Opec says oil could hit $200

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 06:01 AM

Opec’s president on Monday warned oil prices could hit $200 a barrel and there would be little the cartel could do to help.

The comments made by Chakib Khelil, Algeria’s energy minister, came as oil prices hit a historic peak close to $120 a barrel, putting further pressure on global economies.

[B]His remarks suggest Algeria wants Opec to continue to resist calls by US and European leaders for the cartel to pump more oil to help ease prices. But Mr Khelil blamed record oil prices on the weak dollar and global political insecurity[/B].

He told El Moudjahid, Algeria’s government newspaper: [B]“I don’t think that an increase in production would help lower prices, because there is a balance between supply and demand and the stocks of gasoline in the United States have recorded a surplus and are at their highest level for five years.”[/B]

He added: “The prices are high due to the recession in the United States and the economic crisis, which has touched several countries, a situation that has an effect on the value of the dollar. Each time the dollar falls 1 per cent, the price of the barrel rises by $4 and of course vice versa.”

Some US senators have pinned the blame for high oil prices directly on Opec and Saudi Arabia, its largest and most powerful member.

[B]In a letter to President George W. Bush last week, they said Riyadh had cut its oil production by about 2m barrels a day over the past three years, even though oil prices had continued to rise.[/B]

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

[url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4200dc9e-1521-11dd-996c-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1[/url]

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 06:10 AM

Its criminal how we are being taken advantage of by these blood suckers. And their greed has caused a spill over to the prices of our basic necessities like [B]food[/B] because of the cost of gas/oil. Then we have the politicians who are in bed with the saudis yet pretend to be outraged by these prices and vow to fight for us.

PlumberKhan · 04-29-2008, 07:34 AM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515049]Its criminal how we are being taken advantage of by these blood suckers. [/QUOTE]

Not really...I mean, can you blame them? You shouldn't be able to force them to sell their product cheaper....there is actually one very effective way to do that. Stop buying it. Period. If they can't sell their crap at their inflated prices, I suppose they would have to lower it.

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 07:43 AM

[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2515074]Not really...I mean, can you blame them? You shouldn't be able to force them to sell their product cheaper....there is actually one very effective way to do that. Stop buying it. Period. If they can't sell their crap at their inflated prices, I suppose they would have to lower it.[/QUOTE]

But I do blame them, partialy. I do not think we should excuse greed. I agree with you (and this has been beaten to death) that we need to use alternate fuels. This is where some of our bought and paid for politicans fail us. But you are correct to say that we need to slow down and, eventually, stop buying gas/oil.

It still does not excuse greed. And cue the fools that think capitalism is an excuse to be as greedy as you want and have no morality :zzz::zzz:

bitonti · 04-29-2008, 08:35 AM

this has to be the environmentalist's fault.

I also blame Bill Clinton.

jets5ever · 04-29-2008, 11:18 AM

[b][size="7"]I Don't Understand Anything But I Am Mad As Hell, Aaaaaarrrrrghh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/size][/b]

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 11:31 AM

making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. Neither does calling your friends into the previous thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does not make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples.

And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation. You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech.

So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:

HDCentStOhio · 04-29-2008, 11:39 AM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515378]making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. [B]Neither does calling your friends into a thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. [/B] Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples.
[B]
And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation.[/B] You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech.

So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]
Which thread was that? I hope you are not talking about the Rupurt Murdoch Newsday/myspace conglomerate that is a threat to democracy. Please.

jets5ever · 04-29-2008, 12:12 PM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515378]making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. Neither does calling your friends into the previous thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does not make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples.

And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation. You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech.

So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]

Bail me out when I was getting my a$$ kicked? By YOU? On the media consolidation thread? That was a victory for you in your world? What color is the sky in that world, Francis?

