I can't summarize the gist of the analysis better than its author did:
"Whatever else, the event in Qana was a human tragedy. But the photographs do not show it honestly. Rather, they have been staged for effect, exploiting the victims in an unwholesome manner. In so doing, they are no longer news photographs - they are propaganda. And, whoever said the camera cannot lie forgot that photographers can and do. Those lies have spread throughout the world by now and will be in this morning's newspapers, accepted as real by the millions who view them."
Last week, a UN observation post in Lebanon was destroyed by Israeli bombs. Almost immediately thereafter, the anti-Israel UN Secretary General -- who has yet to roundly criticize Hezballah terrorists for using Lebanese civilians as human shields -- said, "I call on the government of Israel to conduct a full investigation into this very disturbing incident and demand that any further attack on U.N. positions and personnel must stop."
When the news of the outpost's destruction hit the newswires, the usual cast of Israel-hating characters, -- including Jan Egeland (of "stingy US" fame), UN High Commissioner of Human Rights Louise Arbour, the Israel-hating Human Rights Watch, and of course, Amnesty International -- began issuing condemnations of the Jewish state, accusing it of "war crimes." But the fact of the matter is that the UN outpost that was destroyed was actually targeted by Hezballah, which used it as a shield against Israeli counterattack.
Recently released correspondence from Maj. Hess-von Kruedener, one of the UN observers killed at the outpost, indicated that Hezballah was using the outpost as a shield to fire rockets into Israel. From the Ottawa Citizen:
"Just last week, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener wrote an e-mail about his experiences after nine months in the area, words Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie said are an obvious allusion to Hezbollah tactics.
'What I can tell you is this,' he wrote in an e-mail to CTV dated July 18. 'We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both (Israeli) artillery and aerial bombing.
'The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters (sic) of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters (sic) from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity.'
Those words, particularly the last sentence, are not-so-veiled language indicating Israeli strikes were aimed at Hezbollah targets near the post, said Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie.
'What that means is, in plain English, 'We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the (Israeli Defence Forces),' he said.
That would mean Hezbollah was purposely setting up near the UN post, he added. It's a tactic Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie, who was the first UN commander in Sarajevo during the Bosnia civil war, said he's seen in past international missions: Aside from UN posts, fighters would set up near hospitals, mosques and orphanages.[Emphasis added]
A Canadian Forces infantry officer with the Edmonton-based Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry and the only Canadian serving as a UN military observer in Lebanon, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener was no stranger to fighting nearby.
The UN post, he wrote in the e-mail, afforded a view of the "Hezbollah static positions in and around our patrol Base."
"It appears that the lion's share of fighting between the IDF and Hezbollah has taken place in our area," he wrote, noting later it was too dangerous to venture out on patrols.
The e-mail appears to contradict the UN's claim there had been no Hezbollah activity in the vicinity of the strike."
Hezballah's decision to set up around around the UN observation post indicates that it is operating under an outdated assumption that Israel is still sensitive to condemnations from the so-called "international community." Years of Israel's appeasement of her enemies, including the Oslo Accords and the Gaza give-back, built that assumption. Constant, cross-border attacks by Hezballah into Israel have now rendered it false.
Hezballah correctly sees every civilian death it has engineered in Lebanon as a propaganda victory for its self, since its allies in the press generally ignore the fact that it is Hezballah, and not Israel, that is deliberately targeting and killing Lebanese civilians by using them as human shields.
Hezballah's human shield strategy will fail, since post-Gaza Israel could now care less about so-called "world opinion." It has finally awoke to the fact that its survival is its primary concern.
Recognizing the futility of tip-toeing around terrorists while trying to kill them, Israel is now fighting them in the way they must be fought: by killing as many of them as possible, no matter where they hide, "world opinion" be damned.
"The new Government of Jaroslaw Kaczynski is preparing a purge of hundreds of thousands of Poles suspected of collaborating with the communist secret police," The Times of England reports, "including headmasters and university chancellors as well as journalists, diplomats, army officers and politicians of all colourings."
Better late than never (though "purge" has a filthy Stalinist connotation). Say "SB" to Poles who lived under communism, and it's unlikely they have forgotten the savagery of the Sluzba Bezpieczenstwa. One of the SB's victims was Father Jerzy Popieluszko, murdered in October 1984.
The NAACP has met with Dr. Biscet and is aware of his imprisonment. Search the NAACP's website, however, and you will find only the previously linked press release on Kweisi Mfume's 2002 meeting with Biscet. Other black organizations like the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) have demonstrated conscience in this regard.
"By associating the words "Fascism" with the Islam is to instill fear and by not acknowledging that a political agenda is not the same thing as a belief system, Senator Santorum invoked the oldest and the strongest kind of human fear -- fear of the unknown. Zionist and the pro-Israel lobby continue to instill fear in Americans by escalating unsubstantiated threats against them and fabricating a vast web of lies to justify their actions against Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. By instilling fear of orange and red alerts we Americans have witnessed increased government intrusion into our daily lives and the erosion of our basic rights and freedoms. Don't ask Santorum to "apologize," folks. Vote Democratic. " [emphasis added]
A few comments on Kofi Annan's latest condemnation of Israel:
The story about the four dead UN 'peacekeepers' describes the incident as an "attack" by Israel, although it's unknown if the UN observer post was struck by Hezballah (POA) terrorists or the Israeli Defense Forces--much less whether or not the act was deliberate.
The Muslim Arab who wrote the story predictably rushed to condemn Israel, but as fast as he was, Kofi Annan was faster. Upon hearing the news, he abandoned a meeting with Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and the Prime Minister of Lebanon to denounce Israel to the eager Establishment Media. "I am shocked and deeply distressed by the apparently deliberate targeting by Israeli Defense Forces of a U.N. Observer post in southern Lebanon. I call on the government of Israel to conduct a full investigation into this very disturbing incident and demand that any further attack on U.N. positions and personnel must stop," he said in the gravest, most accusatory tone he could muster.
Israeli officials also rushed to issue a statement without waiting to determine who was responsible. They rushed to apologize for the incident.
The AP story went on to describe two members of the UN 'peacekeeping' force killed recently by POA as having been killed in a "crossfire between Israeli forces and Hezbollah guerrillas." By listing the Israeli forces first and misrepresenting the shooting as a "crossfire," Israel is not-so-subtly portrayed as the responsible party. Notice that the POA terrorists who OWN Southern Lebanon are described as "Guerrillas."
What's left unsaid is that the UN is there to observe Israel, not the terrorists. Its "impartial observers" have witnessed the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers in the past by terrorists and tried to cover it up--even going so far as to withhold film of the event! The UN is deeply hostile towards Israel, as the unprecedented number of resolutions condemning the beleaguered little country attests. Israel would be justified if they had targeted the "observer" post, which was staffed by enemies eager to portray it as a vicious predator.
AP stories are carried by every major news outlet in the world. It's a sure bet that it will continue to disseminate this kind of anti-Israel propaganda disguised as objective journalism throughout the present conflict and beyond.
When I write 'anti-Israel,' I mean 'anti-Semitic.' Zionism is the belief that Jews deserve a homeland. Israel is that homeland. Anyone who claims to be anti-Zionist or anti-Israel is an anti-Semite, whether they mean to be or not. (Most of them mean to be.)
In the eyes of the Establishment Media, Israel can do no right, and terrorists get a free pass by being labeled as 'guerrillas,' 'militants,' 'gunmen,' 'fighters,' ' militiamen' and even 'soldiers'--every Orwellian euphemism for 'terrorist' that can be imagined.
The hopelessly corrupt UN is a destabilizing force in the world, and has been for decades. It sows conflict, opposes peace and pardons evil on a regular basis. Its mission statement is contravened utterly by the Third World parasites who control it. It has zero moral authority, and its overt support of POA terrorists renders every statement it issues worthless. It will use the death of its 'observers' to demonize Israel endlessly.
John Murtha will be stumping for 41 Democrats this election season, proving once again that the Democratic Party leadership does not have a clue how to win in November.
The controversial Murtha has become so delusional that he recently said that if congressional elections were held now, the Democrats would become the majority. "If it was today, we'd win 50 seats," he said.
I stand by my prediction that the Republicans will maintain their current majority, if not pick up a few seats in November. John Murtha will help make the latter part of my prediction come true.
Kofi Annan Charges Israel With Deliberately Killing U.N. 'Soldiers'
Kofi Annan, who is normally quiet when Muslim suicide bombers deliberately target and then murder civilians, was unusually outspoken today in accusing Israel of deliberately targeting and killing 4 UN 'peacekeepers.' From Israel National News:
"United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan charged early Wednesday morning that Israel deliberately targeted a United Nations post in Lebanon late Tuesday night, killing four UNIFIL members.They were part of the international body's peace keeping force in Lebanon that was created in 1978 after the beginning of the Peace for Galilee Campaign, Dan Gillerman, Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations said he was "shocked" by Annan's accusations and demanded an apology."
The Democratic Party continues with its brilliant campaign strategy of painting America as a broken, miserable nation and Americans as nearing desperation. Here's a recent example:
"House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi joined Sen. Charles Schumer of New York and Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Rahm Emanuel of Illinois at a gas station near the Capitol this afternoon to discuss rising gas prices and Republican economic failures. Below are Pelosi's remarks:
'Good afternoon. As I was walking over here, I was thinking of President Bush and when he said that things were so great with the economy. I was thinking how out of touch he is with middle- income families in America; how out of touch he is with an economy where we have record budget deficits, record trade deficits, the lowest purchasing power for the minimum wage in years, a record number of jobs going overseas, and the worst record of job creation of any President since Herbert Hoover.
'I don't think the economy is going well, Mr. President. That's what you may hear from your corporate CEO friends, but that is not what Democrats are hearing from middle-income Americans. What we are hearing from them is that they want a New Direction. The country is going in the wrong direction. We propose a New Direction that will create jobs, make health care more affordable, make higher education more possible, and do so in a fiscally responsible way. "One of the principles we will advocate is energy independence. The middle-class squeeze that American families are experiencing is tightened by the cost of gasoline at the pump."
Let's face it, the Republicans have evolved into a Party of spendaholics. But Democrats as "fiscally responsible"? -- I just fell out of my chair laughing. When will the Dems learn that most Americans are neither desperate nor miserable?
