Fox News stirs up the anger of Canadians (Who knew we had that emotion?)

[Oniya]

*invokes Google-fu*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_miners%27_strike_(1984-1985)

This one?

[HairyHeretic]

I would presume so. It's the only one I can think of at least.

[consortium11]

Well, I can only go on my own interpretation of how I read the stories they present on the website.

A quick google search on "BBC bias" will throw up a host of websites chronicalling the BBC's "varied" level of coverage, although to be fair the criticisms are generally of the BBC as a whole as opposed to just their news reports, although their coverage of the middle East and notably Israel has repeatedly been heavily biased (as one of the BBC's own reports on the issue of bias states). Perhaps most telling the BBC refuses to release the findings of the most comprehensive report on the issue... which would suggest it's pretty heavily critical.

We talking Thatcher era here? If so, your memory is a hell of a lot better than mine.

The miners was in the Thatcher era, although the BBC has edited clips before and since (including in recent years). It's mainly that doing that is about as serious a failure of journalistic integrity as can be imagined, but the BBC seems to get a free pass. Imagine if Fox News admitted to reversing footage to, for example, make it appear a group of black men attacked police... only for it to turn out the police attacked. Would they ever live it down?

It's before my time, but media bias is a personal favourite topic of mine, so I generally look into it. It's just as interesting how Fox News or on the other side msnbc are considered very biased (although generally that's their comentators as opposed to their actual news), while the BBC gets glowing recomendations despite repeatedly faking news footage.

And this is from someone who checks the BBC about 4 times a day.

[Sel Nar]

I showed that 'Entertainment' Clip to my younger brother, who is, currently, in basic training in the CDN. Army.

I'm currently a 4-hour drive from where he's training, and I swear, I could ~hear~ the entire base's Collective Head Explode.

So... Yeah; Lots of pride here regarding our personal and military histories. I think, what really got Canada, as a whole, Riled up was that this 'Entertainment' *Cough*Complete Dreck*Cough* Was aired on the same day we recovered Four Soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan. So, if 116 dead out of 8 years of active combat duty for 2000 men and women, who will not even Consider pulling out of Afghanistan until at least 2011 is 'a pansy' army, then I am PROUD to be a member of a nation with such an armed force.

Interestingly, the show's host sent a written apology, but the Royal Canadian Legion (the war Veteran's association, essentially) rejected it out of hand, citing that the comments and language used in that show showed blatant disrespect for the living, the dead, and the families of those who have been lost in conflicts worldwide. I honestly can't blame them. Anyhow, that's my 2 cents.

[Chris Brady]

I sort of resent that. While I respect those that go and sacrifice themselves for what they believe in (because I just wouldn't be brave enough), I disgree with the concept of war, I really do. You shouldn't have to die or kill to fight your corner.

The problem, Catty, is that at some point, you may have to fight.  In this case, the Terrorists believe that they are right, we are wrong and because of that, we have to die.  End of line.

And letting them kill us because it'll show them we're 'better' doesn't work, because they HAVE ALREADY rationalized that anything we do will PROVE THEM MORE RIGHT, and that their cause is 'just'.

The only thing that can and will change, is that someone from their side will have to look at what they have and see that change is necessary.  And that someone will have to survive the others wanting to kill him for wanting something different.  I'm sure there are/were a lot of Middle Easterners who decided to change for the better, to stop the killing.  But sadly, I'm also sure that they got killed before being able to do anything about it.

This really isn't about 'good' or 'bad', but about survival against a bunch of armed, dangerously pigheaded people that WILL go through with any act, because they simply believe that they are in the right.

It really is that simple.

[Will]

Um, on the subject of "Red Eye" not being considered news... Maybe they shouldn't be on a news channel.  Comparing it to the Daily Show is a little unfair, I think, considering the Daily Show is on Comedy Central.

And as news bias, sure, I would agree that every news outlet is biased.  The important thing is, how much?  As was said, Fox News doesn't even attempt to be neutral, in an effort to appeal to the lowest common denominator and get ratings.  Seriously, it is Fox News, after all.

[Oniya]

Yeah, news channels should be all news - just like Cartoon Network should be all cartoons, MTV should have actual music (I don't care what genre), and Sci Fi Network (I will never use the new name!) should show science fiction.

[Inkidu]

Angry Canadians? Write this down certainly it's never happened on such a scale. Naw, I like Canada. :)

[HairyHeretic]

The problem, Catty, is that at some point, you may have to fight. 

Perhaps, but I would be inclined to call fighting the least good option. It may sometimes be necessary, but that doesn't make it good.

In this case, the Terrorists believe that they are right, we are wrong and because of that, we have to die.  End of line.

I doubt it is quite that simple.

And letting them kill us because it'll show them we're 'better' doesn't work, because they HAVE ALREADY rationalized that anything we do will PROVE THEM MORE RIGHT, and that their cause is 'just'.

