»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Interesting Set Of Articles
| The Alley |
|
Interesting Set Of Articles |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
. http://www.memri.org/ . |
||
| © Copyright 2008 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
For yet another interesting article, google Selective Memri This article appeared in the Manchester Guardian. Even though Pip's instructions on how post a link are very clear, I still can't figure out how to do it. I'll keep practicing, though. Best, Jimbeaux  |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
' Save some time Are they lying? . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Huan Yi, Very interesting stuff. I've bookmarked the site and I'll try to look in on them occasionally. I'm not sure who's actually funding the site, but I'm impressed by what appear to be pretty straightforward primary sources. I really appreciate you having dug this out. Thanks, BobK. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
misleading fallacy [This message has been edited by oceanvu2 (03-14-2008 12:37 PM).] |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Your expected something else, John? Bob, I'm with you. It IS interesting and I'm going to dig a little deeper, too...even though I'm easily misled  |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Just copy the URL from your browser and paste it in the reply box Jim, like this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/12/worlddispatch.brianwhitaker For what it’s worth I don't think the articles are lies, but I’m not sure exactly what overall message they‘re trying to convey. Apart from perhaps that some people really don’t like the US and Israel and, I don’t know about you, but I sort of guessed that already. It may be that this organisation is trying to prove that this view is widespread in the middle-east, which may in fact be the case, if it is it sort of bursts the bubble on the oft quoted statement “we’re doing this for the Iraqi people”. I mean where’s the sense in helping a populace that hates and despises you and looks forward to the day when you and your country are wiped off the face of the earth. Then again it may prove nothing of the sort, the articles may simply be selected and biased reports of the factual mad ravings of extremist individuals who are trying to present a biased opinion and demonise an entire population based on the skewed views of a few individuals. Perhaps it just proves that some people don’t like the US and other folks don’t like the middle-east. Which ain't really news, at least to me. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Hi Balladeer: I think John may have gotten even more than he expected. So far, four people have taken the time to read his reference and ponder. At least two and perhaps three, have looked at an article with a questioning, not dismissive, point of view. And he got me, not necessaily known for brevity, to offer a two word response from the same source that he and Ron led me to for "pathetic fallacy." John put up a good link to look at. I don't think he expected unquestioned acceptance. But then, far be it from me to guess what John might or might not expect. So far, no one has said Memri is lying. I suggested through my reference that not everyone considers Memri to be impartial or without an agenda. Best, Jim |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Huan Yi, Your posting was terse to the point of unintelligibility. It reads in its entirety quote: In the interests of sounding terse you omit supplying some information needed to understanding your question: 1) Who do you wish to save time? 2) Whose time do you wished to be saved? 3) Is there time being wasted? Whose Time? By whom? And what is your understanding the purpose may be of these so far unspecified parties in doing this thing with the time of other people. 4) What is wasted time, and why is it something you appear to believe other people should not do? 5) Having saved this time, how do you know it, and what then do you do with it? The second line appears to have some relation to the first, but what that is, exactly, is somewhat obscure. The main questions about the second line seem to do with the words "they" and "lying." 1) Who are "they"? The Manchester Guardian? If you believe this, perhaps you should write them and ask, though I would suggest that you specify exactly what you think you may have been lying about, and where and when such lies took place. They would certainly wish to know. I certainly wish to know. Are "they" the people of the web site you presented? If you thought they were lying, I don't know why you'd present the site, and I find it interesting enough to explore. I haven't made up my own mind about how to judge what they say. "Lying" certainly wouldn't have been one of the points that I'd have used for evaluation. I would have looked for a point of view and the ways that point of view was supported, including the use of lies. I expect everybody to do a certain amount of lying, though I feel worse about it when "we" do it. The forces of Democracy. I also feel worse when democrats get caught up in a sex scandal or taking bribes, if that makes you feel any better. Nevertheless, the question of who "they" are is still in front of us. 2) How are they lying? How could we tell? 3) To whom are they lying and for what purpose? Surely you get the point here, Huan Yi. If you want me to become upset about somebody's misdeeds, then the least you can do is tell me enough about who they are and what they've done to identify with your outrage. I am willing to look at the occasional unexplained web site because I understand that you are a man of few words and I respect that. But I need enough to understand what you're trying to tell me. Please help poor Mr. Bob. He is all at sea. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Bob: I think the terse post was meant for me, as was Balladeer's response. I think John was asking if I thought "Memri," not "The Guardian" was lying. Maybe not, though. Sometimes tough to tell. John: Some of your posts seem indeed quizzical. Not necessarily this one. Jim Aitken |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I;ve done some study on MEMRI and I have no problem with it. The majority of it's work is translations from MIddle East press. It's interesting to see what they are saying, and what their readers are being told, in that part of the world. Some of their topics paint Islam in a favorable light while others don't. It is not all one-sided and, as Jim and the site points out, none of their translations have proven to be anything but accurate. Several articles caught my eye.... Saudi Daily Arab News: The Saudi Woman Is Always To Blame for Her Problems This article condemns the Saudi woman as always being guilty, no matter what, due to her being born in a male-dominated society. We have seen evidence of this lately in the case of the Saudi woman sent to prison for being raped. The article ends with this statement "She is guilty when others confiscate her property or real estate by impersonating her, and her greatest sin is that her identity stems from her guardian. The Saudi woman is always guilty and anyone who thinks of dealing with her humanely is a criminal." Interesting, no? In the article Al-Qaeda Commander in Northern Iraq: We Are in Dire Straits, it is revealed