Originally posted by maria_stardust
reply to post by tvtexan

---

If so, at what point in time do you feel journalistic integrity flew out the window?

We have been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest clouds. They may be right, that Hanoi's winter-spring offensive has been forced by the Communist realization that they could not win the longer war of attrition, and that the Communists hope that any success in the offensive will improve their position for eventual negotiations. It would improve their position, and it would also require our realization, that we should have had all along, that any negotiations must be that -- negotiations, not the dictation of peace terms. For it seems now more certain than ever that the bloody experience of Vietnam is to end in a stalemate. This summer's almost certain standoff will either end in real give-and-take negotiations or terrible escalation; and for every means we have to escalate, the enemy can match us, and that applies to invasion of the North, the use of nuclear weapons, or the mere commitment of one hundred, or two hundred, or three hundred thousand more American troops to the battle. And with each escalation, the world comes closer to the brink of cosmic disaster.

To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past. To suggest we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. On the off chance that military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy's intentions, in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations. But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.[32]

Originally posted by marriah3330
Yes, this for me is definitely one of my favorite introductions. Most of us have joined ATS because we as people feel like we need to look elsewhere for the truth rather than believe every word we hear from MSM, but for a person who actually has worked for the MSM to come onto ATS and introduce themselves, man, I am really looking forward for your input, personal knowledge, and opinion of topics that we discuss here on ATS. So far I have only read 2 pages of replies so forgive me if I am asking the same questions as anyone else but I plan on reading the other pages here after this reply. I do have my first question for you----

What made you come on here and join our family? Is there a particular recent event that has driven you to the point where you feel you need to disclose, or in most of our cases further prove for us that there are conspiracies within the MSM? I'm curious exactly to what event/s have driven you to come out in the open like this if any I have my own theories but instead of speculating, I thought I'd ask you myself.

Once again, I thank you and welcome you with open arms. And I looked into your mood because I didn't know the definition of the word "redacted" and so I googled it and found the definition for anyone else who didn't know what it meant. Interesting. Here is the definition... www.merriam-webster.com...

Peace,
Marriah