Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old March 10th, 2008 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Washington Times

Washington Times Cleans Out Extremists

The Washington Times has appointed a new executive editor, marking a major change in direction for the perennially money-losing paper that is owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon. John Solomon, a former Associated Press and Washington Post reporter, replaces Wesley Pruden, who was editor-in-chief for 16 years.

Solomon's appointment may mark the end of a tumultuous period for the hard-right Times, which included a spate of extremely bad press such as "Hell of a Times," a devastating exposť of racism and sexism at the paper that was published in The Nation in October 2006. The negative coverage apparently took its toll on newsroom morale. Several prominent staffers ó including Washington insider Tony Blankley, the newspaper's editorial page editor and former press secretary for then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), and FOX News contributor Bill Sammon ó have left the organization in the past year.

The appointment of Solomon means that Pruden's once-important vision for the future of the paper, which has a reputation for shoddy journalism, will not come to pass. Pruden told C-SPAN in 2005 that he thought his managing editor, Francis Booth Coombs (who claims on his personal website to have been "in many ways the chief architect of Washington Times news coverage"), should ultimately replace him. But Coombs, whose bigotry has been detailed in the Intelligence Report and who has been accused of racism by former Times employees, also announced his retirement in January.

Coombs' wife, Marian, has written extremist material for white supremacist publications, and Coombs has actually published several of her stories in the Times. As revealed by the Report in 2005, some of those stories relied on explicitly racist sources.

One of Coombs' favorite editors, Robert Stacy McCain, is a foe of interracial marriage and a former member of the white supremacist League of the South. (McCain resigned from the Times a few days after Solomon's hire was announced.) Coombs' personal website was created and registered by George McDaniel, who has worked for and been published by the racist American Renaissance journal. Possibly even more damaging were March 2007 allegations that Marian Coombs had associated with neo-Nazi leader Bill White, whose website is filled with attacks on Jews and blacks.

During Pruden and Coombs' tenure, the Times had on its staff other extremists besides McCain. Sam Francis, who would serve as editor in the late 1990s and early 2000s for the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens, was the paper's deputy editorial page editor from 1987 to 1991 and then a columnist until 1995. Francis was fired that year after conservative author Dinesh D'Souza wrote about racist remarks Francis had made at a 1994 American Renaissance conference.

Even so, when Francis died in 2005, the Times wrote a glowing obituary. The article completely omitted Francis' 1995 firing from the Times and his prolific writings for white supremacist publications, describing him instead as "a leading voice of traditional conservatism."

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intel...le.jsp?aid=895
 
Old March 10th, 2008 #2
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[WT goes the rest of the way: already kike-right on foreign policy, it will now go kike-left ward on softer stuff.]

New Direction Apparent at Washington Times
Posted in Media Extremism by Mark Potok on February 27, 2008

Print This Post Print This Post

Just one month after taking the reins of The Washington Times — a paper with a long history of far-right reporting and several top editors linked to white supremacist ideas — Editor-in-Chief John Solomon has signaled a major change in direction.

In an internal memo issued on Monday, Feb. 25, the Times’ Patrick Tuohy listed a set of five changes to the publication’s rules of style. The brief E-mail spoke volumes.

No longer will the Times refer snidely in headlines to “Hillary”; the new headline reference to the New York senator and presidential candidate will now be “Clinton.” The word “gay” will replace the word “homosexual” in copy — “except in clinical references or references to sexual activity,” as Tuohy writes. The newspaper, which had fiercely opposed gay marriage in its editorials and less explicitly in many of its news columns, will stop using sarcastic quotes around the word “marriage” when discussing same-sex unions. It has now approved the word “moderate” (”centrist” was the formerly preferred term) for discussing a particular range of political views — a word it apparently avoided in the past because it carried the connotation of “reasonable.” Finally, the newspaper will now refer to “illegal immigrants,” not “illegal aliens,” a term many immigrants and human rights activists feel is denigrating and conjures up visions of frightening other-worldly beings.

The Washington Times has a long history of hard-right political views that informed not only its editorial pages but also, very frequently, its new reporting. It has a reputation for using tendentious language that demeans those it disagrees with. The new style changes clearly reflect the efforts of Solomon, a former Associated Press and Washington Post reporter, to point the paper in a more mainstream direction.

Solomon replaced Wesley Pruden, who had been editor-in-chief for 16 years and who had championed his managing editor, Francis Booth Coombs, as his replacement. As a result, Coombs quit the paper with Pruden. A Coombs favorite, assistant national editor Robert Stacy McCain, followed a few days later. All three men have ties to white supremacist ideas that have been detailed in the Intelligence Report and on Hatewatch, both published by the Southern Poverty Law Center, and elsewhere.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/0...hington-times/
 
Old March 10th, 2008 #3
John in Woodbridge
Senior Member
 
John in Woodbridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,749
John in Woodbridge
Default

I remember getting the Washington Times many years ago. Not nearly as offensive as The Post but the later newspaper would have some extensive high-brow articles that were an interesting read (usually interspersed between nigger-worship). The point is I think WN media can take some hints from a media outlet like the Washington Post when it comes to propaganda effectiveness.
__________________
Itís time to stop being Americans. Itís time to start being White Men again. - Gregory Hood
 
Old March 11th, 2008 #4
centerfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 656
centerfire
Default

How is it that Moon didn't know about the racist leanings of the people who ran and contributed to the newspaper which he supported with the hundreds of millions of dollars? The anti-immigration line taken by the publication alone should have alerted him, yet there was so much more than that advocated by the contributors. These ideas are diametrically opposed to the core teachings of his "Unification Church."

The "unification" nonsense is the goal of unifying the entire world, largely by breaking down racial barriers. In a college course I took on states of consciousness, there was a segment on cults in which we watched a video about Moon and his group. There was footage of a mass wedding he presided over at a stadium (there may have been more than one), and it was plain to see how he paired great numbers of interracial couples. So the folks running his propaganda rag were advocating the very opposite of what Moon himself sees as the goal of his cult movement. I did a quick Google search and found a tract he wrote explaining his philosophy entitled "The Trust Placed In Us," which was written 6/3/1979. Here are two excerpts:

Snippet 1 ... Our first job is denial and separation from that kind of life, and we begin by denying the materialistic and individually oriented trends that America thinks are worth pursuing. We deny the new counterculture the hippies said they would build. We do unconventional things like worship, and not only that, but in a sanctuary without chairs. We are not thinking only in Western cultural terms, but looking at the world as one unit. Here white people are thinking about all races, for instance.

Snippet 2 ... Since our goal is to love the world, it is nothing for white people to love black people, and for black people to love whites is easy. Your love shows when you come to be matched. Did those who volunteered for interracial marriage accept it because I pushed them? That day I was colorblind. Why is it possible in the Unification Church? Because our goal is to love the world, and as a result there is nothing we cannot digest. For us there is no boundary between races or cultures.

I can see why he published a "conservative" rag and backed political "conservative" orgs, given that he opposes the hippies and their disconnectedness. What surprises is that he would allow the likes of Sam Francis and the others mentioned to pilot one of his main propaganda vessels.

I didn't read the entirety of "The Trust Placed In Us," though it's easy to find on the net if you want to indulge yourself.
__________________
"In 1958 I still believed that there was a significant intellectual difference between the American bourgeoisie and the cattle that one sees peering between the slats of large trucks as they contentedly munch hay on their way to the abattoir."

Revilo P. Oliver

Last edited by centerfire; March 11th, 2008 at 06:23 AM.
 
Old July 29th, 2008 #5
Hugh Lincoln
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 53
Hugh Lincoln
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Crowe View Post
I remember getting the Washington Times many years ago. Not nearly as offensive as The Post but the later newspaper would have some extensive high-brow articles that were an interesting read (usually interspersed between nigger-worship). The point is I think WN media can take some hints from a media outlet like the Washington Post when it comes to propaganda effectiveness.
The Washington Times is about as exciting as listening to oatmeal. It just plain sucks... not even worth the quarter they charge. The op-ed page if the fucking worst. Nobody gives a shit what Arnaud de Borchgrave has to say. John Solomon sounds to me like a complete climber who built up his rolodex at AP and cares more about connections than actual journalism. And I never could get comfortable with the Moonie crap.
__________________
Life to Whites
 
Old November 12th, 2009 #7
Gabry Ponte
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,024
Default

Being from the DC area the WT has always been called the "Mooney" paper. Moon is a nutcase and those lemmings that follow him are even worse. It is a cult comparable to Hari Krishnas. They also have mass weddings where people marry strangers they have never met.

So it is hard to get legitimacy with that kind of baggage. I read the WT when it was laying around in an office waiting room or somewhere. Nothing special really. Some articles were good but it seemed to be a Christian leaning paper. If traditional means a christian family that prays and goes to church then for me that is not a WN paper.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:23 AM.
Page generated in 0.09495 seconds.