Waiting on site’s conservatives to viciously attack Stewart while avoiding his claims entirely in 10….9….8….7….6….5….

Jon Stewart does it again!!! Team stupid has my vote!!

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Waiting on site’s conservatives to viciously attack Stewart while avoiding his claims entirely in 10….9….8….7….6….5….

This was one the funniest pieces Stewart has ever done. In part, because it goes right for the truth and hangs onto it. The El Douchey China segment, the Gretch’s “looking it up and still getting it wrong” segment were knee-slappers.

My vote:

Purina: EVIL
Senseless: EVIL
Kilmeade: STUPID
El Douchey: STUPID AND EVIL
Gretch: STUPID AND EVIL

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

Wait, so Fox News attacks a major stockholder when it seems appropriate to do so? And that’s a bad thing? Or is it?

Using their reasoning, its the only way to cut off the revenue stream to these bad dudes.

That’s just silly. Stop doing business with Citibank, Apple, AOL, Motorola, Four Seasons and the Plaza Hotel.

… and, who ever knew watching FOX is financing the “Ground Zero Terror Mosque”?

Thanks, Stewart!

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

I wonder when we’ll see MSNBC covering GE and Iran.

Pablo said:
I wonder when we’ll see MSNBC covering GE and Iran.

Fine. Do that. But the topic here is FOX financing terrorism. Stick to the topic.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

Nut Alert….Nut Alert…..Is there a doctor out there than can help the Lyin King? Oh I mean the Real Royal King.
RRK needs help. His mother dropped him on his head when he was a baby. The damage is getting worse everyday. He keeps seeing his invisible childhood friend, Basil. He is also hearing voices that keep feeding him nonsensical rhymes. If this keeps up he will lose his job at White Castle. When he got that job he thought they were serving burgers out of HIS house.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL

LOL.
So News Corp second largest shareholder = funds Imam Rauf=funds “mosque”

Simple enough equation.

Jon Stewart is brilliant. He’s no less partisan then Bill Maher, but I can’t help but admire his comedy.

I’m voting for Team Stupid, and I’ll throw in the producer of the show who bears equal responsibility for not having the hosts do a disclaimer. If something like this occurred on the evening news programs (Bret Baier/Shepard Smith) it would be much more serious.

Origin of IGNORAMUS:
Ignoramus, ignorant lawyer in Ignoramus (1615), play by George Ruggle, from Latin, literally, we are ignorant of
First Known Use: circa 1616

Pablo said:
Wait, so Fox News attacks a major stockholder when it seems appropriate to do so? And that’s a bad thing? Or is it? That’s just silly. Stop doing business with Citibank, Apple, AOL, Motorola, Four Seasons and the Plaza Hotel.

I give you credit for making an effort on this one Pablo. Is you view that they intentionally did not mention the terrorist ownership of FOX, or they just did not realize? Seems like you go with the former.

AngelPeters said:
LOL.So News Corp second largest shareholder = funds Imam Rauf=funds “mosque” Simple enough equation.

I’m not so sure. Marceaux, I mean Blower, can’t seem to understand it.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

Another pathetic Jon Stewart Cry for Relevancy!

Poor ole’ sod, he’s getting to be as sad as Olbermann…sitting there every night, flailing about in total bewilderment, as an entire nation rejects his discredited politics!!!

heh-heh-heh!!

Azarkhan said:
Jon Stewart is brilliant. He’s no less partisan then Bill Maher, but I can’t help but admire his comedy. I’m voting for Team Stupid, and I’ll throw in the producer of the show who bears equal responsibility for not having the hosts do a disclaimer. If something like this occurred on the evening news programs (Bret Baier/Shepard Smith) it would be much more serious. Origin of IGNORAMUS:Ignoramus, ignorant lawyer in Ignoramus (1615), play by George Ruggle, from Latin, literally, we are ignorant ofFirst Known Use: circa 1616

I do think the Gretch’s sloppy Googling is lesson to all: Don’t just read the headline. Don’t just copy and paste.

By the way, I think you’re point about the news programming being held to a higher standard is true. I don’t really fault Shep or the hard news people like Major. I’m not sure where F&F falls. I suppose it is commentary, but it is commentary masked as news, so it’s a hybrid of some sort. Clearly not pure news, however.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

NORBIT said:
Another pathetic Jon Stewart Cry for Relevancy! Poor ole’ sod, he’s getting to be as sad as Olbermann…sitting there every night, flailing about in total bewilderment, as an entire nation rejects his discredited politics!!! heh-heh-heh!!

Last night, he certainly seemed far more relevant and truthful and far more a journalist than any of the clowns he was showing at FOX, including the Friends, Purina and Senseless.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

The Real Royal King said:
But the topic here is FOX financing terrorism.

A stockholder is not the company, genius. I know, too fine a distinction for you…

valkyrie101 said:
Is you view that they intentionally did not mention the terrorist ownership of FOX, or they just did not realize?

Al-Waleed is a terrorist? Is that because of the $20 million he gave Harvard?

I vote for Fox News being stupid.

I though you guys loved all that bridge building stuff. What happened?

Pablo said:
Al-Waleed is a terrorist? Is that because of the $20 million he gave Harvard?

Interesting reasoning. So, if you rob a Chase Bank branch, running away with US $200,000.00, and you offer the defense that you gave US $20.00 of it to Goodwill or the SPCA or the USO, then you’ll be found not guilty?

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

Pablo said:
A stockholder is not the company, genius. I know, too fine a distinction for you…

But shareholders set policy. Big shareholders set policy in big ways. So, FOX is sort of the American Al Jazeera, only not as objective as Al Jazeera because of its strong Saudi ties?

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

The Real Royal King said:
By the way, I think you’re point about the news programming being held to a higher standard is true. I don’t really fault Shep or the hard news people like Major. I’m not sure where F&F falls. I suppose it is commentary, but it is commentary masked as news, so it’s a hybrid of some sort. Clearly not pure news, however.

Since all morning shows always include an element of entertainment, I don’t think they are held to the same standard as the evening news programs. I don’t view the Today Show as the equivalent of NBC News. While the show includes hard news, it is more about light stories and entertainment.

Ah, it wouldn’t be morning without our FIRST dose of F(ox) D(erangement) S(yndrome), courtesy of colby. Sorry lefty nut jobs, but no matther HOW MUCH you want it, Fox, Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, etc, aren’t going ANYWHERE!!! But you continue to provide great entertainment with your various derangements, so thanks for that!!

The Real Royal King said:
Interesting reasoning. So, if you rob a Chase Bank branch, running away with US $200,000.00, and you offer the defense that you gave US $20.00 of it to Goodwill or the SPCA or the USO, then you’ll be found not guilty?

Your theory fails on the notion that Al-Waleed did something good with that money. Well, that and the fact that it’s just plain stupid.

Pablo said:
Al-Waleed is a terrorist? Is that because of the $20 million he gave Harvard?

No he isnt a terrorist (well I dont know either way) the point is FOX implies he is an evil man with extremist intentions, while never saying his name. You cant imply someone is an American hating terrorist supporter but, only when he supports a mosque not when he owns part of your company.

Azarkhan said:
Since all morning shows always include an element of entertainment, I don’t think they are held to the same standard as the evening news programs. I don’t view the Today Show as the equivalent of NBC News. While the show includes hard news, it is more about light stories and entertainment.

