First Amendment Rights For Who?
When discussing the train bombing in India most of this nation’s MSM refuse to blame the terrorists for the bombing. The MSM is refusing to admit we are in a war with radical islamists, a world-wide war. In trying to put my words in order, I ran across the post from Penraker describing how a left leaning, America hating, terrorist sympathizing media is actively working to undermine the President in this war on terror.
Why would a paper breezily leak our most important secrets, but then refuse to even consider the fact that bombings are being carried out by Islamists? Is there a bizarre bias here? It certainly looks like they are on the side of the terrorists.
But this is just part of a bigger picture: the media has begun to obscure the truth, on a wide and sustained basis. It has become the anti-media, determined that you should believe only certain things, and so it presents only half the story. We get only half the story from Iraq. We get only half the story on the Guantanamo memo yesterday. Dan Rather is caught with faked documents. The NY Times puts forth people who are pretending to be torture victims. Abu Ghraib runs on the front page for 30 straight days.
This should not be surprising, considering they were educated in colleges and Journalism schools that focused on revealing only one side of an issue, in an attempt to indoctrinate. This is the Howard Zinn school of journalism.
Tell only one side. Hide the real fullness of the truth. Hide the facts you do not like; hide the arguments from the other side.
There is more, but the first line does the trick for me. The MSM raises bloody hell when someone mentions the Times, or others like them, should not publish secrets. They all cry about have 1st Amendment rights. These are rights they defend so vigorously in spite of what it costs this country in terms of being able to defend itself. At the same time, the former newspaper of record tries to stymie any criticism for publishing these secrets. In fact, they try to confuse the whole situation by referring to their first amendment rights. They are critical of all who do not support their extreme liberal position. The New York Times and their ilk only support the 1st Amendment when it favors them and their agenda.
Posts
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment