Community | February 05, 2012 | 289 comments

What the HELL is wrong with you Religious Nuts?

source: http://www.this-page-intentionally-left-blank.org/

I hear this constant bitching about the assault on Religion here in the United States. When in fact it's the Religious assault on the rest of us is the problem. If you want to believe in the invisible Man Or Woman in the Sky thats your private right to do. Give me a break there has never been an assault on Religion in the schools, because there has never been the right to pray in school. You can't make this shit up, always with the hating of Gays and other Religions has slowly eroded your believers away from the Church. Didn't Jesus say to pray in private and keep it to yourself? All though Birth Control wasn't even mentioned in the Bible, you have to attack Planed Parenthood relentlessly. I get it, you don't favor ABORTION, then don't get an abortion. In fact only 3% of Planed Parenthood's business is abortion, paid for in donations not government funds. Jesus H Christ stay the hell out of everyones business, the recent assault by the Breast Cancer Organization Susan B Komen (On Planed Parenthood) is more proof of the ever creeping exhibit of Religion on our society. Then there is that Church from Kansas that loves to show up and protest against Homosexual's and dead Soldiers Funerals, can't you see how narrow minded that is? A Soldier that died defending your Religious FREEDOM, and you want to make a mockery of his or hers funeral? You people are absolutely NUTS! There is NO ASSAULT on your Religion, your preoccupation with what goes on in other people bedrooms is to say the least retarded!
  1. groups:
    Community,   Culture,   Science,   Progressive America,   18 more
  2. tags:
    Hate
  3.     
    |

289 comments // What the HELL is wrong with you Religious Nuts?

  • jubal
    • +2
      jubal  

    • I had an amazing revelation the other day after reading the lost Gospel of Judas that was released by the National Geographic Society some time ago. The translation conducted by international linguists, experts in Coptic texts, is available in PDF format at this link here. http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf

      Well, the big conundrum I have struggled with in all my theological studies is the following. Why would an all powerful all knowing god who created mankind need to redeem his own creation by sending himself to the earth to die at the hands of his creation so that he could save his creation? This is not logical and never made any sense to me. Until I decided to walk away from religion all together and opened my mind up to other possibilities and explanations for age old questions like, Why are we here? or Where did we come from? Why is there evil in the world? Why is there suffering? etc...

      I learned some startling explanations that at first didn't jive with my original understanding of the bible. First came the revelation that the god of the old testament isn't the same "Father" that Jesus revealed, a god of perfect love, peace and forgiveness. That "Father" never was analogous in my mind to the god of the old testament that was homicidal, genocidal, jealous, angry, vengeful, essentially displaying all the ugly human traits we all hate. I also could never understand why mainstream Christianity never seemed to actually practice the things that Jesus says they should do. They have been too busy converting people, killing people who refuse the "good news", enslaving people's minds, making huge inroads into politics, and wreaking havoc on the earth. Instead, they should be feeding and clothing the poor, taking care of the sick and the brokenhearted, they should be demonstrating by their actions that they don't judge or hate anyone and especially wouldn't scream at people that their "going to hell." In fact, most fundamentalist and evangelical Christians demonstrate the traits of the old testament god, than the unconditional love and forgiveness of the "Father" Jesus revealed.

      So armed with this factoid, I continued to probe into the issue. They I learned another startling fact, that the god of the old testament is merely an administrator angel who declared himself to be the most high god among all the other gods, and that their were in fact, many gods jockeying for the position of Supreme. So after reading the Gospel of Judas it became crystal clear, why Jesus died at the hands of the old testament god, because he was redeeming humanity from the insanity of that administrator angel who required a blood offering to deter his wrath. Jesus sacrificed himself to the old testament god like a lamb, so that we could all get saved from that monster.

      In the Gospel of Judas, Jesus explains that no man, no angel, nothing in the entire universe has seen his "Father" and that his "Father" exists in an entirely separate realm, like a parallel universe. Those who have been bought and paid for with his blood, become the property of the new realm, the sacred and holy generation that dwells in the fullness of the spirit. They are the incredible people that Jesus describes on the mount of olives. And the bleeding heart liberals are the closest ones to display the qualities of such people as this new realm seeks. People who care about other people and find the authority and dominion of the four major powers: politics, religion, money and war...to be intolerable. These people are the chose, the elite, the ones Jesus wants on his team. He could care less about capitalists and patriots and nationalists and religious fanatics....these people have committed atrocities in the name of Jesus and Jesus says....they aren't anything to him. They will all perish and die along with the god they serve...that old testament god.