I tend to agree.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

MichelleF said:
Ah, it wouldn’t be morning without our FIRST dose of F(ox) D(erangement) S(yndrome), courtesy of colby. Sorry lefty nut jobs, but no matther HOW MUCH you want it, Fox, Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, etc, aren’t going ANYWHERE!!! But you continue to provide great entertainment with your various derangements, so thanks for that!!

What does that have to do with what Stewart deconstructed?

Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal IS News Corps. 2nd largest shareholder. He funds Imam Raul.

News Corp is the parent company of Fox News.

Does this make people squirm? or even a better quesiton, Should it make people squirm? Should Fox News be held into account considering Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal gets a cut of the profits that they help generate, and he is known to fund Iman Rauf?

Isnt what people are asking is “who is funding this?”
Well we do know who has been funding Imam Rauf.

MichelleF said:
Ah, it wouldn’t be morning without our FIRST dose of F(ox) D(erangement) S(yndrome), courtesy of colby. Sorry lefty nut jobs, but no matther HOW MUCH you want it, Fox, Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, etc, aren’t going ANYWHERE!!! But you continue to provide great entertainment with your various derangements, so thanks for that!!

You know, Michelle-in-Utah, it puts you in very, very bad light to fall back on our tiresome defenses of the incrasingly despicable FOX especially with strong Islamic tie, and the terror fnancing tie we now have before us, not to mention what Mugatu so succinctly and eloquently described above. In a very short time we have FOX involved in the Breitbart scam, we have FOX crossing the line from journalism to poliical advocacy and overt funding, we have FOX virtually ignoring a major news story and we have FOX’s ties to the man providing significant funding Ground Zero Terror Mosque. In essence, what you are saying, is as long as a “news” orgainzation panders to your radical rightist views, you could care less about its integrity, the integrity of its on-air personalities or the credibility of its coverage. You have no problem crawling into bed with both the Discredited and the Disreputable. Sad, really.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

AngelPeters said:
What does that have to do with what Stewart deconstructed? Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal IS News Corps. 2nd largest shareholder. He funds Imam Raul. News Corp is the parent company of Fox News. Does this make people squirm? or even a better quesiton, Should it make people squirm? Should Fox News be held into account considering Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal gets a cut of the profits that they help generate, and he is known to fund Iman Rauf? Isnt what people are asking is “who is funding this?”Well we do know who has been funding Imam Rauf.

Indeed, I don’t know how Stewart’s chart could be any clearer. None of the clutter and the twists and turns in the Beckerhead’s chronically distorted logic.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

I’m glad the left is finally coming around to seeing what a terrible idea building the NYC mosque is.

writer said:
I’m glad the left is finally coming around to seeing what a terrible idea building the NYC mosque is.

I’ll be glad when the radical right finally admits what a terrible idea FOX News is.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

Of course, for talking about a Saudi, Stewart is also being xenophobic.

Pablo said:
A stockholder is not the company, genius. I know, too fine a distinction for you…

So why did they go out of their way not to mention it buddy?

So King, you’re saying you’re now against the mosque?

mugatu said:
No he isnt a terrorist (well I dont know either way) the point is FOX implies he is an evil man with extremist intentions, while never saying his name. You cant imply someone is an American hating terrorist supporter but, only when he supports a mosque not when he owns part of your company.

Don’t try to use logic with these people, Mugatu.

By the way, how’s the derelict campaign going? lol

This must be embarrasing for them. I wish someone on fox would comment on this, but of course, they wont.

Royal Race-Baiter/Religious Bigot, your comments and Faux outrage are SO outrageous, that they deserve no response. Take you meds and go back to bed.

writer said:
Of course, for talking about a Saudi, Stewart is also being xenophobic.

No, but Fox News sure is xenophobic despite the fact that a large percentage of their funds not raised through advertising come from foreign sources.

MichelleF said:
Royal Race-Baiter/Religious Bigot, your comments and Faux outrage are SO outrageous, that they deserve no response. Take you meds and go back to bed.

Perhaps you should take some survival seeds and go hide in your bunker with your gold?

But the left is always telling us that anytime a foreigner is put in a bad light, it’s xenophobia. But don’t worry. For once I agree with the left. Screw all of those damned Arabs. And screw their NYC mosque.

writer said:
So King, you’re saying you’re now against the mosque?

As usual, you purposefully miss the point. Imam Rauf is a moderate, Kuwaiti-born Arab-American. News Corp’s principle ownership includes a Saudi known for financing terrorism. The Saudis, as you know, not the Iraqis, not the Kuwaitis were the 9/11 masterminds and financiers. So, the point is not the mosque, but the money FOX viewers contribute to terrorism and the little side step FOX does to avoid mentioning this.

You understand, I am not being critical of you here. It is a shameful and indefensible position.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

writer said:
But the left is always telling us that anytime a foreigner is put in a bad light, it’s xenophobia. But don’t worry. For once I agree with the left. Screw all of those damned Arabs. And screw their NYC mosque.

Nice way to twist words, you may have a future at Fox.

MichelleF said:
Royal Race-Baiter/Religious Bigot, your comments and Faux outrage are SO outrageous, that they deserve no response. Take you meds and go back to bed.

In other words, you can’t defend the indefensible. Apparently, no one at FOX can either. They certainly are not trying.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Nice way to twist words, you may have a future at Fox.

IS the Gretch’s “go-fer” retiring?

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

There’s evidently no pleasing the left. I agree with Stewart about the Arabs being evil, and they’re still upset.

MichelleF said:
Fox, Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, etc, aren’t going ANYWHERE!!!

And rational folks like Stewart will continue to point and laugh at the hypocrisy of all of them, as well as their weak-minded cheerleaders.

MichelleF,

As an American and a Fox viewer, does it bother you that Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, News Corp. 2nd largest shareholder, funds Imam Rauf, who is behind the building of the mosque?

It’s a straight forward, clear cut, question. Yes or No?

Should Fox viewers be informed of these facts? Does Fox have the responsibility of informing their viewers of these facts given the context of the mosque debate?

I’ll answer. Yes, it bothers me. Stewart is right. All of those Arabs should go straight to hell.

Hugo Daun said:
And rational folks like Stewart will continue to point and laugh at the hypocrisy of all of them, as well as their weak-minded cheerleaders.

The worst part is that 100 years from now nobody will know who any of those people are. Barack Obama, however, will still be very well remembered.

writer said:
I’ll answer. Yes, it bothers me. Stewart is right. All of those Arabs should go straight to hell.

Not all of them, just that one.

writer said:
So King, you’re saying you’re now against the mosque?

I think the point is that its ridiculous to assume that FNC is in the business of Islamic indoctrination just because they are funded in part by the owner of The Kingdom Foundation. Just as its ridiculous to assume the Islamic Cultural Center is in the business of Islamic indoctrination. As someone pointed out yesterday, one of the Koch brother’s donated 10 million dollars to the ACLU–that doesn’t mean Koch gets to put his ideology into what the ACLU.

Kayvan Ghavim said:
So why did they go out of their way not to mention it buddy?

How does one go out of their way not to mention something? Usually, if you’re going to not do something, you can not do it while going about your ordinary business.

Angel,
If Fox were say, actiively doing business with Iran (like the network of the left), I would have a problem with that. If you can point to ANYTHING Fox has done that leads you to believe their as sympathetic to terrorists as the other networks, then we will talk.

