en-us http://www.intensedebate.com/users/333907 Comments by Schizoid_Mann http://bigjournalism.com/jjmnolte/2012/01/09/johnny-depp-gate-what-did-the-mainstream-media-know-and-when-did-they-know-it/#IDComment259595986 Spot on! My money's on the third theory. Mon, 9 Jan 2012 16:15:47 +0000 http://bigjournalism.com/jjmnolte/2012/01/09/johnny-depp-gate-what-did-the-mainstream-media-know-and-when-did-they-know-it/#IDComment259595986 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208104547 You are right on target. Sun, 16 Oct 2011 01:21:40 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208104547 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208102382 Very true. I'm glad to see not everyone here is sounding the klaxon on an imminent attack by the Chinese. There is more of a threat to the U.S. from Russia than from the PRC. People get all uptight over reports of China's navy, their submarines, the 'new' aircraft carrier, or their air force, etc. In most cases, their hardware is plentiful, but outdated. Currently I have colleagues involved in the updating of fighter interceptor aircraft to be deployed by the Japanese Air Self Defense Force to replace their current inventory of American F-15's and F-4's. U.S. fighters sold and/or lent to Japan are the same birds the U.S. uses (TBD) with slight modifications for pilot comfort, ease of maintaining, etc. (also, 70% of the aircraft parts (not the airframe) will be manufactured in Asia - that's a deal US companies should envy for their autos and electronics). But there is one major difference between what the U.S. uses for itself and what it sells to Japan and other allies: the radar targeting and electronic warfare systems. The Japanese aircraft are 'crippled' so to speak. The latest, in-use technology that the American aircraft employ are not installed in the Japanese models. In fact, even if you somehow obtained said missing components, they would not function. The reason I mention this, is to give you an idea of how China fares with its own air force. Japan's crippled radar systems are leaps and bounds ahead of China's 'state of the art' so that can give you an idea of the major advantage American aircraft have over their Chinese counterparts. China's in elementary school, the U.S. is in grad school. Some may say, 'what about the downing of the EP-3 Orion?' That was due to pilot error on the part of the Chinese. It was a very unfortunate accident. But it was an accident. The pilot died. The American aircrew, whom I am familiar with, were quite distraught, since, as all pilots and aircrew know the world over, there is a camaraderie that exists among airmen regardless of nation. So to see one die, at peace time especially, is a loss for all. It wasn't an act of aggression (on either part), as the press reported at the time, and as some here apparently still believe. Without revealing too much, I can say it was 'hot dogging' that led to his death and the collision with the EP-3, which was on a surveillance/ information gathering mission. One could argue that the presence of a 'spy plane' near their border was an act of aggression in itself, and there is a case for that, but this happens all the time. And both sides know it very well. For many years, Soviet TU-95's were regularly intercepted off the coast of Massachusetts as part of information gathering missions. This happened about two or three times a month. Sometimes more, sometimes less. They did it, we did it off their coast. In the case of China, the birds got too close. Once the accident happened, it changed the dynamic entirely, since the public is generally not aware of these missions - they look bad for both sides, so neither wants them publicized. Since it was going public, though, the entire incident was utilized politically more about Taiwan than about the crash or technology trade-off itself. Bush (and America) took a hit on it publicly in the press. Rest assured, though, behind the scenes (where it counts) the PRC was the loser and contrary to what the American press reported, President Bush handled it with tremendous acumen. As for the cyber attacks by the PRC and elements thereof, they can be seen in the same light as 'testing response' as we saw so frequently with the Soviet Bear bombers. Yes, the TU-95's were bomber aircraft designed to deliver multiple nuclear warheads on several targets each. Did they? No. Were they carrying nuclear weaponry when they 'tested response'. I'll let you guess on that one. I don't want to get into hot water. I must assume everyone in the world reads everything online (as you all should). Lets just say, dosimeters aboard the F-106s and later F-15s did not (in most cases) measure anything beyond ambient radiation. So why would the Soviets send their latest bombers each capable of destroying American cities, within view of American landfall and not load them with ordinance? The answer is obvious. To test us. To test our response times - what type of aircraft were scrambled to intercept, how long did it take, what weaponry and how much was visible, AIM9s, AMRAAMs, etc. Were only two aircraft scrambled? Or were there more? What if two were scrambled off Goose Bay, Labrador, would they have others up from McGuire or Tyndal AFB? Testing response. The cyber attacks are the same thing but in this new era that we find ourselves. If we attack this node, what safeguard comes into play, how long does it take, what's their workaround, do they have a workaround in place, or do they scramble for one impromptu? What happens if several points are attacked at once, which one gets priority? And so on. It's a game. Testing, always testing. Cyber attacks measure response. Once again, do not assume the U.S. is passive here. The computer system's of the PRC ministries are attacked with regularity and impunity by the U.S. and its allies for the same purpose. Their press won't report on it for obvious reasons, and our own press isn't made aware of these measures, also for obvious reasons. Sun, 16 Oct 2011 01:13:31 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208102382 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208087130 Because the West is their customer. Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:23:41 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208087130 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208078630 Yes, sometimes repetition works. Make that 'always works'. I was going to respond to your comment, but upon reflection and seeing the presence of insults and name-calling, I decided it would be a waste of my time. Enjoy your day. Sat, 15 Oct 2011 23:56:12 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208078630 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208076249 China, unlike much of the west, plans ahead. Far ahead. Their current actions should always be seen as how they would be effective 10, 20 or even 50 years from the present. They see a potential threat from the West that needs to be balanced by their own defensive measures, and if one recognizes the strategy of deploying an underground missile network - no surprise that it resembles a hardware version of the U.S.'s own DARPA network system from the 1950s - you can see that it's designed to be defensive in nature, guaranteeing that a strike on known missile firing locations would be ineffective and would trigger an overwhelming response regardless of whether capital and major cities were destroyed. It's a blueprint they copied from the West. If the U.S. and Europe were able to construct a network of tunnels in the Cold War, they would have. China has the land mass to achieve that without much fanfare. Their one weakness is satellite fly-overs. The underground missile network is a counter balance to that 'soft spot'. But this is all academic. There is a major overriding reason why China would not want war with the West. Attacking the West would be like The Gap attacking the protesters in NYC. The West is China's most favored customer. And if people don't like that, we have only ourselves to blame. And judging by the negative votes my post has received, I can see the mainstream press is as effective as usual, diverting the public's attention from the problems of the administration to an outside threat, an evil empire. I think you can be sure that there will be more stories of the threat of China attacking the U.S. or chipping away at her defenses, leading up to the election cycle. And you can also be sure that the President Obama will be shown in a very favorable light by the mainstream press, being credited with circumventing a potentially hostile act from China. You can bet your iPod on it. Sat, 15 Oct 2011 23:48:54 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment208076249 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment207761693 China is not the enemy. The PRC does not wish to engage in anything that will circumvent their future development, which includes space exploration. War will most certainly disrupt that. It China wanted war, they would do it tomorrow over Taiwan. There is posturing, but that's politics. Always has been. Think for a moment, people. Why would you trust the mainstream press regarding an enemy to the United States military? Why, for even a split second would you trust them? Do not fall for the China bashing bait. China is not an enemy of the United States. In fact, in spite of the lack of leadership and finesse of America's current president, China does not hold negative views of America at all. China in many respects is copying the U.S., using America a role model for its own development. Well, a role model from 'the good parts version', the capitalist version. Yes, in a communist country, in international cities like Shanghai and Hong Kong, it's easier to start a business, with lower taxes and more business and personal freedom than in NYC or Chicago or Boston or any big city in America. This is a fact. When China hosted the most recent Olympics can you guess what figure upon entering the stadium created the biggest, loudest, most enthusiastic heart-felt cheering from the Chinese people? Take a guess. The answer is: George W. Bush and his father George H.W. Bush. That's right. I'll bet you never saw that on American news, did you? But I was there. As were hundreds of thousands of others. And their love of the Bushes is famous. Read a little bit about papa's stint in China as Ambassador and George's time there as a child to get a little insight into why the Chinese love them. And they do. China is not America's enemy. China is looking to be a world economic giant. Who can blame them for wanting what we want? What danger has every economic giant faced throughout history, that caused its demise? Economic collapse? No. The greatest threat, hot or cold, was military in nature. China is defending itself. As America did in the 1950s when we viewed the world as enemies to our own way of life. They see the policeman role the U.S. (and NATO) have been taking and disapprove and are fearful. They see the celebrity class use China as a punching bag on human rights issues while