      So take heart and remember...the unconditional love of the holy spirit manifested in Jesus is forever. While this world and the one who created it and all the people who love it and exploit it and govern it and fight for it and worship their god on it....THEY WILL ALL DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH.

    • 4 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • jubal
  • circlesquared
  • AmericanStandard
    • 0
      AmericanStandard  

    • Hello pot... this is the kettle... you are black! I am a proud agnostic but I think people should be allowed to think whatever the hell they want to. Concerning Komen I say more power to them as they are a private entity and the backlash they are receiving will more than teach them a lesson. I just think it is a bit ignorant to attack the religious in this manner not to mention hypocritical. You are basically saying "Why can't you people be tolerant of my views while I refuse to tolerate your views!?" Don't get me wrong, I am all for logic in place of superstition but with all the facts and evidence on the side of non-believers why stoop to mudslinging? That type of behavior is the last result of the desperate who can no longer argue the facts.

    • 4 months ago
  • GavinTheMother
    • +5
      GavinTheMother  

    • Lost me at "you people". Religious people aren't a "people" as though all "secular" people represent one another. I understand what your trying to get at. But you lost your point the same way the people that you are railing against lost theirs: Gross generalities, name calling, and the inability to see your adversary in human terms. This is nothing more than verbal carpet bombing. Have you and Ann Coulture been discussing strategies?

    • 4 months ago
  • 2hellnwait
  • congoboy
  • ahiguy
    • +2
      ahiguy  

    • That most "religions" are, and continue to be the 'true north' to which most societies follow as the moral 'compass' that guides the ethics and character of their destinies... it is laughably absurd that secularists turn to govt relativism as the ultimate "authority" on defining moral turpitude... especially so, when it is blatantly obvious of the nearly complete and total moral corruption within the govt they "worship."... ignorantly exacerbating legions of progressively malevolent nincompoops!.. and I'm to look to these jokers as examples of ethical moral behavior?.. what a got-damned joke.

    • 4 months ago
  • CitizenHill
  • congoboy
  • kennymotown
  • kennymotown
  • ahiguy
  • congoboy
  • dcrog
    • -2
      dcrog  
    • ahiguy:

      Be carefull, I'm not sure how much some of the herd in here understands the concept of "true north". People who look to the government for all that is right and just have a pre-disposition to accepting government encroachment, particulary when "the other guy" gets more scrutiny than they! Furthermore, their perception of right and just are primarily concerned with the "the other guy" paying more taxes. So, you must temper your commentary concerning the likes of True North 'cuz some peoples' needles are pointing to the government.

      There is certainly hypocricy, WTF moments, and intolerance associated with some faith based organizations and religions for that matter. It would be a better world if tolerance was abundant not only for the Islamists, but the for Jews, Hindus, Christians, Budists, Atheists, all views of faith tolerated and having tolerance for each other. We are under the same sky after all! We must be concerned about the western institutions, such as the Catholic organizations being forced to provide abortions and abortion funding; would an Islamist organization here in the US that provides social and medical services to a community be forced to embrace abortion as well?

      Sure, there's a lot of hypocricy, but we must all remember that a rose smells like a rose no matter what you call it.

    • 4 months ago
  • dcrog
    • -3
      dcrog  
    • CitizenHill:

      Have you ever seen the movie, Idiotcracy? If not, gotta dumb yourself down and watch it! You'll see what the world could be like if those of the same ilk of the flea bag movement that was OWS, were actually in charge of everything.

    • 4 months ago
  • Naumadd
  • ahiguy
    • 0
      ahiguy  
    • Naumadd:

      I'm not at all impressed with secularisms progress to date... as a matter of fact, I adhere to the statement that: "what has always made the "State" a hell on earth has been precisely that (the secular) man has tried to make it his heaven."

    • 4 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • ahiguy
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
    • +2
      Truthitswhatsfordinner  

    • Idiots can give any movement a bad name. Religion has been used for bad ends at times and perhaps that is one of the reasons why so many have abandoned it.

      Jesus, however, was a great role model for how to keep the faith and confront the hypocrisies present in a given religion among other things.