As an American and a Fox viewer, does it bother you that Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, News Corp. 2nd largest shareholder, funds Imam Rauf, who is behind the building of the mosque?

It’s a straight forward, clear cut, question. Yes or No?

Funds and funded are not the same thing. You’re familiar with tense, right? As an American, does it bother you that the Department of State funds Imam Rauf, who is behind the building of the mosque.

MichelleF said:
Angel,
If Fox were say, actiively doing business with Iran (like the network of the left), I would have a problem with that. If you can point to ANYTHING Fox has done that leads you to believe their as sympathetic to terrorists as the other networks, then we will talk.

You mean aside from providing funds to a stock holder who funds terrorism? Let’s talk, Michelly.

The Real Royal King said:
News Corp’s principle ownership includes a Saudi known for financing terrorism.

Cite?

If Saudi investment is bad, then it’s bad across the board. The NYC mosque should not be built. The left and right finally agree on something.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
You mean aside from providing funds to a stock holder who funds terrorism?

Cite?

Fucking Islamophobes.

NORBIT said:
Another pathetic Jon Stewart Cry for Relevancy!

Poor ole’ sod, he’s getting to be as sad as Olbermann…sitting there every night, flailing about in total bewilderment, as an entire nation rejects his discredited politics!!!

heh-heh-heh!!

I have a strong feeling that you have never seen the show.

You libs are so hilarious! You get up in the morning and the first thing you do is check Media Matters and Daily Kos to see what the talking point of the day is. You were just SURE that the Sherrod thing would be the end of Breitbart AND Fox and yet their ratings are as strong as ever. So you move on to the next thing on the list that WON’T work. It’s sad really. Your mission is a fruitless one and will remain that way. Even with The Whitehouse as an ACTIVE participant in your war, you can gain NO traction. But, as I said earlier, it’s fun to watch your various derangements.

Pablo said:
Cite?

Fucking Islamophobes.

Are you aware of how stocks work or do I have to explain that? Are you aware of how people make money in the stock market or do I have to explain that as well?

Pablo said:
Funds and funded are not the same thing. You’re familiar with tense, right? As an American, does it bother you that the Department of State funds Imam Rauf, who is behind the building of the mosque.

I am familiar with tense yes.

Pointing out the hypocrisy that many Fox viewers are showing. They are bothered by DoS funds but arent bothered by News Corps element.

Selective outrage.
I have no problem with people being outraged over the DoS funding him if they are also outraged that News Corps second highest shareholder is also funds him

Spread the outrage.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Barack Obama, however, will still be very well remembered.

Jimmy Carter is well remembered, especially now when many are pointing out the similarities between Carter’s presidency and that of Obama.

It’s about time Stewart came around. Being Jewish, he should be especially offended at Muslim anti-semitism. Don’t stop there, Jon. Start pointing out hateful groups such as the Nation of Islam.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Are you aware of how stocks work or do I have to explain that? Are you aware of how people make money in the stock market or do I have to explain that as well?

Are you aware that I was asking you to cite the funding terrorism aspect of the comment I quoted? Or do I have to explain reading to you?

writer said:
Of course, for talking about a Saudi, Stewart is also being xenophobic.

I think you missed the point of the segment.

MichelleF said:
Angel,
If Fox were say, actiively doing business with Iran (like the network of the left), I would have a problem with that. If you can point to ANYTHING Fox has done that leads you to believe their as sympathetic to terrorists as the other networks, then we will talk.

If you are outraged that the DoS is funding Rauf, should you be just as outraged at News Corps second biggest shareholder does too

Why not spread your outrage equally? Why so selective?
Are you blinded by your loyalties?

MichelleF said:
You libs are so hilarious! You get up in the morning and the first thing you do is check Media Matters and Daily Kos to see what the talking point of the day is. You were just SURE that the Sherrod thing would be the end of Breitbart AND Fox and yet their ratings are as strong as ever. So you move on to the next thing on the list that WON’T work. It’s sad really. Your mission is a fruitless one and will remain that way. Even with The Whitehouse as an ACTIVE participant in your war, you can gain NO traction. But, as I said earlier, it’s fun to watch your various derangements.

You conservatives are hilarious. You continue to pump the same old bs never have any actual substance to your arguments. Preying on the paranoia of the old and ignorant. You were SURE that Obama would never get elected, SURE his stimulus wouldn’t pass, SURE healthcare wouldn’t pass. Now you’re SURE he won’t get re-elected and the democrats will loose both houses. You consistently watch glenn Beck and believe whatever he shovels to you despite the obvious facts against it, you re-write history so easily and openly support a network which doctors photos, a candidate that has quit every post she has ever held and yet still portray yourself as morally superior despite the many illegal actions and the unpopularity of your presidents such as Nixon: watergate, Reagan: Iran-Contra, the unpopularity of Bush Jr & Sr. You also say liberals can’t win an election, negating the fact that up until Clinton you killed off everyone that you knew you couldn’t beat. Ah to be a child again.

AngelPeters said:
They are bothered by DoS funds but arent bothered by News Corps element.

DoS is using our money. News Corp, as far as anyone knows, isn’t doing anything, let alone with our money.

Perm, I got Stewart’s point. This Saudi is a bad guy. So if he has a hand in building the NYC mosque, we should be against it.

AngelPeters said:
If you are outraged that the DoS is funding Rauf, should you be just as outraged at News Corps second biggest shareholder does too

Cite? How much? When? Details, please.

This is what happens when you think you’re watching the news on Comedy Central.

Azarkhan said:
Jimmy Carter is well remembered, especially now when many are pointing out the similarities between Carter’s presidency and that of Obama.

Actually, Obama’s presidency is far more similar to Reagan. Both presidents fell below 50% in their 10th month for starters. Although Reagan caused a recession in his 2nd year, Obama didn’t.

Unreasonable Libs says:

You also say liberals can’t win an election

They can’t if they are honest about their agenda. Obama didn’t run as a lib, he ran as a moderate. Can you name me ONE actual liberal who ran AS A LIB, that has gotten elected saying he would implement a liberal agenda?

Pablo said:
Cite? How much? When? Details, please.

This is what happens when you think you’re watching the news on Comedy Central.

I dont watch Comedy Central. I watched the clip here.

I’ll take it that you are unaware of News Corps and Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal connection. Fine. Many people are.
If you so chose you can do the homework.

writer said:
But the left is always telling us that anytime a foreigner is put in a bad light, it’s xenophobia. But don’t worry. For once I agree with the left. Screw all of those damned Arabs. And screw their NYC mosque.

Actually, the idea here is putting FOX in the bad light and not necessarily the prince. This has been a topic of controversy since 9/11, the Republicans in bed with Saudi Nationals. Nothing new here. Just seems odd that they are willing to attack the hand that feeds them, without of course, actually calling out the name that feeds them. It just seems there is a lot of deep questions here. Of course, FOX isn’t going to be concerned because their viewers and fans aren’t going to raise questions, which there should be some raised. The whole thing seems odd, and there is certainly a deeper story that what the right or left is saying. I mean one of the key jokes is “Either Team Evil or Team Stupid, no third option.” But I think we should try to figure out the third option.

So, screw the damned Arabs, oh, and writer, I would avoid using numbers like 1, 2, or 3, since we got those from the damned Arabs. I expect Roman Numerals from you from now on.

