Categories
Politics

CNN Evil Cowards?

 

 Did CNN allow a know nothing coward to cast political aspersions with no evidence or even probable cause to believe what they were saying.

What was the evidence they had, what was the experience factor of this man who made this accusation?  Why did CNN allow this to go out on the air at all, when you have someone that allegedly and obviously perhaps did not know what he was talking about speak on national TV what does that say about who you are as a news organization.

 

 We have to ask what were they thinking…

In a news story that will shake you to your core, it should come as no surprise that our Media are so corrupt that they might stoop to producing a news segment that has no business in our society.

You may be wondering what this is about because the biggest news story yesterday was that for the first time since 2001 on September the 11th we as a nation will now have yet another date and time that we will never forget what we were doing when we heard the news that America has been a victim of terrorism.

911 is now another chapter in history, we remember it and even more importantly it taught us a lesson that when you become lax and when you allow your military to become less than effective that there is a price to pay for being stupid.

We learned that horrible things can happen when we let our guard down.

We learned a lot of things that can make it difficult to understand why these things happen.

But you know what else we have learned, that news is no longer the news, because yesterday CNN did something that was allegedly despicable, Cowardly and perhaps even Evil.

So, what did they allow this to happen, they did something that is wrong and it might even be illegal, they talked about a national event that involves an ongoing investigation as if they had knowledge about what was going on.

If that is true then someone needs to have a talk with CNN to find out what they knew and when they knew it…

This is specifiable because they attempted to politicize the horror and death of children live on the air and they tried to say that it was a right wind thing, my friends this is not journalism this is illegal and needs to stop.

The FCC needs to conduct an investigation into this organization to find out what they know about this event because as they stated on national TV they may have knowledge about these events, why is that?

Simply because if they have no knowledge about this event then they need to apologize to the American People and those families that lost loved ones and those Americans that lost legs and arms, and will be forever a victim of the second attack in 12 years.

It is time that the media stop trying to use tragedies like this for political gain.

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Politics

More Security issues at us Embassy

A report by a news organization apparently has begun to filter through the news agencies concerning a very sad event where a man has been assassinated, this is a horrible situation and how can we continue to act so stupidly?

(Reuters)

Masked gunmen shot dead a Yemeni man on his way to work at the U.S. embassy in Sanaa on Thursday, a security source said, the latest in a wave of assassinations in the Arab state where Washington is battling al Qaeda militants.

In so many ways we have a foreign policy that is demented and destructive to our service members and our officers that represent America abroad.

Have the democrats created a problem by spiking the football, with regard to the horror of so many issues in foreign policy.

 

 

Categories
Politics

Sarah Palin Emails

Does the tail wag the dog?

Where are all the liberals now?

 

Seems like all the news coverage did nothing and went no where.

When will be begin to see the liberals emails, that would produce a lot of scandals, or is that not of interest to the media?

Why should it matter about the Sarah Palin emails, and who really cares anyway?

This issue brings to light a lot of questions about the designs of a potentially biased and out of control liberal agenda that allegedly some people are very concerned with. One of the problems we face is that in many instances the media is taking only one side in the political structure of this country.

This creates a disparity and it creates a false sense of fact.

This is a problem for many reasons, the most important of which is that the media is in some cases deceiving the American public into believing a certain thing, when facts may not support that way of thinking.

It is disturbing because of the way the FTC is beginning to define commercials and what is consumed by the public, in some cases it might be viewed as a crime in the future, if an alleged biased media company publishes an opinion or if that news company engages in what could be considered deceptive speech then we might have a condition where censorship might be preferable to the obvious bias that has become a large part of what Americans have come to expect from the news.

When you consider the implications, that are present here you have to think seriously about what it means when a news organization takes an interest in only one party in this case the alleged biased media have show an interest in former Governor Sarah Palin’s emails, considering the issues of privacy attached here, when will see democrat emails being scrutinized, as seriously as Sarah Palin is now.

So, this really opens up the subject of how long it will be before all politicians are subject to having their emails read long after they are out of office and for what purpose would it be?

Why would it make a news story?

Unless there is some equal disclosure of democratic governors or other candidates that are running or might run for office, notice how there seems to be a lack of jurisdiction here.

Sarah Palin is no longer the Governor of Alaska, she is not running for any office, she is a private citizen.

So on what terms did this mass exposure of private material occur?

Could you be next, might you have at some point in your past had a private email discussion, did you have the right to expect you would have privacy?

Should we start to allow full disclosure of all public officials emails?

If not why not?

Because I am sure that the emails of democratic elected officials would be equally interesting to the media.

Should we not have access to all these emails of every elected official?

If not then why not and if why not then why Sarah Palin?

What makes her emails subject to the freedom of information act?

If Sarah Palin had no reasonable expectation of privacy then how can anyone have any expectation of privacy, should we now begin to stop using the internet, because it has been subjected to a double standard of jurisprudence prudence?

(yes, it is totally subjective and that is the object of this article)

I find it interesting here that we can disclose emails when its Sarah Palin but other public officials that perhaps are allegedly biased along with the media are not subject to those same standards.

I find it very interesting that the media thinks that so many people out there are not smart enough to figure this out, perhaps they will begin to take notice when the election of 2012 does not come out the way they think it will or more precisely the way they have hoped to influence the outcome of the election.

One thing remains clear, no one is being fooled.