Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

six months ending march 2003 home delivery nyt 709,881
six months ending march 2004 home delivery nyt 688,645

six months ending sept 2003 home delivery nyt 702,419
six months ending sept 2004 home delivery nyt 692,154


six months ending march 2003 single copy nyt 323,166
six months ending march 2004 single copy nyt 310,155

six months ending sept 2003 single copy nyt 341,904
six months ending sept 2004 single copy nyt 310,431


apparently they had a small spike in growth recently. I expect thats from liberals moving out of "flyover" country and into the bastions of socialism.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

Jax obviously doesn't even read his own posts. He printed 4 different statistics for the exact same thing.

And then, you can't be a RW troll without making a random comment about Socialism. GOOD BOY. YOU REMEMBERED!

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

[ QUOTE ]
lol
its the NEW YORK TIMES !!
Why not qoute CBS or NRWSWEEK !
Thank you. I needed a laugh.

[/ QUOTE ]How stupid can you be? It's a U.S. Army Report.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

I know full well that the crowd of people here, especially guys like Grey and quads and all of them, will misunderstand what I'm about to say, but I'll say it anyways...

1) This is not an entire story. It is one alleged account from a "confidential Army report"...clearly it can't be THAT confidential, I guess....

2) I understand it isn't the only report of its kind, but to all the anti-war people here who fail to see reason and only wish to smear and defile, think about it for a second: NYT is a business. Its there to get readership, readership that its losing. Stories like this shock people, they get more readership. But even if this story is entirely true, consider that actions like this are the exception, rather than the rule. Divisiveness is your goal and you're well on your way, but think about things for a few minutes before just posting everything you can think of to attempt to attack the "other side".

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) This is not an entire story. It is one alleged account from a "confidential Army report"...

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not 'alleged' according to the report. Its a 2000 page report. Sounds to me like its been thoroughly investigated.

Odd how you try to dismiss it.

[ QUOTE ]
I understand it isn't the only report of its kind,

[/ QUOTE ]

True. There have been reports of abuse in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo. On top of that, We have Bush sending prisoners to countries who are even looser with the torture. Bush wanted to be allowed to torture people. He had his counsel look into it. There is a pattern here.

[ QUOTE ]
but to all the anti-war people here who fail to see reason

[/ QUOTE ]

That is so bizarre. You could be pro-war and against torture. And what do you mean 'fail to see reason?'

[ QUOTE ]
and only wish to smear and defile

[/ QUOTE ]

To borrow your train of thought...
I understand it isn't the only report of its kind, but to all Bush apologists here who fail to see reason and only wish to excuse everything horrendous that happens under this administration, think about it for a second: Bush asked to get around the Geneva Conventions, he argued for torture, in every sphere where we have prisoners (Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo) there have reports of abuse... not by individuals in secret; by interrogators in front of guards, in front of their superiors, in front of ANYONE who wandered by... their behaviour was accepted and condoned. This has happened repeatedly in multiple locations. Why do the Bush apologists feel that this is insignificant?

[ QUOTE ]
Its there to get readership, readership that its losing.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, a newspaper is trying to drum up readership by printing NEWS verified by a MILITARY REPORT. How scandalous! A newspaper printing NEWS to get readers.

Every newstory of wrongdoing is some sort of scandal/conspiracy. Why can't a neocon ever just accept that its news. And that it means what it means?

[ QUOTE ]
But even if this story is entirely true, consider that actions like this are the exception, rather than the rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you know? There have been reports that this has been happening for years. According to the Red Cross, they warned the US years ago that the 'Koran' abuse was widespread and likely to lead to problems Internationally if it got out. They were concerned because it was NOT isolated.

[ QUOTE ]
Divisiveness is your goal and you're well on your way, but think about things for a few minutes before just posting everything you can think of to attempt to attack the "other side".

[/ QUOTE ]

Rathar then assume everything is an attack and wrong, why don't YOU think about things. Like perhaps there's a problem with the military where they're torturing prisoners? Why don't you consider that there are problems out there that need addressing. Instead of turning everything into something partisan, you could just think. Maybe there's a problem that needs fixing.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not anymore. It's readership has been dropping

[/ QUOTE ]

I am talking about worldwide respect. NYT is one of the most (if not the most) respected newspapers in the world. Readership is obviously important, but not always indicative of respect.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

[ QUOTE ]
I know full well that the crowd of people here, especially guys like Grey and quads and all of them, will misunderstand what I'm about to say, but I'll say it anyways...

1) This is not an entire story. It is one alleged account from a "confidential Army report"...clearly it can't be THAT confidential, I guess....

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain. Are you saying that you have information that the Army report is wrong, or are you saying that this type of thing is not the only thing the Army is doing over there (which is obvious) and that some of what the Army is doing is good? Or are you saying something else?

[ QUOTE ]
2) I understand it isn't the only report of its kind, but to all the anti-war people here who fail to see reason and only wish to smear and defile, think about it for a second: NYT is a business. Its there to get readership, readership that its losing. Stories like this shock people, they get more readership. But even if this story is entirely true, consider that actions like this are the exception, rather than the rule. Divisiveness is your goal and you're well on your way, but think about things for a few minutes before just posting everything you can think of to attempt to attack the "other side".

[/ QUOTE ]

And so what are you trying to say here? That these stories, "even if . . . entirely true", should not be reported, because they are "exceptions"? Again, please explain.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

What other correlation to respect there could be? If it was truly the most respected newspaper, people would be flocking to read it.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

[ QUOTE ]
What other correlation to respect there could be? If it was truly the most respected newspaper, people would be flocking to read it.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the best selling novel of all time? Is it the most respected? There is no correlation. Stupid people ruin that sort of logic.

Re: What the Newsweek Farce Was Supposed To Distract Us From
 

I think the news is a little different. At least from what I've seen, most people want real news. I just think that for a newspaper to be the most respected, it woul be widely read. I'm not trying to start and argument or anything, but I disagree about it being very respected.