Ah, so you make claims and I should prove them? Nope, you’re gonna have to do it.

@dandmb50- Haven’t watched Jon for ages but did watched last night and it was on the spot. Why does Fox not mention the name of the guy in charge of this group, because he’s a partner in FOX?
Nice try Fox, gotcha how you gonna get out of this one. I’m leaning towards Team Stupid.

Daniel .. Toronto, CANADA
http://bit.ly/cummEc

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Actually, Obama’s presidency is far more similar to Reagan.

Strange that I haven’t seen that particular comparison in the news. Of course, I don’t expect a leftist to acknowledge the truth; deceit is more your game. Anyway, time will tell.

MichelleF said:
You libs are so hilarious! You get up in the morning and the first thing you do is check Media Matters and Daily Kos to see what the talking point of the day is. You were just SURE that the Sherrod thing would be the end of Breitbart AND Fox and yet their ratings are as strong as ever. So you move on to the next thing on the list that WON’T work. It’s sad really. Your mission is a fruitless one and will remain that way. Even with The Whitehouse as an ACTIVE participant in your war, you can gain NO traction. But, as I said earlier, it’s fun to watch your various derangements.

That’s not the first thing I do when I get up in the morning. After I finish Becking, I make coffee.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

AngelPeters said:
MichelleF,

As an American and a Fox viewer, does it bother you that Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, News Corp. 2nd largest shareholder, funds Imam Rauf, who is behind the building of the mosque?

It’s a straight forward, clear cut, question. Yes or No?

Should Fox viewers be informed of these facts? Does Fox have the responsibility of informing their viewers of these facts given the context of the mosque debate?

because if we abandon capitalism and force waleed to sell his shares no one would buy them up and fox would go bankrupt? is that your point angel? there is no background check to buy stock. you libs are such fail debaters

The Real Royal King said:
But shareholders set policy. Big shareholders set policy in big ways. So, FOX is sort of the American Al Jazeera, only not as objective as Al Jazeera because of its strong Saudi ties?

Owning 7% of the shares in Newscorp gives Alwaleed editorial control over Fox News? Your post would have given you more creedence if Alwaleed held 51% of Newscorp’s shares. Fox News had more opinions against Cordoba House than CNN which had more opinions in support of the Cordoba House. I bet you didn’t know that Alwaleed holds shares in Time Warner (CNN). Comparing stories of the Ground Zero Mosque between CNN and Fox News, you’d think CNN policy was set by Alwaleed. Lefties always whine that Fox News’ audience doesn’t even come close to the audiences of the broadcast networks. Fret not, Alwaleed owns shares of Disney, parent company of ABC.

writer said:
Perm, I got Stewart’s point. This Saudi is a bad guy. So if he has a hand in building the NYC mosque, we should be against it.

No, you didn’t get the point. The point was that FOX News called him a bad guy without saying his name. FOX is the one who brought that up. It was a confusing thing that doesn’t make any sense. See, that’s the joke. That’s the absurd thing. Pay attention to subtext.

The Real Royal King said:
That’s not the first thing I do when I get up in the morning. After I finish Becking, I make coffee.
.

you forgot the step where you get the gardener off your wife…

To his credit, now that the King knows Alwaleed is involved in building the NYC mosque, he’s against it.

Constantly said:
because if we abandon capitalism and force waleed to sell his shares no one would buy them up and fox would go bankrupt? is that your point angel? there is no background check to buy stock. you libs are such fail debaters

You are right. But the Prince also said that the reason he bought the shares was to be an influence in American politics. Mainly because their GDP is of course mainly oil, bought by us. And as long as he can keep spreading his power within American politics, his country stays rich. Of course, you want to be part of the network that is against clean energy. Again, I think there’s something deeper to this story. Check out the interview he gave on Fox Business if you get a chance.

Perm, it can’t be both ways. Either Alwaleed is a bad guy, or he’s not. It would be hypocritical of Fox to say he’s bad, then take his money. But it’s also hypocritical for the left to say he’s bad, then be okay with the NYC mosque being built, if Alwaleed is going to be involved.

VegasRudy said:
Owning 7% of the shares in Newscorp gives Alwaleed editorial control over Fox News? Your post would have given you more creedence if Alwaleed held 51% of Newscorp’s shares. Fox News had more opinions against Cordoba House than CNN which had more opinions in support of the Cordoba House. I bet you didn’t know that Alwaleed holds shares in Time Warner (CNN). Comparing stories of the Ground Zero Mosque between CNN and Fox News, you’d think CNN policy was set by Alwaleed. Lefties always whine that Fox News’ audience doesn’t even come close to the audiences of the broadcast networks. Fret not, Alwaleed owns shares of Disney, parent company of ABC.

Actually it does. http://www.dcbureau.org/20100203319/Trento-s-Take/trentos-take-fox-news-cant-upset-murdochs-saudi-prince.html

Permatiltx said:
You are right. But the Prince also said that the reason he bought the shares was to be an influence in American politics. Mainly because their GDP is of course mainly oil, bought by us. And as long as he can keep spreading his power within American politics, his country stays rich. Of course, you want to be part of the network that is against clean energy. Again, I think there’s something deeper to this story. Check out the interview he gave on Fox Business if you get a chance.

yeah waleed seemed very happy about the boxoffice receipts for “avatar”. does james cameron know he was financed by someone who wants to keep us addicted to fossil fuels?

writer said:
Perm, it can’t be both ways. Either Alwaleed is a bad guy, or he’s not. It would be hypocritical of Fox to say he’s bad, then take his money. But it’s also hypocritical for the left to say he’s bad, then be okay with the NYC mosque being built, if Alwaleed is going to be involved.

So, you’re changing the argument. Is that how you plan to win? Look, if Fox News has done nothing wrong, then take the time out to investigate it. If you’re confident that there isn’t wrong doing or some underlying theme, then you’ll come out smelling like roses. I’ve done work for News Corp, I like them. They are a pretty solid, well run company. And it seems that there’s something here. Why mention the Prince not by name, but by deed? See, there’s something odd there. They’ve named names constantly, but not here. And what does this benefit to the prince? How does he make money off of social unrest in the Middle East? Are you willing to ask the same questions? Heck, I want to know more about GE and the Iran connection. Of course, it makes sense for GE to do that, they are an energy company first, media company second (though they have lately started to switch over to the clean energy campaign since discovering that there is some prime fundage to be made off it as well as a shitload of tax breaks.) But does having the Iran connection within their energy department mean that there is influence in the media? (Hard to say, since MSNBC have been very anti-Iran with coverage of their elections.) See, it’s not black and white. There is some dark gray mixed in there, but as long as you keep the black and white mentality, you won’t have to see into the own thing that you are supporting. I think that has more to do with fear than anything else.

perm, how am I changing the argument? I’ve agreed with Stewart. If there’s something wrong with Alwaleed, Fox should be up front about it. If there’s nothing wrong with Alwaleed, then why is the left pointing out his investment with Fox as if there’s something wrong with it?

Constantly said:
yeah waleed seemed very happy about the boxoffice receipts for “avatar”. does james cameron know he was financed by someone who wants to keep us addicted to fossil fuels?

