Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WHAT ELSE IS CNN HIDING?
Iconoclast ^ | April 12, 2003 | Stephen Rittenberg

Posted on 04/12/2003 7:29:41 AM PDT by clintonbaiter

April 12, 2003: In Friday's New York Times Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, wrote an op-ed piece that must surely be a prime candidate for this year's Moral Idiocy Award in Journalism. He tells, with a mixture of pride and self-pity, how pained he was for having to deceive CNN's world-wide audience for twelve years about how bad the Saddam regime really was.

He tells of knowing about assassinations, inhuman brutality, pervasive terror on a par with Stalin's Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany, but not breathing a word about this to the world at large. He visited Baghdad thirteen times. "Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard -- awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff."

Instead of closing down CNN's Baghdad Bureau, he and the rest of the journalists at CNN decided that it was better to go on broadcasting to the world a fairy tale about Iraq. Making us think that Iraq was just another misguided little Arab country that doesn't know any better.

I've heard Big Lies before but this makes Goebbels look like a rank amateur.

Jordan's ridiculous rationalization for not telling the truth about what kind of regime Iraq really was -- that he wanted to protect the staff safety -- wouldn't pass muster with anyone with a shred of journalistic responsibility. All he had to do to make his staff safe was to fire them and close the Bureau, then assign one or two individual reporters to keep their ears open for a couple of years, and then have them come home and write their story -- the true story of the regime.

What possible journalistic value could broadcasting half-truths, lies and varnished news have? The net result is that CNN succeeded not in informing its public but in dis-informing it. CNN's stupid policy of news access at all costs -- even if it's not news -- has dealt its own credibility a serious blow....

(Excerpt) Read more at iconoclast.ca ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cnn; coverup; dissemblers; easonjordan; hypocrites
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last
Just as we always suspected. No wonder Peter Arnett felt so at home at CNN.
1 posted on 04/12/2003 7:29:41 AM PDT by clintonbaiter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
DONATE TODAY!!!.
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
It is in the breaking news sidebar!


2 posted on 04/12/2003 7:30:34 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
2/13/97: Clinton allows U.S. to set up news bureaus in Cuba

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a move it said would focus more attention on the shortcomings of Communist Cuba, the Clinton administration gave the go-ahead Wednesday for 10 U.S. news organizations to open bureaus in Cuba. Of the 10, only CNN has permission from the Cuban government.

3 posted on 04/12/2003 7:35:13 AM PDT by martin_fierro (Mr. Avuncular)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
"What else is CNN hiding?"

Judy Woodruff is Janet Reno's mistress.
4 posted on 04/12/2003 7:36:45 AM PDT by Bluntpoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
.."things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis.."

SO according to this CNN reporter there are some lives that are worth more than others? The Iraqis that were suffering at the hands of Saddam weren't as important?

5 posted on 04/12/2003 7:38:07 AM PDT by Zipporah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zipporah
Remember, these are the same guys that wouldn't report things for 8 years if they jepoardized Democrat presidential prospects, including a lot of events with people dead in unusual circumstances.

What did CNN know and when did they know it?

6 posted on 04/12/2003 7:42:30 AM PDT by thoughtomator (I predict hysteria at the UN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
"What else is CNN hiding?"

They've got Waldo in a closet.

7 posted on 04/12/2003 7:42:42 AM PDT by Drango (Two wrongs don't make a right...but three lefts do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
I would think after the confessional no one would take anything CNN had to say as newsworthy fact.

In my view they are finished. They slit their own throat with this expose'.
8 posted on 04/12/2003 7:42:51 AM PDT by snooker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
What did CNN know and when did they know it?
9 posted on 04/12/2003 7:44:40 AM PDT by chnsmok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
What possible journalistic value could broadcasting half-truths, lies and varnished news have? The net result is that CNN succeeded not in informing its public but in dis-informing it.

