![]() |
Planting phony stories
"yojimbo" wrote in message .. . True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front page of the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan. BWHAHAHA, you can't be serious. The NYT a mouthpiece for Bush, that's just plain stupid. Show me ONE pro-war editorial. |
Planting phony stories
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:28:33 -0500, dxAce
wrote: MnMikew wrote: "yojimbo" wrote in message .. . http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007148.php As we know now from the LATimes and the NYTimes, Now there's some non-partisan sources. NOT! They're both the DNCTimes. East and West Coast editions. dxAce Michigan USA I don't know about the L. A. Times, but the New York Times (no relation) has been caught aiding the Administration's propaganda campaign leading up to the fake Iraq war. The criminal White House would steer Judith Miller to Curveball, Miller would publish Curveball's bull**** WMD fantasies, then Bunnypants would use the NY Times stories as proof of Saddam's giant threat. |
Planting phony stories
David wrote: On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:28:33 -0500, dxAce wrote: MnMikew wrote: "yojimbo" wrote in message .. . http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007148.php As we know now from the LATimes and the NYTimes, Now there's some non-partisan sources. NOT! They're both the DNCTimes. East and West Coast editions. dxAce Michigan USA I don't know about the L. A. Times, but the New York Times (no relation) has been caught aiding the Administration's propaganda campaign leading up to the fake Iraq war. The criminal White House would steer Judith Miller to Curveball, Miller would publish Curveball's bull**** WMD fantasies, then Bunnypants would use the NY Times stories as proof of Saddam's giant threat. OK, Dependspants. LMAO at the mentally ill Rickets yet again. You go!, 'tard boy. dxAce Michigan USA |
Planting phony stories
"MnMikew" wrote in message ... "yojimbo" wrote in message .. . True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front page of the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan. BWHAHAHA, you can't be serious. The NYT a mouthpiece for Bush, that's just plain stupid. Show me ONE pro-war editorial. You can look at their editorials from February to April 2003. It's all there. As far as their front-page coverage, it's remarkable -- and somehwat peculiar, don't you think? -- that Condi Rice and Dick Cheney would spend every Sunday morning talk show trumpeting the librul New York Times in-depth weapons reporting to push their drive to war. It's all on record. |
Planting phony stories
In article ,
dxAce wrote: MnMikew wrote: "yojimbo" wrote in message .. . http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007148.php As we know now from the LATimes and the NYTimes, Now there's some non-partisan sources. NOT! They're both the DNCTimes. East and West Coast editions. I don't read the Times from either coast due to their liberal bias. I don't read or support their web sites either. All newspapers are generally on the decline because of the poor reporting and bias exhibited in the daily print. The newspapers used to have a lock on reporting the news so the general public was ignorant of this fact but not anymore. AM broadcast talk radio, AM radio news, the Internet and satellite have become alternate sources of news reporting and commentary. In the past unless you had a short-wave radio you did not really understand what was going on out in the world. All you had was the newspapers and their slant. The three networked TV and radio news was mostly in lock step with the newspapers and you would get the same story from them. Short-wave was the only way you could hear what other countries had to say about events or about the USA "directly" without the newspapers filtering what they had to say but only the short-wave listening crowd had that ability. Not only did I listen to Russia, Red China and other communist countries SW broadcasts I also used to read their news network over short-wave with a Universal RTTY decoder. Listening to their networked news their main object was to nuke if necessary then over run the USA, Israel, Vietnam, South Korea and basically just grind us into the dust. The USA was evil and deserved whatever it had coming to it. The total defeat and occupation of the USA was was the goal all the communists countries worked toward and that is still their objective today. You did not hear ANY of this strident talk reported in the main stream media until recently. Today people have more of these alternate sources to compare to the newsprint and are rejecting the poor reporting and bias in reporting the news and the general public has also rejected to greater degree the biased commentary about the news. Since a greater percentage of the population have other sources to compare the print reporters "take" on the news than just short-wave radio more and more people are becoming aware of the media bias and are rejecting that bias. The East and West coast Times have not learned their lesson that they no longer have a lock on the news reporting and will continue to decline. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Planting phony stories
