The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Watching News at Ten and found myself shaking my head and quietly seething at, yet again, the media's attempts to brainwash the populace (sandwiched between the Bond Movie...irony?) into "Get Saddam! He's a Hitler"
Top news story? The "terrorist poison plot" that was failed. Anti-Terrorist police seize small quantities of a poison from a North London flat and 6 North Africans have been arrested.
Good, nice to see potentially murderous people detained - no problem with that at all. It's how it should be.
But the news linked it to...can you guess?...thaaaat's right, "countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq" - cue shots of Hussein waving like a girl and various bearded folk, obviously radical terrorists.
Ok now:
Countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq, yes. But also like England, France (Rainbow Warrior anyone?) and the United States. Yet strangely no mention of Afghanistan or Bin Laden - who seems to have disappeared from the world's "He's evil" list since Bush started itching for a sequel to The Gulf. Yet no mention of North Korea....but that's a whole other topic.
The news spent an age linking the threat of large quantities of this poison to "weapons of mass destruction", which fed nicely into the next story about reserves being called up in readiness for war.
But oddly, another story further into the news was to do with the UN Weapons Inspectors having not found a single piece of evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. And without this evidence, the UN will not pass a resolution for war.
What I don't get is why they tried so hard to put the poison story and shackle it to Iraq - a country that has no history of terrorist action against us or the US to the best of my knowledge.
It seemed to me that the media was stirring public unease and fear towards Iraq to justify the current course of war - despite the UN not authorising any such action.
And the "No weapons found" story also made mention of the Inspectors calling unannounced on a chemical factory and recieving no resistance and total co-operation from the director of the company. They have taken samples away for testing, but have admitted that it's previous history of creating Uranium may prove inconclusive in linking to any recent action.
Experts admitted that this poison is only a major threat to large numbers of people in massive doses and should be handled in full biohazard suits. Yet these arresting officers were kitted out in normal flak-jackets etc.
I'm confused, getting mixed signals here.
But then, I am a cynical lefty flag-burner.
Top news story? The "terrorist poison plot" that was failed. Anti-Terrorist police seize small quantities of a poison from a North London flat and 6 North Africans have been arrested.
Good, nice to see potentially murderous people detained - no problem with that at all. It's how it should be.
But the news linked it to...can you guess?...thaaaat's right, "countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq" - cue shots of Hussein waving like a girl and various bearded folk, obviously radical terrorists.
Ok now:
Countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq, yes. But also like England, France (Rainbow Warrior anyone?) and the United States. Yet strangely no mention of Afghanistan or Bin Laden - who seems to have disappeared from the world's "He's evil" list since Bush started itching for a sequel to The Gulf. Yet no mention of North Korea....but that's a whole other topic.
The news spent an age linking the threat of large quantities of this poison to "weapons of mass destruction", which fed nicely into the next story about reserves being called up in readiness for war.
But oddly, another story further into the news was to do with the UN Weapons Inspectors having not found a single piece of evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. And without this evidence, the UN will not pass a resolution for war.
What I don't get is why they tried so hard to put the poison story and shackle it to Iraq - a country that has no history of terrorist action against us or the US to the best of my knowledge.
It seemed to me that the media was stirring public unease and fear towards Iraq to justify the current course of war - despite the UN not authorising any such action.
And the "No weapons found" story also made mention of the Inspectors calling unannounced on a chemical factory and recieving no resistance and total co-operation from the director of the company. They have taken samples away for testing, but have admitted that it's previous history of creating Uranium may prove inconclusive in linking to any recent action.
Experts admitted that this poison is only a major threat to large numbers of people in massive doses and should be handled in full biohazard suits. Yet these arresting officers were kitted out in normal flak-jackets etc.
I'm confused, getting mixed signals here.
But then, I am a cynical lefty flag-burner.
Page:
US and UK sell weapons to Iraq to fight Iran
US funds Bin Laden to fight Russian
But now their baddies
Why on earth were UN inspectors looking in Sadam's cleaning closet? Yeah he'll hide them there.
I thought you didn't care about the world anymore Goatboy?
US funds Bin Laden to fight Russian
But now their baddies
Why on earth were UN inspectors looking in Sadam's cleaning closet? Yeah he'll hide them there.
I thought you didn't care about the world anymore Goatboy?
Bush controls the world.
Unfortunately.
Unfortunately.
Following on, "experts" all agree that this poison is used most typically in assasinations rather than public terror attacks.
Why no discussion about North Africa and whatever ties they have with their own country before shouting "Hussein"?
Mind you, this will all be forgotten by the weekend so why worry?
Why no discussion about North Africa and whatever ties they have with their own country before shouting "Hussein"?
Mind you, this will all be forgotten by the weekend so why worry?
Continuing on from Goatboys little mention of North Korea. Did you see that shot of all of those soldiers in the street? Good god, their army must be MASSIVE. To be honest at the moment i think more attention should be diverted to North Korea than Iraq. Especially since North Korea has threatened open war against anyone who tries to stop them developing nuclear arms.
The more I think about Iraq, the more confused I become. The more I know, the less I understand. It seems to me that the government have no idea why they want a war with Iraq, they just know that they do.
The government arguments for war are in disarray. The proof of it is in the behaviour of the pro-governement media, and the individual apologists for anything the US/UK decide to do. These people have given up on the government explanations and started concocting their own. First there is the whole terrorism thing: nobody has seriously suggested that Iraq is linked to Al Queda, but these insinuations keep getting made. Start a sentence about terrorism, finish it about Iraq. Guilt by association - very clever. Then there is the 'top secret intelligence material' that people go on about; no one has said that this stuff exists, but, y'know, it might and it might say really bad stuff.