You're too funny. "Followers?" Who even talks like that? You seem obsessed with me for some reason. You don't have any clue what free speech is. Your "greed" nonsense here is typical. I could quite easily engage you in a serious discussion about gas prices and morality, but you're not interested in serious discussions by your own admission and, frankly, you're not worth it. Nuu, Parafly, Queens, LIL, finlee, cr726; those guys are worth it, and even BB when he's not acting like a child. But not you and not Kenny. For a guy who tried to insult me for taking this board too seriously, you seem to take it very seriously yourself. You're a sad little man.

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 12:25 PM

[QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2515394]Which thread was that? I hope you are not talking about the Rupurt Murdoch Newsday/myspace conglomerate that is a threat to democracy. Please.[/QUOTE]

Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well.

And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:

jets5ever · 04-29-2008, 12:35 PM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515474]Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well.

And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]

Dude, you looked foolish on that thread. You're embarassing yourself now. Stop.

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 12:44 PM

[QUOTE=jets5ever;2515448]Bail me out when I was getting my a$$ kicked? By YOU? On the media consolidation thread? That was a victory for you in your world? What color is the sky in that world, Francis?

You're too funny. "Followers?" Who even talks like that? You seem obsessed with me for some reason. You don't have any clue what free speech is. Your "greed" nonsense here is typical. I could quite easily engage you in a serious discussion about gas prices and morality, but you're not interested in serious discussions by your own admission and, frankly, you're not worth it. Nuu, Parafly, Queens, LIL, finlee, cr726; those guys are worth it, and even BB when he's not acting like a child. But not you and not Kenny. For a guy who tried to insult me for taking this board too seriously, you seem to take it very seriously yourself. You're a sad little man.[/QUOTE]

Like I am supposed to take you seriously as a history major who sees protest and unified solidarity as useless? Should I begin to count off the amount of times throughout history that you would have been proven wrong? I should take someone serious who would be arrogant enough to tell Albert Einstein that his theories are off?

But you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. 5ver, you have it backwards: I have no real interest in debating you. It is you who take yourself far too seriously. You have admitted several times in other threads how arrogant you can be. My problem with debating you has nothing to do with disagreeing with you. Its that you can be very condesending to people. Its true that, when things get heated we all can be a little much. But you have been warned about this-in fact I believe it was in the aforementioned thread, actually.

Like you, there are many people that I can debate with who are interesting at this site. But they do not always act condesending.

I don't insult you because you take the board too seriously. I did it because you take [I]yourself[/I] too seriously. So lets just agree to disagree and move on...............

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 12:53 PM

[QUOTE=jets5ever;2515487]Dude, you looked foolish on that thread. [B] You're embarassing yourself now. Stop.[/QUOTE][/B]

again....here we go. For someone that has no interest in debating me you sure seem to do do it enough.

My response was to HD bringing up MYSPACE as a way to minimize the idea that his media empire could ever be a threat to free speech.

My point was that General Electric, who has tremendous influence in the media and military field, also make kids items. Does take away from their influence because they make kids alarm clocks?

If you cannot understand the connection, maybe you should stop posting in this thread.

2foolish197 · 04-29-2008, 12:58 PM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515378]making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. Neither does calling your friends into the previous thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does not make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples.

And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation. You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech.

So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]you have no idea what you are talking about with that media thread.you offered nothing specific just a boring lecture.and you still don't get the supply and demand thing yet.mr intelligentjetfan lol....

HDCentStOhio · 04-29-2008, 12:59 PM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515474]Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well.

And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]
And how about the SIX media conglomerates you mentioned in that thread. Do they all have exactly the same viewpoints? Oh, right, they are all part of the evil Media-Industrial Complex. Big Business is bad for democracy.:zzz::zzz::zzz:

2foolish197 · 04-29-2008, 01:01 PM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515504][/B]

again....here we go. For someone that has no interest in debating me you sure seem to do do it enough.

My response was to HD bringing up MYSPACE as a way to minimize the idea that his media empire could ever be a threat to free speech.

My point was that General Electric, who has tremendous influence in the media and military field, also make kids items. Does take away from their influence because they make kids alarm clocks?

If you cannot understand the connection, maybe you should stop posting in this thread.[/QUOTE]you deal in arm chair professer talk.specifically what the hell are you talking about?

doggin94it · 04-29-2008, 01:04 PM

[quote=intelligentjetsfan;2515474]Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well.

