NY Times caught once again promoting leftist propaganda

In the past two days the Democratic Party operatives who run the New York Times have had to edit two different stories after normal Americans called them out for their blatant leftist propaganda.

First, it was for their story about how 'airplanes' took aim and brought down the Twin Towers:



A day earlier, they lionized the murdering communist Mao Zedong as "one of history's great revolutionary figures.'

You know, like George Washington:



Leftists who claim this propaganda-filled rag run by Democratic Party operatives is unbiased truly need to leave their echo chamber once in a while.

And our more important question: why do Democratic Party operatives insist on downplaying the actions of Islamic extremists and murdering communists?

 

The NYT is the democrats Pravda!!!!!!!!!!!! No more no less.

 

Historically speaking, you simply cannot deny Mao was very influential “revolutionary “ figure. Good or bad.

 

But is he a "great" revolutionary figure?

 

If you had lived in China under the Emperor - he might have been. You weren't there. What he became afterward is independent of the initial revolution. One could say he led a successful revolution, one impacting a larger population than any before it - but became a tyrant afterward. Historically an important revolution, of which he was the dominant figure.

 

No one with a modicum of intelligence, takes anything that rag says, seriously.

 

No American who grasps history gives credence to right wing revisionism.

 

Sun Yat-sen (/ˈsʌn ˈjætˈsɛn/; 12 November 1866 – 12 March 1925)[1][2] was a Chinese politician, physician and philosopher who provisionally served as the first president of the Republic of China; and the first leader of the Kuomintang (Nationalist Party of China). He is referred as the "Father of the Nation" in the Republic of China due to his instrumental role in the overthrow of the Qing dynasty during the Xinhai Revolution. Sun remains a unique figure among 20th-century Chinese leaders for being widely revered in both mainland China and Taiwan.[3]

Although Sun is considered to be one of the greatest leaders of modern China, his political life was one of constant struggle and frequent exile. After the success of the revolution in which the Han Chinese regained power after 268 years of living under Manchurian rule (Qing dynasty), he quickly resigned from his post as President of the newly founded Republic of China and relinquished it to Yuan Shikai, and led a successive revolutionary government as a challenge to the warlords who controlled much of the nation. Sun did not live to see his party consolidate its power over the country during the Northern Expedition. His party, which formed a fragile alliance with the Chinese Communist Party, split into two factions after his death.

Sun's chief legacy resides in his development of the political philosophy known as the Three Principles of the People: nationalism (independence from foreign imperialist domination), "rights of the people" (sometimes translated as "democracy"),[4] and the people's livelihood (just society).[5][6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Yat-sen (emphasis mine)

Mao did not lead a revolution, but rather seized control of China during a civil war which the KMT lost. If you want to admire the man who got rid of the Emperor, than it would be Sun Yat Sen, not Mao.

 

This is like saying the Nazis were among history's greatest barbecuers.

There are lots of ways to say things, and lots of ways to be untruthful by not saying the whole truth.

Charles Manson was one of the more notable charismatic leaders of the latter 20th century. So was Jim Jones.

Warren Jeffs was a devoted father and family man who loved his family like no other.

Roman Polanski and Woody Allen have always been "young at heart" just like Jeffrey Epstein, a recently deceased philanthropist devoted especially to young people.

Jeffrey Dahmer was one of the 20th century's most creative chefs.

...

 

But leaving 2/3 of his resume out is tantamount to fraud.

 

Yeah, but it wasn't just the communist Moa that was revolutionizing the country. There was also a democratic revolution on its way as well. Moa was always a tyrant.

 

I'll agree he was noteworthy; he far surpassed Stalin when it comes to being a leftist killer of one's own citizens.

But along with the Clinton advisor who had an ornament with Mao's picture hanging on the White House Christmas tree, many leftists in the U.S. seem to admire him; apparently, the headline writer for the New York Times also feels this way...

 

You do realize my OP displayed what is clearly left wing revisionism by the New York Times? And that it was normal Americans who were upset at this attempt to rewrite history?

'Splain yourself, my friend...

 

You clearly do not understand what revisionism means then if that is your view.

Real America has never left the conservative revise our history.

They never will. 'Splain that.

 

The NYT is the democrats Pravda!!!

 

What right wing revisionism?

 

OJ Simpson was a great football player...

 

That's like claiming Al Capone was just a poor misunderstood Italian civil rights worker.

 

But then like all the commie gun grabber he killed off something like 50 MILLION of his own people. Uh-------------he WAS a bad guy!!!!

 

Mao was one of the great revolutionary figures. They are not saying he is a great humanitarian, but as a revolutionary how could you even argue the point. He led the largest revolution in history.

 

OJ Simpson played great football.

Mao did not lead a great revolution but, rather a despicable one, He was a despicable revolutionary leader.

 

Moronic comparison on your part.

 

Because it was not a great revolution. His revolution was one of destruction. He destroyed Chinese civilization.

 

I didn't say he wasn't a bad guy. I just said that he was a historically important figure in the annuls of revolutions. You cannot deny that.

 

I never liked him either.