The Unofficial GOP Strategy :cool:

[Sihouette]

Any fool can see that CITI has a uniquer position in the financial pecking order and under proper guidance can made LOTS of money. You boogyman obviously has a pretty good ability to pick winners.

If he were out to kill America he would be in a cave with OBL. But unless he wants HIS money to disappear, and he certainly does NOT, he's got no interest in hurting his interests

Your spelling and grammar's a little weird here. Rosetta stone not working today? Protecting the good name of the Prince are we doggy?

You mean the US has to cede soverignty to the world community when it comes to humanitarian and climate concerns, but can tell the world community to take a flying fukc if it wants to invest in American prosperity?

I wouldn't exactly call Citibank "American prosperity"...neither would the Prince at this point. I'm sure his other investments will cushion him though. Heck, he probabaly made sure of that in advance. Or not, you know depending on whether or not you buy into the theory..

I find it wholly weird that the bosses at Fox Noise are answering to an ownership that is nearly 100% foreign. We have the Australian holdings via the Murdoch family and the Saudi holdings via the Prince. Odd too that that corporation is the single most inciteful entity in media today. Endlessly they spin and pit american against american. I remember the russian article recently "predicting" that american would rupture into civil war soon. I'm sure it's all just one big hodgepodge coincidink. The talking heads at Fox are really a bunch of roleplayers who are taking their cues from foreigners who may not have our best interests in mind after all...

1. Buy out their biggest bank.

2. Buy up their loudest media outlet.

3. contribute to collapse of their financial system.

4. Use the media outlet to pit democratic citizens against GOP citizens.

5. Incite civil war.

6. Move in for the kill.

Of course, it's just a theory...

 

[dogtowner]

Your spelling and grammar's a little weird here. Rosetta stone not working today? Protecting the good name of the Prince are we doggy?

typing is not my long suit

no response then ?

 

[Revere]

I find it wholly weird that the bosses at Fox Noise are answering to an ownership that is nearly 100% foreign.

Murdoch is Australian. What interests of the Australian government does Fox surreptitiously advance?

How are the interests of the US advanced if it pays billions to foreign government in the pursuit of green de-development?

Your jingoism is rather selective.

 

[Sihouette]

The Murdoch clan may not be beholden to the overall attitudes of the Australian position. I was pointing out that they aren't beholden to the US more than anything. From all accounts of that family I'd say they're beholden to money, which flows like oil out of the Middle East.

It's just a theory after all...nothing to get worked up about I'm sure.. Though there is that nagging problem that is a fact: Fox Noise is guilty of inciting civil unrest in a time of heightened national security and war. That one little detail is somewhat problematic..

 

[Revere]

It's just a theory after all...nothing to get worked up about I'm sure.. Though there is that nagging problem that is a fact: Fox Noise is guilty of inciting civil unrest in a time of heightened national security and war. That one little detail is somewhat problematic..

Free speech protections don't apply only to polite speech.

 

[Sihouette]

Free speech protections don't apply only to polite speech.~Revere

Yes but they do stop at inciting civil unrest in a time of war. Check your Constitution for details..

treason n the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war

Here's what the Constitution says:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Using free speech to incite civil unrest during wartime where a sworn enemy has vowed to "use any means necessary to bring down the United States", is aiding the enemy.

National security trumps free speech in this instance. You cannot speak freely in a nation that doesn't exist. Do the math. Foreign-owned Fox Noise inaccurately portraying that one set of citizens intends to "slaughter" another [quoting the Saudi/Australian employee Glenn Beck here] is inciteful of civil unrest and ergo treasonous speech.

 

[Revere]

What free speech specifically is treasonous?

Does an Australian (Rupert Murdoch) want to do harm to the US?

 

[Sihouette]

Read the post above of mine to answer your question. I have no idea about what Murdoch is up to. We can only judge that clan by what they allow to be aired on their "News" program..

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Yes but they do stop at inciting civil unrest in a time of war. Check your Constitution for details..

Here's what the Constitution says:

Using free speech to incite civil unrest during wartime where a sworn enemy has vowed to "use any means necessary to bring down the United States", is aiding the enemy.

National security trumps free speech in this instance. You cannot speak freely in a nation that doesn't exist. Do the math. Foreign-owned Fox Noise inaccurately portraying that one set of citizens intends to "slaughter" another [quoting the Saudi/Australian employee Glenn Beck here] is inciteful of civil unrest and ergo treasonous speech.

Great...does that mean we can 'tar & feather him', hang him in the town square...run him out of the country on a rail/ship/plane...LOL

 

[Revere]

Read the post above of mine to answer your question. I have no idea about what Murdoch is up to. We can only judge that clan by what they allow to be aired on their "News" program..

You haven't cited any case for Foxnews threatening the government.

Civil unrest is not treasonous. Civil unrest ended the US involvement in Viet Nam.

Remember?

 

[Sihouette]

We'll see.

 

[Sihouette]

Looking deeper into Fox News, the mouthpiece for the GOP..

Well, I'll just let the text do the talking..

RIYADH (Reuters) – Muslim tycoons should buy stakes in global media outlets to help change anti-Muslim attitudes around the world, ministers from Islamic countries heard at aconference in Saudi Arabia on Wednesday.

Information ministers and officials meeting under the auspices of the 57-nation Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the world’s largest Islamic body, said Islam faced vilification after the September 11 attacks, when 19 Arabs killed nearly 3,000 people in U.S. cities in 2001.

“Muslim investors must invest in the large media institutions of the world, which generally make considerable profits, so that they have the ability to affect their policies via their administrative boards,” OIC chief Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu told the gathering in the Saudi city of Jeddah.

“This would benefit in terms of correcting the image of Islam worldwide,” he said, calling on Muslim countries to set up more channels in widely-spoken foreign languages. …

“The fierce attack on Islam in the five years since the September 11 attacks has forced us into a defensive position on our faith and understanding of our tolerant religion,” Egyptian Information Minister Anas el-Feki said in a speech.

“Now more than ever we need a new Islamic media message that reaches all parts of the world,” Feki said, citing Israel’s recent 34-day war in Lebanon as one issue where Muslims needed to make their views and influence felt http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2010/01/16/mustread-society-of-professional-journalists-promoting-islamic-propaganda-in-media/

On September 20th 2007 the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU) and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) gathered leading scholars and researchers, heads of national and international organizations, newspaper editors, and government officials to discuss the content, causes and consequences of Islamophobia. Dr. John L. Esposito (Professor and Director of the ACMCU) and Secretary General of the OIC Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu underscored that this meeting was a starting point for a long-term project of understanding and developing practical strategies to challenge Islamophobia. As such, the discussion, produced at its conclusion, a set of pragmatic suggestions on what directions and actions could be taken. http://cmcu.georgetown.edu/events/lectures/islamophobia/39333.html

CAIRO — The Saudi billionaire whose investment firm is one of the biggest stakeholders in Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. said he is looking to expand his alliances with the media giant, in the latest indication that his appetite for growth remains robust even as his company retrenches.



Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a nephew of the Saudi king and who was listed last year by Forbes as the world's 22nd richest person, met with News Corp.'s chief executive Rupert Murdoch on Jan. 14 in a meeting that "touched upon future potential alliances with News Corp.," according to a statement released by his Kingdom Holding Co. late Saturday.

Media reports have indicated that News Corp, parent to Fox News and Dow Jones & Co., among others, may be thinking of buying a stake in Alwaleed's Rotana Media Group, which includes a number of satellite channels that air in the Middle East.
Neither company has commented publicly on the possible deal, but the talks offer an indication yet that such an agreement may yet be in the offing.

Kingdom Holding's statement said Alwaleed is already the second largest stakeholder in News Corp., with 5.7 percent of the shares of the media company. The stake is held through Kingdom Holding, in which Alwaleed holds a 95 percent stake.

The investment company has a diverse portfolio, ranging from hotels to shares in Apple, eBay and Citigroup.

Alwaleed, and the investment firm, were hit hard by the global meltdown.

He has since focused on shoring up borrowing power, in part through a recent decision to transfer 180 million of his shares in Citigroup to Kingdom Holding. In a statement last week, he described the move — valued at about $600 million — as key to facilitating future borrowing and growth...

..Alwaleed raised his stake in Citigroup to 5 percent in late 2008 from less than 4 percent in a move that came as the company was facing a possible collapse. Kingdom Holding says Alwaleed is the single largest shareholder in Citigroup. http://www.gatorsports.com/article/20100117/NEWS/100119526?p=2&tc=pg

I'm seeing the OIC as good cop that pats us on the back and buys up our media influences and Bin Laden [naturally formally denounced by the OIC] as bad cop who harasses us and bleeds our military and Treasury. Now it may be that the GOP is too dumb to connect the dots. Or it may be they've been paid well to look dumb. Interesting to note that O' Reilly has recently not only defended his buddy Beck for taunting neighbor against neighbor that one might "slaughter" the other, but that O' Reilly has started to pit the tea party people against each other insinuating that 10% of them are "nuts" and "crazy". So now they must turn on each other to see which is which.

The mind control and pitting of civil unrest, coupled with islamic influence in our media is unsettling. Anyone who pits citizen on citizen in time of war for profit is in deep doo doo. We'll be watching Fox with a very close eye in the coming months for any and all leanings towards incitement.

 

[GenSeneca]

Looking deeper into Fox News, the mouthpiece for the GOP..

Well, I'll just let the text do the talking..

More like letting "TommyT" do the talking, he originally posted this at Conservative's Forum:

http://www.conservativesforum.com/cgi-bin/conservatives-forum/YaBB.pl?action=print;num=1265896852

Competing theories here:

Foreign-owned Fox Noise..

and:

The CIA controls the media.

You Leftists should get together and decide once and for all who is controlling Fox News, the CIA or the Arabs.

 

[Sihouette]

I'm thinking there are gray areas that need looking into. What do you think about the information Genseneca? Have any comments about the OIC meeting in Riyahd? Any thoughts on how that might affect the dialogue at Fox News pitting americans against each other or are you on the side of those who think it's OK to profit by dissolving the US from within? How left is it to want to keep the solvency of the US away from islamic influence?

And I have no comment on your internet stalking activities, but the mods may.

 

[GenSeneca]

Any thoughts on how that might affect the dialogue at Fox News pitting americans against each other

I think Hillary Clinton said it best, "We have a right to debate and disagree with this or any administration!"

Why aren't you up in arms over MSNBC pitting Americans against each other? Why haven't you looked into who owns and controls them?

And I have no comment on your internet stalking activities, but the mods may.

Please, feel free to report me. I would be interested to see how the Mods would react in such a situation.