PDA

View Full Version : why Fox is not new



Qtec
10-27-2009, 06:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Rachel Maddow points out what has been largely overlooked in the discussion of the White House feud with Fox News., that explains why Fox is not news. </div></div>

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LUid0IZ2w)

how they do it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQnmxW-UyKo&feature=player_embedded)

Q

Qtec
10-27-2009, 07:29 AM
More proof. What news channel promotes rumours?

Remember this?
real investigating (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pMgsbMcpOE&feature=player_embedded)
Q

Deeman3
10-27-2009, 07:56 AM
I do remember a "real" news organization like CBS faking documents to show that Bush was AWOL in the National Guard.

Funny how none of you branded them fake news then. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

pooltchr
10-27-2009, 08:16 AM
But CBS had pure motives to justify their fabrication. Any lie is ok if it supports the liberal cause!

Steve

Qtec
10-27-2009, 08:21 AM
No, CBS did NOT fake documents. They got set up. The content of the documents were true but the docs themselves were fake.

Q

Qtec
10-27-2009, 08:29 AM
Is this the ZILLIONTH time you reply to a post of mine and IGNORE the content of the post? Your answer is always "the SAME as "but Bush...."
Which other "news orgs' promote political movements against ONE party? Not just on one issue but they are against EVERYTHING Obama does or wants to do.

If Fox just reported the news that would be OK, but they can't.


RW said it perfectly. If you are involved in making the news , you are not a news channel.
Q

LWW
10-27-2009, 09:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, CBS did NOT fake documents. They got set up. The content of the documents were true but the docs themselves were fake.

Q </div></div>

Sure they were ... once one accepts the ideology of "FAKE BUT ACCURATE" they have irreversibly jumped the shark.

CBS said this: (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40376)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"As is standard practice at CBS News, each of the documents broadcast on '60 Minutes' was thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity,"</div></div>

CBS later admitted this was a lie: (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/10/national/main665727.shtml)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The action was prompted by the report of an independent panel that concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece. The panel also said CBS News had compounded that failure with a “rigid and blind” defense of the 60 Minutes Wednesday report.

Asked to resign were Senior Vice President Betsy West, who supervised CBS News primetime programs; 60 Minutes Wednesday Executive Producer Josh Howard; and Howard’s deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy. The producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated.

“We deeply regret the disservice this flawed 60 Minutes Wednesday report did to the American public, which has a right to count on CBS News for fairness and accuracy,” said CBS Chairman Leslie Moonves.

The panel said a "myopic zeal" to be the first news organization to broadcast a groundbreaking story about Mr. Bush’s National Guard service was a key factor in explaining why CBS News had produced a story that was neither fair nor accurate and did not meet the organization’s internal standards. </div></div>

Had CBS used a standard and readily available tool used for authenticating docs they would have know the truth. They either didn't, or did and ignored the results: (http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000838.php)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Using something called the Haas Atlas, the definitive collection of various typefaces, Mr. Bouffard (and other forensic document examiners) examined the veracity of various documents for over 30 years. Beginning in 1988, Mr. Bouffard hired a programmer to write a computer database program that catalogues the nearly 4,000 typefaces that appear in the Haas Atlas. This computer program is now a forensic standard that is sold as a companion to the Haas Atlas by American Society of Questioned Document Examiners (ASQDE).</div></div>
The story also was almost certainly done in conjunction with the Kerry campaign ... and, the person supplying them had a prior fraud conviction that was well known.

So, please, don't insult the forum's intelligence by implying that you want the truth to come out or are engaging in anything other than a blatantly partisan and totally transparent jihad against the actual truth coming out.

OH DEAR! (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml)

LWW

Qtec
10-27-2009, 09:11 AM
Did THEY fake the documents or did they recieve these Docs from someone else?
Your post says NO.....idiot.

Q............

LWW
10-27-2009, 09:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More proof. What news channel promotes rumours?

Remember this?
real investigating (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pMgsbMcpOE&feature=player_embedded)
Q </div></div>

WOW!

You are taking an arse kicking in multiple threads over how you cover up for Hillary on this Madrassa scam and blame Fox for doing the same thing CNN did and both getting it from a source close to Hillary.

Have you no shame?