And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:[/quote]

Seriously? you think you came out ahead in that thread?

PlumberKhan · 04-29-2008, 01:04 PM

[url]www.snoringemoticonssuck.com[/url]

[QUOTE]Study shows that amount of snoring smiley use is directly proportional to the amount gayness lying below the surface of ones unconsciousness. [/QUOTE]

jets5ever · 04-29-2008, 01:10 PM

[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515495]Like I am supposed to take you seriously as a history major who sees protest and unified solidarity as useless? Should I begin to count off the amount of times throughout history that you would have been proven wrong? I should take someone serious who would be arrogant enough to tell Albert Einstein that his theories are off?

But you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. 5ver, you have it backwards: I have no real interest in debating you. It is you who take yourself far too seriously. You have admitted several times in other threads how arrogant you can be. My problem with debating you has nothing to do with disagreeing with you. Its that you can be very condesending to people. Its true that, when things get heated we all can be a little much. But you have been warned about this-in fact I believe it was in the aforementioned thread, actually.

Like you, there are many people that I can debate with who are interesting at this site. But they do not always act condesending.

I don't insult you because you take the board too seriously. I did it because you take [I]yourself[/I] too seriously. So lets just agree to disagree and move on...............[/QUOTE]

I really don't take myself all that seriously, you're just not a very useful person to have discussions with. I tried having serious discussions with you and you admitted to being a clown and you told me to not take anything you write seriously, so I don't. I don't recall ever typing the phrase "unified solidarity" in my life. There is nothing to move on from or to; you're a clown by your own admission. And the worst part is that you're not even funny. Even Plumber at his worst was funny some of the time. You are starting to bore me.

intelligentjetsfan · 04-29-2008, 01:13 PM

[QUOTE=2foolish197;2515515]you have no idea what you are talking about with that media thread.you offered nothing specific just a boring lecture.and you still don't get the supply and demand thing yet.mr intelligentjetfan lol....[/QUOTE]

with respect, in that thread there were specific sites listed with specific information. Just for starters here are some more;

[url]http://www.takebackthemedia.com/owners.html[/url]

MediaChannel's Media Ownership Chart
This is a handy graphic chart of who owns what. This page is one large images, so it may take a long while to load on slower connections.

Columbia Journalism Review's 'Who Owns What'
Colombia Journalism Review provides a clickable list of the major media companies and their holdings. This web guide demonstrates the exceedingly far reach of these companies.

The Nation's 'Big Ten'
Here's a clickable chart of the world's ten biggest media conglomerates. The 'Big Ten' shows that concentration of media owndership isn't just a problem here - it's happening worldwide.

The Incredible Shrinking Ownership Group
In 1985, there were 50 companies who owned media outlets. The graph on this site shows that between then and now, the number has dwindled to only six, and if the planned deregulation goes through it'll decline even further. Includes the major media reform advocacy groups.

FAIR's List of For-Profit Media
FAIR points out that most media outlets are owned by for-profit corporations, which by nature makes them more accountable to the stockholders than the public interest.

NOW's 'Who Controls The Media?'
This easy-to-read chart breaks it all down - even down to which cable outlets are controlled by which conglomerates.

04-29-2008, 06:01 AM	#1
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	Opec says oil could hit $200 Opec’s president on Monday warned oil prices could hit $200 a barrel and there would be little the cartel could do to help. The comments made by Chakib Khelil, Algeria’s energy minister, came as oil prices hit a historic peak close to $120 a barrel, putting further pressure on global economies. [B]His remarks suggest Algeria wants Opec to continue to resist calls by US and European leaders for the cartel to pump more oil to help ease prices. But Mr Khelil blamed record oil prices on the weak dollar and global political insecurity[/B]. He told El Moudjahid, Algeria’s government newspaper: [B]“I don’t think that an increase in production would help lower prices, because there is a balance between supply and demand and the stocks of gasoline in the United States have recorded a surplus and are at their highest level for five years.”[/B] He added: “The prices are high due to the recession in the United States and the economic crisis, which has touched several countries, a situation that has an effect on the value of the dollar. Each time the dollar falls 1 per cent, the price of the barrel rises by $4 and of course vice versa.” Some US senators have pinned the blame for high oil prices directly on Opec and Saudi Arabia, its largest and most powerful member. [B]In a letter to President George W. Bush last week, they said Riyadh had cut its oil production by about 2m barrels a day over the past three years, even though oil prices had continued to rise.[/B] Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008 [url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4200dc9e-1521-11dd-996c-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1[/url] Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 04-29-2008 at 06:14 AM.

