Monday, April 6, 2020

Fox News Is Finally Being Sued For Constantly Lying To Their Viewers


9 comments :

  1. Interesting. Didn't know such a suit was possible. But whom could they be suing on behalf of?

    The First Amendment is historically so fenced that there's likely little juridical room left for such a suit to serve as a credible threat.

    ReplyDelete
  2. “Fox News Is Finally Being Sued For Constantly Lying To Their Viewers”
    No. See http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/278406
    “We want to make sure that our platform, which is our values statement of our party, is a platform that you can be proud of, a platform that, again, reaffirms our commitment to a two-state solution — negotiated directly by the parties,” Perez told Jewish Democratic leaders in a call last week, according to Jewish Insider
    No. Shame/disgrace that Jewish Democratic leaders are pushing for a two-state solution — negotiated directly by the parties. Appeasement doesn’t bring peace. What brings peace? See my http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/25499
    May Hashem comfort the family with all those who mourn for Zion and Jerusalem
    I pleaded endlessly with my brother Rabbi Yitzchok ben Avraham Abba זצ"ל to make aliya, he, his wife and extended family. He and his wife drove me on July 8, 1991 to the airport when I made aliya. Yes I’m in deep sad mourning in Bnei Brak. The security officers asked me so nicely an hour ago when I was going for my daily walk wearing a mask and gloves to stay in Bnei Brak. I feel safe here, b”h. See http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/25493
    Dear Diaspora Rabbis
    This is not the time for well-meaning Internet messages and sermons about unity in times of trouble, nor about the renewal of Diaspora life when the epidemic has passed.
    Torah thoughts in these trying times
    Shabbat 118b:
    “R. Johanan said in the name of R. Simeon b. Yohai: If Israel were to keep two Sabbaths according to the laws thereof, they would be redeemed immediately, for it is said, “For thus said the Lord: “As for the eunuchs לסריסים who keep My sabbaths, Who have chosen what I desire And hold fast to My covenant—” (Isaiah 56:4). Which is followed by, “I will bring them to My sacred mount And let them rejoice in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices Shall be welcome on My altar; For My House shall be called A house of prayer for all peoples.” (Ibid. 7).”

    “To be sure, they seek Me daily, Eager to learn My ways. Like a nation that does what is right, That has not abandoned the laws of its God, They ask Me for the right way, They are eager for the nearness of God:” (Isaiah 58:2). Beautiful.
    This Friday is regular day in Israel, to prepare for the Shabbat.

    ReplyDelete
  3. typical Trumpian response - change the topic from virus to Israel.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 7, 2020 at 1:41 PM

    He's telling us that he's an avel, nothing trumpian about that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. it was the very first thing in the comment

    ReplyDelete
  6. No, the topic is Israel. See what I say http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2020/04/alarm-denial-blame-pro-trump-medias.html
    Allow me to add from Churchill WW2 book 4 pp. 431-2 [Moscow August 12, 1942]:
    “I inquired whether he had ever asked himself why Hitler did not come to England in 1940, when he was at the height of his power and we had only 20,000 trained troops, 200 guns, and 50 tanks. He did not come. The fact was that Hitler was afraid of the operation. It is not so easy to cross the Channel. Stalin replied that this was no analogy. The landing of Hitler in England would have been resisted by the people, whereas in the case of a British landing in France the people would have been on the side of the British. I pointed out that it was all the more important therefore not to expose the people of France by a withdrawal to a vengeance of Hitler and to waste them when they would be needed in the big operation in 1943.”
    Churchill then was fired up to attack Rommel after Rommel conquered Tobruk June 2, 1942. Churchill dismissed Stalin’s views and made attacking Rommel in Africa the war aim. Alas, I say, had Churchill agreed with Stalin and attacked Hitler in 1942 in France, this would have demoralized Hitler. “M. Stalin emphasized the importance of striking at the morale of the German Population.”
    We now know that the world knew of the death camps summer 1942. Stalin’s idea would\ve save the Jews. Stalin was right to attack Hitler in 1942. Interesting, much evidence that Roosevelt agreed with Stalin and tried and failed to persuade Churchill.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kalonymus HaQatanApril 7, 2020 at 3:22 PM

    https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/featured/1847887/bde-the-novominsker-rebbe-ztl-head-of-agudas-yisrael-moetzes-gedolei-torah-is-niftar.html?fbclid=IwAR1ia1j_V5oFDpDqwTjl_xvmbfbSple5wMw8tTmtb_ZGck-EjQhInU8kL3s

    ReplyDelete
  8. Allow me to add Churchill WW2 book 4 pp. 433-4:
    “I emphasized that we wanted to take the strain off the Russians. If we attempted that in Northern France we should meet with a rebuff. If we tried in North Africa w ehad a good chance of victory, and then we could help in Europe. If we could gain North Africa Hitler would have to bring his Air Force back, or otherwise we would destroy his allies, even for instance, Italy, and make a landing. The operation would have an important influence on Turkey and on the whole of Southern Europe, and all I was afraid of was that we might be forestalled. If North Africa were won this year we could make a deadly attack upon Hitler next year [too slow too late for the Jews]. This marked the turning-point in our conversation. Stalin then began to present various political difficulties. Would not an Anglo-American seizure of “Torch” [code name for operation against Rommel in Africa] regions be misunderstood in France? What were we doing about de Gaulle? I said that at this stage we did not wish him to intervene in the operation. The [Vichy] French were likely to fire on de Gaullists but unlikely to fire on Americans.”
    Dumb. The de Gaullists hated the Vichy French. Dumb not to wish de Gaulle to intervene. Almost everybody hated the Vichy French. That’s exactly where Churchill should’ve focused on.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.