When even the Christian Science Monitor thinks our government has gone too far..

[Hasbinbad]

Maybe it's time you wake the fuck up.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/1203/Guantanamo-for-US-citizens-Senate-bill-raises-questions

[Hailto]

First thing I've seen you post that I agree with.

[Hasbinbad]

First thing I've seen you post that I agree with.
When "Libertarians" and the motherfucking ACLU are singing the same tune, according to the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, it's a.) probably extremely hard to find a legitimate argument against that tune, and b.) arma fucking geddon.

[Harrison]

No one cares what crackpot idiocy you read while stoned off illegal drugs. No one.

[purest]

uh the christian science monitor is an extremely reputable int'l rag.

going "even the christian science montior thinks __" is retarded because CSM has literally nothing to do with promoting religion or being conservative, despite its name.

that's like saying "even the economist thinks ____" .. to which anyone who actually follows int'l news would look at you puzzled like u were a complete idiot and say "um OK? a widely read and widely respected paper thinks ____?"

[Hasbinbad]

Are you SERIOUSLY implying that just because it has a large (probably inflated) readership that a media source cannot be biased?

Seriously?


SERIOUSLY???

[purest]

uh no what i am clearly saying is that CSM is a solid paper and that you r dum as fuk for assuming it is some kind of pro-christian or right-wing agenda based on its name alone

u r 100% off base as anyone who actually follows int'l news well knows CSM is a well respected and neutral paper

[Hasbinbad]

I mean, I understand what you are saying, but they are hardly the cutting edge of independent investigative journalism. They have bias, and it is obvious. They accomplish this bias via the means outlined in "Manufacturing Consent," just as ALL media does. There is really no such thing as a "solid paper," and I feel nothing but sympathy for how disenfranchised you will be (as was everyone else who woke up) when you finally see the curtain pulled back another layer.

As far as news outlets go, I would probably trust the CSM more than any other source because at least they don't try and purport that they have no bias. While I cannot say that I am an aficionado of the CSM, I have read several of their articles from time to time, and yes, they employ decent to good writers and editors. Can the bias still be detected? Yes.

So:

uh no what i am clearly saying is that CSM is a biased paper just like every other paper, and that u r dum as fuk for assuming I thought they were more biased than any other media outlet based on me saying "even."

u r 100% off base as anyone who actually critically thinks about and analyzes int'l news well knows CSM has a slant just like every other well respected paper, of which none are neutral.