Canada Kicks Ass
CBC = Forked Tongue

REPLY

1  2  3  4  5  6  Next



karra @ Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:40 pm

The mothercorp, propaganda machine of those who lean left - waaaaaay left - provided another example of UNBIASED journalism last night on the show Disclosure.

An 18 year old volunteer US soldier informed his unit was heading to Iraq, contacted people in his US home town who put him in touch with a Quaker couple in s/w Ontario. Over a period of weeks the soldier was couched re a suitable cover story in the event they were questioned at Canadian Customs.

They weren't stopped.

The soldier arrived at the Quaker's residence - they welcomed him with open arms. The soldier missed his family of course and realises he may never be permitted to set foot in the United States again, but thinks that's an ok price to pay for not going to Iraq.

What's unique about this story is that the soldier is requesting refugee status.

What's not unique about this story is the CBC's coverage. They, on at least three occasions stated the 'soldier escaped the United States.'

Now how sick is that? A journalist states that and the mothercorp doesn't edit it out, in what for them would be a unique display of unbiased journalism. No mention that the soldier is now a deserter, and that there are laws in most countries for exactly that. No mention that this soldier will likely be extradited back to from whence he came, to face charges. As should those who aided and abetted him on both sides of the border face charges.

As if the lefties both soft and hard that populate the halls of all the CBC monoliths across this country could define the word 'unbiased.'

Yes folks, the CBC that originally, when there was no competition, provided shows such as 'Hockey Night in Canada', 'Don Messer', 'Tommy Hunter' and so on; a short list but that was all there was then. Today however it's a different story - this left-biased behemoth requires one billion - yes, $1,000,000,000.00+ of your money each and every year. Heaven forbid this breeding petri dish for all things left should have to compete in an open market.

Most of you are likely aware that while the rest of the world was watching the tragedy of 9/11 unfold, led by CNN. The CBC took more than two hours after CNN began broadcasting this terrorist attack to discover there was something going on that might be interest to viewers in Canada. Meanwhile CTV and the graspers Global Network had clued in shortly after the first tower.

[align=center]WATCH YOUR WALLET[/align]

   



Rev_Blair @ Wed Mar 10, 2004 8:48 pm

Funny...I watched the whole 9-11 debacle live on CBC NewsWorld. The coverage began shortly after the first plane hit the first tower. The same time everybody else's coverage began. Yes, at first it was live feeds from other networks, then stringers began filling in, then regular reporters were on the scene. Since the border was closed and communications were a mess, that's to be expected. The coverage began immediately though.

Shelagh Rogers anchored it live on CBC Radio 1 too. Same kind of situation. Same kind of coverage. Mostly call-ins from reporters who in the US for other reasons. Sometimes the connections were lost, sometimes there was confusion. The coverage was there though, from start to finish.

CBC did break away from the 9-11 attacks to report on other news...the entire world did not come to a standstill that day...but they did cover the story from start to finish. They did it professionally and they did it well.

That US military guy? Are you saying he didn't escape, Karra? I never watched Disclosure, so I won't comment on your judgement of the show, but when somebody runs from a place or situation they don't want to be in, it is generally described as escaping.

   



karra @ Wed Mar 10, 2004 9:33 pm

Axslly you're wrong - it's as I stated.

$1:
Yes, at first it was live feeds from other networks, then stringers began filling in, then regular reporters were on the scene. Since the border was closed and communications were a mess, that's to be expected. The coverage began immediately though.

Do you ever know what you're talking about?

'Yes at first. . . .'
'Then stringers. . . '
'then regular reporters. . . '
'since the border was closed. . . "
'and communications were a mess. . . '
'the coverage began immediately though'

Holy cow. Read that again and think about what you wrote - do you really believe it or are you just spouting the party line?

$1:
Are you saying he didn't escape, Karra? I never watched Disclosure, so I won't comment on your judgement of the show, but when somebody runs from a place or situation they don't want to be in, it is generally described as escaping.


Ahh, the mangle as expected. You run true to form - mangle, twist and turn anything that doesn't support your left wing view of whatever.

What don't you understand about 'law'?

For instance - deserter - accomplice during - accomplice before - accomplice after. These words (accountability) would be anathema to a extreme-left leaning leftie. Think there's any here?

You continue to shock and awe me as you continue your drivel of hate towards George Bush and all things American, when we have a basket-full of problems right here in river city that should concern you. Yet don't.

Anyway thanks for the reply.

Carry on.

   



Rev_Blair @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 6:01 am

$1:
Do you ever know what you're talking about?


Yes, actually I know exactly what I'm talking about. I even gave you a chronology of how they provided that coverage, a chronology not too different from what every other foreign news agancy did, BTW. I'll say it againThe CBC covered the events of September 11 from start to finish. They did it well in spite of adverse circumstances

That's far different than your assertion that coverage did not begin until two hours after the attack started. Perhaps you could try to provide some proof for your erroneous assertion.

