[unspun]

"These publishers have asked us not to allow any material at all to be posted to FR: "

americanpolitics.com
antiwar.com
eweek.com
extremetech.com
independent.co.uk
newyorker.com
pcmag.com
studlife.com
theonion.com
thetowntalk.com
universitystar.com
vanityfair.com
washingtondispatch.com
---
Funny how this kind of person wants the First Amendment when it's on their side (publishing profanity, lies, and propaganda postited as reporting). Not when taking advantage of the First Amendment exposes them, though.

[an amused spectator]

Warning: since only one legal copy of this article is allowed on the Internet, the original's content may have been altered to fit the copyright holder's political or historical agenda

Warning: since there is only one legal source of this article available on the Internet, the original source's content may have been altered to fit the copyright holder's political or historical agenda

Any other ideas for warning labels?

[Gunrunner2]

Universitystar.com. . .wow, my ol school. Must have been the mocking we gave the Star for publishing a while back an article that was horribly offensive and foul and offensive. My, my. . .what crybabies. They should have had the courage of their belief's and stood up and defended their public voice. But noooo. . . .
And today, when I checked in out of curiosity, I see vandals defaced the veteran’s memorial.
The usual “tolerant” lefty libs on campus spray-painted “Kill Bush” on the memorial. Such compassion and sensitivity. A student quoted in the article stated, “’There is a code of ethics for having your voice heard with a political message,’ Parker said. ‘People get so angry with the methods used, they don’t hear the message.’” Well. . .I dunno about you but the message I got was to heck with good and great and selfless men, it’s all about me. Yup, I’ll just bet this same dolt, and all the other lefty libs on campus, are desperately reaching for excuses to mitigate the guilt of the vandals, if not justify their actions.