(Time to pump a hundred gallons of $3 per gallon gas into my big, beautiful, gas-guzzling, emissions-spewing boat and catch some fresh, tasty stripers and quahogs for dinner.) That's how dark, desperate and miserable life is in my corner of these United States. And that's in spite of the fact that I live in the horribly corrupt, economically repressed 'blue' state of Rhode Island.
Neocons are Nazis. Not Neo-Nazis, but goose-stepping old-school Nazis who want to rule the world with an iron fist. Just ask any leftist. You don't even have to ask, because they compare anyone to the right of Ward Churchill to Hitler sooner or later--usually sooner. The constant accusations of fascism by the left have rendered the word all but meaningless in modern discourse. It's become a moonbat synonym for "Republican," "right-winger" and "neocon"--all of which describe any American who wants to wipe out jihadis, opposes illegal immigration, goes to Church or owns an American flag. Even the 911 terrorist victims are "little Eichmanns."
In an effort to protect the country they love (yes, America!) from the right-wingnuts of the Hitler Youth, the patriots on the left thought they found the ideal candidate for the 2008 presidential election--one who would guide them to victory and establish peace in the realm. A gifted speaker, proven leader, and decorated war veteran who couldn't be labeled a draft-dodger by the fascists on the right. After reading the following bio by Edward Feser, the DNC recycled all their Billary campaign banners into sexy red and black gammadion arm bands. The new arm bands were designed to compliment their Aids Awareness arm bands and let everyone know their social standing. Sadly for the sentinels of liberty on the left, the "one who guides" died long before he could accept their nomination.
"He had been something of a bohemian in his youth, and always regarded young people and their idealism as the key to progress and the overcoming of outmoded prejudices. And he was widely admired by the young people of his country, many of whom belonged to organizations devoted to practicing and propagating his teachings. He had a lifelong passion for music, art, and architecture, and was even something of a painter. He rejected what he regarded as petty bourgeois moral hang-ups, and he and his girlfriend "lived together" for years. He counted a number of homosexuals as friends and collaborators, and took the view that a man's personal morals were none of his business; some scholars of his life believe that he himself may have been homosexual or bisexual. He was ahead of his time where a number of contemporary progressive causes are concerned: he disliked smoking, regarding it as a serious danger to public health, and took steps to combat it; he was a vegetarian and animal lover; he enacted tough gun control laws; and he advocated euthanasia for the incurably ill. He championed the rights of workers, regarded capitalist society as brutal and unjust, and sought a third way between communism and the free market. In this regard, he and his associates greatly admired the strong steps taken by President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal to take large-scale economic decision-making out of private hands and put it into those of government planning agencies. His aim was to institute a brand of socialism that avoided the inefficiencies that plagued the Soviet variety, and many former communists found his program highly congenial. He deplored the selfish individualism he took to be endemic to modern Western society, and wanted to replace it with an ethic of self-sacrifice: "As Christ proclaimed 'love one another'," he said, "so our call -- 'people's community,' 'public need before private greed,' 'communally-minded social consciousness' -- rings out.! This call will echo throughout the world!"
The reference to Christ notwithstanding, he was not personally a Christian, regarding the Catholicism he was baptized into as an irrational superstition. In fact he admired Islam more than Christianity, and he and his policies were highly respected by many of the Muslims of his day. He and his associates had a special distaste for the Catholic Church and, given a choice, preferred modern liberalized Protestantism, taking the view that the best form of Christianity would be one that forsook the traditional other-worldly focus on personal salvation and accommodated itself to the requirements of a program for social justice to be implemented by the state. They also considered the possibility that Christianity might eventually have to be abandoned altogether in favor of a return to paganism, a worldview many of them saw as more humane and truer to the heritage of their people. For he and his associates believed strongly that a people's ethnic and racial heritage was what mattered most. Some endorsed a kind of cultural relativism according to which what is true or false and right or wrong in some sense depends on one's ethnic worldview, and especially on what best promotes the well-being of one's ethnic group."
For the Left's dream of capturing the White House it's too bad he's gone, because he was charismatic and his ideas meshed nicely with those of today's Left.
He knew why an alliance with the jihadis against the fascists on the right was so important. "Any alliance whose purpose is not the intention to wage war is senseless and useless." That's why the left doesn't ally itself with Buddhists or Jews.
He knew the importance of conforming to group opinion. "Anyone who sees and paints a sky green and fields blue ought to be sterilized."
He knew the importance of education. "When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side,' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already...What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.' He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future. Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction." (He was referring to the factual definition of liberalism--progressive and tolerant.)
He understood the importance of elitism, and how to manage the masses who don't know what's good for them. "How fortunate for leaders that men do not think. What good fortune for governments that the people do not think. What luck for rulers, that men do not think. The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force. All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach. Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise. I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.”
He knew that lying was necessary to achieve the greater good. "The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it. It is not truth that matters, but victory. The victor will never be asked if he told the truth."
He knew how to rally the troops and marginalize opponents and the public. "The art of leadership. . . consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention. The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category."
Most of all, he knew that the ends always justify the means. Power over others is the goal of all good leftists. "Success is the sole earthly judge of right and wrong."
Yes, it's a shame that Adolph Hitler died before his time. He would have made a great presidential candidate for the far left freaks who comprise the base of the Democrat Party. He would have shown those "fascist" neocons the true power of the left. He loved Islam, hated Jews, exalted hedonism and was willing to assume responsibility for all our lives.
The mullahs in Iran and the ruling Assad family of Syria have been waging war against Israel through terrorist proxies for decades. Their pet terrorist group, “Party of Allah” (Hezbollah,) has recently pulled out all the stops and is making what it hopes is the final push that will destroy Israel. Iran and Syria are openly aiding POA, mainly with an estimated arsenal of 13,000 rockets with launching crews. They have absolutely no chance of succeeding, and I believe they've instigated a countdown to their own destruction.
After the timid Israeli response to the recent kidnapping of an Israel Defense Forces soldier by POA, the terrorists were emboldened enough to kidnap two more soldiers and murder eight in another cross-border assault. They assumed Israel would show its usual suicidal restraint, but when it didn't, they began launching the rockets and missiles they've been deploying along the border for the last six years.
The Israeli response we're seeing isn't business as usual. Instead of issuing impotent condemnations and freeing thousands of imprisoned terrorists, Israel launched a counter attack. The counter attack began as an effort to rescue the kidnapped soldiers, but after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the leader of POA launched an all out war against Israeli civilians, that effort changed. It is now a campaign to destroy POA and sever Syrian and Iranian control of Lebanon.
Iran also funds the terrorist "Islamic Resistance Movement" (Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyah,) which now controls the Palestinian Authority "government.”" (The acronym for IRM is the familiar Hamas, which means fanaticism in Arabic, and violent injustice in Hebrew.) IRM has stepped up its civilian murder pogrom to coincide with that of POA. The IDF is hunting down the IRM terrorists who carried out the attacks, but there is no effort being made to destroy the organization yet.
America is busy juggling the military missions in Afghanistan and Iraq with the containment of North Korea, but the imminent showdown with Iran over its nuclear weapons program hasn't been sidelined. The Mullahs know it's coming, and have abandoned what little restraint they ever practiced. They thumbed their noses at the impotent UN, which never had any intention of impeding their nuclear terror program. Their pet POA terrorists -- who control Southern Lebanon-- increased their cross-border attacks on Israel after North Korea's latest round of missile launching brinkmanship. The mullahs have been preparing for a final assault on Israel for years, and they figure America is busy elsewhere and too hobbled by realpolitik to interfere. They know their time is running out, and they stupidly think they can avoid the destruction of their nuclear weapons program, destroy Israel and cripple America--all by instigating a regional conflict. Unfortunately for them, the only countries likely to be drawn in are America and Syria.
They're trying to wage a war of extermination against Israel through their POA proxies without getting their hands dirty. They think they can avoid responsibility this way. They're desperately trying to draw America into the conflict, along with as many Muslim countries as possible--and failing miserably. Israel doesn't need America's help to hunt POA down in Lebanon, and America has no desire to join in. Sunni Arabs aren't going to openly attack invincible opponents like America and Israel to help the Shiites and Persians they despise. There is nothing to be gained from such a foolhardy move, and much to be lost.
In the beginning, the mullahs thought that a coalition of Muslim countries would join the fight and draw America into the conflict. Now they think America can be provoked into entering the fray, and so draw in other Muslim countries. Incredibly, they think such a coalition could defeat America and Israel. After decades of getting away with murder, they live in their own fantasy world. They're trying to realize their fantasy of a world without Israel, but the Israelis are a hard reality that refuse to disappear.
The mullahs are growing increasingly frustrated with POA's failure to halt the Israeli advance, and their frustration will soon change to more overt action. They won't be able to watch their investment get destroyed without intervening in some way. They have probably ordered POA terrorists to strike within America--a probability that has been borne out by POA statements. They are also likely to launch missiles at Israel if all else fails.
President Bush has vowed in the past to aid Israel in the event of an attack by Iran. That attack has begun in a very public way, and will continue to escalate. Israeli demands for the safe return of its kidnapped soldiers, and for the Lebanese "Army" to replace POA at the border have been spurned. the assault on Israel has redoubled, and the Syrian and POA puppets in the Lebanese government have threatened to send their "Army" to aid POA against Israel.
For years, I've been convinced that Bush plans to liberate Iran from the mullahs and Syria from Bashar Assad according to a rough schedule. Rather than suffer unending attacks from POA while waiting for Iran to launch a nuclear warhead, Israel struck back. This conflict is pushing whatever schedule Bush might have forward. The mullahs are boasting that POA can strike all of Israel with their rockets, and their terrorist proxy vows to strike at America. Israel isn't going to return to the status quo, with POA deployed on its Northern border launching daily attacks. American policy makers are hoping that the conflict will soon run its course and America can sit it out. (They don't want the esteemed international community to think we're siding with our Israeli allies against our sworn enemies.) The terror masters have other ideas. They will continue to do whatever they can to draw America into the conflict. They're dead set on uniting a "Coalition of the Weak" against Israel and America.
Iran has initiated its avowed attempt to destroy Israel, and the IDF will likely be forced to attack its nuclear facilities. Once they do, America will be committed as well. Bush will use the opportunity to ensure they're rendered completely inoperative. If the IDF goes after the mullahs themselves, America will likewise be drawn in.
POA won't be allowed to retreat into Syria and lick its wounds, although it's sure to try. Assad is a stupid man, and he thinks territorial sovereignty will protect the terrorists. It won't even protect him when the reckoning comes.
