text:
Comments:Republican Congressman Ron Paul endorses Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin for President of the United States

Baldwin who? Ron Paul just lost all credibility. People know Barr and Nader. This Baldwin guy just seems to be a puppet candidate with nothing to add to the debate except strange comments about how McCain was the mastermind behind September 11. Great choice, Dr Paul. Jeesh.

Hell no.

dysfunctional
This is more dysfunctional than an episode of Dynasty.

This is the right choice...
Yes, I believe he did. The American people could then make a more informed decision. Voting for someone you truly believe in is more important than voting the lesser of two evils. I could not live with myself if I voted for either Dem's or Rep's in the Presidential election, when I do not believe that their change is the change that we desperately need. I watched both the Democrat and the Republican conventions. From what I saw Obama's change was going back to the old spend and expand the government. The Republican's are not much better since they have expanded government spending tremendously over the last 8 years. There are certain things that should be left to the states to manage. If education was left at the state level then we could save a lot of money by not having to fund the Dept of Education because the states would be funding there own local departments. Don't get me started on taxes. What is wrong with a straight 10% across the board tax as oppose to the messed up tax system we have today. People should not have to higher an accountant so they can get back as much as they can in their tax refund. I keep hearing how there was surplus in the late 90's. How could their be a surplus if we still had a hugh trillion dollar debt? Any way I suggest you check out one of the third party candidates for real change. It is better than voting for someone you do not believe would best represent your views. As for me I am voting for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. He best represents my views than anyone else I have found today.

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams

- Click to the http://constitutionparty.com - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom http://www.baldwin08.com - Chuck Baldwin for President

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=582 Friends - please read this new and important piece by Dr. Paul.
 * There was a "surplus" in the 90's because the government was taking in more money than they spent, thus helping reduce the national debt --199.190.223.190 13:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

For the above question of how a surplus works with a trillion dollar debt, a federal government budget surplus would imply the debt is not getting larger, and there is money which could have been (theoretically) used to pay off the debt. I think that a big part of that surplus in the Clinton years, though, was due to fancy accounting, and not due to actually taking in more money than they were spending. The debt we owe to the Federal Reserve is bull, though (and that's something like 40% of the public debt). How does the government pay back the interest and principle on that? By "borrowing" money from the Fed (the Fed creates it out of thin air), at interest. 207.224.116.239 17:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Choice
Of course he did. Would he really support Barr? I don't think so. Too bad he didn't do it long ago though. Chuck is a far better choice.

Glad
I am glad Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin. Dr. Baldwin is very close to Dr. Paul's views, ie pro life, pro constitution and anti Fed. I have placed a Chuck Baldwin sign in my yard and will walk my precinct for Chuck.

Rick Martin, Buhl, Idaho

Baldwin/Castle
Chuck Baldwin, although a church pastor with a strong pro-life stance, believes correctly that the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to rule on abortion, save for a constitutional amendment. Little by little, the Democratic and Republican parties are starting to realize that their two party dictatorship is starting to be seen by the American people for the sham it really is. I believe that Bob Barr forced Paul into making some kind of endorsement by not attending the press conference, making many Libertarian voters question their own plans to vote for Barr and wondering who else they should consider voting for. I don't believe that Paul made this endorsement out of spite. Barr shot himself in the foot by wrongly choosing to skip the press conference, big time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.108.119.137 (talk) 09:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Dissapointed
I am disappointed that Paul chose to endorse this candidate. There are several non-liberty stances taken by the Constitution Party. Anonymous101talk 16:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What other choices does he have? Fephisto (talk) 01:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Why does it matter?
3rd party candiates don't win. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.148.62 (talk) 17:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So? The point of voting isn't to win.  Fephisto (talk) 01:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Big mistake
The views and goals of a religious fanatic are incompatable with libertarian views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.68.32.6 (talk) 19:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there any cite for the claim that "Snubgate" has actually caused Barr to "rapidly decrease in popularity"? Sure, there are a lot of people complaining on-line about him, but by and large they're the same people that were complaining about him before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.21.167 (talk) 01:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong choice.
I actually began for a brief time to actually warm up to Ron Paul, who was giving a broad endorsement to alternative politics, but now he turns his back on that and gives a sole endorsement to fucking Chuck (wants to build a bible based government) Baldwin? Nothing even remotely constitutional about this guy, I'd rather vote for McCain and Obama while eating dogshit then vote for him.

Absolutely yes. Chuck is a man who can be trusted to do the right thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.145.146 (talk) 02:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

"Although he refers to himself as "The Abraham Lincoln of this generation", he has also spoken of Lincoln (along with Woodrow Wilson) as one of the two "worst presidents" in history. Baldwin is also a supporter of private schools and an opponent of the Department of Education." -Wikipedia Article on Chuck Baldwin

This shows that the man is clearly not educated. He practically called himself the worst choice for President and is still running. Instead of education reform he wants to get rid of the whole system so only the elite can be educated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.229.31 (talk) 04:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Who else?
Barr is not a libertarian by any means, McCain/Obama I believe have already been commented on, and Cynthia/Nader are socialists. Fephisto (talk) 01:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Responsible choice
Third party politics should be about a professional bid for a more diverse political scene, not a popularity contest. Paul did the right thing to delegitimize Barr's grandstanding. —Shii (talk) 07:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

If he wanted to be a wuss, yes.
He should have endorsed himself, declared himself an American for America, and urge everyone to simply write in his name if he can't get on the ballot. If you walk up to an electronic voting booth, federal law mandates that there be an "other" box - check it and when they come up to you to verify and give you a physical ballot to write on and sign, vote for who you want! Be it Paul, Bush, a sock, whatever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.144.241 (talk) 07:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


text: User:IDangerMouse

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User:IDangerMouse


text:
Comments:Mass delivery of anti-Islamic DVDs in swing voting states

Should the film have been distributed to private homes? Have you seen the film?
What next, propaganda bombs full of leaflets saying "You must vote for Bush/McCain or you will die painfully! And don't ever dare to ask any real questions or you will die!"? This is ridiculous. 74.227.163.224 05:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hahahahaha, not democrat Azmi 03:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This guy before me is kind of an idiot.
I live in Florida and recieved this documentary. It is not incendiary towards the Muslim community at large, simply the movement in Islam that seeks to destroy our civilization and has stated that as being it's objective. It does not mention anything about George Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama, or the election. It deals strictly with radical Islam and how it is a big problem in our world. If you feel like Obama can do a better job handling it than, by all means, vote for him in November.

Also, this article is written in a bias manner. I enjoy the concept of wikinews, but I often feel like the information presented is written by passionate fools, perhaps I will get my news elsewhere. Really, calling a man a "talking head" in a supposedly objective article. You should be ashamed of yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.54.64 (talk) 11:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * You're serious about "talking head" being a biased term? Is it left or right? cuz I thought everyone had a head, and everyone talks.....are you missing a head?

 * I live in the same state as you and I did not shit.--66.229.17.181 13:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Not sure why you feel the need to insult everyone 132. If you feel that "talking head" was a bad word to put (and I don't feel it was, as they were talking heads as far as I had been told by the various sources. I also called them analysts, counter-terrorists, etc, in other articles, and most of the time, yet you conveniently ignored that). If the talking head is the only instance of bias in the article you have (and I did put in collaboration that I was having a difficult time keeping it neutral as every source was very heavily biased), then go right ahead and change it. And yes, it was an election issue. Sending a mass, expensive amount of terrorist-related DVDs to swing states is an election issue. Please stop pretending, it's laughable. Again, if you see a problem, change it, but as far as I see others find it neutral enough (I challenge you to write any article 100% neutral). --Poisonous (talk) 16:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

To clarify a "talking head" is a standard term used in the television/movie industry to describe a scene in which there is no action and the shot focuses largly on the dialog of the speaker and his image. This is most notable in news, interviews and monologs. It in no way is derogitory or degrading. It's quite litterally a description of the type of scene and used throughout world media. (I've worked in broadcasting on a national and international level for the past 7 years). —216.113.208.150 17:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Islamic videos
The most alarming aspect of "Obsession" is the speech of the Mullahs in the mosques. Their earnest exhortation of the audience to slaughter Jews and the audience response is appalling. An undercover video (google "undercover mosque video") in England will show the same thing. CAIR and other apologists for Islam know this is going on, they just hate having it revealed. James Johnson

Hate speech
This sort of racist islamofascistic rubbish that is quoted in the DVD video documentary has no place in the world.

