Although the Sulzberger Dynasty's New York Times claims to be interested in printing "all the news that's fit to print," the Times has apparently felt that news which contradicts the Warren Commission's official version of how JFK was actually eliminated in Dallas isn't fit to print. As Destiny Betrayed by James DiEugenio recalled:
"A summary of the Times' early devotion to the Warren Report includes: Tom Wicker's unprofessional failure in November 1963 to follow up diligently on the Parkland doctor's statement that JFK suffered wounds of entry into his throat; Arthur Krock's appraisal of the Report as `the definitive history of the tragedy'; Wicker's unqualified testimonial in the preface for Warren Commission counsel David Belin's book, Harrison Salisbury's endorsement of the Times' abridged version of the Report; the Times' shamelessly doctored and biased selection of testimony in The Witnesses..; its flagrant headline November 24, 1963, when Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby; the systematic violation of the pledge, taken after Oswald's death by then-managing editor Turner Catledge, to refer to Oswald as `the alleged assassin'; the removal on December 1, 1970, of searching pro-conspiracy questions in John Leonard's book review of Jim Garrison's Heritage of Stone from all but the early, bulldog edition..."
The effect of the GOP tax scam on real estate
59 minutes ago