America is the world's only superpower. There is no Soviet Union to pressure America into restraining Israel as it did at the end of the 1967 Six Day War. No amount of international pressure can prevent America from wiping out the mullahs and their nuclear program in retaliation for probable POA attacks. Hopefully, America will help to expunge the barbarians this time. Tehran and Damascus have overplayed their hand, and the "Axis of Evil" may lose two members very soon.
The anti-Semites and America-haters of the world are going to get the ceasefire they're clamoring for. It will come after the mullahs, Assad, and their pet terrorists in POA have been removed from the world stage. The sooner, the better.
"Iran insists it will not be drawn into the Middle East fighting between Israel and Tehran's Hezbollah clients..." AP (Brian Murphy).
Is it just news writing style? The article reeks with liberal sympathy for Tehran, but such dissembling is to be regarded as objectivity and impartiality. That's the best the media can offer.
Regarding the probability that Iran will put more powerful weapons in the hands of Hezbollah, Murphy quotes the apologist Ahmad Bakhshaiesh, "No one is saying this is possible or could even happen, but just the thought will likely increase the pressure on Iran." Such brilliance has caused world wars before, needless to say.
Nasser Hadian, another Tehranian, says of the Iranian nuke pushers: "In their minds, the region is so volatile that the only safety is to have the ability to produce a nuclear deterrent."
Like, who's threatening Iran?
Lies, lies, and more lies. The media loves them. The media thrives on them. Fabricated objectivity. Artificial balance. Schoolboy journalism, really. Blindness on parade. Dissembling on display.
"Former Stasi [East German secret police] officers and high-ranking members of the defunct communist regime are causing a stir by mounting a public campaign for rehabilitation," the Associated Press reports, "claiming they were only following orders in jailing dissidents and upholding a shoot-to-kill policy that claimed the lives of more than 1,000 people as they tried to escape to the West."
One of the people interviewed for the article was Hans Bauer, who "as a deputy chief prosecutor ...worked closely with the Stasi and prosecuted 'people who violated the law against leaving the country.'"
"They only carried out their orders," Bauer remarked of East German functionaries, adding that they "did not commit any human rights abuses."
An obscene surreality then appears in the article:
"The Nazis also said they weren't guilty because all they had done was to obey the law," said Hubertus Knabe, director of the museum in the Hohenschoenhausen prison in Berlin where the Stasi used to interrogate prisoners.
Matthias Melster was held there for trying to escape, and now works as a guide at the museum. He says he is increasingly confronted by Stasi veterans who contest his version of history.
"They come on my tours and question everything I tell them, saying I don't have enough evidence for my allegations," he said.
In March, about 200 former East German officials disrupted a public meeting about setting up information panels outside the memorial site, calling the victims liars, he said.
Why the hell are these criminals walking around?
For Germany, it seems Vergangenheitsbewaltigung (coming to terms with the past) means never having to implement justice. This is no trivial failure since, for better or worse, as the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges observed, "Germany...is one of the essential nations of the western world."
A writer for Germany's Der Spiegel visited the memorial gathering in Nazareth for brothers Muhammad and Rabiya Taluzi, who were murdered by a Hezballah rocket. Among his observations:
-"'Our passports say Israel, but we are brothers of the Arabs,' the deputy mayor Raji Mansour says at the memorial gathering. Green Hamas flags are displayed all around the house and in the cramped neighborhoods of Nazareth. The Arab speaker on the radio calls for solidarity with the Lebanese brothers. Hezbollah has many supporters too. Some at the memorial gathering confess they are proud to have relatives who are members of the radical Islamic militia."
-"...There is a lack of bunkers and shelters in the Muslim villages, the mayors of Nazareth and many other localities complain. But in the case of Nazareth, the city did have alarm sirens but they were switched off. The city wasn't automatically warned of an impending attack because the sirens also sound to celebrate Israel's Independence Day: The Palestinians wanted to have nothing to do with that. They preferred renouncing their own safety to participating in Israeli patriotism."
-"Sheikh Kamal Hatib has come to clearly state his view on the matter. The deputy leader of the Islamic Movement, the largest Muslim organization in Israel, speaks only briefly about the two boys. Then the bearded man becomes angry and begins gesticulating wildly. 'Israel is responsible--the hands of Olmert and Perez are stained with the blood of Mahmoud and Rabiah,' he says, almost screaming, his expression grim. More than 80 men listen to the religious leader."
I wrote an article four years ago titled "Israel's Coming War Within." Stuff like this doesn't prompt a retraction.
The following paragraph is the most succinct statement of the modern political Left's agenda that I've ever read.
"Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, destroy their ruggedness. Get control of all means of publicity and thereby: Get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance. Destroy the peoples faith in their natural leaders by holding up the latter to ridicule, contempt and obloquy. Always preach true democracy but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible. Encourage government extravagance, destroy its credit, produce fear with rising prices, inflation and general discontent. Foment unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders and foster a soft and lenient attitude on the part of government towards such disorders. By specious argument cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues: honesty, sobriety, continence, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness. Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext, with the view of confiscating them and leaving the population defenseless."
This primer covers so many of the Left's cherished beliefs and insidious tactics that it could be the mission statement of the New York Times, or an oath taken by university professors.
In fact, it was written by the patron Saint of the left, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, around 1917.
The power-mad monster who used murder, terrorism and imprisonment to stifle all dissent embodied the warped social goals of the Left more closely than any other human being in history. He handed unlimited power to the state, practiced deceit as a matter of course, enforced rigid group-think, used terror as a means of political intimidation, and redistributed wealth and food staples. This is exactly what the Left wants for America.
If the Left were to gain the absolute power it desires, the secret police, gulags and mass executions that Lenin loved so much would become hallmarks of American life. Any group that thinks the "underprivileged" members of society should be organized in a system of violence against the capitalist establishment would make it a certainty. Lenin also believed this -- it formed the basis of his mass terror against "enemies of the revolution," who tended to be anyone he was displeased with.
A government based on absolute power for the elites always paves the way for even greater, more ambitious monsters--monsters like Stalin.
It's frightening how much leftist dogma can be summed up with brief quotes from the "Father of the Revolution." What's even more frightening is that very few leftists are aware that they're channelling Lenin's ghost. Their hubris concerning scholastic achievement is misplaced.
A short list of the Left's positions on important issues of the day includes:
Honesty and integrity. "A lie told often enough becomes the truth."
Terrorism. “We need the real, nation-wide terror which reinvigorates the country and through which the Great French Revolution achieved glory.”
Civil liberties. (For the elites only.) “It is true that liberty is precious -- so precious that it must be rationed.”
Religion. "Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
Education. (As indoctrination.) "Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted."
The economy. "The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation."
A free press. "The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses."
Women's rights. (As a means of destroying the family structure.) "You all know that even when women have full rights, they still remain fatally downtrodden because all housework is left to them. In most cases housework is the most unproductive, the most barbarous and the most arduous work a woman can do. It is exceptionally petty and does not include anything that would in any way promote the development of the woman."
Politics. "To rely upon conviction, devotion, and other excellent spiritual qualities -- that is not to be taken seriously in politics."
Elitism. "If Socialism can only be realized when the intellectual development of all the people permits it, then we shall not see Socialism for at least five hundred years."
Gun control. "One man with a gun can control 100 without one."
Capitalism and alleged American imperialism. "If it were necessary to give the briefest possible definition of imperialism, we should have to say that imperialism is the monopoly stage of capitalism."
Literature. "Literature must become Party literature. ...Down with unpartisan litterateurs! Down with the superman of literature! Literature must become a part of the general cause of the proletariat."
Morality and vegetarians. "I am a bad, wicked man, but I am practising moral self- purification; I don't eat meat any more, I now eat rice cutlets."
Mercy. "You cannot make a revolution in white gloves."
Family values and the hatred of the other that motivates leftism. "We must hate - hatred is the basis of communism. Children must be taught to hate their parents if they are not communists."
The pursuit of power is the only rational reason for being a practicing leftist. The hard Left's entire agenda is based on lies and corruption. The goal of the conscious Left is tyranny by the elites. The unconscious Left is naive enough to believe it's actually working for the betterment of mankind. Some don't believe it, and some are oblivious, but all leftists -- whether consciously or not -- are working towards a totalitarian dystopia.
LGF has posted some great photos from sophisticated, urbanane, civilized cities around America where Islamic sympathizers are enjoying their constitutional right to spread the infection of their virulent ideology.
The photo above from New York is my personal favorite. It is a refreshingly honest portrayal of the real Islamic objective, which is not territorial concerns about Israel, or economic concerns about oil, or ancient grievances about 11th century wars, or cartoonish sensitivities about Western "disrespect" of Islam, or even about a woman's right to choose (Would you like stoning or throat slashing to go with that pre-marital sex, dear daughter?).
At its very core, Islamic ideology is about nothing short of global expansion and conquest through violence. Distinct from the ideological components of the world's other major religions, Islam requires the belief that we will only know peace and paradise when the world -- all of it -- embraces Islam. Other religions preach exclusiveness; Islam preaches inclusion -- mandatory inclusion. Allah will descend and create paradise on earth only when everyone in the world has submitted to Islam and lives by sharia law.
Thus, the son of the son of the son of the son of the son of today's 'Ahmed' relies on him to carry out the fight in order to realize Holy Paradise for his progeny. A preview is depicted in the photo above -- no doubt a flash of inspiration to many a Muslim.
The strategy to be employed to accomplish this Islamotopian paradise is violence and war, jihad war to be exact. However, no tactic is more important in war than deception, according to Islam's "ideal man," the Prophet Mohammed.
So, don't be surprised if our bespectacled jihadis carrying this banner get a stern talking to from their local programmer . . .er . . . "imam." Strictly speaking, they screwed up. Maybe too much beer and MTV at their Columbia U. frat house caused them to forget the script.
--------------------Westboro Baptist 'Church' members
Fred Phelps, who leads the insane Westboro Baptist 'Church,' has found an ally in the ACLU. Phelps runs the website GodHatesFags and is notorious for showing up at funerals of U.S. servicemen where he and his followers carry signs saying, "Thank God for IEDs," "God Hates Fags," and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers."
Phelp's overall message is that nearly every bad thing that happens in America, or any calamity befalling Americans, results from America's tolerance of homosexuals. Hurricane Katina?--blame it on gays. Coal mine explosion?--blame it on gays. Soldiers killed in Iraq?--blame it on gays.