In addition to dis-informing the public, Eason Jordan lied by saying (multiple times) that CNN would only report accurately in Iraq.

From a transcript of an NPR interview with Eason Jordan

Jordan lied by making each of these statements on October 25, 2002


10 posted on 04/12/2003 7:48:04 AM PDT by syriacus (The Palestine Hotel sniper probably used a silencer, if he had ANY brains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chnsmok
CNN...The DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA NETWORK
11 posted on 04/12/2003 7:48:18 AM PDT by The PeteMan (Go to Hell Cronkite!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
CNN: Another member of the Axis of Weasels.
12 posted on 04/12/2003 7:53:08 AM PDT by stboz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
While discussing this op-ed piece, RUSH asked what CBS agreed to in order for Dan Blather to get the interview with SADDAM! This effort by our President is starting to produce some unexpected results - THE LIBERAL MEDIA DOING A MEA CULPA!
13 posted on 04/12/2003 7:56:16 AM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
When Benedict Arnett gave his "reports", he would pontificate in that weird accent for about three or four minutes. He sounded SO professional and knowledgeable.

However, I always noticed that at the end of his spiel, he had said nothing of substance, nothing new, nothing insightful, nothing informative. It was just a spate of words, words, words.

It was so obvious that he was on a leash and hoodwinking American viewers with meaningless pap and many times, outright enemy propaganda.

This Judas, CNN and his other employers past and present sold their souls for twenty pieces of dinars and will live in infamy forever.

Leni

14 posted on 04/12/2003 7:57:21 AM PDT by MinuteGal (THIS JUST IN ! Astonishing fare reduction for FReeps Ahoy Cruise! Check it out, pronto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
New Republic article, by Franklin Foer, Posted on 10/17/2002 1:44 PM EDT by GeneD

Air War: How Saddam Manipulates the U. S. Media

There are alternatives to mindlessly reciting Baghdad's spin. Instead of desperately trying to keep their Baghdad offices open, the networks could scour Kurdistan and Jordan, where there are many recently arrived Iraqis who can talk freely "Amman is the place to find out what's really going on in Iraq," says ex-CIA officer Robert Baer, who spent the mid-'90s working in and around Iraq. (To CNN's credit, it has sent reporter Brent Sadler to Kurdistan despite Baghdad's furious objections.) Or they could they use their access to depict the harsh realities of life under Saddam--even if it means never returning to Iraq.

It's a method used by Soler in his documentary Uncle Saddam, to be aired on Cinemax next month. After spending a month ingratiating himself with Saddam's entourage, Soler convinced the Iraqis to grant him camera time with His Excellency's inner circle. His film shows Saddam to be a lunatic, devoid of morality or humanity. It captures images of Saddam's unique style of fishing-hurling grenades into a pond and then sending aides to retrieve the kill. It documents Saddam's megalomania: Iraq's biggest paper features Saddam in a new pose on the cover each day. "I don't need a relationship with Iraq," he explains of his decision to bare all. "It was my one shot. Every day it was how can I push the limits."

To be sure, after screening his documentary for film festivals and Iraqi opposition groups in the U.S., Soler found red paint splattered on his Los Angeles home, his trash can set on fire, and a death threat in his mailbox. But with the film he smuggled out of Iraq via courier, Soler gives more psychological insight into Saddam than ten years of American TV reportage.

When I asked CNN's Jordan to explain why his network is so devoted to maintaining a perpetual Baghdad presence, he listed two reasons: "First, because it's newsworthy; second, because there's an expectation that if anybody is in Iraq, it will be CNN." His answer reveals the fundamental attitude of most Western media: Access to Baghdad is an end in itself, regardless of the intellectual or moral caliber of the journalism such access produces. An old journalistic aphorism holds "access is a curse." The Iraqi experience proves it can be much worse than that.


15 posted on 04/12/2003 7:58:14 AM PDT by syriacus (The Palestine Hotel sniper probably used a silencer, if he had ANY brains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
So the Vietman VX lie was not an aberation for CNN but operations as normal.

