell us? Look at the crashes—all four were so badly damaged they were basically useless. 😬 Were you actually on one of those planes? You weren't. Bush and his inner circle claimed it was terrorists, and they called it "proof." Then Bush and his crew said Saddam was behind it, so that was it. Then Bush and his guys said Iraq had chemical weapons, and guess what? They never found them. 😬 Are we really supposed to trust Bush and his clique after all this? 👎 😬 🤣

hiddengardener84 said:What did the black boxes tell us? Look at the crashes—all four were so badly damaged they were basically useless. 😬 Were you actually on one of those planes? You weren't. Bush and his inner circle claimed it was terrorists, and they called it "proof." Then Bush and his crew said Saddam was behind it, so that was it. Then Bush and his guys said Iraq had chemical weapons, and guess what? They never found them. 😬 Are we really supposed to trust Bush and his clique after all this? 👎 😬 🤣

The attempt to blame Saddam Hussein for the attacks was clearly designed to appeal to voters in rural Alabama rather than to appeal to anyone with a functioning intellect. 😂 When you bring up arguments like that, it becomes pretty obvious whose side you're on. Besides, there are already dedicated threads for discussing September 2001 on this forum, so please don't clutter up this specific discussion with off-topic posts.

rowdytinker said:Do you honestly think throwing a few emojis is going to cover up your cheap lies and total fabrications?????😕 👎

What lie?😬 Did they actually find chemical weapons or prove that Saddam ordered attacks on New York and the Pentagon? Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with the news lately.😬

hiddengardener84 said:What lie?😬 Did they actually find chemical weapons or prove that Saddam ordered attacks on New York and the Pentagon? Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with the news lately.😬

They never even claimed that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on the WTC, so please, let's not resort to lying. 🤮 🤮 🤮

Give me a break. Don't act like US officials weren't claiming Saddam was behind September 2001. Stop lying through your teeth. It’s reckless. I personally watched on TV as Condoleezza Rice was laying out the "evidence" that Saddam ordered those attacks. Naturally, public opinion polls showed over 65 percent of Americans believed it was true. That's old news—maybe you were still in grade school back then and weren't paying any attention to the news 😬

hiddengardener84 said:Give me a break. Don't act like US officials weren't claiming Saddam was behind September 2001. Stop lying through your teeth. It’s reckless. I personally watched on TV as Condoleezza Rice was laying out the "evidence" that Saddam ordered those attacks. Naturally, public opinion polls showed over 65 percent of Americans believed it was true. That's old news—maybe you were still in grade school back then and weren't paying any attention to the news 😬

You didn't "personally" watch anything; you likely saw some edited segment from Al Jazeera. Back when everything was gearing up for the invasion of Iraq, that wasn't even a point of debate among anyone with half a brain. 🤣 It seems you aren't even capable of figuring out that I'm a man and not a woman, so I'll just wish you a good day. 😂

rowdytinker said:But it was reported in Australia, which is an American and Israeli ally. Maybe those other countries just aren't as interested, or perhaps you just haven't checked? You're letting paranoia take over again.🤣

Proof that it's true? Do you actually have someone on the ground, or did you just make this up? Or do you simply want to believe everything the Syrians say? Give us some proof, hiddengardener84. Just once.👎

What exactly are you trying to prove with all this Cold War rhetoric? Which damn allies are we even talking about during a (relatively) peaceful period!?

And get this—an Israeli ally, like the AU, basically means supporting Zionist violence and the occupation of the Palestinians and Palestine? Think about it.
If you ask the average citizen, you'll get an answer just like a local journalist would: they conduct a street poll regarding support for Bush (both then and under Howard) for the war in Iraq, and out of 200 people surveyed, they find only 6 (six) Bush sympathizers (haha, both his and Howard's). Everyone else made their stance crystal clear against that criminal occupation.

Just because a leader is clueless, acting erratically, and doing whatever foreign powers tell him to do doesn't mean the masses actually support him. In fact, every poll for months now has suggested that people have had quite enough of him. If he had conducted foreign policy in the interest of the US national interest instead of catering to some globalist types, his approval ratings among his own citizens would surely be higher.

The Israeli attack on the rocket base in Syria was carried out and, naturally, demands a response. Currently, this is a Syrian note/demand sent to the UN Security Council.
I wouldn't rule out a more concrete Syrian response to the Zionist military via ballistic measures. At the end of the day, let the music play.

Kyle Ross19 said:What exactly are you trying to prove with all this Cold War rhetoric? Which damn allies are we even talking about during a (relatively) peaceful period!?