Last year, after Phelps and his followers disrupted the Missouri funeral of Army Spec. Edward L. Myers, the Missouri state legislature stepped in and passed a law requiring such protests to be held a set distrance from funerals. The ACLU will now help Phelps challenge that law, and ultimately, a similar one that has been passed on the federal level.
"In the lawsuit, the ACLU says the Missouri law tries to limit protesters' free speech based on the content of their message. It is asking the court to declare the ban unconstitutional and to issue an injunction to keep it from being enforced, which would allow the group to resume picketing.
'I told the nation, as each state went after these laws, that if the day came that they got in our way, that we would sue them,' said Phelps's daughter Shirley L. Phelps-Roper, a spokeswoman for the church in Topeka, Kan. 'At this hour, the wrath of God is pouring out on this country.' "
Should Westboro Baptist Church be allowed to openly spread its message of hate? Yes, since it is better to allow such groups to operate in the open rather than to drive them underground where they can plot, plan and organize free of opposition. Should Westboro's members be allowed to crash funerals? Absolutely not.
Become a member of the Patriot Guard Riders, who shield grieving family members and friends of the deceased from the hate and insanity of Fred Phelps and his band of miscreants. Membership signup takes only a minute. When Phelps tries defiling a military funeral in your town, link arms with the Riders to neutralize him and his followers.
Since I've been so busy with other 'public interest' projects, I've just gotten around to mailing out requests for copies of Arthur 'Pinch' Sulzbergers New York State handgun permit application and his concealed weapon license.
As you might know, New York State has some of the toughest handgun laws in America. The New York Times, which Mr. Sulzberger publishes, is a hard core pro gun control newspaper. Yet Sulzberger has a permit to carry a concealed handgun in New York City (where it is almost impossible for private citizens to get such a permit.)
A well-known gun control expert, who for now will remain anonymous, has informed me that once a NY handgun permit is issued, it can be revoked for a variety of reasons including aggressive or bizarre behavior or the taking of prescribed or illegal psychoactive drugs.
Is publicly clutching a toy moose and telling one's employees to "talk to the moose" bizarre behavior for an adult to engage in? Should someone who engages in such behavior ( and has a temper, to boot) be allowed to carry a concealed handgun? These, and other questions, are now on their way to the New York Public Information Office. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Correction: In previous posts I'd erroneously said that Sulzberger was clutching a toy bear and telling his employees to "talk to the bear." I stand corrected. Below is an updated photo of Pinch with the proper stuffed companion.
Representing radical Islamists at the event were members of the oxymoronic Islamic Thinkers Society, who carried banners saying things like "Islam Will Dominate," and "God Will Send the Mushroom Cloud From the Sky on Israel." The most outrageous sign was carried by a hairy-armed bozo wearing a checkered tablecloth on his head. It read, "Islam is Peace." (No it's not -- it's the religion of peace.)
You might remember the Islamist Thinkers Society from a charming video we posted back in February which showed its members denouncing the U.S., praising Allah and stomping on and burning an American flag.
"Cuban women in Miami will demand their right to travel to the Island without restrictions," reads a recent Cuban headline. That's quite a statement given the Castro regime's restrictions on travel to anywhere outside Cuba and restrictions on internal movement. Here are just two Cubans who have been torn from their families because of this national captivity:
Many in this town [Nazareth, Israel's largest Arab city] did not blame Hezbollah for the deaths, holding Israel responsible instead. Some expressed support for the Lebanese guerrillas--underscoring the divided allegiances of Israel's Arabs.
Here are some more gems:
-"This is not Israel. This is Nazareth."
-"No one here is mad at Hezbollah."
-"Hezbollah belongs to Lebanon. They are the sons of Lebanon, the heart of Lebanon. Not like America says, they protect Lebanon from these evils."
-"Nobody will tell you (Hezbollah leader Hassan) Nasrallah is a killer. Ask. No one here will tell you he's a terrorist."
"Many Israelis consider the Arabs a fifth column allied with the country's enemies," the story remarks. Gee, I wonder how Israelis would get that impression.
His [Taha's] statements were echoed and amplified by ex-MK Abdul Malik Dahamshe, who told Nazareth's Arabic-language Kul el-Arab that the raid "was an honorable and legitimate operation." He also praised the rocketing of Sderot and other Israeli towns, underscoring and elaborating on this theme to every Israeli radio interviewer who gave him airtime.
If it walks like a fifth column and talks like a fifth column...
1) Hezballah doesn't know that these cities contain large Arab populations.
2) Hezballah doesn't care that they contain large Arab populations.
3) Hezballah is behaving punitively against Israeli Arabs.
I don't think 1 is plausible; 2 is more plausible; and 3 interests me most. As I've noted, Arabs are hardly harmonious among themselves. In addition to its (un)holy war against al Yahud, perhaps Hezballah is concurrently settling an internal score? That is, Hezballah is bombing its brethren for insufficiently opposing the Zionist fiends and collaborating with them. ("Collaboration" in this context includes living in Israel and doing business with Jews.)
Islamic Republic of Iran's Ambassador to Cuba, Ahmad Edrisian, on Wednesday met and conferred with the Cuban Transportation Minister Carlos Manuel in Havana. According to a Wednesday report by the IRI Foreign Ministry Information and Press Bureau, the two sides during the meeting surveyed the current level of commercial and business transaction between Iran and Cuba and emphasized the need for their broadening and continuity.
Call me loco, but I think this "broadening" involves more than commerce.
Israeli Arab brothers Muhammad and Rabiya Taluzi were playing in predominantly Arab Nazareth yesterday when one of Hezballah's rockets murdered them. Well, people show solidarity in different ways.
In Bahrain, Sunnis and Shiites put their differences aside to march in protest of IDF attacks, waving placards emblazoned with [Hezballah leader Hassan] Nasrallah's face. "Beloved Nasrallah, hit Tel Aviv!" chanted the crowd, estimated at around 10,000 people.
Follow up to Rocco DiPippo's post on hitting the Old Gray Hooker where it hurts, Fox News has reported the following:
"Faced with weaker than expected earnings -- and a stock price that's half of what it was four years ago -- The New York Times has announced it will cut the paper's width from 54 inches to 48, and cut 250 printing jobs. The new cost-cutting plan will shave 5 percent off of the space devoted to news coverage -- and save the paper about $42 million a year.
"Executive Editor Bill Keller said less space would require tighter editing, but called the move a "much less painful way to go about assuring our economic survival than cutting staff or closing foreign bureaus."
If the NYT wants to assure their economic survival, it should realize that its demise is not due to the size of their pages, but what is printed on them.
In true liberal elitist spirit, the cost for its lunatic moonbat content will be born by the guys who physically print those pages, instead of by the leftist journalists, editors, and publisher responsible for the content that misleads, insults, offends, and sometimes even endangers the very people who (foolishly) subscribe to the Times.
The good news is, "All the (leftist propaganda) that's fit to print" will now have a smaller square of rag to "fit" onto. The NYT is getting smaller -- first in terms of circulation, and now even physically. If the trend continues, with any luck we may look forward to the day when the NYT is relegated to the scribble of its treasonous publisher on a single roll of toilet paper from his federal prison cell.
No doubt Moonbats would somehow call that "censorship". The rest of us will call it free-market correction of an inferior product, and the belated enforcement of federal laws against treason in a time of war.
It is important to remember what happened in Buenos Aires as Israel fights Hizballah (and Iran and Syria by proxy). It clarifies the vital objective of smashing this menace.
This story should be on the front page of every newspaper in America:
NARRATIVE NOMINATING SSG DAVID BELLAVIA FOR THE MEDAL OF HONOR DURING OPERATION PHANTOM FURY FALLUJAH, IRAQ
On the night of 10 November 2004 Third Platoon, A Company, Task Force 2-2 IN near OBJ Wolf in Fallujah, Iraq, was ordered to attack to destroy six to eight Anti Iraqi Forces (AIF). 1LT Edward Iwan, the A Company Executive Officer, had identified six to eight AIF who had entered a block of twelve buildings. These AIF had engaged A55 and tanks from Team Tank with automatic weapons and rocket fire. Having a 25 mm cannon malfunction, 1LT Edward Iwan cordoned off the area and called Third Platoon to enter and clear all buildings until the AIF were killed or captured.
The first nine buildings yielded many AK47s, Rocket Propelled Grenade launchers, rockets, assorted ammunition, and flak vests. When they came to the tenth home, SSG Colin Fitts, 1st Squad Leader, led his squad of soldiers into the house, with four soldiers from SSG Bellavias 2nd Squad. SGT Hugh Hall, 1st Squad, B Team Leader and SGT Warren Misa 1st Squad, A Team Leader, established a quick foothold in the interior of the house. When SGT Misa attempted to clear the second room he encountered heavy enemy fire. Two AIF were under a stairwell, well covered behind a three-foot barrier, engaging SGT Misa and SPC Lance Ohle as they attempted to move into the room. At that point, multiple bursts of automatic and semi-automatic gunfire were exchanged from extremely close quarters. As rounds impacted near the entry point of the house, nine Third Platoon soldiers became fixed inside the house. At that moment, fire erupted from a kitchen ground floor window onto the inner cordon in the carport of the house. At one point, gun fire was being exchanged inside and outside of the house, as a total of three dismounted squads from Third Platoon were in contact.
SSG Bellavia quickly requested a M240B machine gun and a M249 SAW to suppress the AIF under the stairs in an effort to break contact and consolidate the platoon. Rounds from the insurgent side of the wall began impacting through the poorly made plaster. Multiple soldiers were bleeding from the face from flying debris. Two soldiers had glass and metal shards in their face, one soldier had been grazed on the side of his stomach underneath his vest and at least six others were bleeding from some cut or scrape from the point blank fire they were receiving. As two soldiers answered the request for support, it became apparent that the entrance to the building was extremely dangerous from ricocheting rounds.
Rather than place his soldier at risk, SSG Bellavia moved quickly to come to the aid of the squad. He exchanged weapon systems with a M249 SAW gunner and entered the fatal funnel of the room. The enemy was crouched behind the barrier and continued to fire at the doorway of the house where SSG Bellavia was positioned. With enemy rounds impacting around him, he fired the SAW at a cyclic rate of fire, forcing the enemy to take cover and allowing the squad to break contact and move into the street to consolidate. SSG Bellavias actions undoubtedly saved the lives of that squad.
