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

uhhh I ees,let me chek my reegogarance to see where I am at.I felllll
into a burning ring of firrrre and the flames kept gettin higher and
higher,,,, that ring of fire,,,,, that ring of firrreee,,,,,,,,
http://www.chivalry.com/cantaria/lyr...glan-road.html
cuhulin

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.

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

David wrote:
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.

Cite.

The criminal White House

Got rid of them in 2000, kept them out in 2004. Thanks for a pleasant
memory.

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.

You have a fertile and overactive imagination.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

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

"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?

DX Ace,

Both the NYT and LAT buildings should be painted Red
{or at least Pink} - imho ~ RHF

From: "RHF"
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: 2 Dec 2005 23:11:19 -0800
Subject: Planting phony stories

DX Ace,

Both the NYT and LAT buildings should be painted Red
{or at least Pink} - imho ~ RHF
.
Or maybe red white & blue would be more appropriate, since our founding
fathers were so adamant about keeping a free press in our new democracy that
they incorporated its protection in the very First Amendment.

("No government ought to be without censors, and where the press is free, no
one ever will. If virtuous, it need not fear the fair operation of attack
and defence. Nature has given to man no other means of sifting out the truth
whether in religion, law or politics. I think it as honorable to the
government neither to know nor notice its sycophants or censors, as it would
be undignified and criminal to pamper the former and persecute the latter."
--Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792.)

The irony here is that you would criticize those newspapers for telling the
truth. In this case the truth is that the Bush administration, while
bragging about the "free and independent" news sources springing up in Iraq,
seeks to control what those sources report. A free press has always been
anathema to the Bush administration because of all the administration's
devious pursuits and corrupt practices that don't hold up well to public
scrutiny.

This administration is looking more and more like the corrupt Nixon/Agnew
one, whose primary enemy was not the foreign powers who would seek to
destroy our democracy, but rather the media who would seek to protect it.

Greg

Greg wrote:
Or maybe red white & blue would be more appropriate, since our founding
fathers were so adamant about keeping a free press in our new democracy that
they incorporated its protection in the very First Amendment.

Let's treat it the same as we treat that other thing protected even
before free press in the First Amendment (religion). You can have a
free press, but your press people can't do their thing on public
property or in schools, and they can't offer the paper for sale in
public, it has to be sought out quietly by those who want it.

The irony here is that you would criticize those newspapers for telling the
truth.

No, when the NYT or LAT tells the truth, all you'll see out of us is
amazed silence. We criticize them for telling lies and for passing
opinion as fact.

In this case the truth is that the Bush administration, while
bragging about the "free and independent" news sources springing up in Iraq,
seeks to control what those sources report.

Control? No. Persuade them to print some good stuff about us? Sure, in
the ages-old way of persuasion in the middle east; we crease their
palms with silver.

A free press has always been
anathema to the Bush administration because of all the administration's
devious pursuits and corrupt practices that don't hold up well to public
scrutiny.

The truly free press, which has originated with the Internet and other
available forms of mass communication not controlled by traditional
media, has been the best thing for Bush and the conservative movement
in general since the founding fathers created the Constitution. It's
really anathema to liberal lies. And that ****es you off, doesn't it?

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.