Alweed bought into FOX after Avatar was finished and released. So technically, he wasn’t financed by him. His money probably didn’t have much to do with that film other than marketing. But then, Cameron tends to be a majority of his own cash into projects through Lightstorm. Of course, that being said, I’m pretty sure filmmakers could give a flying fuck where the money comes from as long as they can make movies and when it comes to Cameron, he doesn’t have to worry about editorial decisions, I’m sure he gets final cut, so not influenced at all.

writer said:
perm, how am I changing the argument? I’ve agreed with Stewart. If there’s something wrong with Alwaleed, Fox should be up front about it. If there’s nothing wrong with Alwaleed, then why is the left pointing out his investment with Fox as if there’s something wrong with it?

Because FOX said the guy was a bad guy. Not Stewart, not the left, it was said by FOX News. And they said it without bringing up his name. See, that’s the story, not solely the villainy of the prince. The left doesn’t have to say he’s a bad guy because FOX said it already. That’s the story, that’s the point of the segment. It has little to do with Alweed himself.

perm, then as I said, If Fox genuinely believes he’s a bad guy and still takes his money, they’re being hypocritical. And if he’s proven to be a bad guy and invests in the NYC mosque, then it would be hypocritical of the left to still support the mosque.

writer said:
perm, then as I said, If Fox genuinely believes he’s a bad guy and still takes his money, they’re being hypocritical. And if he’s proven to be a bad guy and invests in the NYC mosque, then it would be hypocritical of the left to still support the mosque.

You say that because you are unwilling to say there’s a hole without pointing out the hole somewhere else. You can’t say, “If Fox genuinely believes he’s a bad guy and still takes his money, they’re being hypocritical.” Bam, that’s fine. Because that’s where the argument is right now. Now, is your next statement wrong, doesn’t matter, because that’s not what the argument is about. Are you unable to find a problem with FOX News without then saying, but there’s a problem here? Try it. It doesn’t make you less of a conservative. Doesn’t turn you into a liberal. But it makes you a stronger person who will stand on the merits of his beliefs over the ideology of a group of people who are making money hand over fist and could give a flying fuck about you.

writer said:
To his credit, now that the King knows Alwaleed is involved in building the NYC mosque, he’s against it.

Actually, you are lying again. You don’t know what my position is on the community center. You know a given the building Consitutional sanction, but you know nothing else. Please stop your constant lying.

MORE NEWS FOX WON’T COVER:

FOX’S QUEST FOR THOSE FINANCING TERROR,
OUGHT BEGIN WITH A LOOK IN THE MIRROR.
BIN TALAL AND KINGDOM HOLDING COMPANY
ARE OBVIOUS SOURCES OF THIS VILLANY.

Despite the left’s stereotype, all conservatives don’t live and die with every word said on Fox. If Alwaleed is shady, then they shouldn’t be taking his money. Now can you be open enough, perm, to say that if Alwaleed is indeed shady and discovered to be investing in the building of the NYC mosque, you’ll question its construction?

King, I was trying to be on your side. Surely if you believe Alwaleed funds terrorists, and is planning on investing in the NYC mosque, a great patriot such as yourself couldn’t be for its construction. Trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, and this is the thanks I get.

Permatiltx says: You say that because you are unwilling to say there’s a hole without pointing out the hole somewhere else. You can’t say, “If Fox genuinely believes he’s a bad guy and still takes his money, they’re being hypocritical.” Bam, that’s fine. Because that’s where the argument is right now. Now, is your next statement wrong, doesn’t matter, because that’s not what the argument is about. Are you unable to find a problem with FOX News without then saying, but there’s a problem here? Try it. It doesn’t make you less of a conservative. Doesn’t turn you into a liberal. But it makes you a stronger person who will stand on the merits of his beliefs over the ideology of a group of people who are making money hand over fist and could give a flying fuck about you.

I think you’ve explained it five ways from Sunday, and he’s either being obtuse on purpose, or is not getting it. Seeing his other posts I’d guess its deliberate. I’m even more fascinated with the fact that MichelleF still deliberately won’t answer the question either. Do they really understand the hypocrisy of what Fox and Friends did? I’m also still waiting for MichelleF to explain how Glenn Beck the entertainer is going to restore National Honor on the 28th, and will he still be considered an entertainer during the event?

Writer oh my god…Stewart is not saying he’s a terrorist. You can’t be that myopic. Fox and Friends said he’s a possible supporter of terrorism. And he’s the second largest investor in Newscorp. He profits from Newscorp. So by Fox and Friends logic, Fox’s funds the Mosque.

Socrates, I think I’ve said two or three times that if Fox believes the guy is bad and still takes his money, they’re being hypocritical. I really don’t know how much clearer I can make it. Because I follow it up by asking the left a question they find uncomfortable doesn’t make my former statement any less clear.

Okay then how about another question…is the guy really bad? And if he’s not, since he obviously enjoys doing a great deal of business with the United States, then is his supporting of the Islamic Center, a good thing?

Funny. I was going to ask you the same thing. If it’s discovered that Alwaleed funds terrorists, and he invests in the NYC mosque, will you still favor it being built? As for myself, I think the Muslims have the right to build wherever they want if they’ve bought the property. But I do think it would be insensitive. It would be like building a German beer garden across from Auschwitz. But do they have the right to do it? Yeah. But if investors in the NYC mosque also fund terrorists, that’s a different matter entirely. Your thoughts?

Socrates69 said:
Okay then how about another question…is the guy really bad?

That is the question, but some here seem to want to assume it’s been answered and then ignore the question almost entirely. Count the number of times someone on this thread asserts that al-Waleed “funds terrorism”. Then count the number of times anyone offers any evidence to support that assertion.

I agree. Yet, I also went to the Cordorba’s Initiative website and read for myself what their plans are, and where they are planning to get their funding. They have committed to keeping all of their fundings sources open to the Department of Treasury and another agency.

As for myself, I think they have a right, and I don’t have a problem with it, especially more so now in light of the controversy. Its shows in my opinion, that you can’t hurt or kill us, we rise beyond differences and embrace all religions.

Meantime, I’m also for the gay Islamic bar next door.

Pablo said:
Al-Waleed is a terrorist? Is that because of the $20 million he gave Harvard?

I know nothing about him, except what FOX said.

“Pablo says: That is the question, but some here seem to want to assume it’s been answered and then ignore the question almost entirely. Count the number of times someone on this thread asserts that al-Waleed “funds terrorism”. Then count the number of times anyone offers any evidence to support that assertion.”

Do you agree then its ironic that Fox and Friends is saying something so stupid?

Permatiltx said:
Alweed bought into FOX after Avatar was finished and released. So technically, he wasn’t financed by him. His money probably didn’t have much to do with that film other than marketing. But then, Cameron tends to be a majority of his own cash into projects through Lightstorm. Of course, that being said, I’m pretty sure filmmakers could give a flying fuck where the money comes from as long as they can make movies and when it comes to Cameron, he doesn’t have to worry about editorial decisions, I’m sure he gets final cut, so not influenced at all.

he bought the stock in 2005. nice attempt to change history.

“Constantly says: he bought the stock in 2005. nice attempt to change history.”

I’m sure it was malicious in his intent and is central to the thesis of his entire argument. And yes thats sarcasm.

writer said:
Despite the left’s stereotype, all conservatives don’t live and die with every word said on Fox. If Alwaleed is shady, then they shouldn’t be taking his money. Now can you be open enough, perm, to say that if Alwaleed is indeed shady and discovered to be investing in the building of the NYC mosque, you’ll question its construction?

