Posted on 09/07/2004 6:17:23 PM PDT by chiller
I was at this rally and it was such an american moment that we cheered in support of prayers for President Clinton. Politics were put aside, we were all Americans. Then the AP spits out the lie.
Powerline has published the email of the reporter's boss. Read this over and SEND EMAILS!!!!
powerline writes.......
Over the weekend, we wrote about the false Associated Press report on a rally for President Bush in West Allis, Wisconsin. The AP report, by AP correspondent Tom Hays, said that "Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them." This was a lie; the audiotape of the rally discloses no booing whatsoever. The AP subsequently issued a corrected version of the article, which deleted all reference to the non-existent booing.
I emailed Mr. Hays over the weekend to ask for an explanation. This morning I sent Mr. Hays the following email:
Mr. Hays, I assume that you are back in your office after the holiday and will now be in a position to respond to my earlier email asking about your false report that Republicans booed President Clinton at a rally in West Allis, Wisconsin, and President Bush "did nothing to stop them." I have listened to the audio of the rally; there was no booing. I have been told by a number of people who were present at the rally that there was no booing. The Associated Press issued a corrected version of your story deleting the false claim that the crowd booed.
So, I want to know what you have to say for yourself. Were you actually at the West Allis rally? If not, from whom did you get the false information that the crowd booed? If you were at the rally, what was your basis for reporting that the crowd booed and President Bush did nothing to stop it? And what relationship, formal or informal, do you have with the Kerry campaign?
I look forward to hearing from you. We have a website that is read by 50,000 or more people, and we have commented on this incident at length. Those comments have been linked to by other websites with readerships totaling in the millions. If you have anything to say for yourself, I will happily print it. Otherwise, I will be forced to conclude, and will publish my conclusion, that this is a naked instance of press bias, and that you deliberately filed a false report for the purpose of aiding the Kerry campaign.
Mr. Hays' email address is thays@ap.org. I will advise our readers if and when I get a response from him. In the meantime, polite emails to the above address, asking for an explanation of his false report, would be appropriate.
"All The News That's Shi'ite To Print"
Oh, yeah...THAT "boo". The old media can't stop digging their own grave.
From the newspaper that gave us Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair.
Heard a Russian pastor on a talk show this morning - many of the victims were Baptists - this was an explicit attack on Christian people.
I agree. That's beyond the pale, even for the despicable NY Slimes.
Friday night's NBC news with Brokaw ran the West Allis clip with cheers and applause and no comment. I like to think there was a purpose for this 10 second slam of the AP.
Nondenominational freedom fighters bump.
My vote is for Putin.
This was translation from Russian, not Arabic. He said in RUSSIAN "Allah" instead of "Bog".
You could be entirely correct - objectively.
Technically Allah and God may interchange in translation.
However, the point of the post is that subjectively allah refers to the muslim god (or, to God in arabic) and God is the god of the Christians. In a more obscure comparison - how would you interpret "By the Gods I did not shoot"?
Belief, propaganda, votes, are subjective issues, not based on one-for-one mechanical exchanges of equivalent elements.
By changing from allah to God, the author intentionally obscured the nature of the terrorist - making him appear to be a non-muslim to those reading the article.
I'm sure the author simply wanted to avoid profiling....no thoughts about misleading the public...not at all afraid that the party line might be smudged by mass murder...nothing like that, nah.
And with that, the argument is won. Thanks.
In my area, those who consider themselves "intellectuals" or "well-informed" read the national edition of the NYT, while the hoi polloi read the (still liberal and NYO-oriented, but with a bit less arrogance) local paper. I read the local paper along with the hoi polloi, despite my Ivy League education and professional status, and REFUSE to buy the NYT!!!! But I often complain about the local paper's social liberalism, Serbophobia, and pro-muslim stance.
Glad to help.
In my whole life, I have bought just one copy of the NYT. It was back during the second clinton error, when all impeachment was breaking loose, and I thought it would be interesting to see what 'the paper of record" had to say on the whole thing.
If I could return that paper for a cash refund now, I believe I would.....
Yes, but Adolph was a "National" socialist, the fellow travelers at the NYT, such as Walter Duranty, were "World" socialists". The difference is only in who will do the suffering. First.
The NY Times article wasn't written for the Arabs but for Americans who they are deliberately trying to mislead. "Allah" is not God, it is a different diety ---- you would never shout "God akbar" before bayoneting a small child or beheading an innocent person because the God of the Christians and Jews would not be pleased but they believe their allah is.
Actually the matter was settled by the previous post: the cowardly thug was pleading in Russian, but said "Allah" rather than "Bog". Then NYT again proves itself contemptible.
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.