HT to Hugh Hewitt. Usually I don't get around to looking at the LA Times 'til around noon, but thanks to Hugh's impassioned denunciation, I've already read one of the worst pieces of propaganda ever to appear in The Times' pages -- and that's saying something, believe me.
The entire piece about North Korea is composed of "happy talk" and spin from an anonymous North Korean former diplomat -- was he reluctant to allow his name to appear lest he be identified as a well-known Kim Jung-Il spy or apparatchik? And why would The Times' accede to such a request? It's not like he's criticizing the "Dear Leader," you know.
The piece defies belief. There is no attempt at balance -- no attempt to acquaint people with the very real and serious abuses perpetrated by the evil North Korean regime (and yes, it is evil). Editors at the Times should have checked out pieces like the following ones here (detailing eyewitness accounts of atrocities committed in N.K.'s concentration camps); here (Chuck Coulson recounts how a popular singer was raped and imprisoned merely for singing a South Korean song on television); here (Time mag article: "Evil, Yes; Genius, No") or here (CBS News piece on how "The Diary of Anne Frank" is used to foment hatred of America).
As the snippy newsman once played by David Spade on "Saturday Night Live" might have said, "It's called reporting. Look into it." Instead, the paper settled for printing a line of self-serving garbage from the tyrants in the North Korean government.
It's common knowledge that The Times is politically biased. It's clear that The Times is morally and ethically biased, too -- and not in the right direction.
For shame. When the crude-mouthed puppeteers of "Team America" have a clearer moral sense of what Kim Jung Il's all about than one of America's "premier" daily papers, it's a sad commentary, indeed.
The entire piece about North Korea is composed of "happy talk" and spin from an anonymous North Korean former diplomat -- was he reluctant to allow his name to appear lest he be identified as a well-known Kim Jung-Il spy or apparatchik? And why would The Times' accede to such a request? It's not like he's criticizing the "Dear Leader," you know.
The piece defies belief. There is no attempt at balance -- no attempt to acquaint people with the very real and serious abuses perpetrated by the evil North Korean regime (and yes, it is evil). Editors at the Times should have checked out pieces like the following ones here (detailing eyewitness accounts of atrocities committed in N.K.'s concentration camps); here (Chuck Coulson recounts how a popular singer was raped and imprisoned merely for singing a South Korean song on television); here (Time mag article: "Evil, Yes; Genius, No") or here (CBS News piece on how "The Diary of Anne Frank" is used to foment hatred of America).
As the snippy newsman once played by David Spade on "Saturday Night Live" might have said, "It's called reporting. Look into it." Instead, the paper settled for printing a line of self-serving garbage from the tyrants in the North Korean government.
It's common knowledge that The Times is politically biased. It's clear that The Times is morally and ethically biased, too -- and not in the right direction.
For shame. When the crude-mouthed puppeteers of "Team America" have a clearer moral sense of what Kim Jung Il's all about than one of America's "premier" daily papers, it's a sad commentary, indeed.
posted by LadybugUSA at 9:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home