04-29-2008, 11:31 AM	#7
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. Neither does calling your friends into the previous thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does not make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples. And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation. You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech. So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz: Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 04-29-2008 at 11:37 AM.

04-29-2008, 06:10 AM	#2
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	Its criminal how we are being taken advantage of by these blood suckers. And their greed has caused a spill over to the prices of our basic necessities like [B]food[/B] because of the cost of gas/oil. Then we have the politicians who are in bed with the saudis yet pretend to be outraged by these prices and vow to fight for us.

04-29-2008, 07:34 AM	#3
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Banned Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,013	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515049]Its criminal how we are being taken advantage of by these blood suckers. [/QUOTE] Not really...I mean, can you blame them? You shouldn't be able to force them to sell their product cheaper....there is actually one very effective way to do that. Stop buying it. Period. If they can't sell their crap at their inflated prices, I suppose they would have to lower it.

04-29-2008, 07:43 AM	#4
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2515074]Not really...I mean, can you blame them? You shouldn't be able to force them to sell their product cheaper....there is actually one very effective way to do that. Stop buying it. Period. If they can't sell their crap at their inflated prices, I suppose they would have to lower it.[/QUOTE] But I do blame them, partialy. I do not think we should excuse greed. I agree with you (and this has been beaten to death) that we need to use alternate fuels. This is where some of our bought and paid for politicans fail us. But you are correct to say that we need to slow down and, eventually, stop buying gas/oil. It still does not excuse greed. And cue the fools that think capitalism is an excuse to be as greedy as you want and have no morality :zzz::zzz:

04-29-2008, 08:35 AM	#5
bitonti searching Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philly Posts: 38,786	this has to be the environmentalist's fault. I also blame Bill Clinton.

04-29-2008, 11:18 AM	#6
jets5ever Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Boston Posts: 11,692	[b][size="7"]I Don't Understand Anything But I Am Mad As Hell, Aaaaaarrrrrghh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/size][/b]

04-29-2008, 11:39 AM	#8
HDCentStOhio longing for the days of Ronald Reagan Hall Of Fame Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Long Island & Section 337 Posts: 4,859	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515378]making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. [B]Neither does calling your friends into a thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. [/B] Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples. [B] And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation.[/B] You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech. So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE] Which thread was that? I hope you are not talking about the Rupurt Murdoch Newsday/myspace conglomerate that is a threat to democracy. Please.

04-29-2008, 12:12 PM	#9
jets5ever Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Boston Posts: 11,692	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515378]making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. Neither does calling your friends into the previous thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does not make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples. And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation. You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech. So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE] Bail me out when I was getting my a$$ kicked? By YOU? On the media consolidation thread? That was a victory for you in your world? What color is the sky in that world, Francis? You're too funny. "Followers?" Who even talks like that? You seem obsessed with me for some reason. You don't have any clue what free speech is. Your "greed" nonsense here is typical. I could quite easily engage you in a serious discussion about gas prices and morality, but you're not interested in serious discussions by your own admission and, frankly, you're not worth it. Nuu, Parafly, Queens, LIL, finlee, cr726; those guys are worth it, and even BB when he's not acting like a child. But not you and not Kenny. For a guy who tried to insult me for taking this board too seriously, you seem to take it very seriously yourself. You're a sad little man.