First off, the whole guilt by association is coming from the Kingdom Foundation donating $305,000 to Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow which is sponsored jointly by two of Rauf’s organizations. Technically, Alwaleed hasn’t donated directly to Park51. Again, it’s a jump of the gun without investigating. The DOS has funded Rauf’s trip to Middle Eastern countries to try and create closer Western/Muslim ties. Now, the DOS can’t be called a donator to Park51, can it? And since, Rauf sponsored the charities that Alwaleed gave money to, does that mean that the DOS is supporting terrorism (it doesn’t). So, Alwaleed is as shady as FOX News, in that he is making efforts to make money for his interests. The building of the Islamic Center is about religious protection. It’s built for Muslim Americans, not radical extremists. If he gives money or doesn’t (he’s already given his money to a lot of American companies, are they terrorists?), it doesn’t matter. I have my principles, and I will stand up for them.

Socrates69 said:
Do you agree then its ironic that Fox and Friends is saying something so stupid?

All together? Like a glee club? I’m going to suggest that you go back and watch the clip again, this time paying particular attention to what was said on Fox and Friends. You’ll find that “He funds terrorism” is not in there.

Constantly said:
he bought the stock in 2005. nice attempt to change history.

I’ve been caught. I was trying to change history. Truth be told, I read an article wrong. Read it too quickly (There is one other thing I’ve said in the last couple of days that I read the article wrong. Again, it’s my mistake.) I had read an article about Alwaleed trying to expand ties to News Corp that was printed in January of 2010. I thought that meant that was when he was buying the stock. Perusing the article, I see that indeed he did buy the stock in 2005. Jumped the gun. Sorry about that. But I still stand behind my “Filmmakers don’t give a fuck where they get the money from as long as they get the money” stance.

Its amazing how many people commenting here do not get the gist of this story. The point of the Daily Show segment was to highlight the hypocrisy and manipulation of the “terror mosque” story by Fox News. Anyone who doesn’t see this is stupid…

So if Alwaleed doesn’t fund terrorists, I see nothing wrong with him investing in Fox. We are a capitalist country, and I don’t blame Fox for wanting to make a buck from whomever wants to invest. If they called out Alwaleed by name as a bad guy, then took his money, that would be hypocritical. If they were talking about other possible investors in the mosque and not Alwaleed, then there is no hypocrisy.

(For the record, I wasn’t trying to change history. I don’t agree with changing history. Unless I had a time machine, then I’m for changing history, but not killing Hitler or anything. I’d try to keep people from seeing Date Movie. That would help the world most, since there would be no Vampires Suck or Epic Movie or anything else. Hmmm, maybe I could go back and stop Scary Movie. I mean, it was funny, but look at the Hell it unleashed.)

David Harper said:
The point of the Daily Show segment was to highlight the hypocrisy and manipulation of the “terror mosque” story by Fox News. Anyone who doesn’t see this is stupid…

Anyone who uses the phrase “Terror Mosque” is stupid. Everyone knows it’s the “9/11 Debris Field Unmosque.”

writer said:
We are a capitalist country, and I don’t blame Fox for wanting to make a buck from whomever wants to invest.

I’m not sure how, even if they wanted to, News Corp could prevent anyone from buying their stock, aside from taking it off the market.

As the left is always telling us, that would be guilt by association.

Pablo said:
I’m not sure how, even if they wanted to, News Corp could prevent anyone from buying their stock, aside from taking it off the market.

So you are pretty sure that Murdoch did not seek the Waleed investment? Waleed just went on e-trade and bought some shares?

Pablo said:
Are you aware that I was asking you to cite the funding terrorism aspect of the comment I quoted? Or do I have to explain reading to you?

Pablo,

Read carefully. The people who said he was funding terrorism, is the people who are against the mosque. The imam’s radical Islamic financier is the guy people are saying is the terrorist supporter and thus the imam is ‘friends’ with the radical Islam group. Now you were asking for citations of his funding of terrorists. I don’t have that proof. FNC seems to think they do. It just happens to be that the guy they are slamming is part owner of the network they are on.

———

Yes, the people who pointed to GE being involved with NBC is exactly right. But unfortunately, without regulations, huge companies can buy themselves out of the news cycle. That doesn’t take away from what FNC is commenting on and being hypocritical of. I don’t know the guy; but how I see it is that this guy has more money than he knows what to do with. He gives some of it away as a philanthropist. The other money goes into investments. A business person is a business person first and forehand–if there is a buck to be made, they will do it.

Stop pretending that everything is straightforward. There are nuances in life, and pretending that everything is yes or no really leaves no room for rational analysis.

writer said:
Funny. I was going to ask you the same thing. If it’s discovered that Alwaleed funds terrorists, and he invests in the NYC mosque, will you still favor it being built? As for myself, I think the Muslims have the right to build wherever they want if they’ve bought the property. But I do think it would be insensitive. It would be like building a German beer garden across from Auschwitz. But do they have the right to do it? Yeah. But if investors in the NYC mosque also fund terrorists, that’s a different matter entirely. Your thoughts?

Would you agree that if someone is tagged as a funder of terrorists, and they were also funding FOX, that would be a different matter entirely?

Socrates69 said:
“Constantly says: he bought the stock in 2005. nice attempt to change history.”

I’m sure it was malicious in his intent and is central to the thesis of his entire argument. And yes thats sarcasm.

look genius, he said to watch the FBN interviews. i saw them live them and it was the same time avatar was out. they discussed it at great length, and waleed wouldnt have been so stoked if he hadnt been involved until after it was released.

valk, I believe I already said that.

valkyrie101 said:
Would you agree that if someone is tagged as a funder of terrorists, and they were also funding FOX, that would be a different matter entirely?

valk does your ass taste like peaches or something? you really should stop and go outside once in a while.

Turn it around, valk. If people funding the mosque are found to also be funding terrorists, are you still for having it built?

Of course the government has no power to stop those connected to and or funding terror from influencing our public discourse, in a legal manner, and coming in through the back door, in the last place we would have thought to look for it, FOX News, but short of government power, now that we know, shouldn’t we be talking about a non-governmental backlash, ala Rand Paul, letting the market speak, against FOX and its advertisers?

It depends, valk. If it’s proven that their investor also funds terrorists, it’s a legitimate question. If he’s not funding terrorists, then it’s simply another rich guy making a business investment.

writer said:
It depends, valk. If it’s proven that their investor also funds terrorists, it’s a legitimate question. If he’s not funding terrorists, then it’s simply another rich guy making a business investment.

Yes, but the important thing, is that it is an Islamic businessman. An Islamic that we all call “moderate”, and respect, notwithstanding his headdress, sunglasses and facial hair. As distinct from the mad men that run terror networks in the name of Islam. That latter group constitutes a tiny percentage of the overall Islamic population. By giving the Islamics seeking to build near ground zero such a hard time, we are saying that there is some connection between 911 and them. Which is not true. Our feelings to the contrary are bogus. Under those circumstances, if you were them, would you back out, just to be nice? I wouldn’t. I would drag it out and see where it goes. They, and all of the Islamic world, world wide, are thinking what does America think about us, let’s see. We should celebrate the mosque. It represents who we are, as free men and woman, and as distinct from other nations. What better way to say to Islam that we believe in freedom, and favor peaceful relations.

Stewart nails it again. You can’t argue with the facts.

