Of course, Al’s first ‘Bush-bashing’ was on 1990’s In Case… CD/video during the end of Stigmata when he said “Fuck George Bush”…but then he says ‘fuck’ to pretty much everything else on the planet at the end of that song. [crazy]
[reply]
His rantings are often ill informed and just plain stupid, making broad, sweeping generalisations about a subject he seems to know little about.
Hey, I agree with Senor Peligro. How about that?
I don’t like Bush. I think he did two good things in his Presidency so far (and I can’t remember what one of them was). But I DON’T think there was some sort of vast conspiracy behind 9/11 or hurricane Katrina to kill American citizens, as Al seems to, or that Bush is the most evil man on the planet.[/reply]
I think what they’re getting at is that the US government used these disasters as an excuse to go apeshit, clamping down on freedom of speech, invading other countries, controlling the media to such an extent that it’s laughable, that sort of thing. all those lovely things it always wanted to do but never had a valid reason to… mind you, 911 was kinda convenient… this sort of thing has been done before, and it will be done again. i’d like to point out that i’m in no way anti-american, i just can’t stand abuse of power.
I think what they’re getting at is that the US government used these disasters as an excuse to go apeshit, clamping down on freedom of speech, invading other countries, controlling the media to such an extent that it’s laughable, that sort of thing. all those lovely things it always wanted to do but never had a valid reason to…
yeah but that is kind of “stating the obvious”…
I think what they’re getting at is that the US government used these disasters as an excuse to go apeshit, clamping down on freedom of speech, invading other countries, controlling the media to such an extent that it’s laughable[/reply]
Hmm I agree with the other statements you’ve made but I don’t know how much they have clamped down on or tried to control the media…
I mean we still got that idiot Michael Moore spouting his bullshit every which way didn’t we? And there are obviously many more examples, including the entire CNN network. Overtly biased liberal media is alive and well…not that that’s necessarily a good thing.
How exactly did they “control the media”?
If you mean by the limited coverage of the recent wars in the Middle East, then you are quite mistaken.
You see the reporters are forced to ride with Marines and other troops for practical safety reasons. They can only get so much coverage of the battle field without risking their own safety. Many of them currently stay in hotels in the safer parts of Iraq and pay Iraqi informants for information.
The military has their own reporters who are both aoldiers and journalists, but these reporters obviously tend to be biased. These are the ones who are able to penetrate deepest into what’s really going on, but their reports are sometimes limited or classified by the higher-ups.
Also this war has raised an interesting question:
Is it the soldiers’ job to protect independent journalists and allow them full coverage on the battlefield? Some marines have died because they had to take extra risks protecting inexperienced reporters on the field. Is that right?
At the same time, the U.S. citizens are supposedly the ones supporting this war effort and we have a right to be kept up to date on it.
So I really don’t know what should be done about this issue.
But please, show me how Bush is “controlling the media” will you?
if what i said was stating the obvious, why is bush in power? it might be obvious to me and you, but there’s obviously a lot of people who are oblivious.
as for controlling the media, i wasn’t really speaking about how reporters have to be selective about how they report certain facts when in a warzone. bias at that level should be expected, but when the report is broadcast from a studio in the states somewhere, the context is lost, often deliberately. networks like fox simply do not state both sides of the story. News should be factual, not political, not emotional, not even entertainment. the viewer should be able to make up their own minds about a situation, they should not be influenced by rupert murdoch or some other over-opinionated media mogul who decides what the ‘correct’ news is to broadcast. much like bush’s original election where the major news networks were reporting him as having won, even though it was still up in the air - because that’s the result the network owners wanted. unfortunately most of these people are on bush’s side. after all, they’re all business men, out to make as much money as possible. how come there was no serious reporting on halliburton getting all those contracts? why is new orleans being ignored by the media? the overtly liberal media too, is just as bad (although the lesser of two evils). how can anything that’s biased, even in the slightest, be considered a reliable source of information for the general public?
i wonder how many hundreds of millions of dollars Bush has in his media budget? I imagine it’s a bit more than mcdonalds… and how many kids around the world are getting fat cos of their advertising?
so, how many mistakes does the government admit to on TV? how many do you think they’ve made? How many attrocities have american soldiers committed? how many human rights have they violated? how many innocent people have died or been abused? do you think it’s fairly represented in the media? do you think the US government is perfect? I’m just trying to say that everything is controlled, even if you don’t realise it. what about when bush claimed he saw the first plane crash into the tower live on tv, and how horrified he was? he was using the media to try and show the people that he cared. he was lying though, unfortunately.
and people like michael moore are tolerated because they don’t change anything. most westernised societies are too apethetic about politics these days, which is a shame.
sorry if i’m coming across preachy, i don’t mean to be. i’m just pissed off at the state of the world at the moment and i find it harder to watch the news every day.
oh, i just want to say that most of what i’ve said could be applied to the british government, media and military too. it’s not just the americans!
if what i said was stating the obvious, why is bush in power? it might be obvious to me and you, but there’s obviously a lot of people who are oblivious.
