http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnew...erica.html

"Shutting down" the AP would be antithetical to American values, the US Constitution, etc. But, shutting them out of military reporting would be justified, IMHO, as the reporter was embedded with the military unit. One of the problems is that the AP is probably far less accountable than an individual newspaper would be because, in theory, any embedded reporter for almost any US newspaper could act as an "AP Reporter".

The reporter should be removed from his reporting duties on the war. There's a dark side to taking a picture of a dying, mutilated soldier this reporter was "embedded" with.

I'm not really sure how one could do it..but..removing financial support of the AP would be the quickest way to effect change. Using the force of government to effect change is usually followed by unintended consequences.

In juxtaposition, here is an AP article about the Van Jones resignation - not a word about communism. They want it completely scrubbed from the discussion.

Quote:President Barack Obama's adviser Van Jones has resigned amid controversy over past inflammatory statements, the White House said early Sunday. Jones, an administration official specializing in environmentally friendly "green jobs" with the White House Council on Environmental Quality was linked to efforts suggesting a government role in the 2001 terror attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans. The matter surfaced after news reports of a derogatory comment Jones made in the past about Republicans, and separately, of Jones' name appearing on a petition connected to the events surrounding the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. That 2004 petition had asked for congressional hearings and other investigations into whether high-level government officials had allowed the attacks to occur...

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=..._article=1

(09-07-2009 02:05 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I'm not really sure how one could do it..but..removing financial support of the AP would be the quickest way to effect change. Using the force of government to effect change is usually followed by unintended consequences.

That's virtually impossible.

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/faq.html#2 Wrote:2. Who owns The Associated Press?
The Associated Press is a not-for-profit cooperative, which means it is owned by its 1,500 U.S. daily newspaper members. They elect a board of directors that directs the cooperative.

3. What is the reach of The Associated Press?
On any given day, more than half the world's population sees news from AP.

AP serves 1,700 newspapers and 5,000 radio and television outlets in the United States as well as newspaper, radio and television subscribers internationally.

Over the past decade, AP has also sold a selection of its text, photo, audio and video reports to commercial online operations, both closed-end desktops (the Information Services business) and open Web sites (the Digital business). From the beginning, the objective has been to extract supplemental revenue from commercial markets to subsidize more newsgathering and other services for members. This policy has been regularly reviewed and reaffirmed by AP’s Board, mostly recently in 2005.

.

WELL SWEETHEARTS !!!!!!!!!!

This time it AIN'T GW's fault !!!!!!!!

During Father Barack's "Short Tenure and POTUS", the Last Two Months in BOTH WAR THEATERS have seen it's bloodiest Causality Count to Date since Operations Began in the Middle East.

You guys who used to just love bashing Bush over these U.S. Troop Causality Counts, now have ONLY Father Barack to blame.

But then I believe this is what he really wants .... so many of our Soldiers dying that HIS MEANS TO HIS ENDS will be met.

What a sorry piece of sphincter life you guyz tossed into the White House.

.

McCain would've definitely put us in the same position, he pretty much admitted.