Now that we know how the game is played, please tell us why your reporting from Damascus, or Gaza, or the West Bank (as just three examples) should be given any credibility whatsoever. How much of Arafat and Assad’s thuggish behavior have you been covering up? And if you now propose to tell us, why should we believe you?
In a just and rational world, this should be devastating for the network, but they’ll probably get the usual pass.
I have to add a new term to the media glossary.
“Fierce resistance” means they shoot back, almost always to little effect.
Chirac is going bonkers.
Now he wants to set up a French news channel to counter the “Anglo-Saxon” perspective from CNN and…wait for it…the BBC.
If he doesn’t think that the BBC already provides a French perspective, then the mind boggles at what he expects the French channel to broadcast.
Chirac is going bonkers.
Now he wants to set up a French news channel to counter the “Anglo-Saxon” perspective from CNN and…wait for it…the BBC.
If he doesn’t think that the BBC already provides a French perspective, then the mind boggles at what he expects the French channel to broadcast.
Chirac is going bonkers.
Now he wants to set up a French news channel to counter the “Anglo-Saxon” perspective from CNN and…wait for it…the BBC.
If he doesn’t think that the BBC already provides a French perspective, then the mind boggles at what he expects the French channel to broadcast.
A wonderful phrase that Rumsfeld just used in his press briefing. He means that in the mathematical sense, of course. Catastrophe theory is about how one can see huge and abrupt changes from small inputs, and it’s exactly applicable here. USA Today (via Donald Sensing) has a good wrapup of how it happened, including the story of how a captured colonel resulted in the rapid fall of Baghdad.
He really went off on the doom’n’gloom reporting today as well.
A wonderful phrase that Rumsfeld just used in his press briefing. He means that in the mathematical sense, of course. Catastrophe theory is about how one can see huge and abrupt changes from small inputs, and it’s exactly applicable here. USA Today (via Donald Sensing) has a good wrapup of how it happened, including the story of how a captured colonel resulted in the rapid fall of Baghdad.
He really went off on the doom’n’gloom reporting today as well.
A wonderful phrase that Rumsfeld just used in his press briefing. He means that in the mathematical sense, of course. Catastrophe theory is about how one can see huge and abrupt changes from small inputs, and it’s exactly applicable here. USA Today (via Donald Sensing) has a good wrapup of how it happened, including the story of how a captured colonel resulted in the rapid fall of Baghdad.
He really went off on the doom’n’gloom reporting today as well.
Rabid leftist professors continue to live the lie.
I doubt it, despite the dumb headline of this article.
The very first graf of the story puts the lie to it:
Cloning humans, or any other primates, may be impossible with today’s techniques because of a fundamental molecular obstacle, say scientists trying to understand why attempts to clone monkeys have failed.
The emphasis is mine.
It may indeed be that our present cloning techniques preclude cloning primates, but the notion that it is “impossible” is utter nonsense. It doesn’t violate any laws of physics, and is most certainly possible, even if we have to get a little, or a lot smarter to make it happen.