What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Birther Conspiracy Thread (1 Viewer)

Lou Dobbs challenges his own CNN network

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Mon Aug 3, 6:46 am ET

NEW YORK – He's become a publicity nightmare for CNN, embarrassed his boss and hosted a show that seemed to contradict the network's "no bias" brand. And on top of all that, his ratings are slipping.

How does Lou Dobbs keep his job?

It's not a simple answer. CNN insists it is standing behind Dobbs, despite calls for his head from critics of his reporting on "birthers" — those who believe President Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States despite convincing evidence to the contrary. The "birthers" believe Obama was born in Kenya, and thus not eligible to be president.

Dobbs' work has been so unpopular that even Ann Coulter has criticized him.

Dobbs has acknowledged that he believes Obama was born in Hawaii. But he gives airtime to disbelievers, and has said the president should try to put questions fully to rest by releasing a long version of his birth certificate. He's twice done stories on his show after the public leak of a memo from CNN U.S. President Jon Klein saying that "it seems this story is dead."

Klein said those stories were OK because they were about the controversy and weren't actually questioning the facts. But critics suggest Klein is parsing words, that even raising the issue lends it credence.

Joked The Washington Post's Lisa de Moraes: it "explains their upcoming documentary: `The World: Flat. We Report — You Decide.'"

Dobbs hasn't made it any easier by using his radio show to fight back at critics, who he called "limp-minded, lily-livered lefty lemmings." He considered going on CNN tormentor Bill O'Reilly's Fox News show to thank him (O'Reilly says the birthers are wrong, but he defended Dobbs' right to talk about it).

"He's embarrassed himself and he's embarrassed CNN," said Brooks Jackson, a former CNN correspondent. "And that's not a good thing for any network that wants to be seen as a reputable, nonpartisan news organization."

So who needs the headache?

Klein said Dobbs does a smart newscast that explores issues that get little in-depth attention elsewhere, such as trade with China, health care funding and the stimulus plan. He suggested Dobbs' CNN work is unfairly lumped in with his unrelated radio show, and that he's judged on the show he did a couple of years ago, when Dobbs became a political target for his campaigning against illegal immigration.

The two men sat down after last year's election to make changes, aware that the anti-immigrant Dobbs' image ran counter to the brand CNN was trying to create. CNN calls itself the network of unbiased reporting compared to conservative commentators on Fox and liberal ones at MSNBC.

Since then, Dobbs has been doing a relatively straight newscast, Klein said.

"He brings more than three decades of experience reporting and broadcasting the news," Klein said, "and that's very valuable to a news network."

Through a spokeswoman, Dobbs said he would not comment for this story. But he is a CNN original. Except for a two-year break a decade ago, he's been with CNN virtually from the network's beginning. Much of that time was spent anchoring a business newscast that made him hugely influential in the business community and immensely valuable to CNN. Old-timers say the desire of advertisers to be connected with Dobbs and Larry King essentially funded the network for years.

Dobbs is considered among the smartest people at CNN, and also the most personally intimidating. For whatever reason — the rise of CNBC as a competitor or a sense that opinionated hosts were the future for cable news — Dobbs morphed from a business anchor to a polarizing populist.

That version of Dobbs seemed better suited for HLN, formerly CNN Headline News, which has an opinionated prime-time lineup led by Nancy Grace. But reruns of Dobbs' show didn't do well on HLN, which is more female oriented. Klein said he and Dobbs determined Dobbs was more valuable as a reporter than as a commentator.

The 861,000 people who tune into his 7 p.m. ET newscast on a typical night are down 20 percent from last year, according to Nielsen Media Research. He's still ahead of MSNBC's Chris Matthews in that hour.

"It's very cutthroat," said Janet Keefer, a Drake University journalism professor and former CNN producer. "As long as he isn't doing anything that's driving viewers away, they'll keep him."

Fear could be another factor keeping Dobbs and CNN together.

Dobbs has never been shy about fighting for his point of view. His feud with former CNN chief Rick Kaplan spilled out on the air in 1999 when he objected to having his "Moneyline" show pre-empted for a speech by President Clinton about the Columbine school shootings. "CNN President Rick Kaplan wants us to return to Littleton," he said. Dobbs soon left CNN and returned after Kaplan left.