As the platoon gathered outside to get accountability of personnel, two or more AIF engaged Third Platoon from the roof. Rounds ricocheted off the ground and SSG Fitts moved his squad to an adjacent building to over watch the AIF on the roofs. SSG Bellavia grabbed an M16 rifle and headed back to the outside of the house. SSG Bellavia called for a Bradley Fighting Vehicle to come up and suppress the outside of the building. The high walls of the enemy strong point made it difficult at close proximity to get well-aimed 25mm cannon fire into the actual building. AIF again engaged Third Platoon from windows.
After the BFV suppressed the house, SSG Bellavia decided to move back inside the house to determine the effects of the BFV fire and whether the AIF still occupied the bottom floor of the house. He placed two SAW gunners and SSG Scott Lawson into the courtyard as the inner cordon. Michael Ware, a TIME magazine journalist, entered the house with SSG Bellavia.
SSG Bellavia entered the house and told SSG Lawson to stay outside until he was needed in the second room. The only two people that went into the house at first were Michael Ware and SSG Bellavia. SSG Bellavia heard AIF whispering from the other side of the wall. Mr. Ware was told to run out if anything happened inside the second room. The journalist insisted on going into the second room. SSG Bellavia got in a low crouched fighting position and quickly pie wedged the first room and fired his M16A4. The enemy immediately fired back with a belt fed RPK machine gun. SSG Bellavia quickly turned away from the fire. The AIF had fire superiority and SSG Bellavia didnt have time to get off well-aimed shots. Read the rest.
More than 500 left-wing activists gathered in central Tel Aviv on Sunday to protest the escalating violence in Lebanon and the Israel Defense Forces' continued offensive in the Gaza Strip.
Some schmucks are so ideologically intoxicated that even self-preservation eludes them. As Crash Davis said in Bull Durham, "Hopeless. Utterly f**king hopeless."
Flight 77 Simulation Demolishes Lunatic 9/11 Theory
One of the products of Bush Derangement Syndrome(BDS) has been the proliferation of conspiracy theories accusing the Bush Administration of having orchestrated the events of 9/11/2001. One such conspiracist, University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett, recently appeared on the Hannity and Colmes show to announce that, "I do know that 9/11 was an inside job."
As part of their BDS-based "inside job" theory, 9/11 conspiracists say that the Bush Administration fired a missle into the Pentagon on 9/11/2001. This theory has gained substantial traction among the BDS crowd in spite of the fact that the grounds of the Pentagon were littered with the wreckage of American Airlines flight 77 immediately after the supposed 'missile' hit.
Integrated Consultants, Inc., a company that specializes in forensic engineering, has produced a detailed computer simulation of Flight 77's final seconds. It demolishes the missile 'theory.'
Imagine the horror that the people aboard Flight 77 must have experienced as it flew at tree-top level into the Pentagon.
Tehran,Iran, Jul. 16Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei described Israel on Sunday as "satanic and cancerous" and praised the Lebanese group Hezbollah for its "jihad" against the Jewish state.
"This regime is an infectious tumour for the entire Islamic world", Khamenei said in a speech that was aired on state television.
A clear revelation of the mind set Israel faces every day.
Lebanese politician Walid Jumblat said "The war is no longer that of Lebanon. It is an Iranian war."
So, Iran is really trying to start the Apocalypse. Iran wants World War III. But, it's all manipulation. It is a facade. It is a lie. Iran wants to be the leader of the Muslim world, competing against the Arabs, really, and it will end in nothing. The Arabs will never let it happen. They can momentarily unite only in hatred of Israel. They are too tribal to unite effectively in action.
Remember, Israel lives with this hate, everyday. Hysterical hatred, constantly. No other people has ever faced such a challenge, and no other people could ever endure it.
So the thug Ahmadinejad's call for the destruction of Israel resonates with KosKidz? I'd long figured as much.
I will never forget the difference in responses between those attending the 2004 Democratic Convention and their counterparts at the Republican Convention when it came to mentions of Israel.
When John Kerry (who served in Vietnam) made a statement to the effect that 'the U.S. supports Israel' during his acceptance speech, there was a light smattering of applause from the DNC crowd. When Bush made a similar comment during his 2004 speech at the Republican Convention, the crowd erupted in wild, thunderous applause.
A most puzzling question is, "Why do Jews still vote overwhelmingly Democratic"?
Two articles of those articles listed contact information and publicly available addresses of Times publisher Arthur 'Pinch' Sulzberger, and Linda Spillers, a Times photographer. They were written by me to spark debate about that newspaper's story revealing a security detail of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's vacation home in Maryland, and as a provocative response to the Times's chronic, reckless publishing of classified U.S. security details and whole programs vital to the safety of every American -- Times readers and employees included.
At the top of the vacation home story, the Times published a picture of the front of Rumsfeld's Maryland vacation property with the following caption: "There is a lens in the birdhouse at the driveway of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's home at St. Michaels, Md." In the lower right hand corner of the photo, the photographer's name was prominently displayed.
That picture, and the caption beneath it, was viewed by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people across the world including those capable of harassing and physically harming the U.S. Defense Secretary, a controversial, high-profile, public figure hated by leftist and rightist radicals and hated by Al Qaeda.
After I had published my articles on Sulzberger and Spillers and the controversy they sparked was cresting, representatives of Mr. Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney, (whose vacation home had also been featured in the article), and the U.S. Secret Service stepped forward to say they had given Ms. Spillers permission to take the photograph in question. They also said they did not consider either the article or photograph to present security risks.
It's true that in comparison to the recent damage done to the SWIFT program by the New York Times, the security threat posed by the photograph and its caption was minimal. So it is understandable why Cheney, Rumsfeld and the Secret Service issued the mild statements they did. Had they issued condemnations of the Times photo and article, the left-leaning Establishment media, the Times included, would have likely portrayed them as petty and paranoid on 'page one.' In spite of their responses, an important fact remains unchanged: The New York Times needlessly revealed a security detail concerning one of the country's highest ranking public officials--in the middle of a war.
There is another major point concerning the Times article on Rumsfeld's vacation home, and it is central to the controversy surrounding the article's publication: If Rumsfeld or Cheney or the Secret Service had been told, in advance, that the caption beneath the Times photo would reveal the location of a security camera on Mr. Rumsfeld's property, would any of them have approved of its publication? Answering 'yes' to that question pushes common sense past its limits.
So what really was the purpose of the Times's photo, the caption beneath it and the article itself? Was it a low-level act of revenge for the Bush Administration's vocal criticism of its neutering of the SWIFT program? Or, more likely, was it simply another case of sloppy, reckless New York Times war-time reporting at a time when such reporting can, and probably will, get U.S. soldiers, intelligence operatives and government officials killed.
In light of this controversy, a natural question arises: Since the New York Times, a newspaper which sets the tone for the greater Establishment media, acts as if it is accountable only to its self, what mechanism(s) exist to insure that it acts in the best interests of the American public? What mechanism(s) exist to insure that it reports the news as fairly and as accurately as possible and in a way that respects the elected U.S. Government's sacred duty to protect America's citizens during war?
Obviously, as an individual I have neither the power nor the resources and time to affect how the Times, or for that matter any media outlet, conducts its reporting. Still, I am one of the thousands of Americans who have, since 9/11/2001, been compelled to participate in the arena of ideas by publicly voicing their opinions and who now fuel debate on national issues. Our power is in our numbers. Given the U.S. Governments limited options for dealing with the Times's recklessness, that collective power should now be brought to bear against the New York Times and other media outlets that abuse their power by subverting the plans of officials charged with protecting us from both foreign and domestic terrorist threats.
No one elected employees or executives of the New York Times to orchestrate or make decisions regarding U.S. security or U.S. foreign policy. Therefore, there is no legitimate basis for them to do so.
There are those, primarily on the Left, who defend the New York Times's involvement in U.S. security matters as valid expressions of Free Speech. I'm not a First Amendment expert, but it's unlikely that the Founders, who viewed a free press as intrinsic to the maintenance of Liberty, would have considered the Times's revealing of war-time secrets--in direct conflict with the security needs of this nation-- as the valid exercise of free speech. In addition, the Founders envisioned a Press controlled 'by the people,' not one controlled by a small group of politically and ideologically homogenous elites -- as is the case with the modern Establishment media, the New York Times included.
With that in mind, what can be done to force the elites at the New York Times to respect the security of the 280 million people living in America? The current Administration seems unwilling to bring legal action against the Times, or is unable to do so. With the possibility of major world conflict approaching, I say it is now up to 'we the people' to try and force a remedy.
Taking Action Against the Times
A multi-pronged economic boycott of the Times might be the best way to rope-in the Times and those who follow its reckless lead.
As a business entity operating in a free market environment, it is natural to assume that if its consumers (its subscribers) become dissatisfied with the New York Times's product (news) and cancel their subscriptions, it would be forced to improve that product or perish from the marketplace. So it would seem that organizing a subscription cancellation drive against the New York Times would be a good way of getting its attention.
But the Times has already lost an enormous number of subscribers by lurching to the far-Left under Arthur 'Pinch' Sulzberger's (and his teddy bear's) guidance. It has also been staggered by the Jason Blair and other scandals. And yet, as its readership slips away, the Times becomes more and more reckless with America's security, arrogant in its reasoning for being so, and increasingly vengeful towards the current, war-time Administration. A subscription cancellation drive is unlikely to work.
Two other options remain that if exercised could impact the Times hard enough to get its undivided attention: a mass boycott of NY Times advertisers, and convincing investors to dump their New York Times Company stock. These two are good options since their effects will be immediate and precipitous, giving the Times great incentive to change its reckless, treacherous ways.
If your family members and friends own New York Times stock, ask them to write a brief email to Bill Keller, the Times's executive editor. It should state the following, or something like it:
Dear Mr. Keller,
As a shareholder in the New York Times Companies, I am deeply disturbed by the Times's decisions to reveal details of classified U.S. security programs. We are a nation at war and these programs are in place to protect my family and my country. With the threat of world war an increasing possibility, it is now even more vital that your company not compromise America's security.
I will be eliminating all Times stock from my portfolio if your newspaper engages in any further such selfish and irresponsible acts.
Sincerely, xxxxxxx
A boycott of New York Times advertisers might be another way to punish it for the better -- a quick, dramatic loss of advertising revenue (its lifeblood) might evoke a sudden onset of introspection within the Times's editorial and executive boardrooms. Below this paragraph are contact links to some of the Times's major advertisers: Use them to pressure the Times. Tell these major Times revenue providers that you are displeased by the paper's revealing of national security secrets in a time of war. Inform them that since they advertise in the Times, you'll no longer be using or recommending their products or services. Then do just that, and deal with whatever inconvenience it causes you. (Remember, one terrorist can destroy your life or your country--changing banks or buying another brand of stereo, won't.)
Will a substantial public show of economic force convince the New York Times to become more considerate of American's right to live? I don't know. But with the specter of world war fast approaching, doing nothing to counter its recklessness regarding America's security is no longer an option.
The situation in Israel is a great study of PC bias found in the MSM. The high art they have achieved is to slant, very subtly, the language and format of their articles in order to align perceptions towards Liberal thinking, typically though key omissions or formatting choices, rather than obvious assertions.
PC Indoctrination Goals via the MSM:
Those with more power are always wrong; and those with less power are always right, regardless of the logic, evidence, circumstance, or obvious cause of any given situation.
Violence is always bad, unless it serves a revolutionary (Marxist) purpose (i.e. the "have-nots" striking against the "haves").
Powerful countries must always be expected to "stop the violence." Less powerful countries and groups are exempted from any expectation of control over their own violent populations or factions.
Since the current conflict concerning Hamas, Hezballah, and Israel is likely to be dominating the news, and healthy doses of PC dribble are going to be coming our way through the MSM for quite a while, we have to understand what PC is and what it is not.
PC is not about changing certain "offensive" words. PC is not about making people feel better about themselves by creating a less "hostile" work, learning, or social environment. PC is certainly not about "fairness," at least not for anyone in possession of objective reasoning skills. PC is not just harmless tinkering with the language by some poor, over sensitive souls. Regardless of the tendency to joke about comical phrases like "reproductively-challenged" to describe someone who has just been violently castrated, PC is not funny.
PC is about power. It is the passive arm of the Leftist movement; its primary goal is to normalize, though language, Leftist ideals that seek the redistribution of power from the powerful to the less powerful. In its more active form, it is what liberal academics and activists (redundant?) refer to these days as "social justice."
PC favors any act from the powerless against the powerful. Conversely, PC disfavors any act of the powerful against the powerless. It supports the powerless and fights the powerful, in any given situation, regardless of any objective reasoning concerning concepts like truth, logic, reward, responsibility, consequence, competence, or culpability. In other words, it seeks to disassemble the "common sense" that is at the very core of Western (misogynistic, racist, greedy, imperialist, etc.) Civilization.
The PC Church worships the victim, and the leftists who implement the PC Gospels, such as journalists, reserve for themselves the collective right to anoint who is a powerless victim to be celebrated (all non-Westerners), and who is a powerful aggressor to be reviled (all Westerners except liberal elites).
But those of us who have experienced life on more realistic terms, recognizing basic notions like cause and effect, fair and unfair, success and failure, virtue and vice, etc., are not sold on PC doctrine. So our elite leftist clergy must find ways to implement PC concepts into the minds of "the masses" without us realizing it.
To its credit, the Left has been extraordinarily successful at this. The demonstrable self-loathing and guilt that nowadays permeates the political, academic, and corporate culture of the West is due in large part, some would say mostly, to the very successful campaign of Political Correctness waged by the Left.
That said, let's look at the reporting on the big story of the week:
Isn't it interesting that the Israeli soldiers in custody of Hamas and Hezballah are referred to as "captured"? I thought combatants were captured in times of war, but that people – whether in uniform or not – were referred to as kidnapped in times of truce or peace. Was one side at war and the other side didn't know it? (see "Dar Al Harb", Koran)
Isn't it interesting that AP or Reuters stories always open -- invariably within the first few sentences -- with the number of "civilian" casualties (mainly those suffered by Palestinians or Lebanese), before any other statistics are presented? Since neither Hamas nor Hezballah terrorists are officially part of any government, are they considered to be 'civilians" by the MSM, thus counted in those statistics? Also, since when did the number of civilians killed in any conflict become the most important piece of information, overriding all other matters such as military successes and failures, statements by political leaders, and geopolitical impacts? (hint: see "Give Peace a Chance" chapter of the PC handbook).
Isn't it interesting, as Mr. Yeagley has pointed out, that the powerful Western country of Israel is invariably described as the attacker against Lebanon or Gaza in every headline?
Isn't it interesting that the Hamas and Hezballah kidnappings that caused the crisis are always buried in the bottom of a given article? Will they even be mentioned next week?
Isn't it interesting that in virtually none of the MSM articles written on the current conflict is there an account of the constant attacks perpetuated by Lebanon-based Hezballah against Israel over the past decade and longer? Would the hundreds of Israelis killed at the hands of Hezbollah over the years perhaps provide some valuable context for readers as to why Israel has responded to the "capture" of two soldiers with such overwhelming force? Would that perhaps provide readers with some insight concerning charges of Israeli "overreaction" by Eurabian leaders ?
Isn't it interesting that Western media never, ever questions the view from oft-quoted liberal elites that any escalation of violence in a conflict is "useless" or "senseless" and always results in a perpetual (and somewhat mystical) "cycle of violence"? Did journalists reporting on June 6, 1944 propagate the same view at the time? Was the violent defeat and unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany "useless"?
Isn't it interesting that we hardly ever see any descriptions from the MSM about how or why a government would allow an entire third of its territory to be controlled by a terrorist organization for decades? While we're just now starting to see articles that describe southern Lebanon as "Hezballah-controlled," will we ever see an account of the motivations by which a government would allow this to happen? Even if Lebanon was too weak itself to take on Hezbollah, surely such a relatively Westernized country could ask for help from Eurabian allies like Germany or France, n'est pas? How about help from other "moderate" Arab countries who are serious about squashing Islamic terrorism? (Oh, wait. . . never mind.)
Isn't it interesting that "Hezballah" means "Party of Allah" in Arabic, yet it is never spelled by the MSM in the way that would make the name of the God of Islam apparent to Westerners? "Hezbollah" is the common spelling used by the West and the MSM (even Microsoft Word doesn't auto-correct it), thus disconnecting for Westerners the association between this terrorist organization's very name, and the Islamic religious motivations that fuel it.
Isn't it sad that the West remains shrouded in ignorance of basic facts regarding important world events because of blind, dogmatic adherence to PC doctrine on the part of the vanguard of the PC Church -- the Fraternal, United, Communal Knights of the Unashamed Press Services? (apply acronym as appropriate).
"We urge Israel to stop incursions into Lebanon and the destruction of the country's civil infrastructure," comments Russia's foreign ministry. Isn't this the same Russia under ex-KGB lieutenant colonel Vladimir Putin that's so accomplished at destroying civil infrastructure? DoesGrozny ring a bell, tovarishi?
The Russian word naglost comes to mind, which an author of contemporary Russia defines as "an unseemly blend of arrogance, shamelessness, and rudeness."
Lieutenant Ehren Watada is whole-heartedly opposed to the war in Iraq -- yes, whole- heartedly, and that makes him the Left's new real deal hero! Yeah, and Willie and Joe were whole-heartedly opposed to the continuation of the war in the Ardennes but if they had to be there, that's where they would stay.
Willie and Joe had run out of wine cellars to liberate. They were boiling coffee in a steel pot; it was cold, they were wet and half frozen and Axis Sally was telling them they were damn fools. "Wouldn't you rather boogie with the Andrew Sisters than sit in the mud waiting for Gerd von Rundstedt to show up with his Panzers?" she asked. "I'm whole- heartedly opposed to the continuation of this war on Germany. How about you? The deception used to wage this war and the lawlessness that has pervaded every aspect of our civilian leadership has made me ashamed to be an American."
"Well, if we can't boogie with the Andrew Sisters we'll boogie with that bastard Rundstedt and make him wish he had never said 'Heil Hitler,'" grumbled Willie. "Can you imagine the nerve of that dumb broad?" said Joe. "Calling herself an American?
A new generation of Willie and Joes are serving their country in Iraq. One cannot say enough about their bravery and their dedication to the cause of freedom. As in every war though there are a few shirkers, a few Axis Sallies, certainly more than in World War Two. Chalk the excess up to forty years of political correctness and moral equivalency, to forty years of "I gotta do my thing" which for many meant turning on, tuning in and dropping out.
Willie and Joe would not have understood that mindless mantra. They wanted in, not out. They were grossly politically incorrect and there was absolutely no moral equivalency between what they intended to do to Gerd von Rundstedt and what he intended to do them. They would have known Saddam Hussein for what he was. Unlike Teddy Kennedy and Jack Murtha, they would have known instinctively the difference between Abu Ghraib and Dachau. They would have had no more respect for 28-year-old Army Lieutenant Ehren Watada than they had for Axis Sally. Ehren Watada? Yes, Ehren Watada. He's the new "Hell, no! I won't go!" poster child for the David Dellinger crowd. They haven't gotten around to spitting on GIs because there's no draft and without a draft there's nothing to stir up the campus SWINE (Students Woefully Ignorant of Nearly Everything) but they are enthusiastic about this fellow.
Watada is the first commissioned office to refuse to report for duty in Iraq. The war is illegal he says. Maybe he has a better lawyer than Willie and Joe had. "I am whole-heartedly opposed to the continued war in Iraq," Watada told the press, "(to) the deception used to wage this war, and the lawlessness that has perverted every aspect of our civilian leadership." Wasn't that what Axis Sally said?
Watada joined the Army in 2003. Remember, he volunteered -- he wasn't drafted. He is a graduate of Hawaii Pacific University. They must have a first-rate GED program to go along with their moral equivalency classes. Yet after four years of college one would think he would have known what he was doing when he signed up. He must have seen The Green Berets and the Sands of Iwo Jima when he was a kid. What did he think those loud noises were?
The far Left is already calling Watada a real deal hero. They say he is risking seven years in the slammer -- their words. Seven years? But chances are he won't spend any time in the 'slammer.' It would upset Oprah. Maybe if he had served under Uncle Billy Sherman or Phil Sheridan -- but seven years? No, Uncle Billy would have shaved his head and drummed him out of the Army to the tune of The Rogue's March, which might not be such a bad idea if it weren't for the honor.
What the real deal hero will get, instead of seven years in prison, is a movie and a book deal. He won't be hurting for money or lawyers. If he has the guts to appear on The O'Reilly Factor he will be a real deal, but don't bet on that happening.
