Another New Low for the New York Times

Image result for images of rogue airplanes taking aim at world trade center

All the nooze that’s fit to line the bottom of your bird cage

The journalistic dumpster fire that is the New York Times topped itself again yesterday, with this gem posted on Twitter, on the anniversary of 9/11:

“Eighteen years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center.” (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/11/new-york-times-now-deleted-tweet-marking-911-claim/)

The airplanes? The airplanes “took aim”?

Can you imagine how little respect the Times has for its readers, that it would ever publish such a thing, even on Twitter?

They also got the death toll wrong, saying it was “2,000” when in fact it was very nearly 3,000.  But heck, who’s counting? They were only useless Americans wiped out by two rogue airplanes.

Readers didn’t much care for this insult to their intelligence, so the Times deleted the stupid tweet and put up one that was somewhat less stupid. This time the culprit was not killer airplanes but “terrorist attacks”–apparently by persons unknown, or by no one in particular: the Times didn’t see fit to identify the enemy. The accurate term is “Muslim terrorists from Arab countries.”

Do you find it a bit grim that the American people, increasingly, are having to do without reliable sources of news? As citizens of a republic, exercising sovereignty at the polls, we need reliable information. Our mainstream nooze media refuse to give us any.

Here’s praying they get replaced by news outlets that will do their level best to give us honest news. I used to work for a newspaper like that, so I know it can be done. The New York Times doesn’t want to do it, that’s all.

11 comments on “Another New Low for the New York Times

  1. “doesn’t want to do it” is a very accurate statement. How pathetic that we can not even receive “…just the facts” We can form our own opinions, we do not need to read or listen to this twisted way of “reporting”

    1. Today’s “adults” came out of the colleges in an era when a college education became essentially worthless and probably included some heavy political indoctrination. I fear for the future.

    2. J-school graduates were pretty incompetent in the 70s. I know. I tried to train a couple of them. The really odd thing about it was, the high school kids I trained were really good–much sharper than the college grads. Hmm…

Leave a Reply