      If believers and non-believers acted more like him, we would be a society in which our diversity was celebrated and our message was one of peace and tolerance.

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
  • congoboy
  • Wyley_Wombat
    • +6
      Wyley_Wombat  
    • Image

    • This is an example of my "church". It contains nothing built by humans, no images of brutal torture, nothing false. All it has is peace, serenity, balance, and calm, and that is all one needs.

    • 4 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • congoboy
  • dcrog
  • Varex_Sythe
    • +2
      Varex_Sythe  
    • congoboy:

      Just because billions of people have believed something over a period extending thousands of years does not make it true. The majority of people use to believe that the Earth was flat, the Earth was the center of all of existence, and that the position of the stars in the sky upon the day of your birth could determine your destiny.

      Point in case, it is possible that everything was created by God and/or gods; however, it is just as possible that everything within the universe began with, and came to be by chaotic forces with no consciousness or will.

    • 4 months ago
  • CitizenHill
    • 0
      CitizenHill  
    • Varex_Sythe:

      If you have free will & free choice, then right or wrong, the choice you make is yours and makes it no more or less better than the one someone else makes - - those choices each lead to their own inevitable conclusions as lived by the individuals that apply them in their life's circumstances.

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy  
    • Varex_Sythe:

      and just because a few self centered malcontents believe differently doesnt make their view any truer. many things are possible, probability is another thing. you are free to believe what you want but dont discount the beliefs of others like some fanatical extremist middle eastern groups do

    • 4 months ago
  • Varex_Sythe
  • Paratus
    • -6
      Paratus  

    • We absolutely have the right to pray in schools, or any place else for that matter. The problem arises when those opposed to voluntary prayer groups, individual saying a prayer at a graduation or other ceremony, erasing "Christmas" in favor of the generic "holiday" or individual display of religious belief either file suit or whine to the extent that these things are prohibited to satisfy one. NOne of those things above violate any amendment. For authorities to act thus does constitute a "war on religion".
      Stop equating hate with not supporting a lifestyle that does not comport to someones belief system. Not supporting a gay lifestyle at the local or state level is not "hate". The question of gay marriage has not done well when put to the popular vote test. This is not "hate". States are sovereign, they can determine their own destiny. This is why we are free to move from state to state. Why does the gay lobby seek to impose their own agenda in schools and in the textbooks? We see a similar problem where my in-laws live. People move to the country from area that have HOAs and immediately try to control through ordinances what someone does on their own property. Why??
      KOmen withdrew its support for matters not related to abortion. Unfortunately for Komen, withdrawing any support for an organization that provides abortion services invites terrorist activities on itself. PP was wrong in this one. I find it despicable and actually one of the lowest things the left has EVER done to invite ruin on an organization that fights something like breast cancer. It is my understanding that PP does not even offer mammograms which was one of the issues. Breast cancer is a terrible disease and an organization that fights it deserves all the support it gets. This leads me to believe that PP has nothing to do with womans health at all. A bunch of hypocrites? Perhaps. The question isn't relevant here. Anyhow, I plan of agitating my Congress Critter and Senator to pull public funding from Planned Parenthood over this thng. They won't because abortion is a shibboleth of the left. Hmmm, perhaps I will occupy. Suffice to say that I have always thought that the question of an abortion should be between the mother, the father and the doctor. (Yes kenny so don't go getting your panties in a wad saying lies like I have never written that here because I have, many times. And no I think that "Church from Kansas are wackjobs. They and their actions get no support from me). Any laws regarding the banning or permitting of abortions should be at the state level, nto the federal. It's a 9th and 10th Amendment thing.
      I don't think PP should receive ANY taxpayer money at all. Why should the money of someone who does not believe in abortion go to fund abortions? The fact that it does is is more proof of the ever creeping exhibit of the war on Religion in our society to paraphrase the opening post.
      Some people have standards and beliefs to guide their lives. Declaring a war on them using the lie that these beliefs are "hate" are wrong. Asking to abrogate these beliefs and standards in the interest of "inclusion", then advertising, legislating or lying about them is a "war". This is what the left and the militant supporters of their non-belief system do.
      Voted down. This thread was opened as hate speech only.

    • 4 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
    • +1
      The_Wanderer_Kansas  
    • Paratus:

      Way to stay on topic buddy, not. Ever think some of your rhetoric doesn't fit into EVERY thread?

