Throwing around the word "Nazi" for them is like Limbaugh calling feminists "femiNazis".
According to Chris Wallace "no one gets to tell them what the news is"(paraphrased by me), but they get to tell me what the news is??
Sometimes the media are the enemy of the people, like when they suppressed the news of the holocaust:
Only once did the NY Times devote its lead editorial to the Holocaust on Dec. 2, 1942, which was when the State Dept. had unofficially confirmed to rabbis that 2 million Jews had been murdered and that 5 million more were in danger of the same fate. That was as far as their concern went because the caution in the story was that other people might get the same treatment as the Jews "even our own mongrel nation".
In March 1943 the paper was moved to concede that the plight of the Jews in Europe merited extraordinary attention. Anne O'Hare McCormick the foreign affairs columnist wrote that the rally at Madison Square Garden had exposed the shame of the world. Seven other editorials echoed similar thoughts. The Times on the previous day had covered the rally as the smallest one of 11 front page headlines: "Save Doomed Jews Huge Rally Pleas".
More than a year later the Times discussed the idea of temporarily housing refugees in isolated American camps for innocent victims...without ever mentioning the Jews.
Many other stories were located far from the front page...like page 28 "Extinction feared by Jews in Poland"
June of '42 saw Goebels blaming the Jews for the bombings they were suffering and that the Jews would pay for all the suffering they had caused with the extermination of their race in Europe and even beyond Europe...page 7
In November '42 the State Dept. conceded that it had confirmed the extermination campaign but the Allies were helpless to prevent it.
In 1943 The Times made a passionate plea for the European Jews with a brief essay by a novelist.
The next and last article was on June 9, 1944.
NEVER THE LEAD ARTICLE OF THE DAY. Clearly the facts couldn't speak for themselves.
You could have read the front page of the NY Times in 1939 and 1940 without knowing that a million Jews were being sent to Poland and dying.
You could have read the front page of the NY Times in 1941 without knowing that the Nazis were machine gunning hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Soviet Union.
You could have read the front page of the NY Times in 1942 without knowing until the last month that the Germans were carrying out plans to exterminate European Jews
Had you read the front page of the NY Times in 1943 you would have been told once that Jews from France, Belgium, and The Netherlands were being sent to ghettos and camps in Poland where more than half the Jews from Europe would be killed.
In 1944 you would have read on the front page of the horrible places, like Auschwitz, but only further in the paper could you learn that the victims were Jews.
1945, Dachau and Buchenwald were liberated and made the front page, but the part about the victims being Jews was hidden deep within the paper.
Now, the owner of the Times was Jewish as was the publisher, but no one would have had any idea what was happening to the Jewish people. The Ny Times by placement of stories and by omission did an evil thing and worked as an enemy of the people. Not just the Jewish people, but all the people who read that fish-wrapper.
TL;DR
It's not always the news, but the way news is reported...the way words and meanings are twisted and people get maligned.Statistics: Posted by Ronster — Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:08 am
]]>