New York Slimes getting spanked for another Walter Duranty quality article.


In 1932 Walter Duranty won a Pulitzer prize for a series of articles he wrote about Joesph Stalin’s murderous Soviet Union. No, Duranty didn’t tell the truth about Stalin’s Soviet Union, he lied his ass off. To this day the New York Slime still stands firmly behind what the entire world now knows were Duranty’s lies. The New York Slimes is actually proud of the lies that Duranty told, those lies are the basic foundation of the Socialist beliefs of the majority of America’s so called Mainstream Media personal ideological beliefs.

Lying to advance their Socialist/Marxist ideology is nothing new, certainly not for the New York Slimes. They have been doing it for nearly 3/4th of a century now. It is the natural consequence of believing that you are so much smarter than everyone else and that everyone else is to stupid to make the right decisions if left to their own devices, and having no actual morals and ethics, save the belief that the end justifies the means.

To quote CS Lewis:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

CS Lewis perfectly described the American Socialist/Marxist movement. Way up at the top of the list of advocates and propaganda meisters of that American Socialist/Marxist movement, is none other than the New York Slimes. For exacly who these Socialist/Marxist advocates are, see JournoList (sometimes referred to as the J-List).

‘Completely false’: Sources on ground in Benghazi challenge NYT report

Fifteen months after the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, the narrative of the attack continues to be shaped, and reshaped, by politicians and the press.

But a New York Times report published over the weekend has angered sources who were on the ground that night. Those sources, who continue to face threats of losing their jobs, sharply challenged the Times’ findings that there was no involvement from Al Qaeda or any other international terror group and that an anti-Islam film played a role in inciting the initial wave of attacks.

“It was a coordinated attack. It is completely false to say anything else. … It is completely a lie,” one witness to the attack told Fox News.

Sean Smith, a foreign service officer, and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were also killed in the 2012 assault.

The controversial Times report has stirred a community that normally remains out of sight and wrestles with how to reveal the truth, without revealing classified information.

Fox News has learned that the attack on the consulate started with fighters assembling to conduct an assault.

“Guys were coming into the compound, moving left, moving right…and using IMT (individual movement techniques). … That’s not a spontaneous attack,” one special operator said.

“One guy was shooting, one guy was running. There are guys watching the gates. … The bosses on the ground were pointing, commanding and coordinating — that is a direct action planned attack.”

New York Times Contradicts Own Reporting on Benghazi

Either New York Times writer David Kirkpatrick is ignoring his own colleagues’ work, or the Hillary Clinton supporters are laying out early foundations to combat what will be the biggest criticism of her tenure as Secretary of State if she decides to run for the Oval Office.

The New York Times’ assertion that Al Qaeda’s involvement in the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi is particularly questionable considering the preponderance of evidence that shows otherwise.

In his piece, Kirkpatrick writes, ”But the Republican arguments appear to conflate purely local extremist organizations like Ansar al-Shariah with Al Qaeda’s international terrorist network. The only intelligence connecting Al Qaeda to the attack was an intercepted phone call that night from a participant in the first wave of the attack to a friend in another African country who had ties to members of Al Qaeda, according to several officials briefed on the call,” he claims. “But when the friend heard the attacker’s boasts, he sounded astonished, the officials said, suggesting he had no prior knowledge of the assault.”

A September 2012 P.J. Media piece by Patrick Poole shows how bizarre the recent New York Times piece’s attempt to downplay Libya’s Ansar al-shariah’s connection to Al Qaeda. At the time, Fox News reported that Abu Sufyan Bin Qumu, a former GITMO detainee and head of Ansar al-Shariah, was on the ground in Benghazi the week of the attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans:

A former Guantanamo Bay detainee with Al Qaeda ties was in Benghazi the night of the Sept. 11 attack, according to a source on the ground in Libya.

The source told Fox News that ex-detainee Sufian bin Qumu, who is suspected of running camps in eastern Libya where some of the assailants trained, is also a “respected member” of Ansar al-Sharia — one of the Islamist groups identified in State Department email traffic two hours after the attack.

Two sources familiar with the investigation, when asked about bin Qumu’s whereabouts the night of the attack, did not dispute the claim he was in Benghazi.

While it is not clear whether bin Qumu was directing the assault, his security file from Guantanamo may be revealing. Having already trained in Usama bin Laden’s camps, in 1998 bin Qumu joined the Taliban in Pakistan and “communicated with likely extremist elements via radio during this period indicating a position of leadership,” the file shows.

Not that any of this diminishes the credibility of the New York Slimes, since they obliterated anything they might have had that resembled integrity or credibility way back in 1932.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s