"yojimbo" wrote in message ... "MnMikew" wrote in message ... "yojimbo" wrote in message .. . True enough! Both editorialized in favor of war. And no-one is more responsible for giving voice to Bush & Cheney's lies than the front page of the New York Times, so, yeah, they are indeed very partisan. BWHAHAHA, you can't be serious. The NYT a mouthpiece for Bush, that's just plain stupid. Show me ONE pro-war editorial. You can look at their editorials from February to April 2003. It's all there. As far as their front-page coverage, it's remarkable -- and somehwat peculiar, don't you think? -- that Condi Rice and Dick Cheney would spend every Sunday morning talk show trumpeting the librul New York Times in-depth weapons reporting to push their drive to war. It's all on record. Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman, who just returned from Iraq, defended U.S. efforts there in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and a subsequent news conference on Capitol Hill, saying the military has "a good plan" for victory in Iraq, that progress is "visible and practical" and warning that such progress could be turned back by a premature withdrawal. But the major media that played up Democratic Rep. John Murtha's call for withdrawing U.S. troops largely ignored Lieberman's remarks. Neither ABC nor CBS mentioned the senator in their nightly newscasts while NBC aired a short sound byte. And The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today ran not a word of Lieberman's praise for U.S. efforts in Iraq. |
Planting phony stories
"Telamon" wrote in message ... Today people have more of these alternate sources to compare to the newsprint and are rejecting the poor reporting and bias in reporting the news and the general public has also rejected to greater degree the biased commentary about the news. All good points. But of course, none of that stopped Dick Cheney from using the librul NYT every Sunday to push his war while at the same time sweeping CIA doubts under the rug. Doesn't anybody else think it odd that a Republican White House would prioritize and herald intelligence from anonymous sources printed in the librul New York Times over it's own CIA has a problem? Or is it just another awesome punchline for us to laugh our heads off? |
Planting phony stories
"MnMikew" wrote in message ... Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman, who just returned from Iraq, defended U.S. efforts there in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and a subsequent news conference on Capitol Hill, saying the military has "a good plan" for victory in Iraq, that progress is "visible and practical" and warning that such progress could be turned back by a premature withdrawal. But the major media that played up Democratic Rep. John Murtha's call for withdrawing U.S. troops largely ignored Lieberman's remarks. Neither ABC nor CBS mentioned the senator in their nightly newscasts while NBC aired a short sound byte. And The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today ran not a word of Lieberman's praise for U.S. efforts in Iraq. Oh, so now we want to endorse the radical views of Joe LOSERman??? Har-har, LMAO!!! |
Planting phony stories
In article ,
"MnMikew" wrote: "yojimbo" wrote in message ... Snip BS Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman, who just returned from Iraq, defended U.S. efforts there in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal and a subsequent news conference on Capitol Hill, saying the military has "a good plan" for victory in Iraq, that progress is "visible and practical" and warning that such progress could be turned back by a premature withdrawal. But the major media that played up Democratic Rep. John Murtha's call for withdrawing U.S. troops largely ignored Lieberman's remarks. Neither ABC nor CBS mentioned the senator in their nightly newscasts while NBC aired a short sound byte. And The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today ran not a word of Lieberman's praise for U.S. efforts in Iraq. Joe Lieberman appears to be one of a handful of elected Democrats that will stick to principle over party. He is one of the few Democrat Senators I trust to speak the truth or do the right thing. I trust ABC, NBC or CBS News will spin the story just like the East or West coast Times. These organizations are all of the same liberal ilk, which is why they are on the decline. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Planting phony stories
"Telamon" wrote in message ... Joe Lieberman appears to be one of a handful of elected Democrats that will stick to principle over party. ....And the facts!! Time magazine Baghdad Bureau Chief Michael Ware, just the other day: "I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting." He is one of the few Democrat Senators I trust to speak the truth or do the right thing. Yeah, he speaks the Bush truth (ie. "There can be no doubt") and the Bush right thing (ie. "We must not be nation-builders," Mr. Bush told LOSERman's running-mate in the 2000 election debates). I trust ABC, NBC or CBS News There ya go again, putting your trust in the librul media. How many times can they trot out Mr. Bush's war lies and excuses before exercising some skepticism?? will spin the story just like the East or West coast Times. These organizations are all of the same liberal ilk, which is why they are on the decline. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com