LWW

Gayle in MD
10-27-2009, 09:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is this the ZILLIONTH time you reply to a post of mine and IGNORE the content of the post? Your answer is always "the SAME as "but Bush...."
Which other "news orgs' promote political movements against ONE party? Not just on one issue but they are against EVERYTHING Obama does or wants to do.

If Fox just reported the news that would be OK, but they can't.


RW said it perfectly. If you are involved in making the news , you are not a news channel.
Q

</div></div>

LMAO! They come up with one damn time that Dan Rather couldn't document a story, in all his years of reporting, when the net is chock full of documentation on hundreds of times Fox has been proven to fabricate, and then spread, lies, AND slander, that these ditto heads comfortably ignore completely, no response to our facts, then they've won, in their short circuited egominds, only.

The RW Press was after Dan Rather for decades. They finally set him up and got him on the documents, but just like when the special prosecutor stated, a cloud was hanging over Cheney's office, reasonable people knew damn well what that meant, same thing with the Rather situation. He reported till he was seventy-five years old, and they finally got him on ONE THING!

Big whoopie! fox was discredited as a propaganda tool of the RW from the gitgo.


Some people still deny the lies that led to Iraq, and the vast financial rewards the Bush/Cheney cronies gained from the blood of our soldiers.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Chopstick
10-27-2009, 09:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More proof. What news channel promotes rumours?

Remember this?
real investigating (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pMgsbMcpOE&feature=player_embedded)
Q </div></div>

Well, let's just have a look at the school.

Oh geez, it's a Dutch school. That's even worse! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

pooltchr
10-27-2009, 10:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[
LMAO! They come up with one damn time that Dan Rather couldn't document a story,
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif </div></div>

The one time he got caught. How many other times did he get away with it?

Can you say "intergrity"? And do you know what it is?

Steve

Gayle in MD
10-27-2009, 11:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did THEY fake the documents or did they recieve these Docs from someone else?
Your post says NO.....idiot.

Q............ </div></div>

Let's get back to the subject of your post...as the right, cannot address any of the truth about Fox, hence, they spin the debate out in space, off to an entirely different subject.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYUIXCZe3vY&feature=channel


Defending Fox News, as a source of anything but Republican Propaganda, is a fool's game, and we can see all the fools, same ones who defended the truly, most anti-constitutional, unamerican, treasonist administration in our history, unable to grasp the truth about Fox, the RW, Republican propaganda station.

Liars leading the denying, illiterate fools of America.

"How Can Forty Million People Be So Dumb?" The entire rest of the world could see what they refused to see for eight years, but not these nutjobs on here.

Same ol' Same ol'....

wolfdancer
10-27-2009, 11:38 AM
AND....let's not forget the subconscious suggestions embedded in the "Fox news" sic... reports. (how else to explain away the Glenn Beck fan club)...or the subsequent renderings...of that "news"...sick.....from our 4 or 5 intrepid Fox devotees, here...and this after being processed through their already encumbered brain. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

sack316
10-27-2009, 12:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LUid0IZ2w)
</div></div>

Funny, your own link here directly contradicts what you said in the thread the other day about the exclusionary tactics of the white house with Fox news in the Feinberg interview (about a minute into this clip).

Sack

Gayle in MD
10-27-2009, 12:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">AND....let's not forget the subconscious suggestions embedded in the "Fox news" sic... reports. (how else to explain away the Glenn Beck fan club)...or the subsequent renderings...of that "news"...sick.....from our 4 or 5 intrepid Fox devotees, here...and this after being processed through their already encumbered brain. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">Well, you know, the nitty's are too stupid to understand that one can make a point, using a link, although it may include some opposing ideas, but in general, still supports the original point being made.


IOW, we have more than our share of dense little Nitties around here, but that's all they have, nit picking, without any credibility.

Gee, did they learn that in the build up to the illegal invasion of Iraq?

Do they even realize that Dick Cheney told us years ago, that the Taliban was gone, smashed, forever?

Can they even make the conection between Fox's lies for the last administration, and the fact that we're still having to fight the Taliban, and Iraq, is STILL in sshambles, after they got on here for over a year, bragging about "The Surge" had worked, while we kept telling them, that the civil war would continue to rage on for years, Surge or no Surge?

But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, they knew it all...little nitty brickheads...</span>

pooltchr
10-27-2009, 03:21 PM
Has anyone beside me noticed that whenever the ice gets thinner under Gayle's point of view, that the attempted insults and name calling increase?

Steve