Are they?

If someone invaded your country would you not want them out either?

Think i have said it before that a your terrorist is someone elses freedom fighter…Ask any Wermacht Soldier from 39/45 what he thought of the Marquis !

War ,any War, is not something to enjoy or glorify. Yes glorify the courage ,the comradeship and IF the war is a Just war think of it as a job well done, but dont relish the deaths of others no matter how misquided you beleive them to be.

I presume most if not all people on this forum find the Videos on the likes of Youtube showing the attacks on and deaths of Coliation troops to be as disgusting and sickening as i do? Surely then we should be setting better standards than this by not taking pleasure in the deaths of others no matter what their crime ?

How many true veterans do you think enjoy reliving the deaths of their enemies when time has passed and the high emotions & stress of a daily brush with death are in the past ? Very damned few that i have met.

.

tell you what really got on my nerves last week …

I was driving in the road towards town and along comes a cop car blues ,siren everything going….passes me out and then gets stuck behind a car & lorry …eventually passes same and speeds on into town…..
to pull into the cop shop….clocking off time!!! 😡

Very sad to see another proper comic actor passing on.

RIP.

I consider the media having no fear to be a bad thing. No, I do not want some “big brother” to keep them under thumb, but there is great potential for media to become arrogant and inject subtle bias into reporting. I would like the reporters to be transparent about their personal beliefs instead of holding themselves up as paragons of unbiased virtue.:( Through transparency, the audience can compensate for potential bias by: 1) not believing the report, 2) believing some of the report or 3) believing the entire report. The fear of having their biases found out should keep them in line.

Below is a link to a case study that compares the usage of liberal and conservative “talking points” used during reporting of the American government-paid pension system a few years ago.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/
2005/socialsecurity/socsec.asp

Which is all very well when you can depend on the majority of the audience to be able to understand the subtleties of the sort of manipulation that media and/or governments can put on things.

The media needs regulation.Perhaps more so now than ever before because we are so dominated by so much media output .

When i view FOX the arrogance that you talk about seems almost endemic and it would seem that their claim to be balanced and fair is pretty far from the reality.

Oh and with regard to the above link…it is very interesting but as we say over here “one swallow does not a summer make”

I doubt that close examination of the balance shown by FOX on a long term basis would stand up to scrutiny.

DH mosquito.

and didnt they use night fighter versions of the Beaufighter for a while?

Vanguard…………Vauxhall

Victor……………..Vauxhall

Cavalier…………..Vauxhall

Crusader………….Clan

Orion………………Ford

Gazelle…………….Hillman/Singer

Scout……………..Skoda

and a few limited editions & asides;

Mirage……………Renault Laguna

Harrier…………….Ford ( version of Escort )

Rapier…………….Sunbeam/Talbot

Which makes it rather harmless.If a organization is open about what its politics, it’s far more honest than a group with an adgenda pretenting to be objective.

A conservative TV network is no different than a liberal or conservative paper. And in Europe (and increasingly the U.S.) papers have long been known as conservative, middle-or liberal.

If people know of a media organization’s “leanings” they’re prepared for what they read or hear.
Also, there is what communications researchers call “cognitive dissonance” where people believe what they want to believe and don’t what they don’t. As an example: If they don’t like Bush, they won’t listen to a story that paints him in a good light even if it comes from a normally trusted source.

Yep fair enough but surely it would be better if the people were allowed to decide from fair and balanced reporting without the bias without left , liberal or right wing leanings?

And lets remember that we have to allow for the lack of education & poor literacy levels which may, note i say may, mean that impressionable people will believe what they see without realising that it is not necessarily the gospel truth..Hence my advice to spread your wings( no pun intended PII ) and take in as much info from as many different sources as poss.

Living in LA has exposed me to many who work in the entertainment industry. Everything in media is driven by numbers of viewers/listeners/readers. Without viewers/listeners/readers the producers/editors get fired and replaced by someone who can improve the numbers. Specific audiences are targeted in an effort to create a niche and keep viewership high. Fox has their target audience, as does CNN, ABC/NBC/CBS and the BBC. Those target audiences are not the same. Everything you see or hear has dazzle or shock added to keep your interest, especially the “news” including the BBC. Crises and freak stories are disproportionately reported because they rivet the viewer’s attention (hence my previous reference to Anna Nicole and Britney). Positive stories are boring and get little air time. Numbers trump objectivity every time.

This is without a doubt the case in the US where sensationalism and controversal comment seems the prerequisite for success .However this is most definitely not the case with the BBC or any of the more responsible Broadcast networks..After all the news SHOULD be presented in a balanced and unbiased way allowing the viewer to make their own decision having been given the facts pure and simple…Granted there are occasions when the news may have been subtly slanted to suit a particular point of view but that is a rarity .

FOX on the other hand is about a subtle in its bias to the Republicans & the present Administration as a bull in a china shop!

While there may be covert actions that we may never hear about, I seriously doubt there will be any shooting. All appearances point to an operation to foster Iranian regime change in a manner similar to Poland and the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. If any shooting does occur, it will likely be initiated by the Mullah’s as the last gasp of a failed regime

Cant see that covert actions will have the end result that the White House wants….I just hope someone over there does a better job at looking at the consequences of their actions and what may need to happen in the aftermath of any downfall.

Given such issues as this scandal around Walter Read , which is after all something they should have been able to sort easily, i cant see how we can expect them to organise a drinking session ( polite wording) in a brewery!

..