NationStates Jolt Archive

Scroll through the pics and read the comments (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/05/middle_east_iraqi_election_views/html/1.stm)

Scroll through the pics and read the comments (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/05/middle_east_iraqi_election_views/html/1.stm)
What's Librul?

Scrolled through and read...what's your point?

Scrolled through and read...what's your point?
Agreed. And at least the BBC can spell "Liberal" properly.

i dont see how thats liberal at all

theyve gone to Iraq, asked people what they think, and then told us

seems fine to me

The viewpoints seem pretty varied to me...for, against, indifferent...how is that a 'liberal bias'?

Are you going to make this thread about something, or should we all just break out into random song?

No you see it is liberal because the BBC are actually asking the people of Iraq what they think whereas the American news stations use the presumption that election = happiness. Its liberal to accuse American action in Iraq being anything but perfect.

It seems like they have a good balance of people for and against the elections.

Oh, and you garner so much respect when you use expressions like "librul"

thanks for the replies...just posted that as an example of un-biased BBC reporting....

And yes I do know how to spell liberal. :rolleyes:

The viewpoints seem pretty varied to me...for, against, indifferent...how is that a 'liberal bias'?

I think that's the point - it isn't. But a lot of right wing USians accuse the BBC of being some sort of liberal mouthpiece, which it obviously isn't. I think this is trying to prove that.

No you see it is liberal because the BBC are actually asking the people of Iraq what they think whereas the American news stations use the presumption that election = happiness. Its liberal to accuse American action in Iraq being anything but perfect.

thats a pretty interesting way of putting it....

thanks for the replies...just posted that as an example of un-biased BBC reporting....

And yes I do know how to spell liberal. :rolleyes:

I understood what you meant by "librul".*mini-fluffle*

I think that's the point - it isn't. But a lot of right wing USians accuse the BBC of being some sort of liberal mouthpiece, which it obviously isn't. I think this is trying to prove that.

We have a winner!

I think that's the point - it isn't. But a lot of right wing USians accuse the BBC of being some sort of liberal mouthpiece, which it obviously isn't. I think this is trying to prove that.
Hmmmm...I have difficulty spotting sarcasm, especially when so many people I'm CERTAIN are using it turn out to be quite serious:) Do you think we'll get any of those arguing this is biased? Naw...they'll just say, "Oh, ONE TIME they are objective, the liberal dandies...pass the remote, I want to watch FOX!" Plus, they might think that some family named the Libruls bought out BBC :D

We have a winner!

Tell me I win cookies! I've been craving some all day...

Why the elections won't work:

"How can we not vote when Ayatollah Sistani ordered us to do so. Elections must be good for us because the Sayed won’t order us to do something if it is not right."

#10

I understood what you meant by "librul".*mini-fluffle*
Ah...see, this is where it can work against you not being a yank on this board...I missed the accent!

(By the way, fluffles sound like little farts to me...what the heck does it mean to you?) :eek:

Hmmmm...I have difficulty spotting sarcasm, especially when so many people I'm CERTAIN are using it turn out to be quite serious:) Do you think we'll get any of those arguing this is biased? Naw...they'll just say, "Oh, ONE TIME they are objective, the liberal dandies...pass the remote, I want to watch FOX!" Plus, they might think that some family named the Libruls bought out BBC :D

:D

Hmmmm...I have difficulty spotting sarcasm, especially when so many people I'm CERTAIN are using it turn out to be quite serious:) Do you think we'll get any of those arguing this is biased? Naw...they'll just say, "Oh, ONE TIME they are objective, the liberal dandies...pass the remote, I want to watch FOX!" Plus, they might think that some family named the Libruls bought out BBC :D

LOL!!! :)

Tell me I win cookies! I've been craving some all day...

will choclate eclairs do??

Ah...see, this is where it can work against you not being a yank on this board...I missed the accent!

