Justin Case wrote:

"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in message
news:e7lq1i02499@news4.newsguy.com...

Justin Case wrote:

"The Kat" <newskat@katxyzkave.net> wrote in message
news:u5ar92t08rqa2dgeolleh5rd5aeoi3v0td@4ax.com...

On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 18:05:40 GMT, "Justin Case"
<NoFuckin'Way@UgottaBkidding.net> wrote:

Your so called "real news agencies" are owned and controlled by

'Ruppert

Murdock', Google him, in addition of having controlling interests in

most

all your major news sources he owns over 300 cable channels. If

Murdock

does not approve it does not become news, none of his agencies will

report

it out of fear of their jobs.

I see NO sense in trying to reason with someone who WON'T listen to

reason,

or reply with inkling of reality.

Just Google "Ruppert Murdock", but you won't, because YOU won't listen

to

reason.

You can't even spell his name correctly.

BFD, it's Murdoch instead of Murdock.

It matters a great deal when you start asserting things but can't even spell their first or last name correctly.

He controls 90% of the media, that is a fact.

Bollocks. And besides which, it's a non-sequitor, unless you're implying
that Murdoch and his minions are also in on the conspiracy with the
other thousands required in a typical kook konspiracy scenario.

Check it out. I bet you won't
bother to check.

Please credible evidence for this claim.

Besides over 300 newspapers, movie studios, and cable channels he closed a
deal with China.

Irrelevant, I want you to demonstrate your claim that he controls 90% of the media as you asserted.

Not that it matters since it was a non-sequitor.

You live in a fantasy to think you have an unbiased media. Now run away

and

hide from the facts.

Alex Jones is unbiased?

Everybody is biased. That is why freedom of the press is so important to a
free society.
You need to hear from all sides of the fence to form an informed opinion.
How can voters make the right choice if all they hear is from the Murdoch
machine ?

You're right you should be able to hear from all sides of the fence. It doesn't make Alex Jones a good journalist though. He's a terrible journalist, at least for people who are interested in hearing facts rather than his rants, half truths and boring voxpops.