Saudis Influencing Fox News

[poncho]

It is of the utmost importance to begin to notice, to scrutinize and assess what Fox covers and -- more important -- what it doesn't and why.

< snip >

As I reconsidered the Murdoch-Alwaleed relationship, I was struck anew not only by the 7 percent of News Corp. that Alwaleed owns, but also by the 18.97 percent of Rotana, Alawaleed's Arabic media group, that Murdoch owns. I discovered that just as Murdoch-Alwaleed holdings include Fox, Alwaleed-Murdoch holdings include Al Risala, a 24/7 religious station run by a Kuwaiti Muslim Brother named Tareq al-Suwaidon. Al-Suwaidan, who doubles as a popular on-air host at Al Risala, is not just any Muslim Brother, either. He is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-financing trial in US history, the Holy Land Foundation trial. That means the US government believes Al-Suwaidon, too, was involved in fund-raising for Hamas. That means that Murdoch and Alwaleed's cable stable includes O'Reilly, Doocey and Al-Suwaidon, aka, Mr. Hamas.

That's not the only appalling connection the Saudi association brings to News Corp. On the advisory board of Al Risala is Abdullah Omar Naseef, whose Rabita Trust has been designated by the US Treasury as an Al Qaeda financier (see photo).The structural parallels may be somewhat imperfect but they are still illustrative: Just as Alwaleed has a business connection to News Corp. board member Roger Ailes, Murdoch has a business connection to Al Risala board member and al Qaeda financier Naseef.

< snip >

What becomes clear quickly is that Fox never, ever covers the amazing, shocking and terrifying stories that reflect the undermining incursions of sharia (Islamic law) into the West.

CONTINUE . . .

Seems there's some things Rupert and the Royal Prince would rather it's Christian conservative republican viewers not be informed about.

Wonder why?

 

[Revmitchell]

Good grief...................

 

[poncho]

Good grief...................

Reality sucks doesn't it Rev? It just won't go away!

Sad as it is the thought of Sean Hannity sucking up to the same guy he was accusing of supporting terrorism for a paycheck is kind of funny.

"I would have nothing to do with his money either" Said he. :laugh:

On the October 22, 2001, edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes (accessed via Nexis), Sean Hannity said, "[T]his is a man that blames the United States and their policies for the attack that took place on September 11th. That is such an egregious, outrageous, unfair offense that I would have nothing to do with his money either, and I applaud what Mayor Giuliani did. It showed a lot of guts and character."

On the December 13, 2005, edition of Hannity & Colmes (accessed via Nexis), while discussing a grant Al-Waleed gave Georgetown and Harvard universities, Hannity said: "This is a bad guy. Rudy was right to decline the money. Why would these universities take money from him?"

Sean is still with Fox drawing a regular paycheck.

Also in 2002, however, Alwaleed seems to have had something of an epiphany. From the Arab News (which Alwaleed also owns):

Arab countries can influence U.S. decison-making "if they unite through economic interests, not political," [Alwaleed] stressed. "We have to be logical and understand that the U.S. administration is subject to U.S. public opinion. We are not so active in this sphere [public opinion]. And to bring the decision-maker on your side, you not only have to be active inside the U.S. Congress or the administration but also inside U.S. society."

Does that sound like perception management to you? Does to me.

 

[poncho]

Before I explain, let's go back just to the beginning of last month when Al Gore' sale of Current TV to Al Jazeera was big news, particularly on Fox.

As Fox personalities repeatedly (and understandably) revelled in Gore's obvious hypocrisies for selling out to an Islamic oil-and-greenhouse-gas dictatorship, I was struck by something important that was being left out:

The fact that a key Fox stakeholder -- the second largest stakeholder outside the Murdoch family -- was himself a leading member of an Islamic oil-and-greehouse-gas dictatorship. It seemed highly relevant at least in the spirit of full disclosure, even if it might have subdued some of the on-air guffaws.

Oops the Fox News "information specialists" must have missed that little detail. Like they missed the little detail about their most quoted Syrian source of information being a Sunni anti Assad blogger living in England paid by the British government and going by the "name" of "The Syrian Observatory For Human Rights".

No bias on his part and the fact that his sources inside Syria were Saudi backed anti Assad Islamic foreign fighters that ate their victims innards are never mentioned in any of the news articles in the Fox News archives and there is page after page of Fox News articles in their archives that quote this guy as if he is actually a credible source. Oiy!

Go have a look for yourself.

There may be no liberal bias over at Fox but it sure looks like there is a Saudi bias.

