Re: MD Covert Propaganda

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Oct 16 2005 - 18:03:01 BST

  • Next message: khaled Alkotob: "Re: FW: Re: MD Cooperation, Profit and Some Thoughts"

    DMB:

    Let me know when someone is arrested for "violating the law" against
    covert propaganda. Until then, all that you, the GAO (stacked with Bush-
    hating liberals) and Frank Rich prate about is just far left-wing humbug.

    I'll accept Frank Rich as a reliable source when you do the same for Brent
    Bozell and Bernard Goldberg.

    Until then, your slanderous and unprincipled nonsense will be seen for
    what it is -- bull.

    Platt

    > Howdy MOQers:
    >
    > DMB quoted Frank Rich:
    > "...Federal auditors from the Government Accountability Office declared
    > that the administration had violated the law against 'covert propaganda'
    > when it repeatedly hired fake reporters (and one supposedly real pundit,
    > Armstrong Williams) to plug its policies in faux news reports and editorial
    > commentary produced at taxpayers' expense. " Frank Rich, New York Times
    > OP-ED page.
    >
    > Platt replied:
    > As a reporter, Frank Rich is as objective as Ann Coulter. I'll gladly match
    > Rich quotes with Coulter quotes if that's the level DMB wants to sink to.
    >
    > dmb says:
    > Frank Rich's alleged bias has nothing to do with it. He has reported that
    > the GAO "declared that the administratd had violated the law", but his is a
    > matter of fact. Either the GAO issued such a declaration or they did not.
    > Its entirely checkable. Did you bother to dispute this fact? Nope. Did you
    > check other sources to see if they were reporting the same story? No. Did
    > you check with the GAO itself? Of course you didn't. Did you address the
    > administration's illegal covert propaganda at all? Not a bit. All you did
    > was try to discredit Frank Rich as biased. And one can only assume that the
    > intended implication is that Rich was not reporting the turth, but
    > propagandizing instead. And on the opinions page too! Are you being ironic
    > or just nakedly unprincipled?
    >
    > And why do you prefer to attack the reporter rather than address the actual
    > content of that report? Why is Frank Rich the issue rather than the
    > administration's crimes? Could it be that you are just too horrified to
    > face it because you're constantly parroting the administration's
    > propaganda. Could it be that its too hard to admit to the truth of these
    > declarations because you've been so proudly drinking the cool-aid? I should
    > show some compassion here since you are clearly the victim of a series of
    > crimes, but I guess I'm just not Buddhist enough for that. For some reason
    > my concern is with those who might be persuaded by your slanderous and
    > unprincipled nonsense.
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
    > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
    >
    >
    >
    > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 16 2005 - 18:14:39 BST