Well, if they left in the part about the "war for oil", it would be too obvious that Kerry and Michael Moore wrote the speech for him. They already got dangerously close with the "little girl and her goat" remark...

As for leaving out the part about the damage to his terror network, and wanting more violence in the Afghan elections, that's just the kind of crap we'd EXPECT to be left out.

Karl Rove must be hiding it and saving it for election night.

Our promoting the Democratic elections in Afghanistan is the "Moslem Security" that we're not suppose to mess with in order to prevent more terrorist attacks.

The attempts of the maniacal liberal media to alter the election doesn't make me as mad at the voluntary blindness of much of the general populace.

Have we reached the end of the usefulness of the MSM? Or has the MSM realized the need for their services has rapidly diminished?

Maybe they are smart. As a buggy whip company, they know their time is running out. So, instead of running out the string, they are morphing into a new entity, a politically arm of the democratic party. This would justify the investment by democratic leaning businesses and politicians to work to keep there position in the marketplace, by supporting the media with advertising and legislation.

T

A Kerry presidency would be destructive to Republicans because it would institutionalize the illegal voting tactics of the left. We won't recognize this country in four years if Kerry wins.

Click on my name for comment on the two most important objectives we must accomplish in the next one and 1/2 days. Our focus has narrowed to these two items, and they are both achievable.

Yeah, this concerns me a lot as well.

I blogged about it yesterday (see link).

Soon after the tape came out, Fox mentioned they had it. I wasn't clear if they had the whole thing or just the part that al jazeera broadcasted. Any body know? My point is, I would think that Fox would play the whole thing -- unless the feds asked them not too. It just doesn't add up. Well, maybe they are holding it back until tomorrow.

This is absolutely crucial right now - in such a tight race and with the internals at best showing Bush with a 3 point margin (clearly within the range of error) such a revelation would have a dramatic effect. Obviously though if any news org like Fox had it (althoughI doubt other MSM's would ) they would show it.

I missed something here as to who it is who has withheld the portion of the UBL tape and who has it in it's original copy...meaning, is there some gatekeeper involved who has prevented the full tape from being made available to news sources, or, have news sources received the full tape but decided as a generally concerted MSM effort to withhold the parts that implicate and/or are damaging to Kerry?

I agree as you describe here that the withheld statements (as you've paraphrased) are damaging to Kerry and I can follow and accept your suggestions because of that...just saying here that I don't yet understand who has withheld what. There is little remaining in my estimation that lends credibility or reliability to most of the mainstream media, and this is a wretched example of why -- "editing" what the American public "should know about" because it's damaging to their DNC candidate. At least it proves that democracy isn't what they have in mind as a standard, emphasizing what's earlier been defined about CBS, etc.

I hope that FOX has the nerve to show the full demented UBL "speech" tomorrow. If anyone would, I'd hope that it was FOX who would. Hope that they do.

This reminds me, however and moreover, of the afterward statements by some of the jurists who served on the criminal trial for O.J.Simpson, some of who revealed after the verdict/jury duty they'd served that IF they'd been aware of certain significant information during the trial, they'd have convicted Simpson.

But, certain important information was withheld from them, and they were allowed to motivate on the "reasonable doubt" standard instead, later saying that what they learned after the jury, from other sources about conditions and such as aspects to the murders that occurred, that had they known during the trial (while sequestered) what they learned afterward, that they'd have had no reasonable doubt and would have voted to convict.

More indication of the damage to a democracy by "democracy by prosecution" with a relatively employed media set of sources acting to sequester public discourse.

I'm not suggesting that all information available to our government should be available to the general public and understand realistically why some of certain areas of knowledge should remain classified. However, where this tape is concerned, it's already been broadcast elsewhere, and the media has no presence as a form of government to withhold information simply because it's not what they think will get them what they want...

Censorship in reverse. Media as the 'BuyThis' standard of operation.