Poor Cindy Sheehan is the loser in all of this. There won't be much demand for her inane prattling with Watada hogging the headlines. "The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush," said Cindy. The Liberal press loved it. Of course, it was something they already knew, but it sounded better when Cindy said it. Gold Star mothers rate higher than Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky on the creditability meter. So what is Cindy to do to get attention, date Fidel Castro? She flirted shamelessly with Hugo Chavez, but he's too young for her, besides, Hugo's already spoken for. Jimmy Carter got there first and as everyone at VH1 knows, Carter's kisses last longer than Cindy's. But that hasn't stopped the Left's favorite mom. "I'd rather live under Chavez than Bush," she said. God speed, Cindy, God speed!
In the meantime, Watada is looking for new digs. Tacoma's First United Methodist Church has an old Army cot in the basement and has offered Watada sanctuary. They have been doing this for a long time. It's an old Christian tradition. It started with Jesus, Mary and a jackass, but in recent years they have been getting mostly jackasses.
"This is the best way for us to support our troops," said the Rev. Monty Smith. The Church has a care center for military personnel where 'Gomer' and 'Beetle' can go for "counseling, emotional support and time for reflection on their options." Watada has been in the Army for three years, he's an officer and a gentleman. He must have spent a little time reflecting on his options and upon the kind of example he was supposed to set for the enlisted men under his command. 'Beetle' and 'Gomer' look up to men like Watada. And Watada has let the men under his command down.
George S. Patton said, "There is a great deal of talk about loyalty from the bottom to the top. Loyalty from the top down is even more necessary and much less prevalent." Patton wasn't talking about General Halftrack and Lieutenant Fuzz, he was talking about Lieutenant Watada. The Army is better off without officers like Watada. Without them, Willie and Joe are safer.
President Bush, on a trip to Russia, said it was up to Hezbollah "to lay down its arms and to stop attacking." But Russian President Vladimir Putin urged a balanced approach by Israel and said it appeared the nation was pursuing wider goals than the return of abducted soldiers.
Of course Israel has wider goals! How about, preventing more suicide mass-murderer bombers from blowing up Israeli restaurants, or preventing more Hezbollah rockets from hitting Israeli towns from southern Lebanon, or Hamas rockets hitting Israel from inside Gaza? Israel has lost over 1,300 civilians in recent years--all to this animalistic expression of Arab-Islamic hatred.
Wider goals, indeed. Does this come to the world as a shock? Or only to those so blinded by prejudice that they cannot allow Israel the privilege of self-defense?
Check this phenomenal site out: CENTCOM the website of U.S. Central Command. The site has a fascinating section called "What Extremists Are Saying." Here's a little taste of what it offers:
"Peaceful 'capitulation' dialogue and negotiations that would lead to interference with God's laws and compromising will certainly bring about great disaster and an undesirable infliction to those who accept it, and that will not help them in the sight of God, even if they own the entire earth. By God, to live for one moment under the laws of God on a span of earth is by far much better than living for centuries owning wealth on earth where the laws of God are not applicable."
Finally, we say it candidly to the world:"We will not accept anything other than Islam as a religion. We will not compromise our faith. The infidels should wait for nothing from us other than sounds of weapons and explosions until God's word is held high. This is our demand; we live for it and die by it. God said: 'Allah has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practice their religion, that which He has chosen for them. And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they worship Me and do not associate anything with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the Fasiqun [i.e. wicked]' [Koranic verse, Sura 24:55]."
The Left might be right. We can reason with and negotiate peace with Islamists. But before the U.S. State Department tries that approach, let's soften up some of the religious fanaticism that drives Islamists to kill. I therefore call on members of the Legal Left, including the ACLU, Center for Constitutional Rights and National Lawyers Guild, to travel to Iran and personally request that the Iranian leadership consider removing religious symbols and references from the public sphere and work towards a separation of mosque and state. If succesful, the lefty lawyers could then move on to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Somalia. Their efforts could help bring us 'citizens of the world' closer as people.
Fawaz Damra, a radical Muslim leader of Cleveland, has been jailed and is awaiting deportation. (He has significant terrorist ties.) Neither Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Sudan, Egypt or the "Palestinian" territories will have him.
Who are we kidding? Why is the Arab world allowed to play this deadly games?
Do we have this straight? Lebanon attacked Israel. Not the other way around. Military personnel came across the border, into Israel, and attacked Israeli soldiers, killing three and capturing two. That's called "aggression."
But do a search: "Lebanon Attacks Israel," and all you'll get is "Israel Attacks Lebanon."
That says it all.
(CNN can't bring itself to call it like it is. "Abduction," "cross-border raid," etc. Outrageous reporting, really.)
Sympathy for the Devil:Daily Kos Cries for John Walker Lindh
By now you've heard about the Daily Kos post "A World Without Israel," where blogger 'qrswave' writes how wonderful the world would be were Israel to disappear from the face of the earth. No surprise there, since the far-Left despises Israel and consistently sides with its barbaric, Islamist enemies.
The far-Left also often sides with enemies of the U.S. A recent post by another DailyKos blogger, 'Drummond,' provides a good example of this phenomenon.
The Kos post is titled "Whatever happened to Johnny Walker Lindh?" As you may recall, Lindh, an American citizen, was captured in Afghanistan fighting with the Taliban against the U.S. Of course, that instantly qualified him as a hero to the far-Left, but since 9/11 was still fresh in the minds of Americans when Lindh was captured, leftists knew better than to publicly express sympathy for him or solidarity with him. Lindh was eventually sentenced to 20 years in prison for his treachery.
It's now been almost five years since Islamists attacked the U.S. mainland on 9/11/2001. The far- Left no longer feels constrained in voicing sympathy for America's enemies. Here's what Daily Kos blogger 'Drummond' has to say about John Walker Lindh:
"The kid obviously didn't want to die so he grabbed it [a plea bargain], although given what I've since learned about the case I'm wondering if he made the right decision. Absent the requisite two witnesses that could testify that he actually shot at American troops or otherwise conspired against America, I don't know how the treason charges could have stuck. Let's remember that the Taliban were the recipients of 43 million in aid mere months before 911, with the protests of womens groups over the Taliban excesses falling on deaf ears in Washington. Arguably Lindh did nothing specifically against the law. . . . Hamza, as he [Lindh] now calls himself, may be confused under my secularist standards, but he seems far from evil." [Emphasis added]
So let's get this straight: According to the Daily Kos, John Walker Lindh-- who took up arms against his countrymen to help further the Taliban's hyper-intolerant, homophobic, sexist, racist, xenophobic, hyper-religious, ultra-violent agenda -- is "far from evil."
What's next for the far-Left Daily Kos? -- an essay proclaiming the 9/11 hijackers " innocent victims of U.S. imperialism?"
A few weeks ago, an open letter from a Lt. Cotton who claimed to be serving in Baghdad began circulating around the internet. In the letter, Cotton slammed the NY Times for revealing the details of the SWIFT surveillance program. Until now I hesitated posting the letter because its origin was unconfirmed. Though the authenticity of the letter is still unconfirmed, the existence of Lt. Cotton in Baghdad is not.
I reprint the letter with reservation. But even if it is later determined to be a fake, the points it makes over the NY Times SWIFT scandal are nevertheless on the money .
"Dear Messrs. Keller, Lichtblau & Risen:
Congratulations on disclosing our government's highly classified anti-terrorist-financing program (June 23). I apologize for not writing sooner. But I am a lieutenant in the United States Army and I spent the last four days patrolling one of the more dangerous areas in Iraq. (Alas, operational security and common sense prevent me from even revealing this unclassified location in a private medium like email.)
Unfortunately, as I supervised my soldiers late one night, I heard a booming explosion several miles away. I learned a few hours later that a powerful roadside bomb killed one soldier and severely injured another from my 130-man company. I deeply hope that we can find and kill or capture the terrorists responsible for that bomb. But, of course, these terrorists do not spring from the soil like Plato's guardians. No, they require financing to obtain mortars and artillery shells, priming explosives, wiring and circuitry, not to mention for training and payments to locals willing to emplace bombs in exchange for a few months' salary. As your story states, the program was legal, briefed to Congress, supported in the government and financial industry, and very successful.
Not anymore. You may think you have done a public service, but you have gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers and all other soldiers and innocent Iraqis here. Next time I hear that familiar explosion -- or next time I feel it -- I will wonder whether we could have stopped that bomb had you not instructed terrorists how to evade our financial surveillance.
And, by the way, having graduated from Harvard Law and practiced with a federal appellate judge and two Washington law firms before becoming an infantry officer, I am well-versed in the espionage laws relevant to this story and others -- laws you have plainly violated. I hope that my colleagues at the Department of Justice match the courage of my soldiers here and prosecute you and your newspaper to the fullest extent of the law. By the time we return home, maybe you will be in your rightful place: not at the Pulitzer announcements, but behind bars.
I never liked John Lennon. Though I thought the Beatles were a talented group I found Lennon's solo music uninteresting to a fault. And in comparison to the passionate, ass-kicking music of his peers like Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Sabbath and Santana, Lennon was annoyingly sappy and lame.
During the days when those groups ruled the music scene, I knew little about politics and cared even less about world events--my likes and dislikes at the time were generally disconnected from political influence, so Lennon's silly politics had nothing to do with my dislike of both him and his music. Frankly, my friends and I thought he just sucked. It was no deeper than that.
Now that I'm more politically astutue, I know that Lennon's iconic stature was mostly due to an Establishment media that was hypnotized by his radical Left views and outrageous, (though pretentious), publicity stunts. Some readers might remember the public fuss created when Lennon and his wife at the time, the talentless Yoko Ono, posed nude. (Put those clothes back on right now, Yoko! ) I've also realized that it was precisely people like Lennon and Ono who helped destroy America's will to win in Vietnam. And the Southeast Asian 'communist paradise' that Lennon and the rest of the 'peace' movement' worked so hard to assist, ultimately killed millions, and drove countless others to risk death on the high seas rather than remain in that 'paradise.'
But that's the way of the Left-- toy with the lives of others because hey, the world is just one big freakin' social experiment. Look at us! Look at us, we're such sensitive, caring people--oops!--sorry that the ideas and social programs we pushed on your community made things much worse!
Look at any American inner-city Black community and you'll see the fruits of the Left; poverty, helplessness, hopelessness and death. And no one, except the members of those communities, ever paid the price for having created them, precisely in the way that people like Lennon and Ono-- who got what they wanted in Vietnam-- never atoned for the horror they helped create.
With that micro-rant as an intoduction, I bring news of another Hollywood upchuck of lefty nostalgia, this time about the lives of John Lennon and Yoko Ono.