equally nefarious violations continuously happen within the borders of America and are ignored. They don't want the U.S. or the UN meddling in their domestic affairs, just as Americans don't want The Hague ruling on Americans in an International Court of Law. Again, who can blame them for wanting what we want? I ask you to ask yourselves why would the mainstream press be harping on the "China is evil" theme? Sat, 15 Oct 2011 06:18:52 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19cbae00c31007ab44469985e8a939e2.6a1&show_article=1#IDComment207761693 http://biggovernment.com/amarcus/2011/04/20/confirmed-cbs-editors-refuse-to-release-full-audio-of-obama-hot-mic-recording/#IDComment144616410 Collusion Broadcast Service Wed, 20 Apr 2011 20:47:07 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/amarcus/2011/04/20/confirmed-cbs-editors-refuse-to-release-full-audio-of-obama-hot-mic-recording/#IDComment144616410 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19d12e5647311a6750cb654cad6306f8.3e1&show_article=1#IDComment134378886 Tokyo is okay. But worried about the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant up north. Teams on site assessing next move. Sat, 12 Mar 2011 06:41:23 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.19d12e5647311a6750cb654cad6306f8.3e1&show_article=1#IDComment134378886 http://tv.breitbart.com/flashback-barney-frank-jokes-about-assassination-attempt-on-cheney/#IDComment123163326 Because Liberals will almost always choose other Liberals, even if those choices are clearly inferior to a Conservative. That's the only reason why Democrats are elected nowadays. There exists a built-in voting audience that, short of a scandal that hurts their cause, if there is a D on the ballot, they will choose it, even if they despise the candidate (which they will never admit). They will look for some reason, obscure usually, such as, 'Well, I don't agree with everything he says, but his stance on (insert cause) is strong, and I think that's more important than what he does in private". The cause is often something like 'the environment' which is a good one to choose for Liberals, because rarely does anyone know the full voting record of a particular Senator or Congressmen on the very complicated and special interest laden minefield of 'the environment'. So they can choose it without being called out on their choice. This is why I think it's a must for Conservatives to advertise the voting records of such people in news media - full page ads in print media, commercials on network and cable voting the appalling congressional history of elected officials such as Barney Frank. There are enough good people, even on the Left, who, if they are confronted with clear facts about the voting records, will back off voting for such inept and corrupt officials in future. Sun, 23 Jan 2011 11:08:54 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/flashback-barney-frank-jokes-about-assassination-attempt-on-cheney/#IDComment123163326 http://tv.breitbart.com/truck-crashes-into-oncoming-traffic/#IDComment123161189 Why does the vehicle have a mounted video camera? Is it a patrol car? Sun, 23 Jan 2011 10:59:36 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/truck-crashes-into-oncoming-traffic/#IDComment123161189 http://tv.breitbart.com/abcs-amanpour-links-jfkrfk-assassinations-to-todays-political-atmosphere/#IDComment123110823 She's right. Both Lee Harvey Oswald and Jared Loughner were loners, misfits and both read The Communist Manifesto. Sun, 23 Jan 2011 05:30:19 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/abcs-amanpour-links-jfkrfk-assassinations-to-todays-political-atmosphere/#IDComment123110823 http://tv.breitbart.com/abc-news-staffer-warns-gop-against-obamacare-repeal/#IDComment119243453 ...next time you refer to Republicans as war mongers or 'war junkies'.... "I didn't. And the one politician I like that I listed is a Republican....who isn't a war junkie. That doesn't mean the vast majority of both parties aren't. " I thought I caught that phrase in your implied description of McCain, no? Also, I didn't list the duration of wars for a reason. The American involvement in World War II lasted less than 5 years - hard to believe isn't it? Especially when we consider that it had such monumental impact on our present world - your life and my life and everyone else's alive today. Everyone. Also hard to believe that in that relatively short span of time it is believed more were killed than in all the other wars listed. So, duration of war - you bring up Iraq still going on and lasting longer - both true - isn't as important as lives lost is it? Or are days on a calendar more important than the lives of human beings? Panama and Granada were both operations not wars. Semantics I know. And one could argue that Somalia was also an operation because it did start out as one, under Bush '41 (R). A humanitarian relief operation that was transformed by Clinton (D) into a policing, arrest, search and destroy mission - war. Also, many could argue that Iraq I and Iraq II/Afghanistan are the same war, just with a gap or lull between the action. That would make this present war even longer in duration, but once again, in terms of lives lost, nothing in comparison with WWII. The margin is far from slim. As for this: "What you posted here I could have posted maybe some half-dozen years ago. But I grew out of it. So there is always hope. " You'll have to clarify your point here. I appreciate recommended reading suggestions, but for now, the shelf is quite full. Mon, 3 Jan 