I'm not a yank either, but I guess my time over at fark.com is starting to pay off ;)

(By the way, fluffles sound like little farts to me...what the heck does it mean to you?) :eek:

A fluffle is this smiley: :fluffle:

Why the elections won't work:

"How can we not vote when Ayatollah Sistani ordered us to do so. Elections must be good for us because the Sayed won’t order us to do something if it is not right."

#10

And this is different how from those who say one does not have a right to a voice in our democracies if we choose not to vote?

will choclate eclairs do??

Beggars can't be choosers!

Beggars can't be choosers!
Especially in a capitalist economy! Har, har, har :cool:

Beggars can't be choosers!

thats all I have I'm afraid

I wonder how this thread will go...I'll find out tomorrow

I am off to bed now

And this is different how from those who say one does not have a right to a voice in our democracies if we choose not to vote?

Sistani backs a single candidate, he is not ordering people to support the democracy, he is ordering people to vote for a particular candidate.

Especially in a capitalist economy! Har, har, har :cool:

Hmm, I never thought about suckling at the government's teat for cookies before! I wonder if it'll work...

Sistani backs a single candidate, he is not ordering people to support the democracy, he is ordering people to vote for a particular candidate.

Yes and? Is Sistani not allowed to endorse a candidate?

Hmm, I never thought about suckling at the government's teat for cookies before! I wonder if it'll work...

Now thats going too far!!!! Leave my breasts out of this!!!

thats all I have I'm afraid

Correction: That's all I have now. Mwoahahaha!

It seems like they have a good balance of people for and against the elections.

Oh, and you garner so much respect when you use expressions like "librul"

Is that "balance" representative of the Iraqi people as a whole?

Because if they're trying hard to make it seem like a lot of people are against the elections -- or an equal number, when (if) the truth is that most are in favor of it -- THAT would show anti-America bias.

Yes and? Is Sistani not allowed to endorse a candidate?

My point was that he is ordering people to do it, he is not reasonably explaining why they should vote. In this country there is a reasonable discourse as to what the best choice would be.

What is the difference between a tyrant and someone who can order people to vote them into power?

Now thats going too far!!!! Leave my breasts out of this!!!

Oh, you poor, you! Your tits are teats? :eek:

Those quotes were VERY un-liberal. No idea what you're smoking.

My point was that he is ordering people to do it, he is not reasonably explaining why they should vote. In this country there is a reasonable discourse as to what the best choice would be.

What is the difference between a tyrant and someone who can order people to vote them into power?

Sure. I understand what you are saying and my first point is still relevant.

Especially as you mention discourse which is not the case. Political discussion has become so polarised that instead of people say that 'we agree to disagree' we see 'you are anti *name of country* get out. So no discourse...just constant arguement.

Oh, you poor, you! Your tits are teats? :eek:

legs actually!

legs actually!

*shudders*

I though #4's arguement was really strong

I will not take part of these elections. How can we have elections when the occupation forces have their boots over our necks? What kind of election will it be when most Iraqis are not participating? This is just an American plot to hand the government to their agents and say this is your government.

He thinks that it is going to be a bad election because not enough are going to vote...so of course the only way to fix that is not vote yourself.... :headbang:

Sure. I understand what you are saying and my first point is still relevant.

No, because we say that you cannot voice your opinion if you don't vote in this society. By simply commanding people to vote, he is making sure that they don't have a voice even if they vote.

Especially as you mention discourse which is not the case. Political discussion has become so polarised that instead of people say that 'we agree to disagree' we see 'you are anti *name of country* get out. So no discourse...just constant arguement.

And how is that working out for the US? There is no turnover in Congress, we have a president who made one of the biggest foreign affairs blunders in US history getting reelected. Many people voted simply so their side could control all branches of the government.

That said, at least there still is the dissent and discourse.

I watched a BBC news report today and it compared elections in the British controlled south to those in the American controlled North.

In the south, the security is entirely in Iraqi hands. British soldiers in Basra are not even allowed near the voting booths and the Iraqi election officials have the power to ask them to leave.

