Ya, sure. I want to see a transcript please.

Msnbc Claims




Thus quoth the Journo:

"But Mullen appeared to be edging toward saying that military action, either by Israel or the United States, or both, would be catastrophic."

"Appeared" to be "Edging toward".

And you. mr journalist, "appear" to be "reaching" for any old thing that "appears to be edging" toward overt propaganda for your candidate

The Wolrd is gonna end! - UPDATED

Unless, you know, you vote for the obamessiah

Here's a screenshot, for posterity, and before they "Memory hole" it.



"The sense of helplessness is even reflected in this year's presidential election. Each contender offers a sense of order—and hope. Republican John McCain promises an experienced hand in a frightening time. Democrat Barack Obama promises bright and shiny change, and his large crowds believe his exhortation, "Yes, we can." "

and

"Each period also was followed by a change in the party controlling the White House. "

Ok! thanks for the heads up, darlings. Did you ever stop to think, Alan Fram and Eileen Putman, That your constant campaign of bad news is the only news, leftist bias, unfairness, dishonesty, alarmism, caviling, whining, distortions and other bad habits have anything to do with the problem?

Do you know what YOUR approval rating is?

Insty picks up an actual Journalist who has seen the light

Today is Obamessiah day!

When a Republican secures the nomination, we get this:




A small picture of a slightly worried looking man against a plain backdrop.

When their candidate gets nominated, we get this:



Big picture of demigod towering over adoring followers

And this:



Historic Victory looking up for greater glory of the change idea

And this:



"Swirl" of history! Change! Adoring crowds!

We are beyond a subtle bias this year. These people are propagandists.

Your news about Iraq, interpreted for you.

The Source:

Lets see...

"Bush to Mark 5 Years of War in Iraq"

Ok. Is this like an Anniversary type thingy then?

"WASHINGTON (AP) - Five years after launching the U.S. invasion of Iraq, President Bush is making some of his most expansive claims of success in the fighting there. Bush said last year's troop buildup has turned Iraq around and produced "the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden."

You see, President Bush "Makes Claims" and what he claims is "put in parenthesis"

Massive anti-war demonstrations were planned in downtown Washington to mark Wednesday's anniversary of the war, which has claimed the lives of nearly 4,000 U.S. troops. Across the river at the Pentagon, Bush was to give a speech to warn that backsliding in recent progress fueled by the increase of 30,000 troops he ordered more than a year ago cannot be allowed.

Ah There are "Massive" "anti -war demonstrations" planned against, and a mention of US deaths, and "warning" about "backsliding."

"The challenge in the period ahead is to consolidate the gains we have made and seal the extremists' defeat," he said in excerpts the White House released Tuesday night. "We have learned through hard experience what happens when we pull our forces back too fast - the terrorists and extremists step in, fill the vacuum, establish safe havens and use them to spread chaos and carnage."

Bush added: "The successes we are seeing in Iraq are undeniable, yet some in Washington still call for retreat."

I sense a "Damning but" coming up.

Democrats took a different view.

"On this grim milestone, it is worth remembering how we got into this situation, and thinking about how best we can get out," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich. "The tasks that remain in Iraq - to bring an end to sectarian conflict, to devise a way to share political power and to create a functioning government that is capable of providing for the needs of the Iraqi people - are tasks that only the Iraqis can complete."

DOH! How hard was that to spot, heh?


The rest of the article is as bad - So Ill summarise the methods used, lemme know if you spot any!

Here is a list of methods used by leftist propagandists to "educate" you.

In this Article I detect Numbers 1, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13, and 17 coming up for the "massive planned protests.

How the Soviet Union Fell

Abc, Msnbc and Cnn frontypage this:



And then, we get to see this:

Ya, ok, mr. "music sank the evil empire guy". Ronal Reagan gets no mention.

The Journo-interpreter then sallies forth to gather this gem-

"At present, if the United States takes the decision of a more encouraging policy toward the North then we can embrace the United States," he said."

Hoo Boy. You never got to ask him about internment camps, huh? That would be doubleplus ungood.

Talk about rose-tinted glasses.

On Terrorists, Youths, Spades and Reuters.

This gentleman has covered the bases, way more succinctly than I ever could.

"That odd odor you smell is the aroma of politically correct mendacity wafting through the hallway. Danish youths torching cars for six nights running because spring is coming? What’s wrong with this carcass? You can’t tell from the first four paragraphs, but the cat peeks out of the Burka in the paragraphs that following."

Ka-POW! Wow. I wish I could write like that.

Hey you! Mr News Consumer! If you read anything from Reuters, you should consider yourself misinformed.

Sigh.....

An example of "Headline does not belong to picture" This method is designed to strengthen certain Memes - in this case "All bad news from the Middle East is because of the Iraq war"



The worst part of this headline contains all kinds of subtle press malfeasance, to wit-

1. "Study" - this takes the onus of proof away from the reporter, who now can say he/she was "just" reporting. Yeah, like the bullshit Lancet study? Remember, only BAD news about Iraq makes the news headlines, and only negative studies.
   
2. That is a file photo. It has NOTHING to do with the story. If this were Bosnia, the picture would have been of a mass grave, none of which have been found in Iraq, if I were to get my news only from your headlines. Or at least on any front page of ABC, MSNBC, CBS, BBC, with near the frequency as this tripe.
3. Worst of all, the headline pretends that the idiot journalists know better how to conduct operations and logistics for our troops. Go cover a candlelight vigil, or a cat in the tree story, please. You are not needed in Iraq, we won, despite you.
   

MSM Methods of (mis)reporting Politics

Claim you are “unbiased”, by not letting your readers know how you vote.. Then………

1. Criticize your political opponent Whenever You Can, and never give credit when due. Even when it is painfully obvious that you were wrong, and the Wingnut was right. Caveat: the MSM is 90% Leftist.
2. Set Standards for Conservatives, of absolute perfection, or better than perfect,. Examples are - Casualtyless wars, Low Oil prices, admission to mistakes when asked by hostile reporters, No tripping, ever! etc,) for Conservatives, Corollary to rule# 2: Expect Nothing of liberals except to get, and stay elected. Report on any transgressions of the expected perfection, as abject failure
3. Play “Name That Party” IE, When Conservatives are involved in scandal, be sure to mention their party affiliation. Many times. Do not mention Democrats party affiliation, if at all possible. If necessary, do it at the end of a long article that makes many mentions of unrelated Republican transgressions.
4. When a scandal is possible about a Rethuglican, FRONTPAGE! When it turns out to be nothing? - Corrections page a18, under the escort services ads.
5. Use The Damning But technique whenever good news for conservatives cannot be avoided.
6. When good news for Bush – for example the “Anbar Awakening” is unavoidable to mention, Find an “expert” that disagrees, and give him most of the article space.
7. Treat all Military Staff with complete circumspection. Quote : A military spokesman “claimed” Or “defended” the latest move/decision in trouble-ridden XXXX” Exception, the “expert who disagrees.” The “Expert’s” word is taken as is, no qualifier.
8. Treat All Military members on the line as victims of bad policy, as long as that policy is set by a Republican. – Exception, the “expert who disagrees.”
9. If the policy is set by a Democrat, They are “Acceptable casualties of war” See #2, “standard of perfection”
10. Count Bodies – of friendly/allied/USA soldiers. If 3 friendlies die when taking a mountain stronghold, but 150 Enemy soldiers were killed, Treat enemy soldier deaths as “a military spokesman claimed”, then go to tearful relatives of your own countries casualties, and ask them how they feel, on camera. “Damning but” technique helpful. Point out that “Area Was Unsafe!”
11. Ignore progress, if progress may be good for conservatives. It is after all, relative to another bad thing somewhere. If no factoids can be found or manufactured (above willing suspension of disbelief level), do a negative poll. Zogby, Gallup are good go-to pollsters for this
12. When progress is undeniable, find a victim of the progress. Every silver lining has a cloud! ”Fewer Deaths in Iraq Bad for Cemetery workers” Real headline.
13. Nagging problems: “More electricity, but stifling heat continues” or “Some Progress, problems remain”. A Variation of the “perfection” theme (#2) almost always used as, or in conjunction with “damning but” technique.
14. Negative word use without substantiation or perspective – “Costly Move” “Unpopular War” “Lowest Approval rating” “Most casualties between 12:00 and 12:01pm, In Iraq, ever”
15. UN/NATO/FRENCH approval is necessary for wars started by Republicans. Democrats, Not so much. See Kosovo.
16. The Enemy of your enemy (example, Ahmadenijad vs George W Bush) – is your friend, and deserves the benefit of the doubt. Also, really easy, non-confrontational interviews.
17. Small protests that agree with your worldview can be made to look important with lots of close up shots of the most interesting poster held by a normal looking /angry individual. NEVER publish pictures of freaks in marches, unless…… They are conservatives. Then, that is all that you publish. Remember to use “fringe, far-right, extreme, and fundamentalist” often in describing them. The rightist freaks, at least. Use pictures taken from inside the crowd, outward, to make a conservative protest look smaller. Or take more pictures of the leftist counter-protestors than you do of the actual marchers. Make sure their version gets more space, quotes, and better pictures.
18. At protests, Ignore left-on-right violence. The opposite applies to the opposite event.
19. At leftist protests, treat police who are trying to protect the tax-paying public and their property as oppressors of free speech and the right to express views.
20. At rightist protests, treat police who are protecting leftist counter protesters from abusive, bad words, as victims of vicious brown shirt-like fascists – (and the leftists as victims of violent conservative thugs) unless a leftist gets arrested.
21. Arrests at protests: - if leftists, list their complaints and that of their attorneys. If conservatives, write about their transgressions, find lefty with complaint about events.
22. Use “file photos” to obscure your lack of information from any given event. File photos are very seldom questioned, so, for example, all “file photos” of Iraq will show destruction or death, or soldiers pointing guns at children. File photos of anointed politicians will reflect them in all their holy glory.
23. The Memory Hole: If you do not acknowledge a salient fact or event that you were wrong about, ever again, that fact or event may be treated as if it never existed, or took place.
    

24. Define the political center to the left. That makes Hillary Clinton a “moderate”, Hugo Chaves slightly leftist, And journalists the center.
25. Use Bigspeak. Decimate. Surge. Atrocity. Global. International. Billions. Deficit. Tons. Used when describing something bad, BIG bad, cause by wasteful Americans and their Idiot-in-chief.
26. Newwordyness. I-anything. Webinar. Organic. Bio-crap. Nano. Blog. Truthiness. Use when trying to sound “hip”. Remember to type on Mac. Imac. I’m a Mac. Under an Ipod. On the internet. I-blogging!
27. The “Bad gun” or “Devil made him do it” argument. : Whenever a terrorist or Criminal kills, or convinces himself to kill, write that the “Iraq war radicalized” him, or “Easy access to guns/explosives/knives/drugs/high heels by gangs” caused the death-murder-bombing/fashion crime to occur. Never write that the act was willful on the part of the perpetrator.
28. Lie internationally, retract locally. International wire services will disseminate news far and wide, the retraction will be made at their site only.

Summary of all of the above - Anything Bad that happens, Anything at all, will get tied to, or mentioned as a part of The GWB Administration. Anything good will be ascribed to dumb luck - if it cannot be ignored.

Free your mind from it's MSM bonds!

Excerpt from this article:

"Then we have hate speech laws, which empower governments to punish people of politically incorrect passions. In Europe, Canada and elsewhere, average citizens have suffered persecution for criticizing homosexuality and Islam and voicing other unfashionable truths. And as hate speech laws become more entrenched and accepted, the list of taboos of the tongue grows longer - and more widespread. They're coming soon to a theater of social operations near you."

Mindcrimes: Don't think, or say what we want you to? Report to the commission! Freedom of speech, my ass.

Here is someone who will nor be cowed by a so-called "human rights commision" (better named the "mindcrime police"?)

Note the complete dearth of reporting on this by the MSM. Who are more than willing to leak national security information, but cannot publish cartoons offensive to our enemies.

The press is the enemy.

Not all Journalists think they are owed a job.

"Whatever Keen (or I) may believe the future holds, it’s not society’s job to ensure that journalism remains profitable. It’s journalism’s job to entice readers and viewers with a product that’s worth the price of admission. These struggles, as important as they may be to some of us, do not signal the cold-blooded murder of “our culture.”" Read it all here: H/T Instapundit

You would think...

ABC news could find a bad picture of this guy



Quoth the newsfilter:

"The terror group has also been campaigning to reach a broader audience, announcing that its No. 2 figure, Ayman al-Zawahri, would respond to journalists' questions sent over the Internet. The deadline for the queries was Jan. 16."

Lets see If ABC asks him whether he "ever admits to any mistakes"

UPDATED - Your news, as interpreted by ABC (re-interpreted by me)

The Senate is poised to take up a $516 billion measure to fund 14 Cabinet agencies and troops in Afghanistan, with President Bush likely to sign the measure if his GOP allies can add up to $40 billion for the war in Iraq.

Why do they need to do that? No explanation.

Senate leaders would like to wrap up debate Tuesday, though GOP conservatives may balk, unhappy with spending above Bush's budget and a secretive process that produced a 1,482-page bill with almost 9,000 pet projects sought by lawmakers.

Why is it above Bush's Budget? Ah! a "secretive process" (unexplained), "pet projects", and anonomynous "lawmakers" Lets try this, ABC - use the words "pork", and "Democrats"

Despite opposition from conservative hard-liners like Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Jim DeMint, R-S.C., the stage is set for a year-end budget deal ending a monthslong battle between the White House and congressional Democrats over domestic spending.

And what do these two guys oppose? PORK. ABC sees fit to name their resistance, without naming waht they resist. Once again, what they do NOT report will tell you more than what they do!

Now here comes the biggest weasel-paragraph I've seen all week:

Democrats have succeeded in smoothing the rough edges of Bush's February budget plan, which sought below-inflation increases for domestic programs other than military base construction and contained numerous cutbacks and program eliminations.

Smoothing the edges, ey? Below inflation increases for domestic programs! And "numerous" "other things"! Wow - Now we know what is going on. Thank you, Oh journalist who reports things to us, so we may know what is going on!

Actually, Im confused. WTF? Let's read on....

But Democrats were able to fill in most of the cuts by shifting money from the Pentagon and foreign aid budgets, adding "emergency" funding above Bush's budget "cap" and adding future-year funding for federal education programs.

Uh-oh. PORK.

The bill passed the House late Monday after an unusual legislative two-step aimed at easing the bill's movement through a gauntlet of anti-war Democrats and Republicans unhappy with the measure's price tag and the process that produced it.

Again - thanks for the explanation. POOOORK!

The House first voted 253-154 to approve the omnibus spending bill funding domestic agency budgets and foreign aid; they then voted 206-201 to add $31 billion for troops in Afghanistan to the measure and sent the combined spending package to the Senate.

Huh? What?

Democrats are generally far more supportive of military operations in Afghanistan than they are of the unpopular war in Iraq.

Aaaah! the "unpopular" war. Yeah. OK. Made unpopular by a relentless propagandist effort on the part of ..... You.

Republicans generally opposed the omnibus measure, arguing it's unfair to provide money for troops in Afghanistan but not Iraq. They also opposed $13 billion in spending above Bush's "top line" request for the one-third of the budget passed each year by Congress.

Quote please? Damned Republicans. All they do is "argue". Like naughty children.

And there you have it! The Senate is poised, Democrats smoothed the rough edges of Bush's plan by filling in cuts below inflation increase and numerous cutbacks and eliminations, Republicans argued, Unpopular war in Iraq.

Oh, and Article contents contradicts headline.

Soundbite file transfer complete. You are what you read peeps, don't eat gum off the ground!

UPDATE:

Here is what really happened.

"Damning but" of the week

Wow! looks like good news, huh?



Aaaahh. Here it is. The "Damning But". In the form of the "poll" on the right.

And - the last heading in the article -

"Threat remains
While the level of violence has reduced, the threat has certainly not gone away. "

HEH, that news was so good they needed TWO damning buts!.

When they print bad news regarding Iraq, it is bad news only, and front page. When they find good news, they have to line it's fringes with this crap. The BBC is not a good source for proper, unfiltered news.

Please note, this article does not come from a front page.

An Opinion Unfit to comment on

Let Alone, Print.

It's here! But nowhere to be found here.

If a Democrat makes a doubleplus ungood speech, and the NYT ignores it - did it happen?

This is how the game is played - Talk only about the things that fit your agenda - make them "issues", and stay on that message. Never give your philosophical opponent the mic, and if you DO let him speak, make sure it is through an interpreter-Journalist who can put it in the right context for you.

The problem for readers? You are slightly dumber after you had read this publication, becase vital information is being kept from you deliberately.

H/T Powerline