atinymonkey

Personally, I think if the bias has been there for a long time it's very hard for people to spot it. CNN used to be a cornerstone of the media industry, but it's become diluted into infotainment for the 5 second attention span. At one point in the 1980's, the BBC would source storys and footage from CNN (with credits) as CNN was always the first at the scene. Not any longer though. An interesting side point about how insular the US has become ; only 5% of Americans have passports and of those only 5% have used them to travel outside the country. But hey, it's mostly because of the cost to travel outside the states. It's odd though that so many Americans want to travel Europe and how so few actually do. Actually, I don't like travelling Europe that much either.

I know the post has already been countered, but I felt the need to point out homophobic posts are against the forum rules. Point 2.l) : - http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6206 I know I'd prefer it if that sort of view was put back in the box, and a lid put on it. I'd rather not have to deal with your homophobic opinions, if it's all the same to you. Thanks.

Indeed they do, I have one on my desk at the moment. http://www.britishmuseum.co.uk/product.asp?cat=70&product=519 For a item of such significance, it's rather hidden away in the museum. Odd that so many people died over it, and now it gathers dust and get's overlooked by passers by.

lol, I send you a tape of me having fun on my spacetrip

Mmmm, I don't think outsourcing of jobs it the sole reason. China is simply retaking it's economic place in the world.

I haven't looked at the other statements that your concerned over, but the connection to the Saudi royal family is very valid. Both Bush Jnr and Snr have oil companys that deal with Saudi oil, and the royal family is linked to that. Bush Snr never said he didn't have a connection, and I don't see why you would consider it a lie. So far as pot shots go, Kerry's is right on target.

Okay.

It's standard in science papers, very few english papers have acronyms in them.

Er, I can answer that. Apparently none Ninjas were getting hold of the shuriken and foolishly using them on boards. Naturally, not being Ninjas, more often than not the shuriken would not hit home. Occasionally, and this caused the concern, the shuriken would rebound on the hapless none-Ninjas and lodge themselves in squishy none-ninja flesh. The European Leaders and the Ninja council got together and agreed not to sell shuriken to the public, on account of the public not being awesome nor sweet. Actually to be wholly accurate, shuriken all small throwing type weapons. I think shaken are those ninja wheels, which are a bit silly but awesome none the less. But not to be confused with shuriken, which is a generic term. I know this to be true, because my pal Harry had a brother who once met a man who went to Japan. Apparently. Although Harry did tell me that dog biscuits were what ninjas ate so they could see in infrared, which I tryed and it turned out not to be true.

Hang on, I thought Newcastle, Leeds and Kings College were all higher than Oxford and Cambridge? Maybe it's based on average earnings of ex-students.

Well, such is the eventual conclusion of democratic society. We deal with it using sarcastic language and satire, but it dosen't seem to be working.

Oh, I thought this thread was about the gunpower plot. I'm quite upset now. Still, the bonfire will cheer me up.

Ah, of course. I forgot the litigious nature of modern America, I guess I don't really take it seriously enough to remember. You don't quite understand. National is of a nation. English is of England' date=' and therfore is Englands [i']national[/i] language. English is the primary language in America but not the national. The national languages of America are Indian, as I would have expected someone to have pointed out to you, it being an important part of your history. I suppose what I'm saying is if your going to claim people should speak English, the least you could do is use it correctly yourself.

Because they can, and you can't.

