A Journalistic Cover-Up


In the summer of 2003, Operation Predator was launched by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agency. The investigation has targeted individuals who make and consume child pornography worldwide. Because much of this stuff is manufactured overseas and shipped to America, ICE agents took the lead in tracking down the bad guys in the USA.

In case you don't know, child pornography features children from infants on up, being raped in a variety of ways by adults. It is expensive to purchase and, because of the Internet, the distribution of this evil material has become easy. Have a credit card, you can get it.

According to ICE agents, one of those who used a credit card to purchase child porn is attorney Charles Rust-Tierney, the former President of the American Civil Liberties Union in Virginia. Tierney was arrested and charged on February 23rd.

Tierney apparently told the feds that he paid for the child porn using a PayPal account and then downloaded images of prepubescent girls being violently raped onto CD-ROM disks, which the authorities seized in his home.

One of the images Tierney was in possession of showed a little girl tied up and screaming while being violently raped.

This shocking case received little media attention even though Tierney, 51, is a well known figure in the Washington, DC area and strenuously fought against limits on internet access in libraries.

On December 1, 1998, Tierney issued this statement: "Recognizing that individuals will continue to behave responsibly and appropriately while in the library, the default should be maximum, unrestricted access to the valuable resources of the Internet."

And included among those "resources" is child porn. The ACLU in Virginia successfully blocked any filtering of objectionable material in Loudon County libraries.

This is off the chart disturbing, and you would think the media would be all over it. When Ted Haggard was scandalized by a male prostitute in Colorado, the media relentlessly hammered the preacher. He deserved much of it, but the coverage was everywhere.

How many of you have heard of Charles Rust-Tierney?

The only major liberal news organization to cover the story was the Washington Post. It ran a small mention of it in the second section of the paper, essentially burying the situation. The New York Times ignored the story entirely. So did NBC News, CBS News, and CNN. ABC News mentioned it on its website.

There is no question that an ACLU big shot who fought against library filters being busted on federal child porn charges is a big story. So what's going on?

The truth is the committed left press in America is no longer interested in reporting the news. Anything that hinders a favorable view of the far left will be ignored; anything that advances liberal causes will be celebrated. News reporting today is largely about ideology and shaping the culture, not about informing the public.

This is dangerous. The Constitution gives the news media a wide variety of protections because the Founding Fathers wanted information to get to the folks. So answer me this: Did the media do its job covering the case of Charles Rust-Tierney?

It did not. Another example of the downward spiral of American journalism. The New York Times masthead says "All the News That's Fit to Print."

Sure.


I am leaving the author out on purpose. If anyone asks
I will inform you of the author. (It's not hard to figure out though)

That shit makes me sick.

Limbaugh, or Boortz. All the signs are there.

Ridiculous comparisons? check.

Spending half the article on one thing much more attention grabbing, than riding that into moving on to something totally unrelated? check.

Criticizing the ACLU? check.

Attacking the "Far-left press?" check.

Ironically bemoaning the "spiraling downfall of journalism?" check. Obviously the author expects to be excluded from that last statement.

So, yeah, gm, it's pretty easy to pick out who authors all the stuff you post, even if you left out the author.

Hm, I thought this was going to be an invitation to discuss the ramifications of child pornography within our culture. Instead it is disappointingly about once again...left versus right coverup...zzzzzzzzzzzz

I see Nappy beat me to it...

The only ones these days complaining of media bias are the ones trying to perpetrate it, it would seem.

Interesting storey, and no doubt those involved will face the full riggers of the Justice System. If this is supposed to be an example of liberal journalism, come on, the US Press may be liberal, I dont know, but I do know, what would it matter,I have never yet seen a US Journalist get stuck into the Administration, asking them the ackward questions and sticking at,lame, a new American word I learnt this week, thats what the US Press are.

lame, a new American word I learnt this week, thats what the US Press are.
Woohoo, I taught Paul a word! :D

Woohoo, I taught Paul a word! :D
now if you could teach him English!