      Last I knew, at least here in my state PP DOES NOT PROVIDE ABORTIONS! They can help discuss the option and DIRECT the young women to the safest available options. Anyone who doesn't believe that PP has anything to do with womens' health should go spend some time sitting in the waiting room, and QUIETLY observing. PP offers a plethora of other services that all get ignored over their supposed provision of abortions.

      1. They provide pregnancy tests for the underpriveliged so that they may get into insurance programs and be able to arrage OB-GYN supervision of pregnancy they intend to keep.
      2. Counseling and training on how to deal with abusive relationships with men or with their families.
      3. Counseling for personal abuse issues like drugs and alchohol.
      4. Psychological care and networking to help women find remedies or at least ways to cope with things such as post partum depression.
      5. Counseling and support in the arrangement of adoption processes.
      6. Resource management training and budgetary training.
      7. Assistance in applications for many other government and local charitable programs to help them with whatever their unique situations involve.
      8. RELIGIOUS COUNSELING! Wait what...religion in a place like that? You bet, the most common pamphlets at PP are #1 Dealing with Relationships #2 Religious #3 Addictions

      Please research or at least really think something thru before you speak.

      --edit-- Hell here in Kansas our PP locations are almost entirely funded by what most people would be tempted to call the "religious right" especially the wives of the religious right... perhaps thats a point more people need to consider.

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • kennymotown
  • congoboy
  • dcrog
  • dcrog
  • dcrog
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
  • congoboy
  • Paratus
    • 0
      Paratus  
    • congoboy:

      Yeah, no kidding. I don't pay any attention to a lot that is said here, except for laughs. No one I ever run into ever thinks like some of these guys, frankly I wonder if they are someone paid to come up with this stuff. Kansas, above, didn't even read his reply. I'm not trying to change their minds just express my opinion. I really don 't care what PP does. It's the behavior and rhetoric they and their knee jerk supporters displayed toward Komen which is dispicable.

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
  • Naumadd
    • +2
      Naumadd  

    • Slow down a bit, yes there is right to pray in schools - there's simply no right to impose prayer, or in other terms, compulsory prayer. To make prayer compulsory is official endorsement, individual prayer is not official endorsement and is therefore still constitutionally protected.

      Of course, you're right, the assault isn't on religion, but rather the upholding of the Constitution. It's easy to see enforcement of the Constitution in a negative light only if are the target of that enforcement. The religion of individuals is safe - the attempts of organized religion to impose dominion over government and the public square is not.

      Freedom of religion has never meant freedom to dominate. It has also never meant freedom from question, freedom from skepticism, freedom from critique, freedom from competition, freedom from mockery or other competing speech.

      You are simply free to worship as you choose PROVIDED you afford everyone else the same liberty. If you do not, your freedom of religion can indeed by severely curtailed until you adopt a more civil attitude toward your neighbor.

    • 4 months ago
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
    • +2
      The_Wanderer_Kansas  
    • Naumadd:

      Yes, I agree. If a child wants to say a silent prayer at the beginning of the school day, that is their choice and their right, however a young man at a school function taking that opportunity to "lay down the gospel" regardless of the religions of his audience is not. You're also right about "compulsory prayer", it is an endorsement.

      Personally I am of the belief that the religious right are now pushing so hard for privitization of our schools (among several other things) because they know they can not win a re-introduction of compulsory prayer in our PUBLIC schools, and to further their indoctrinations of our children they must get our schools out of public pervue. Point to ponder

    • 4 months ago
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
    • 0
      The_Wanderer_Kansas  
    • Truthitswhatsfordinner:

      I disagree, a prayer outloud at a place where we are not giving a choice to avoid it is NOT ok it is a direct conflict with our right to freedom from religion. Prayers in a situation where a kid can not stand up and walk away from it is unnaceptable. Prayers in a gathering where the people have chosen to be there is an entirely different situation! A quiet prayer where the heck ever you want is fine, a loud as you want to prayer is OK as long as people are given the oportunity to choose whether they are exposed to it or not.

    • 4 months ago
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
    • +2
      Truthitswhatsfordinner  
    • The_Wanderer_Kansas:

      You add an interesting caveat however, the person who utters a prayer out loud in a public place is constitutionally protected under two separate parts of the first amendment-- freedom of speech and freedom to practice religion without Congressional interference. The person who does not want to listen to the prayer can simply move or dismiss the prayer as the fancy of the ignorant. So we agree that a public prayer is okay as long as those who don't want to hear it can walk away and that nobody should be forced to pray.

