Dallas Morning News gives 'Memos' front-page slot!

[reprehensor]

Finally. The 'News' is a product of the Belo Corporation. The same Belo corporation that in 2003 sided with FOX News in a court case that ended like this;

In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.

snip

What is more appalling are the five major media outlets that filed briefs of Amici Curiae- or friend of FOX – to support FOX’s position: Belo Corporation, Cox Television, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., Media General Operations, Inc., and Post-Newsweek Stations, Inc. These are major media players! Their statement, “The station argued that it simply wanted to ensure that a news story about a scientific controversy regarding a commercial product was present with fairness and balance, and to ensure that it had a sound defense to any potential defamation claim.”

For those of you living outside of the Republican Black Hole that is the D/FW area, this is a huge victory for truth.

I can't find the article on the Dallas Morning News website, it is a newswire feed from the LATimes, here is the Times link;

New Memos Detail Early Plans for Invading Iraq

LONDON — In March 2002, the Bush administration had just begun to publicly raise the possibility of confronting Iraq. But behind the scenes, officials already were deeply engaged in seeking ways to justify an invasion, newly revealed British memos indicate.

Foreshadowing developments in the year before the war started, British officials emphasized the importance of U.N. diplomacy, which they said might force Saddam Hussein into a misstep. They also suggested that confronting the Iraqi leader be cast as an effort to prevent him from using weapons of mass destruction or giving them to terrorists.

The documents help flesh out the background to the formerly top-secret "Downing Street memo" published in the Sunday Times of London last month, which said that top British officials were told eight months before the war began that military action was "seen as inevitable." President Bush and his main ally in the war, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, have long maintained that they had not made up their minds to go to war at that stage.

snip

Publication of the Downing Street memo at the height of Britain's election campaign at first garnered little notice in U.S. media or other British newspapers. But in the weeks that followed, anger has grown among war critics, who contend that the document proves the Bush administration had already decided on military action, even while U.S. officials were saying that war was a last resort.

How much light can a cockroach take?

Let's find out.


--------------------------

[jojo54]

1. WOW! From the chimp's home state huh?

A big step for Texas.

[ixion]

2. nice misleading headline

:eyes:

[Liberal Dose]

3. To hell with the light, how about some RAID?

Thank you for the projectcensored link. Once again I am longing for days gone by.

Remember the Fairness Doctrine? We desperately need it back.

http://www.fcc.gov/contacts.html


Fairness Doctrine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy enforced in the United States by the Federal Communications Commission that required broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance, and to present such issues in a fair and balanced manner.

In Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1969), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine, under challenges that it violated the First Amendment.

The Doctrine was enforced throughout the entire history of the FCC (and its precursor, the Federal Radio Commission) until 1987, when the FCC repealed it in the Syracuse Peace Conference decision in 1987. The Republican-controlled commission claimed the doctrine had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate and suggested that, due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was probably unconstitutional. Others, noting the subsequent rise of right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh, suggest the repeal was more likely motivated by a desire to get partisans on the air.

The two corollary rules, the personal attack rule and the political editorial rule, remained in practice even after the repeal of the fairness doctrine. The personal attack rule is pertinent whenever a person or small group is subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations must notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said, and offer the opportunity to respond on the air. The political editorial rule applies when a station broadcasts editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulates that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. ordered the FCC to justify these corollary rules in light of the decision to axe the fairness doctrine. The commission did not do so promptly, and in 2000 it ordered their repeal. The collapse of the fairness doctrine and its corollary rules had significant political effects. One longtime Pennsylvania political leader, State Rep. Mark B. Cohen of Philadelphia, said "The fairness doctrine helped reinforce a politics of moderation and inclusiveness. The collapse of the fairness doctrine and its corollary rules blurred the distinctions between news, political advocacy, and political advertising, and helped lead to the polarizing cacophony of strident talking heads that we have today."

[ChiciB1]

4. Very Goood!

But Even Roaches can live NINE days without their HEADS! Their brains are in their bodies!!

So much for watching ANIMAL PLANET!

[newyawker99]

11. Hi Mzztakable!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Liberal Dose]

12. I've been a reader for a long time, but thanks for the welcome!

Rarely a poster. It always seems as though someone has already said what I would've.

[Blue_Roses]

5. this is big

unbelievable...:wow:

[reprehensor]

8. For D/FW it's HUGE.

Belo also owns one of the biggest local televison stations, Channel 8.

I guess it's time to start pounding them with letters now.

[realFedUp]

6. It is on the front page of the LA Times today also

finally:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-britmemos15jun15,0,3650829.story?coll=la-home-headlines

New Memos Detail Early Plans for Invading Iraq
British officials believed the U.S. favored military force a year before the war, documents show.
By John Daniszewski
Times Staff Writer

June 15, 2005

LONDON — In March 2002, the Bush administration had just begun to publicly raise the possibility of confronting Iraq. But behind the scenes, officials already were deeply engaged in seeking ways to justify an invasion, newly revealed British memos indicate.

Foreshadowing developments in the year before the war started, British officials emphasized the importance of U.N. diplomacy, which they said might force Saddam Hussein into a misstep. They also suggested that confronting the Iraqi leader be cast as an effort to prevent him from using weapons of mass destruction or giving them to terrorists.

The documents help flesh out the background to the formerly top-secret "Downing Street memo" published in the Sunday Times of London last month, which said that top British officials were told eight months before the war began that military action was "seen as inevitable." President Bush and his main ally in the war, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, have long maintained that they had not made up their minds to go to war at that stage.

snip

"Condi's enthusiasm for regime change is undimmed. But there were some signs, since we last spoke, of greater awareness of the practical difficulties and political risks…. From what she said, Bush has yet to find answers to the big questions:

• How to persuade international opinion that military action against Iraq is necessary and justified;

• What value to put on the exiled Iraqi opposition;

• How to coordinate a US/allied military campaign with internal opposition (assuming there is any);

• What happens the morning after?"

continued

[kentuck]

7. Now they can say....

It's been reported...even if they never say another word about it. Forgive my cynicism.

[Ishoutandscream2]

9. Once again, my Rowlett friend, I'm shocked I tell ya'

My first day of summer vacation, and my wife's grandmother gave me her paper this morning (you wouldn't think I would subscribe to that rag, do ya?) I open it up, and WHAM, THERE IT IS ON THE FREAKIN'FRONT PAGE!!! I was simply flabbergasted!!!!

[reprehensor]

10. It's ok, you don't have to subscribe.

But you could always write a letter to Channel 8 and ask them to cover Conyers' forum tomorrow...