I am a bit late with this -- for which I apologize, I have been a bit under the weather, and am trying to get caught up. Anyway, it is important to have it on the record: the Flopping Aces blog has some key and eye-opening revelations about this story.
Thanks to all who sent this in.
I've been following this amazing story for days. I'm not surprised at all. The MSM is anti-American and working feverishly to destroy American confidence in it's Armed Forces and The President.
Anyone who believes the MSM is a clueless dolt.
If the president and the armed forces would fight back the same way the nazis-in-turbans fight back they would be avoided by the msm too. Everybody knows it. The msm just looks for easy meat so they can sell thier spew to ignorant people who don't think critically about what they read. The msm lost its credibility with me as far as i'm concerned.
Hope you are now feeling better Robert. This story needs to be spread far and wide!
AP replies:
[...]
""The attempt to question the existence of the known police officer who spoke to the AP is frankly ludicrous and hints at a certain level of desperation to dispute or suppress the facts of the incident in question," AP International Editor John Daniszewski said in a statement e-mailed to On Deadline this afternoon.
[..] Read it all.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2006/11/us_military_and.html
I have to agree with this comment left by Bob at the USA Today On Deadline web site:
"The AP apparently figures that the best defense is to go on offense, but this is a pathetic offense: "The attempt to question the existence of the known police officer who spoke to the AP is frankly ludicrous and hints at a certain level of desperation to dispute or suppress the facts of the incident in question."
The "known police officer" used by AP doesn't work for the police, so far as the U.S. military could determine.
What else would a reasonable person do after finding that such a person couldn't be found and that no reports of such an incident had been made, except to notify the AP and request a retraction if other credible evidence doesn't exist?
It's not an "attempt" to question the AP story, nor is it a "hint" of desperation and cover-up. It's a direct offer of contradictory information which ought to cause AP to back up and look again.
Since the AP has taken this tack, their follow-up story is not as credible as it might have been."
"The aim of our terror is to induce surrender before the great battles are even fought. This is the true meaning of “asymmetric” warfare. The weaker side in military strength may demonstrate conclusively that it has a stronger stomach for relentless, unstoppable acts of terror."
WISE WORDS INDEED ! which cut through to the core of the war against western democracy.
Concepts that need to be addressed far more on this website in understanding the soft coercion of public opinion through the MSM and educational establishements and the creation of public dissent against the authories in power.
This has been the main weapon in Islam's fight against us.
It is the subversion that Gramsci could only dream about.
Sad to say, true...MSM is the enemies best intel source, followed by loons masquerading as university professors at #2.
As for why our armed forces don't retaliate...they're currently forbidden to get hostile, even to people on the street trying to attack them for their position (That's where I come in, as I am no longer leashed, and enjoy every minute of it, too...with grateful gratitude from the members of our armed forces who aren't allowed to fight back).
The MSM is case-in-point #1 for Lincolns comments on being brought down from within. Had they done this in WWII they'd lose their broadcast licenses and everyone knows it...but that's another topic & another forum.
;-)
What does one expect from an oligarchy (the MSM) which is profit driven. Didn't it back 100% G.W. Bush in his presidency, his programs and his lies and invasion of Iraq?
It backed Bush yesterday, and now that it rode that horse, it is backing a new and fresher horse..it's totally Orwellian.. and you clowns are owned.
Kool-Aid Alert...
Not even close...87% backed the other guys, by their own admission...not Bush.
They didn't argue with Bush over the war because they would have been castigated by the public at that time. the NON-profit news outlets were ferociously anti-Bush (PBS, etc).
Invoking the drivel of kook fringe sites don't help your case...I read them too, for laughs.
;-)
AP enemy propaganda?
This story is a great example of why battlefield news should always be taken with a grain of salt.
Wars are waged on many fronts, and this website is a regular stop for me when I'm questing for input on the current status of the Islamic extremist worldwide activities.
When you regularly surf many sources for world news, the MSM bias is easily recognized, and becomes secondary to the realities you find to be true.
I've become a resource to others as they question me daily, and I've found that exposing the violent tenets of Islam is quite an enlightenment to many!
I've also noticed that the general thinking we see here and in other related online discourse only catches up to the MSM indoctrinated public six months or a year later...that's way too long.
We need to speed the recognition process along by instructing ignorant computer owners how to utilize their stagnant machines and get a real education on world affairs.
Couldn't have said it better myself...^5s.