What do the following stories have in common? repost w/ an edit

[Botany]

What do the following stories have in common?

Breitbart's story about Shirley Sherrod's alleged racist remarks about a white farmer.

The Black Panthers were trying to scare off white voters story.

The Al Gore sexual assault charge story.

ACORN was willing to help a pimp set up an underage prostitute business story.

The Climate-gate story aka scientists were trying to manipulate data to prove their case about global warming.

All those stories were based on lies and pushed 24/7 by Fox and other right wing outlets even though they were
proven to be false however the damage was done and Roger Ailes sees that as a victory. I saw about 15 seconds of Sean Hannity
selling the lie that there was DNA evidence of Al Gore's sexual assault in Portland, Oregon in 2006 but I doubt that he
or Fox have come on air and issued a retraction or an apology because they are not in the news business but in the
attack and bloody the "other side" business.

Joseph Goebbels would be proud of such work.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." J. Goebbels

BTW I hope Shirley Sherrod sues the hell out of Breitbart for damages and Tom Vilsack too. The republicans are a true minority
party and they are trying to cling to power with fear and lies. Because who do you think is paying Breitbart to produce his hit pieces?

[dipsydoodle]

1. That's what happened here but not just by Fox.

Now an often repeated lie : Why The UK Banned Corexit

What seems to be almost unique here is the the blog writer put in his own correction to remove the lie. Chances are you won't find even a DU blogger has entered this correction

Thanks to my brother, the engineer, for the correction regarding UK’s “rocky shores test” (and for keeping ME honest):

From my understanding, the “limpet test” a.k.a. “rocky shores test” that is performed by the UK is primarily an evaluation of the ability of the limpet to adhere to a rock surface after exposure to a dispersant. The inability to adhere is a result of the slipperiness caused by the surfactant in the dispersant. “For the purposes of the test”, the limpet is assumed dead if it is unable to adhere to the rock after exposure. This is because a crustacean that is unable to adhere to the rock will likely die due to any of a number of causes including wave action, predation, etc.

While the negative effects on crustaceans are certainly of concern, the test result implies no toxic effects on other creatures OR on any creatures in areas where rocky shores are not present. In fact, the ban in the UK applies only to use of the dispersant in areas of rocky shores and has no effect in offshore applications (3 miles out and further).

Additionally, it’s important to point out that the UK ban on Corexit is specifically for rocky shoreline conditions and that (referencing Corexit 9500 and 9527): “Existing stocks of these products may still be used away from rocky shorelines in appropriate conditions.”

http://cleanthegulfnow.org/archives/why-the-uk-banned-corexit/

Please note that I have used this example solely because its one I came across by chance yestereday whilst searching for a suitable link to refute the umteenth lie here on DU. I do not support BP in any way shape or form but I do believe in the complete truth. So - the next time you find a blog containing that lie then maybe consider whether or not anything else the blogger has written is the truth or a fabrication.

[Botany]

2. Whatever .....