    • 4 months ago
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
  • congoboy
  • dcrog
  • dcrog
    • -2
      dcrog  
    • The_Wanderer_Kansas:

      The RR is not "pushing". The "push" comes from the parents of the children being disgusted with how the gubment schools are letting the kids down, and the tax payers who are forced at gun point to "contribute" to the system. Certainly, there are plenty of private religious schools, there are also others as well. If you have a child, take your pick. Some communities don't have much choice to offer, but times will change.

    • 4 months ago
  • dcrog
  • dcrog
    • -1
      dcrog  
    • The_Wanderer_Kansas:

      There is no such thing as "freedom from religion". That is a term that was made up, who knows when, by someone who never read the Constitution. Think about it, the only way you could have such a "freedom", is for the Government to quash freedom of expression. It's okay that tax payer property does not advertise a religion, but to require the same amongst the citizens is a slippery sloap.

    • 4 months ago
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
  • The_Wanderer_Kansas
  • Naumadd
    • 0
      Naumadd  
    • dcrog:

      "Freedom from religion" is simply freedom from compulsory religion. It doesn't mean you can be free from exposure to the practices of others. To do that, freedom of religion would have to be suppressed. That, of course, is a no-no.

      No, freedom from religion means no one or no group can extend their individual right to believe and practice as they choose to a dictate that others must believe and practice as they do. Yes, you are free but ONLY if you allow others the same.

      If you do not, you break the civilized contract and forfeit at least some of your liberty until you choose to be civil.

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
  • dcrog
  • dcrog
  • dcrog
    • -1
      dcrog  
    • congoboy:

      Fair and balanced?!?!? It would seem that some must give other members a dose of reality ever so often, lest they be lost and have no way to make it back to reality bro!

    • 4 months ago
  • kennymotown
    • +3
      kennymotown  

    • I'm getting very tired these days, and a little more tired today than I was yesterday! My hands are getting older, not to mention my feet, I've been handed a false dream, you know the one that says if you work hard enough you can live the American Dream. No more Mr. nice guy, I'm going to put more effort into breaking this machine that is grinding us workers like meat in a butcher shop.

    • 4 months ago
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • kennymotown
  • congoboy
  • kennymotown
  • congoboy
  • PeteLeS33
    • +3
      PeteLeS33  

    • It's the old trick of accusing the OTHER of what YOU are doing. Sensationalizing the "Assult on Religion" while religion is Assulting your rights is the name of the game.

      There was an old retired grandmother in another neighborhood in my city who made a name for herself as part of the local neighborhood watch group. Her call in tips to the police netted some arrests of drug dealers in her neighborhood. In which she got a plaque from the mayor. A few months after she was honored, she herself got arrested for, yep you guessed it, a pound of pot with intent to distribute.

      Was she the upstanding citizen who was determined to keep crime off the streets of her beloved neighborhood??

      Hell NO, she was eleminating the competitition!

      Whenever we are accused of something we need to see what the accuser is doing. Chances are they are the ones that are doing what they are accusing us of.

      Great post Kenny.

    • 4 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • Plue
  • kennymotown
    • +1
      kennymotown  
    • Plue:

      Thanks Plue, the shred of respectability of the Elite is falling by the wayside. The Religious Right has always been their biggest supporters. I'm dropping hints all the time as to is the real enemy, I remember a former friend that is by now one of the Elite himself telling me my venture into Bhudism was not a good choice. 20 years later and a little wiser, I can now see what he was hinting at!

    • 4 months ago
  • Plue
  • kennymotown
  • Plue
  • kennymotown
  • warman1138
  • LivingPong
    • +2
      LivingPong  

    • 80% of Catholics use birth control. What year is it 1950? Politicians have started yelling "Class Warfare" because the people demand action regarding criminal activity in the financial markets! Do they seriously believe it is a wise idea to have criminals lurking in the ranks of people who have access to $Billions? They have no problem with trying to whip up religious anger to get them the votes they desperately seek. It's a completely shameless act.