America

 * The intent of the founders, particularly the Anti-Federalists, was to create a government where all religions were kept separate from state affairs. What people do with their religions in the private sector is their own business.  The people who made this film may or may not be racist, hateful, fearful, or whatever, or perhaps not -- that sort of opinion depends on your own prejudices (and don't think you don't have them) -- but the government has no place intervening in their right to have their opinions and pronounce them to anyone who wants to hear.  If you receive this film and don't like it, throw it away like any other junk mail -- they can't make you watch it or make you agree with them.  Also, as far as "hate speech" goes:  that's about as fascist as one can get.  The minute you start dictating what opinions people can or can't have, YOU are the one advocating the Thought Police.  "Hate speech" is SPEECH, and "hate crimes" are CRIMES.  If a crime is committed, you punish the crime -- you can't (or, rather, shouldn't) dole out extra punishment because the person has an opinion you don't like.  Who's the real hater, here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.216.238.26 (talk) 13:18, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Hmm... name-calling and an attempt to silence critics by force... gee, you don't happen to be exactly the kind of Muslim this video is there to warn us of, do you? The ironee... she burns! 151.190.254.108 13:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Interesting that the post these originally applied to has disappeared.

 * It was Freedom *From* Religion, by using freedom of religion as a tool. The idea was that if the religions were too busy fighting each other's ideology, then they wouldn't have any effort left to spend attempting to interfere with the government (one of the central tenants of the founding father's ideology was that Monarchy is a bad idea, and it was well known at the time that religion and monarchy worked together to prop each other up and repress the people. That's where the strong anti-religious sentiments of the founding fathers originated. Well, that and the fact that they were all Deists, which is an anti-religious philosophy by its nature very). Gopher65talk 14:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * The problem I see, 66, is that these were delivered to people's homes without their asking. It also targeted a religion that several of the people who got the DVD are a part of. And that it was focused on swing states is even worse. But you are right, it's hate speech, not hate crimes. No one wants to bar them from distributing or having or making videos like this: but delivering them to people's homes without their permission is rude and could frighten Muslims who may perceive it as a threat.--Poisonous (talk) 16:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I say again: "If you receive this film and don't like it, throw it away like any other junk mail -- they can't make you watch it or make you agree with them."  Also, I didn't say it's hate speech -- I simply said "hate speech" (whatever someone might consider that to be) should not be silenced, and "hate crimes" (whatever someone might think those are) should not receive extra punishment.  Crimes are crimes, opinions are not; and the notion of free speech exists specifically to protect the opinions of people you disagree with.  The minute opinions become crimes, and speech is no longer free, we're all in big trouble -- which, it seems, is how it may already be, and it's only getting worse.  And, incidentally, anything (and I do mean anything) can be PERCEIVED as a threat.  Punishing people for maybe-threats is tough.  Unless someone is willing to state a threat plainly, it's hard to be reasonably certain of their intent.  (Further, even if someone intends a threat does not mean they intend, or are even able, to follow through ... but that's straying from the subject at hand.)

1) Deism is not anti-religious. 2) while many of the U.S.A.'s "founding fathers" were Deists, it was far from all of them. 3) if the "founding fathers" were anti-religious, they would not have added the "free excercise" clause to the First Ammendment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.216.57 (talk) 08:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Lulz
Because radical Catholicism adamantly opposed to radical Islam is different. It's for the good of the people! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smackdat (talk • contribs) 12:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

wow
I try ordering it on Netflex and it is on very long wait. --66.229.17.181 17:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... let's examine the film from a different perspective. We'll replace Muslim extremist with Judeo-Israeli/Christian-American-Right Wing-neocon extremist alliance.

Ah look, the video is not attacking ALL Americans/Israelis, just ones that meet certain criteria. Most of the people with their religion are OK, it's just these certain members with influence that are extreme... Wow, look at all these videos of these people using war machines against civilians.

Now listen to their jingoism and hate rhetoric (think hardcore Israeli "settlers" and jackass rednecks talking about 'hadjis.'

The point is that it's pretty simple to make a group look like it's at war with you.

So the question is: why do you want to do this; what are the motives?

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." -Herman Goering

Bah, you know what? I don't have time for small minded people who want to fight a perpetual war against Muslims and whose basis for thinking their own country or culture is righteously superior to others is a nagging anxiety if you try to go against the repetitive programming you received in childhood. You're obviously fearfully-oriented, propaganda-susceptible, xenophobic people who already have your minds made up, so what's the point? I had more to write, but it really is futile. Cheers to your successes. May it lead to a new chapter in your religious tomes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.146.72.234 (talk) 17:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

This appears to be available on VeohTV in multiple languages. I just now started watching it so I don't have a conclusive opinion, but it does appear quite propagandist and sensationalist in style and rhetoric.97.81.77.13 18:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Junk that goes into the garbage
The organization responsible here is not far off from the likes of the stormfront idiots but look for those groups to adopt this tactic soon too. They probably have the same advisors. That is the downside of cheap movie making technology. Even the crazy kooks and loons can make them and then throw them at you. Looks like I'll have to start throwing away junk DVDs as well as junk mail. 65.1.172.18 18:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Facts
Let's use images of burning WTC towers as a reminder of all the radical Arab Muslims that want to destroy America! Spread again and again "never forget" bumper stickers. God Bless America.

And to add to that, if I recall on the day of 9/11, pretty much every news channel showed the Towers getting smashed repeatedly, over and over and over. Never forget. But then, why could'nt they show one single clip of anything hitting the pentagon? Should we forget about that? So many conspiracy "theories" yet not one shred of proof otherwise. Just that all tapes were confiscated, and no information disclosed. "Its a matter of national security". Why? why is a plane hitting the WTC not a matter of national security but a plane hitting the pentagon is. I'm confused and i think that's exactly what our administration wants.

--

Maybe the videos show an explicit footage of some official there boinking his secretary —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.31.198.193 (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Radicalism
Why not go after all fundamentalism/radicalism? Notice how the cover of the DVD says Radical Islam, not Islam, you don't need to cry racist just because someone documents a radical group, as long as they use sound facts. Not all Muslims want to go out and kill, in fact, very few do. All radicalism is evil and needs to be defeated (not necessarily by interventionism...), but calling people racists or bigots will only give radical groups what they want. 68.189.148.241 22:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

It's true that most muslims aren't tolerant, but those who just go out and kill IMHO can be summed up in a 2 or barely 3 digit number. no reason to send out DVDs with a production cost of 50 million US$. This thing is probably up to no good :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.31.198.193 (talk) 08:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

A Clever Idea
Fantastic movie/documentary! The film provides data and accounts, but does not mention or support any political party. Its goal is to educate the American people on radical Islam, and provide testimonies and data not from the American media. However, the clear underlying goal is to make voters think ideas such as, "look at the danger of Radicals!" or "How can I protect myself from the growing popularity of Radicalism in the world?" After I saw the movie, I felt an enormous wave of patriotism, and all of a sudden saw new (but not complete) justification for any war on terror anywhere. Not showing any bias, but as these ideas relate strongly to Senator John McCain, I would surmise that the distribution of this film is for voters to support the war on terror and feel strong patriotism, both of which are ideas stronly tied in with Senator McCain. I will not say which candidate I support, but I must say, though both candidates have produced thoroghly clever propoganda programs, this is a particularly excellent idea.

 * "Both" candidates? There are more than just two.  Thinking there are only two is what has gotten us into the big heaping mess we're in now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.216.238.26 (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

"..I felt an enormous wave of patriotism.." hahahah yeah baby let's go out and kick some muslim ass woo woooo.. retard

Cant You See ?
Granted, it is not incendiary towards the Muslim community at large, simply the (radical / fundamental) movement in Islam that seeks to destroy our civilization and has stated that as being it's objective. But all radical / fundamental movements of any beliefs are dangerous to any society, correct ?

Indeed, it does not mention anything about George Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama, or the election. But why the DVDs were distributed ONLY in swing voting states ?

We should be ashamed of ourselves if we can't see what's the grand motives behind and get provoked.

