Recent Comments by 9162 subscribe to this feed

SHOCKER: Rude Fox News Interview w/ Naomi Wolfe

9162 says...

A pocket guide would actually be pretty handy, justinian. And you are right on about the lack of safety for the nation the neocons have gotten for all their changes since 2001. I mean, in 2001, an average of 3,509 people died on public highways every month. That's more than everyone who died in the plane attacks unless you count the soldiers dead in Iraq. Guess what, I'm more afraid of dying in my car than some criminal mastermind terrorist blowing me up. They may hate us, but they're just not very good at killing Americans(except in Iraq). One lucky try in 5 years isn't enough to make me afraid, why are you?

The Myth of the Liberal Media

Siskel and Ebert - Uncensored Bloopers

SHOCKER: Rude Fox News Interview w/ Naomi Wolfe

9162 says...

I'm reading this book now, and I thought it was a shame she focused so much on trying to sell the book overall instead of answering the guy's questions.
Secret Prisons? We got none, right?

Remember those CIA rendition flights? They take you wherever in the world they want to torture you. No judge, no jury. Secret until somebody leaks it to the press. They even tried to kidnap a guy in Italy but their gov't found out. At least with the Gulags, everyone knew about them.

I find especially idiotic the question of what to do with these enemy combatants if we can't keep them in Guantanamo forever. Hey, I know, let's have a TRIAL where the gov't shows their evidence and lets the accused defend themselves against the charges. It's likely some people who have been rotting away in Guantanamo for 4 years haven't even been told why they are being held. Imagine living like that because some neighbor who hated you told the visiting US Army that you were a Taliban, and whoops, off you go. Does this situation more closely resemble a democracy or a fascist dictatorship, you tell me?

When she finally gets around to mentioning how the UK and Spain dealt with terrorists(following the law, regular trial), he just interrupts and laughs at her, then poses the question again as if she wasn't answering it. An inattentive viewer would just think she was going off on a tangent and didn't answer the question, being evasive because she can't answer directly.

The surveillance of citizens is the one point that disturbs me most as it affects many more Americans than secret prisons. I would have liked to see how Kasich explains how good this is, and also legal. Another post-9/11 power grab that the public still would not know about if it hadn't been leaked to the press. ATT currently filters all their internet traffic and lets the NSA spy on it with no warrants or oversight!! How is this legal?

The interviewer's bias is readily apparent, the best way she could have responded was succinctly answer his questions with facts, no long speeches. They call this a news channel?

  • 1


Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon