Note: The links and resources on this Web page are intended only for those who wish to data mine news and resources on this specific subject matter via our entire site Atomz Search Engine from the period of time starting with 2008, when Obama was running for office, until the near end of his term in late August 2012.
Stunning interviewby liberal progressive at CNN, trying to control the news.
CNN host Soledad O’Brien ambushes The Obamas author Jodi Kantor.O’Brien lost it, basically telling the author how to write politically correct copy acceptable to progressives. Soledad couldn’t stand it that Kantor revealed such intimate details on Michelle Obama, trying to turn her writing into a racist statement on an "angry black woman."
The man who called Newt very offensive name in video is a . . . wait for it . . . a well known Democrat who spews liberal hate.Think CNN reported that? Watch video.
Lady GaGa performs Alejandro with a Sodom and Gomorrah like actunder a huge heavenly angel figure on American Idol to millions of cheering fans. And ESPN worries about what Hank Williams, Jr., says on another network unrelated to sports about Obama? What hypocrisy, where free speech is suppressed by ESPN for a country music star giving a comment on a radical president that has surrouded himself with Czars while speech mocking the world's Christian religion is glorified by FOX is fine.
With acquisition of Huffing Post, AOL turns further left sticking it in the face of its millions of conservative members, as illustrated by their selected photo.
Obama's presentation started after the wrestler Hulk Hogan's patriotic anthem, "Real American," played. Images of Americana from Mount Rushmore to Uncle Sam were shown on the screen,alongside his birth certificate. And then he offered to show his live birth video, which turned out to be a clip from the Disney film, "The Lion King." (Still no answer why Obama could have shown the doc in 2007, yet refused, messing with America's Constitution as if an toy.)
Is a picture still worth one thousand words? As FOX News would say, You decide!
So what is the Real Culture at FOX News?
FOX News says its America's (cough) Fair and Balanced channel, meaning its really 50% conservative and 50% liberal in its reporting. This is in a world where most every other national media outlet is far-left progressive liberal nearly 100% of the time. It's why I now call FOX News "The 50/50 Channel," conservatives to often seem to be thrown scraps from the FOX dinner table while FOX embraces consultants such as Jehmu Greene on it news AND business channel. I believe it's corporate culture had already headed left before Beck left, as you can read in the research done for the article, The Dead Zone .
Want the real conservative News that supports your family values? Go to the Internet and check out these sources.
Alliance Defense Fund, The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), The American Thinker, American Spectator, Big Government, Big Hollywood, California Population, Canadian Free Press, Christian Science Monitor, CNS, Daily Caller, Eagle Forum, First Things, FrontPage, Glenn Beck.com, Heritage Foundation, Human Events, The Jimmy Z Internet Radio Show, Judicial Watch, Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF), Let Freedom Ring, Liberty Counsel, Michelle Malkin, New Media Journal, NewsBusters, Newsmax, Numbers USA, OneNewsNow, Pastor Brain's News, Rush Limbaugh.com, Rutherford Institute, Stand Up America, Townhall, Traditional Values Coalition, Wall Builders, Western Journalism, WorldNetDaily (WND), and others.
MSNBC taken to task for defending Obama over his missteps in Egypt . . . again voting present as voters had been warned he would do if elected president.
MSNBC's tubby Ed Schultz calls New Jersey governor a fat slob for protecting taxpayer spending. (Remember it's the Democrats who love spending other people's money, not to help the disadvantaged but to create voting blocks for future elections so they can spend more.)
A trough - A long, narrow container, open on top, for feeding or watering animals; Any similarly shaped container; A gutter under the eaves of a building; eaves trough; A short, narrow canal designed to hold water until it drains or evaporates; A long, narrow depression between waves or ridges - Wiktionary
"'Avatar' is a thinly disguised, heavy-handed and simplistic sci-fi fantasy/allegory critical of America from our founding straight through to the Iraq War," wrote Nolte. "It looks like a big-budget animated film with a garish color palette right off a hippie's tie dye shirt." . . . read more
From the idiots at Newsweek, the pub who called Obama "A God!" - Now they write, "Why Barack Obama represents American Catholics better than the pope does." . . . read more
Young Journalists at Scoop 44 rejoice, as if good Germans again, proclaiming Obama's Civilian Work Force is ready to serve across the United States doing his definition of "community" work. In Germany, Hitler had called his efforts to organize the youth as his loyal Brown Shirts. Scoop 44 is an example of the agenda of America's future journalist . . . read more
Not mad at the state-run media yet? Maybe you finally will be, as national medias such as the New York Times had pushed Bush to release Gitmo prisoners. Now these elitist publishers may soon have your son's or daughter's blood on their own hands, as if they really give a damn.
Mullan sprung from Gitmo jail now leads foe in Afghan Campaign against U.S. Marines . . .read more
The AP appeared to be getting its story tips from the Obama campaign, as Boston Globe deputy national political editor, Foon Rhee, reported: "The Obama camp today is sending around reports on Singlaub, founder of the US Council for World Freedom, which was involved in the Iran-Contra scandal during the mid-1980s and was criticized for supposed links to Nazi collaborators and right-wing death squads in Central America." . . . read more
“I noticed the New York Times this morning had three stories on their front page that are essentially about Sarah Palin’s children. I don’t think they get it. I don’t think they have a clue as to what is going on out in the country. They are trying their best to drag her down in any way and apply a double standard to her that they wouldn’t apply to anybody else . . ." read more
A conservative media analyst points out that it took the wire services and major television networks a year to discover who Reverend Jeremiah Wright was -- yet only 48 hours to begin running "sneering pieces" about Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin's religion. Tim Graham says that shows a glaring double standard . . . read more
The honor page for Sergeant Speer had the information below that you will never see from the pariah at the Associated Press or in too many of our nation's newspapers that simple cut and paste AP stories onto their pages:
Six days before he received the wounds that killed him, Sgt. 1st Class Christopher J. Speer walked into a minefield to rescue two wounded Afghan children, according to fellow soldiers.
Like the new promises of Obama . . . give the voters a trail filled with flowers of change . . . on a path that eventually leads to the same old lies. - Webmaster
Report says MSNBC execs know net is in the tank for Obama
Last July, Obama said "more young black men languish in prison than attend colleges and universities."Actually, more than twice as many black men 18-24 are in college as there are in jail. Last September he said, "We have a system that locks away too many young, first-time, nonviolent offenders for the better part of their lives." But Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute, writing in the institute's City Journal, notes that from 1999 to 2004, violent offenders accounted for all of the increase in the prison population. Furthermore, Mac Donald cites data indicating that:
"In the overwhelming majority of cases, prison remains a lifetime achievement award for persistence in criminal offending. Absent recidivism or a violent crime, the criminal-justice system will do everything it can to keep you out of the state or federal slammer." . . . read more
"Every Tuesday night Keith is up there as the face of NBC News. That’s a problem....[Tim] Russert has spent 20 years building credibility. All of a sudden he’s taking questions from Keith Olbermann, the Daily Kos blogger? . . . What’s it going to be like in the general election now that everyone knows we’re the in-house network of Barack Obama?"
- A "high level source inside MSNBC," as quoted in a June 3 posting by Steve Krakauer to the TVNewser blog . . . Source MRC
With CBS close to losing the total viewers race for the first time in five years, CEO Leslie Moonves called Fox's ratings hit "American Idol" a "monster" and urged somebody to "kill that show."
"While we're in repeats, 'American Idol' continues to be a monster," Moonves said Thursday at the McGraw-Hill Media Summit in New York City. "It's a phenomenon. If somebody would kill that show, I'd really appreciate it. But it's a national phenomenon, and it continues to do extremely well. It's tough to compete with it." . . . read more
More Americans turning to Web for their news
70% no longer trust drive-by media - Mar.
Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe traditional journalism is out of touch, and nearly half are turning to the Internet to get their news, according to a new survey.
While most people think journalism is important to the quality of life, 64 percent are dissatisfied with the quality of journalism in their communities, a We Media/Zogby Interactive online poll showed.
"That's a really encouraging reflection of people who care A) about journalism and B) understand that it makes a difference to their lives," said Andrew Nachison, of iFOCOS, a Virginia-based think tank which organized a forum in Miami where the findings were presented.
Nearly half of the 1,979 people who responded to the survey said their primary source of news and information is the Internet, up from 40 percent just a year ago. Less than one third use television to get their news, while 11 percent turn to radio and 10 percent to newspapers . . . read more
2006 Harris Interactive Poll Rates the Public's Respect for Professions . . . read more
- Our Analysis of the MainStream Media -
See, here's a page from Liberal Ethics 101 on how to handle the national news when your own sh**s in their underwear - Mar.
Incredibly, in lead stories Monday night about New York Governor Eliot Spitzer being linked to a prostitution ring, neither ABC's World News nor the NBC Nightly News verbally identified Spitzer's political party. Must mean he's a liberal Democrat -- and he is. CBS anchor Katie Couric, however, managed to squeeze in a mention of his party. Last August when news of Larry Craig's arrest broke, both ABC and NBC stressed his GOP affiliation . . . read more
"I can sit here now, and knowingly tell you that life’s hard sometimes. But, I made it. I’m still here and I love who I am. If I never went through the hard times, I would not be able to appreciate the good ones. Cliché, yes, but I know it’s true. I have experienced just how hard it can be. I can honestly tell you to never dwell on the past, but build from it and keep moving forward." - Ashley Alexandra Dupré (on her Web site.)
Oh my . . . Americans are finallysending a strong message to media businesses that they are tired of all the progressive propaganda continually aimed at their families by Hollywood. When do you think Hollywood will learn that their job is to entertain and not to indoctrinate? I guess the only way to get their attention is for the public to just keep hitting them in the wallet again and again until they bleed a river of green. - Webmaster
"G-rated movies power 2007 box office, again family films fare 438% better than R-rated in latest study" (Mar.) . . . read more
- In 2007, local business leaders were referred to as Nazis via cartoon allowed to run in paper -
Newspaper has demanded that all American cable channels carry the Al-Jezeera Network as manageing editor demands, " . . . let's fight attempts to quash it." (See archive.) Publisher then also asked readers to reach out to moderate Muslims.
Here is video of Moderate Muslim, Saudi Cleric Muhammad Al-'Arifi, on How to Beat Your Wife as it was given to young Muslims in the televised Lebanon "Ramadhan Show."
Ten-thousand moderate Muslims in Khartoum demanded British teacher killed, who innocently called a Teddy Bear "Mohammed," their chanting, “Shame, shame on the UK,” protesters chanted, and they called for Gibbons’ execution, saying, “No tolerance: Execution,” and “Kill her, kill her by firing squad.”
CNN first made a deal with Saddam to keep their news agency in Iraq if it didn't report on his atrocities to Iraqis, as all other news agency were being kicked out.
CNN got away with it. No Iraqi citizen, who had lost a loved one to Saddam during that period of time, ever came to the U.S. in retribution toward executives at CNN for their cavalier attitude, one that had thrown Iraqi human rights into CNN's garbage can in the name of profit.
Then CNN last year ran a video given to them by terrorist in Iraq, the video actually showing terrorists shooting a young American GI. The voiceover provided by the terrorists was heard to say, "Don't shoot until the women and children are out of the way." CNN knew it was a PR statement by the insurgents, yet still ran it in the name of profits. (See picture on this page of what these nterrorists really do to Iraqi children.)
CNN also ran a large graphic "X" over Cheney's face during a speech, among other things. And now, according to TV Newser, a Chyron shown in the upper left was run by CNN reading, "Bush resigns." (Note: the word Chyron comes from the company that invented the technique of putting modular art and characters over a televised image.)
The picture shows that CNN News continues to be dangerous to our right to know the truth.
"The media, in large part, gave us this war." - CNN, Bill Press
Sent to CNN, but meant for all media outlets
Why is America's superstructure suddenly in dire need today when just yesterday journalists didn't seem to know the issue even existed? What hypocrites from Fox News to CNN to the nationa networks.
If the media had returned to preventative reporting years ago and away from its dangerous "gotcha mentality" of today, this bridge could have been shut down and lives saved. Instead, the mainstream media chose to focus on spoonfed stories such as Paris Hilton going to jail, one that went on for weeks.
It's like the bridge fell onto the heads of journalists, who said, "Huh?"
If the press wants to investigate another coming collapse, it needs to ask why Congress allows American innovation onto the Internet for counties to research through its new passage of the Patent Reform Act.
It makes me sick to see the media try to play the hero on this bridge accident when it chose to not investigate the issue in the first place until Americans paid with their lives. Is that the new bottom line? Blood leads?
Webmaster August 3, 2007 - the day after the collapse of the Minneapolis Interstate bridge
If you don't understand how the three major networks can go so far to the left, along with cable outlets such as CNN to allow the transmission of a terrorist's video shooting a GI's, not to mention the vile New York Times and other SP newspapers, then you really still don't understand the meaning of greed and corruption at the highest levels of America's corporations. We call it Bill Clinton's real legacy to the American people of, "I did it because I could, ass holes. "
Beware when someone mocks others. We've watched Olbermann's show and have become disturbed he has to mock others to make a dime. It seems while he had worked hard to get where he is today, his content is filled with making fun of others rather than coming up with original material that is useful for his viewers. Because of that Olbermann really belongs on Comedy Central, not MSNBC.
(Note: Below are archived news links. Content may have been removed from their respective servers.)
OH MY. HERE THEY GO AGAIN!
ABC, NBC, and CBS go out of their way to be sure indicted Detroit Mayor is not shown to be a Democrat. My oh my, see how the networks filter their news to be sure it falls in goose step with the DNC. And they wonder why more and more independent Americans are dumping the networks for, loosely said, "the news?"
Two weeks since the ABC and NBC evening shows took multiple days before getting around to informing viewers that disgraced New York Governor Eliot Spitzer belonged to the Democratic Party -- after every ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news program last year immediately highlighted the party of Republican Senators David Vitter and Larry Craig -- Monday's broadcast network evening newscasts all failed to note, verbally or on-screen, 's party . . . read more
Reporter Kevin Tibbles, also sans any mention of a party affiliation, outlined: "The Detroit city council votes overwhelmingly to ask the Mayor to resign. 37-year-old Kwame Kilpatrick, in his second term of the Mayor of the Motor City, is mired in financial, political, and personal scandal, but refuses to budge."
Source: MRC / ABC
Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick
The short item from Brian Williams on the NBC Nightly News:"We are covering America tonight, beginning in Detroit, where Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick -- that's his police booking photo -- was indicted on perjury and other charges in the wake of a sex scandal there. The Mayor denied having an affair with his chief of staff until text messages showed otherwise. He faces up to 15 years in prison and expulsion from office, if he's found guilty. He said today he'll be exonerated."
Harry Smith set up the CBS Evening News story:"In Detroit, a sex scandal led to criminal charges today against the Mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, a married father of three. Prosecutors say his own text messages prove he committed perjury. Dean Reynolds has the story."
Reynolds began:"At 38, Kwame Kilpatrick is the youngest Mayor in Detroit's history. Once an up-and-coming star, he now has another less-welcome distinction....prosecutors charged Kilpatrick with eight felonies, alleging he lied under oath about an affair with a top aide, blocked an investigation into it and used taxpayer dollars to hush it up . . . "
Hypocrites at NBC News ask Democrat Candidates in Cleveland debate about the importance of new incoming Russian president when the network news itself only spent seconds on the subject.
During Tuesday night’s presidential debate, NBC’s Tim Russert tried to test the Democratic candidates’ basic knowledge of foreign policy, asking what they knew about the man who will almost certainly be elected president of Russia in Sunday’s elections. After Hillary Clinton gave a general answer that kept referring to “Putin’s handpicked successor,”Russert pounced: “Do you know his name?”
But if the fact that Dmitry Medvedev will assume the Russian presidency is actually important, Russert and his co-moderator, NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams, have utterly ignored it as journalists.
A Nexis search shows just one reference to Medvedev on NBC, an April 14, 2007 story about Russia’s giant energy company, Gazprom, of which Medvedev was chairman of the board. (The story aired on a weekend, when Lester Holt, not Brian Williams, was in the anchor chair.) . . . read more
Reporter Jim Maceda talked about Medvedev for exactly 13 seconds, as file footage of Medvedev speaking at what appears to be a shareholders meeting. (See photo to left.)
Maceda: They call it Kremlin Inc., capitalism with Putin himself as the ultimate CEO. In this system, the line between strategic resources, oil and gas, and political power is not only blurred, it doesn’t exist.
Take Dmitry Medvedev, Gazprom’s chairman of the board and deputy prime minister. Many believe he's a front-runner to succeed Putin. It’s as if Microsoft’s Bill Gates were US secretary of commerce as well.
But over the past nine months, as Medvedev campaigned for the presidency, NBC has completely ignored him.
So has ABC and CBS. Hillary could easily have said, “I don’t know anything about him, including his name, because I get my news from you, Tim.”
Goldberg complained: "The New York Times showed virtually no interest in Bill Clinton and Gennifer Flowers. It showed absolutely no front page interest in allegations by a reputable businesswoman named Juanita Broadderick, who said that, when Bill Clinton was attorney general of Arkansas, he raped her.
But they did have interest in putting on page one a story that alleged that Nancy Reagan, while she was married to Ronald Reagan, was having an affair with Frank Sinatra." Goldberg further contended that at the Times, "they have lots and lots of biases, but they think that anybody who thinks that is the one with the biases." . . . read more
"They think that they're pure and noble and above it all. But I just gave you some examples. If they have no interest in a story about a credible woman saying that Bill Clinton raped her when he was attorney general, but put Frank Sinatra and Nancy Reagan on page one, that shows their agenda, their biases."
O'Reilly hosted the segment with Goldberg and, to argue the liberal side, FNC contributor Jane Hall of American University. The FNC host began by asking Goldberg what he thought of the situation. Goldberg:
"Well, first, unless this lobbyist is a secret agent working for al-Qaeda, this is going to help John McCain a lot more than it's going to hurt him because nothing unites conservatives more than their visceral distrust of the New York Times.
But let me put this into some kind of historical perspective. The New York Times showed virtually no interest in Bill Clinton and Jennifer Flowers. It showed absolutely no front page interest in allegations by a reputable businesswoman named Juanita Broadderick, who said that, when Bill Clinton was attorney general of Arkansas, he raped her."
Great idea from ABC, joining StarTrek, saying soon the earth will be so warm they will have to move their studios to outer space.
Good Morning America weatherman and resident environmental alarmist, Sam Champion, wondered on Friday if global warming could cause "the ultimate climate disaster"and force humanity to abandon Earth and live in space. (Throughout the day's themed program, various GMA hosts filed reports on space and astronauts.)
So, as a transition to a piece on liberal environmental issues, Champion segued: "And now to our series 'Global Warming: Global Warning.' . . . read more
Together with clips of Lynas from the documentary, Champion proceeded to offer hyperbolic panic about the end of all life. He intoned: "If the world warms by six degrees, it would be the ultimate climate disaster...Natural disasters become routine and catastrophic flooding leaves major cities abandoned."
Champion also followed the Al Gore model and claimed that all disagreement on the subject has ended: "The debate put aside, scientists now agree our world is getting warmer."
Of course, even Champion was forced to admit, in a circuitous manner, that there has been relatively little change over the last millennia: "In fact, it's nearly one degree warmer than it was a thousand years ago."
Source: ABC Good Morning America
ABC has gone where no man has gone before
Champion used the segment to preview a new documentary called "Six Degrees Could Change the World" that air Sunday night on the National Geographic Channel.
He [of course] failed to inform viewers that the author upon which the special is based on, Mark Lynas, is a hard-left environmentalist who once threw a pie in the face of Bjorn Lomborg at a reading of Lomborg's book, "The Skeptical Environmentalist."
To the progressive and arrogant idiots at National Geographic that have sailed off the edge of the earth - how about "The minus 2 degrees that changed the world?" These are the ones that told you the universe was slowing down and then saying recently, "Oh never mind, we got it wrong again. It's speeding up, but this time we're right."
Russia and now Canadian scientists are seeing a quiet sun on the horizon (pardon the pun), believing that global cooling may be repeating from the 18th century, one which had lasted over 100 years and changed the types of foods that were grown, millions of people staving or dying from diseases related to malnutrician while wiping out the Vikings in Greenland, (changed to Whiteland?)
It had caused Ireland to give up grains and switch to potatoes, a hardy plant. But then when the potato blight hit, people again were starved as their only useful crop turned to mush.
Bias continues in spades at CBS News labels Republicans as Conservatives, yet NOT ONCE do they use the negative Liberal word once for Democrats:
No state, not even Massachusetts or New York, was liberal to the CBS crew, but shortly before 10 PM EST Couric announced "John McCain has won the deeply conservative state of Oklahoma" and she later listed McCain's win in the "very conservative state." In the next hour, Greenfield described California as "a conservative state for Republicans." (When announcing Obama's win in Connecticut a little past 10 PM EST, Couric simply said the state "has a strong anti-war sentiment.")
In that Schieffer comment quoted above about how the "very conservative establishment" opposes McCain, Schieffer saw an up side to being disliked by conservatives . . . read more
He's got a whole lot of CONSERVATIVES on his side, ranging from Jack Kemp, the Godfather of supply-side economics, to Tom Coburn, the Oklahoma Senator, maybe the MOST CONSERVATIVE Senator on a lot of grounds. But there are these people, particularly in the media, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingarham folks, who have no truck with him. James Dobson, the head of Focus on the Family, BIG CONSERVATIVE GROUP, has said in so many words, 'I will not vote for John McCain' " . . .
There may be an up side of this. He may play at, 'look, I'm the one that can get moderate votes, that. I'm the one that these folks out there that you don't like very much, they don't like me either.' But there is a split here. We're seeing a split between the CONSERVATIVE ESTABLISHMENT, THE VERY CONSERVATIVE ESTABLISHMENT and the Republican Party.
Opposition to John McCain from conservatives is clearly a proper topic of news analysis on an election night, but during its two hours of EST/CST prime time coverage of Super Tuesday, the CBS News team managed to . . .
apply the "conservative" label at least 44 times -- in several instances beyond anything about the conservative split with McCain -- yet never once uttered the term "liberal" during a night when two liberals faced off on the Democratic side.
Jeff Greenfield and Bob Schieffer each tagged the same Senator, 25 minutes apart, with Greenfield calling Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn the "most conservative Senator" and Schieffer referring to him as "very conservative."
Schieffer characterized the fissure between conservative activists/talk show hosts and McCain as a "split between...the very conservative establishment and the Republican Party." Schieffer later warned that McCain must "put out this fire" the "very conservative Republicans are waging."
The CPI report, "False Pretenses: Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq," carried the bylines of Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith.
CPI's bio for Lewis noted how he founded CPI "in 1989 and served as its executive director until December, 2004. He is now the president of The Fund for Independence in Journalism." The bio also recalled:
"From 1977 through 1988, Lewis did investigative reporting at ABC News, and at CBS News as a producer for senior correspondent Mike Wallace at 60 Minutes."
FNC's Brit Hume on Wednesday night, [January 23, 2008], noted the common belief of many of the statements considered false and how George Soros funds CPI.
The following is from the January 23 "Grapevine" segment on Special Report with Brit Hume:
"A study by two self-described non-profit journalism organizations accuses President Bush and his advisers of 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following the 9-11 attacks.
But a large number of those statements were drawn from repeated assertions that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction -- a concept nearly universally accepted by most of the world's intelligence services at the time. For example, President Bush said of Hussein quote, 'He has weapons of mass destruction. He's used them before. He's used them on his own people before.'
In fact we know now that Hussein had chemical weapons. He was being tried on charges of killing 5,000 Iraqi Kurds with chemical weapons when he was executed for other crimes.
The study was done by the Fund for Independence in Journalism -- which is an arm of the Center for Public Integrity -- which is heavily funded by Bush critic George Soros."
We are still waiting for a judgment on the accused rape of Juanita Broaddrick. Yet African-American preachers still love to support Bill Clinton, obviously not even interested to bring this up to either him or Hillary for a final resolution. So much for preaching to a choir that has left the room.
But I find it very interesting when a wife doesn't want to know if her husband had been with another woman when he was a representive of a state government. Could it be because that's all too common among those sitting in the pews, Slick Willy viewed as one of their own good-old boys? It's all a very sad commentary of our time in America, as its society continues to slide down the slippery slope into the gutter.
Times Slimes U.S. Veterans
The Times reached back not only to Vietnam but to Ancient Greek mythology to make its case for the psychological horrors of post-war life:
"Decades of studies on the problems of Vietnam veterans have established links between combat trauma and higher rates of unemployment, homelessness, gun ownership, child abuse, domestic violence, substance abuse -- and criminality. On a less scientific level, such links have long been known.
" 'The connection between war and crime is unfortunately very ancient,' said Dr. Shay, the V.A. psychiatrist and author. 'The first thing that Odysseus did after he left Troy was to launch a pirate raid on Ismarus. Ending up in trouble with the law has always been a final common pathway for some portion of psychologically injured veterans.' " . . . read more from Times Article
To make the Iraq-Vietnam comparison explicit, Sontag and Alvarez unearthed a study from 1988. But back in August 2006 the Times itself reported a debunking of the 1988 study that cut the negative findings in half.
In a February 2006 story, Alvarez accepted as fact the myth of minorities as "cannon fodder" on the front lines.
John Hinderaker at the Powerline blog put the numbers in context, something the Times didn't bother doing.
"As of 2005, thehomicide ratefor Americans aged 18-24, the cohort into which most soldiers fall, was around 27 per 100,000. (The rate for men in that age range would be much higher, of course, since men commit around 88% of homicides. But since most soldiers are also men, I gave civilians the benefit of the doubt and considered gender a wash.)
"Next we need to know how many servicemen have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan. A definitive number is no doubt available, but the only hard figure I've seen is that as of last October, more than 500,000 U.S. Army personnel had served in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Other sources peg the total number of personnel from all branches of the military who have served in the two theaters much higher, e.g. 750,000, 650,000 as of February 2007, or 1,280,000. For the sake of argument, let's say that 700,000 soldiers, Marines, airmen and sailors have returned to the U.S. from service in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"Do the math: the 121 alleged instances of homicide identified by the Times, out of a population of 700,000, works out to a rate of 17 per 100,000--quite a bit lower than the overall national rate of around 27.
"But wait! The national rate of 27 homicides per 100,000 is an annual rate, whereas the Times' 121 alleged crimes were committed over a period of six years. Which means that, as far as the Times' research shows, the rate of homicides committed by military personnel who have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan is only a fraction of the homicide rate for other Americans aged 18 to 24. Somehow, the Times managed to publish nine pages of anecdotes about the violence wreaked by returning servicemen without ever mentioning this salient fact."
"How does this feel, of all the honors that have come your way....Who does it make you think of? Is there a loved one?", Williams took to his blog to call "ridiculous" the suggestion, fueled by an NBC News reporter's admission "it's almost hard to remain objective" in covering Obama, that NBC has any "bias." . . . read more
There was a time when repoters were fired from their jobs for being biased during an election. These comments now say the bosses at the networks are no longer watching over the children.
But NBC and MSNBC have been actively promoting Obama's candidacy.
Back in 2006, Today co-host Meredith Vieira called him "electrifying" and a "a rock star in politics" who has "touched people" and pushed him to run: "If your party says to you, 'We need you,' and, and there's already a drumbeat out there, will you respond?"
Last summer, the Today show uniquely showcased a union's stunt with Obama playing a health care worker. Reporter Lee Cowan served up this softball: "What does it say about the state of our health care that you've got a 86-year-old man being taken care of by a 61-year-old woman and you put the two of them together and they probably don't have a living wage?"
"I interviewed Lee Cowan, our reporter who covers Obama, while we were out yesterday and posted the interview on the Web. Lee says it's hard to stay objective covering this guy. Courageous for Lee to say, to be honest."
Bennett informed viewers that "the argument was that he used the phrase 'phony soldiers.' He was talking about a phony soldier," namely Jesse MacBeth, and both the AP and ABC News ran pieces on "phony" soldiers. My Friday NewsBusters posting pointed out how ABC's World News, in a September 24 story on what anchor Charles Gibson described using the same "phoney" term as Limbaugh, looked at "phoney heroes" -- those passing themselves off as Iraq war veterans. Reporter Brian Ross noted:
"The authorities say the most disturbing case involves this man: 23-year-old Jesse MacBeth. In a YouTube video seen around the world, MacBeth became a rallying point for anti-war groups as he talked of the purple heart he received in Iraq and described how he and other U.S. Army Rangers killed innocent civilians at a Baghdad mosque. It was a complete fabrication." . . . read more
While our troops are putting their lives at risk in the U.S. military, this vile Congress, a cess pool run by its elected Democrats, worries about a talk show host while it supports far-left Web sites that show sicko cartoons, such as Senator Liberman from Connecticut positioned to look like his's going to give Bush a blow job.
This are vile Americans, who couldn't protect this country from an attacked if they tried, their mind only on being sure their butts continue to sit in those comfortable chairs in Congress.
For them to call Russ Limbaugh an anti-troop hater is like calling Bill Graham an atheist. This country has become a house of cards and cannot stand with these elitist bastards at the helm of our ship of state.
"In an explosive new twist to the flap over Rush Limbaugh and the "phony soldiers" controversy, it has emerged that ABC News used similar language and the same context in a news segment that aired two days before his comments. As a result, serious doubt should be cast upon those who are pushing for the talk titan's censure.
In fact, on Monday, 24 September, the network's Charlie Gibson introduced a segment reported by Brian Ross regarding a number of "phony veterans" now under investigation for falsely claiming to have served in wartime. One of those mentioned in the story is none other than Jesse MacBeth, the same fake soldier referenced by Rush during the program in question."
But far left Web sites told another story along with mainstream media outlets, Congress covering itself for the vile misstep by the organization that contributes to their campaigns, Moveon.org.
After Don Imus made his “ho” comment about the Rutgers women’s basketball team on April 4, the media went into a feeding frenzy. In the first week after the story broke, the three major networks aired a total of 19 segments. On cable, CNN had 60, with Fox News at 21 and MSNBC at 13.
The New York Times ran 12 articles, USA Today and The Washington Post each ran nine, and Newark, New Jersey’s Star-Ledger ran 11.
But after the Sept. 7 Navy-Rutgers football game, at which Rutgers fans crudely and obscenely abused the visiting Midshipmen players, fans and families, the media were nearly silent . . . read more
"FUCK you, too, Rutgers," and especially your cowardly administration. Administrators and professors at too many universities today not only tolerate this kind of attitude on campus but also firmly encourage it.
Even voters in San Francisco removed the military out of their city. We hope when the earthquakes come, that is exactly what they do. Stay away. Sometimes you need to get what you so richly deserve so you can fully understand the justice you had asked for.
“Navy was booed and peppered with ‘You suck!’ chants when they stepped on the field for both halves. Toward the end of the second half, Rutgers students in the new bleacher section began to serenade the adjacent section of Navy fans and uniformed Midshipmen.
“ ‘F-- you, Navy. F--you, Navy. F-- you, Navy.’ ”
On Tuesday, Rutgers President Richard McCormick apologized to Naval Academy officials in a letter in which he said, “No student-athlete should ever be subject to profane language directed at them from the crowd, and certainly not the young men of the Naval Academy who have made a commitment to serve our nation in a time of war.”
Meanwhile, Rutgers athletic director Robert Mulcahy and Greg Blimling, vice president of student affairs, wrote an open letter saying the outbursts were “undignified, disrespectful and unacceptable.”
So how have the media responded? On Sept. 12, the Washington Post, UPI and AP ran less than 300 words each on the Rutgers officials’ apology. The New York Times, meanwhile, with Rutgers in its backyard, referred to the incident in the sixth paragraph of a Sept. 14 column by Harvey Araton about the overall Rutgers football program. The networks have ignored the incident completely . . . read more.
Webmaster: Goddamn political correct television news networks not telling thee American people this true story. May their buildings come down to match their elitist hate and lies to America.
High level officials in the Public Broadcasting System are operating from a mindset that is overly sympathetic toward the concept of "parallel societies," where sharia (Islamist laws) holds sway over democratic norms, according to documentary filmmaker Martyn Burke.
Burke, also a Hollywood producer, collaborated with some conservative national security experts to produce a documentary on moderate Muslims, entitled, "Islam versus Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center."
WETA, the Washington, D.C., affiliate of the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) declined to air the film as part of the "America at a Crossroads Series" earlier this year. (See Related Story)
The objections WETA-PBS officials had to the film were outlined in a series of notes "Crossroads Series" producer Leo Eaton addressed to Burke and his partners at ABG Films.
The documentary "created a one-sided narrative," wrote Eaton. "You present the ongoing struggle between your chosen 'moderates' and 'extremists' in very subjective and very claustrophobic terms," he continued. This sentiment was apparently shared by other top officials connected with the series . . . read more
"Not only did they [PBS] suppress our film, but they put in MacNeil's film, which was unmistakably pro-Islamist," said Gaffney. "It's hard to dispute the idea that there was an agenda here hostile in the extreme toward the idea of courageous anti-Islamist Muslims telling their story."
Some of the more problematic features of Islamic law that Burke and Gaffney noted included the following:
- A Muslim man is allowed to beat his wife.
- A woman needs four male witnesses to prove rape or adultery and could be stoned to death for adultery if she fails to find them.
- A Muslim cannot be condemned to death for the murder of an infidel.
- Judges in an Islamic state could only be Muslim. A non-Muslim judge can only adjudicate for infidels.
Webmaster: These damn, pariah secular progressives at PBS are using taxpayer dollars to take America down the road of surrender and disrespect, as is happening today in the Netherlands, Germany, and sadly England as Europe falls to a new civilization. All this under the watch of President George Bush, which proves again the fish always stinks from the head.
Christiane Amanpour’s six-hour miniseries "God’s Warriors" reflects less of the reality of "fundamentalist" monotheists - Jews, Muslims, and Christians - and more of liberals’ attitudes about these faiths. It is clear, given how CNN and Amanpour covered each faith, that they have sympathy towards Muslims in the U.S., "concern" with the Jewish settlers in the West Bank, and are uncomfortable towards the beliefs and practices of Christian evangelicals.
Tuesday night’s "God’s Jewish Warriors" focused on the cause of the "right-wing" Jewish settlers. The term "right wing" is used seven times to describe the settlers and/or their supporters in Israel and in the United States, and "fundamentalist/-ism" was used three times, once in reference to Christian supporters of the settlers in the U.S. On Wednesday night’s "God’s Muslim Warriors," "fundamentalist/-ism" was the more prevalent term, used 11 times. "Right wing" is used twice, only to describe Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch Parliament . . . read more
AMANPOUR: Across Europe, Islam is the fastest growing religion, the number of Muslims tripling in the last 30 years. This increased Muslim presence, and violence like the Van Gogh murder, play into the hands of right-wing politicians, like Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch parliament . . .
Geert Wilders, Member of Dutch Parliament: Yes, here we have my seat.
AMANPOUR: . . . who fears the Dutch are losing their country to an alien culture. The party he's founded has staked its political future in large part on an anti-Islam platform. He's proposed shutting down immigration from non-western countries and banning burkas and nikabs, the head-to-toe coverings worn by some Muslim women, even though few here wear them.
Webmaster: The Dutch are now emigrating out of their country for the first time since WWII, Amanpour blaming a fix on what she calls a right wing parliament member. Which goes to prove again that with Amanpour by your side, you don't need any enemies. Notice how she takes the murder of a Dutch playwright by Muslim extremists and turns it into a right wing agenda, something Communists would do as an everyday propaganda stunt. This is a very dangerous woman reporting for a very dangerous news organization that treats America as simply another customer. CNN needs to move to the Middle East where its agenda lies and off the American soil it continues to violate. Oh, didn't CNN tell you? Amanpour is an Iranian. It's again why you never trust Progressives with your news if you really love your freedom.
Philadelphia Inquirer reporter Gail Shister wrote about the issue at CBS News:
“One of the early casualties was 'Free Speech,' a segment in which ordinary people as well as celebrities sounded off on various issues. For many CBS News staffers, the nadir was a 'Free Speech' segment Oct. 2, the day five Amish schoolgirls were murdered in Lancaster County. The father of a child killed in Colorado's Columbine High School massacre in 1999 blamed the Amish tragedy, in part, on the teaching of evolution in public schools and on abortion. Despite CBS's avowed intention to include all viewpoints in ‘Free Speech,’ the segment caused an uproar in the newsroom, according to CBS insiders. ‘There's a difference between free speech and responsible speech,’ an embarrassed correspondent says.” . . . read more
"When my son Dan was murdered on the sidewalk at Columbine High School on April 20, 1999, I hoped that would be the last school shooting. Since that day, I’ve tried to answer the question, 'Why did this happen?'
This country is in a moral free-fall. For over two generations, the public school system has taught in a moral vacuum, expelling God from the school and from the government, replacing him with evolution, where the strong kill the weak, without moral consequences and life has no inherent value.
We teach there are no absolutes, no right or wrong. And I assure you the murder of innocent children is always wrong, including by abortion. Abortion has diminished the value of children."
Webmaster: Now it should be clear as day to you. We have the definition of free speech from the framers of the Constitution and we have the definition of free speech being acted out by those children who control the news at CBS. Now you can't say you didn't know that there really was censorship going on over at CBS News against those who were not far-left liberals. It's call control of the media . . . street walkers at CBS News pandering to their Johns while controlling your Fourth Estate. I have not watched CBS News for over two years. If you can't see the forest for the trees, than how can you vote intelligently when you can't tell the spin from the truth.
You have to do some sleuthing, however, to even learn about how twice as many blame popular culture as gun availability and, when you add in poor parenting, four times as many blame something other than access to guns.
To get to Langer's posting, headlined "Mental Health Measures Broadly Backed, but Culture Gets More Blame Than Guns," which as of 8pm EDT Monday night was not on the ABCNews.com home page or the World News page, you must click on "Politics" on the sidebar and then scroll to the very bottom of the lengthy page to see the headline in the "Polling" box.
"ABC News polling chief Gary Langer, in a posting buried on ABCNews.com, revealed that a poll taken Sunday discovered that when "asked the primary cause of gun violence, far more Americans blamed the effects of popular culture (40 percent) or the way parents raise their children (35 percent) than the availability of guns (18 percent)." ABC's World News on Monday devoted nearly two minutes to results of ABC's survey, but didn't get to that finding which shows the public does not share the media assumption that gun availability is to blame for the murders at Virginia Tech."Source: Media Research Center
As liberal politicians pose at churches, salt their speeches with Scripture, and insist that their aggressive drive for more government is pious obedience to the Almighty, they are getting powerful cover from the mainstream media.
The biggest help they are getting, apart from credulous acceptance of their sudden spiritual enthusiasm, is the media’s demonizing of conservative Christians. Religion’s okay only if it mirrors liberal opinion.
The New York Times has been in the forefront of the conservative Christian-bashing, running voluminous pieces that accuse churches of avoiding taxes and warning darkly that the Christian Right is on the verge of turning the United States into a Talibanesque theocracy.
Maintaining this false image takes a lot of repetition and misrepresentation. A perfect example is an article in The New York Times Sunday Magazine (Feb. 18) in which Concerned Women for America’s position on spiritual outreach is so grossly distorted as to constitute a lie.
Webmaster: Oh my, the New York Times again? Gee, and it's the only paper of record you can buy at Starbucks. Of course, we no longer go there tired of standing in line behind too many leftist customers that are so full of themselves they seem to float above the floor.
And Peter Singer and the Times? Here is a quote we read from Singer, one the horny editors at the New York Times would surely approve of, "If your dog can tell you he has to go out, he can tell you other things, too."
We guess the Times would also be in favor of recommending the addition of a new "Princeton-Singer Category" to the annual dog show held in the city that never sleeps, titled "Best F***." We know the Muslims hate America, but when looking at the types of people that run the Times, how can any sane human blame them. There can be no doubt the Times really is The Great Satan or The Slut of the City . . . Sodom's Pub.
At the time, Kazimi notes, "the Iraqi military claimed that some of its soldiers were cornered on Haifa Street and killed after running out of ammunition. This incident set off the subsequent battles there. Al-Qaeda also released written statements at the time taking credit for the initial phase of fighting. . . . The footage 'obtained by CBS' is identical to that put out by Al-Qaeda. But Logan makes no mention of Al-Qaeda's video and does not address the implication that the footage she used was off an Al-Qaeda video. And if it's not off the Al-Qaeda video, then how did she get footage identical to the one used by Al-Qaeda? This needs to be explained."
But "the most damning indication of journalistic incompetence," Kazimi blogs, is that "Logan makes no mention about the affiliation of these insurgents fighting on Haifa Street. Not even the slightest mention is made that al Qaeda is taking credit for the fighting there. On the contrary, the audience is treated to a blanket accusation by an anonymous civilian (wearing a headdress in the insurgent manner) denouncing the Americans and the destruction they've brought to bear on Haifa Street." . . . read more
Webmaster: Oh, my, we are back to the set-up ambulance videos used by AP as real news during the Lebanon war in the summer of 2006. The media today has become a propaganda tool used by terrorists, who rightly see journalists as slime opportunists who would forward their own career on the back of weakening America's resolve in the war on terror. In other words, as used to be said about them, "They would sell their own mothers to forward their careers." These are not called bastards. That is too kind. They would be better identified as traitors, ones who should see the hangman's noose. But the American people are getting tired of it all, a Harris summer 2006 poll showing the public rating the journalist trade as one to trust at 13%, we believe lower than used car salesmen.
The AP's dispatch on the protest explained: “United for Peace and Justice, a coalition group sponsoring the protest, had hoped 100,000 would come. They claimed even more afterward, but police, who no longer give official estimates, said privately the crowd was smaller than 100,000.” And if Schieffer didn't believe the Washington Post, New York Times or the AP, he certainly didn't show much respect for his CBS News Washington bureau colleague Joie Chen, who related on Saturday's CBS Evening News (as recounted in Brad Wilmouth's NewsBusters posting):
“But for all the tie dye and familiar chants, the anti-war movement has moved on and changed direction. Today's protest didn't go near the White House, instead leading tens of thousands up Constitution Avenue to the Capitol, bearing a message for the new Congress, now controlled by Democrats.” . . . read more
Webmaster: And again the same faces of hate against America appear, including the pariah Jane Fonda, who sat in a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft bunker smiling as they were shooting down an American B-52. And same to McCain who gives this spoiled elitist any excuse for still existing on this earth.
"Are There Two Different Fort Bennings?" So asked James Taranto in his Friday "Best of the Web Today" compilation for Opinion Journal.com as he cited an AP story posted on ABCNews.com with the headline, "Bush Cheered at Fort Benning," while the New York Times headline declared: "Bush Speaks and Base Is Subdued." . . . Media Research Center
Webmaster: It's worth saying again and again. The elites over at the New York Times didn't like our GI's rebuilding Japan and Germany after WWII, either. If you subscribe to the New York Times after their publishing lie after lie, then you're the pariah, not the Times. Can you image repeating what the Times had written to only discover it was a lie, then having to find everyone you had so proud told, acting out a line as if an actor on Saturday Night Live saying, "Never mind!"
The facts of the case came to light in November through the efforts of a pro-life Web site, LifeSiteNews.com. At first, The Times editors stonewalled over the facts, then they covered up the reporter’s biased sources and denied unethical journalistic practices. Finally, the newspaper’s ombudsman, Byron Calame, wrote a column on December 31, 2006 detailing the newspaper’s malpractice in the April 9 story. Amazingly, but not surprisingly, the newspaper’s editors saw no reason to “doubt the accuracy” of the story, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. So, no retraction, no recriminations and no firings.
This incident is reminiscent of the case in 1992 when Rigoberta Menchu was awarded the Nobel Prize for a fabricated autobiography of her life in the 1987 book I, Rigoberta Menchu. Hearing of the fraud, the New York Times sent one of its investigative reporters to Guatemala with the purpose of verifying Ms. Menchu’s claims in the supposed “autobiography” Ms. Menchu's defenders still claim that the dishonesty of her account is of no consequence, because her words are “metaphorically true;” she remains a hero to the left . . . read more
"Once again, if a story is 'metaphorically true,' if it fits The Times’ leftist ideology, then there’s no need to verify it. So much for The Times being the “paper of record.” When a paper’s credibility is suspect, what is left? Little wonder that circulation, revenues, and the value of The New York Times (as based on the price of their stock) continues to decline."
Webmaster: It's worth saying again, the elites over at the New York Times didn't like our GI's rebuilding Japan and Germany after WWII, either. If you subscribe to the New York Times after their publishing lie after lie, then you're the pariah, not the Times. Can you image repeating what the Times had written to only discover it was a lie, then having to find everyone you had so proud told, acting out a line as if an actor on Saturday Night Live saying, "Never mind!"
It's official: The editors of The New York Times have no shame. Don't take my word for it. Listen to the Times' own ombudsman, Byron Calame.
On Sunday, Calame wrote a stunning column debunking an April 9 New York Times Magazine cover story on abortion in El Salvador. The sensational piece by freelance writer Jack Hitt alleged that women there had been thrown in prison for 30-year terms for having had abortions. Hitt described his visit to one of them, inmate Carmen Climaco. "She is now 26 years old, four years into her 30-year sentence" for aborting an 18-week-old fetus, Hitt reported.
The magazine featured heart-rending photos of Climaco's 11-year-old daughter, eyes filled with tears as she clutched a photo of her jailed mom. Cruel. Horrible. Outrageous. And utterly, demonstrably, false.
Climaco had actually been convicted of murder for strangling her newborn baby. This information was uncovered by pro-life groups. Lifesite.net obtained the court documents in Climaco's case and published them on their website in late November. Calame followed up and also independently obtained the documents easily -- records which Hitt didn't bother to try and get for himself to verify the propaganda being fed to him. Reported Calame:
Webmaster: The New York Times didn't like our GI's rebuilding Japan and Germany after WWII, either. If you subscribe to the New York Times after their publishing this lie, then you are the pariah, not the Times.
"In 1995, I published a short paper in the academic journal Science. In that study, I reviewed how borehole temperature data recorded a warming of about one degree Celsius in North America over the last 100 to 150 years. The week the article appeared, I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.
"I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period." "The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a time of unusually warm weather that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the "Little Ice Age" took hold in the 14th century. ... The existence of the MWP had been recognized in the scientific literature for decades. But now it was a major embarrassment to those maintaining that the 20th century warming was truly anomalous. It had to be "gotten rid of."
Webmaster: Can you believe this pasty-ass reporter? No wonder the American people see the journalist trade as 13% reliable, down from a low of 44% in 1999.
When the AP called Reid for comment, he hung up on them. You would think that an aggressive, fair and balanced media would have been incensed and activated. But we don't have a fair and balanced national media. It should be said that major newspaper editorial pages were not impressed with Reid's defense. The Washington Post suggested that "Mr. Reid's professions of transparency and full disclosure are transparently wrong." But the network distaste for saying anything critical of the Democratic leader was obvious. ABC aired nothing. CBS aired nothing. NBC's Chip Reid offered a few words on "Nightly News" -- after the latest full story on "Foley fallout." There was no "Harry fallout." CNN stood out as especially pathetic. On CNN's "American Morning" the day after the Reid story broke (and nearly two weeks after Foley resigned), they aired 18 minutes of Foley stories and 35 seconds on Harry Reid. On "The Situation Room," Wolf Blitzer quarantined the Reid story to little dribs and drabs heavy on Reid protesting his innocence. Meanwhile, CNN was devoting minutes to more substantial stories, like Arnold Schwarzenegger joking on "The Tonight Show" that connecting him to Bush was like connecting him to an Oscar. Toxic Bush -- now that's Blitzer-tickling news. But the networks were not alone in displaying fall-campaign favoritism. The New York Times put its Harry Reid story the next day on page A-19. The headline? "Senator to Amend Financial Forms." Could the Times have possibly come up with a better "please don't bother to read this, no real scandal here" headline? In case you're wondering if the Times favors Democrats on scandal stories, this was the Page One headline on the very same day: "Foley Case Snags Incumbent In Ohio Race for House Seat." Reporter Adam Nagourney found Republican House leader Deborah Pryce in deep trouble in Columbus. On that day, the Foley news spilled over into 74 column inches of text and pictures. By contrast, the Reid story was merely 18 column inches. Clearly, the Times doesn't hide its partisan priorities . . . read
Webmaster: We told you so! It's not your Fourth Estate. It's theirs, and you pay to allow them to steal it from you. Where are the patriots? You can only read about them in the history books.
Flames, clenched fists and death threats -- a heart-pounding collage of sensational imagery and rhetoric. What more could a TV exec need to attract audience eyeballs? Recall the talking heads who told us in 1990, after Saddam invaded Kuwait, that "the Arab street" was going to rise en masse, as an ur-proletariat, which would support Saddam against the West. If you need documentation, check out a few old PBS "NewsHour" transcripts. But the mass rising didn't happen. Why? Because the Arab street was, to a great extent, the creation of television cameras. Political operatives -- no doubt many on Saddam's payroll -- knew they could attract the sensation-hungry camera crews and use the media to project the operatives' preferred "image of anger." Twenty-first century Islamo-fascist terrorists, however, have refined the model and moved beyond an image of anger to a new form of prepared global ambush that integrates murder, terror and instant media. The ambush technique coordinates blood-spilling violence with sensational imagery and rhetoric using a dispersed network of media operatives, guerrillas and terrorists. Networked, Coordinated Blood-spilling plus Sensationalism -- hence the technique's acronym: the CBS ambush. . . read more
Webmaster: This should be extremely disturbing to any American that loves their country, that the suits over at CBS News continue to place their personal take-home pay, which is attached to ratings, ahead of national security and America's winning of its war against the terrorism of 9/11. Don't get mad. Get even? Would anyone blame an American, whose life was changed or a loved one killed as a indirect result of the CBS ambush directive, if they began their own terrorist campaign against CBS.
CBS's Byron Pitts traveled to the same state and located the very same Marine to demonstrate that on the war “even some life-long conservatives are no longer hearing the President's message." On Thursday's CBS Evening News, Pitts touted the ex-Marine's credentials: "Retired Marine Corps Colonel Jim Van Riper is a Christian, card-carrying member of the NRA who voted for President Bush twice. But as more Marines have died in Iraq, his confidence in the Bush administration died as well." Van Riper asserted: “I don't mind arrogance except when there's dead bodies as a result." Pitts explained how “Van Riper will vote for Democrats across the board," and then cued him up: “If you could sit across from President Bush, what would you say to him?" Van Riper: "Sir, I'm disappointed." King signed off from Greenville, while Pitts reported from Jacksonville, the home of the Camp Lejuene Marine Corps base, presumably an area with thousands of retired Marine corps officers -- yet CNN and CBS, ten months apart, stumbled upon the very same retired Marine Colonel -- an amazing coincidence. (Transcript and more follows) A November 21, 2004 Daily News (of Jacksonville, NC) news story, on Secretary of State Colin Powell's resignation from the Bush cabinet, strongly suggests that Van Riper had turned against the war more than a year before CNN's King touted his opposition as a fresh trend and more than 18 months before CBS's Pitts trumpeted him. An excerpt: . . . read
Months After CNN Featured Him, CBS Showcases Same Anti-Bush Retired Marine
Webmaster: Gee, remember the Afghan schoolmaster that was beheaded because he was using his new found freedom to educate Afghan girls, his school holding 1,300 students? Hell, the progressive opportunists at CBS News never ran an extended story on this hero in the first place, a real example of the sacrifices Afghans were willing to make for their new found freedom . . . let alone CBS News running it again as they did with this repeated story of a conservative Marine against Bush. It just goes to prove the television network news executives of today are cowards. If they had been doing these kinds of antics during the Revolutionary War, they would have found their buildings burned down and their access to disinformation destroyed. See what happens when you don't protect your democracy from opportunists like this, your right to know then having to be entrusted with these cockroaches, and a reason we have not watched any of the networks news programs for over a year now. These men and women who make these decisions should be labeled as traitors and thrown into jail until the war is over. It is sad that Americans today so lack purpose they wouldn't even boycott these executives where they shop and eat. Talk about loss of resolve. America has not won a war since WWII, now about to lose three in a row. How long before a world leader realizes this country is ready for the taking, Americans not having the stomach anymore for a fight, just wanting to roll over when times get tough while not wanting their lattes to get cold. It's all typical signs of the slow internal destruction of a democracy.
This past spring, major protests were organized to rally opposition to tougher control of the American border from the tide of illegal immigration. In “Election In The Streets,” a new study by the Media Research Center, analysts poured through a staggering 309 network news stories in late March, April, and May. The findings were jaw-dropping. The Big Three in no way sought to reflect what was going on in the world in a “fair and balanced” fashion. Ninety percent of the American public believes that illegal immigration is a serious national problem. The networks have sought to create – not report, create – the exact opposite of reality. Rather than highlight the overwhelming opposition to illegal immigration, the networks put on the air a remarkable, distorted array of celebrated voices of “dissent” for illegal-alien “rights.” There were almost twice as many soundbites dedicated to advocates of looser immigration laws than there were to border-control advocates (504 to 257). On the nights of the protests, the tilt was beyond outrageous. On April 10, the soundbite count on the three evening newscasts and ABC’s “Nightline” featured 43 voices favoring illegal-alien “rights” and only 2 opposed. And they mock Fox’s motto of “fair and balanced.” If the networks sought to reflect the opinion slant of the real world, the soundbite count would have been 9 to 1 – the other way. . . read
Webmaster: The executives of broadcast news view the public as cattle and their three networks as the ranch, thinking they are free to run the territory after Clinton's legacy of "I did it because I could." These network executives have left the reporting of news in the dust and have decided propaganda is a more profitable business to be in, giving them perks of personal gain in power. They have abandoned protecting our democracy through the dissemination of information as it happens, deciding instead to color the news. Their purpose to keep the American public off balance so no one will know where the truth really lies. In a much older America, these executives would be treated as traitors and either placed in jail or become the main attraction of a public hanging. But sadly those older Americans of conviction are gone. If today's American citizens were back in the Revolutionary War, they would be more worried about protecting
their 401ks than the environment that allowed those capitalistic investments to exist. It's why Plato believed that no successful democracy could ever survive. Seen any old ones around? The truth is in front of you yet you will not believe.
Denton concluded, "These photographers have come away with powerful shots that required no manipulation digitally, but instead, manipulation on a human level, and this itself is a bigger ethical problem." The manipulation is also not a moot point: When the next war comes, will photographers and editors once again carry Hezbollah's mail? Here are just three examples of pro-Hezbollah staged photography courtesy of Reuters, the Associated Press and Agence France-Presse: -- Photos of bombing sites with clean and undamaged toys and stuffed animals perfectly positioned in front of them for maximum poignant impact. It's possible that Mickey Mouse and others merely sprung up at those spots, but it's much more likely that their placement was the product of intelligent design. -- Photographers moving other objects to more readily jerk tears. For example, many media outlets displayed a photograph of a mannequin with a wedding dress standing near the site of an Israeli air raid -- as if an explosion that knocked down a building a few yards away would leave a mannequin standing but unnoticed by hundreds of rescuers and media members running around earlier in the day. -- Photos two weeks apart showing the same Lebanese woman bemoaning the destruction of her apartment by Israeli bombs. The photos showed her in front of two different buildings, leading one blogger to write, "Either this woman is the unluckiest multiple home owner in Beirut, or something isn't quite right." . . . read
Webmaster: I thought when CNN negotiated with Saddam to stay in Baghdad, promising not to report any attrocities, was the low point. Or the L.A. Times messing with a photograph showing a GI pointing his weapon at Iraqi civilians, when in fact the rifle in the original photo was pointed to the ground. But CNN's ass is still in airports and the newspapers I guess will just keep on doing this stuff until the people break down the doors and burn the businesses to the ground. That's when they will go back to real reporting and stop the propaganda shit!
Matt Lauer, Diane Sawyer and Harry Smith know a potential roadblock to Democratic success when they see one, and all three suggested to Senator Joseph Lieberman he should drop out to prevent a Democratic loss in the fall. From Connecticut, Lieberman appeared Wednesday on the ABC, CBS and NBC morning shows and received identical reactions from all three hosts the morning after his loss in the Democratic primary. NBC's Matt Lauer on the August 9 Today show: "Senator is there any phone call you could receive, is there anyone in the Democratic Party who could call you today and ask you to drop out that you would listen to?" ABC's Diane Sawyer on Good Morning America: "Senator, I heard you say I'm a Democrat. But you're talking about running as an independent and there are members of the party who've already said, commentators, that this is a selfish decision. How can you run against the party? What will happen?" CBS's Harry Smith on The Early Show: "A final quick question. You will run as an independent at risk of losing the seat to the Republicans? You understand that risk? By splitting the Democratic vote." . . . read more
"All three network morning shows tried to roadblock Liebermann from running as an Independent candidate in Connecticut. Why, they are only supposed to report? Because they no longer report. They now intimidate as if employees of a state run media. If the Democrats get back in power, the outlets will become the state run media."
Webmaster: See how easy it is to spread your own propaganda using national television cameras and microphones within elitist studios ready to spread the message rather than the news.
Reuters withdrew all 920 photographs by a freelance Lebanese photographer from its database on Monday after an urgent review of his work showed he had altered two images from the conflict between Israel and the armed group Hizbollah. Global Picture Editor Tom Szlukovenyi called the measure precautionary but said the fact that two of the images by photographer Adnan Hajj had been manipulated undermined trust in his entire body of work. "There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image," Szlukovenyi said in a statement. "Reuters has zero tolerance for any doctoring of pictures and constantly reminds its photographers, both staff and freelance, of this strict and unalterable policy." The news and information agency announced the decision in an advisory note to its photo service subscribers. The note also said Reuters had tightened editing procedures for photographs from the conflict and apologized for the case. Removing the images from the Reuters database excludes them from future sale. Reuters ended its relationship with Hajj on Sunday after it found that a photograph he had taken of the aftermath of an Israeli air strike on suburban Beirut had been manipulated using Photoshop software to show more and darker smoke rising from buildings . . . read more
"Reuters withdraws all photos by freelancer," Aug 7, 2006
Webmaster: See how easy it is to spread propaganda.
Remember when the L.A. Times and New York Times doctored photos of an America soldier aiming his rifle at Iraqi citizens, when in fact the rifle had been pointed toward the ground. Both these newspapers should have had their doors immediately closed, sending a warning shot across the bow of the newspaper and TV news industry. But it didn't happen, and look what we have today.
And don't forget the executive at AP in 2002, waving his hand like Moses saying there are no such things as terrorists, and that the word had no meaning, telling all AP journalists they were to use the word bomber instead.
Your right to know? Sure, then where are the safeguards and consequences. Only when the people rise up and say enough is enough, closing the doors themselves will it change. It is the way of history.
Presidential adviser Karl Rove said Saturday that journalists often criticize political professionals because they want to draw attention away from the "corrosive role" their own coverage plays in politics and government. "Some decry the professional role of politics, they would like to see it disappear," Rove told graduating students at the George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management. "Some argue political professionals are ruining American politics _ trapping candidates in daily competition for the news cycle instead of long-term strategic thinking in the best interest of the country." But Rove turned that criticism on journalists."It's odd to me that most of these critics are journalists and columnists," he said. "Perhaps they don't like sharing the field of play. Perhaps they want to draw attention away from the corrosive role their coverage has played focusing attention on process and not substance." Rove told about 100 graduates trained to be political operatives that they should respect the instincts of the American voter. "There are some in politics who hold that voters are dumb, ill informed and easily misled, that voters can be manipulated by a clever ad or a smart line," said Rove, who is credited with President Bush's victories in the 2000 and 2004 elections. "I've seen this cynicism over the years from political professionals and journalists. American people are not policy wonks, but they have great instincts and try to do the right thing." . . . read more
The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled “Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy” by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP’s bias and methodology. AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.” In the interest of full disclosure, the AP should release the names of the “more than 100 top climate researchers” they attempted to contact to review “An Inconvenient Truth.” AP should also name all 19 scientists who gave Gore “five stars for accuracy.” AP claims 19 scientists viewed Gore’s movie, but it only quotes five of them in its article. AP should also release the names of the so-called scientific “skeptics” they claim to have contacted. The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore, having viewed the film at a private screening at the invitation of the former Vice President. In addition, Correll’s reported links as an “affiliate” of a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm that provides “expert testimony” in trials and his reported sponsorship by the left-leaning Packard Foundation, were not disclosed by AP . . . read more
"The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled 'Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy' by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP’s bias and methodology. AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie 'An Inconvenient Truth.' "
We also learn that Saddam is "resolute," while we are to infer that he is brave in the face of death and loyal to his countrymen. He's ready to die, he said, and he'd stand firm again were his country to be invaded. Fortunately, I was all out of hankies as this story hit the wires. Also, providentially, I happened to be reading a book that allowed me to maintain perspective even as others apparently were wilting in the presence of lunatic grandiosity. The book is called "Mayada, Daughter of Iraq," by Jean Sasson, and tells the story of a woman journalist, Mayada Al-Askari, who was arrested and tortured in 1999 along with the other "shadow women" of cell 52 in Baladiyat prison. I might have missed Mayada's story, published three years ago, if a friend of mine, Salley Lesley, hadn't written a song inspired by the book, which in turn inspired me to read it. You, too, may have missed it. Sasson says many newspapers and networks (Fox was one exception) declined to interview Mayada when she visited the United States. The French refused to publish the book, in which Mayada speaks briefly of her appreciation for President George W. Bush and the liberation of Iraq . . . read more
After reading an excerpt from the columnist on the left side, why is the Fox News Channel the only one that always says, "We report, you decide."