Everyone believes their cause is just. If they didn't, why would they persue it?

The only thing that can and will change, is that someone from their side will have to look at what they have and see that change is necessary.  And that someone will have to survive the others wanting to kill him for wanting something different.  I'm sure there are/were a lot of Middle Easterners who decided to change for the better, to stop the killing.  But sadly, I'm also sure that they got killed before being able to do anything about it.

Chris, you might want to do a bit of reading about the Middle East before coming out with statements like that. Terrorism is not that simple. There are plenty of underlying causes that will contribute to it. While I may not be familiar with the Middle East, I did spend 20+ years growing up in Northern Ireland, so believe me, I've seen terrorism on a daily basis.

It is not black and white.

This really isn't about 'good' or 'bad', but about survival against a bunch of armed, dangerously pigheaded people that WILL go through with any act, because they simply believe that they are in the right.

No, it isn't.

ter·ror·ism      (těr'ə-rĭz'əm)  Pronunciation Key
n.   The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

And I could add religious into that definition.

It really is that simple.

Again, no, it isn't. It is nowhere near that simple.

Any terrorist cause has dozens of root causes and possibly hundreds of years of greivances to call upon. Until you can understand why it is happening, you can't change things to stop it happening again.

Because it can change. Look at Northern Ireland during the late 70s and early 80s, and compare it to today.

I now return you to your regularly schedule disgust with Fox Propaganda.

Though if anyone does want to discuss terrorism I'll spin this off as the start of a new thread and we can go from there.

[Zero]

Most state troopers and national guard of the United States are mounted... It's not very ridiculous at all.

[crystaltears]

So, I highly doubt any of the yanks have heard about this, but a certain fox news program named the "Red Eye" has caused quite the outrage across my country (Canada), especially in Southern Ontario.

The news program made such slanderous and insulting remarks in reference to Canada's wish to 'take a break' from Afghanistan and get out of their as soon as possible.

Some of the things said were, "I didn't even know they were in the war", "I thought that's where you go if you don't want to fight", and the host suggested Canada would use the time out to "do some yoga, paint some landscapes and run on the beach."

"Isn't this the perfect time to invade this ridiculous country," Gutfeld continued. "They have no army."

They also suggested that Canada was taking advantage of the power of the neighbor to the south, being, of course, the United States.

In addition they also made fun of the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police), making fun of their dress uniform and horses. 

Now I don't know about you. But I don't appreciate this at all. Make fun of our maple syrup, igloos, and crazy canucker accents all you want, but do not make light our sacrifices we made for your war on terror.

So... thoughts on the matter? Has anyone south of the Great White Expanse heard anything about this?

I hadn't heard a thing about it. Personally I don't hold those views, and I'm certain most Americans I know in real life (granted that's maybe a network of 50 people) probably don't either. Several of them have had the opinion that this war is a bit too costly, none of them have ever spoken against anyone who's put their life on the line for us in war, or service (such as RCMP or our own Police, etc.) in front of me.

Personally, I have a few friends up there in Canada-land. And I'm very happy to count them as friends. Further, I happen to love the RCMP, who actually road in one of the Texas State Fairs or something one year and had an avid little Texan cowgirl fan for many years to follow (got to love their horses too, such beautiful creatures).

So, no, I hadn't heard about it. I'm sad it happened, but media is media. *Frowns* There is a reason I rarely watch news channels.

Just my 2 cents.

[Oniya]

Most state troopers and national guard of the United States are mounted... It's not very ridiculous at all.

A horse is more maneuverable than a car, faster than an officer on foot, and won't fall over like a bike or motorcycle when you dismount and do a take-down.

[consortium11]

A horse is more maneuverable than a car, faster than an officer on foot, and won't fall over like a bike or motorcycle when you dismount and do a take-down.

But they have real issues if you question their sexuality...

http://www.oxfordstudent.com/tt2005wk6/News/finalist_arrested_for_calling_police_horse_'gay'

;)

[Sabby]

Wow. Free Speech doesn't exist anymore.

[Rhapsody]

Yeah, frankly, holding the line at Dunkirk with the German war machine down on you... that took cajones the size of Texas to do that.  Kudoes to the Maple Leafs for helping to hold 'em off.  On another note, a Canadian detachment took one of the beaches on D-Day.  I can't remember which one it was... Juno, I think.  Anyway, I'll be the first to come to the defense of Canadians when people suggest that they can't fight like wolverines. O_O

If we're talking about WW Canadian heroes, I'd like to nominate the Royal Newfoundland Regiment though, technically, we were still Dominion ruled by the UK until 49.  Nearly 600 Newfies bled and died at Beaumont Hamel, and nearly a century later, some of us still consider our Memorial Day more important than Canada Day, even though they're both celebrated on July 1st.  Hell, we even named our university Memorial in their and other soldiers' honor.