Nevertheless, I agree this DVDs distribution is a clever idea to stirr up the public opinion in swing voting states using radical/fundamental Muslim issues. Simply put, hitting two birds with one stone. Yet not smart enough to anticipate the reactions from people who already fed-up with such non-sense propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.137.190.216 (talk) 11:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This Doesn't Worry Anyone?
Not that there are radical Muslims out there, but that so many people can be tricked by this one video. Of course there are that small group of radical Muslims. But there are also groups here like the KKK and the Nazis, not that they go around killing people any more. But I know a bunch of Muslims, and they don't want to kill every thing and every one to do with Western Civilization. They are just like you and me. Anyway, these radical Muslim leaders lie to their people, and trick them into fighting. Just like our great government of the U.S. did with Iraq. They said they were the ones who attacked the World Trade center, but that wasn't true. They used Americas fear into rallying us behind them. Finnaly, I got that DVD with the paper, but I didn't watch that garbage. Anyone who has completely one sided views on a group of people is stupid (actually, that right there sounds a little hypocritical). But they act like every Muslim wants to kill any Jew they meat. I have Muslims and Jews as friends, and they don't want to kill each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duckwariorrandom (talk • contribs) 11:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

You got the DVD, you didn't watch it, and yet you call it trash. If you had even read the cover of the DVD you would have noticed Radical Islam, not anything even to the effect of ALL TOWEL-HEADS ARE BAD KEEL EM. "They said they were the ones who attacked the WTC, but that wasn't true.", so the Stockholm Effect is responsible for this? In my opinion, watch the DVD before you tell everyone how "they act like every Muslim wants to kill any Jew they meet." Please put a few fire-crackers in your dominant hand, wrap your fingers around 'em REALLY tight, and light the fuses. You are an idiot. 68.189.148.241 19:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it
If it's this easy to scare people into compliance, why doesn't Obama just make up some sort of superflu to make people clamor for his free health-care system? --Smackdat (talk) 13:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

It is true
If this video were not true, I would not have been walking with a friend past a poster showing the faces of people killed in terrorist attacks and have her point to one and say "That's my cousin."

My friends would not have gone to Israel this summer to work with children traumatized from the loss of a parent or sibling.

Kobi Mandell would not have been murdered.

Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser would not have been kidnapped and held dead for two years.

I would not have spoken to an Israeli soldier who stopped a mentally retarded Palestinian boy at a checkpoint and found him carrying bombs, because he was told that if he blew himself up the girls would like him.

The Twin Towers would still be standing, and those who worked there would be alive.

You don't have to believe it if you don't want to. But please, open your eyes. Yes, there are people in this world who want to kill us.

--129.98.221.89A Jew [disclaimer: This is my personal opinion. The above are my personal experiences. I do not speak for all Jews or all North American high school students. I speak for myself.] —Preceding comment was added at 15:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Has nothing to do with the election!!! SIKE!!!!
If this is so informational why was'nt I informed of it?? Am I not important enough to get the DVD??? Why was it only swing states if it has nothing to do with the election? Apparently this information is only important for the swing states, so why should the rest of the country care??? AND why is the source of funds being kept secret? secrets?!?!?!....especially when it has to do with terrorism DVD's.

Why would it be related to the election? because McCain is all for finishing in Iraq, and Obama is for getting out. To the GOP getting out means letting the "terrorists" win and will completely undo everything we've done there for the past 6 years. To the Dem's it means ending the death count for our soldiers, letting Iraq take care of itself already, and focusing on more important issues (Domestic). Now you can argue all you want about the war in Iraq, the fact of the matter is we are helping Iraq, not ourselves....

Absolutely yes! it's imperative to see it
It is not about al Muslims, but about the radical Islamic fascism (fascism in the name of Islam) force. And CAIR is a very radical Islamic organization that its founders have stated that 'Islam isn't in America to be equal but to DOMINATE!' besides, CAIR is a pro Hamas group (that still haven't rejected its genocide of the Jews Hamas reiterates goal of world domination by Islam - annihilation of Israel -establishment of Caliphate in Jerusalem, oh! Don't lie to me that they're about "land") and is linked with Al-Arian that raised funds for the terror organization. CAIR Is basically a HATE 'wolf pack' organzation masked in "civil rights group" sheep cloting.

I agree that "you must watch obsession because CAIR doesn't want you to know the truth about radical Islam".

Americans Agianst Hate CAIR Watch CAIR = Hate & Terror Ohio against Terror Anti-Cair, Defending America from the CAIR threat The CAIR Files —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jokftt (talk • contribs) 21:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Islam is a religion like all others. It provides sanctuary and spiritual guidance to its followers. Also like other religions it has radical, self-righteous members who hide behind the name of their religion while they commit atrocious acts. I don't feel like the DVD did anything to mar the reputation of the huge majority of peace-loving Muslims. It did show us what radical zealots will do when they feel justified in hiding behind the name of their god. The comparison of these Islamic radicals to Hitler's Nazis was not a comparison of Muslims to Nazis. It was a comparison of ideolgies. Both groups are extreme, racist, self-centered and very dangerous. The intent of the DVD was to make us all pay attention to the danger that these extremists present. ---Grace 17 (talk) 22:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Seriously people...
The main issue one should have with this video isn't it's content, which is designed to spread fear and remind all of us of the dangers of terrorists that are lurking around "every" corner, but rather its manner of release. Lets send all the voters in swing states a movie about radical islam which society at large now associates with the word terrorist. That doesn't sound politically motivated at all. Not one bit. That is the main issue with this production.

And to all the people who have said that it's their right to free speech to produce and send out this video... Keep in mind, all people, whether extremist, american, british, african.... etc are people. Videos like these are what dictators use to incite hatred. What they should focus on is not that they exist but why they take such a harsh anti-west view. If you stop and think about history and all, our country has poked its nose into other countries business for centuries. We go in, kill their leader, set up a puppet government which then turns into a horrible mess and so we try and fix it by using force. It amazes me that our conflict in Iraq hasn't made more people see this. Our actions there have bred more terrorists, caused the collapse of stability, and killed hundreds upon hundreds of their people. How could people in that environment not be swayed by radical thoughts. They view it as protecting their homes from the American terror. We as Americans should stop and think how we would feel should another country come and tell us how we should be governed or try to empathize with those people who live in those countries. We are taking our influence over the world and rather than trying to benefit humanity, we are greedy and selfish. America isn't the fairytale that they try and teach you in elementary school. If we respected other countries better and tried to actually aid the people in them rather than fulfilling our own interests the world would be a better place and we wouldn't have pissed off millions of people who then turn that hate into action. WE dug our own grave when it comes to anti-west sentiments in the middle east. '''We should learn from this, defend ourselves, but also seek to rectify the situation rather than push fear into the hearts of our people. Because fear leads to hate. And hate leads to violence. And the cycle will only continue'''. So I implore you to think outside the microcosm of your life and think not of how they hate us... but why.--75.86.237.69 01:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I live in NY state, and I received one of these films. It's honestly one of the most hate filled propaganda flicks I've ever seen, and as a Muslim, I find it highly offensive that it was mailed to my house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.73.64.157 (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Do not instigate people
I think it is very wrong for the dvd to have been distributed to private homes.Though i have not wacthed the movie it is wrong to scare the American voters through such crud method, if we are sincere with ourselves can we really say the war in iraq is justified or are the producers of the movie now scared of what outcome the war will endager the coming generation of American.Why dont the American voters ask the republicans to produce evidence the chemical weapons found in Iraq.Must they the American voters allowed themselves to be deceaved in this 20th century? most of the developments going on in Saudi Arabia is being done by American firms.why take their money and still paint the islamic religeon bad just because of some few misguided people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifewire67 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

My two cents
I believe that one of the problems is the terms we use. Some may call it semantics, but unless you've been subject to stereotyping you'll never understand. (I'm a mix of Irish/German/Filipino) I don't consider terrorists part of the religions that I respect, despite what they claim otherwise. First of all "fundamentalist" should not automatically conote terrorism. It's about following the original and literal precepts of your ideas/ideology. Second, "radical" should not be associated with terrorism. In reality, it's about wanting change from the existing system, for better or for worse. Finally, "extremist", in some ways can be used to describe a terrorist, however, I feel it should be done in context of the person and their individual beliefs rather than as a prefix to a belief system they claim unto themselves. My reasoning for these ideas is that I have each of these "terms" within my own family. I have an uncle who is a Jehova's Witness, which we can think of as a fundamentalist Christian. My brother and I do not strictly adhere to many of the practices of Catholics, therefore we can be thought of as radicals. My grandmother in the Philippines used to walk on her knees to church, until she got too old and started watching church on TV, could be considered an extremist. None of us are terrorists. I propose that those misguided people who are known to be terrorists should not be connected with their claimed religions, their actions are not representative of any of the world's religions. 207.108.15.11 15:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Talk:American war deserter given stay of deportation in Canada

Image
Image link seems to be newly dead? Was it deleted for a reason?~ Sherurcij 18:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Something odd happened with the image on Commons. Fixed. Chris Mann (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 12:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:208.89.210.123

title: User talk:208.89.210.123


text:
User talk:DizzyStar

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 08:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Reviewing articles - how articles pass through editorial review
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Reviewing
Please see Reviewing articles. Generally only editors/reviewers should review articles. But thanks for being quick about it :) DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Per IRC- Dragon's not out to get you - but by your own admission you are new here. I think Dragon just wants you to get a better feel for things before you start reviewing. Reviews are supposed to be our final line of defense to stop copyright violations, style problems, etc.  You need to make sure you've read and understood the rules, policies, etc.  Items like WN:SG for example.  Another way you can think of it is in a print newspaper, the most senior/experienced member is the editor.  So... We appreciate your eagerness, I saw you wrote an article too, and while that might not make it - keep up the good work.  It is hard to get into these things, but with a little perseverance, you'll do just fine. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 06:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Table Code
Per your request.

-- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 08:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hawthorn wins 2008 AFL Grand Final
Great work on the article. That was the first time I've collaborated with some one to write an article. The article made it the the main lead as well. Well done and I hope to maybe collaborate with you again. --RockerballAustralia (talk) 07:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

2009 AFL Grand Final
Lets do it. I'm happy to do a half each.

Also see my article Australian rules football: West Gippsland Latrobe Football League Grand Final for ideas --RockerballAustralia (talk) 23:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

IRC Collab
On Grand Final day, I'll open an IRC channel dedicated to the GF. I'll email you the address then --RockerballAustralia (talk) 06:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

GF
All confirmed --RockerballAustralia (talk) 23:38, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Featured article is better --RockerballAustralia (talk) 10:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

2010 AFL GF
I'm up for another one --RockerballAustralia c 10:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Quarters 2 and 4 will be fine. Though I'm acctually a Saints supporter and disagee strongly with your assessment of the outcome.--RockerballAustralia c 06:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:DizzyStar


text:
Talk:Adam Cooney wins Brownlow Medal

Before peer review some points --Brian McNeil / talk 08:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * w:AFL leads to a disambig page
 * The sport should be explained for the international audience
 * ✅ -- DizzyStar (talk) 05:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Review

 * ✅ -- DizzyStar (talk) 05:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Second Review

 * Thanks. -- DizzyStar (talk) 06:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Adam Cooney wins Brownlow Medal


text: Template:HYS question right

title: Template:HYS question right


text:
Comments:American war deserter given stay of deportation in Canada

About time.
It is about time that a country stood up to America over this. I used to think that if I was drafted, that I would go, but you know what, I would rather be labeled as a criminal from an unjust war then be force to work for this corrupt government as a murderer. Good for deserters. They will help show the government that we will not fear them.

We need to get back to the day when the government feared the people, and worked for the people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.171.180.101 (talk) 10:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Drafted? Listen to what America's Last Great Composer had to say on the topic... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYibOaLGOh8 --Brian McNeil / talk 10:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * The Drafted been dead for years, idiots.--66.229.17.181 15:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And every time there is a major conflict some politician slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun trots it out as a solution. Considering it dead and buried is a sure-fire way to see some such muppet resurrect it, idiot. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * In the US organisations like Americans for the National Service Act (which is part of Service Nation) and Service Nation (until it changed it's website) support this form of slavery. Note that these are not small groups, the recent Service Nation conference was attended by both Obama and McCain and was widely reported on in the news media.Military Slavery is not dead and buried. Anonymous101talk 15:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * wow you both are fucking idiots. Every time the Draft comes up it's shot down even by the President Bush. And calling it slavery? So serving you county is slavery now? Both of guys are the type to defend anything anti Gov or military. And sadly this Slaves are the ones making sure assholes like you have the freedom of speech. Makes me sick if i think about it.--66.229.17.181 16:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Slave: (definition from Wiktionary) "A person who is forced to work for another." In the draft a person is forced to work for another. It is slavery. Simple. Also, remember to be civil. Anonymous101talk 16:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So, since prison inmates are forced to work within the prisons, they are slaves as well?
 * Technically, yes, although, in my opinion there is nothing morally wrong with this if the person has committed a crime and any income from it is given to the harmed party (if no one is harmed, it should not be a crime) Anonymous101talk 17:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

As for the guy who insists on dropping the fbomb, Constitutional rights dont apply anymore. I can think of a dozen ways I could nail someone for using their first amenedment rights. Defamation Anyone? 164.116.47.180 (talk) 16:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Quick way to immigrate to Canada?
So, is this just a quick way to immigrate? When I brought my husband here from the US it took 3 years. Maybe he should have just enlisted in the military and deserted here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.186.147 (talk) 11:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Coward
This man voluntarily signed up for military duty then decided that he didn't like fighting. If he doesn't like fighting why sign up in the first place? Furthermore, we as Canadians shouldn't be supporting or rewarding this kind of dereliction of duty. What kind of message are we sending to our own soldiers when we allow things like this to happen? That its OK to play army and fool around with guns and big boy toys but when we actually need you to fight you can desert and we won't mind? Hinzman should be sent back to America and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.181.162 (talk) 13:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Spacehusky (talk) 16:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Because they signed up for the military to defend the United States, and defend the constitution. This war was both unconstitutional under US law and illegal under international law. Therefore, they should be allowed to stay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.20.208 (talk) 22:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Precisely what he said ^. Did we find WMD's? I still cant understand why anyone would be still be behind the war in Iraq after all of the pretenses have been proven false. Why fight a war that you have no just reason to fight? We found Saddam, but we did not find Bin Laden. Or so we did and "we let him go" but thats a whole other topic. The reason we went overseas was to fight a war on terror, not to help and aid other countries that need help after starting a war in thier land over FALSE PRETENSE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.47.62 (talk) 23:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Traitors
All he should get is a firing squad. Over 4000 Good man and women die (by choice) for the Freedom of the Iraqi and Afghan People and this guy pussy out and find a age old reason not to fight (religion). He is a typical scum who took the Military benefits but dos not want to fight for his county. And Canada is showing it's a haven for traitors and cowards yet again. --66.229.17.181 14:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I seriously doubt he's received any military benefits in a long time. Besides, he's choosing to break a contract instead of killing people he has no right to kill. So what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.16.34 (talk) 17:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Canada should hand these theses deserter back to USA before it is too late. How dare these people to leave the army. They should be given maximum punishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.111.130.180 (talk) 16:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

during the vietnam war people moved to canada to avoid conscription. This soldier volunteered. He had signed a contract that was legally giving up his rights to the government. It seems real glamorous to sign up and be a hero but the truth is war is ugly. He has realized this but is still held by the contract. There should be a way to legally remove yourself from service without legal recourse. Thats the problem you see,its not that canada shouldn't send him back. They should. Its that the the services should have a cancel contract clause. This of course can't apply during tours in foreign countries. But barring a history of m.i.a. or you should be able to remove from service when stationed in a us base with viable transportation to a location attainable to there final destination. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.177.63.249 (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Please note, he did serve in Afganistan. This was going to be his second deployment. However, since the Iraq war was started illegally and under false pretenses he has moral objections. It is the duty of an officer to refuse to follow orders he feels are unlawful. I believe starting a war under a false guise would count. He is clearly not afraid to fight because he has already done for. Simply put, he doesn't want to fight for the wrong reasons. And neither would I. 216.113.208.150 18:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

All these crazy jingoist idiots have no idea what war is really like. The contract between soliders and the state has been broken by the state. The regulations on the time length for deployment and troop rotations have been violated. I am glad this guy is safe now. All of the other allied soliders should be recalled. This war is a travesty to military planning and seves no legitimate national interests for anyone other than Israel. Let them fight it. 65.1.172.18 18:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Blind Patriotism
There's no relevance between loving the country you're in and agreeing with every decision it makes. There arises a problem when citizens of a nation do not question the decisions being made for them. I love the United States of America, and most of what it stands for. I've lived here all my life, but that is not to say that I love all the decisions being made for its citizens by its leaders. Those who oppose anyone that voices their [controversial] opinion, especially when the opinion is shared by nearly half the nation, do not deserve the label of faithful patriots. Rather, they should be known and should call themselves blind patriots. The foundation of this country is based primarily on opposition to misaligned or corrupt leadership that would've otherwise been blindly accepted by all.