Keep this in mind. When the media in rank step suppresses a news story, like the one mentioned on the left, three things are happening.
1.) they don't trust you to make the right decision when all the truth is known.
2.) they're treating you like a child, as if they are mommy and daddy.
3.) their news reporting has become propaganda.
This should scare the hell out of you, therefore always turning to many sources before making a decision, and we don't mean different newspaper. We mean different kinds of sources.
Contact your local newspaper and ask if they know of the book "Mayada Daughter of Iraq" and if not, why don't they?
The gaffe lasted for only 16 seconds but, said media magpie Matt Drudge on his Web site, it "captured the president starting and stopping his message, then looking at the White House media advisor for direction." An embarrassed Blitzer materialized and told viewers the mistake had been made by "the network pool," though there were no reports of it appearing on other networks.
Another Web site said that an NBC producer, in charge of the pool for the night, erred in removing the presidential seal from the screen too early; it was supposed to remain there until just before the speech began. When CNN technicians saw the shield vanish, they assumed the speech was about to start.
Whatever, the mistake probably boosted circulation of the president's appearance, since the goof had been captured on tape and was soon playing on media-watchdog Web sites.
CNN may be in for criticism, in addition, for using Dobbs to anchor the post-speech show (a "special edition" of "Lou Dobbs Tonight") because Dobbs regularly and vehemently attacks U.S. immigration policy on his nightly CNN program. Although he called the speech "a bold attempt," he also complained that it was "long on rhetoric and short on specifics."
Remember when they put a large black X over Cheney's image in the control room? How the hell did all their newscasts get into all our airports, their domestic ratings so small and biased, a news organization that seems to need to merge with the BBC and off our soil - Webmaster
Bob Schieffer led Tuesday's CBS Evening News by heralding "bad news for the Republicans" in a new CBS News/New York Times poll and suggesting the new poll portends "a dramatic shift in the political landscape" with approval of Congress at only 23 percent, its lowest since 20 percent in 1994.
But reporting on that low number 12 years ago, just six days before Republicans took control of the House and Senate, Bob Schieffer didn't see disaster ahead for Democrats. Back then he maintained: "It's hard to gauge who'll be helped or hurt by all this gloom come Election Day."
Today's journalists, while free to report the news as it happens for the sole purpose of giving Americans unbiased information that will allow them to make useful decisions for what they believe is best for their democracy, have discovered it's better for them if they just don't report or give little attention to the stories they don't want their readers to know about.
Here is one example. Do a search on the Web for Patrick Kennedy and an incident he had at a US. airport in 2000 with a African-American airport screener after the federal employee wanted to search his bag, it not fitting into the X-Ray machine. (Just remember as you read this, you or I would have gone to jail.)
Using Google, we only found the original story on Newsmax along with a recent reference from the Fox News Channel because of Patrick Kennedy's most recent run-in with Capital Hill police in May of 2006, six years after the airport incident.
With virtually every mainstream newspaper out to lunch on this story as seen in this Internet search, it simply proves our point about the continued bias of the manipulative managing editors that run today's mainstream press.
While journalists seem to have given Patrick Kennedy as much pass as they could without looking as if they were on the payroll, they know it can also help by pushing any negative stories about him quickly off the front page and out of view of the voters.
Of course, there is the opposite effect if you work for the political party journalists don't like. Then they keep stories up as long as they can, for example with Cheney's hunting accident. It's not about how you report the news, but how you play the game with the people's right to know.
While the Kennedys' always seem to get elected anyway, even when a helpless women is left to drown or a minority worker is grabbed while doing her job in airport security, it says the Kennedys' are really either very smart or the voting public is really very stupid. I vote for the latter.
Finally, note in the story on the right that the African American worker was later fired from her job. Gee, where is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton when you need them? "Off on vacation," . . . that is when the Kennedys' need them to stay out of the picture?
Copy from the Newsmax story, January 24, 2005:
A clip in "Taking on the Kennedys," filmed by director Josh Seftel, captures Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., getting physical with security guard Della Patton as Patton was loading his luggage into a scanner.
Kennedy, who insisted he was in a rush to catch a flight back to Boston, allegedly pushed Patton and grabbed her by the arm when she informed him that she would have to inspect his carry-on bag because it wouldn't fit through the X-ray machine.
The New York Post, however, reports that Seftel's documentary includes video of "Kennedy getting into a 'physical altercation' with a female airport security guard."
Rep. Kennedy, who wasn't charged in the incident, denied he had manhandled Patton. But in July 2000 he offered her $25,000 to settle the dispute. On the advice of her attorney, Greg Mallory, Patton rejected the offer.
She was later fired from her job, with Mallory claiming Rep. Kennedy was responsible.
"And the voters of Rhode Island just keep putting Kennedy back into office. People, no matter how intelligent and sophisticated they think they are, in the end always get the government they deserve."
The real story is the social irresponsibility of the New York Times, the Indonesian government, and scores of NGOs in Indonesia still fighting Newmont. The whole trial fiasco has cost the average Indonesian dearly. A few years ago, investment in mining topped U.S.$2.6 billion. Today the figure is less than $177 million. The loss in investment means that many more babies, not unlike the little baby girl that died in Buyat, will die of malaria or malnutrition, or grow up without an education. Far from being the boogeyman, Western investment offers the greatest hope for the future of Indonesia. Thanks to Jane Perlez and her confederacy of dunces, that hope shines less brightly.
Mr. Stern also cited the example of Joe Francis, the creator of the "Girls Gone Wild" video series, who Mr. Stern said had offered to fly much of the staff of Page Six to a place Mr. Francis owns in Mexico on his private jet for Mr. Johnson's bachelor party.
Reporter caught on tape: 'WE KNOW HOW TO DESTROY PEOPLE . . . IT'S WHAT WE DO'- Source, Drudge - New York Times
"I'm still so upset about this war and I'm so proud I live in a country where you can protest." She showed a photo of herself marching with her pre-teen daughter and her husband, Richard, who was the senior political producer at CBS News for most of the 1980s. Behind her in the photo: A protest sign featuring a "W," for George W. Bush, with a slash through it." . . . read more
So if this is true, the potential new replacement for Couric at the NBC Today Show will also not be fair and balanced. When the folks finally wake up to discover that their fourth estate has been stolen and only one poltical party runs the media, the media better run. And Couric's experience as a reporter? Not needed, seems to be the line over at CBS. That's because when you're beaming propaganda around the country, all you want is a Tokyo Rose, attracting America's culture just needs a little more T&A.
"The New York Times has been urgently warning congressional Republicans to abandon the Iraq War or face ruination in the November elections. Of course, for three years now, the Times has predicted that all world leaders who supported the war would be thrown out of office on their ears. However embattled they are, I don't think Republicans are at the point of taking advice from the mainstream media, but let's look at the facts" . . . read more
Wow, read this article on how many "Times" the New York Times got it totally wrong on elections around the world with countries that supported the Iraq war!- Webmaster
"As it did in the Abu Ghraib mistake, the Times ran an editors' note on page 2 of its front section, along with a lengthy news article (this time on the front page of Section B). Again mirroring the Abu Ghraib episode, the newspaper revealed a surprising and inexplicable lapse in fact-checking on the part of a reporter and/or editor.
The original article, more than 1000 words in length, was written by Nicholas Confessore. He also wrote the news article about the error today. Without saying that he wrote the first story, he wrote today: 'The Times did not verify many aspects of Ms. Fenton's claims, never interviewed her children, and did not confirm the identity of the man she described as her husband.' " . . . Editor & Publisher
However, in the month leading up to this poll the nation had already been subjected to a near constant obsession on the part of the media and policymakers opposed to the war, commenting endlessly on the likely potential for an outbreak of civil war. In short order, this and other polls were then conducted and released, only to have the very same people recalibrate the findings into another set of news cycles and spats of national finger-pointing. In such an environment, what should we expect the American public to believe? . . . Wade Zirkle
When a newspaper of record buries a health warning, as if it was giving an award to any reader that could find the article, that is from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) on the spread of STDs among teens, and does this act for obvious political correct reasons, the health of the people who live in the city this newspaper serves have in essence become acceptable collateral agenda for the editorial staff, which is bowing down to the fascist politics of sexual orientation.