that the top commanders acknowledge that Al-Qaeda is losing positions all over Iraq, due to Iraqis joining forces with the Americans. It also speaks of their decrease in popularity. The article hardly portrays Al-Qaeda in the light they want to be thought of. Mar 7 SD# 1864 - Arab-American Psychiatrist Wafa Sultan Clashes with Egyptian Islamist Tal'at Rmeih, Program Host on Al-Jazeera TV translates a heated discussion involving Islamist beliefs and actions. It does publish the comments of Wafa Sultan, which are not favorable concerning Islam at all. I find this to be fair treatment. "Burn Down the Offices Of The Newspapers That Affronted Our Prophet... Bomb Them so Body Parts Go Flying, and With These Body Parts, Allah Will Quench the Believers' Thirst for Revenge" excerpts from a press conference held by Abu 'Abir, spokesman for the Salah Al-Din Brigades, the military wing of the Popular Resistance Committee, in Gaza. The press conference aired on Al-Jazeera TV on February 18, 2008. I think every non-Muslim should read this article. It speaks of.. "First of all, we call upon the Islamic nation to rise up, and not make do with a futile economic boycott, in the face of this affront to our honorable Prophet. We call upon them to drive out the Danish embassies and ambassadors from the lands of the Muslims, and to expel them from the Muslim countries. They should take serious and immediate action to burn down the offices of the newspapers that affronted our Prophet, and to bomb them, so that body parts go flying, and with these body parts, Allah will quench the believers' thirst for revenge." "We Call Upon Muslims All Over the World to Bomb The Embassies, Kidnap Danish Ambassadors, and Kill Them [at] the Tomb Of The Prophet" All of this over the publishing of cartoons? Americans ( and other infidels) should recognize the true hatred and insanity behind extremist Muslim beliefs. Finally, for my good pals Obama, Clinton and Democrats in office, we have this... Libyan Leader Al-Qadhafi: In America, "A Candidate Who Wants People To Vote For Him Keeps Talking About Change... They Want to Change America and its Current Political System"; "The Whole World Will Return to the Libyan Model" of Government Every once in a while, American politicians should take their heads out of their butts long enough to realize that what they say and do has world-wide implications and results. Obama and Clinton decide to use CHANGE as their mantra, nothing really new since it has been used before, but there they are, screaming CHANGE as loudly as they can. Doe they really want change? Oh yes...the change in leadership in the Oval Office. That's it. Other countries, though, will take this and run with it to the detriment of the US. The whole world will return to the Libyan model. I have watched the world and the people in it. I've seen that in America, a candidate who wants people to vote for him keeps talking about change. They all keep saying 'change, change.' They want to change America and its current political system. They want to make a change in their lives. They say their system is a failure, that their government is a failure, and that their elections are a failure. An American who wanted to get elected said: 'I will make a change.'" Thanks, Obama. You're doing good. To this day, there is no ideal ruling system in the world, which can resolve the problems. There are conflicts everywhere. They are still asking: 'Who won the elections - Al Gore or Bush?' Thanks, Democrat hard-liners so unable to accept defeat that they make it a world-wide issue that others can use against us. You done good, too. One thing that has been consistant in our past is that America has always put on a united front to the world. Those days are over and we are poorer for it. I'm reminded of the scene in the Godfather where Brando takes James Caan aside and warns him never to show dissention in the family to outsiders (which, incidentally, was the first step in the destruction of the family). Should we have dissention, checks and balances? Of course,,,,but to the world we should be united, especially against the enemy. We throw that away on political slogans to get votes. This article illustrates that. Let me add that this practice is not limited to Democrats. It just happens to be their year for doing it. Republicans in the past have done the same, I'm sure. Maybe the next time Obama's preacher goes to visit Qadhafi, he can mention that to him [This message has been edited by Balladeer (03-16-2008 04:46 AM).] |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: I'm certainly no expert on the Corleone family, but I rather thought the first step in their destruction was when they decided that lying, cheating, stealing and killing were acceptable ways to solve problems? I don't believe that successfully hiding their sins would have necessarily mitigated their sins. I would much rather see a family do what is right and correct what is wrong than to have them hide behind lies that clearly not everyone is going to believe any way. And, yes, a "united front" is just a euphemism for "someone has to lie about how they feel so we can all tell the same damn truths." Mike, I think you are always going to be able to find someone eager to twist what we say and do. That's probably why they're called enemies? Personally, I would much rather have them twist the truth than some silly agreed upon lie. Let's concentrate on doing what is right and correcting what is wrong, and leave the united front to those with something to hide. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Ron, I agree. There's nothing wrong with doing what's right and correcting what's wrong but what has seemed to gain popularity by the political parties is to shout out wrongs with the loudest possible voice, instead of getting together away from the cameras and actually work on working things out. Is there something wrong with saying, "We can do it better"? Is is necessary to publicly trash the other side with the biggest headlines possible, and the country along with it? Obama's wife claims there has been nothing to make her proud of the United States until her husband became a presidential candidate. Obama speaks of how Americans are walking the streets in despair. Hillary speaks of how the current government has damaged the country. When to their advantage, they portray life in the United States as dismal as possible. When to their advantage, they portray the military in the worst light possible. They will say anything as loudly as they can go get votes, with no thought as to the fact that their words are heard around the world and make differences as to what people think of us as a country. Is this what you call doing what's right and correcting what's wrong? I happen to think that presenting a united front is the proper way to act. Do you correct your child in public in front of strangers or in privacy when you get home? There is no need for the public name-calling and public mud-throwing in politics. When terrorists applaud Democrats winning seats in congress, there's something wrong. Our enemies know of our deep division and they use it...and it's not necessary. It's not correcting or not correcting, Ron. It's how we do it. There is no need to trash the government or the country in public for the sake of vote-getting. That's all I'm saying. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