If a man is opposed to an order given to him, which is followed by an outstanding percentage of the population, and takes the proper steps to avoid conflict, is he not exhibiting the same ideology as that of our founding fathers? After all, who knows whats better for you than yourself?

Belief is irrelevant
The simple fact is that desertion is a crime, in any country. This is not an issue of conscription, these people voluntarily signed on the dotted line, and agreed to fight; in that regard, they should face the consequences that coincide with breaking that oath. As a Canadian, I believe it isn't our place to be deciding who is sent home to face crimes they have committed. Whether or not we as Canadians disagree with the Iraq War, or even the War in Afghanistan is a topic for another forum of discussion. The law is the law, these people agreed to abide by it, regardless of their personal views. That is military service; if you can't handle it, don't join. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.155.24 (talk) 20:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Wow, my thoughts exactly. I will help people escape conscription, and would flee it myself as I am pacifistish ('ish' because I will pull the trigger to, say, stop a marauding gunman) but if you agreed to do it then, well, no sympathy. Different if he had cracked up, that's essential being incapacitated, but he evidently didn't. All that said however, I must point out that 'calling the war illegal means a harder sentence' is well, probably illegal and certainly not a fair operation of a system that claims to allow free speech. Maybe he could be sentenced by Canadians under US law? (Theoretically possible, though in practise I can't see them doing it). As in to is Canada right: If they believe America is wrong, they should stand up. If not, they should shut up. I know what I believe, but the question is Canada, not me. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The 'it's the law so obey it' argument really doesn't work. Rosa Parks voluntarily didn't give up her seat on the bus, yet I am 99% sure that you wouldn't be criticizing the Canadian government for allowing Rosa Parks to stay in Canada to avoid imprisonment. Sure, they are different things, but the 'it's the law so obey it' argument only works if all laws are perfect, and they are not. Anonymous101talk 15:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * He did serve the country, he fought for us in Afghanistan, which most of the country was behind. I give him alot of credit for that, and if he decided he no longer wants to serve the country then its his prerogative and he needs to move to another country, which he did. I'm not exactly sure of all the details with contracts and laws pertaining to military service, but I sure as hell would not sign any of it if it says I have to unconditionally take orders against my will or face imprisonment. Perhaps thats why I don't serve. Just as the soldiers have to deal with that fact by law, the country and its people should deal with the fact that by law theres not a thing a country could do if one of its citizens decides it no longer wants to be a part of it and goes to another country. If the law is the law, then by law he did not desert anyone, he basically changed who he wants to serve.

 * But the problem is that if he signed up and then saw what he felt was an immoral war, it's wrong to force him to continue to fight in it. If soldiers discovered once they went to war that they would have to do immoral things (like killing children or something), is it really okay to force them to do these things? And just because something is the law doesn't mean it's okay: that's why we change our laws all the time and protest them through civil disobedience. --Poisonous (talk) 23:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Poisonous, I completely agree with you. Anonymous101talk 15:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

While he did Sign on the Big red line, he realized what he was doing was wrong, and fled. Its not glamoruos, But it was -Probably- the right thing to do, Morally. Considering if this was truely against his consience, the guilt would drive him mad. 164.116.47.180 (talk) 15:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

This isnt new
Canada has already had problems with draft dodgers. I used to visit Nelson, BC every summer, and you would think you are back in the 60s because of the number of them. They even wanted to have a monument for the dodgers. However, I would not like to be in their place... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.186.54.102 (talk) 00:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
User:ESanchez013

Well, hello there!

I'm new here to Wikinews. I'm active on the English Wikipedia (here's my userpage there) so I may be able to figure out a few things by myself, but I'd love your help to show me how other things work. Thanks!

title: User:ESanchez013


text:
User talk:ESanchez013

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! (This generally helps - but you probably know some already ;) --Brian McNeil / talk 11:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Reviewing articles - how articles pass through editorial review
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:ESanchez013


text:
School shooting in Kauhajoki, Finland kills eleven

September 23, 2008

At approximately 11:00 a.m., a man in his twenties entered the Kauhajoen koti- ja laitostalousoppilaitos vocational school in , Finland with a gun and began to open fire, killing 11 people.

The man identified as Matti Juhani Saari, 22, was wearing a mask when he entered the school. Reports say he was a student at the school. The shooting is reported to have occurred in the school's cellar, where students were taking an exam. At least 150 students are reported to have been in the school when the shooting started.

According to superintendent Urpo Lintala, the shooter was apprehended by police, but suffered a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. He was transported to Tampere central hospital, but later died of his injuries. Police state he made a video of himself shooting a gun and later posted it on YouTube. On Monday after finding the video, authorities questioned him, but no charges were filed due to a lack of evidence.

At approximately the time the shooting started, police say a fire had been started, but was quickly extinguished by firefighters. There have also been reports of a bomb threat to a nearby building.

This is the deadliest school shooting in Finland since November 2007 when eight people were killed at a high school in.


text:
Comments:Media reports exaggerate cell phone risks again

Yeah, let's all put our cell phones in our shirt pockets! Then we'll only get lung / heart cancer instead of messed up spooge! --Smackdat (talk) 12:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes cellphone are very dangerous specially to stupid guys driving vehicles it is a caused of accidents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.191.69.149 (talk) 16:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not a scientist. I have never performed nor seen the results of any experiments regarding the safety of cell phone use. However, I trust the scientific community when I read that scientists say that the weight of the evidence shows no link. I also would think that, if there were some risk, that someone somewhere who uses their mobile phone almost constantly would have contracted some sort of illness and would link it to their phone in a publicized case. In fact, I would expect that to happen by mere random chance, even if there were no risk whatsoever of mobile phone use. The fact that, in a nation where almost everyone seems to have a mobile phone, where we like sensational news, and where we are open about suing manufacturers for illnesses they cause, we have not heard of even a single incident of this nature indicates to me that it is extremely unlikely that there is any risk. Agiar2000 (talk) 18:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

This isn't the seventies anymore, mobile phones are safe and won't give people cancer by putting it in their pocket. I always find when the media goes on about it that it's just them scaremongering again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.9.41.61 (talk) 08:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Honestly...
I don't have a phone because it makes me constantly reachable-a plague in some cases. In reference to this, I think that the phone risk is minimal and only relates to those who have their phones glued to their skulls all day and night. In today's world, you get cancer from everything... even when you step outside to take a breath of not-so-fresh air. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.59.81 (talk) 02:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

mobile athreat to human being
the waves which pass through us invisible aliens definite through research will prove how dangerous is the use of mobile phones, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.157.181 (talk) 08:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

ABOUT CELLULAR PHONES

I am a senior Neurologist from India, where in there are many cell phone users, of all category. Around 1800 cell phone users who use cell phones more than 12 hours per day, have been examined by me by BAER studies, ad EEG, and none showed any abnormal findings. The EEG showed normal alpha frequencies, and a few who projected fast activity have been found to take alprozolam tablets. Most of them an anxious character. As the population ration uses the cell phones, the degree of cerebral malignancies are negligible and unrelated to the small radio waves which could be had from any source, including cosmic radiation or micro oven. There is no fool proof studies so far conducted in human, about the carcinogenicity or acousttic neuroma in the brain, causally related to the cell phone usage. The norms issued by standard phones, are quite safe, and those substandard phones issued from various bogus manufactures are not to be used, as the wattage of output of EMW are not contemporary and may be excess, about which we have no studies. The Electromagnet waves could be harmful to the flies, as Alerthin a pesticide which kills the mosquitoes. If they are really harmful to the flies and other lower genus, science would implicate electromagnetic radiations to kill mosquitoes and not defendant on sprayers to kill them!!! The effect on spermatozoa, when exposed ELECTROMAGNETIC radiations as in the cell phones, do not change any morphology of the sperms, and how it will affect spermatogensis? Absolutely baseless information are available from different media, that cell phones are dangerous.


text:
Talk:School shooting in Kauhajoki, Finland kills eleven

Finnish sources should be labelled with fi and some English ones will really help with peer review --Brian McNeil / talk 12:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Image
Could somebody with more experience with images place the image of the police vehicles in a location that would look a bit more balanced. I have zero talent for layout. -- Cimon Avaro (talk) 14:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


text: File:Android.png

title: File:Android.png


text:
User talk:Kilik42

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here are some pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 15:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Reviewing articles - how articles pass through editorial review
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Kilik42


text:
First Google Android phone unveiled, will be available soon

September 23, 2008 The first phone that runs on Google Android was unveiled today by T-Mobile. The announcement of this new handset, named the T-Mobile G1, was made in an event run by T-Mobile USA which took place today.

The event started at 14:30 UTC (10:30 local time) when Cole Brodman, the chief technology and innovation officer of T-Mobile USA, started introducing the people who were going to be present at the launch. These people were Andy Rubin, who represents Google, and Christopher Schlaffer, who is the CTO of Deutsche Telekom.

Five minutes later Schlaffer announced that Google Android will be available for Christmas 2008 on T-Mobile for customers of Deutsche Telekom. The new phone was then revealed by Cole Brodman, who described the phone as "iconic."

Commentators, however, dismissed claims that the phone was iconic. Marguerite Reardon from CNET said that Android looks rather like the iPhone, and as a result she does not think the phone can be described as iconic. She also said that the Android device looks the Danger Hiptop device, which is also known as the T-Mobile Sidekick.

The new phone will be available free in the UK for users with contracts that cost over 40GB£ (Approximately 74 US$) per month. These planned tariffs are expected to include unlimited web access.

Android is completely open source, and was developed by Google and the Open Handset Alliance, a partnership of over thirty companies working to develop open source software for mobile phones.


text: User talk:168.10.72.10

title: User talk:168.10.72.10


text:
Template:Google

An infobox for and its news. ''Are newer articles not showing? Refresh''

Customize this infobox .

title: Template:Google


text: Talk:First Google Android phone unveiled, will be available soon


text:
Comments:First Google Android phone unveiled, will be available soon

=Will you buy a device that uses Android?=

That it's open source might make me buy it
Logictheo (talk) 19:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Finally, Open-Source Phones
I wonder how much the handset will cost without a tariff? Being Open-Source would hopefully create opportunities to mod the phone to be able to access any network, even home-brew ones. It certainly seems a very powerful tool, finally Google's Open-API services will be accessible on the move, and not just from a laptop, that doesn't count. I can't wait! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.171.9 (talk) 21:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

sick
Can't wait for it to be released. Should be one of the best phone offers out there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.216.95.253 (talk) 20:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

no i would buy an iphone —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.173.47.254 (talk) 15:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Availability in the rest of the world
Anyone knows if this phone will be sold outside the UK? Specifically Sweden? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.254.214.92 (talk) 19:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


text:
Senate Committee hears bailout proposal

September 24, 2008

Treasury Secretary and Chairman of the Federal Reserve  fielded questions from the Senate  today. Paulson and Bernanke were joined by, chairman of the SEC, and , director of the. The four urged the Committee to pass to spend up to US$700 billion to bailout investment banks by purchasing their "illiquid debt".

They made the pitch to the committee to bail out Wall Street by passing legislation giving the Treasury unprecedented authority and little oversight. The $700 billion will bail out investment banks with illiquid mortgage assets, securities these firms cannot sell because of the state of the housing sector. The proposal will create a reverse auction, in which the illiquid debt will be bought by the Treasury at a price much higher than the fire sale prices the securities are currently valued out.

The debate centered around whether the government should be involved, is $700 billion too much, will it work, the issue of oversight, and the urgency of the situation.

Paulson and Bernanke claimed that such a bailout is precondition to a healthy recovery to the economy; credit is contingent on a healthy economy, the purchase of the bad debt will increase the lending to business and consumers to help the recovery of the economy.

title: Senate Committee hears bailout proposal


text:
User talk:Jason Potter

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here are some pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! PatrickFlaherty (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Reviewing articles - how articles pass through editorial review
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Jason Potter


text:
User talk:72.73.91.226

Hello and a piece of advice
Hello. Thank you for visiting Wikinews. However, we don't appreciate the kind of edits you've made so far. Continued perpetration of vandalism from your part will result in a block without further warning. We hope that you will decide to contribute for the benefit of the project in which case the following pages will give you an overview of how Wikinews operates.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Anonymous101talk 17:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The community portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Blocked

title: User talk:72.73.91.226


text: User talk:71.10.134.79

title: User talk:71.10.134.79


text:
User talk:Drtruegreen

Spam
Hi, please do not place any kind of on our website - it will be  so no one will see it. If you do want to contribute to Wikinews, see the introduction.Anonymous101talk 17:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Drtruegreen


text: User talk:98.192.78.98

title: User talk:98.192.78.98


text:
User talk:216.11.6.34

Hello and a piece of advice
Hello. Thank you for visiting Wikinews. However, we don't appreciate the kind of edits you've made so far. Continued perpetration of vandalism from your part will result in a block without further warning. We hope that you will decide to contribute for the benefit of the project in which case the following pages will give you an overview of how Wikinews operates.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Anonymous101talk 17:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The community portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:216.11.6.34


text:
User talk:129.241.133.176

Welcome
Welcome!

129.241.133.176, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews:
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Here are some other hints and tips:

 * I would recommend that you get a username. You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikinews, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information (not even an e-mail address), and there are many benefits of having a username.  (If you edit without a username, your IP address is used to identify you instead.)

 * When using talk pages (the "collaboration" tab at the top of the page), or the comments pages (tab "opinions"), please sign your name at the end of your messages by typing four tildes (~~). This will automatically produce your username (or IP address) and the date.

If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Anonymous101talk 18:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:129.241.133.176


text:
Gordon Brown: I can lead Britain through economic crisis

September 23, 2008 Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, today spoke at the 2008 Labour Party conference. In his speech he described his determination to lead his party and country, in addition to claiming that the current financial situation meant that this was no time for a novice to claim a country, saying that he is the right man to lead. This speech comes as questions are raised over Brown's suitability as a leader.

Brown introduced the speech by telling the conference attendees that he wanted to discuss his reasons for leading the country. "I want to talk with you today about who I am, what I believe, what I am determined to lead this party and this great country to achieve," he said. "I know people have real concerns about the future of the country, the future of the economy and people in this hall have concerns about the future of our party too."

He then claimed that he "didn't come into politics to be a celebrity or thinking I'd always be popular." "Perhaps, that's just as well," he continued. "No, 25 years ago I asked the people of Fife to send me to parliament to serve the country I love." He then said that he "didn't come to London because I wanted to join the establishment, but because I wanted and want to change it."

"And so I want to give the people of this country an unconditional assurance - no ifs, no buts, no small print - my unwavering focus is taking this country through the challenging economic circumstances we face and building the fair society of the future," he said, later in the speech. "The British people would not forgive us if at this time we looked inwards to the affairs of just our party when our duty is to the interests of our country."

Brown then made more in depth comments on the credit crunch. "Each generation believes it is living through changes their parents could never have imagined - but the collapse of banks, the credit crunch, the trebling of oil prices, the speed of technology, and the rise of Asia - nobody now can be in any doubt that we are in a different world and it's now a global age," he claimed. "In truth, we haven't seen anything this big since the industrial revolution. This last week will be studied by our children - as the week the world was spun on its axis - and old certainties were turned on their heads."

Later in the speech, Brown discussed how he believes his government should deal with climate change. He also said that targets for an 80% cut in greenhouse gas emissions should be considered. "I am asking the climate change committee to report by October on the case for, by 2050 not a 60% reduction in our carbon emissions, but an 80% cut - and I want British companies and British workers to seize the opportunity and lead the world in the transformation to a low carbon economy and I believe that we can create in modern green manufacturing and service one million new jobs."

Labour ministers reacted positively to the speech. Jacqui Smith, the current Home Secretary, said that "I think today's speech showed that he is a great leader and a great prime minister." Foreign Secretary David Miliband, meanwhile, described the speech as 'excellent'.

Shadow chancellor George Osborne, however, responded to the speech by saying that "there was nothing really new in the speech - no apology for the mess he's got the country into and no new ideas that show us how he's going to get us out of it."


text: User talk:62.2.182.172

title: User talk:62.2.182.172


text:
WWE Raw Results from Cincinnati, OH for September 22, 2008

September 23, 2008

Monday evening was the 800th episode of WWE Raw, although not as celebrated as last year's 750th "Raw Family Reunion" episode, it was "business as usual" for the show, pushing towards the WWE No Mercy pay-per-view in two weeks.

