Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot............................

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I do think it is funny. When you read a newspaper article and it is about some that is accused of comiting a crime, they find a mean looking picture to post with it.



When it is a happy article, they find a happy picture.





Tom
 
Of the four items listed above, all of them have become manufactured media frenzy's. If this were still the Clinton administration or (*GULP*) even worse, the Gore administration, whould they have been stories at all?



The media has this enept way of bending the truth. Look at all the headlines that covered the papers about the Cheney accident. 50 all had nearly identical headlines, while another 50 were nearly opposite, but all the same story line.



1) Abu Gharib, not a big deal in my book, especially when our soldiers and civilians are -beheaded, -hung from bridges, etc.

2) Gitmo, still waiting on the a) proof and b) ruling that what we are doing is illegal. TR did something much worse with the Japanese during WWII and he is reveared today. Democrat.

3) Secret Prisons Overseas.... Top Secret that was released, and has yet to be proven true. What's the big deal? How can you say that if they exist, the people there are there for their own safety?

4) FISA (Joke) Wire Taps - taps on call the are either origionating from or connecting in foreign countries only. Again, what the difference between this and the P-3 Orions listening to Cell Phone conversations in China? Oh yeah, another Top Secret program that some Bush Hater relased to the media.



People need to be going to Jail if they release top secret material to the media (including Scooter Libby if found guilty).



Media types should also be held responcible for a) inaccurate reporting (ie Koran in Gitmo) and b) if their editorialized stories lead to mass hysteria. Thye are affraid of re-printing cartoons depicting Mohammud, but have no problem re-broadcasting Abu Gharib pictures when the story is long over with.



Bias?
 
People need to be going to Jail if they release top secret material to the media (including Scooter Libby if found guilty).
Click to expand...



Dale,



This is another example of how the media has distorted a story. Libby wasn't charged with revealing any classified material. So far, he's only been charged with perjury before a grand jury.



The media pick and choose which stories they want to spin up depending on who's in office.



A Failure of the Press



By William J. Bennett and Alan M. Dershowitz

Thursday, February 23, 2006; A19







There was a time when the press was the strongest guardian of free expression in this democracy. Stories and celebrations of intrepid and courageous reporters are many within the press corps. Cases such as New York Times v. Sullivan in the 1960s were litigated so that the press could report on and examine public officials with the unfettered reporting a free people deserved. In the 1970s the Pentagon Papers case reaffirmed the proposition that issues of public importance were fully protected by the First Amendment.



The mass media that backed the plaintiffs in these cases understood that not only did a free press have a right to report on critical issues and people of the day but that citizens had a right to know about those issues and people. The mass media understood another thing: They had more than a right; they had a duty to report.



We two come from different political and philosophical perspectives, but on this we agree: Over the past few weeks, the press has betrayed not only its duties but its responsibilities. To our knowledge, only three print newspapers have followed their true calling: the Austin American-Statesman, the Philadelphia Inquirer and the New York Sun. What have they done? They simply printed cartoons that were at the center of widespread turmoil among Muslims over depictions of the prophet Muhammad. These papers did their duty.



Since the war on terrorism began, the mainstream press has had no problem printing stories and pictures that challenged the administration and, in the view of some, compromised our war and peace efforts. The manifold images of abuse at Abu Ghraib come to mind -- images that struck at our effort to win support from Arab governments and peoples, and that pierced the heart of the Muslim world as well as the U.S. military.



The press has had no problem with breaking a story using classified information on detention centers for captured terrorists and suspects -- stories that could harm our allies. And it disclosed a surveillance program so highly classified that most members of Congress were unaware of it.



In its zeal to publish stories critical of our nation's efforts -- and clearly upsetting to enemies and allies alike -- the press has printed some articles that turned out to be inaccurate. The Guantanamo Bay flushing of the Koran comes to mind.



But for the past month, the Islamist street has been on an intifada over cartoons depicting Muhammad that were first published months ago in a Danish newspaper. Protests in London -- never mind Jordan, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Iran and other countries not noted for their commitment to democratic principles -- included signs that read, "Behead those who insult Islam." The mainstream U.S. media have covered this worldwide uprising; it is, after all, a glimpse into the sentiments of our enemy and its allies. And yet it has refused, with but a few exceptions, to show the cartoons that purportedly caused all the outrage.



The Boston Globe, speaking for many other outlets, editorialized: "[N]ewspapers ought to refrain from publishing offensive caricatures of Mohammed in the name of the ultimate Enlightenment value: tolerance."



But as for caricatures depicting Jews in the most medievally horrific stereotypes, or Christians as fanatics on any given issue, the mainstream pres
Click to expand...
 
TrainTrac - I agree about the media. I have dealt with local media many times and they NEVER get it right. By "right" I mean they don't quote me accurately and don't report accurately what I explain very carefully.





Best example - NSA wiretaps on foreign citizens calling the United States is reported as "DOMESTIC SPYING". This is not MLK Jr, the Black Panthers or the Weather Underground. We don't even know they are calling US citizens, they are probably calling foreign nationals inside the US.



Question for all of the "Bush lies, spies and doesn't explain the whys" crowd - Is it okay to intercept an email from Al-Quaeda? What if it is routed through a server located in the US? Keep in mind that about 80% of the worlds email traffic goes through servers, cables, switches or satellites located in or owned by the USA and USA based companies. Is there an expectation of privacy when calling from overseas? Emailing?
 
Best example - NSA wiretaps on foreign citizens calling the United States is reported as "DOMESTIC SPYING". This is not MLK Jr, the Black Panthers or the Weather Underground. We don't even know they are calling US citizens, they are probably calling foreign nationals inside the US.
Click to expand...



Funny you should mention Dr. King, the Black Panthers, and WU. All of the FBI wiretapping conducted on them was during the LBJ adminstration. Remeber LBJ? A true liberal icon: The father of the "Great Society".:wacko:
 
Actually, the MLK Jr wiretapping was authorized by Robert Kennedy while serving under John Kennedy. Amazing that prominent Dems stood up at Coretta Scott Kings funeral and denounced Bush wiretapping with Teddy sitting right there.
 
What do u guys think about Bush letting a UAE state run company run your ports?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What do u guys think about Bush letting a UAE state run company run your ports?
Click to expand...



Personally, I think it is bad news. To me, it doesn't matter if they are the best in the world. They do not have a vested intrest in protecting something they do not own. As a US citizen, or Canadian in your case, essentially own your country you live in. We buy the buildings used by the leaders with our tax money. We keep it heated in the winter and cooled in the summer. We paid for Air Force One so the president has a safe mode of transportation when he travels to other places. I have a vested intrest in protecting a ship I helped purchase to protect me and my loved ones.



If you are in the UAE, how much does the USA mean to you?





Tom
 
Bush is making it really hard for the republicans in 2008....That is just an outsiders

point of view, I may not understand US politics.
 
King George is tyrant.



Honestly, I think someone other then a Democrat or a Republican get into office. That should put the Dem's and the Rep's in thier place.





Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Top