Yellow Journalism at its best.

16 posted on 04/12/2003 7:59:05 AM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
It was disgusting to watch the media in Baghdad during the war dispensing disinformation and outright lies. They must take responsibility for being complicit with Saddam.
17 posted on 04/12/2003 8:02:00 AM PDT by Paraclete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
CNN can no longer claim journalistic impartiality, or have any credibility whatsoever in other global venues. Jordan should have closed the office in Baghdad and reported the atrocities as soon as possible thereafter. "Freedom of the press" indeed...

It is distressing to learn that CNN collaborated with Saddam Hussein in his brutality. They have the blood of thousands on their hands.
18 posted on 04/12/2003 8:03:58 AM PDT by Jack of Clubs (Out, damn spot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
Now that we know that Saddam was mostly talk, we will find that he maintained his international status by using the wealth he got from bootleging oil and sharing the Food for Oil money with the UN program managers.

He paid Chirac and many others to keep Iraq in the adminstrative arenas for so long. He also paid media types (just as Castro pays media types) to keep the bad news down. It should not surprise anyone that CNN has censored the news to fit the Iraqi agenda for many years.

Now, imagine how they shaded the news to protect Willie the Sleaze, fudge the election reporting to try and get Gore elected (the false report by the election sampling outfit that Gore had won Florida was pure fiction), the reporting on the creativity of the Florida Supreme Court, the lack of coverage about any evil by a leftist, and many other things. The Fonda heritage is alive and well at CNN.

BTW, did CNN cover all the Cubans that were just murdered by Castro, three days after the end of their trial for trying to escape? Can you imagine what CNN and the NYT would say if Texas even suggested they were thinking about such expeditious handling? Alas, the NYT is probably smarter than CNN and would never admit they were shading the truth, as well.

19 posted on 04/12/2003 8:28:18 AM PDT by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
The Peloshi says: You must believe everything that CNN has to say. Never watch into the evil Fox News!


20 posted on 04/12/2003 8:37:00 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (Being a Monthly Donor to Free Republic is the Right Thing to do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
You know, you seem to have no compassion or feeling for a man whose own staff would be murdered if he went public. He would have needed government support in such a case. He can only go public now. If he did not give this information to our government, privately, I would be concerned. As has been often said, there is much the public doesn't know. And perhaps shouldn't know. That's what government is for in situations like this.

Lighten up a little and try and open your heart rather than defaulting to your brain's little party line. These are human beings--all of them.
21 posted on 04/12/2003 8:47:21 AM PDT by equus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: equus
Are you serious? Those of us who are outraged with CNNs admission don't need to "lighten up". You need to get some moral fiber. You think moral culpability starts/ends with telling the government? What about personal accountability? Why do you think CNN should be absolved from moral and ethical behavior. It's nonsense to say that CNN had no other choice than to perpetuate lies for 12 yrs. Ill-informed nonsense and typical of liberals' defense when confronted with unethical actions. CNN took the easy way, the expedient way, out of a difficult moral dilemma. They could have closed up shop in Iraq, removed their staff from harms' way, and written their expose 12 yrs ago. Why didn't they? Simply because they cared more about getting a oneup on the other networks and making money.
22 posted on 04/12/2003 9:00:03 AM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Your recap of the NPR broadcast with Eason Jordan is great. Good catch. Thank you.
23 posted on 04/12/2003 9:02:34 AM PDT by kitkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
Here's what I don't understand: this admission is so damning, why did CNN feel the need to reveal it now--especially when they've successfully kept the secret under wraps for 12 yrs? What benefit did Jordan expect to derive from this late-breaking confession? Enlighten me?
24 posted on 04/12/2003 9:09:21 AM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
He was cleansing his soul. I sense that he can not sleep well with his demons.
25 posted on 04/12/2003 9:51:27 AM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: leprechaun9
"THE LIBERAL MEDIA DOING A MEA CULPA!"