The show opened with WWE World Heavyweight Champion Chris Jericho coming to the ring and climbing atop a tall ladder where the WWE World Heavyweight Championship belt was hanging overhead. Chris Jericho will face current antagonist Shawn Michaels in a Ladder Match for the championship at the pay-per-view. Jericho talked about the fact that while fans applauded Michaels' remarks regarding his accomplishments in ladder matches fans have forgotten that Jericho has won three championship titles in ladder matches, and has participated in more high-profile ladder matches than Michaels. This would draw out former champion Randy Orton, who has been injured with a shoulder injury for the last three months. Orton on a tear criticizing current and former champions as well as top contenders as to their worthiness of holding the title, and Chris Jericho was no exception. Just as it looked like Jericho was ready to pummel Orton, Orton declared that WWE Raw General Manager Mike Adamle made a new proclamation that anybody who attacked Orton would be suspended indefinitely.

Jericho withdrew from the ring, but was immediately replaced by CM Punk, a man Orton attacked a few weeks ago, costing him the WWE World Heavyweight Championship in a four-way match at the WWE Unforgiven pay-per-view. Punk and Orton would come nose-to-nose before Punk slapped Orton in the face, sending him reeling to the corner. General manager Mike Adamle came out along with acting on-air representative Shane McMahon. Together they diffused the situation between Punk and Orton, and announce the main event match, champion Chris Jericho and John "Bradshaw" Layfield against Shawn Michaels and Dave Batista.

Before that main event happened, Jericho would talk with Mike Adamle in his office, speculating that the reason Shane McMahon was at the show was to test Adamle's skills as a leader rather than a company yes-man, and that rather than following Mr. McMahon's directions to the letter, that he should use them as a suggestion for his own ideas. This would result in the main event becoming a three-on-two match, with the addition of Lance Cade to the team of Jericho and Layfield. Cade, a former protégé for Shawn Michaels and current ally of Jericho, played a major factor in the match. Cade's presence in the ring was a distraction to Shawn Michaels, who spent the majority of the match fighting off double-team efforts and cut off from making a tag to his partner. Dave Batista would eventually make that tag, but would be quickly overpowered by Jericho and Layfield. Michaels would tag in one last time while Batista would continue to fight outside of the ring with Layfield. Michaels appeared to have Cade defeated, but a distraction by Jericho allowed Cade to recover and attack Michaels from behind, pinning him after executing a sit-out powerbomb.

Full match results for the evening:
 * CM Punk def. WWE World Tag Team Champion Cody Rhodes by pinfall;
 * WWE Intercontinental Champion Santino Marella def. Deuce Shade by pinfall in a non-title match;
 * Kane def. Evan Bourne by pinfall;
 * Kelly Kelly def. WWE Women's Champion Beth Phoenix by pinfall in a non-title match;
 * Mike Mizain & John Morrizon def. Cryme Tyme by pinfall;
 * WWE World Heavyweight Champion Chris Jericho, John Bradshaw Layfield & Lance Cade def. Shawn Michaels & Dave Batista


text:
Comments:Gordon Brown: I can lead Britain through economic crisis

=Is Gordon Brown the right man to lead the UK?= NO! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.24.48.243 (talk) 00:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

No idea! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.158.89.10 (talk) 08:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

No but Cameron will be even worse so what are going to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.252.133 (talk) 12:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Economic Crisis
My name is chloe sullivan i am 19 yrs old,

Why is the centre of atention on this money problem, telling us we need to spend and put more money into the economy,so the rich can stay rich! i hate the fact that this is the case, spending money and basing our lives around material things is what got us into this problem in the first place, this country has lost all its morals and community values, we should be focusing on that, and doing good wills, we dont need flash cars and all that, i have lived and worked in south africa and the conditions and quality of life is appauling for the majority, and we have become to complacent with the material world we know, i mean that banker thats pention is like 6 million + what the hell is worth that amount of money its only worth what people are willing to pay for it, and we shouldnt be willing! we live these sorts of lives at the rest of the worlds expence, there is no such thing as fair trade from the west, like the 5 richest people in the world have together more money than the 28 poorest counties, once again what is worth that amount of money, except the well being of them countries, so we cant have the new dress we wanted or have money for nights out and fags, how shallow!


text:
Talk:WWE Raw Results from Cincinnati, OH for September 22, 2008

Show Notes
Kamnet (talk) 19:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Show opens with Chris Jericho, comments winning 3 championships by ladder matches
 * Randy Orton out, criticizes Jericho, announces that he cannot be touched per Mike Adamle
 * CM Punk out, slaps Orton, Adamle out, suspends Punk
 * Shane McMahon out, reverses suspension, puts Punk in match against Cody Rhodes next
 * Declares main event Jericho/Layfield vs. Michaels/Batista
 * CM Punk d. Cody Rhodes
 * Santino Marella & Beth Phoenix confront Batista backstage
 * Marella d. Deuce Shade, calls out Batista
 * Kane confronts Mike Adamle & Shane McMahon backstage, says he wants another shot at Rey Mysterio
 * Kane d. Evan Bourne, attacked by Rey Mysterio afterwards, Mysterio injured in attack
 * Kelly Kelly d. Beth Phoenix in non-title match
 * Orton confronts Shane McMahon backstage, is put in his place
 * Charlie Haas promo for the new "Mr. Perfect" DVD
 * Miz & Morrison mock Cryme Tyme in skit before match
 * Mike Mizain & John Morrison d. Cryme Tyme
 * Chris Jericho talks to Mike Adamle, main event is made 3-on-2
 * Jericho/Layfield/Cade d. Michaels/Batista


text:
Talk:Gordon Brown: I can lead Britain through economic crisis

Shame on you for missing this: "telling the conference attendees that he wouldn't to discuss his reasons for leading the country." Unfortunately, I'm not sure what "wouldn't to" is supposed to mean: "wanted to" or "wouldn't". Jade Knight (talk) 02:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


text: Talk:Stressed plants produce aspirin-like chemical


text:
Swiss cabinet reorganised, Finance Minister in coma

September 23, 2008

Swiss Finance Minister Hans-Rudolf Merz has suffered a major heart attack and had to be hospitalised. He was in Eastern Switzerland when he collapsed. Later on Sunday he was flown by helicopter to Bern University Hospital where he was placed into an artificial coma. The Finance Minister underwent today a major bypass surgery and doctors say that he will have to remain in Intesive care for at least two weeks. As a result, the cabinet has been reorganised, with Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf (Minister for Justice and Police) as the interim Finance Minister and Moritz Leuenberger (Transport Minister) as her deputy.

The Swiss President, Pascal Couchepin, announced that he would not be attending the UN General Assembly in New York and that the Cabinet would hold an extra-ordinary session.


text:
User:Netscr1be

Wikinews Articles
Hundreds of victims still unidentified three months after Typhoon Frank :/2008/09/29 OBOP

University of Calgary scientist Keith cracks carbon capture conundrum :/2008/10/01 OBOP

 * Member: Canadian Association of Journalists - Freelance Caucus
 * Graduate: Centennial College - Journalism Program - 2004

Pix: Scenic: Guelph Lake

Pix: Artistic: Carved in Stone

Pix: Artistic: Colgate Avenue Garage

title: User:Netscr1be


text:
User talk:81.41.128.115

September 2008
Welcome to Wikinews! Although everyone is free to contribute, at least one of your latest contributions to ETA bomb kills soldier in northern Spain was considered vandalism and then reverted. Please try out test edits in our sandbox. Thank you. ESanchez013 (talk) 21:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:81.41.128.115


text:
Spies warn of October Al-Qaeda operations

September 26, 2008

Last month, US intelligence intercepted Al-Qaeda communications warning operatives to be ready for instructions in October. The terrorist group is thought to be planning what has been called an "October surprise" possibly in order to influence the 2008 US elections, just as it did in 2004 when it bombed Madrid commuter trains.

The messages reportedly were simply to be alert and ready to be called upon, and were sent both physically and electronically.

According to Ted Gistaro, a US intelligence officer, the government is "not aware of any specific, credible al-Qaida plot to attack the U.S. homeland, but [does] receive a steady stream of threat [sic] reporting from sources of varying creditability".

Intelligence agents are expecting an increase in the number of related messages as October nears.

