Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMurdoch’s NYPost Today Backs Michael Moore Bush-Saudi Claims from “Fahrenheit 911″
Murdochs NYPost Today Backs Michael Moore Bush-Saudi Claims from Fahrenheit 911″
Roger Friedman - Dec 15, 2013
http://www.showbiz411.com/2013/12/15/murdochs-nypost-today-backs-michael-moore-bush-saudi-claims-from-fahrenheit-911
Shock: todays Murdoch owned highly conservative New York Post features an opinion piece backing Michael Michael Moores Bush-Saudi claims from Fahrenheit 911. Its the main story on the Posts website with a huge photo and prominent placement. The story is also featured in a color block headline on the front page of todays paper.
Moore must get a lot of satisfaction out of this. Its only taken a decade for a conservative pundit writing in a conservative newspaper to endorse his movie.
Indeed, Paul Sperrys editorial is a direct echo of a 2003 Vanity Fair story by Craig Unger, author of the book that was the underlying information for the Oscar winning movie. That book was called House of Bush, House of Saud .................
Sperry writes:
President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report. Text isnt just blacked-out here and there in this critical-yet-missing middle section. The pages are completely blank, except for dotted lines where an estimated 7,200 words once stood (this story by comparison is about 1,000 words).
A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are absolutely shocked at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks. ..............
Moore must get a lot of satisfaction out of this. Its only taken a decade for a conservative pundit writing in a conservative newspaper to endorse his movie.
Indeed, Paul Sperrys editorial is a direct echo of a 2003 Vanity Fair story by Craig Unger, author of the book that was the underlying information for the Oscar winning movie. That book was called House of Bush, House of Saud .................
Sperry writes:
President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report. Text isnt just blacked-out here and there in this critical-yet-missing middle section. The pages are completely blank, except for dotted lines where an estimated 7,200 words once stood (this story by comparison is about 1,000 words).
A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are absolutely shocked at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks. ..............
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 827 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (10)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Murdoch’s NYPost Today Backs Michael Moore Bush-Saudi Claims from “Fahrenheit 911″ (Original Post)
Coyotl
Dec 2013
OP
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)1. What gives? Whats the Post's game here?
I don't particularly doubt the truth of certain allegations that are generally relegated to the CT Forum, but why is a Murdoch rag pushing it?
Any ideas? Theories?
msongs
(67,459 posts)2. maybe to sell newspapers and hike website page views? nt
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)3. Because this is back in the news
Maybe there is a story we don't know yet, but they do? Murdoch has ears, you know!
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)4. But what's their interest in pushing the story?
They don't run stuff that doesn't advance their grander scheme.