COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN GOVERNMENTSLAVES
‘We’re not losing
touch’
New York Times CEO
Mark Thompson said he doesn’t believe the paper’s coverage has a liberal bias
and doesn’t believe the Times has “lost touch” with people in between America’s
two coasts.
Not losing touch with what?
The Pentagon?
The security services?
American corporate interests?
The Israel Lobby?
No, you certainly are not losing touch with any of those
folks.
Your bonds are likely stronger than ever, in fact.
As for, “he doesn’t believe the paper’s coverage has a
liberal bias..."
Absolutely, it does not. There is nothing, absolutely
nothing liberal about the New York Times, except in the minds of some Americans
who are fixated with hating liberals, even though many of them could not define
the word accurately.
Some of the things I see written in America about ‘liberals”
resemble a Christian fundamentalist preacher’s rants about Satan. They are
often, ipso facto, uninformed and silly.
America in fact has few genuine liberals living in it. A
throbbing, fairly brutal world empire is about as far from being a cozy,
sheltering home for liberals as you can get. Someone who might start out being
liberal in America is before long hammered into a more acceptable form, but even
if a person is not changed, he will have few outlets for his views and few
audiences.
There can be nothing liberal about a newspaper which has consistently
supported and promoted and lied about America's every war for decades and
decades, none of those wars having anything to do with legitimate defense.
Or about a newspaper which passes all its Mideast stories by
the official Israeli Censor for approval before running, a fact only recently
revealed.
Or about a newspaper which keeps Thomas Friedman as a top
columnist. Covered with Pulitzer Prizes - American journalism’s way of
elevating questionable practitioners into unquestioned authority, even though
we know it has been awarded to outright frauds in the past - Friedman has
virtually never written an honest sentence in his life, except for all those
many sentences when it is clear to all he is just doing advertising blurbs.
Or about a newspaper which has been caught playing footsie
with the CIA a number of times. It was even been caught with CIA personnel on
its staff. A newspaper, too, that has on a number of occasions used shabby FBI
tips to publicly hound or persecute innocent people.
The New York Times has been described as the "official
house organ” of America's power establishment.
That describes its function accurately, and there is nothing
remotely "liberal" about that. The paper contains often enough good
or interesting items to maintain the interest of that establishment and promote
its own general reputation, but when it comes to the really important function
of informing readers about what is behind great matters, the newspaper not only
fails consistently, it works to the opposite purpose.
Too many people in America simply do not understand the
origin or meaning of the word "liberal," yet they regularly complain
or even rage about liberals. It is laughable.
The Clintons are not liberals. John Kerry is not liberal.
Madeleine Albright is not liberal. The New York Times is not liberal. The Democratic
Party is not liberal. Indeed, it is the War Party of a vast imperial
enterprise, otherwise known as America.
_________________________________
Response to another
comment:
“Objective reporting
is not in their repertoire”?
And just where do you see that quality in America, anywhere
in America?
It doesn't exist.