Ex-CIA agent Gary Berntsen said that Al-Qaeda was likely not capable of carrying out another attack on the US, but would target its allies "to peel them off from the coalition that George Bush has built to defeat them". Roger Cressey, once a counter-terrorism official, agreed that the attacks would likely be global and not focused on the US.

An advisor to John McCain noted that in the past, Al-Qaeda have used three different tactics to influence elections: public bombings, assassinations, and messages to voters.

Recently, Al-Qaeda attempted an attack on the new Pakistani President Zardari after his anti-terrorism speech, targeting the Islamabad Mariott hotel where he was expected to eat. According to the vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, the attack would have been devastating if it had succeeded in killing the new President. "Think of the symbolic value if they were able to kill Zardari after his first address as president of Pakistan in a speech announcing his fight against the terrorists," he said.


text:
Talk:Spies warn of October Al-Qaeda operations

I can't find any other sources so unless I or someone else can find another source, won't be working on it. (Sorry, forgot to sign in again.) --Poisonous (talk) 22:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikilinks
At least some effort should have been made to Wikilink this piece prior to publication. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Not published
Wikinews is not the mouthpiece of the U.S. government and this should never have been published in the form it is as I write this. It is propaganda, pure and simple, and those involved in its production and approval should turn in their journalist badges as they are escorted out the building.

Sorry, this is simply not journalism. This is something even VOA wouldn't carry, and the American taxpayer funds their operations. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit
editprotected Category:Asif Ali Zardari. Ali Rana (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ – Juliancolton  | Talk 16:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


text:
Explosion at new shopping centre in Bath, United Kingdom

September 26, 2008 An explosion has taken place in the city centre of Bath, United Kingdom in a new shopping centre which is still being built. The explosion is said to have been caused by a gas canister that caught fire and exploded, setting fire to the building. Firefighters responded and were able to extinguish it at around 18:00 BST, approximately one hour after the explosion took place.

Several shops including Marks and Spencer, Boots and Game were evacuated. Bath Spa railway station was also closed off. Avon and Somerset police spokeswoman Jenny Bigwood said "The area has been cordoned off at the request of the fire and rescue service as there are believed to be a number of gas cylinders on the site." The fire service spokesperson also said that "officers were called just after 5pm today to a report of a fire at the SouthGate building site."

According to eyewitness reports there was "black smoke, ...a few bangs and a series of fairly large explosions."

Bath Spa railway station has since reopened but several people cannot get their cars out of the area due to closed roads. A shelter has been set up at the Pavilion near the leisure centre in North Parade Road. The centre was due to open in 2009 but is due to be delayed.

Despite the large size of the explosion, it is believed that no one has suffered from any injuries as a result of the incident.


text:
Talk:Explosion at new shopping centre in Bath, United Kingdom

Wikinewsie
This users witness report needs to be rewritten. I am not sure how to do that seeing as he is not speaking as if he were there initially as a reporter. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Anonymous101talk 21:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Category request
editprotected

Please add Category:Somerset. Thanks, Rodw (talk) 12:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Pi zero (talk) 14:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


title: User:Pie4all88


text: User talk:Pie4all88

title: User talk:Pie4all88


text: Comments:Swiss cabinet reorganised, Finance Minister in coma


text:
Comments:Allegations that New Zealand school administers corporal punishment

hello I believe this is a strong matter


text:
President Bush: U.S. respects Pakistan's sovereignty

September 24, 2008

U.S. President George W. Bush acknowledged Pakistan’s sovereignty and pledged continued support for the country in economic and security fields. His comments were likely in response to the Pakistani president's anger when US helicopters crossed Pakistani borders.

Bush and Asif Ali Zardari, newly elected President of Pakistan, met at the Waldorf Asotria Hotel on the sidelines of the 63rd UN General Assembly session and discussed strengthening their bilateral relationship. Bush also expressed full support for the "Friends of Pakistan" initiative to drum up international support for its economic development.

While talking to the press, Pakistan's Information Minister Sherry Rahman said "President Bush praised President Zardari's courage and commitment to fight terrorism despite his great personal loss". Bush also expressed grief over the heavy loss of life during the weekend bombing on the Marriot hotel, Islamabad.

At the outset, he said Pakistan was an important ally and reaffirmed the United States commitment to assist Pakistan’s economic development while also citing Washington’s bipartisan support in this respect.

Zardari took over the presidency from Pervez Musharraf in August.


title: File:24September2008.pdf


text:
Comments:WWE Raw Results from Cincinnati, OH for September 22, 2008

I love that someone decided to use this cite for something usefull. this is one of the only storys on wikipedia that people can use any more. It sucks that there is so much info out there and no one can use it because they found it on wikipedia which sucks by the way! any wayz cudos to who ever figured out a lagit way to use this cite with out penalizing people who really do need to find answers but are bogged down with crap from this stupid websit!

Comments from feedback form - "Nm"
Nm Nm —217.122.192.87 (talk) 15:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Ustad abu gosok

Faster, if you contact me on id.wikipedia

title: User talk:Ustad abu gosok


text:
Wikinews:Briefs/September 24, 2008

= Wikinews News in Brief for September 24, 2008 =

Transcript
Good day, this is the Audio Wikinews Brief for Wednesday, September 24, 2008. I'm Kevin Fields, and here are today's current stories.

School shooting in Kauhajoki, Finland kills eleven
Eleven people have died in what is said to be the deadliest school shooting incident in over a decade in Finland. Tuesday morning a 22 year-old student entered a vocational school in Kauhajoki, Finland opened fire in the school's cellar, where nearly 150 students were taking exams. Police apprehended the student and transported him to a local hospital, where he died of a self-inflicted gun shot wound to the head.

Gordon Brown: I can lead Britain through economic crisis
UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown spoke at the 2008 Labour Party conference on Tuesday. In his speech he described his determination to lead his party and country, in addition to claiming that the current financial situation meant that this was no time for a novice to claim the country, saying that he is the right man to lead. Brown also stated that he planned to set policies in place to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by the year 2050. Party leaders reacted favorably to the speech, while critics claimed that Brown neither spoke of anything new nor outlined any clear policies for the future.

First Google Android phone unveiled, will be available soon
Google and mobile telecoms provider T-Mobile unveiled the new T-Mobile G1 handheld phone on Tuesday morning during a media event sponsored by T-Mobile. The handset runs Google's new Android software, integrates with all of Google's online software applications and also features WiFi connectivity and a three megapixel camera. The phones will be available in the United Stated by the end of October, and will be available for the Christmas shopping season in the Europe.

Mass delivery of anti-Islamic DVDs in swing voting states
Voters in swing states across the United States began receiving a one-hour DVD called Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West over the weekend. The video was produced and distributed by Clarion Fund, a non-profit organization connected with Zionist and pro-Israeli organizations. The DVDs were delivered with leading newspapers mostly in swing states such as Ohio, Florida, and Michigan. The film focuses on drawing parallels between "Islamo-fascists" and Nazis, and opens with a series of videos of terrorist acts. It features interviews with counter-terrorist analysts, footage from Arabic TV, and interviews with former terrorists. Outraged Muslims have objected to the film and its distribution. The film has been criticized for misquoting sources, poor fact checking, and including biased witnesses and testimony. Several of the analysts featured in the film have been criticized as being racist and anti-Islamic. Clarion Fund, which also sells a DVD titled The Third Jihad, states copies are being distributed to 28 million homes but there is no intent to sway voters. The organization's focus, however, is only on radical Islamic threats to national security. The group also runs a website, RadicalIslam.org, which recently endorsed Republican party nominee John McCain for President of the United States.

Conclusion
This has been an Audio Wikinews Brief and is freely available for copy under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 license at http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/. Catch the latest breaking news on Wikinews at Wikinews.org.

title: Wikinews:Briefs/September 24, 2008


text: Talk:Senate Committee hears bailout proposal


text:
Talk:President Bush: U.S. respects Pakistan's sovereignty

Addition of link to wikipedia 'Friends of Pakistan' article
editprotected

(Note: as I have just recently created my account, I apologize for my ignorance of how things work)

Is it possible to add a link to the Wikipedia "Friends of Pakistan" article ? I am looking for information to expand this stub, and saw that it said that there were no links to it. I was unable to figure out how to do so in this wikinews article, and would appreciate someone's help.

 * adding these links seems inappropriate since "Friends of Pakistan" is not mentioned in the article. --SVTCobra 00:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit
editprotected Category:Asif Ali Zardari. Ali Rana (talk) 07:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ – Juliancolton  | Talk 16:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)