http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=33086

<font color='white'>Ukrainians demand end to 66 years of N.Y. Times lying

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 14, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com


As a shareholder in the New York Times Company, I rejoiced to learn from the Associated Press: "Amid a devastating reporting scandal in which two top editors have resigned, the New York Times faces the possible loss of its 1932 Pulitzer Prize.

"Times reporter Walter Duranty won the award more than 70 years ago for his reporting on the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin's communist regime.

"In April, however, a Pulitzer committee launched a review of Duranty's work after Ukrainian groups worldwide complained he deliberately ignored the forced famine in the Ukraine that killed millions."

Actually, as detailed in the book "Stalin's Apologist," Duranty, New York Times Moscow correspondent emphatically denied any such Stalinist mass murders, for which British correspondent Malcolm Muggeridge called Duranty "the worst liar in the history of journalism."

That apparently has made much too little a difference to the New York Times Company.

At one shareholders' meeting I asked (then) publisher Arthur ("Punch") Sulzberger why this monumental liar Duranty's framed photograph is on the wall of the Times' hall of fame of Pulitzer winners. "Punch" was both courteous and concerned.

He arranged for me to tour the hall, and later told me that under Duranty's picture a plaque had been installed reading "Other writers in the Times and elsewhere have discredited this coverage."

That was surely not enough – that and the Times' counting Duranty among all their Pulitzer winners about which they annually brag.

When at a later Times shareholders' meeting, I asked about this again – of new publisher Arthur ("Pinch") Sulzberger – this young man was totally rude and resistant.

In the Pulitzer Prize's 86 years of existence, no prize has been revoked, the AP reported – although the Washington Post surrendered Janet Cooke's 1991 award after she admitted writing a series about an 8-year-old heroin addict who didn't exist. The Post failed, however, to fire editor Ben Bradlee who allowed these days of lies into the print of the Washington Post.

Michael Sawkiw Jr., president of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, said more than 15,000 post cards, and thousands more letters and e-mails, were sent to the Pulitzer board.

"Exactly like Jayson Blair, the heart of all this is journalistic integrity and ethics," said Sawkiw.

For denying Stalin's mass murder of Ukrainians, Duranty of the New York Times was given exclusive interviews with this dictator, and accompanied Molotov to Washington in 1933 when President Roosevelt extended diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union.

That the New York Times has refused to repudiate Duranty's Pulitzer – as the Washington Post sent back their lying reporter Janet Cooke's Pulitzer – is a continuing American journalistic outrage.

If New York Times publisher "Pinch" decides not to repudiate Duranty's Pulitzer and stop the annual bragging with Duranty as one of the Pulitzer recipients, young Sulzberger should be forced to resign, just as he (finally) forced the resignation of editors Howell Raines and Gerald Boyd. </font>

Time magazine just did a story on the worst printed lies, Hitlers diaries and such. This NY Times series of stories seemed by far the worse case. The journalist was an obvious communist sympathiser and they arragantly ignored all the other posts by the world journalists. :mad: If it is such a well known lie why not bend over backwards to rectify it? A newspaper without credibility is just pointless.

As a daily NY Times reader, I'm still pulling for them to get it together and end this mess.

Note that the mess is born mostly of affirmative action and secondly of laziness in review. Let us see.

At least it doesn't have the "let us proscribe your world to you" slant the economist does. ;) I have noticed this very recently, as I now get The Economist weekly.

Just give me a week or two and I'll find a problem with the BBC. ;)

Not good. :(

Maybe they should have a little chat with FOX News' lawyers... They ended up getting FOX to be allowed to tell lies.
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/28/arpubmg022803.htm

[ 06-16-2003, 02:37 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

:D Hell - surely they didn't need 3 court hearings and all those expensive lawyers to prove to people that they distort the truth. So there we go folks - it is OK to lie and there is no legal obligation to present truthful facts - well done Rupert - you showed them [img]smile.gif[/img] .

Of course, while what they are doing is legally acceptable there remain those scattered dots among us that find it morally reprehensible. Hence our failure to remain silent on the matter.

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
I remember reading about the coverup of the Ukraine Starvation.....no doubts about it, Stalin was one of the most productive if not THE most productive mass murderer in all of recorded history.
</font>

Actually that record goes to Chairman Mao - with Stalin second and Hitler rounding out the top three. Beware of dictators :(

Back on topic:
The Ukranians tried to have the Pulitzer prizerevoked once before (back around 1990) - and failed. Maybe they thought that the recent scandals at NY Times would make their case stronger?