That's not how I read it. Ask yourself. Why would this turkey make such an open admission in the New York Times? The obvious answer is that CNN wants access in Iraq in the future, and therefore needs to butter up the new government when they come into office The first step in that direction is to say that they never really liked Saddam all that much, but they stayed in Iraq in order to do as much good as possible (gag).

This way he gets all the bad news out right away and can use the next year or two to get into the good graces of the Iraqis--he hopes. Watch Howell Raines start to butter up the Iraqis too. He wants access for his reporters, and needs to undo any bad will caused by the Times's negative twist on the war.
26 posted on 04/12/2003 10:38:34 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
See # 26.
27 posted on 04/12/2003 10:40:09 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
What else is CNN hiding?

I'm sure they'd like to hide their dwindling ratings from their advertisers.

28 posted on 04/12/2003 10:48:11 AM PDT by Vision Thing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
"...CNN took the easy way, the expedient way, out of a difficult moral dilemma. Why...? Simply because they cared more about getting a oneup on the other networks and making money..."

They had one other MAJOR reason: If they told the truth, it would benefit GWB (and the republicans in the 8 years of the Clinton morasse). And that was something that they would not do at ANY expense.

God, I hate the Clintons and what they tried to do to this country!

29 posted on 04/12/2003 10:49:31 AM PDT by Husker8877
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
If Al Gore was president, CNN could happily continue on with their Bagdad Bureau filing year-upon-year of stories about Saddam's birthday parties, the wonderful Iraqi "elections", and the many great Socialist triumphs of his regime.
30 posted on 04/12/2003 11:02:30 AM PDT by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snooker
"I would think after the confessional no one would take anything CNN had to say as newsworthy fact. In my view they are finished. They slit their own throat with this expose'."

You are correct. CNN did themselves irrepairable damage by issuing what amounts to a confession of journalistic deceit.

So, ask yourself, "Why did they do it?" Eason Jordan is, himself, an Executive VP. His mea culpa had to be approved at the very top. These are not stupid people. Arrogant, perhaps, but not stupid.

They are obviously engaged in damage control -- via the Clintonian device of releasing dirt on themselves before somebody else digs it up.

If they felt the need to take this hit, there is an even bigger one somewhere out there that they are absolutely desperate to avoid.

There is Cuba, of course. There is also China...

31 posted on 04/12/2003 11:03:11 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
Here's what I don't understand: this admission is so damning, why did CNN feel the need to reveal it now--especially when they've successfully kept the secret under wraps for 12 yrs? What benefit did Jordan expect to derive from this late-breaking confession? Enlighten me? >>>>>>>>>


My opinion:
One word: PRE-EMPTION. Eason Jordan was not the only one who knew this. CNN Baghdad bureau staffers knew it, including the Iraqi staffers who were kidnapped and tortured. He needed to put the story out before them, WITH HIS PROTECTIVE SPIN!! This was DAMAGE CONTROL, not a soul-cleansing confession.
32 posted on 04/12/2003 11:51:53 AM PDT by GeorgiaYankee ("They're either dead, or running like Hell" Gen Tommy Franks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaYankee
This guy did not operate in a vacuum, that's for sure. WHO in the AOL/TIME/CNN hierarchy - with their extensive ties to the Democratic Party and the Clintons - was authorizing this approach to news-gathering in Iraq?
33 posted on 04/12/2003 12:09:03 PM PDT by Cookie123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
Is this story being reported nationally? The American people have a right - and a need - to know. CNN was helping Saddam to keep the people of Iraq - and the whole world - in darkness about his evil deeds. CNN has blood of the innocents on its hands.
34 posted on 04/12/2003 12:11:54 PM PDT by Saundra Duffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
WHAT ELSE IS CNN HIDING?