I think certain sections of this country have gone slightly round the bend. They just can't quite believe that our government is behaving so stupidly, and so they've dreamed up reasons why it must be so. "There must be more to it, right? They must know more than we do, they must."
The government arguments for war are in disarray. The proof of it is in the behaviour of the pro-governement media, and the individual apologists for anything the US/UK decide to do. These people have given up on the government explanations and started concocting their own. First there is the whole terrorism thing: nobody has seriously suggested that Iraq is linked to Al Queda, but these insinuations keep getting made. Start a sentence about terrorism, finish it about Iraq. Guilt by association - very clever. Then there is the 'top secret intelligence material' that people go on about; no one has said that this stuff exists, but, y'know, it might and it might say really bad stuff.
I think certain sections of this country have gone slightly round the bend. They just can't quite believe that our government is behaving so stupidly, and so they've dreamed up reasons why it must be so. "There must be more to it, right? They must know more than we do, they must."
Thats why I read the Financial Times.
I hate the completely crap mediation from all the other newspapers and the news programs. Channel 4 news is ok having said that.
ITV should be shot.
'Lets make it seem like everything the government is doing is perfect'.
TheSun won Labour its landslide election. Stupid tabloid.
I hate the completely crap mediation from all the other newspapers and the news programs. Channel 4 news is ok having said that.
ITV should be shot.
'Lets make it seem like everything the government is doing is perfect'.
TheSun won Labour its landslide election. Stupid tabloid.
Watching News at Ten and found myself shaking my head and quietly seething at, yet again, the media's attempts to brainwash the populace (sandwiched between the Bond Movie...irony?) into "Get Saddam! He's a Hitler"
Top news story? The "terrorist poison plot" that was failed. Anti-Terrorist police seize small quantities of a poison from a North London flat and 6 North Africans have been arrested.
Good, nice to see potentially murderous people detained - no problem with that at all. It's how it should be.
But the news linked it to...can you guess?...thaaaat's right, "countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq" - cue shots of Hussein waving like a girl and various bearded folk, obviously radical terrorists.
Ok now:
Countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq, yes. But also like England, France (Rainbow Warrior anyone?) and the United States. Yet strangely no mention of Afghanistan or Bin Laden - who seems to have disappeared from the world's "He's evil" list since Bush started itching for a sequel to The Gulf. Yet no mention of North Korea....but that's a whole other topic.
The news spent an age linking the threat of large quantities of this poison to "weapons of mass destruction", which fed nicely into the next story about reserves being called up in readiness for war.
But oddly, another story further into the news was to do with the UN Weapons Inspectors having not found a single piece of evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. And without this evidence, the UN will not pass a resolution for war.
What I don't get is why they tried so hard to put the poison story and shackle it to Iraq - a country that has no history of terrorist action against us or the US to the best of my knowledge.
It seemed to me that the media was stirring public unease and fear towards Iraq to justify the current course of war - despite the UN not authorising any such action.
And the "No weapons found" story also made mention of the Inspectors calling unannounced on a chemical factory and recieving no resistance and total co-operation from the director of the company. They have taken samples away for testing, but have admitted that it's previous history of creating Uranium may prove inconclusive in linking to any recent action.
Experts admitted that this poison is only a major threat to large numbers of people in massive doses and should be handled in full biohazard suits. Yet these arresting officers were kitted out in normal flak-jackets etc.
I'm confused, getting mixed signals here.
But then, I am a cynical lefty flag-burner.
Top news story? The "terrorist poison plot" that was failed. Anti-Terrorist police seize small quantities of a poison from a North London flat and 6 North Africans have been arrested.
Good, nice to see potentially murderous people detained - no problem with that at all. It's how it should be.
But the news linked it to...can you guess?...thaaaat's right, "countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq" - cue shots of Hussein waving like a girl and various bearded folk, obviously radical terrorists.
Ok now:
Countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq, yes. But also like England, France (Rainbow Warrior anyone?) and the United States. Yet strangely no mention of Afghanistan or Bin Laden - who seems to have disappeared from the world's "He's evil" list since Bush started itching for a sequel to The Gulf. Yet no mention of North Korea....but that's a whole other topic.
The news spent an age linking the threat of large quantities of this poison to "weapons of mass destruction", which fed nicely into the next story about reserves being called up in readiness for war.
But oddly, another story further into the news was to do with the UN Weapons Inspectors having not found a single piece of evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. And without this evidence, the UN will not pass a resolution for war.
What I don't get is why they tried so hard to put the poison story and shackle it to Iraq - a country that has no history of terrorist action against us or the US to the best of my knowledge.
It seemed to me that the media was stirring public unease and fear towards Iraq to justify the current course of war - despite the UN not authorising any such action.
And the "No weapons found" story also made mention of the Inspectors calling unannounced on a chemical factory and recieving no resistance and total co-operation from the director of the company. They have taken samples away for testing, but have admitted that it's previous history of creating Uranium may prove inconclusive in linking to any recent action.
Experts admitted that this poison is only a major threat to large numbers of people in massive doses and should be handled in full biohazard suits. Yet these arresting officers were kitted out in normal flak-jackets etc.
I'm confused, getting mixed signals here.
But then, I am a cynical lefty flag-burner.
Page: