"Original Pechanga" fibs about news site

In Educating "Original Pechanga" About News, I said that Original Pechanga touted touted the superiority of NDNnews to PECHANGA.net as a news source. She responded:Rob says I claimed that NDN news was a superior news source and I did nothing of the kind. I stated that it was easier to run a website when you had Pechanga money like Victor, rather than having to go out and work on something other than your website.In fact, she did several things "of the kind." She posted enough to make her feelings clear on the subject. Here's the evidence from Original Pechanga's own blog:

NDNnews Tamra Defends Her Site from Pechanga AttacksTamra patiently explains to Victor Rocha's lackey the difference between a casino tribe sponsored website/casino Indian website (of which, Victor is one, making $36,000 per month in per capita, now that Pechanga terminated 25% of its tribe)Original Pechanga didn't just say the money made Victor's job easier. She directly stated that PECHANGA.net is a "casino tribe sponsored website." This is a bald-faced lie, since the website is privately owned and independently operated.

She strongly implied that Victor's per-capita payments make him favor news about "casino Indians." Again that's a lie, since he basically posts every article, whether positive or negative, about all Indians, not just "casino Indians."

After this false and misleading introduction, she proudly reposted Tamra's comments as a standalone blog entry. Here's Tamra describing her NDNnews site:My website IS a NDN news source and has been for many years. ... I would also like to point out, in case it was over looked, that ICT and Indianz are operated by casino tribes. So, they certainly have the man power and funding to have top of the line sites, posting hundreds of items each day and considered the news "source." I would too if I made $20K+ a month or more, with all that casino money. I too could have a staff and spend all my time posting articles.Original Pechanga labeled this posting a "takedown" of me. That means she was contradicting my assertions that PECHANGA.net is an unbiased news site. The only way to "take down" this view is to promote the opposite view: that NDNnews is a less biased and thus superior site.

Via Tamra, Original Pechanga strongly implied that NDN News is an Indian news source...and PECHANGA.net isn't. She strongly implied that people need to consider PECHANGA.net's source of funding, which is "all that casino money." She all but said (again, via Tamra) that money corrupts the postings at PECHANGA.net, making the site worthless as a news source.

The only reason for Original Pechanga to repost Tamra's comments was to emphasize that she agrees with them. She proved this with her final comment:Tamra spells it out PERFECTLY.After all that, Original Pechanga would have to be daft to claim she hasn't touted NDNnews over PECHANGA.net as an unbiased source of news. She's linked PECHANGA.net to the corrupting influence of casino money as deftly as George Bush linked 9/11 to Iraq.

But wait, there's more

In the comments section of another posting, Original Pechanga reiterated her assertion that the Pechanga tribe controls PECHANGA.net:When Victor named his site to honor the tribe, do you not think that carried some responsibility? Do you NOT think that people don't think of the tribe when they see the site? That is not part of the tribe, even though the link is "small" as you said. Does a SMALL link work differently than a LARGE link? Or do the both send you equally as fast to the site?She also posted several comments from others who said similar things. For instance:PECHANGA.NET DOES'NT PRINT THE TRUTH ABOUT DISENROLLMENT'S AND MORATORIUM'S. THEY POST FEEL GOOD ARTICLES ABOUT THEMSELVES. ... PECHANGA.NET IS PUBLISHED BY A TRIBAL MEMBER WHO, IF HE SPEAKS THE TRUTH, WILL LOSE HIS PER CAP. CHECK AND MAYBE EVEN GET DISENROLLED. SOOO HE KEEPS QUIET LIKE A GOOD OBEDIENT DOG. ARF, ARF,LICKING THE HAND THAT FEEDS HIM.Original Pechanga's blog comments are monitored, unlike mine, so she has a choice whether to post these attacks or not. She chose to post them.

She also has a choice whether to let them stand unchallenged or to challenge them. Readers of my blog know that I never let false or misleading claims go unchallenged. Because not disagreeing with them is the same as tacitly agreeing with them.

Both factors--posting the negative comments and not challenging them--imply she agrees with these comments. No other conclusion is logically possible.

Coupled with the initial fib about PECHANGA.net's being casino-sponsored, it's clear what Original Pechanga believes: that PECHANGA.net is corrupt and biased. If she don't believe this, let her state it publicly in her blog or here. Otherwise, I'll rightly conclude that she does believe it.

P.S. The second posting is worth reading if you want to see a real "takedown." Readers can judge for themselves who won the debate.