Well, there was all that stuff about the Clintons back in the 90's.
35 posted on 04/12/2003 12:14:13 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Megaphone for a Dictator
CNN’s Coverage of Castro’s Cuba, 1997-2002 Executive Summary
May 9, 2002

Five years ago, CNN became the first U.S.-based news organization with a full-time news bureau in communist Cuba in nearly 30 years. As an independent and highly-regarded news organization, CNN’s mission was to transmit the reality of Castro’s dictatorship to American audiences. In 1997, then-White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry told reporters that “reporting of truth about the conditions in Cuba would further...peaceful, democratic change in Cuba.” CNN officials also had high hopes. Incoming Havana bureau chief Lucia Newman assured viewers “we will be given total freedom to do what we want and to work without prior censorship.”

CNN’s Havana bureau now has a five-year track record that can be evaluated, and the results are not good. Media Research Center analysts reviewed all 212 stories about the Cuban government or Cuban life that were presented on CNN’s prime time news programs from March 17, 1997, the date the Havana bureau was established, through March 17, 2002. MRC’s analysis found that instead of exposing the totalitarian regime that runs Cuba, CNN has allowed itself to become just another component of Fidel Castro’s propaganda machine.


On FNC's Fox & Friends on May 14 Rich Noyes discussed the MRC's study of CNN's Cuba coverage, "Megaphone for a Dictator"

Major findings:

CNN gave spokesmen for the communist regime a major advantage, broadcasting sound bites from Fidel Castro and his spokesmen six times more frequently than non-communist groups such as Catholic church leaders and peaceful dissidents.

CNN’s stories included six times as many sound bites from everyday Cubans who voiced agreement with Castro and supported his policies than quotes from Cuban citizens disagreeing with the government. This left American audiences with the impression that Castro’s communist government is overwhelmingly popular among the Cuban public.

CNN provided very little coverage of Cuba’s dissidents, who were the focus of only seven of the 212 Cuba stories broadcast during the past five years, or about three percent of CNN’s total coverage. That’s fewer than half as many stories as CNN produced in just the first three months of 2002 about alleged human rights abuses by the United States against prisoners held at its base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

CNN also practically ignored Cuba’s lack of democracy, a topic which was featured in only four stories (or just under two percent). One of those reports, in January 1998, consisted of Lucia Newman trumpeting Cuba’s rigged election as superior to those in the U.S. because they have “no dubious campaign spending” and “no mud slinging.”

Much of CNN’s coverage of Cuba focused on the tiniest slices of everyday life, which created the sense that Cuba was basically a normal country, not one in the grip of a dictatorship’s secret security apparatus. Instead of focusing on the regime’s human rights abuses, CNN showed Cubans waiting for ice cream cones, profiled a promising young ballerina, and interviewed a 94-year-old guitar player.

On CNN, Castro was treated more as a celebrity than a tyrant. Rather than revealing the dirty secrets of his dictatorship to the world, CNN reported on Castro’s 73rd birthday celebrations and, in February 2000, featured the dictator’s office in the “Cool Digs” segment of CNN’s Newsstand.

The MRC report concluded that “CNN could have used its unique bureau to add to the American public’s knowledge of the only totalitarian state in the Western hemisphere. But instead of enlightening the public about the regime’s repression, CNN’s Havana office has mainly provided Castro and his subordinates with a megaphone to defend their dictatorship and denigrate their democratic opponents.”

If CNN is interested in improving its coverage, the MRC report included the following suggestions: 1) increase the amount of Cuba news; 2) commit to doing real investigative journalism in Cuba; 3) broadcast regular reports on the welfare and status of political prisoners held by Castro; and 4) promote the reporting efforts of Cuba’s independent journalists. But if CNN cannot or will not commit to improving its coverage, it should close its Havana bureau rather than perpetuate the fiction that it is helping Americans better understand the realities of Cuba under Castro.

