Search results

basically your accusing me of trolling, which is not the case. actually my motivation was for debate and to keep the other thread from being hijacked OT. that is why in the OP you will notice i ask for links to back up any assertions made, your assumption is way off base. if you look at the tone...

actually i did not say "AHAHHAHAHAH OMFG AL JAZEERA LIBERAL PINK COMMIE SO BIASED OMFGOMFGOMFOMG" i said "the al jazeera article was BS" and demonstrated how...but since facts do not concern al jazeera...and apparantly some posters on this board either i am sure you share the same attitude...

Thanx, i will have to take a look at it after work or during lunch. :)

your doing some serious stretching there.

i agree with you(or as i mentioned in another thread, all opinions are "biased" otherwise they would not be opinions), but some are worse than others though.

well, since that anchoerman IS a news source for many people, what distinction is there?

it uses false information to make it appear that the US is using "poison gas" that "melts the bodies" of people

could you fix the link? how about CBS? yeah dan rather! http://www.showmenews.com/2004/Sep/20040927Comm002.asp

cite with example splease. my opinion is al jazeera is the most "biased" media outlet. the most recent example in sensaltionalist journalism would be this article. http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=5875 since i have work to do it...

all i ever seem to do? this is the first thread where i even talked about al jazeera...ROFL!!! let me guess...another witch hunt is about to start....

why dont we start a thread to keep from hijacking this one? :) regarding al jazeera's reporting we can cite the article in the OP as obviously sensationalist, even reporting information that is un true, it took about 3 minutes to debunk. in the new thread you can answer the question i...

really? can you show me some articles on foxnews.com that are blatently false like this one? i would dearly love to see them. links please, back yourself up.

america can do plenty wrong(just like france), but to accept what al jazeera says in a obvously sensationalist article is well...stupid.

you would think al jazeera could use google. but i am surethey know what it is. i am not achemist but i know what napalm is. they are just feeding the idiots who beleive whatever they say. you have to remember, this is al jazeera we are talking about here...

and you know this because al jazaeera says so? riggghhhhttt. this just proves my ealrier assertion about the "BLAME AMERICA™" crowd, they will latch on to ANYTHING.... no matter how ridiculous...as long as it critical of america.

i did read the article. that is how i know it is BS. it is saying napalm is a "poisonous gas" quote from article. "Residents in Fallujah reported that innocent civilians have been killed by napalm attacks, a poisonous cocktail of polystyrene and jet fuel which makes the human body melt."...

pre emptive? what is pre-emptive about debunking an article that is obvious BS(from al jazeera no less ROFL!!) my post was a direct reaction to the OP ,nothing pre-emtpive about that. do you really think an article that claims napalm is a gas that melts humna bodies, then claims "witnesses"...

and we know this is going on becuase al jazeera says so? ROFL!!

napalm is not a "banned" weapon. it is not a "gas" it is petrol in jellied form. it does not "melt" human bodies as the article claims, it simply burns them i bet your one of those people who say fox news is "propaganda" but believe everything aljazeera says ROFL!!

any opinion is "biased". otherwise it would not be an opinion...