Sorting Through the Emails, Phone Calls, Blog Posts
Until More Information Becomes Available, What is Known Now
What is Actually Taking Place in New Hampshire on January 6?
A Time Line of Events As Can Be Verified
DBKP was going to publish a timeline later today on the Ron Paul situation at the New Hampshire forum/debate/brunch/luncheon/get-together on January 6th.
We have sifted through a ton of reports, blog postings, sources, phone calls, emails and comments. We’d first like to say “THANK YOU” to everyone who has attempted to help bring order to a confused state of affairs.
That being said, there are some inaccurate reports and postings out there. When trying to trace the source of these, it either is 1) the same sources repeating wrong or inaccurate information and linking back and forth to each other, or 2) reading information into what has actually been stated.
A third possible source of inaccuracy is the “friend told it a friend who heard it from a friend” syndrome. We have several emails which directly contradict each other, each claiming the same source as proof.
While checking to see if anything new and known has popped up–not recycled reports from somewhere else already checked–we came across this posting by William Westmiller on Nolan Chart.
We do not know William. But his report below is as accurate as we have been able to verify at this point in time. It may prove to contain errors, but we couldn’t find any, based on what DBKP knows at this moment.
Read rest of story:
Ron Paul: Debates, Forums, Fox, NH and What We Know
Source:
Ron Paul: Debates, Forums, Fox, NH and What We Know
Mondoreb blogs at Death By 1000 Papercuts. Interested readers can e-mail him at
mondoreb@gmail.com. All DBKP stories are filed under Mondoreb at BNN.
Loading ...
2 users commented in " Ron Paul and New Hampshire Debate: What Is Known "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackThe story originally broke on the Associated Press wire. It was then picked up by most major media outlets and spread from there. Why is nobody asking the AP writers what their sources were, and why they went with the story if it was not independently confirmed. AP is supposed to be an reliably accurate news source, so many others (such as William Westmiller on Nolan Chart) went with it, assuming accuracy. Since FOX News (not surprisingly) refused confirmation, denial or even comment on the story, what’s a reporter supposed to do?
Typically, many pundits, columnists and even supposedly ‘respectable’ media outlets are spinning this story in a way to smear Ron Paul and his supporters. Maybe that was the purpose of the AP report in the first place… You know, plant a seed, watch it grow… CHOP DOWN THE WEED! Yellow journalism at it’s smarmiest.
xtrabiggg
++++++++++++++++++++
“AP is supposed to be an reliably accurate news source”
I have a question for you:
Who owns AP?
You don’t know? Isn’t it strange that about the only thing you know about one of the largest most influential news organizations in the US is that they are Associated Press – AP.
Then there is Reuters.
Who are they and who owns them?
Those two mysterious agencies write just about all the news you see in this country.
Trying to get Americans to realize what these organizations actually do is very difficult because nobody in the US can believe for a second that they are just propaganda outlets. I mean, this is the United States, we couldn’t POSSIBLY have propaganda. Well, unless you know who Edward Bernays is, and what Operation Pbsuccess was, and how well placed propaganda made by Bernays was essential in that CIA operation – back in 1954.
But whenever you see a hit piece of something with a ton of inaccurate information, like here:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/31/arts/TV-Debate-Limits.php
Notice nobody’s name is attached to the article. Paul is polling higher than Thompson is, and Thompson was invited, yet there is nobody to contact to correct that mistake – and meanwhile readers that don’t know, assume that Paul really is just a fringe candidate and it’s perfectly reasonable to leave him out of the race since “he can’t win anyhow”.
The real battle here is getting Americans to realize they don’t really have any access to news through television or newspapers any more. The only place you can get it from is here, on the Internet. I doubt the people who spent all that money to control newspapers and television are happy about that and wish it to continue..
Leave A Reply