With Dobbs hosting his own weekday radio show, the thought of him launching anti-CNN missiles every day has to be disconcerting.

It's also not hard to imagine Fox News chief Roger Ailes coveting Dobbs as a prize for his struggling business news network, offering reports to the main news channel as well.

Organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and Media Matters for America have called for CNN to take Dobbs off the air; he's proven a galvanizing and attention-getting force for his critics. At CNN, they're hoping the controversy dies down with the heat of August.

For that, they'll need Lou Dobbs' help.

 
timschochet said:
Lou Dobbs challenges his own CNN network

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Mon Aug 3, 6:46 am ET

NEW YORK – He's become a publicity nightmare for CNN, embarrassed his boss and hosted a show that seemed to contradict the network's "no bias" brand. And on top of all that, his ratings are slipping.

How does Lou Dobbs keep his job?
How fo the CNN "journalists" keep their jobs after having been caught lying?Dobbs' is asking a question - many would say it's a stupid and/or absurd question - but at least he didn't blantantly lie to the American people like his CNN overlords did.

 
Homer J Simpson said:
interestingOne thing I noticed is that the creases on the Kenya Birth Certificate and the Australian one don't match up at all.

If you were to do all of that work to clean up the creases, why wouldn't you change the offficials' names?

At least one blogger is calling for a justice department investigation into the forgery. I hope they get to the bottom of it (I'm confident that they won't)

 
pantagrapher said:
Wow. I'd never seen/heard her before. The Movement couldn't find someone who sounds/comes off a little better?
That's what happen when you have nut-job theory, you get nut-job representation. This ain't rocket science.
Nut-job doesn't have to mean ridiculous accent and annoying sounding voice. I think kaa could do the Movement better, and that he should apply for her position.
 
pantagrapher said:
Wow. I'd never seen/heard her before. The Movement couldn't find someone who sounds/comes off a little better?
That's what happen when you have nut-job theory, you get nut-job representation. This ain't rocket science.
Nut-job doesn't have to mean ridiculous accent and annoying sounding voice.
Apparently it does.
How do you figure?
 
timschochet said:
Lou Dobbs challenges his own CNN network

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Mon Aug 3, 6:46 am ET

NEW YORK – He's become a publicity nightmare for CNN, embarrassed his boss and hosted a show that seemed to contradict the network's "no bias" brand. And on top of all that, his ratings are slipping.

How does Lou Dobbs keep his job?

It's not a simple answer. CNN insists it is standing behind Dobbs, despite calls for his head from critics of his reporting on "birthers" — those who believe President Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States despite convincing evidence to the contrary. The "birthers" believe Obama was born in Kenya, and thus not eligible to be president.

Dobbs' work has been so unpopular that even Ann Coulter has criticized him.

Dobbs has acknowledged that he believes Obama was born in Hawaii. But he gives airtime to disbelievers, and has said the president should try to put questions fully to rest by releasing a long version of his birth certificate. He's twice done stories on his show after the public leak of a memo from CNN U.S. President Jon Klein saying that "it seems this story is dead."

Klein said those stories were OK because they were about the controversy and weren't actually questioning the facts. But critics suggest Klein is parsing words, that even raising the issue lends it credence.

Joked The Washington Post's Lisa de Moraes: it "explains their upcoming documentary: `The World: Flat. We Report — You Decide.'"

Dobbs hasn't made it any easier by using his radio show to fight back at critics, who he called "limp-minded, lily-livered lefty lemmings." He considered going on CNN tormentor Bill O'Reilly's Fox News show to thank him (O'Reilly says the birthers are wrong, but he defended Dobbs' right to talk about it).

"He's embarrassed himself and he's embarrassed CNN," said Brooks Jackson, a former CNN correspondent. "And that's not a good thing for any network that wants to be seen as a reputable, nonpartisan news organization."

So who needs the headache?

Klein said Dobbs does a smart newscast that explores issues that get little in-depth attention elsewhere, such as trade with China, health care funding and the stimulus plan. He suggested Dobbs' CNN work is unfairly lumped in with his unrelated radio show, and that he's judged on the show he did a couple of years ago, when Dobbs became a political target for his campaigning against illegal immigration.

The two men sat down after last year's election to make changes, aware that the anti-immigrant Dobbs' image ran counter to the brand CNN was trying to create. CNN calls itself the network of unbiased reporting compared to conservative commentators on Fox and liberal ones at MSNBC.

Since then, Dobbs has been doing a relatively straight newscast, Klein said.

"He brings more than three decades of experience reporting and broadcasting the news," Klein said, "and that's very valuable to a news network."

Through a spokeswoman, Dobbs said he would not comment for this story. But he is a CNN original. Except for a two-year break a decade ago, he's been with CNN virtually from the network's beginning. Much of that time was spent anchoring a business newscast that made him hugely influential in the business community and immensely valuable to CNN. Old-timers say the desire of advertisers to be connected with Dobbs and Larry King essentially funded the network for years.

Dobbs is considered among the smartest people at CNN, and also the most personally intimidating. For whatever reason — the rise of CNBC as a competitor or a sense that opinionated hosts were the future for cable news — Dobbs morphed from a business anchor to a polarizing populist.

That version of Dobbs seemed better suited for HLN, formerly CNN Headline News, which has an opinionated prime-time lineup led by Nancy Grace. But reruns of Dobbs' show didn't do well on HLN, which is more female oriented. Klein said he and Dobbs determined Dobbs was more valuable as a reporter than as a commentator.

The 861,000 people who tune into his 7 p.m. ET newscast on a typical night are down 20 percent from last year, according to Nielsen Media Research. He's still ahead of MSNBC's Chris Matthews in that hour.

"It's very cutthroat," said Janet Keefer, a Drake University journalism professor and former CNN producer. "As long as he isn't doing anything that's driving viewers away, they'll keep him."

Fear could be another factor keeping Dobbs and CNN together.

Dobbs has never been shy about fighting for his point of view. His feud with former CNN chief Rick Kaplan spilled out on the air in 1999 when he objected to having his "Moneyline" show pre-empted for a speech by President Clinton about the Columbine school shootings. "CNN President Rick Kaplan wants us to return to Littleton," he said. Dobbs soon left CNN and returned after Kaplan left.

With Dobbs hosting his own weekday radio show, the thought of him launching anti-CNN missiles every day has to be disconcerting.

It's also not hard to imagine Fox News chief Roger Ailes coveting Dobbs as a prize for his struggling business news network, offering reports to the main news channel as well.

Organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and Media Matters for America have called for CNN to take Dobbs off the air; he's proven a galvanizing and attention-getting force for his critics. At CNN, they're hoping the controversy dies down with the heat of August.

For that, they'll need Lou Dobbs' help.
How many days/weeks until Dobbs is working for Fox?
 
timschochet said:
Lou Dobbs challenges his own CNN network

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Mon Aug 3, 6:46 am ET

NEW YORK – He's become a publicity nightmare for CNN, embarrassed his boss and hosted a show that seemed to contradict the network's "no bias" brand. And on top of all that, his ratings are slipping.

How does Lou Dobbs keep his job?
How fo the CNN "journalists" keep their jobs after having been caught lying?Dobbs' is asking a question - many would say it's a stupid and/or absurd question - but at least he didn't blantantly lie to the American people like his CNN overlords did.
Just admit you're a birther, Brock.
 
Homer J Simpson said:
interestingOne thing I noticed is that the creases on the Kenya Birth Certificate and the Australian one don't match up at all.

If you were to do all of that work to clean up the creases, why wouldn't you change the offficials' names?

At least one blogger is calling for a justice department investigation into the forgery. I hope they get to the bottom of it (I'm confident that they won't)
I'm glad the bloggers are on top of it. ;)
 
Homer J Simpson said:
interestingOne thing I noticed is that the creases on the Kenya Birth Certificate and the Australian one don't match up at all.

If you were to do all of that work to clean up the creases, why wouldn't you change the offficials' names?

