Posted on 01/07/2009 9:56:50 PM PST by Jet Jaguar
Title edited from original.
TV networks: Don't raise eligibility questions Fox, CNN, MSNBC all refuse permission for advertising time
Barack Obama's campaign officials and transition office repeatedly have rejected reporters' requests for comment on questions raised over his lack of documentation regarding his birth and the resulting concerns over his eligibility to be president. Now a number of media organizations apparently don't want questions raised either.
WND columnist Janet Porter told WND she found that out when her organization, Faith2Action.org, tried to purchase airtime to publicize information about the eligibility concerns.
She told WND that national networks that refused to sell her time for a 60-second commercial included CNBC, MSNBC, Headline News, CNN and Fox. Washington, D.C., outlets for the same organizations did the same.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
World nut daily? I know, I know.
What a shock, the media has been told that if you cross Barack Hussein Obama, your gonna go down
She needs to sell the ad to the New York Times, they are desperate for cash.
Damn those commies....what the hell is this?
Russia?
This headline needs punctuation.
J B Williams’ website at 5pm, says Chief Justice Thomas has accepted one of those law suits for total court review of “O’s” eligibility.
Citizen Kane.
I caught a few minutes of Hannity while driving this week. The caller asked a question and then followed up with an inquiry about obama’s BC topic. Hannity very quickly said he never brought up the topic and proceeded with a shifty change of subject. He was scared s***less to talk about obama’s BC!!
What a gutless(McCain like) crew of ‘conservative’ talkers are out there....I’ve moved on to the internet talkers because these talkers are phonies.....
Fox, CNN, MSNBC all refuse permission for advertising time
My fault, title was too long for FR. I formatted incorrectly.
JB Williams website is jb_williams@comcast.net
No, it was not illegal for U.S. citizens to go to Pakistan in 1981.
I would like to see proof one way or the other.
Could you, at that time, enter Pakistan on a private US Passport or not?
State Department approved only in 1981.
It is possible that Barry Soetoro had a state department approved passport, since he was traveling with a Pakistani friend whose father was wealthy and into the micro-loans program Barry’s Grandmother was deeply involved with. But it is not likely since his trip would not have been commerce related.
That would be an e-mail addy, not a website.
The NYT piece states:
Tourists can obtain a free, 30-day visa (necessary for Americans) at border crossings and airports. Transportation within Lahore is plentiful, with taxis, scooter rickshaws and horse-drawn tongas (especially in the old city) readily available. Insist that taxis and scooter rickshaws use their meters to determine fares, however.
Americans needed a Visa to enter Pakistan so there must not have been a ban.
The NYT piece also states that Pakistan International Airlines had an office in NYC.
For more information write to Pakistan International Airlines, 551 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017 (212-949-0477)
Now, I really doubt that the NYT would publish an article stating that Americans needed a visa to enter Pakistan, if in fact Americans could not go to Pakistan. In addition, I doubt that Pakistan International Airlines would have an office in the U.S. if their planes were not permitted to land in the U.S. and they were not permitted to fly U.S. citizens.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE2DA1338F937A25755C0A967948260&sec=travel&spon=&pagewanted=5
Therefore, the the theory that Americans could not travel to Pakistan in 1981 is pure nonsense.
Thanks for the reference.
Well that is odd since the NYT ran a story in its travel section in 1981 about travel to Pakistan. The article simply stated that a U.S. citizen would need a visa to enter.
Yes, just a visa, just like you would have needed to travel to Brazil, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or most other countries in the world.
It may seem odd to you, but then your sole purpose for lurking the BC threads is to obfuscate and misdirect. I don’t care what your NYT article states, I know someone who had a heck of a time getting a pass from the Satte Department in 1981 and his was a ‘humanitarian journey’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.