Good intentions v. good tactics

What's going on in Washington, D.C.?

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Topic author
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: Good intentions v. good tactics

#61

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

Okay, this thread is so far off the topic, that it's going to be closed if this continues for even one more off-topic post. Anyone who doesn't want to believe what I posted is free to believe or not believe, I frankly don't care in the least. If you don't understand why I can't post confidential NRA information on a public website, then there's nothing I can say.

Chas.
User avatar

VMI77
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 6096
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Victoria, Texas

Re: Good intentions v. good tactics

#62

Post by VMI77 »

K.Mooneyham wrote:Someone made a statement to the effect that the news media used to be more honest, etc. I severely disagree. I've said this before, but Walter Cronkite comes to mind INSTANTLY when I hear that sort of thing. He was one of the main reasons why the American populace was convinced that the war in Vietnam was lost after Tet '68 when in reality, the Viet Cong were all but destroyed as a cohesive fighting force. And that is merely one example of the perfidy of the old media. They are and have been, by and large, a bunch of lying snakes, all the way back to William Randolph Hurst and his yellow journalism...and they are, by and large, more tied in with the increasingly nanny-state authoritarian establishment than ever. Just to keep this firearms related, who constantly bangs the drum for gun control, makes firearms owners look evil, vilifies the NRA, and scares the non-firearms owning public with thoughts that they are all in non-stop danger of being gunned down with "assault weapons"? The mass media machine, that's who. I trust any of them as far as I can pick 'em up and toss 'em, as my grandpa used to say.
What passes for "news media" have always been liars and scoundrels throughout history --back as far as there is any recorded history. And there have always been "reporters" on the government payroll. The perfidious British provide a stunning example:
Archived documents have revealed that Mussolini got his start in politics in 1917 with the help of a £100 weekly wage from MI5.

For the British intelligence agency, it must have seemed like a good investment. Mussolini, then a 34-year-old journalist, was not just willing to ensure Italy continued to fight alongside the allies in the first world war by publishing propaganda in his paper. He was also willing to send in the boys to "persuade'' peace protesters to stay at home.
That was a lot of money back in 1917.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/o ... -mi5-italy
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."

From the WeaponsMan blog, weaponsman.com
Locked

Return to “Federal”