04-29-2008, 12:25 PM	#10
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	[QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2515394]Which thread was that? I hope you are not talking about the Rupurt Murdoch Newsday/myspace conglomerate that is a threat to democracy. Please.[/QUOTE] Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well. And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:

04-29-2008, 12:35 PM	#11
jets5ever Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Boston Posts: 11,692	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515474]Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well. And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE] Dude, you looked foolish on that thread. You're embarassing yourself now. Stop.

04-29-2008, 12:44 PM	#12
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	[QUOTE=jets5ever;2515448]Bail me out when I was getting my a$$ kicked? By YOU? On the media consolidation thread? That was a victory for you in your world? What color is the sky in that world, Francis? You're too funny. "Followers?" Who even talks like that? You seem obsessed with me for some reason. You don't have any clue what free speech is. Your "greed" nonsense here is typical. I could quite easily engage you in a serious discussion about gas prices and morality, but you're not interested in serious discussions by your own admission and, frankly, you're not worth it. Nuu, Parafly, Queens, LIL, finlee, cr726; those guys are worth it, and even BB when he's not acting like a child. But not you and not Kenny. For a guy who tried to insult me for taking this board too seriously, you seem to take it very seriously yourself. You're a sad little man.[/QUOTE] Like I am supposed to take you seriously as a history major who sees protest and unified solidarity as useless? Should I begin to count off the amount of times throughout history that you would have been proven wrong? I should take someone serious who would be arrogant enough to tell Albert Einstein that his theories are off? But you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. 5ver, you have it backwards: I have no real interest in debating you. It is you who take yourself far too seriously. You have admitted several times in other threads how arrogant you can be. My problem with debating you has nothing to do with disagreeing with you. Its that you can be very condesending to people. Its true that, when things get heated we all can be a little much. But you have been warned about this-in fact I believe it was in the aforementioned thread, actually. Like you, there are many people that I can debate with who are interesting at this site. But they do not always act condesending. I don't insult you because you take the board too seriously. I did it because you take [I]yourself[/I] too seriously. So lets just agree to disagree and move on...............

04-29-2008, 12:53 PM	#13
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	[QUOTE=jets5ever;2515487]Dude, you looked foolish on that thread. [B] You're embarassing yourself now. Stop.[/QUOTE][/B] again....here we go. For someone that has no interest in debating me you sure seem to do do it enough. My response was to HD bringing up MYSPACE as a way to minimize the idea that his media empire could ever be a threat to free speech. My point was that General Electric, who has tremendous influence in the media and military field, also make kids items. Does take away from their influence because they make kids alarm clocks? If you cannot understand the connection, maybe you should stop posting in this thread.

04-29-2008, 12:58 PM	#14
2foolish197 i suspect hanky-panky All League Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: astoria Posts: 4,528	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515378]making letters bigger doesn't make you look any smarter. Neither does calling your friends into the previous thread to bail you out when you were getting your a** kicked. Some people here may see you as some wise sage but many do not. Just because you do not agree with a point of view, does not make it wrong. If some of your followers want to believe your nonsense that you are "all knowing on all subjects"; good for you. But when you, as a history major, state that protest and unified action does no good, it is scary. That is just one of many examples. And you couldn't have been more ignorant on that last thread about media consolidation. You got hung up on the amount of channels and could see no further. Men and women who are a lot wiser then you are on that subject devoted years researching media consolidation and its affect on free speech. So make some more bold lettered posts and have a couple of your friends here tell you how wise you are on all subjects. :zzz::zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]you have no idea what you are talking about with that media thread.you offered nothing specific just a boring lecture.and you still don't get the supply and demand thing yet.mr intelligentjetfan lol....