We are living through a cultural transformation of epochal significance as one civilization (Western) yields with barely a peep to another (Islamic). This process is well-advanced on the European continent, where Islamic "no-go zones" proliferate in urban centers (or suburbs) and parallel legal societies have taken hold from London to Berlin. (Sharia courts are even recognized by the British government.) "Desertification" is a new French word for the flight of indigenous French people from Islamized neighborhoods. Government elites of Europe respond to such unrest and unhappiness by silencing the critics of Islamization, putting them on trial for "hate speech" violations, and even sometimes in prison (particularly in the UK). This is what's going on in the democracies of the West -- UK, France, Austria, Denmark, Holland -- and Fox viewers don't know it unless they learn it somewhere else.

You'd think the red white and blue apple pie Fox News Christian conservative republican "information Specialists" would be all over the spread of Sharia law in Europe but instead they focus their attention on demonizing Iran. Go figure huh?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

This should be a clue as to why this is likely the most bogus "story" Poncho has ever dared post:

"Extremism"?? What brand?? Here's the deal: This website is dedicated to exposing "Muslim extremism." He has spent days irritating billions of electrons needlessly to try to "prove" Muslim extremism doesn't exist!! But when he stumbles on a website -- in this case, Clarion Project, which essentially sees a Muslim terrorist hiding under every rock -- that seems to "prove" his other bizarre beliefs, he won't hesitate to use it as "proof" even though the overall bent of the website may be diametrically opposed to everything else he "believes."
Essentially, he's just a hater filled with hypocrisy.
How does that fit with Christian faith?

Done here, done with him.

 

[Revmitchell]

Wait! I thought that the news media was owned by the multinational corporations and the world bank. Which is it that or muslims?

 

[InTheLight]

This should be a clue as to why this is likely the most bogus "story" Poncho has ever dared post:

"Extremism"?? What brand?? Here's the deal: This website is dedicated to exposing "Muslim extremism." He has spent days irritating billions of electrons needlessly to try to "prove" Muslim extremism doesn't exist!! But when he stumbles on a website -- in this case, Clarion Project, which essentially sees a Muslim terrorist hiding under every rock -- that seems to "prove" his other bizarre beliefs, he won't hesitate to use it as "proof" even though the overall bent of the website may be diametrically opposed to everything else he "believes."
Essentially, he's just a hater filled with hypocrisy.
How does that fit with Christian faith?

Done here, done with him.

TND, I've challenged Poncho, Error-On, Zaac, Jedi, CrabTown, Rev, and others about their news sources and the answer I got back was that any source was legitimate if it backed your position. Error-On went so far as to say Pravda was legit.

BTW, I happen to think Poncho makes a good point here...

 

[Revmitchell]

the answer I got back was that any source was legitimate if it backed your position. Error-On went so far as to say Pravda was legit.

Uh I never responded to your silly question. So you did not in fact get that response from me. However, there is not a news source out there that someone somewhere does not have an issue with. And the bias against any news source is personal in each and every case.

BTW, I happen to think Poncho makes a good point here...

No surprise there.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

BTW, I happen to think Poncho makes a good point here...

I think you've mistaken the one formed by the tin-foil hat on top of his head for a valid argument.

 

[InTheLight]

No surprise there.

Why no surprise? Are you saying I usually agree with Poncho?

 

[InTheLight]

I think you've mistaken the one formed by the tin-foil hat on top of his head for a valid argument.

Even a blind squirrel....

 

[Revmitchell]

Why no surprise? Are you saying I usually agree with Poncho?

I am saying you like to bash Fox because you want to feign some sort of objectivity. No one buys it and you make silly cases against Fox. Your issues with fox is nothing more than your own personal biases and dislikes.

 

[InTheLight]

I am saying you like to bash Fox because you want to feign some sort of objectivity. No one buys it and you make silly cases against Fox. Your issues with fox is nothing more than your own personal biases and dislikes.

No news service is unbiased. Try saying this aloud, "Fox News is biased", "Fox News is biased". It's really quite liberating.

 

[Revmitchell]

No news service is unbiased. Try saying this aloud, "Fox News is biased", "Fox News is biased". It's really quite liberating.

You do not get it. There are specific programs that are and lean conservative those are the commentary shows. There are other shows on Fox that are not they just give the news facts. If you actually spent any time watching it you would know. Instead you comment on it and broad brush everything based on no personal knowledge or understanding.


And just to enlighten you there is bias in evey news source out there. So to pick out one above the others show a personal bias against and certainly no objectivity.

 

[poncho]

I still think it's funny that Sean Hannity has to kiss the rump of the guy he accused of supporting terrorism for a paycheck.:laugh:

"I wouldn't have anything to do with his money!" What's that boss? Yeah I uh, well that was before you were my boss, boss. You aren't going to hold it against me are ya boss? I really need the regular paycheck.