      These people whipping up anger and mayhem are using people to further their own ambitions and religion as a cover. It is a popular ploy used by tyrants throughout history. Find a target. Create crazy hate speech or totally non-factual argument and slander till the cows come home. Set up fund for crazy talk and appoint yourself the administrator of fund. Create administrators fee to avoid any modern legals. Hitler used the Nazi swastika, these modern cult leaders use a cross or other religious symbolism and they certainly aren't out there feeding the hungry or helping the persecuted.

    • 4 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • ecoalex
  • kennymotown
  • pjacobs51
  • kennymotown
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
    • -4
      congoboy  
    • Image
    • pjacobs51:

      be careful where your finger points my hypocritical friend...Panel Found Dan Rather Lied

      Posted by Paul

      Published: January 10, 2005 - 11:57 AM

      The panel (PDF, HTML). identified 10 "serious defects" in the preparation and reporting of the story... But there is bigger news if you read closely.

      The most serious defects in the reporting and production of the September 8 Segment were:
      1. The failure to obtain clear authentication of any of the Killian documents from any document examiner;

      2. The false statement in the September 8 Segment that an expert had authenticated the Killian documents when all he had done was authenticate one signature from one document used in the Segment;

      3. The failure of 60 Minutes Wednesday management to scrutinize the publicly available, and at times controversial, background of the source of the documents, retired Texas Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel Bill Burkett;

      4.The failure to find and interview the individual who was understood at the outset to be Lieutenant Colonel Burkett's source of the Killian documents, and thus to establish the chain of custody;

      5. The failure to establish a basis for the statement in the Segment that the documents "were taken from Colonel Killian's personal files";

      6. The failure to develop adequate corroboration to support the statements in the Killian documents and to carefully compare the Killian documents to official TexANG records, which would have identified, at a minimum, notable inconsistencies in content and format;

      7. The failure to interview a range of former National Guardsmen who served with Lieutenant Colonel Killian and who had different perspectives about the documents;

      8. The misleading impression conveyed in the Segment that Lieutenant Strong had authenticated the content of the documents when he did not have the personal knowledge to do so;

      9. The failure to have a vetting process capable of dealing effectively with the production speed, significance and sensitivity of the Segment; and

      10. The telephone call prior to the Segment's airing by the producer of the Segment to a senior campaign official of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry - a clear conflict of interest - that created the appearance of a political bias.

      #2 is the killer. Dan Rather got on the air and flat lied to the American people. He should be fired.

      Once questions were raised about the September 8 Segment, the reporting thereafter was mishandled and compounded the damage done. Among the more egregious shortcomings during the Aftermath were:
      1. The strident defense of the September 8 Segment by CBS News without adequately probing whether any of the questions raised had merit;

      2. Allowing many of the same individuals who produced and vetted the by-then controversial September 8 Segment to also produce the follow-up news reports defending the Segment;

      3. The inaccurate press statements issued by CBS News after the broadcast of the Segment that the source of the documents was "unimpeachable" and that experts had vouched for their authenticity;

      4. The misleading stories defending the Segment that aired on the CBS Evening News after September 8 despite strong and multiple indications of serious flaws;

      5. The efforts by 60 Minutes Wednesday to find additional document examiners who would vouch for the authenticity of the documents instead of identifying the best examiners available regardless of whether they would support this position; and

      6. Preparing news stories that sought to support the Segment, instead of providing accurate and balanced coverage of a raging controversy.

      #3 is the killer on this one. This was not just poor reporting or a "mistake." The panel has found that they lied. When Dan Rather made the conscious decision to lie to the American people, he sealed his fate. Dan should be fired.

      I could add one the panel missed. Dan said during his report that he had them vouched for by a person that had seen the actual documents in the 70's. No such person existed and that was a lie. The Panel missed a serious firing offense.
      http://wizbangblog.com/content/2005/01/10/panel-found-dan-1.php

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
  • kennymotown
  • congoboy
  • TanzaniteDiamonds
  • pjacobs51
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • pjacobs51
    • +2
      pjacobs51  
    • congoboy:

      I'm afraid the disservice is on your part Sir.

      You see, if Fox News had as strict scrutiny as CBS (and others) and "fired" their top anchors/reporters every time they lied, or just made sh*t up (like the video above) they would no longer be in business.

      . . . see the difference?