And get this—an Israeli ally, like the AU, basically means supporting Zionist violence and the occupation of the Palestinians and Palestine? Think about it.
If you ask the average citizen, you'll get an answer just like a local journalist would: they conduct a street poll regarding support for Bush (both then and under Howard) for the war in Iraq, and out of 200 people surveyed, they find only 6 (six) Bush sympathizers (haha, both his and Howard's). Everyone else made their stance crystal clear against that criminal occupation.

Just because a leader is clueless, acting erratically, and doing whatever foreign powers tell him to do doesn't mean the masses actually support him. In fact, every poll for months now has suggested that people have had quite enough of him. If he had conducted foreign policy in the interest of the US national interest instead of catering to some globalist types, his approval ratings among his own citizens would surely be higher.

The Israeli attack on the rocket base in Syria was carried out and, naturally, demands a response. Currently, this is a Syrian note/demand sent to the UN Security Council.
I wouldn't rule out a more concrete Syrian response to the Zionist military via ballistic measures. At the end of the day, let the music play.

The walls are already crumbling in those Jewish barracks. If Iran delivers its hardware and gets its two hundred and thirty Hezbollah fighters ready, it's game over. The future doesn't look bright for that creation. Maybe it would have been better if they just built their own state in Israel like was originally planned. 👍It's never too late☕

hiddengardener84 said:What lie?😬 Did they actually find chemical weapons or prove that Saddam ordered attacks on New York and the Pentagon? Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with the news lately.😬

hiddengardener84 said:It’s honestly such a shame. Now, I’ll leave it up to you all to guess which TV network broke the news and exactly what they reported. The worst news is absolutely true. ?

Even if you've gone off on a tangent and managed to answer everything except the actual question I asked, I’m going to ask you again: how can you be sure this news is actually true? Mze, what's your take?👎

Kyle Ross19 said:What exactly are you trying to prove with all this Cold War rhetoric? Which damn allies are we even talking about during a (relatively) peaceful period!?

And get this—an Israeli ally, like the AU, basically means supporting Zionist violence and the occupation of the Palestinians and Palestine? Think about it.
If you ask the average citizen, you'll get an answer just like a local journalist would: they conduct a street poll regarding support for Bush (both then and under Howard) for the war in Iraq, and out of 200 people surveyed, they find only 6 (six) Bush sympathizers (haha, both his and Howard's). Everyone else made their stance crystal clear against that criminal occupation.

Just because a leader is clueless, acting erratically, and doing whatever foreign powers tell him to do doesn't mean the masses actually support him. In fact, every poll for months now has suggested that people have had quite enough of him. If he had conducted foreign policy in the interest of the US national interest instead of catering to some globalist types, his approval ratings among his own citizens would surely be higher.

The Israeli attack on the rocket base in Syria was carried out and, naturally, demands a response. Currently, this is a Syrian note/demand sent to the UN Security Council.
I wouldn't rule out a more concrete Syrian response to the Zionist military via ballistic measures. At the end of the day, let the music play.

My apologies. I was using the same terminology used by Arabs themselves (we can just look at their news coverage here), who refer to the USA, the UK, Australia, and their allies during these "relatively" peaceful times. Even Australian politicians use that exact phrasing. So, I suggest you write them a polite letter and maybe they'll correct it for you.👍
As for changing public opinion, he is against the war (much like the civilians in Iraq, there was even a poll for that), but that doesn't change the fact that Australia is an ally to America.👎

I suppose I might be in the minority here—maybe I am—but regardless, I fully support Israel's right to exist. Now, don't get me wrong, I certainly don't condone the occupation of Palestinian territory or any violations of a neighboring country's airspace, but as long as the Arab world keeps calling for the total destruction of Israel, I just don't see what other options are being left for the Israelis.

Let me try to address those questions.

1. Personally, I don't see any sanctions coming.
2. Syria isn't going to retaliate against Israel; they simply don't have the military muscle to go toe-to-toe with them. If they did, they would have reclaimed the Golan Heights by now.
3. This news hit the American media, but most Americans are pretty distracted right now—I mean, NFL season has kicked off, so people aren't exactly glued to global affairs, much like how they often overlook the war in Iraq.

rowdytinker said:Even if you've gone off on a tangent and managed to answer everything except the actual question I asked, I’m going to ask you again: how can you be sure this news is actually true? Mze, what's your take?👎

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/905359.html
Some people just can't get enough links. I guess they're never satisfied.☕
I’m really curious to see how rowdytinker plans on justifying an attack on another country's sovereignty. If there's one thing that's pretty obvious here, it's that there's actual support for this kind of wild behavior within the Israeli public—otherwise, Netanyahu wouldn't even be opening his mouth. It feels like he's just playing to the crowd to score political points.
And then you have people claiming that Palestinians chose Hamas themselves, and that’s why they deserve collective punishment—as if Israelis are somehow better. I guess I doubt many people would actually stand up against that kind of lawlessness.
Just don't start feeding me those lines about how Syria was "plotting something" or whatever. That kind of rhetoric is actually pretty dangerous. I mean, you can always find someone claiming a country is "preparing something" whenever it suits the narrative, depending on what people need to hear at the moment.