Ok boss ok we won't report on the spread of Islam and Sharia law in Europe. No sir boss we'll never question your motives for investing 3 billion dollars in Faux Snews. :laugh:

What's that boss? Reveal Rupert's business connections to "Al Qaeda" financiers? Oh noooo boss we'd never report on that. Matter of fact we'll go out of our way not to report on it and we'll demonize anyone who does. We know how to apply the "goering factor" we've been doing it to liberals from day one.

We'll just call em liberals or conspiracy theorists. It works every time. Our loyal Sunni Faux Snews viewers have been trained to parrot us without thinking. That's how we like our viewers, uninformed and well trained in repeating talking points. Word for word in most cases!

What's that boss?

Oh no sir boss we'll never report about you supporting Christian beheading warriors for Allah in Libya and Syria. You can count on us boss our lips are sealed! We like our big paychecks and celebrity status too much.

No sir boss the fact that your family are totalitarian Muslim dictators will never make it to our teleprompter screen. Our "information specialists" know better than that.

We all know what to do and not do to stay on the payroll. :1_grouphug:

Sunni Faux Snews. I wrote a song about it, wanna hear it? Here it goes!

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we're all fair and balanced.

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we'll Reilly you up about the Shiites o o o o and you won't know the difference.

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we'll never investigate our owners. Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we'll hide our Muslim connections.

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we're all here to bring glory to Allah and the Saudi kingdom.

Sunni Faux Snews! Fair and balanced coverage of all the news our Sunni Muslim owners will allow!

Hooah!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

 

[poncho]

See boss I told ya our loyal viewers are easily manipulated. They'll believe whatever we say and never ever question what we don't say. It don't matter about all those facts coming out now.

Don't worry about it boss. Our viewers are more into repeating things we say than learning about what's really going on.

We're the great Sunni Faux Snews and we got alot of work ahead of us if we're going get you that war with Iran you want boss.

Oh and that lawsuit the 9/11 victims have brought against you and your family that the judge just gave the go ahead to, don't sweat it boss we won't mention it in any of our "snews" broadcasts. If anyone brings it's up we'll demonize them for ya but good!

You can count on us boss.

 

[InTheLight]

You do not get it. There are specific programs that are and lean conservative those are the commentary shows. There are other shows on Fox that are not they just give the news facts. If you actually spent any time watching it you would know. Instead you comment on it and broad brush everything based on no personal knowledge or understanding.

I used to watch Fox News (and CNN) but gave them up a few years ago. I have personal knowledge of it.

And just to enlighten you there is bias in evey news source out there. So to pick out one above the others show a personal bias against and certainly no objectivity.

You could try reading what I wrote instead of going into automatic attack mode:

No news service is unbiased.

 

[quantumfaith]

I still think it's funny that Sean Hannity has to kiss the rump of the guy he accused of supporting terrorism for a paycheck.:laugh:

"I wouldn't have anything to do with his money!" What's that boss? Yeah I uh, well that was before you were my boss, boss. You aren't going to hold it against me are ya boss? I really need the regular paycheck.

Ok boss ok we won't report on the spread of Islam and Sharia law in Europe. No sir boss we'll never question your motives for investing 3 billion dollars in Faux Snews. :laugh:

What's that boss? Reveal Rupert's business connections to "Al Qaeda" financiers? Oh noooo boss we'd never report on that. Matter of fact we'll go out of our way not to report on it and we'll demonize anyone who does. We know how to apply the "goering factor" we've been doing it to liberals from day one.

We'll just call em liberals or conspiracy theorists. It works every time. Our loyal Sunni Faux Snews viewers have been trained to parrot us without thinking. That's how we like our viewers, uninformed and well trained in repeating talking points. Word for word in most cases!

What's that boss?

Oh no sir boss we'll never report about you supporting Christian beheading warriors for Allah in Libya and Syria. You can count on us boss our lips are sealed! We like our big paychecks and celebrity status too much.

No sir boss the fact that your family are totalitarian Muslim dictators will never make it to our teleprompter screen. Our "information specialists" know better than that.

We all know what to do and not do to stay on the payroll. :1_grouphug:

Sunni Faux Snews. I wrote a song about it, wanna hear it? Here it goes!

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we're all fair and balanced.

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we'll Reilly you up about the Shiites o o o o and you won't know the difference.

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we'll never investigate our owners. Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we'll hide our Muslim connections.

Sunni Faux Snews o o o o we're all here to bring glory to Allah and the Saudi kingdom.

Sunni Faux Snews! Fair and balanced coverage of all the news our Sunni Muslim owners will allow!

Hooah!

You must be a resident of Colorado, it sure appears you are smoking something.

 

[quantumfaith]

That theme music has been playing a encore in my head while reading some of the comments of this thread.