The Regiment recovered from its near-extinction the first day of the Battle of the Somme, and is still active today. 

Since 1992, soldiers and sub-units of the regiment have served to augment Regular Force units in Cyprus, Bosnia, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan on peacekeeping and combat missions.

500,000 people all told in my province, and these are the heroes many of us are descended from and related to.  I know each and every single other province has similar legends and heritages.

So Fox News can kiss my Canadian ass.  We're proud of our soldiers, past present and future, even if you're not.

[Zakharra]

 Talk to the current head of Homeland Security. She insinuated that the 9-11 terrorists came into the US through the Canadian border.

[Silk]

Talk to the current head of Homeland Security. She insinuated that the 9-11 terrorists came into the US through the Canadian border.

Even though the general consesus is that they came from the east? Espeically since a whole lot of warnings apparently went off in europe about those planes that were failing to respond in our airspace.

[Nessy]

Even though the general consensus is that they came from the east? Especially since a whole lot of warnings apparently went off in Europe about those planes that were failing to respond in our airspace.

They're politicians. They are going to misstate facts and going to say things that excites their base. I think John McCain mentioned the border thing with Canada and another rep whose name I cannot remember. I believe point of the discussion at the time had to do with whether or not it makes sense to practically strip search people coming into the USA by plane when they can hop a fence at the Mexico border and drive by some barely working camera or use a boat to cross at the Canadian border. There is, of course, an assumption being made by either statement that for some reason Canada and Mexico didn't stop them from entering their borders and that probably has to do with the fact that none of the countries are working with the same list.

It's a valid concern, whether or not it already happened. The point is and was, it could.

[Zakharra]

 She, at the least, should have known where those terrorists came into the US, and it was not through the US/Canadian border. It was well documented how they got into the US. So her accusation uneccessarily pissed off a friendly neighhbor.

[Nessy]

She, at the least, should have known where those terrorists came into the US, and it was not through the US/Canadian border. It was well documented how they got into the US. So her accusation uneccessarily pissed off a friendly neighhbor.

Yeah, it would be useful if politicians checked their facts before opening their mouths and make accussations, but I don't see why that should piss off any nation. It would be just as much the USA's responsibility to protect its border, if not more so, than Canada's. I just think some people want to be pissed off. If I got angry at every ignorant, clueless statement that was uttered by politicians or people who think they just know everything while I was traveling abroad I would have spent a lot more time being angry and a lot less time enjoying myself and understanding other cultures. Stupid statements from politicians is not unique to the USA.

[Zakharra]

 Yeah, but the head of Homeland Security? I'm a common person in the US and I knew the terrorists hadn't come in through Canada. If she blew it on something as easy as that, it makes me question how effective she will be.

[Nessy]

Yeah, but the head of Homeland Security? I'm a common person in the US and I knew the terrorists hadn't come in through Canada. If she blew it on something as easy as that, it makes me question how effective she will be.

Well I am not a huge fan of politicians by any means. I really am not, but they are common people too. They make mistakes. I mean how many wars and battles have we (insert any nation here) entered with misinformation. I am pretty sure at some point, there was a discussion on whether the terrorists entered through borders Canada or Mexico. I am going to forgive someone for making a mistake that, on paper, isn't that unreasonable at all. We all make them and most of us don't have the media shoving cameras in our face when we do. A mistake is not a reflection of a lack of intelligence or necessarily an indication that someone is not qualified for their position. It is just an indication that they were wrong at a given point in time. The head of Homeland Security is under a lot of pressure, has a lot of responsibility and deals with more information than most of us could even imagine. You are, of course, free to judge her as you will. I am going to give her the benefit of the doubt.

[Silk]

Well I am not a huge fan of politicians by any means. I really am not, but they are common people too. They make mistakes. I mean how many wars and battles have we (insert any nation here) entered with misinformation. I am pretty sure at some point, there was a discussion on whether the terrorists entered through borders Canada or Mexico. I am going to forgive someone for making a mistake that, on paper, isn't that unreasonable at all. We all make them and most of us don't have the media shoving cameras in our face when we do. A mistake is not a reflection of a lack of intelligence or necessarily an indication that someone is not qualified for their position. It is just an indication that they were wrong at a given point in time. The head of Homeland Security is under a lot of pressure, has a lot of responsibility and deals with more information than most of us could even imagine. You are, of course, free to judge her as you will. I am going to give her the benefit of the doubt.

If she cannot handle the workload she should not have taken the job.

[Nessy]

If she cannot handle the workload she should not have taken the job.

She's not Rush Limbaugh here. There isn't' a pattern of years of just wanting to insight and misrepresent information. There isn't anyone out there that doesn't have a misstep on the job once in awhile, not even the leaders of our countries.

[Silk]

Except the world leaders are meant to be the ones "In the know" If they got a desk full of reoprts saying that it was sighted coming over europe, you dont ask if it came from bloody canada.