Then in American controlled Mosul, Americans have banned all traffic in or out of the city for the weekend. Armed American patrols go around on every street and stand ominously outside the voting booths.

The BBC provides me with "Brit Wit"; the comedies are enjoyable, once you get past the accent.

There is also, "The Red Green Show", which was/is aired from Canada.

Depending on where you are, the comedies can be a relief from the usual fare. :)

Is that "balance" representative of the Iraqi people as a whole?

Because if they're trying hard to make it seem like a lot of people are against the elections -- or an equal number, when (if) the truth is that most are in favor of it -- THAT would show anti-America bias.
Yes of course if Britain who invaded Iraq, have a news organisation making less then compliementary reports about the invasion/occupation that Britain is participanting in, then clearly this is all about America.

"I am very happy with the elections. Of course I am voting and I am voting for Allawi. He is our man. He is a strong man that the Iraqis need. All this violence will end when a strong Iraqi government is elected.

"I am very proud that for the first time in our history in Iraq and the Arab world free democratic elections are taking place."

That's what I got.
Liberal???
Buh?

Well I'd like to say thanks for getting to three pages with no flaming! Thanks!

My entire point of posting this is that it shows a bunch of different points of view that neither or 'everything is fine' or the 'ohmygodweareallgonnadieinahugefireballofdoom' ....

This is whats called fair and balanced reporting. You might not agree with what these people are saying but just the fact that they are able to say them is one step in the right direction of democracy.

I am surprised that the usual "the BBC is made up of evil Liberals" crew did not make any comments on the this thread.

Probably coz they just don't have a leg to stand on LOL!!!

Liberal was such a dirty word. It meens free, without bias, open minded, without religious dogma or bigotry.

It's a bloody good word.

I'm quite pleased that there are some optimists still in Iraq. But I'm still bothered that they cannot separate religion from government. They're all muslims but still hate each other. It looks like a northern Ireland scenario.

Liberal was such a dirty word. It meens free, without bias, open minded, without religious dogma or bigotry.

It's a bloody good word.

I'm quite pleased that there are some optimists still in Iraq. But I'm still bothered that they cannot separate religion from government. They're all muslims but still hate each other. It looks like a northern Ireland scenario.

Well that and also that modern conservatism and liberalism are linked by history...

As for the question of religion....well you just need to look at the US and reigion....

They seem resonably varied. Do you think that they intentionally ignored a thousand other replies that were all positive just to fill out space with the more negative comments because they want everyone to think the elections have failed that badly..?

Maybe the quotes on number 10 were a crude translation of what she actually meant?

Modern conservatism is kinda neo-liberalism if you look at liberalism as a late 19th & early 20th century political ideal.

BBC is the best news service in the world, that and al-jazeera.

They seem resonably varied. Do you think that they intentionally ignored a thousand other replies that were all positive just to fill out space with the more negative comments because they want everyone to think the elections have failed that badly..?

well seeing as this is before the election....no! :)

Modern conservatism is kinda neo-liberalism if you look at liberalism as a late 19th & early 20th century political ideal.

BBC is the best news service in the world, that and al-jazeera.


Bingo!!! I visit another site that consists of gun toting survivalist extreme christians....

told one bloke he was a neo liberal...

I felt the meltdown 5000 miles away! LOL

Well this is how American teens feel about free press in general.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4225013.stm

There have been billions of threads on that already. Everyone felt really smart for being the first person to tell general about it. Myrth was wondering around closing them all yesterday.

There have been billions of threads on that already. Everyone felt really smart for being the first person to tell general about it. Myrth was wondering around closing them all yesterday.
Sorry, haven't spent too much time around here lately. I quessed it might have been dealt with already, but didn't bother to check. I do check before I start new threads thought.

Sorry, haven't spent too much time around here lately. I quessed it might have been dealt with already, but didn't bother to check. I do check before I start new threads thought.

Fair enough, carry on.