Text 48150, 79 rader
Skriven 2007-02-10 03:02:16 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 48130 av Joe Schweier (1:275/412)
Ärende: Bj"rn is a fool, was: Four fools?
=========================================
 BF>> Still, why haven't they said anything about the killing of an Englishman
 BF>> in Iraq?
 BF>> When they showed that on BBC they said that it wasn't going to be shown
 BF>> in
 BF>> North America. Why is that censored in USA?

 JS> No.... Simple... I lived in the US for past 6 years... I moved back to
 JS> Canada in the past few months, I am a citizen of both countries.  Anyway,
 JS> news is local.  The US reports, mAinly, US news and Canada does the
 JS> same.... it reports "MAINLY" Canadian news.  This is the first time I have
 JS> heard of the Englishman getting killed and I watch both US and CDN news.

It happend three years ago and wasn't revealed until now. An A 10 shooting on
an English military vehicle and of course you haven't heard about it sincce it
was
censored in North America.

 JS> There has been little to no news coverage of said person being covered on
 JS> any of the news outlets here in North America...

I know, see above. They only want you to know what they think is best for you.

 JS> It has nothing to do with
 JS> Fox news and everything to do with what pays the news companies bills...

Just another way of cencor-ship.

 JS> I'm also sure the US news companies are busy with their Bush bashing and
 JS> also talking about the thousands of US service people who have given their
 JS> lives, or limbs, for people who don't desire freedom as much as we do,
 JS> here in North America anyway.

Nothing about that on Fox so we must have different channels.

 JS> No censorship here in Canada or the US... just local news.

So what's going on in the world is none of your intrests, intresting. That
explains
why you're so narrow minded.

 BF>> Another thing that shows how double standard works with some in USA is
 BF>> the
 BF>> thing with cell phones in schools.
 BF>> They are not allowed but a teacher says that they are good to have to
 BF>> vidoetape the teachers when they are out of order. Have can't have heard
 BF>> of Catch 22.

 JS> Are you on crack...

Can we leave the insults?

 JS> The kids are cheating with their cell phones... They
 JS> are text-messaging each other with test results and what not.  Kids need
 JS> to focus on their studies in schools not what their buddies are doing in
 JS> the bathroom...  Most teachers don't get out of hand... and if parents
 JS> really want to know what is going on in the classroom  they can have the
 JS> school board setup something to tape the class.  This was the teacher can
 JS> protect themselves against some of the kids now a days.  There is no catch
 JS> 22... there are about a million ways to get to the truth. Letting kids run
 JS> wild with cell phone disrupting class and cheating with them is not a good
 JS> idea.

Then, why does a teacher say they are good to have them so the kids can video-
tape their teachers? They are good to have but they are not allowed. Don't you
find that a bit strange?
Those videos are available on youtube somwhere because that's where Fox got
them.

 JS>>> About the austronaut.... Y can't pass that one up... God Bless
 JS>>> America!!!!

 BF>> For what?

 JS> Y not...

For having double standards?

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)