:lolhit:

I heard Bush being called a 'lame' duck President awhile ago, didnt get it at the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame_duck_(politics)

News reporting today is largely about ideology and shaping the culture, not about informing the public.

I'd say that is very true.

Anything that hinders a favorable view of the far left will be ignored; anything that advances liberal causes will be celebrated.

I'd say that that is diametrically opposed to the truth.

If there was ever a news story in this country in the mainstream Press --the nightly "news" teevee programs, the Newsweeks and the Reader's Digests, the radio talks shows-- that was told in such a way as to promote a "favorable view of the far Left", I must have missed it. And I've been listening to the mainstream "news" for over 40 years.

Noam Chomsky would be an example of one of the best known individuals who delivers commentary on the state of affairs in America today, who espouses a leftwing viewpoint. Is it a "far left" viewpoint? Not to me, but for the sake of argument, let's say his views are "far left".

Gore Vidal would be another excellent example of a very well known person who delivers commentary on the state of affairs in America today, who espouses a leftwing viewpoint. Is it a "far left" viewpoint? I do not think it could be said to be a "far left" viewpoint by any stretch of the imagination, but for the sake of argument, let's say his views are "far left".

Howard Zinn and Michael Parenti would be another example of well known writers and commentators, who speak out about the state of affairs in America today, who espouse a leftwing viewpoint. Is it "far left"? Maybe. What is "far"...? At any rate, for the sake of argument, let's say their views are indeed --- "far left".

Now; concerning those four people mentioned above, how many times have any of you seen the mainstream Media give them one minute of airtime to promote a "favorable view of the far Left".......??

How about a half a minute?

How about 5 seconds?

How about, have you EVER once seen ANY of these four men allowed anywhere near a microphone or a printed page in ANY mainstream Media outlet??

The notion that these supposed "far left" voices are given any hearing whatsoever in this country's mainstream Media, much less that such "far left" viewpoints are being "promoted" and defended, is complete hogwash.

___________________________________

The idea that there is a huge "liberal Media" operation in this country that is equal in power to and acting as a counterbalance to the mainstream, status-quo, flagwaving, Corporate-owned-and-controlled-Media is a preposterous farce. It is a myth and an effort to further push us into a divisive mentality meant to create conflict and population division. The conservative mainstream Media, especially the talk radio shills, do not report anything that would cast negative opinions on the ruling classes.....i.e., *the Administration*.

Why do you admire those men if they aren't far left if you're purported by yourself to be one of the most liberal people on the planet?

Who are those you look up to that are as "far" left as you?

Thanks Evak.

now if you could teach him English!

:lolhit:
Pog ma hoin.

Pog ma hoin.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/mikezila_bucket/dacf.jpg

deas, mike.

Limbaugh, or Boortz False and False What is wrong with the article?
Is it not truthfull? Do you just not like it because it puts egg on the ACLU's face?




Limbaugh, or Boortz. All the signs are there.

Ridiculous comparisons? check.

Spending half the article on one thing much more attention grabbing, than riding that into moving on to something totally unrelated? check.

Criticizing the ACLU? check.

Attacking the "Far-left press?" check.

Ironically bemoaning the "spiraling downfall of journalism?" check. Obviously the author expects to be excluded from that last statement.

So, yeah, gm, it's pretty easy to pick out who authors all the stuff you post, even if you left out the author.

Limbaugh, or Boortz False and False What is wrong with the article?
Is it not truthfull? Do you just not like it because it puts egg on the ACLU's face?
Give it up. The ACLU does a lot of good things, but no one ever claimed that everyone in the ACLU is a good person. I bet you could go to any company or organization and find one person there who looks at child porn. Big fucking deal. All this means is that the guy's a pervert; it says nothing about the ACLU.

Limbaugh, or Boortz False and False What is wrong with the article?

For one, it's plagiarized.


Is it not truthfull?

Unlikely, but it might be truthful.


Do you just not like it because it puts egg on the ACLU's face?

How does it do that? It made no mention of the ACLU engaging in the practice of looking at child porn as a matter of policy. How does this reflect badly on the ACLU?