American dollars is plunging: NO MORE TRAVEL!

"Sjoerd" wrote in
:


"lh" schreef in bericht
...

Agreed that Fox News is biased to the point that it's not really a
news organization. It's more like a 24 hour editorial channel. But
at the
same
time I wonder why so few Europeans think that their media is biased.

Because we have a very diverse media landscape here, with very
conservative newspapers that for instance support the US occupation of
Iraq, and very liberal ones that oppose it. So by reading 2 or 3
newspapers you get both opinions and "supporting evidence".
The US media are almost all very conservative and right-wing. For
instance, I don't think there is a major network nor a major newspaper
in the USA that opposes the war in Iraq.

Sjoerd



Have you ever read the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times,
San Francisco Chronicle, or San Jose Mercury News? ALL have opposed the
war in Iraq.

The New York Times and Washington Post are very major newspapers and have
worldwide circulation. Most US news media has a left wing liberal bias,
FOX news being the main execption with a right wing conservative bias. The
conservative right wing dominates "talk" radio.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

lh wrote:
to whom you were not married. But without a doubt Holland is more liberal
than the US in terms of gay rights.

I think that Holland is a far more mature country in many areas, such as
environment, health care and human rights. I would surmise it is the result of
a good education system.

"Sjoerd" wrote in message
...

"lh" schreef in bericht
...

Agreed that Fox News is biased to the point that it's not really a news
organization. It's more like a 24 hour editorial channel. But at the
same
time I wonder why so few Europeans think that their media is biased.

Because we have a very diverse media landscape here, with very
conservative
newspapers that for instance support the US occupation of Iraq, and very
liberal ones that oppose it. So by reading 2 or 3 newspapers you get both
opinions and "supporting evidence".
The US media are almost all very conservative and right-wing. For
instance,
I don't think there is a major network nor a major newspaper in the USA
that
opposes the war in Iraq.


I think that you're overestimating the degree to which US media is
monolithic. I certainly heard anti-war arguments, whether or not the
newspaper or televison station airing the views came out and endorsed either
camp. Actually I thought that the anti-War voices were pretty loud, at
times even shrill. What did happen with Iraq though is that majorities from
both major political parties in the States supported they war, so the US
wound up with the unusual spectacle of both Democrat (liberal) leaning news
services and Republican (conservative) leaning news services agreeing more
than they disagreed. They disagreed more about which party was more to
blame for the current state of affairs than about anything of substance.
What was, and is, mostly missing from the mainstream Amecican media is those
who take the view that it is not Republicans or Democrats that are the root
of all the world's evil but that it is America that is the root of all evil.
There are a few notable exceptions though, such as Michael Moore,
presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, a few Hollywood actors, and
occionally we even get to read Robert Fisk's denounctations of the USA. But
it should be understanble why it is difficult to market anti-Americanism to
Americans. While liberal Eurpoeans seem to have taken 911 as evidence that
America is worst thing that has ever happened to thje world, to most
Americans the post-911 escalation of anti-Americanism among Eurpopeans
sounds a lot like the lawyer defending a rapist by trying to portray the
victim as a whore.

Marty Shapiro wrote:
The New York Times and Washington Post are very major newspapers and have
worldwide circulation. Most US news media has a left wing liberal bias

The Times and Post are to the left of Fox News, sure, but they are quite
centrist. It's just that the left is so poorly (and incompetently, by and
large) represented in US media that the apparent spectrum is biased
rightward (constant harping about the "liberal media" helps with that
process).

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

lh wrote:
I think that you're overestimating the degree to which US media is
monolithic. I certainly heard anti-war arguments, whether or not the
newspaper or televison station airing the views came out and endorsed
either camp. Actually I thought that the anti-War voices were pretty
loud, at times even shrill. What did happen with Iraq though is that
majorities from both major political parties in the States supported they
war, so the US wound up with the unusual spectacle of both Democrat
(liberal) leaning news services and Republican (conservative) leaning news
services agreeing more than they disagreed. They disagreed more about
which party was more to blame for the current state of affairs than about
anything of substance. What was, and is, mostly missing from the
mainstream Amecican media is those who take the view that it is not
Republicans or Democrats that are the root of all the world's evil but
that it is America that is the root of all evil. There are a few notable
exceptions though, such as Michael Moore, presidential candidate Dennis
Kucinich, a few Hollywood actors, and occionally we even get to read
Robert Fisk's denounctations of the USA. But it should be understanble
why it is difficult to market anti-Americanism to Americans.

You seem to be saying that being against the war is the same as being
anti-American. Does this apply to everything the government does? What about
being anti-ATF-at-Ruby-Ridge?

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

"nobody" wrote in message
...
lh wrote:
to whom you were not married. But without a doubt Holland is more
liberal
than the US in terms of gay rights.

I think that Holland is a far more mature country in many areas, such as
environment, health care and human rights. I would surmise it is the
result of
a good education system.

And manageable size. With the exception of gay rights and legalized drugs,
people in Singapore have similar quality of life as the Dutch and yet they
are neither liberal nor under the delussion that thier **** doesn't stink.

"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message
...
lh wrote:
I think that you're overestimating the degree to which US media is
monolithic. I certainly heard anti-war arguments, whether or not the
newspaper or televison station airing the views came out and endorsed
either camp. Actually I thought that the anti-War voices were pretty
loud, at times even shrill. What did happen with Iraq though is that
majorities from both major political parties in the States supported
they
war, so the US wound up with the unusual spectacle of both Democrat
(liberal) leaning news services and Republican (conservative) leaning
news
services agreeing more than they disagreed. They disagreed more about
which party was more to blame for the current state of affairs than
about
anything of substance. What was, and is, mostly missing from the
mainstream Amecican media is those who take the view that it is not
Republicans or Democrats that are the root of all the world's evil but
that it is America that is the root of all evil. There are a few notable
exceptions though, such as Michael Moore, presidential candidate Dennis
Kucinich, a few Hollywood actors, and occionally we even get to read
Robert Fisk's denounctations of the USA. But it should be understanble
why it is difficult to market anti-Americanism to Americans.

You seem to be saying that being against the war is the same as being
anti-American. Does this apply to everything the government does? What
about
being anti-ATF-at-Ruby-Ridge?

miguel

I don't know what transpired at Ruby Ridge so I can't offer an opinion on
that. I'm not saying that being anti-war is the same thing as being
anti-American. I think that many pro-American people opposed war. But I
think that nearly 100% of people who identify themselves as being
anti-American opposed the war. There's enough of them that almost any
action of the United States will encounter vocal opposition.

In article , nobody
wrote:

lh wrote:
to whom you were not married. But without a doubt Holland is more liberal
than the US in terms of gay rights.

I think that Holland is a far more mature country in many areas, such as
environment, health care and human rights. I would surmise it is the result of
a good education system.

It doesn't hurt that they have one of the larger Nat Gas reserves in the
world... heck Alaska pays it citizens every year just to breathe Alaskan
air.

jay
Sat, Dec 27, 2003


--

Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."

"lh" schreef in bericht
...
While liberal Eurpoeans seem to have taken 911 as evidence that
America is worst thing that has ever happened to thje world, to most
Americans the post-911 escalation of anti-Americanism among Eurpopeans
sounds a lot like the lawyer defending a rapist by trying to portray the
victim as a whore.


There was enormous sympathy in Europe for the US immediately after 9/11. It
was only after Bush decided to start a few wars that this sympathy
disappeared.

Sjoerd

"Go Fig" schreef in bericht
...
In article ,
"Sjoerd" wrote:

"lh" schreef in bericht
...

Why would you not be allowed to live with your partner of 9 years if
you
lived in the USA?

Because I have been offered a job in the US where the employer would
arrange
the work and residence permits for me. Had I been married to a woman,

How long have you been 'married' to your partner ?


While in many cases spouses to get to come on work visa, but it is far
from always the case.

she
would have received a residence permit almost automatically. But no
chance
to get such a permit for a same-sex partner.


You tried ?


My employer asked the US consulate here. Short version of the answer "forget
it".

Sjoerd