Article

2006-01-01 Home Front: WoT

Questions The Islamic Society Should Answer

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Raj 2006-01-01 10:01|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I think a bigger question is why the major media outlets - almost all of them - refuse, distort and lie concerning matters detrimental to the interests of our freedom and democracy.

Why is it that there is not one paper that I can order to be sent to my doorstep that I can rely on as being fair and factual? I suppose the WSJ still has reasonable reporting, yet their editorial page is reportedly one of the most liberal to be found.

Why is this? Who owns major stock in these companies? What percentage of them are owned by foreign interests?

Not one paper. Not one. Even papers in smaller markets in conservative areas have been gobbled up by papers like Knight Ridder and their editorial direction has shifted to the same lies and distortions. And this even as their stock and circulation is spiraling downward beyond control.

Why is it that the same lies and distortions I read in the NYT, WAPO, LA Times and other major papers are exactly the same stories that I can read in any paper across America?

American news outlets have become as dishonest as rags such as the Enquirer. Sensational headlines that distort the facts contained within the text. Ommission of facts that don't support inconvenient points of view. The headlines of NYT and WAPO are no more meaningful or honest than stories of Brad and Jen and Jonbenet's murder we read at the checkstands.

Why is it that I can't read a paper in a small town in Kansas or Idaho or Wyoming that will present views that can only be found on blogs?

I used to think that this was perhaps just because they simply reprinted the garbage from the wires. But with the advent of the internet - this can not be the case.

It's time someone looked at the ownership of these papers - and looked deep into the connections that make every newspaper in America almost idential copies of each other.

How can it be possible that not ONE paper has an editorial staff willing to tell the truth on the Plame/Wilson, Nancy Pelosi and Murtha family connections, the islamist connections behind CAIR, and the zillions of other distortions that we are subjected to?

Such blanket uniformity is downright strange in a country as large and diverse as America. I hope that in 2006 - someone will discover the reasons why this is the case.

Posted by 2b 2006-01-01 10:43|| 2006-01-01 10:43|| Front Page Top

#2 Soon there will be more moskkkks and more bigotry and treason.
It all started by letting Edward Said preach hate to the "intelectuall Left" at the Universities.
After the Mosssskkkkk density exceeds 3 per neighborhood in Urban areas, they will start civil disorder type actions like they did in France.
First they will burn your cars, then they will sue the hell out of anyone who dares complain and then they will declare Boston as "Dar El Islam"

All you have to do is read the Quran, its all in there black on white, you got to be stupid to listen to their pacifying talk.
They are from an alien culture which does not recognize civil liberties and the rights of individual citizens.
They will drag you with them, kicking and screaming, back to the 12th century Islamic Challifat.
I predict a great future to prayer carpet dealers in Boston.

Posted by 2X4 2006-01-01 11:33|| 2006-01-01 11:33|| Front Page Top

#3 2b: all the media in America is owned by only a few individuals who sponsor "different" newspapers, radio, television (which are not really in competition with each other) . . . follow the money. There are very few true competing sources now. And all media is a for-profit business venture, and reflects the values/belief of the business owners. The idea that journalists somehow "protect" our right to know, or that they offer objective information is another "selling point" made popular during the Vietnam war, and before that, if you got straight info it was more a reflection of the culture of the times. News is here to make money. For the owners, the ability to manipulate world affairs and public opinion is the "bright spot" in an otherwise dull news day. The fact that we get reliable information at all is due to the work of some journalists that haven't had to sell out to the directives of the editors/publishers.

About this: "When completed, the $24 million mosque will be the largest Muslim house of prayer in the Northeastern United States . . ."

Does this strike anyone as a bit odd? That's a lot of dough for a poor, oppressed bunch of people. What the Islamics are doing in Europe, they're doing here. The author is correct: " . . . we are at war with violent Islamist radicals, and they are not above using mosques to incubate terrorism." That's pretty much an understatement.

Posted by ex-lib 2006-01-01 12:20|| 2006-01-01 12:20|| Front Page Top

#4 the WSJ news pages are slanted liberal, the editorial page is conservative (except on immigration)

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-01-01 12:47|| 2006-01-01 12:47|| Front Page Top

#5 so how did they get a sweetheart deal on public property? Sounds like the ACLU et al would be all over that.Oh, I forgot, they only protest when something's good for America

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-01-01 12:55|| 2006-01-01 12:55|| Front Page Top

#6 The ACLU isn't against religion - just Christianity and Judism. The cult of Islam is ok with them.

Posted by CrazyFool 2006-01-01 13:10|| 2006-01-01 13:10|| Front Page Top

23:24 Frank G
23:17 xbalanke
23:14 xbalanke
23:07 Rafael
22:58 Red Dog
22:56 Chomomp Anguling3713
22:55 Red Dog
22:54 JosephMendiola
22:53 Rafael
22:50 JosephMendiola
22:48 Alaska Paul
22:46 JosephMendiola
22:45 phil_b
22:35 JosephMendiola
22:32 JosephMendiola
22:05 mjslack
22:04 Oldspook
22:03 trailing wife
21:54 Frank G
21:52 trailing wife
21:41 Barbara Skolaut
21:40 Oldspook
21:39 mjslack
21:23 49 Pan