At least one blogger is calling for a justice department investigation into the forgery. I hope they get to the bottom of it (I'm confident that they won't)
I'm glad the bloggers are on top of it. ;)
Takes a blogger to catch a blogger.
 
Homer J Simpson said:
interestingOne thing I noticed is that the creases on the Kenya Birth Certificate and the Australian one don't match up at all.

If you were to do all of that work to clean up the creases, why wouldn't you change the offficials' names?

At least one blogger is calling for a justice department investigation into the forgery. I hope they get to the bottom of it (I'm confident that they won't)
I'm glad the bloggers are on top of it. :goodposting:
Takes a blogger to catch a blogger.
They'll get to the bottom of it like they found the culprit for the yellowcake forgeries....oh that's right, they didn'tor the Bush national guard papers....nope, no luck there

or how the veracity of the Downing Street Memo was ascertained -- nope no luck there all we have are retyped copies as the originals were returned and the photocopies destroyed.

Nope, we'll never find out who's responsible for this forgery either....It'll be just a separate set of "facts" to some faction or other.

The information age has really brought us the age of disinformation and misinformation.

Sen Moynihan used to say, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Nowadays, it seems, you are entitled to your own facts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Homer J Simpson said:
interestingOne thing I noticed is that the creases on the Kenya Birth Certificate and the Australian one don't match up at all.

If you were to do all of that work to clean up the creases, why wouldn't you change the offficials' names?

At least one blogger is calling for a justice department investigation into the forgery. I hope they get to the bottom of it (I'm confident that they won't)
I'm glad the bloggers are on top of it. :thumbdown:
Takes a blogger to catch a blogger.
They'll get to the bottom of it like they found the culprit for the yellowcake forgeries....oh that's right, they didn'tor the Bush national guard papers....nope, no luck there

or how the veracity of the Downing Street Memo was ascertained -- nope no luck there all we have are retyped copies as the originals were returned and the photocopies destroyed.

Nope, we'll never find out who's responsible for this forgery either....It'll be just a separate set of "facts" to some faction or other.

The information age has really brought us the age of disinformation and misinformation.

Sen Moynihan used to say, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Nowadays, it seems, you are entitled to your own facts.
Well said, well spoken. Perhaps one of the most overlooked aspects of the age of communication, something I bring up in every class I teach by the way. Well played sir.

 
timschochet said:
Lou Dobbs challenges his own CNN network

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Mon Aug 3, 6:46 am ET

NEW YORK – He's become a publicity nightmare for CNN, embarrassed his boss and hosted a show that seemed to contradict the network's "no bias" brand. And on top of all that, his ratings are slipping.

How does Lou Dobbs keep his job?
How fo the CNN "journalists" keep their jobs after having been caught lying?Dobbs' is asking a question - many would say it's a stupid and/or absurd question - but at least he didn't blantantly lie to the American people like his CNN overlords did.
Just admit you're a birther, Brock.
Oh no, somebody attacked the liberal ogliarchy that Tim worships..."must react, must defend"
 
I saw Michelle Malkin on some show recently. I found her voice as grating as Ms. Taitz's. For some reason I found Ms. Malkin compelling nonetheless. (She was not speaking on this issue, but was touting some book listing the many many shortcomings of the pres. and his associates.)

 
I saw Michelle Malkin on some show recently. I found her voice as grating as Ms. Taitz's. For some reason I found Ms. Malkin compelling nonetheless. (She was not speaking on this issue, but was touting some book listing the many many shortcomings of the pres. and his associates.)
She's incredibly intelligent, and very passionate. I don't think she's involved in the birther thing, but she's a pitbull on Obama corruption.
 
I saw Michelle Malkin on some show recently. I found her voice as grating as Ms. Taitz's. For some reason I found Ms. Malkin compelling nonetheless. (She was not speaking on this issue, but was touting some book listing the many many shortcomings of the pres. and his associates.)
She's incredibly intelligent, and very passionate. I don't think she's involved in the birther thing, but she's a pitbull on Obama corruption.
She's also way easier on the eyes than ORLY.
 
