DescentBB

In light of TB's post , I came across something a bit more substantive to back up what he pasted:

\"Burke wrote that his documentary depicts the plight of moderate Muslims who are silenced by Islamic extremists, adding, \"Now it appears to be PBS and CPB who are silencing them.\"

So is a federally funded media trying to protect Islamnofacism?:

\"Jeff Bieber, WETA's executive producer for Crossroads, gave a substantially different explanation. He said Burke's film had \"serious structural problems (and) . . . was irresponsible because the writing was alarmist, and it wasn't fair.\"

So why is depicting the plight of the silenced muslums unfair and alarmist? Let me hypothesize. Perhaps there is no American/Israel cabal presented as the root cause for why terroist flourish? Does the left wing controlled monolith that is PBS so fear a differing view from the politically correct one purveyed to their audience that any contradiction is verboten? Like the democratic presidential candidates refusing to take part in a debate simply because Fox News is a co sponser, PBS seems also to not being able to handle a dose of opposing view-point. Sadly, the american citizenry are the ultimate losers.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... s0410.html

woodchip wrote:Like the democratic presidential candidates refusing to take part in a debate simply because Fox News is a co sponser

You are truncating the facts a bit there. It wasn't so much that FOX News was a co-sponsor. It was more at controversial remarks made by the head of the channel prior to the debates.

Not saying dropping out was the right decision. In actuality, I think it was a rather stupid choice.

PBS makes great nature shows. I personally can't stand PBS or NPR when it comes to news. NPR is just painful.

Im not going to even bother... this is like a ThunderBunny repeat.

Lets just say that I am pretty sure that the media doesn't like people who want to bomb them due to their freedom of the press