You’ve misunderstood me, valk. I think anyone buying property has a right to build whatever they want. (Providing for zoning laws and building codes, of course.) But do I think the mosque there would be insensitive? Yeah.

writer said:
You’ve misunderstood me, valk. I think anyone buying property has a right to build whatever they want. (Providing for zoning laws and building codes, of course.) But do I think the mosque there would be insensitive? Yeah.

Why insensitive? That essentially means that you think the Islamics should feel bad about 911 because, after all, it was associated with Islam. But the moderate Islamics do not worship the same God as the crazies, who see war instead of peace.

valk, I’ve used the example before of a German beer garden being built across from Auschwitz.. Did the common German soldier run the death camps? No. It was the SS. And in the final election where Germans were still allowed to vote, only 34% backed Hitler. But fairly or unfairly, all Germans are associated with the Holocaust in the common perception. That’s why the mosque in that location would be insensitive.

That is a better analogy than usual. But it is divorced from reality. The proposed mosque is being built in a delapidated space two blocks away, separated by millions of tons of concrete and steel, and no sight lines. There is another mosque just four blocks away. This is not across the street from Auschwitz, in your analogy, it is two blocks away and not visible.

JON STEWART FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

THE TRUTH PARTY WITH BRAINS!!!!

PLEASE JOIN ME. IT IS OUR ONLY HOPE FOR OUR NATION.

valk, that’s part of the perception. Since there is already a mosque four blocks away, trying to put another one even closer to ground zero is seen as the Muslims wanting to spike the ball. Are they doing it on purpose or is it totally innocent? Don’t know. But the perception is out there.

writer said:
valk, that’s part of the perception. Since there is already a mosque four blocks away, trying to put another one even closer to ground zero is seen as the Muslims wanting to spike the ball. Are they doing it on purpose or is it totally innocent? Don’t know. But the perception is out there.

The Iman lives in the neighborhood.

I feel like people on both the right and left are misinterpreting the point being made in this clip. The point isn’t whether Fox is in bed with terrorists, or even whether or not Alwaleed IS a terrorist. The point goes right to Fox’s “Follow The Money” mantra concerning the mosque. By their logic, which is what Stewart is using here for intentional effect, we should all ban Fox News. You can’t “follow the money” to a point which proves your point and refuse to acknowledge the path beyond that. The fact that they refused to name Alwaleed in the segment, refused to show a picture of him, refused to acknowledge him as anything other than a shadowy boogieman is just pure fearmongering.

Jon Stewart isn’t seriously calling for a ban on Fox News. He was pointing out the irony in their claims that this mosque must have a shady pedigree because of who plays a role in its funding. If Fox and Friends didn’t realize, that’s just stupid and bad journalism. If they did — which makes sense, given their deliberate obfuscation of Alwaleed’s name and the real name of his company (Kingdom Holding Company; the Kingdom Foundation is a Christian organization) — then that’s deliberate misinformation in order to further their narrative. And it is completely out of line. And yeah, kinda evil.

valkyrie101 said:
Why insensitive? That essentially means that you think the Islamics should feel bad about 911 because, after all, it was associated with Islam.

No, it means they should respect the feelings of those who consider that sacred ground and don’t want a monument to Islam there. I don’t feel bad about anything I didn’t do. That doesn’t preclude me from respecting others’ feelings about such things. What I can do and what I should do are not the same thing.

marcus.lewis said:
The people who said he was funding terrorism, is the people who are against the mosque.

Who? Quote them.

Now you were asking for citations of his funding of terrorists. I don’t have that proof. FNC seems to think they do.

If so, they probably would have said that. They didn’t. Feel free to quote them, and prove me wrong. Good luck.

There’s a hint that might help: Jon Stewart does not work for Fox News. Now, watch that clip again and come back with those quotes, if you like.

valkyrie101 said:
So you are pretty sure that Murdoch did not seek the Waleed investment? Waleed just went on e-trade and bought some shares?

I have no idea, and neither do you. Right?

Pablo said:
I have no idea, and neither do you. Right?

Here is a world net daily article about the deal: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=117853

Pablo said:
Who? Quote them.

If so, they probably would have said that. They didn’t. Feel free to quote them, and prove me wrong. Good luck.

There’s a hint that might help: Jon Stewart does not work for Fox News. Now, watch that clip again and come back with those quotes, if you like.

I’d rather not waste my time finding transcripts. Okay, so you don’t think Prince al waleed a terrorist financeer?

Pablo said:
No, it means they should respect the feelings of those who consider that sacred ground and don’t want a monument to Islam there. I don’t feel bad about anything I didn’t do. That doesn’t preclude me from respecting others’ feelings about such things. What I can do and what I should do are not the same thing.

Why not just turn the whole two block area into a shrine. That way, they could remove that topless club from the ground zero area too. Face it, offense is being taken against Islamics because those who are offended blame Islam itself, and not just the terrorists for 911.

Three cheers for Jon Stewart. He along with Ron Paul is doing what has to be done to counter the incredible wave of hostility and prejudice being directed at Muslims everywhere. What should have been a non-issue has been turned into one of the most devisive issues in recent memory. The leader of the rabblerousers is, of course, Rupert Murdoch, and his vast partly Saudi owned media empire. Pandering to the frightened, fearful, angry and uninformed people who for some strange reason tune into Fox and it’s many tentacles may superficially empower these people, but it has many negative consequences. Scapegoating millions of innocent people is somewhat reminiscent of Germany in the 1930′s when Hitler began his miserable crusade against the Jews. Also, it’s a little bit like the Terry Schiavo melodrama except this is much worse. Over the next few weeks sanity will return and the Islamic Center will be built and those against it will be even angrier that their false gods have let them down once again. Our great country is changing for the better and we can’t continue to go backwards.

ganymede said:
Three cheers for Jon Stewart. He along with Ron Paul is doing what has to be done to counter the incredible wave of hostility and prejudice being directed at Muslims everywhere. What should have been a non-issue has been turned into one of the most devisive issues in recent memory. The leader of the rabblerousers is, of course, Rupert Murdoch, and his vast partly Saudi owned media empire. Pandering to the frightened, fearful, angry and uninformed people who for some strange reason tune into Fox and it’s many tentacles may superficially empower these people, but it has many negative consequences. Scapegoating millions of innocent people is somewhat reminiscent of Germany in the 1930’s when Hitler began his miserable crusade against the Jews. Also, it’s a little bit like the Terry Schiavo melodrama except this is much worse. Over the next few weeks sanity will return and the Islamic Center will be built and those against it will be even angrier that their false gods have let them down once again. Our great country is changing for the better and we can’t continue to go backwards.

At least we didn’t have to deal with the crazy coverage they had of the town hall meetings like they did last year. What bothers me is that news peeps think that these are the slow months in news, when its not. News doesn’t just stop happening because the staff are taking a vacation.