04-29-2008, 12:59 PM	#15
HDCentStOhio longing for the days of Ronald Reagan Hall Of Fame Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Long Island & Section 337 Posts: 4,859	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515474]Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well. And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE] And how about the SIX media conglomerates you mentioned in that thread. Do they all have exactly the same viewpoints? Oh, right, they are all part of the evil Media-Industrial Complex. Big Business is bad for democracy.:zzz::zzz::zzz:

04-29-2008, 01:01 PM	#16
2foolish197 i suspect hanky-panky All League Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: astoria Posts: 4,528	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515504][/B] again....here we go. For someone that has no interest in debating me you sure seem to do do it enough. My response was to HD bringing up MYSPACE as a way to minimize the idea that his media empire could ever be a threat to free speech. My point was that General Electric, who has tremendous influence in the media and military field, also make kids items. Does take away from their influence because they make kids alarm clocks? If you cannot understand the connection, maybe you should stop posting in this thread.[/QUOTE]you deal in arm chair professer talk.specifically what the hell are you talking about?

04-29-2008, 01:04 PM	#17
doggin94it Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,392	[quote=intelligentjetsfan;2515474]Thats [B]exactly[/B] what I was referring to. And there some posters who agreed with my point of view as well. And its cute how you mention myspace every time as a way of minimizing Murdoch's influence. At one time General Electric, who owns NBC, made alarm clocks with woody woodpecker on it. Does that mean they didn't have a powerful influence on the media? Did it take away the fact that GE also makes tanks and other military products for war because kids thought woody was cute? :zzz::zzz:[/quote] Seriously? you think you came out ahead in that thread?

04-29-2008, 01:10 PM	#19
jets5ever Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Boston Posts: 11,692	[QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2515495]Like I am supposed to take you seriously as a history major who sees protest and unified solidarity as useless? Should I begin to count off the amount of times throughout history that you would have been proven wrong? I should take someone serious who would be arrogant enough to tell Albert Einstein that his theories are off? But you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. 5ver, you have it backwards: I have no real interest in debating you. It is you who take yourself far too seriously. You have admitted several times in other threads how arrogant you can be. My problem with debating you has nothing to do with disagreeing with you. Its that you can be very condesending to people. Its true that, when things get heated we all can be a little much. But you have been warned about this-in fact I believe it was in the aforementioned thread, actually. Like you, there are many people that I can debate with who are interesting at this site. But they do not always act condesending. I don't insult you because you take the board too seriously. I did it because you take [I]yourself[/I] too seriously. So lets just agree to disagree and move on...............[/QUOTE] I really don't take myself all that seriously, you're just not a very useful person to have discussions with. I tried having serious discussions with you and you admitted to being a clown and you told me to not take anything you write seriously, so I don't. I don't recall ever typing the phrase "unified solidarity" in my life. There is nothing to move on from or to; you're a clown by your own admission. And the worst part is that you're not even funny. Even Plumber at his worst was funny some of the time. You are starting to bore me.

04-29-2008, 01:13 PM	#20
intelligentjetsfan All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,307	[QUOTE=2foolish197;2515515]you have no idea what you are talking about with that media thread.you offered nothing specific just a boring lecture.and you still don't get the supply and demand thing yet.mr intelligentjetfan lol....[/QUOTE] with respect, in that thread there were specific sites listed with specific information. Just for starters here are some more; [url]http://www.takebackthemedia.com/owners.html[/url] MediaChannel's Media Ownership Chart This is a handy graphic chart of who owns what. This page is one large images, so it may take a long while to load on slower connections. Columbia Journalism Review's 'Who Owns What' Colombia Journalism Review provides a clickable list of the major media companies and their holdings. This web guide demonstrates the exceedingly far reach of these companies. The Nation's 'Big Ten' Here's a clickable chart of the world's ten biggest media conglomerates. The 'Big Ten' shows that concentration of media owndership isn't just a problem here - it's happening worldwide. The Incredible Shrinking Ownership Group In 1985, there were 50 companies who owned media outlets. The graph on this site shows that between then and now, the number has dwindled to only six, and if the planned deregulation goes through it'll decline even further. Includes the major media reform advocacy groups. FAIR's List of For-Profit Media FAIR points out that most media outlets are owned by for-profit corporations, which by nature makes them more accountable to the stockholders than the public interest. NOW's 'Who Controls The Media?' This easy-to-read chart breaks it all down - even down to which cable outlets are controlled by which conglomerates.