Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Still Waiting For The Union Leader To Post My Comment In Support Of The Browns from 2 days ago...

I just sent this to Charlie Perkins who heads up "New Media" over at the the Union Leader:


I still have yet to see/view any new comments - either in support of or against Ed and Elaine Brown. There have been no new posts allowed on your site since I noted this in a blog post 2 days ago at this link.

I asked you if you are posting comments and you responded:

Charlie: I am posting many comments. There have been many more comments that have come in recently anti-Brown than pro-Brown. A few weeks ago the proportion was more in favor of the Browns. That has swung a bit in the past few weeks.

Fred: Ok. It just seems like….. Like my comment…. Have you posted my comment? My name is Fred.

Charlie: Your name is Fred? No. Because I want your name. I don’t want ‘Fred’.

Fred: I posted my email address and I posted my phone number. What more do you want?

Charlie: That would help. I would like your last name. That would help. We tilt the comments towards New Hampshire people.

Fred: Ok. Ok, well my last name is ‘Smart’ – SMART. I just put my first name in there.


Charlie, I am still waiting for you to post my comments in support of Ed and Elaine Brown which I submitted 2+ days ago.

Is there anything more that you need from me in order for my post/comment to qualify for inclusion?

Thanks again!

Peace and God Bless,


PS. I hope you have been following the news - ie. the Plainfield police chief has admitted to have stood down the Browns after lying to the media:

Evidence Of A Conspircy: Never Happened Or Stand Down?

Police stand down from responding to emergency calls. Then they lie to the media.

Josh Davis WMUR: If you tried to call 911 last night in this area chances are you had a hard time getting through.
That’s because so many Ed and Elaine Brown supporters were dialing that operators just couldn’t keep up….all for something police say “never happened.”

Evidence 911 Dispatch And Emergency Stood Down

Later Police Were Forced To Admit The Stand Down. Because the evidence was available online.

“And Plainfield police did not respond.”

Plainfield Chief of Police: “For officer safety, the same thing for the fire departments or emergency medical services, we would not send them in.


Evidence of a Conspiracy

Casey Lee Cobb | Show The Law | July 31st 2007

WMUR Reports that the activity of the 29th in which lead to an onslaught of hundreds of phone calls from concerned Brown supporters was and I quote “All for something police say never happened.” Now it appears that WMUR is backing away from that statement and video report by releasing a new official (Law Enforcement Friendly) revised edition of the response that local authorities have for that nights events.

In this new (Law Enforcement Friendly) close-ended version of the coverage for the events of the 29th, police admit that they stood down, and refused to respond to emergency phone calls on behalf of the Browns for purposes of the safety of law enforcement officers, firefighters, and EMS. Now if you will notice, in this new video the police completely contradict the reporting of WMUR’s previous version of the coverage of these events where WMUR has specifically stated that this was “All for something police officers say never happened.”

Question: How can you make a conscious decision to stand down from something that “...never happened.”?

Upon closer inspection you will notice that it becomes completely transparent that either

* (A) the statement from WMUR was not factual. (or)

* (B) The local law enforcement and media are working together in tandom in order to shape public opinion to fit the desires of law enforcement, via publishing a revisionists form of history. That version being the more factual, we stood down AND SOMETHING WAS HAPPENING version.

Now I know what you’re thinking, most respectable news agencies would simply issue a retraction of the portion of the news report that was untrue or contradictory. Or if there was something more sinister going on, they may choose to pretend that the first report never existed, and then carry on by publicly releasing on their official YouTube account the (Law Enforcement Friendly) version of history.

If there is no retraction issued regarding the statement “All for something police say never happened.” we can naturally come to the conclusion that option (B) is what WMUR chose to go with. In the un-likely event that WMUR were to try and save face, that they are credible and not under the influence of local law enforcement maybe they would consider revealing the name of their initial source that being the police officer(s) who deliberately lied to the news media.

A Short Recap just in case you’re confused: Police officers did not respond, to something that never happened, and were not present while it was not happening.


Post a Comment

<< Home