ONE WAY TO RAISE NEEDED MONEY TO DECLARE A CRIME AGAINST THE RIGHT TO RELIGION IS BEING STUMPED ON WITH STEEL TIP SHOES AND SPIKE HEELS—NO MONEY BET THEY GOT NOW!

ok i took great pains to read all the posts and responses to this blog. these posts are hilarious, but let me give my take. fox first reported about this mosque back in dec 09. no one cared, the far right started attacking and all hell broke loose say about may. now the initial outrage never targeted the imam, that was after their argument of sensitivity started losing support. they went on to tar the imam as a bad actor because of comments attributed by him on the culpable role the US played on causing 9.11. it was crickets then cause he was of course an ally and emissary for the bush admin.
in 2005 saudi prince buys a stake in fox news. now this is where this gets tricky. this saudi prince is the same person who right after the terror attack he gave the city of New York $20 million bucks along with a lecture about US foreign policy. this was guiliaini’s famous “rub your filthy money on ya chest!” moment with brought him huge accolades. this same prince who murdock 4 years later gladly sold 7% of his newscorp. stock to also a sound of crickets.
fast forward to 2010 now and the same comments that they are attacking imam rauf (similar sentiments mind you of fox news own glenn beck) and the sentiments of the saudi prince owner of newscorp are absolute deal breaker for the building of park51. of course fox news also must tack on the matter of a money trail back to terror ties, of which it is commonly held since 2001 that this same princes royal family routinely sends money to the families of suicide bombers and terrorists, including al quaeda.
whats learned today in the ensuing article about the meeting btwn newscorp and rotana media, (a saudi media company responsible for the airing of the the anti-US/Israel al jazeera network) where we now learn that newscorp $70(0?) million investment is stock owner ship in said media corp.
questions
1. is fox news duplicity ever more apparent? YES
2. does fox repudiate the saudi princes sentiment as well as glenn becks in the same manner as it did the imam raufs? HELL NO
3. should fox loyalist believe now that fox has a sincere agenda in america’s national security interest? HELL NO
4. does fox care that this family sends money to terrorist families? HELL NO
5. does fox care that you give them ratings so that some of this success helps profit saudi princes investment in terrorist families? HELL NO
6. will fox news loyalist look at this as a nothing to see here moment? OF DAMN COURSE THEY WILL!!!
5. should fox be boycotted?

No wonder Bill O’Reilly hasn’t been in.

I’m sure he is furious with the way the clowns at Faux and Friends handled this one.

Every time they get caught doing something stupid, Bill O’Reilly hides under his desk, because he cannot defend it/them/the network.

FairNYC said:
No wonder Bill O’Reilly hasn’t been in.

I’m sure he is furious with the way the clowns at Faux and Friends handled this one.

Every time they get caught doing something stupid, Bill O’Reilly hides under his desk, because he cannot defend it/them/the network.

ha co sign!

I love that clip! Awesome.

Well this is good to know,finally ‘they’ contribute some good to society.
All politics aside,i would like to personally thank all Fox viewers for indirectly supporting the building of this new Islamic Cultural Center.However,we need a lot more investment in Manhattan.A new Islamic Cultural Center is a good start but we need a lot more capital running through our streets to lift Manhattan ‘back up’.

I hear it’s going to have a pool,a gym,a library,a media center and even a tribute to the victims of 9/11.
Plans are moving forward,thanks guys!

After Shirley Sherrod, Obama birthers and “terror babies,” at long last we have a conspiricay theory that’s truly worthy of Fox News!

http://ow.ly/2vxIJ

I love it!! Jon Stewart caught Fox with its pants down again.

gordonbloyershow said:
Nut Alert….Nut Alert…..Is there a doctor out there than can help the Lyin King? Oh I mean the Real Royal King.
RRK needs help. His mother dropped him on his head when he was a baby. The damage is getting worse everyday. He keeps seeing his invisible childhood friend, Basil. He is also hearing voices that keep feeding him nonsensical rhymes. If this keeps up he will lose his job at White Castle. When he got that job he thought they were serving burgers out of HIS house.

Bloyers it looks like your the real nut here!! You Right Wing Wackos are caught lying again. Hows that family values working out for you now.

Terrorists over here, terrorists over there, boo!!! I tawt I taw a tewerwist!!! So we can all agree that this movie is waxing Ridley Scott? Aliens bouncing and crawling out of every crook and panties? What will the climactic ending prove to be? Oh, 2012. Executive Branch law enforcement hulks out and builds a prison over the length of North America slinging cameras, tracking devices and tasers in a wild flurry of misplaced authority? You have to ask yourself, what George Washington would do? He would ask Ben Franklin because he had abundant common sense, knowledge and wisdom. People have the right to question certain things like the lack of discretion in building an Islamic Cultural Center near ground zero. That is the height of arrogance and an insult. Being insulted means that you have respect for yourself. Do we not respect ourselves anymore? Has Jerry Springer finally proven to us what disgusting retards we all are and we just have no self esteem left to fight off these jackals? Tune in, turn off, kill whitey? Really? Not for me. At least I know that I am being the concerned person that I should be and disagreeing with a double standard in spite of publically manipulated correcting propaganda. Which species is next on the protected list and who will be there to enforce it when we are extinct because of our own lack of wisdom and the strength to enforce equality? I know, just blame the one that brought up the subject hide our heads in the sand and pray that the wheels don’t fall off of the doom mobile every day forever. 2012 is coming, 2012 is coming. Panic free for all and martial law. Oh the humanity. The end.

By definition Islam is a religion for peace and spiritual values. I think one mosque is not enough to make up for what happened 9/11. And what about churches and synagoges – just to follow the example?!

Right on Jon–That is not comedy though, it is a sad, sad joke, and it is on all of us Americans especially the unemployed. You can’t spread this far enough and fast enough. If this don’t light a light bulb in the heads of the Tea party, the religious right, the unemployed, the white republicans, and some of the domb Democrats that hate the rest of the world because they are not as rich as daddy told them they could get, than America may just go down the toilet this November.
God, I hope that don’t happen in november. If you can’t understand all of this by November, please don’t vote.

To

HRH

Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Al Saud

Chairman of Kingdom holding Company

Riyadh, K.S.A.

Your highness,

 My name is Prabal Rai from Bhaktapur, Nepal and I’m trying to reach

for your since from 6 year’s and try to seek justice for my life.  As

I have been discharge from Saudi Arabia due to medical reason’s as I

became victim of hemorrhagic stroke due to being long time patient of

Hypertension.  And I was send back to Nepal on May, 2005 due to my

lack of physical condition’s which I no longer provide service to the

company that I have worked. But now with regular therapy and

medication’s I was able to do all my daily activities and personal

thing without any help or assistance from others family member’s.  I

could walk freely in independently with my own and I still hope to be

recover more in future if I get proper therapy and medication’s which

I’m now unable to continue further due to lack of financial stances

from my side.  That’s why I need re-employment back in work but still

due to my physically not fit for providing same working capacity in my

profession which I have worked before as restaurant supervisor I

prefer to worked as office Asst. or any desk job in office premises.

Even I could work in any food industry warehouse inventory controller

or in-charge.

I need this job for my own life security and fulfillment’s of need for

therapy and medication’s expenses and to support my family as well.

Please your highness I’m requesting you i humanitarian grounds to

assists me in form of human relationship as goodwill.  I heard from

many that you are the person with respect and kind heart who is always

willing to help others in time of need and they ask you for your help.

And I hope surely this time you could help me fulfill my cause to

support my life.  As you could further contact through your officials

and from Nepal embassy in the contact address I provide yo below:

Sincerely

Prabal Rai

P.O. Box 15142 K.P.C.

Kathmandu, Nepal

Residential address:  132/4 Balkot V.D.C. Bhaktapur

Tel: 00977-1-6636281 (Home)

      00977-98418354836 (Mobile)