New York Times Blatantly Edits Article About Occupy Wall Street To Protect Police (IMAGE)

Author: October 1, 2011 9:09 pm

Today police in New York City allowed protesters from the Occupy Wall Street rallies to march onto the Brooklyn Bridge. Shortly after they arrested hundreds of protesters for blocking traffic on the bridge, even though they’d allowed them to enter it.

Here you can clearly see NYPD officers leading protesters onto the bridge:

The New York times published an article on their website, explaining the true nature of what had happened. 20 minutes later they had changed it, to make it seem like the police had no blame in this incident.

The man who edited the article has strong ties to the New York Police Department. You can read his bio here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/business/media/13askthetimes.html

Below are screenshots of the same article, side by side. Clearly the New York Times would rather protect the police than report the truth.


Image from https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=o.184749301592842&type=1

Help us get the word out!
Share on Google+Share on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

facebook comments:

13 Comments

  • I don’t suppose anyone bothered to, you know, actually look up the changes to the article on their own before deciding that the NY Times is on Satan’s pay role? Might have discovered that the article actually expanded on the discussion of what happened. In particular:

    “Mr. Dunn said only people at the very front could hear the warning, and he was concerned that those in the back ‘would have had no idea that it was not O.K. to walk on the roadway of the bridge.’ Mr. Browne said that people who were in the rear of the crowd that may not have heard the warnings were not arrested and were free to leave.”

    Come on, folks. If you want to be angry about being manipulated and mislead, at least make sure you’re not being manipulated and mislead into being angry.

    • Many people do not read the whole article. One time I saw a lady reading the headlines of a newspaper thru the window of a newspaper dispenser. She said she didn’t buy the paper because she didn’t have time to read it, she got her news from reading the headlines.

  • Sounds like the NYT got paranoid about the article assigning responsibility to the Police in case the Police turned on them. Many media outlets will become vague and refuse to state the blatantly obvious is there’s a potential court case in it. Yes, to anyone who takes the time to look it over, it is obvious that the Police led the protesters to the bridge, but the papers either don’t want to say anything, or are too scared to say anything.

  • So the NY TIMES has joined the HOES of Wallstreet and the Corrupt BULLY BRUTAL COPS. PIGS ONCE AGAIN!

  • People really need to focus on why this is happening. Why has New York City made the decision to leave their citizens unprotected and easy prey for criminals who rob, rape and murder by dedicating their entire police force on a handful of peaceful young protesters exercising their constitutional rights. The reason is on account of people like the Koch Brothers who are freaking out. The Occupy movement is for real, there’s no turning back now. America is where the war must be fought and right now you are witnessing our troops moving into and occupying the strategic points of engagement. History is in the making!

    • If this is a repeat of Kent State…….we are no longer one country!!!

    • Robert Schiele

      So far, what’s happened in NYC and Boston, is a number of veterans, and some off-duty military personnel have joined the protest movement. They are there because they sympathize with the protesters, not to put them down. I saw one soldier holding a sign that read, “I’ve fought for my country twice. This is the first time I’ve KNOWN my enemy.”

      Yes, I do consider these developments to be potentially portentous, especially given the obvious fact that if our system’s screwed anyone over, it’s screwed our serving men and women worst of all. However, all of this is a far, far cry from active, on-duty military units defecting en masse to join the protesters, let alone engaging in any pitched battles in their defense.

      Could that happen? At this point I’d say the jury’s still out, but if there is one thing I believe virtually all Americans agree upon, it’s that they hate the “banksters,” and almost to the last man and woman despise our almost universally corrupt politicians from BOTH parties. That being the case, at this point, I’d say that nearly anything seems possible.

  • Maggie Richards

    Some democracy we have when police are allowed to entrap innocent people in this manner. Sadder still when a paper like the NY Times rewrites the story to make it look like the protestors committed a crime.

  • Sounds like the protesters are more like sheep then real protesters. “come on boys, lets herd them into the corral”

    Lame.

    • If you are the “J” who has been trolling alt.atheism for the past 10 years, I’m not surprised that you are against the protesters. You are against anything that will help anyone to inprove their situation. You are merely a hate-filled troll begging for attention. If you aren’t him, you are still a troll.

  • You all may want to do some digging into THIS story about the Koch Bros doing ILLEGAL business with Iran…they are already trying to spin and do damage control.
    http://politicalgates.blogspot.com/2011/10/in-new-bombshell-story-bloomberg.html#disqus_thread

  • They STILL don’t understand social media, do they?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

x
Click "Like" to get the latest updates