I saw Michelle Malkin on some show recently. I found her voice as grating as Ms. Taitz's. For some reason I found Ms. Malkin compelling nonetheless. (She was not speaking on this issue, but was touting some book listing the many many shortcomings of the pres. and his associates.)
She's incredibly intelligent, and very passionate. I don't think she's involved in the birther thing, but she's a pitbull on Obama corruption.
I would agree with this, except for the fact that she is a complete idiot. She actually wrote a book entitled, In Defense of Internment, in which she made the argument that the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II was a good idea, and we should consider doing the same thing to Arab Americans after 9/11. And this is the sort of freak whom many conservatives consider an "intellectual". I'll pass.
 
I saw Michelle Malkin on some show recently. I found her voice as grating as Ms. Taitz's. For some reason I found Ms. Malkin compelling nonetheless. (She was not speaking on this issue, but was touting some book listing the many many shortcomings of the pres. and his associates.)
She's incredibly intelligent, and very passionate. I don't think she's involved in the birther thing, but she's a pitbull on Obama corruption.
I would agree with this, except for the fact that she is a complete idiot. She actually wrote a book entitled, In Defense of Internment, in which she made the argument that the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II was a good idea, and we should consider doing the same thing to Arab Americans after 9/11. And this is the sort of freak whom many conservatives consider an "intellectual". I'll pass.
Isn't she Asian?Pat Buchanan is a smart guy too. Doesn't mean I agree with everything he says, unlike you Obama-Robots that think Barry can say or do no wrong.

 
I want to point out something to those of you liberals who are laughing at the high percentage of conservatives who aren't sure where Obama was born. Turns out that back in 2007, a poll was done among Democrats as to whether Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand, and deliberately allowed it to happen. 61% of all Democrats believed this. Can't chalk this one up to racism.

Which just goes to prove something I've suspected for a long time: there's really very little diference between partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans. They're all ####### crazy.

 
I saw Michelle Malkin on some show recently. I found her voice as grating as Ms. Taitz's. For some reason I found Ms. Malkin compelling nonetheless. (She was not speaking on this issue, but was touting some book listing the many many shortcomings of the pres. and his associates.)
She's incredibly intelligent, and very passionate. I don't think she's involved in the birther thing, but she's a pitbull on Obama corruption.
I would agree with this, except for the fact that she is a complete idiot. She actually wrote a book entitled, In Defense of Internment, in which she made the argument that the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II was a good idea, and we should consider doing the same thing to Arab Americans after 9/11. And this is the sort of freak whom many conservatives consider an "intellectual". I'll pass.
Isn't she Asian?Pat Buchanan is a smart guy too. Doesn't mean I agree with everything he says, unlike you Obama-Robots that think Barry can say or do no wrong.
"You Obama-Robots"? Malkin is Filipino.

 
I want to point out something to those of you liberals who are laughing at the high percentage of conservatives who aren't sure where Obama was born. Turns out that back in 2007, a poll was done among Democrats as to whether Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand, and deliberately allowed it to happen. 61% of all Democrats believed this. Can't chalk this one up to racism.Which just goes to prove something I've suspected for a long time: there's really very little diference between partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans. They're all ####### crazy.
Saw that the other day too...the difference was that 26% of Republicans believed it too.
 
I want to point out something to those of you liberals who are laughing at the high percentage of conservatives who aren't sure where Obama was born. Turns out that back in 2007, a poll was done among Democrats as to whether Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand, and deliberately allowed it to happen. 61% of all Democrats believed this. Can't chalk this one up to racism.

Which just goes to prove something I've suspected for a long time: there's really very little diference between partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans. They're all ####### crazy.
This poll? "Did Bush know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?"You guys really need to stretch things to keep up your "both sides do it" facade. And it would be inexcusable for W to have not been aware at some level of the 9/11 attacks before they happened. Of course that is a long way from the lie that that 61% of democrats believe that W deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen as your distortion of the poll results assert.

How do you answer these questions?

"Did Bush know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?"

"Did the CIA know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?"