2011 04:36:36 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/abc-news-staffer-warns-gop-against-obamacare-repeal/#IDComment119243453 http://tv.breitbart.com/abc-news-staffer-warns-gop-against-obamacare-repeal/#IDComment119168278 For further reference, next time you refer to Republicans as war mongers or 'war junkies' you might want to consider the following: Presidents who waged war in America: WWI - Wilson (Democrat) WWII - FDR (Democrat. Germany's rise to power was a direct result of the actions and sanctions by Wilson (Democrat) at Versailles) The only time in human history atomic bombs were used on civilians was by order of a Democrat president, Harry Truman. And he did it twice. Korea - Truman (Democrat) Vietnam - JFK (Democrat), then LBJ (Democrat) War finally ended by Nixon (Republican) Minor 'wars': Kosovo - Clinton (Democrat), Somalia - Clinton (Democrat), Bosnia - Clinton (Democrat) Iraq I - Bush '41 (Republican) Iraq/Afghanistan - Bush '43 (Republican) Not sure how your math is, but any way you calculate it, reasons for war being right or wrong, notwithstanding, Democrats have brought war upon the U.S., declared war, waged it, and killed far more combatants and civilians domestic and international than Republicans by a very, very wide margin. Now, you were saying about war mongering? Sun, 2 Jan 2011 15:29:58 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/abc-news-staffer-warns-gop-against-obamacare-repeal/#IDComment119168278 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/30/top-25-left-wing-films-13-three-days-of-the-condor-1975/#IDComment118890588 Redford is wonderful. Dunaway is scrumptious. Some of their best work here. But it's Max who really steals this film for me. The Swede is superb as the cold, inhumane killer with humanity - possessing more of it than those who've hired him. And the character he plays, though by today's Hollywood has become a cliche, is not entirely fabricated from the writer's mind. Far from it. In fact it's based on a very real and very humane (relatively) human being. My one problem with this film, aside from the portrayal of the NYT as the bastion of all that will save us, is the score. Dave Grusin, whom I do enjoy, was not an appropriate choice. This film needed a different musician to set the mood. I feel Grusin's score underscored (no pun) the action and the tension. If Sydney were alive today, I'd love to ask him about this point. Painfully, Higgin's (Cliff Robertson) office is located in the one place it could no longer be. A sad symmetry that Sydney no doubt was unaware he was making at the time. I also find it funny that the book's days of six were halved to three. Now that's Hollywood! Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:37:33 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/30/top-25-left-wing-films-13-three-days-of-the-condor-1975/#IDComment118890588 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/30/tcms-documentary-on-hollywood-history-wildly-misses-the-mark/#IDComment118886625 Right on the money. Sad news. TCM used to be the last great hope of celebrating movies on television. Too bad they have to try to send a message. They should've listened to the mogul who said to use Western Union instead. When I hear about these kinds of efforts, I wonder, where do liberals come from anyway? How did they get that way? Is it a brain disorder or something in the diet? Because good grief, they are relentless in their undying pursuit of being wrong about everything and pretending not to be. Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:54:29 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/30/tcms-documentary-on-hollywood-history-wildly-misses-the-mark/#IDComment118886625 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/30/tcms-documentary-on-hollywood-history-wildly-misses-the-mark/#IDComment118885865 Well said. Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:45:03 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/30/tcms-documentary-on-hollywood-history-wildly-misses-the-mark/#IDComment118885865 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.656da7e054abfd32af35ccd9e46c1fc5.221&show_article=1#IDComment103621997 Lol! Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:24:52 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.656da7e054abfd32af35ccd9e46c1fc5.221&show_article=1#IDComment103621997 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.656da7e054abfd32af35ccd9e46c1fc5.221&show_article=1#IDComment103621848 This has been known for years. Why is it suddenly news? Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:23:11 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.656da7e054abfd32af35ccd9e46c1fc5.221&show_article=1#IDComment103621848 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2010/09/23/gay-sex-killing-bush-the-outstanding-bravery-of-the-wachowskis/#IDComment100860165 Surprisingly, that's not true. I used to live in New Hope, Bucks County, PA, which is an artist's colony/farming community on the Delaware River (right where Washington crossed). Most of the artists there are gay - big surprise - but so are the shop and business owners who are overwhelmingly wealthy as well. Most of them were Bush/Cheney supporters. Some celebrities own farms there, too, Robert Redford among them, though neither gay nor a Bush supporter obviously. Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:29:18 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2010/09/23/gay-sex-killing-bush-the-outstanding-bravery-of-the-wachowskis/#IDComment100860165