$1:
Ahh, the mangle as expected. You run true to form - mangle, twist and turn anything that doesn't support your left wing view of whatever.


There was no mangle there at all. You took issue with the usage of a word because you didn't understand that usage. I attempted to educate you....A community service if you will.

$1:
What don't you understand about 'law'?

For instance - deserter - accomplice during - accomplice before - accomplice after. These words (accountability) would be anathema to a extreme-left leaning leftie. Think there's any here?


Where did I say anything about the law or the deserter or any of the other things you accuse me of. What don't you understand about the English language?

   



Robair @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 6:36 am

karra karra:

What don't you understand about 'law'?


Well M'am, I know US law does not have any jurisdiction in Canada.

I work with a guy who escaped Romania under Ceausescu. He was serving in the army (the only job available) under a leader he disagreed with. Canada granted him refugee status.

This guy (from the States) was serving in an army under George Dubya, a leader he obviously disagrees with. What's the difference? Sounds like a refugee to me. Sounds like an escape.

You don't think American media is biased? I get the news from about three different sources and come up with my own conclusions. Anybody who doesn't, is just a sheep.

   



RoyalHighlander @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 6:40 am

There goes karra again getting uppity cause some one had the nerve to dis aggree with her... OH THE NERVE ! !

   



Rev_Blair @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:06 am

Here is a link to the Disclosure segment I think Karra is reffering too. AWOL in America Judge for yourselves.

   



AdamNF @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:44 am

I like the CBC. Left wing/Liberal bais is whatthis world needs. World full of liberals and it would acaully be a cnie place to live...

   



bobocop @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 9:51 am

AdamNF AdamNF:
I like the CBC. Left wing/Liberal bais is whatthis world needs. World full of liberals and it would acaully be a cnie place to live...


If the world was full of Liberals, would they funnel the money through advertising agencies in Paris or would they still use good old Montreal?

   



AdamNF @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 9:56 am

Well thats the Liberal party your talking about. Big diffrence between being Liberal and being a memeber of the liberal party.

   



othello @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:40 am

AdamNF AdamNF:
Well thats the Liberal party your talking about. Big diffrence between being Liberal and being a memeber of the liberal party.


Actually, I think you mean the difference between being a "small-l" liberal and being a member of the "big-L" Liberal Party. :)

I concur with Robair on the need for multiple news sources. We have CTV/Globe & Mail as one source, Global / National Post as a second and CBC as a third. That's not much diversity of news, but it's better than the alternative.

   



karra @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:05 pm

Calm down rev. No need to get hysterical.

Why your reaction is enough to lead a person of sanity to suspect you too have found room on the Mothercorp's teat.

$1:
That US military guy? Are you saying he didn't escape, Karra? I never watched Disclosure, so I won't comment on your judgement of the show, but when somebody runs from a place or situation they don't want to be in, it is generally described as escaping.


I am indeed saying he didn't escape. Just like I'm saying he wasn't drafted. Just like I'm also saying he wasn't press-ganged into service. I don't believe, but correct me if I'm wrong, anyone has been press-ganged into any military service for at least a century in this western hemisphere.

He's a deserter. Plain and simple. The US should request his extradition and deal with him as they do deserters. Canada should reject his request for refugee status as it's not a legitimate claim.

   



Robair @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:17 pm

karra karra:
I am indeed saying he didn't escape. Just like I'm saying he wasn't drafted. Just like I'm also saying he wasn't press-ganged into service. I don't believe, but correct me if I'm wrong, anyone has been press-ganged into any military service for at least a century in this western hemisphere.

He's a deserter. Plain and simple. The US should request his extradition and deal with him as they do deserters. Canada should reject his request for refugee status as it's not a legitimate claim.


One could argue that he signed up to protect his country not prices at the pump. Many people do not think this war is justified, this one just happens to wear a uniform. If he doesn't fight, he's punished. It is a legitimate claim.

   



nonrev @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:22 pm

karra karra:
I don't believe, but correct me if I'm wrong, anyone has been press-ganged into any military service for at least a century in this western hemisphere.


Yeah, okay, karra - I guess you've never heard of a little squabble called "Vietnam".

The Man gives you a choice:
- go into the military, or
- go to prison.

I dont think many people would have a problem characterizing that as "press-ganging". But of course that wouldnt fit into your narrow little world, would it?

What colour is the sky where you are, anyway? :roll: :roll: :roll:

   



karra @ Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:40 pm

Deciding whether I wanted to help you make of fool of yourself or not would be just too much on my plate ...thanks for coming here and making it easy for me.

Carry on my good man.

   



REPLY

1  2  3  4  5  6  Next