Fox News edits Paul from AP News articles: PROOF, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times
Topic started on 9-1-2008 @ 05:18 AM by LwSiX
Just thought i would share this, since there are still many who believe Ron Paul and Ron Paul supporters are "crazy" because they believe Paul is being unfairly slanted out of the MSM.

Take a peek at this Official AP article:
ap.google.com...
Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul have passed through since September. Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani and John McCain have not.


And the same story on Fox:
FoX News
Only Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter have passed through since September.



...now tell me there isn't a conspiracy?


[edit on 9-1-2008 by LwSiX]


reply posted on 9-1-2008 @ 10:12 PM by ConspiracyNut23
reply to post by Double Eights



Right. What is going on? Were they pressured by Ron Paul supporters?

The Guardian article still has Ron Paul's name edited out.

EDIT: Form reading the comments on the Fox site, (where most people are extremelly P* off) It seems AP itself made the mistake in the first place, and issued a retraction...

ap.google.com...

Only Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter have passed through since September.


That would explain why the Guardian, not at all like Fox news, also made the mistake. Despite, Fox being obviously biased against Ron Paul, IMO, this was an honest mistake.


[edit on 9/1/08 by ConspiracyNut23]


reply posted on 10-1-2008 @ 04:40 AM by LwSiX
reply to post by zerotime



Certainly not, there are many other reasons why the MSM is not to be trusted, thats why everything they post should be scrutinized. If its a simple mistake, then fine, fair enough, but that still doesn't explain their unbridled dedication to erasing RP existence from their election coverage. Especially since his numbers were right up there with RG in NH, and thats assuming it was a fair count, which it more than likely wasn't given the evidence that has been given.


reply posted on 10-1-2008 @ 10:07 AM by Sri Oracle
BBC excludes Ron Paul from:

news.bbc.co.uk...

"New Hampshire's Winners and Losers"

There is a small blip on every candidate EXCEPT RON PAUL who had 8% of the vote in NH.


Rudy Giuliani came fourth in New Hampshire, but only fractionally behind Mike Huckabee. He will probably be more unnerved by the sight of his lead in national polls shrinking dramatically, and in some cases disappearing. His unusual and risky strategy was always to sit out the early primaries, and to pin his hopes on Florida on 29 January, and Super Tuesday on 5 February.

Fred Thompson's performance in New Hampshire - sixth place, with 1.2% of the vote - was disastrous. He is now staking everything on South Carolina. Unless he wins there, his campaign will effectively be over.



Fred Thompson is somehow worth mentioning because he only had 1.2%

Ron Paul, with grassroots funding pulled together 8% and yet again...

Goes unmentioned.

Maybe he wasn't enough of a winner or enough of a loser... just too "in between" for the article?

Sri Oracle


reply posted on 10-1-2008 @ 10:49 AM by BlueTriangle
Originally posted by LwSiX

Certainly not, there are many other reasons why the MSM is not to be trusted, thats why everything they post should be scrutinized. If its a simple mistake, then fine, fair enough, but that still doesn't explain their unbridled dedication to erasing RP existence from their election coverage. Especially since his numbers were right up there with RG in NH, and thats assuming it was a fair count, which it more than likely wasn't given the evidence that has been given.


So, let me make sure I have this right. You start a thread accusing FoxNews of spreading propaganda by editing Ron Paul out of an AP news article. It is proven almost immediately that they did nothing of the sort. You're answer to whether or not you should apologize for your false accusation is "certainly not." Your justification for this is that "there are many reasons why the MSM is not to be trusted." Sounds like somebody who doesn't want to admit an error to me. It's akin to accusing somebody of murder and upon finding out they are innocent saying "I'm not apologizing because I don't trust that guy. I'm sure he murdered somebody"

Originally posted by LwSiX
...now tell me there isn't a conspiracy?


Um ok, there isn't a conspiracy...you certainly didn't prove anything in this thread other than that you have a preconceived notion and don't care if your accusation is false or not.

Accusations and the refusal to acknowledge a mistake is what gives Ron Paul supporters such a bad name...and ultimately reflects on the candidate. I've actually been actively reading all of the voter fraud threads with interest, but every time I see a thread like this it makes me realize that I can't trust any of you because you have no problem with baseless claims as long as they supports your agenda.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



I finally solved a great mystery! I think I see now...
  Posted 18 days ago with 72 member flags
Finally! MSM Coverage - Legal Challenges to Fed - The End is Near
  Posted 17 days ago with 48 member flags
You Westerners Are Deluded
  Posted 18 days ago with 30 member flags
‘Barcode everyone at birth’
  Posted 3 days ago with 20 member flags
Pentagon Source Alludes to Martial Law Around July 1st, 2012
  Posted 2 days ago with 18 member flags
FBI Seize Email server, then return it
  Posted 15 days ago with 16 member flags