Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => World War III - Chapter 2 => Topic started by: Matthew on March 27, 2007, 05:14:32 PM
-
-
About half of those 15 captured by Iran, had been captured by Iran previously for the same offence. Trillion to one coincidence!
Remarkable statement since to my knowledge the identity of those sailors is not public yet. Reference ?
-
I can't find any articles to support this claim:
Just two weeks ago Israel ordered all of their citizens to quickly depart from a long list of about 30 mid east countries. No explanation was given. This is strong evidence, and a very rare event.
-
I don't think it matters if the hostages have been hostages before...it is not essential to the point.
As for the Israeli warning, we know that no Jєωs perished in the 9/11 Twin Towers explosions and controlled demolition, even though everyone knows how many Jєωs live in New York City.
And a financial building? Come on! That would be like a bomb going off at an Oktoberfest without a person of German heritage getting harmed! Or a basketball stadium collapsing without... oh well, you get the idea.
So if there was a warning before 9/11, there is probably going to be a warning before any other event. Of course they're not going to put it in THEIR OWN MEDIA -- in fact, it's probably going to be very hard for it to leak out.
But the Israeli warning is only ONE SMALL CLUE in the massive list of clues that an Iran attack is imminent.
Matthew
-
I don't think it matters if the hostages have been hostages before...it is not essential to the point.
The essential point is credibility. When you stray out of the mainstream sources, credibility is everything.
As for the Israeli warning, we know that no Jєωs perished in the 9/11 Twin Towers explosions and controlled demolition, even though everyone knows how many Jєωs live in New York City.
And a financial building? Come on! That would be like a bomb going off at an Oktoberfest without a person of German heritage getting harmed! Or a basketball stadium collapsing without... oh well, you get the idea.
The list of victims is readily available. There is enough hate going around to motivate one going through that list and demonstrate that none where Jєωs.
Of course, the exercise has been done, the best estimates are of 400 Jєωs (in-line with New York's demographics) In addition, depending on how you define citizenship, 1 to 5 where Israelie proper.
Unless you can demonstrate that none on the list of confirmed victims (http://september11victims.com/september11victims/) are Jєωιѕн your statement is calomnious and dangerously haineous.
But the Israeli warning is only ONE SMALL CLUE in the massive list of clues that an Iran attack is imminent.
Maybe, maybe not,
It is true, Israel has issued warnings of possible attack against it's interest. This does not mean that it's in relation to an upcoming attack.
This winter, Mossad may have assasinated a prominant Iranian nuclear scientist, allthough this was publicly deamed radiation poisoning. It was most likely the expected retaliation from MOIS (Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security) that prompted the warning.
That retaliation may have occured allready, in what is treated as a ѕυιcιdє, the death of David Dahan, head of the Israeli Defense Ministry Mission to Europe was an assasination according to some Intelligence.
Slight edits.
-
The essential point is credibility. When you stray out of the mainstream sources, credibility is everything.
As if mainstream sources are credible nowadays!! True, some of the news reports may be true, but more often than not, they're spun.
-
As if mainstream sources are credible nowadays!!
I am rewriting this post since I inadvertently destroyed it. and will contact Quo Vadis and make sure he stills agrees since of course, it's not identical to what I wrote 4 hours ago
I admit, the MSM has had some bad moments. Difference is, generally, these mistakes have been harshely sanctionned by the public.
Per example, the NYT still suffers from it's bad reporting from Judith Miller on Weapons of Mass Destructions, Fox News cannot shake off the well deserved label of being an extension of the Republican Party and CBS is still lost since Dan Rathers blunder on the Bush's record in the National Guard.
All these have been hardly judged and incur financial penalties from the lost of credibility. I suppose they will need to re-earn their trust and that takes time.
That being said, all is not the same for alternative media, and this gets under my skin.
Alternative media usually caters to specific like minded niche of individuals who recognize themselves in the tone and content of those news. In as such, they don't mind innacuracies, unsourced information or even bold face fabrications and lies. To the contrary, they find solace in them and are willing to look the other way when an item turns out wrong.
This kind of looking glass, when it's your only window on the world is very close to outright endoctrination.
-
Well, you're quite right about that. Every source has to be tested.
-
True, some of the news reports may be true, but more often than not, they're spun.
I can actually live with a little bit of spinning as long I am familiar with the outlet.
There are rules to this.
- A clear line between what is editorial opinion and what is raw news.
- That even if facts are spun, they are still laying on truth that can be verified independantly.
- That sources are allways indentified, even if it's just to say they are anonynous...
A familiarity with the outlet also allow to unspin the content to a fair extent and reading from a variaty of mainstream sources from all sides of the political spectrum provides a pretty good picture.
-
True, some of the news reports may be true, but more often than not, they're spun.
I can actually live with a little bit of spinning as long I am familiar with the outlet.
There are rules to this.
- A clear line between what is editorial opinion and what is raw news.
- That even if facts are spun, they are still laying on truth that can be verified independantly.
- That sources are allways indentified, even if it's just to say they are anonynous...
A familiarity with the outlet also allow to unspin the content to a fair extent and reading from a variaty of mainstream sources from all sides of the political spectrum provides a pretty good picture.
Well, I am still quite wary about news in mainstream sources, like ABC, CBS, Fox, and some others. Many times, they don't tell the whole story.