On Wednesday, Benjamin Netanyahu, acting as the opposition leader, finally stepped up as the first Israeli official to actually confirm those reports about an Israel Air Force operation in Syria that supposedly went down about two weeks ago.

In an interview with Channel 1, Netanyahu mentioned he was actually a partner in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision to carry out an operation in Syria. He didn't just back the Prime Minister's call; he apparently went as far as personally praising him for taking the initiative. I guess it shows how much they were on the same page back then.

boldgardener93 said:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/905359.html
Some people just can't get enough links. I guess they're never satisfied.☕
I’m really curious to see how rowdytinker plans on justifying an attack on another country's sovereignty. If there's one thing that's pretty obvious here, it's that there's actual support for this kind of wild behavior within the Israeli public—otherwise, Netanyahu wouldn't even be opening his mouth. It feels like he's just playing to the crowd to score political points.
And then you have people claiming that Palestinians chose Hamas themselves, and that’s why they deserve collective punishment—as if Israelis are somehow better. I guess I doubt many people would actually stand up against that kind of lawlessness.
Just don't start feeding me those lines about how Syria was "plotting something" or whatever. That kind of rhetoric is actually pretty dangerous. I mean, you can always find someone claiming a country is "preparing something" whenever it suits the narrative, depending on what people need to hear at the moment.

On Wednesday, Benjamin Netanyahu, acting as the opposition leader, finally stepped up as the first Israeli official to actually confirm those reports about an Israel Air Force operation in Syria that supposedly went down about two weeks ago.

In an interview with Channel 1, Netanyahu mentioned he was actually a partner in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision to carry out an operation in Syria. He didn't just back the Prime Minister's call; he apparently went as far as personally praising him for taking the initiative. I guess it shows how much they were on the same page back then.

Nothing. Just pure chaos within their own ranks. Someone’s definitely cooking up a little surprise to pay them back for everything they've done. 👍

boldgardener93 said:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/905359.html
Some people just can't get enough links. I guess they're never satisfied.☕
I’m really curious to see how rowdytinker plans on justifying an attack on another country's sovereignty. If there's one thing that's pretty obvious here, it's that there's actual support for this kind of wild behavior within the Israeli public—otherwise, Netanyahu wouldn't even be opening his mouth. It feels like he's just playing to the crowd to score political points.
And then you have people claiming that Palestinians chose Hamas themselves, and that’s why they deserve collective punishment—as if Israelis are somehow better. I guess I doubt many people would actually stand up against that kind of lawlessness.
Just don't start feeding me those lines about how Syria was "plotting something" or whatever. That kind of rhetoric is actually pretty dangerous. I mean, you can always find someone claiming a country is "preparing something" whenever it suits the narrative, depending on what people need to hear at the moment.

On Wednesday, Benjamin Netanyahu, acting as the opposition leader, finally stepped up as the first Israeli official to actually confirm those reports about an Israel Air Force operation in Syria that supposedly went down about two weeks ago.

In an interview with Channel 1, Netanyahu mentioned he was actually a partner in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision to carry out an operation in Syria. He didn't just back the Prime Minister's call; he apparently went as far as personally praising him for taking the initiative. I guess it shows how much they were on the same page back then.

Why call it a wild move? These two countries are at war. A ceasefire was never signed. I guess what's actually fascinating here is how incapable the Syrians seem to be. Just look at where Tall al-Abyad is on the map. It would be one thing if it were the Turks attacking, but Israel.🤣 🤣
It’s probably not surprising they take hits like this so often.

Jamie Edwards3 said:Why call it a wild move? These two countries are at war. A ceasefire was never signed. I guess what's actually fascinating here is how incapable the Syrians seem to be. Just look at where Tall al-Abyad is on the map. It would be one thing if it were the Turks attacking, but Israel.🤣 🤣
It’s probably not surprising they take hits like this so often.

You're right, I guess my sarcasm was a bit misplaced. I can't always find the right way to put things.