36 posted on 04/12/2003 12:20:30 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack of Clubs
"It is distressing to learn that CNN collaborated with Saddam Hussein in his brutality. They have the blood of thousands on their hands. "

Did you read the article. They didn't tell anyone, because they were ,"afraid" it would cause the deaths of Iraqis.?

They must think this let them off of the hook.Dum-bass Liberals.

37 posted on 04/12/2003 12:26:41 PM PDT by auggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
bump
38 posted on 04/12/2003 12:27:08 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
Glen Beck really did a number on CNN for this on Friday. Wish I could have taped it!
39 posted on 04/12/2003 12:27:14 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
FOX news played a clip of Iraqi UN Ambassador Al-Douri leaving his residence for JFK to catch a flight for Paris.

At the very end of the clip, Al-Douri called out "Goodbye Richard, goodbye my friend", then walked up and exchanged kisses on both cheeks with a man that FOX identified as CNN reporter Richard Roth.

A picture worth a million words, IMHO.
40 posted on 04/12/2003 12:46:11 PM PDT by Yankee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaYankee
duh. Of course--spin control! Thanks GeorgiaYankee for reminding me of what should have been obvious--i KNEW there had to be some self-interest in there somewhere. My problem is I can't think as deviously as these creeps do so i have problems recognizing hidden agendas...thanks
41 posted on 04/12/2003 12:53:59 PM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Husker8877
Excellent point. In fact, it's more logical than even my idea of financial profit! Nothing is too illegal or unethical or immoral to protect the clintons and liberalism--gosh forbid that 8yrs of deceit under them should be exposed...
42 posted on 04/12/2003 12:58:14 PM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bluntpoint
Judy Woodruff is Janet Reno
43 posted on 04/12/2003 1:04:15 PM PDT by ChadGore (288,007,154 Americans did not protest the war today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
Has anyone seen this story in their local papers? The Philadelphia Inquirer did not carry it, nor did the Delaware County Times. Was it picked up by the wire services?
44 posted on 04/12/2003 1:06:48 PM PDT by Temple Owl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
This would be a plausable explanation if Billy Clintoooon was president, but thank God he is NOT and we are grateful to have a Moral, Principled, and accountable President.

I vividly remember when President Bush went to Congress after the election to meet with the leaders of both parties. When little Tommy Dasshole said that he looked forward to working with the President on the needs of the country, Presdient Bush looked little Tommy in the eye and firmly said, "Just don't ever lie to me!"

Little Tommy was taken back and left speechless. President Bush makes decisions based on his deeply held principles and has a very long memory.

Former Mayor Ed Koch frequently said, "I always forgive, but I NEVER forget!" I believe that President Bush doesn't forget either.
45 posted on 04/12/2003 1:12:04 PM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
Do you think FOX, NBC, CBS, ABC didn't know all this too? Or did CNN just have better reporters that they got the information that no one esle could?
46 posted on 04/12/2003 1:14:29 PM PDT by Wrigley (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
Bla bla bla bla bla bla.
Hope you never have to take action that will get your employees killed. Apparently it wouldn't weigh on your conscience either.
Bla bla bla bla glad your moral fiber is so fibrous.
47 posted on 04/12/2003 1:36:25 PM PDT by equus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
Do you think FOX, NBC, CBS, ABC didn't know all this too? Or did CNN just have better reporters that they got the information that no one esle could?

None of those stations HAD an office in Iraq. Only CNN was allowed and this article makes it perfectly clear why that is. Only CNN would be the Iraqi mouthpiece.

48 posted on 04/12/2003 2:44:04 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: clintonbaiter
>>No wonder Peter Arnett felt so at home at CNN.<<

Yes. And these revelations make Peter Arnett's recent cohorting with the Iraqi government a crime against the Iraqi people as well as American forces in Iraq.
49 posted on 04/12/2003 3:12:14 PM PDT by Risa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra
Did the Beeb have an office in Iraq?
50 posted on 04/12/2003 3:12:59 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson