July 10, 2004
MURDOCH NAMED AS SOURCE ... AGAIN
The Melbourne Age (via the New York Times) catches up on some old news:
When the New York Post tore up its front page on Monday night to trumpet an apparent exclusive that Dick Gephardt would be Senator John Kerry's vice-presidential running mate, the newspaper based its decision on a seemingly unimpeachable source: Rupert Murdoch, the man who controls the company that owns the Post, an employee said on Thursday.
Posted by Tim Blair at July 10, 2004 11:09 AMRupert Murdoch, chief of News Corp, has denied he was the source for a front page "exclusive" story in his New York Post that wrongly named US Representative Dick Gephardt as Democrat John Kerry's choice as his No. 2 in the November US presidential election.
Mr Murdoch yesterday told reporters at the Allen & Co. annual retreat for media executives in Sun Valley, Idaho, that he was not the one who telephoned in the tip, adding that he had occasionally called in items for its page six gossip column.
Hello Tim. I have written to you on various occasions but don't get a reply, I am uncertain whether you receive my emails or not, so I thought I would leave you a message here.
Thank you for your mention of us on your site and in the Bulletin. Please don't think I am complaining, but the very day you mentioned us the site was hacked into and everything was deleted. Everything. Not to worry, it's 90% back up and running. It took us a few days to get to the bottom of it you see.
Thanks again for your plug, I just thought you should know why the site has been unavailable since.
PS. Naturally there may be no connection at all between your plug and the hacking, it just seemed co incidental.
I like vegemite and cats too.
Where I live the Murdoch owned daily publishes mostly left wing gibberish from its legion of caring readers. The letters page is useful for the kitty litter tray.
You have deviated from the "Murdoch Is Master Of The Right Wing Media Cabal" Party Line, Observer, you are banished to the salt mines.
Posted by: Sortelli at July 10, 2004 at 05:33 PMHello Tim , I have tried to contact you on several occasions, but to no avail.
After placing a comment on your site in mid June.
My wifes cat came down with feline distemper.
Now I'm not saying that you had anything to do with it, it just seems odd , that's all.
Now there might not be any connection.
It just seemed coinidental..
So the NY Post made an error. A large error, sure, but just an error. When an error is made and it's admitted, corrected as needed, and doesn't happen all the time .. I don't have too much of a problem.
It's far worse when a paper allows repeated errors (like Bush's turkey), never corrects the errors and doesn't seem to care at all when errors are pointed out.
Posted by: Chris Josephson at July 10, 2004 at 06:59 PMDear Tim, So the US govt admit that they invaded Iraq illegally, and John Howard also reckons it was the right thing to do! Good on him. Yes, there will be critics of Howard's stance, but they have no sense of history or justice.
When Hitler invaded Poland and Israel invaded Lebanon, this was also most enlightened, bringing greater security to the rest of the world.
So Timbo, I demand that you defend the right of Zionists to have nucular (Bush's term, not mine) weapons in Palestine, to demean the citizens of Palestine, to being a brave new world of peace and hope to the Middle East, to rip unborn babies from the wombs of Palestinian women, to murder children in their beds. Go for it Tim - truth, justice and the American Way demand it. Love, Offie
Posted by: Offenbark at July 10, 2004 at 08:12 PMIt looks like Channel Ten has been taken over by the ABC. How's this for a headline on their 5pm news today:
"Israel's Version of the Berlin Wall Set to Fall"
I guess this is basically correct, except for the minor fact that Israel's wall is meant to keep suicide bombers and other murderering terrorist thugs out of the only free democratic country in the Middle East and prevent them from killing innocent civilians, whereas the Berlin Wall was built by one of the most bloodthirsty regimes in history to keep people from escaping the brutality of communism.
In other words, one is designed to keep the bad guys out, whereas the other was designed to keep the good guys in. Other than that, the headline is basically right, right?
The only consolation is that I'm not forced to pay to watch Ten, whereas this is not true of the ABC.
Posted by: Alex Robson at July 10, 2004 at 09:13 PMPff, Alex, weren't you here when Jack Strocchi proved to us all that there was no anti-semetism on the left? Therefore there was no crazy comparison between the security fense and the Berlin Wall. You're making it up. Jack wouldn't lie to us! [/sarcasm]
Posted by: Sortelli at July 10, 2004 at 09:56 PMHey Tim, I have written to you on various occasions but don't get a reply, I am uncertain whether you receive my emails or not, so I thought I would leave you a message here.
Thank you for your mention of me on your site and in the Bulletin. Please don't think I am complaining, but the very day you mentioned me these villains, and in particular the villain Bush, said they had struck Iraq with 40 cruise missiles to assassinate President Saddam Hussein.
Thanks again for your plug, I just thought you should know whenever we attack, they retreat. When we pound them with missiles and heavy artillery, they retreat even deeper.
U.S. forces learned a lesson last night they will never forget. We slaughtered them and will continue to slaughter them. We have killed most of the infidels, and I think we will finish off the rest soon.
PS. Naturally there may be no connection at all between your plug and the invasion, it just seemed so incidental.
"Dear Tim, So the US govt admit that they invaded Iraq illegally, and John Howard also reckons it was the right thing to do! Good on him. Yes, there will be critics of Howard's stance, but they have no sense of history or justice."
I'm thinking that you meant this to be on some other thread entirely. And the invasion was illegal? Not according to the 14 UN resolutions preceding it. I bet you love the UN--so don't deride them!
"When Hitler invaded Poland and Israel invaded Lebanon, this was also most enlightened, bringing greater security to the rest of the world."
Wow. You didn't even put in a comma between Hilter and Israel! You must be a member of the Church of the Sub-Genius--no, wait, Bob would have you killed for that kind of simplistic thinking.
"So Timbo, I demand that you defend the right of Zionists to have nucular (Bush's term, not mine) weapons in Palestine, to demean the citizens of Palestine, to being a brave new world of peace and hope to the Middle East, to rip unborn babies from the wombs of Palestinian women, to murder children in their beds. Go for it Tim - truth, justice and the American Way demand it. Love, Offie"
What is with this "Timbo" thing? Is it Australian for "I'm going to play with your name, which is a thing most people get out of their systems after the 3rd grade"? Incidentally, the people at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission pronouce the word Nu-Ku-Lar, too, and they oughta know. And, how does one "demean" people, anyway? Oh, and Bush is not an abortionist, so I don't get that (and I'm Pro-Choice, but I'm sure you'll not let that get in the way of any mental retorts you might have). And the only children in that area of whom I've heard being murdered in their beds are Israelis ones. Do you have any factual sites?
"Posted by: Offenbark at July 10, 2004 at 08:12 PM"
And no bite to speak of.
Wow. You didn't even put in a comma between Hilter and Israel!
Why would he? As anyone sophistimacated knows, Hitler plus Israel equals the USA.
And you're next Offenbark!!!! Cower before my American Evil!!!!! Mwahahahahaha! Etc.
Posted by: David [.net] at July 11, 2004 at 06:27 AM"As anyone sophistimacated knows, Hitler plus Israel equals the USA."
Really?
I always thought it was Sharon + Bush = Hitler.
Or was it Bush + Hitler = Israel?
Or was it Cheney + Sharon = Bush?
Or was it (Bush + Blair + Howard) / Chirac = Sharon?
Argh, I'm so confused, little help here!!! (And the "+", "/" and "=" should be simple for me, I have an accounting degree.)
Okay, let's take it from the top.
Hitler + Israel = USA
Sharon + Bush = Hitler
Therefore:
Sharon + Bush + Israel = USA
If Cheney + Sharon = Bush
Then:
Sharon + Cheney + Sharon + Israel = USA
or Cheney + 2(Sharon) + Israel = USA
If (Bush + Blair + Howard)/Chirac = Sharon
Then:
Cheney + 2((Sharon + Cheney + Blair + Howard)/Chirac) + Israel = USA
But, Cheney = Haliburton = Oiiiiiiillll
Then:
Oiiiiiillll + 2((Sharon + Oiiiiilll + Blair + Howard)/Chirac) + Israel = USA
Owww. My head hurts
Jay
LOL
Beware the dangers of moonbat arithmetic.
Offenbutt is probably off on some lefty board right now weeping "Those crazy right wingers, they talk about equating Isreal with Hitler like it was a bad thing!!! What's wrong with them????"
Posted by: Sortelli at July 11, 2004 at 09:14 AMHello Tim , I have not tried to contact you on several occasions, but to no avail.
After repeatedly commenting on your site, I lost 20 lbs, my car stopped making strange noises, and my girlfriend's breasts grew half a cup size.
Now I'm not saying that you had anything to do with it, it just seems odd , that's all.
Now there might not be any connection.
It just seemed coinidental... and thanks. ;-)
No, no, no....
Bush = Hitler
Sharon = Hitler
Rumsfeld = Hitler
Cheney = Hitler
Therefore, Bush = Cheney = Sharon = Rumsfeld
Now, therefore the US is ruled by a sinister triad of Cheneys.
Posted by: Quentin George at July 11, 2004 at 10:37 AMAnd to think that when I was younger the whole thing was so much simpler. Basically it was:
Stalin = Hitler
Mao = Hitler
Pol Pot = Hitler
And, of course
Hitler = Hitler
In other words, to fulfill the "= Hitler" part of the quotient, a tyrant had to have murdered 1,000,000 or more innocent people.
Ever since they've introduced the new "moonbat arithmetic", just about anyone the left doesn't like can fulfill the "= Hitler" part of the quotient, I guess.
Posted by: David Crawford at July 11, 2004 at 11:20 AMDavid Crawford = Hitler
How dare you question the Moonbats!
;-)
Posted by: Quentin George at July 11, 2004 at 12:11 PMThis thread needs more vegemite!!!
I just went to the Amish Market [no actual Amish] here in Turtle Bay [no actual turtles or bay], NYC. They had some piece of promotial material taped up by the Marmite with bullet points about it, the second one like this:
* The unique taste causes strongly polarised reactions.
If Marmite is polarizing, what about Vegemite? These things are antipodean. It doesn't get more polarized then that.
Bush = Polarizing
Vegemite = Polarising
Bush = Vegemite
Vegemite = Hitler
Is there anything Bush+Hitler doesn't equal? I'm just asking 'cause there's some people here askin' questions. I didn't tell 'em nuttin'.
Yo, Vinny? Where's the vino?
Posted by: MortifiedPenguin at July 11, 2004 at 01:39 PMNo, No, No, your math is all wrong. The only math I needed to remember when I was in the White House was the answer to the formula:
b4i √u ru/16?
Posted by: Slick Willy at July 11, 2004 at 05:39 PMWilly,
Good to know you avoided the jail bait. That's about the only limitation you recognized, eh?
I do hope we don't elect any more presidents who view the Presidency primarily as an aphrodesiac.
Posted by: Michael Lonie at July 12, 2004 at 12:13 PM