Good Question Here

Adam's Apple

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2004
4,092
452
48
12 DOWN: TOP SECRET WAR PLANS
36 ACROSS: TREASON

By Ann Coulter
June 28, 2006

When is The New York Times going to get around to uncovering an al-Qaida secret program? (not in our lifetimes, Ann)

In the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government anti-terrorism operations that have been revealed by the Times, last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the U.S.

In response, the Bush administration is sounding very cross — and doing nothing. Bush wouldn't want to get the press mad at him! Yeah, let's keep the media on our good side like they are now. Otherwise, they might do something crazy — like leak a classified government program monitoring terrorist financing.

National Review has boldly called for the revocation of the Times' White House press pass! If the Times starts publishing troop movements, National Review will go whole hog and demand that the paper's water cooler privileges be revoked. Then there's always the "nuclear option": disinviting Maureen Dowd from the next White House Correspondents' Dinner.

Meanwhile, the one congressman who has called for any sort of criminal investigation is being treated like a nut. Don't get me wrong: Congressman Peter King is nuttier than squirrel droppings — but he's right on this.

Unless, that is, the country has simply abolished the concept of treason. We've got a lot of liberals who hate the country and are itching to aid the enemy, so what are you going to do? Indict the entire editorial board of The New York Times? (Actually, that wouldn't be a bad place to start, now that I ask.)

Maybe treason ended during the Vietnam War when Jane Fonda sat laughing and clapping on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down American pilots. She came home and resumed her work as a big movie star without the slightest fear of facing any sort of legal sanction.

Fast forward to today, when New York Times publisher "Pinch" Sulzberger has just been named al-Qaida's "Employee of the Month" for the
12th straight month.

Before the Vietnam War, this country took treason seriously. But now we're told newspapers have a right to commit treason because of "freedom of the press." Liberals invoke "freedom of the press" like some talismanic formulation that requires us all to fall prostrate in religious ecstasy. On liberals' theory of the First Amendment, the safest place for Osama bin Laden isn't in Afghanistan or Pakistan; it's in The New York Times building. (AMENNNNNNNNN!)

for full article:
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi
 
Ann just asked a simple question: when is the NYT going to gear up its great "investigative" machine and publish some articles for us to read about Al Quada's secret operations? That would only be fair, right?
 
Adam's Apple said:
Ann just asked a simple question: when is the NYT going to gear up its great "investigative" machine and publish some articles for us to read about Al Quada's secret operations? That would only be fair, right?

Yeah, because, you know, AQ is such a transparent organisation. Their UN representative is very forthcoming, not to mention their head of state and ambassador(s) etc. What next, we'll compare skin heads to GOPers or the Looney Left to the Dems? Hey! I know! Let's talk about the KKK in the same sentence as George Bush or the Animal Liberation Front on the same sentence as Howard Dean while we're at it!
 
Dr Grump said:
Yeah, because, you know, AQ is such a transparent organisation. Their UN representative is very forthcoming, not to mention their head of state and ambassador(s) etc. What next, we'll compare skin heads to GOPers or the Looney Left to the Dems? Hey! I know! Let's talk about the KKK in the same sentence as George Bush or the Animal Liberation Front on the same sentence as Howard Dean while we're at it!

Not even a mediocre deflection.:lame2:

The point you ignore, is that the media in this Nation could at least make an attempt to villify the REAL criminals for things they ACTUALLY do rather than making up half the crap they print attempting to villify Bush and/or his Administration.
 
Are you dodging the question by implying that the NYT has absolutely no capability to learn and publish the secrets of AQ? And the libs would have us believe that the NYT is positively the best investigative force in the world. :D
 
PsuedoGhost said:
You had me going till I saw, Ann Coulter, at which point I stopped reading.

The exact attitude that shows your horizons are narrow. Instead of thinking that F911 was bullshit, I saw the flick for myself and determined it was bullshit. Never be afraid to face your enemy, you might learn something.
 
pegwinn said:
The exact attitude that shows your horizons are narrow. Instead of thinking that F911 was bullshit, I saw the flick for myself and determined it was bullshit. Never be afraid to face your enemy, you might learn something.

Oh no, I've read about half a page of Ann Coulter, and that was enough to determine that all she was full of is a combination of bullshit and hot air. Her time will pass no doubt, but there is no single person who is more divisive and mean spirited than Ann Coulter. Fracturing the United States into liberals and conservatives is really helping all of us. It really is.
 
PsuedoGhost said:
Oh no, I've read about half a page of Ann Coulter, and that was enough to determine that all she was full of is a combination of bullshit and hot air. Her time will pass no doubt, but there is no single person who is more divisive and mean spirited than Ann Coulter. Fracturing the United States into liberals and conservatives is really helping all of us. It really is.

I'm not a big fan of any of the pundits but for sheer hatred you should try Alex Bennet or Jerry Springer. Lynn Samuels is up there as well. They match Ann hate for hate but don't have the skill to market it as well.
 

Forum List

Back
Top