I would answer I hoped they knew of the plans and did everything they could to prevent the event, but just didn't have enough information to stop it. Since they certainly knew what was going on within 45 minutes of the attacks and seemed to have a good idea as to how to respond (other than flying the president around aimlessly all morning) I'd like to give the administration the benefit of the doubt and answer yes to both of these questions. As far as I see the alternative would be the damnable response. But I only enjoy conspiracy theories for the laughs so I would have missed reading between the lines and connecting the dots that the National Review and other made.

Oh, and to be fair I tend to believe that most of the republicans and southerners that answer yes or not sure to the "birthers" nonsense are just ordinary uninformed, intellectually lazy, indifferent folks that swayed by the noise around them. This is what both sides really have in common.

 
I want to point out something to those of you liberals who are laughing at the high percentage of conservatives who aren't sure where Obama was born. Turns out that back in 2007, a poll was done among Democrats as to whether Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand, and deliberately allowed it to happen. 61% of all Democrats believed this. Can't chalk this one up to racism.

Which just goes to prove something I've suspected for a long time: there's really very little diference between partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans. They're all ####### crazy.
This poll? "Did Bush know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?"You guys really need to stretch things to keep up your "both sides do it" facade. And it would be inexcusable for W to have not been aware at some level of the 9/11 attacks before they happened. Of course that is a long way from the lie that that 61% of democrats believe that W deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen as your distortion of the poll results assert.

How do you answer these questions?

"Did Bush know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?"

"Did the CIA know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?"

I would answer I hoped they knew of the plans and did everything they could to prevent the event, but just didn't have enough information to stop it. Since they certainly knew what was going on within 45 minutes of the attacks and seemed to have a good idea as to how to respond (other than flying the president around aimlessly all morning) I'd like to give the administration the benefit of the doubt and answer yes to both of these questions. As far as I see the alternative would be the damnable response. But I only enjoy conspiracy theories for the laughs so I would have missed reading between the lines and connecting the dots that the National Review and other made.

Oh, and to be fair I tend to believe that most of the republicans and southerners that answer yes or not sure to the "birthers" nonsense are just ordinary uninformed, intellectually lazy, indifferent folks that swayed by the noise around them. This is what both sides really have in common.
Not sure what you mean by "you guys". I saw the poll reported on Hardball by Chris Matthews. and he gave the impression that it concerned the 9/11 Truther conspiracy, not whether Bush should have known, which is what you seem to be implying. I thought that was of note and posted it. To me most conspiracy theories are similar in nature. Besides the Truthers, liberals have bellieved in many conspiracies in the past, including the most famous of all: the JFK assassination.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure what you mean by "you guys". I saw the poll reported on Hardball by Chris Matthews. and he gave the impression that it concerned the 9/11 Truther conspiracy, not whether Bush should have known, which is what you seem to be implying. I thought that was of note and posted it.

To me most conspiracy theories are similar in nature. Besides the Truthers, liberals have bellieved in many conspiracies in the past, including the most famous of all: the JFK assassination.
How about guys that just jump to conclusions and don't bother to take ten seconds to see if what they are repeating has any basis in fact, and if it does whether there is any context?I never said that liberals were immune to conspiracy theories, especially those concerning a Bush.

 
interestingOne thing I noticed is that the creases on the Kenya Birth Certificate and the Australian one don't match up at all.

If you were to do all of that work to clean up the creases, why wouldn't you change the offficials' names?

At least one blogger is calling for a justice department investigation into the forgery. I hope they get to the bottom of it (I'm confident that they won't)
I'm glad the bloggers are on top of it. :goodposting:
Takes a blogger to catch a blogger.
They'll get to the bottom of it like they found the culprit for the yellowcake forgeries....oh that's right, they didn'tor the Bush national guard papers....nope, no luck there

or how the veracity of the Downing Street Memo was ascertained -- nope no luck there all we have are retyped copies as the originals were returned and the photocopies destroyed.

Nope, we'll never find out who's responsible for this forgery either....It'll be just a separate set of "facts" to some faction or other.

The information age has really brought us the age of disinformation and misinformation.

Sen Moynihan used to say, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Nowadays, it seems, you are entitled to your own facts.
Forger revealed. (sort of)lol

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top