Why is the New York Times Fighting on the side of the Terrorists?

Answer 1

because they are really a bunch of terrorists in disguise...at least that's my theory...

Answer 2

Why only the NY times, where is the LA times, the wall street journal.

Why did George Bush declare, he would be tracking and cracking down on terrorist bank transactions in early speeches.

Why do repulblican not complain about all leaks, for example where's the love for Judith Miller?

The troubling part of both question and answers is that you set up a strawman for them to attack, meaning your question implies that news papers are assisting terrorist organizations. hence treason.....

That is misleading and not the real issue at heart. The real issue is that the government tracks everyone.

This is the issue at heart the right of people to privacy, versus the right of government to collect infromation without probal cause for an infinite amount of time.

Why infinite because you can not get a surrender or peace treaty against the war on terror, because terror is a tatic not a nation state.

The questinon again remains if the media does not report on the government and its potential deminising of the 4th amendment rights along with the Superme Courts conclusion that privacy is implicit.
At what point does the press remain quite, the press has an obligation to provide people with facts, so they can choose thier leaders or hold them accountable, the press is the fourth estate....without them how can we protect our freedoms...


At what point does america stop being the democracy and begin to look like the countries invade to give freedom too.

The question is not freedom of the press but the obligation of the New papers to tell, warn, alert, save, rally, inform the people that there is a serious danger looming not from terrorist but from our own government.

Again the real question is shouldn't newspaper do thier job and serve the people when government attempts to overreach it power especially in a perpetual war with no end.

The president swore an oath to uphold the constitution...he has failed.

Answer 3

In case you haven't figured it out yet, WE ARE THE TERRORISTS. In this supposed war on terror, we have killed so many people without reason that it completely eclipses the number of people killed in 9/11. Also, it is not wrong or "liberal" to be against what the government and what it is doing right now (even though I do consider myself liberal). Such legislation as has most recently been passed tries to stop people from speaking freely and not being tracked and watched by the government (yeah, there's Orwell again. He always comes into my political argument somewhere. But seriously, we ARE being tracked. What about when verizon sold their phone records to the government?). This goes directly against the constitution that this country is supposedly based on. If I am against such legislation, I am more of a patriot than anyone who claims that I am not.
Also, your heading says that the New York Times is "fighting" or is on the side of the "terrorists." Since when? And if it was fighting (since when do newspapers "fight", anyway? Don't you have to be sentient to do that? WORD CHOICE, people, WORD CHOICE!!!!), wouldn't that mean treason? As far as I know, the New York Times hasn't killed anyone (on second thought hmmmmm... let me rephrase that.) As far as I know, the New York Times hasn't terrorized anyone (no, that won't work either. Try again.) As far as I know, the New York Times hasn't been in league with any terrorists. You really will say anything, won't you?

Answer 4

The fact that you asked this question proves that you are not willing to accept a true answer......You are clearly asking so that one of your fascist brothers can agree with you about how evil people dont trust the government...and everyone that doesnt believe in Dictator Bush is evil and a terrorist...But what the hell I will try in futlity......Now while in this time of War all autority is given to the prince of darkness....excuse me the president...He can without warrant monitor whoever he so chooses he can listen in on phone calls internet and have whoever he so chooses labeled a terrorist and carted off to Cuba and be held with out due process and whoever shall disagree with this is a terrorist...We no longer have civil liberites nor should we ...we should concede all these in the name of the war on terror and all frees press should be halted or people might figure out that they are no longer in a free country but a Bush ditatorship...WHO NEEDS CIVIL LIBERITES AND FREE PRESS WE ALL TRUST IN LORD BUSH AS LORD AN SAVIOR...

Answer 5

Because, not a lot of people know this, but Osama Bin laden actually owns the New York Times. He also has a vested interest in Air America and Citigroup. He's working on a deal to buy the company that protects our ports, too.

Answer 6

Why was the Chicago Sun fighting on the side of terrorists when they leaked the secret identity of Valerie Plame, and why didn't the Bush Adminstration do something about THAT?

Answer 7

What a moronic attempt to lie ---can't even call it skewing the facts.. FYI,Boob, Dubya mentioned the fact, in PUBLIC SPEECHES, that they were inspecting the bank records of various suspects of Al Queda a couple of years ago. The reason this is in the press is because there has been an ABUSE of this "inspection of suspects" in that virtually anyone that is a Bush dissenter has been unreasonably investigated. Try watching something more fact based besides FOX's SPARE and UNBALANCED.

Answer 8

Yeah, WHERE was the White House on the Valerie Plame issue Ethan M??

That was one of our agents, and we found out later Joseph Wilson was right, correct?

How come no Bush reaction on that, which is CLEARLY a felony and has been traced back to the VP's office??

Answer 9

Ethan M. - ohhh on not you again, you are always on here getting pissed off because the liberals are exposing your president for what he is , a bumbling buffoon who is really nothing more than a puppet for oil and other corporate lobbyists that are deadset on eating the young and destroying the earth for the sheer enjoyment of it. Go back to Neoconland.

Answer 10

I didn't think the Times of New York supported this administration or Israel. I suppose you Republicans will say anything to bolster your arguments.

Answer 11

hhmm I doubt they fight on the side of terrorist, I think they are disagreeing with Bush or do not support bush fascist ideology and so it does ppear that not every ones at the NY times are fascist obviously