Current Quarter Expenses.
Posted on 02/18/2012 6:29:09 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Have you heard about the 23-year-old Saudi journalist who tweeted an imaginary conversation with Muhammad? It went something like this: He loved Muhammad, he hated Muhammad, he couldn’t understand Muhammad, he wasn’t going to pray for Muhammad. If this isn’t exactly a disquisition on faith and doubt a la “The Brothers Karamazov,” remember, we’re just talking Twitter.
The journalist received so many mostly white-hot angry tweets from co-religionists condemning his Islamic law-breaking “blasphemy” (30,000 in 24 hours!) that he apologized and fled the country. He hoped to seek asylum in New Zealand but was captured in Malaysia by Saudi agents who returned him to “the Kingdom.” There, according to Shariah (Islamic law), he now faces the death penalty for “blasphemy.”
If you haven’t heard of this young man, whose name is Hamza Kashgari, it could be because you’re watching too much Fox News. As of this writing, almost a week after the Kashgari story broke, I haven’t found a single story about it at the Fox News website. (You try: www.foxnews.com.) Meanwhile, CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC and CNN have all reported the Kashgari story, clueing in their viewers on how far totalitarian Islam, Saudi style, will go to exert its control over the human spirit. But not Fox.
Say – you don’t suppose the fact that Prince Alwaleed bin Talal owns the second-largest block of stock (7 percent) in News Corp, Fox News’ parent company, not to mention a new $300 million stake in Twitter (almost 4 percent), has anything to do with Fox’s silence on this Saudi black eye of a story? After all, it was Saudi dictator King Abdullah – Alwaleed’s uncle – whom press accounts credit with ordering the tweeting journalist’s hot pursuit and imprisonment...
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
YES
I don’t go to the website, but since I have heard about it, it had to be on FNC.
DING DING DING...We have a WINNER! That and a Great Britain Phone Hacking Scandal pretty well killed off “News” Corporation.
I wrote off Faux News in ‘08 after they minimized and stabbed Duncan Hunter in the back, effectively blacklisting him no differently than was Pat Buchanan over at MSNBC, Rupert Murdoch, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and King Abdullah can all kiss my effin ass. Islam is nothing but a cult, it is NOT a religion, it’s adherents are purveyors of death, destruction and misery, and the beliefs of that cult are absolutely inconsistent and incompatible with a free society. The only thing missing from the arms of those who embrace it is a swastika.
The gates of hell shall not prevail. Every young person questions belief and the authority behind it. The ability of the world’s biggest hoax to hold onto a billion souls is on borrowed time.
NO....
George Soros did...
Soros warned he would ‘Get” murdoch, and he did, with the U.K. Phone Scandal.
Glenn Beck went off the air right before that started, as you will recall. Beck was exposing very inconvenient facts about who Soros and sons were, and how they operate. That didn’t jive with the “Current Truth”.
I thought that most freepers already knew that Faux News is partly owned by the Saudis.
Fox News Is Part-Owned By a Saudi Prince Whose Family Rules By Sharia Law
by GuruSodaH8~NKRPB~480 blockedCONS Posted August 20, 2010
mark
Mon Feb 15 15:08:11 2010 · 99 of 384There you have it, folks.
BuckeyeTexan to null and voidI know I’m absolutely right. That 5.7% ownership stake gets the holding company (and effectively the Saudi) a vote on News Corp shareholder issues. It doesn’t get him input into Fox News programming.
I have the second largest number of shares in an S-corp and I get to vote on shareholder issues. What I don’t get to do is tell the majority owner how to do business. I have an opinion, which, as you well know, I am happy to share even when it isn’t requested. An opinion doesn’t equate to input into corporate policy.
Say it ain’t so, nully. Tell me you don’t really believe that “Saudi-controlled” claim.
Tex
Nothing to see here, move along...
It sounds like a pretty lame story. Someone tweeted and others got mad, must be the first time ever. And I dont think it would shed any new light on the situation, pretty much all of Fox’s viewers know that Muslims will kill those that leave the faith. I’d much rather they report on stonings and beatings than twitter. I probably wouldnt run the story either.
On top of that, its not like Fox is a news breaking organization. They are a personality station that covers political impacts of news reports. They didnt even pre-empt O’Reilly or Hannity for the Japan earthquake. So at most, they would have had a 5 minute segment with 1 pro and one con each getting about 20 seconds to make a point (which is almost impossible) while Bill or Sean says “but, but, but....” So what was WND expecting?
As for the conspiracy, the Saudi Prince is the 2nd largest individual owner of shares, but there are multiple groups who own larger portions. You can make a company do things when you only have 7%. So if they didnt have anyone on to talk about it because they didnt want to offend Muslims, then the Saudi Prince is the least of the problems.
*sigh* That's gonna leave a mark...
Yes - and that’s why we don’t watch ANY news on the television any more - none. FOX news is very creepy now.
Yes - and that’s why we don’t watch ANY news on the television any more - none. FOX news is very creepy now.
Posted on the other thread too:
Look closely. Alwaleed bin Talal is the Chairman of Kingdom Holding Company. It is Kingdom which owns stock in News Corp. Neither Kingdom Holding Company nor Alwaleed bin Talal is on the Board of Directors or any Board Committees at News Corp. He has no direct input into corporate governance and no control over Fox News programming.
bin Talal has an opinion, which is clearly valued by Rupert Murdoch in light of bin Talal’s support during Liberty’s hostile takeover attempt, but it’s an opinion nonetheless. Kingdom has voting shares in News Corp. Murdoch has four or fives times that number of voting shares.
News Corp’s holdings are vast and incude the Wall Street Journal, who has reported on Hamza Kashgari. Going down the list, I can quickly find other News Corp subsidiaries who have reported on Kashgari. So I find this assertion that bin Talal has input into News Corp’s content to be without merit.
LLS
I think the direction Fox takes has more to do with Roger Ailes and the ability to make more $$s as well as stay out of the sights of the big guns.
ailes and murdoch both have ordered the network to the left center.
LLS
Pernicious Saudi influence ping.
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.