If that sentence made any sense, you may have been better able to get your point across. As I work as a Buisness Analyst in a multinational corporation, I'll have to assume you sarcasm was because you thought I was a schoolchild with no experience in economics. Perhaps you'll pay more attention to the principles I'm telling you now you know I actually know the subject I'm discussing. One can only hope. This, although true, hold almost no relevant fact at all. Members pay the UN to be in the UN. This we know, have detailed and agreed on. This is highlighting the weakness of American economics rather than the global economy. This is the crux of the US economic instability, it imports far more than it produces and so is incapable of having a self sustaining economy without severe reductions in standards of living (frugal would be decadent in comparison). The US has no major exports at all, save the entertainment industry. In economic terms it is a leach sucking resource from other countries. Even if countries were not able to sell to the US, no country would go bankrupt with a surplus of resource. The majority of states that export the states do so under duress, not from choice. Cash crops grown to sell to the US at a substantially reduced rate to pay, this is done to pay off the debt the country holds with the US which cannot be paid off, while the country is then forced to buy back enough food to feed the population. It's the circle of poverty, and an exploitation of a third world country. Removing that exploitation would benefit the developing nations, certainly not hinder them. Simply repeating that there would be bankrupt nations does not help your argument. It is impossible for a country to go bankrupt, a bank cannot own a country. Your confusing personnel finance with global economics. Stop it. France does not do international trade on a Visa card. If we were to assume for a moment it were possible for a country to go bankrupt, the US would have already have been called into the receivers. Yes, that's very true. But you do need access to the WTO and the international stock exchange. Why do you think sanctions against Iraq, Iran, Somalia etc worked? Because they didn't know other countries existed? Just in case you don't realize who controls the international stock exchange, it's London. London also underwrites all insurance companies and also underwrites the world bank. Yes, things only happen if they happen. Very clever. Ok, back that up. Name one country that could not exist without American trade. Just one that is reliant totally on America. I can name 20 that would benefit from the suspension of trade. Can you see France, Germany and Russia supporting US trade? They have the majority of the votes, after the UK. And the UK, do you think we would give up the chance of controlling the world economy? I hardly think a 1% rise in membership fees will be noticed. It's not even in line with cost of living. Given that most of that money goes to the UN's work with the US in America then the UN may even save money with it's withdrawal. China is communist, and still has a substantial presence in the capitalist system. If they altered the economy slightly, they could isolate all American interests and cripple the US economy. But again, all your doing is pointing out how much other countries would benefit from retention of resource. You raise an interesting point. Japan alone owns 37% of American industry. I would not call that dependant though, it's the opposite really. However, I'm fantastically interested in how communist China is dependant on the US? Could you substantiate that for me? Thanks for remaining me that the top 5 nations are competing for a greater share of the world economy. Perhaps you think they would allow the US to keep the top spot out of generosity. You misuderstand sanctions, by the way. The UN can really pick and choose what they put sanctions on. Mobile phones and TV's would not be high on the list. Oil, however, would. Yes, this is true. They are paid to produce food. That food is not enough per year to feed US population for more than 16 days. That's not what I'd class as self sufficient, more hugely wasteful. Do you not find it interesting that the US cannot export this grain to anybody? It's a big flashing warning sign when nobody needs your exports and you have to let the food rot. It's your pipe dream. Your the one who wants to isolate the US so you can play with your phallic gun. But as I said, you could feed yourself for 16 days and no more. The economy would have collapsed well beofre that. You may be forgetting the greatr depression here, but I am not. Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Tell me, during the 1920's just how self sufficient did the US manage to be? That's where the US treasury bases it's estimates, and the population has increased 14 times since then. A depression in the US would not be a slight tightening of belts, it would be a return to a feudal state. Ah, I also remember the LA riots. The citizens right to return to anarchy. I also find interesting that your more than happy to 'meddle' in other countries affairs at the drop of a hat, but cry bloodily murder if anyone suggest that the US should be helped to protect itself from itself. This duplicitous viewpoint is elitist, undermining and childish.

I can see how you'd pick dodging traffic, but not sky diving. Why are you not out dodging traffic?

What is it exactly your trying to say? That because they are over 18, you couldn't be expected to communicate none verbally? What does that mean, actually? The US has far more than 1 national language. As you say you are a native American, you should know that. http://www.native-languages.org/languages.htm#alpha English is not the American national language, it's the English national language. If your going to be nationalistic, do about something that actually belongs to your country.

We did, the only thing different seems to be you. The irony.

We have had 3 hundred year floods in the past 10 years. Which is a bit odd, it might suggest that the scale is a bit squiffy.

Well, the boy has cried wolf. He's also called superwolf, ninjawolf and atomic mutantwolf. I don't know about the rest of the international community, but in the UK we have been subject to terrorist attacks consistently for 25 odd years and the constant cries of 'Critical High Substantiated Security Risk, whooohaaaa' followed by embarrassed silence are getting to be a source of comedy. Why is this neuroscience anyway?