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy  
    • pjacobs51:

      no, all the networks have been guilty of lies and misleading the public for decades. cbs certainly was aware of dans dishonesty long before he was caught. you actually believe that was his first offense and that these kind of shinanigans are new? actually fox has a lot of catching up to do to even come close to the deceit purpetrated by the big three. i would prefer to believe that you are truly ignorant of media politics than to believe that you would actually consider fox any worse than any of the rest.

    • 4 months ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy  
    • pjacobs51:

      INCIDENCE OF CRIME...The crime rate in Netherlands is high compared to other industrialized countries. For purpose of comparison, data were drawn for the seven offenses used to compute the United States FBI's index of crime. Index offenses include murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. In the UN reports, murders are referred to as "intentional homicides." Aggravated assaults are referred to as "major assaults," and larcenies are referred to as "thefts." According to the United Nations Seventh Annual Survey on Crime, crime recorded in police statistics shows the crime rate for the combined total of all Index crimes in Netherlands to be 5801.04 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2000. This compares with 1951.92 for Japan (country with a low crime rate) and 4123.97 for USA (country with high crime rate). For intentional homicides, the rate in 2000 was 1.15 for Netherlands, 0.50 for Japan, and 5.51 for USA. For major assaults, the rate in 2000 was 277.54 for Netherlands, compared with 34.04 for Japan, and 323.62 for USA. (Note these data for Japan and Netherlands are for "total recorded assaults, since neither Japan nor Netherlands reported a figure for major assaults.) For rapes, the rate in 2000 was 10.36 for Netherlands, 1.78 for Japan, and 32.05 for USA. For robberies, the rate in 2000 was 117.17 for Netherlands, 4.07 for Japan, and 144.92 for USA. For automobile theft, the rate in 2000 was 241.01 for Netherlands, 243.81 for Japan, and 414.17 for USA. The rate of burglaries for 2000 was 573.25 for Netherlands, 233.45 for Japan, and 414.17 for USA. The rate for thefts in 2000 was 4580.56 for Netherlands, compared with 1434.27 for Japan and 2475.27 for USA. (Note that USA data were those reported to INTERPOL for year 2000, since USA has not yet reported this data to UN.) It should be noted that the high crime rate for Netherlands is owed predominantly to property crimes, particularly theft. The murder rate is low, and the rates for rape, robbery, and assault are medium compared to other industrialized countries.

      While the rate of violent crime in the Netherlands is low, tourists are occasionally targeted, usually in conjunction with robbery attempts. Visitors to larger cities frequently fall prey to pickpockets, bag snatchers, and other petty thieves. While thieves may operate anywhere, the U.S. Consulate General in Amsterdam receives frequent reports of thefts from several specific areas. The train from Schiphol Airport to Amsterdam Central Station is particularly plagued by thieves, who often work in pairs. In those instances, one thief distracts the victim, often by asking for directions, while an accomplice moves in on the victim's momentarily unguarded handbag, backpack, laptop or briefcase. The thieves typically time their thefts to coincide with train stops so they may quickly exit. Within Amsterdam, thieves are very active in and around train and tram stations, the city center and public transport.

      Confidence artists have victimized a number of Americans. Typically, this involves the U.S. citizen being contacted in the United States and advised of an inheritance or other offer - often originating in Africa - that requires their assistance and cooperation to conclude. The American is requested to forward advance payments for alleged "official expenses" and often asked to come to Amsterdam to conclude the operation. Several Americans have lost tens of thousands of dollars in such scams.

      TRENDS IN CRIME

      Between 1995 (Sixth Annual Survey) and 2000 (Seventh Annual Survey) the rate for all recorded Index offenses increased from 5977.74 to 5801.04 per 100,000 in Netherlands, an decrease of 3%. The rate of intentional homicide decreased from 1.77 to 1.15, a decrease of 35%. However, the rate for total recorded assaults increased from 180.92 to 277.54, an increase of 53.4%. The rate of rape increased from 9.14 to 10.36, an increase of 13.3%. The rate for robberies increased from 101.78 to 117.17 per 100,000, an increase of 15.1%. The rate for automobile theft decreased from 264.83 to 241.01, a decrease of 9%. The rate of burglaries decreased from 779.91 to 573.25, a decrease of 26.5%. Thefts decreased from 4639.39 to 4580.56, a decrease of 1.3%. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/europe/netherlands.html

    • 4 months ago
123
1 - 100 of 289
kennymotown
more from Community:
from the community

top videos