as for controlling the media, i wasn’t really speaking about how reporters have to be selective about how they report certain facts when in a warzone. bias at that level should be expected, but when the report is broadcast from a studio in the states somewhere, the context is lost, often deliberately. networks like fox simply do not state both sides of the story. News should be factual, not political, not emotional, not even entertainment. the viewer should be able to make up their own minds about a situation, they should not be influenced by rupert murdoch or some other over-opinionated media mogul who decides what the ‘correct’ news is to broadcast. much like bush’s original election where the major news networks were reporting him as having won, even though it was still up in the air - because that’s the result the network owners wanted. unfortunately most of these people are on bush’s side. after all, they’re all business men, out to make as much money as possible. how come there was no serious reporting on halliburton getting all those contracts? why is new orleans being ignored by the media? the overtly liberal media too, is just as bad (although the lesser of two evils). how can anything that’s biased, even in the slightest, be considered a reliable source of information for the general public?
i wonder how many hundreds of millions of dollars Bush has in his media budget? I imagine it’s a bit more than mcdonalds… and how many kids around the world are getting fat cos of their advertising?
so, how many mistakes does the government admit to on TV? how many do you think they’ve made? How many attrocities have american soldiers committed? how many human rights have they violated? how many innocent people have died or been abused? do you think it’s fairly represented in the media? do you think the US government is perfect? I’m just trying to say that everything is controlled, even if you don’t realise it. what about when bush claimed he saw the first plane crash into the tower live on tv, and how horrified he was? he was using the media to try and show the people that he cared. he was lying though, unfortunately.
and people like michael moore are tolerated because they don’t change anything. most westernised societies are too apethetic about politics these days, which is a shame.
sorry if i’m coming across preachy, i don’t mean to be. i’m just pissed off at the state of the world at the moment and i find it harder to watch the news every day.
You don’t understand the media. These are private corporations. FOX is one-sided with a right wing slant because its owner, the billionaire Rupert Murdoch is a die hard Republican and Bush supporter.
News is news. News has been deliberately sensattionalized for a long time and believe me it has nothing to do with the Government.
I don’t think Bush was lying about how horrified he was at the 9/11 crash I mean jesus christ…what do you think these people are somehow seeing it on private satellite cameras hours before the rest of the world sees it!! Come on dude stop with this whiney liberal conspiracy theory “Bush-is-Satan” bullshit.
I don’t like him either but you need to educate
I’m downloading it right now. This thread has got me buzzing. I’ll be back tomorrow with my initial thoughts.
[reply]if what i said was stating the obvious, why is bush in power? it might be obvious to me and you, but there’s obviously a lot of people who are oblivious.
as for controlling the media, i wasn’t really speaking about how reporters have to be selective about how they report certain facts when in a warzone. bias at that level should be expected, but when the report is broadcast from a studio in the states somewhere, the context is lost, often deliberately. networks like fox simply do not state both sides of the story. News should be factual, not political, not emotional, not even entertainment. the viewer should be able to make up their own minds about a situation, they should not be influenced by rupert murdoch or some other over-opinionated media mogul who decides what the ‘correct’ news is to broadcast. much like bush’s original election where the major news networks were reporting him as having won, even though it was still up in the air - because that’s the result the network owners wanted. unfortunately most of these people are on bush’s side. after all, they’re all business men, out to make as much money as possible. how come there was no serious reporting on halliburton getting all those contracts? why is new orleans being ignored by the media? the overtly liberal media too, is just as bad (although the lesser of two evils). how can anything that’s biased, even in the slightest, be considered a reliable source of information for the general public?
i wonder how many hundreds of millions of dollars Bush has in his media budget? I imagine it’s a bit more than mcdonalds… and how many kids around the world are getting fat cos of their advertising?
so, how many mistakes does the government admit to on TV? how many do you think they’ve made? How many attrocities have american soldiers committed? how many human rights have they violated? how many innocent people have died or been abused? do you think it’s fairly represented in the media? do you think the US government is perfect? I’m just trying to say that everything is controlled, even if you don’t realise it. what about when bush claimed he saw the first plane crash into the tower live on tv, and how horrified he was? he was using the media to try and show the people that he cared. he was lying though, unfortunately.
and people like michael moore are tolerated because they don’t change anything. most westernised societies are too apethetic about politics these days, which is a shame.
sorry if i’m coming across preachy, i don’t mean to be. i’m just pissed off at the state of the world at the moment and i find it harder to watch the news every day.
You don’t understand the media. These are private corporations. FOX is one-sided with a right wing slant because its owner, the billionaire Rupert Murdoch is a die hard Republican and Bush supporter.
News is news. News has been deliberately sensattionalized for a long time and believe me it has nothing to do with the Government.
I don’t think Bush was lying about how horrified he was at the 9/11 crash I mean jesus christ…what do you think these people are somehow seeing it on private satellite cameras hours before the rest of the world sees it!! Come on dude stop with this whiney liberal conspiracy theory “Bush-is-Satan” bullshit.
