Isn't it ironic that Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed bin Talal owns Fox News?
The prince is actually the 2nd largest stockholder in News Corp. 2nd only to Murdoch himself. He's also funding the so called "ground zero mosque". Most people know this by now. Those on the right haven't caught on. I don't think they can handle knowing their supposed "enemies" are feeding them propaganda. If they had heard the same about some other channel you can bet they'd be screaming in outrage about Muslims influencing American media. Fox news is just trying to cover their butts by acting like they're against what their boss is/was supposedly doing. Keep it in mind, though, that both AlWaleed AND Glenn Beck blamed 9/11 on U.S. policy. Incidentally, Murdoch also recently purchased stock in AlWaleed's network company in Saudi Arabia. Also, Debbie Schlussel was the one who falsely claimed Soros owns Media Matters. This woman has some serious issues. Media Matters was founded in 2004 by journalist and author David Brock and has received funding from many prominent people and organizations.
Why don't Fox News viewer protest against one of their owners that is a Sharia Law Prince?
Fox exists to keep the republican bubble full of hot air. The people within the bubble doesn't care where that hot air comes from. It could come from Osama Bin Laden himself. If he told them what they want to hear, that everything they believe is good, and right, and everyone else are evil socialists, that would be fine with them.
If Fox News is more of a propaganda outlet of the ultra right-wing, then how does the fact that the second largest shareholder is a Saudi twist its impact?
2017 Ratings: Fox News Is Most-Watched Cable Network For Second Consecutive Yearhttp://ttp://bigthink.com/Resurgence/sharia-prince-owns-stake-in-fox-news-parentFox is the overall most popular cable news-show in America. President Trump watches Fox religiously.It’s no shock Fox wants to copy their success in the Middle East.Fox serves as an example of the deep divide in America, If you watch Fox and MSNBC You will quickly see the division in political thinking in America.Fox loves our President and MSNBC doesn’t. Fox is the for Conservatives to watch and MSNBC is the station for Liberals to watch.Fox will be the Conservative voice in the Middle East. This will widen the gap between adults and their political thinking.I see no middle of the ground voice in news. You’re in one camp or the other.I grew up in a time when folks could compromise-with each other on issues.No one side should claim a monopoly on wisdom.Until both sides of the political spectrum come together, there will be little peace.
No Agenda podcast says Fox News is owned by Democrats. Is this true?
Fox News (which is never news) was begun in 1996 as a “conservative voice in Cable Entertainment.”That has continued to this day.The ownership is split between Rupert Murdoch (who began it, and owns the majority), and Fox Entertainment (which is also partially owned by stockholders).It is about as far from any Democrat ownership as one could get, though.It is not news. It is not journalism. It has always been conservative propaganda, and in the summer of 2016 there was a definite shift in its programming, where it became the propaganda tool of Donald Trump.I hope this helps.
Is it true that Hollywood is run by Jewish people?
It's not run by them in a conspiratorial sort of way, but it would be ignorant to say that 1. it wasn't founded by Jewish people and predominantly ran by Jewish people for most of the 20th Century; and 2. That Jewish people aren't still the most influential group in Hollywood. Throughout the 2000's it seems most of the studio exec jobs have been held by Jewish people. Start Googling the ethnic heritage of actors, producers and directors to be amazed by how much success Jewish people have had in Hollywood. For instance, check out Nicolas Cage's family. Pretty cool stuff.Here's a good article from the L.A. Times: Who runs Hollywood? C'monThat being said, it makes sense that the culture of Hollywood has never been very sympathetic to the faith beliefs and moral values shared by a large section of the American population. Even if many of the Jewish people in Hollywood are not religiously observant Jews, you can't expect them to have much sympathy for a faith that is foreign to them and their heritage. Hollywood is certainly pro-America, but it tends to not be keen on the faith beliefs shared by the majority of the American population (Christianity).That shouldn't be shocking. It's sociology 101. I only bring it up because, as the article points out, there is a fear that if you point out that Jewish people have a lot of influence in Hollywood and that Hollywood is out of touch with many families' moral and religious values, that people may become anti-semitic. But I think the solution isn't hiding an obvious truth (that Jewish people happen to have enormous influence in Hollywood). It's being honest and having an open, understanding dialogue. Hiding it only amplifies conspiracy theorists' fears. And, as the article's author points out, it robs Jewish people of a pretty noteworthy accomplishment: the creation and stewarding of one of the most successful industries of our time.
Are there any trillionaires?
NO. There are no trillionaire’s.Even though if you ask for trillionaire families, you would find that the wealthiest Rothschild family - Wikipedia is considered to be only around $400 billion.Now coming onto the current richest people on 01/01/2017 are,Bill Gates - $83.7 billion2. Amancio Ortega - $73.3 billion3. Warren Buffett - $73 billion4. Jeff Bezos - $64.9 billion5. Carlos Slim Helu - $49.6 billion6. Mark Zuckerberg - $48.4 billion7. Larry Ellison - $47.7 billion8. Charles Koch - $43.5 billion9. David Koch - $43.5 billion10. Michael Bloomberg - $40.3 billion
Was Donald Trump bailed out twice by Prince Alwaleed Talal?
Was Donald Trump bailed out twice by Prince Alwaleed Talal?I assume the question is related to the jabs exchanged between Trump and Bin Talal on Twitter in Januaryالوليد بن طلال on TwitterThe cases the Prince is talking about were two distress sales Trump was forced to do back in the 90s - his yacht and a stake in in Trump Plaza Hotel, which Bin Talal took off him. There were not bailouts per se, as there was no financial assistance provided, but rather a straight up purchase[1] .Footnotes[1] This Saudi Prince Just Burned Donald Trump on Twitter
Why are American conservatives so comfortable with a foreign born person owning their major media outlets?
He's a naturalized citizen, and he's white. That's good enough for conservatives.I do find it more curious that conservatives aren't outraged that Rupert Murdoch co-owns Al-Resalah Satellite TV -- basically a mouthpiece channel for the Muslim Brotherhood managed by a man who spouts "wisdom" like, "The most dangerous thing facing the Muslims is not the dictatorships. The absolutely most dangerous thing is the Jews. They are the most dangerous. They are the greatest enemy." That's right, the owner of Fox News also co-owns a network that broadcasts gems like this:"When there is no hope for peace, there is no alternative but to resort to the gun... The West's conflict with Islam and the Muslims is eternal, a preordained destiny that cannot be avoided until Judgment Day."In the West, "If he [the infidel] feels like having any type of sexual relations, he does... they have organizations for homosexuals, organizations for people who marry animals."“Slaves are the property of their owners. This is slavery in the Shariah, yet a slave enjoys a great deal of freedom. The only thing he is deprived of is the right to own [himself]. That’s it. He enjoys freedom of thought, freedom of belief, the freedom to work, the right to deny [Islam], and the right to command good and forbid evil. A slave enjoys all these liberties, so how can it be claimed that there is no freedom [in Islam].” Gore deal follows Murdoch into Arab TV Page on adl.orgIncidentally, just as curious is that the largest shareholder of Murdoch's News Corp (whose last name isn't Murdoch) is Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal. Now, bin Talal is generally regarded as friendly to the United States, but it's curious that fans of Fox News will have heard him described as the backer of a "terror mosque" a funder of "radical madrassas." Why aren't conservatives concerned that a major American news outlet is part owned by such a supposedly scary guy, a guy who has admitted to being able to influence Fox News coverage?
Why does the visa-waiver bill only consider the dual citizens and visitors of Syria, Iraq, Iran and Sudan ?
Why stop there, let me also add that one of the victims of the San Bernardino shooting was an Iranian American. Also the SWAT team that responded included an Iranian American medic who got his training in Iranian military during Iran-Iraq war. When ignorance is a value among the lawmakers in this country, facts don't matter, and everything is done for short term political points among a population fear-driven, religious fanatics, this is the outcome. This bill is stupid, regardless of the countries it lists. Yes, if you were to actually reap any security benefits (at the cost of making second class citizens), your best bet is to do it to Saudis. But Candice Miller (R-MI) wouldn't dare introducing a bill against Saudis. Her safest choice is to pick on -Iranians, Syrians, Iraqis and Sudanese - Americans who don't spend nearly as much lobby money and have far less of a punch in US media (Saudis are one of the biggest shareholders for FOX news among others). The fact is, Iranian-Americans are more likely to be top professors, executives in Silicon Valley, etc, than the average american, and also Iranian-Americans are less likely to be a terrorist than the average american. But it's upon us, Americans, to participate in the political process more actively, and ensure idiots who pander to crazy zealots are not elected into office.