I don’t like him either but you need to educate[/reply]
lol! i was a media teacher for 6 years [laugh]
yes, these networks are privately owned - by bush’s supporters. he’s in power because of their support. they report what looks good for america, what looks good for business, what looks good for bush. how is that not controlling the media? you are the most powerful man on the planet, and everyone does what you want. good for bush, bad for everyone that’s not his friend.
yes, news is news as well, and it has been sensationalised for a long time… although more so by american networks than, say, the BBC. although the BBC are slowly becoming more and more non-neutral, more americanized. the point is, who allows this to happen? who takes advantage of it? it’s not me or you, it’s the government.
as soon as any new form of media is created, it’s exploited for profit. print, radio, tv, the internet… unforutnately the president of the US is a business man, as was virtually every other politician before him… and him and his cronies are well versed in manipulating the media and therefore the public. why do you think the word propaganda exists? hitler was great at it. the nazi party burnt down that town hall and then blamed it on partisans didn’t they? a war on terror? what the fuck is that? why not have a war on fear and depression while we’re at it? don’t you think it’s funny how bush has started a ‘war’ that can never end? why aren’t there any reports going “oh, hang on a moment, isn’t attacking terror a little bit, er, impossible?”. but it’s on tv, it must be true… so who’s the enemy? where’s the threat? why not just invade pakistan or china? at least you’d have found some WMDs… WMDs? what a term! weapons of mass destruction. could have been applied to any big missile that was found, retrospectively. unfortunately they didn’t find anything remotely like that, unlucky, eh?
oh, and i don’t doubt bush was horrified by 911 (evil and fucking stupid are not the same thing), who couldn’t be? the thing he lied about was witnessing it live on tv. why say something that was blatantly a lie? he was using the media, literally. he saw an opportunity to boost his ratings and took it.
bush is a fucking idiot, but then he’s not much better than blair, thaksin or any other leader.
OK, I’ve listened to it a couple of times now. Not my thing at all, unfortunately. I just find it really boring. Seems like it’s a retread of “Houses of the Mole” which was of course a retread of “Psalm 69”.
Seems like it’s a retread of “Houses of the Mole”
not exactly true, but close.
which was of course a retread of “Psalm 69”.
totally not true.
Lyrically, it is a retread of HOTM. But on a musical level I consider this and DSOTS the two “oddball” Ministry albums that just don’t really sound like anything else they’ve done. Anyone else think that?
Seems like it’s a retread of “Houses of the Mole”
not exactly true, but close.
which was of course a retread of “Psalm 69”.
totally not true.
I disagree in that I’d say in terms of sound, RGB, HOTM and P69 all sound more similar than any other two of Ministry’s albums. Similar themes lyrically too (and no, I’m not just talking about the Bush references).
psalm 69 has tons more stuff in it than houses and blood combined. i can’t see how houses is similar to psalm. psalm is industrial metal, houses of the mole is sort of… punkish metal.
Lyrically they all seem to tread similar ground. It seems that Al has run out of lyrical content outside of the Bush regime and war for oil. At least Psalm 69 seemed fresh and exciting at the time. Now, it all seems so predictable. I don’t care how ‘Evil’ Bush and his cronies may be, this shit is beginning to stink.
Funnily enough, I played RGB to a bunch of friends the other night, who were all big Ministry fans once upon a time. After hearing ten seconds of the opening track, one of my friends rolled his eyes and said ‘Oh, they’re not STILL rattling on about Bush!!! Don’t these guys EVER evolve??!?’
I think we made it through to tack three or four before someone turned it off.
All I could do was smile.
I like this new one a lot.
I don’t think it’s thrash so much. There are a few songs that have a real different taste… Ass Clown, Khyber Pass, Ganggreen…
Of course, for someone who’s used to listen only to Depeche Mode or Morrisey, the whole album might sound a bit too… [put what you want here].
I even think they reinvented their sound again.
Really nice album. Definitely better than HOTM, Psalm96 and Animositisomina. Rio grande Blood sounds fresh and innovative.
Rio grande Blood sounds fresh and innovative.
how so? lyrics are almost the same as houses.
music? it’s all been done before, everything.
even khyber pass.
Lyrically, it is a retread of HOTM. But on a musical level I consider this and DSOTS the two “oddball” Ministry albums that just don’t really sound like anything else they’ve done. Anyone else think that?
Though I don’t think it would have seemed so oddball if it had followed Psalm, I remember a number of people were really hoping, and perhaps even expecting, a Ministry thrash album back then. “Filth Pig” was a 180.
I’m digging the new album and even think the samples in RGB are really funny, much funnier than any of them in “Houses” (though I appear to be in the minority in that I quite like “Mole”, much better than “Animosisitioaodeldlj”).
But, yeah, I think looked at now RGB and Dark Side are a bit the odd guys out.
Rio grande Blood sounds fresh and innovative.
how so? lyrics are almost the same as houses.
music? it’s all been done before, everything.
even khyber pass.
If they have been done before, I haven’t heard those versions 
I can’t pinpoint one particular thing about the Rio Grande Blood which makes it so innovative/fresh, but It makes me smile and I get “good vibes” from it, thats enough for me. It’s really nice and surprising that Ministry can evolve like this after all these years. But of course you are entitled to your opinion. Just wanted to share my thoughts about the album, not to start a flame war 