As part of a promotional blitz for an upcoming film about the annoying couple, Lionsgate Entertainment and Paramount Pictures is running a spoof of the popular DrudgeReport website. Its headline?-- "John Lennon Documentary About to Shake Up the Political Landscape." Naturally, it also mocks Conservatives.
Incredible. The silly, soon-to-be old farts who comprise what's left of the 1960's counter-culture movement actually think they're relevant enough to 'shake up the political landscape.'
Now that the Supreme Court is apparently in the war business, the Bush adminstration has decided to accord the murderous Muslims of Guantanamo (et alibi) full rights under the Geneva Convention rules.
Of course, the Genevea Convention rules don't apply to these thugs. The rules apply rather to those countries or entities who signed it. The murderous Muslims did not. Furthermore the Geneva Convention does not protect saboteurs and terrorists, as Nicholas Stix so ably pointed out.
So, it's another "cave in" situation. It is more indulgence, more weakness, more leniency, on all sides. The Supreme Court is simply not reflecting the conservative values which the Left was so terrified of when Bush's nominees were finally approved. The Supreme Court of course has absolutely no authority whatever in war time implementation of executive orders. This is outrageous, and dangerous!
And since Congress has refused to declare war at all since WWII, they really have nothing to say at all in the matter.
Yet, every egotist wants his say, all in the name of "equality." Our fine American government has become little more than a cheap power fest. All the people are left with is the internet.
In a very extensively researched biography, Meyers tracks several instances where Modi [his nickname] "went out of his way to emphasize his Jewish identity" even to Gentile peers. In one famous story, which Meyers believes is partly true, Modigliani "screamed 'Je suis juif et je vous emmerde' (I am a Jew and I shit on you)" to anti-Semitic Royalists whom he overheard discussing the Dreyfus affair. Terrified, the story goes, the Royalists fled as quickly as they could manage.
The World Cup Soccer game just ended in another prolonged agony. Italy finally beat France, 6-4, not on the field, but in the shoot-out, after the two over time periods. The actual game ended in a 1-1 tie.
But, FIFA rules being what they've become -- a brutalized sloucher fest -- the contest is dragged into the pits. At 65 minutes, both teams clearly quit. Italy carelessly passed the ball to France at least a dozen times afterwards, and France could do nothing with it. This is what happens when the teams have overtime to look toward. They lose the edge to win in 90 minutes. Why bother? They've got another chance.
This pathetic state of affairs is the result of an essentially Leftist approach to all social reality. Reward the loser with more and more chances. No, it's not about giving the crowd their money's worth. It's about giving the undeserving parties as many chances as possible--to the point that the meaning of the game is lost. The spirit of the players is lost. The crowd sits through more than a half hour of sub-standard playing, where great soccer stars play like lazy seventh-graders. They're just too tired to play.
This is not how soccer explains the world, like Franklin Foer says, but it explains how the cheating, weak spirit of Leftism has aversely affected the game of soccer.
This is all FIFA's doing, drawing the game out, making room for a few more milliion-dollar-a-minute advertisements. Yes, there is that financial aspect. But, really, FIFA reflects on the Leftist tendency of all social operations in the world: more chances. Just more chances to win. That's what people seem to want.
This only denigrates the real game, encourages defeatism, and actually mirrors a leniency and moral indulgence we see in international politics. No one wants to suffer any consequences.
I say, if you don't win the game in 90 minutes, you lose. A tie is a loss for both sides. It should not count. When that rule is established, players will know they have to win in 90 minutes. There'll be a lot fewer tie games.
Or, why not have the goalie shoot-out before the game?
Debra Frisch, Leftist Educator and Writer, Threatens to Sexually Molest Conservative Blogger's Two Year Old Son
No outrage from the Left yet, but a leftist University of Arizona Psychology (seriously) Department member threatened online to sexually molest conservative blogger Jeff Goldstein's two year old son. Goldstein publishes the popular Protein Wisdom site, where the 'educator,' Deborah Frisch, left her comments.
"I'd like to hear more about your 'tyke' by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke? Tell all, bro! . . .
. . .[...] as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your 'tyke' it wouldn’t slow me down one iota. You aren’t 'human' to me.
. . . So if you could just tell me the AGE and SEX of your 'tyke,' I'd be stoked! Thanx!
. . . Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby. Are you still married to the woman you humped to produce the toddler? "
Frisch, who has written for the totalitarian CounterPunch webzine, where she praised and defended the loathsome Ward Churchill , resigned her teaching position yesterday after news of her online assault spread throughout the rightwing blogosphere.
As the outrage and publicity began building over the matter, Goldstein's site was brought down by two simultaneous Denial of Service attacks.
So far, leftwing criticism of Frisch's behavior has been almost non-existent and the leftwing blogosphere remains silent about it.
No doubt that's because the Left's out of breath after sanctimoniously bloviating over my public listing of Pinch Sulzberger's and a NY Times photographer's contact info in order to spur debate over the Times's wreckless attitude on U.S. national security matters.
By the way, I was on Alan Colmes's radio program Friday night with lefty blogger Glenn Greenwald and David Horowitz. Unfortunately, I jumped into the mix near the end of the program. The debate (if you can call three ideological warriors yakking at each other a debate) raised more issues than it resolved. That's a good thing. Alan Colmes, a decent lefty, predictably tried controlling the debate to Greenwald's advantage. But what the heck, the conservative Sean Hannity does the same thing when he moderates similar Left vs. Right forums.
I recorded some of the program and, as time permits, I'll edit-out the commercials and post it.
I've thought about contacting Greenwald to do a weekly, online, smackdown-style radio program -- Left vs. Right (or something like that), since I love no-holds barred, in-your-face-style political discussions and Greenwald's a bulldog.
I have all the equipment and the audio production experience to produce a pro-quality show, so why not? [like I have the time. . .]
In between projects in Iraq, I recently had the opportunity to spend a couple weeks on the sublime Indonesian island of Bali. Although the vast majority of Indonesians are Muslim, and Muslims rule the Indonesian government, the population of Bali remains predominantly Hindu. As such, the Balinese have a smiling attitude towards life that few seem to enjoy in Muslim countries.
But it struck me on this most recent visit (my fourth), that the Balinese also enjoy many of life's treasures that also seem to be going extinct in America. The suppression of liberty has many forms, none of which are exclusive to Islam. There are many things that one can experience in a place like Bali that simply would not be tolerated anymore in America, because ours is a society which seeks to "protect" our lives at the cost of our liberties, thereby limiting our options in pursuing our own happiness.
Like anyone, Americans fear certain things. We fear death, injury, and illness. But unlike most, we seek to "fix" these inevitabilities by creating a society that tries, through government regulation and civil litigation, to assign blame to fellow Americans for virtually any ill that may befall us individually. As a result, many of the experiences I enjoyed in a single day in Bali would be either significantly curtailed or completely impossible in contemporary America.
I awoke in our inexpensive rented villa (only $100 per night) near the beach, which included a small private pool. It was nice for my girlfriend and I to be able to enjoy some skinny dipping once in a while behind the walls of our garden, but I wondered if private, unsupervised use of a swimming pool would be very feasible at a resort in the US, given the immense liabilities associated with it. How much of our bill would go towards sky-high insurance premiums to make such an amenity possible, especially since the hotel also provided us with alcoholic beverages right in our own mini-bar?
We also rented a motor scooter through our hotel, and took to the streets to grab some lunch. Traffic rules in Bali are simple: don't hit anything; don't get hit by anything. Control at intersections is virtually non-existent, and careening into oncoming traffic on very narrow roads amidst a swarm of scooters and cars is the rule, rather than the exception. How can the hotel toss us the keys to a scooter for only $4/day under such circumstances, just because we asked for one? Granted, the scooter representative admonished us to "be careful," but is that really enough? Don't they feel a responsibility for the safety of their guests?
After lunch, we arranged a tour driver through our hotel to take us to a famous Balinese temple, high atop the cliffs at Uluwatu. The drive alone, in a minivan driven by a local professional this time, no doubt caused significant anxiety and may have psychologically scarred us for life. It seemed that we were in danger of a fatal crash every minute in oncoming traffic, or on narrow roads along cliffs, or across small bridges with questionable structural integrity. Our driver - that ignorant brute - seemed much more concerned with getting us to our requested destination, rather than nurturing our physical safety or mental/emotional health. In the US, we could have easily sued for the experience.
The cliff-top temple at Ulwatu is truly a sight and experience of a lifetime, and I'm convinced there is no way anyone could enjoy anything like it on US soil anymore. There are paths and walkways high along the cliff edges which overlook the ocean, waves, and rocks over 300 feet below. Some of these walkways have barriers and railings, and some do not. People are free to lean over the barriers, or walk to the unguarded portions of the cliff line and take pictures. On the public grounds of this popular tourist atraction, one may venture as close to the cliff's edge as one dares, or even jump off if one so chooses.
I saw not one warning sign that informed the public that falling off a 300-foot tall cliff is hazardous to one's health. The cliff barriers, where present, were decorative concrete railings only 4 or 5 feet tall, with no plexiglass or mesh between the columns -- easily breached by adult or small child. I guess the Balinese -- those primitive, unenlightened souls -- apparently feel that the public should be able to grasp for themselves concepts like gravity and rudimentary physics, and tend to their children as appropriate.
And then there are the monkeys; they own the temple grounds (a standard feature at monasteries and temples throughout Bali and other parts of Southeast Asia). Vendors provide bags of peanuts and chopped fruit with which to hand feed the semi-tame creatures, and so the monkeys approach tourists in the most matter-of-fact manner, but sometimes get downright insistent. The idea is to hand the monkeys one small piece at a time -- make them earn it, of course. But the monkeys have other ambitions.
My girlfriend retained possession of her full bag of chopped pineapples for a grand total of about 5 seconds. One quick head fake by a monkey who has been doing this every day for about ten years, and the entire bag was his. Up yours, homo sapien.
Perhaps a sign of our evolutionary connections, the monkeys at Uluwatu seem unsatisfied with meager blessings like nuts and fruit, and often seek to improve their lot by depriving slow-witted tourists of more valuable treasures, such as cameras, lighters, sunglasses, jewelry, purses, etc. With lightning speed and fangs that would make any Doberman blush, I witnessed one shrieking Japanese tourist recoil as she clutched her bloodied ear; a furry culprit had brazenly "liberated" one of her shiny hoop earrings. In true banzai spirit, he immediately flung himself upon a branch overhanging the cliff, ensuring the fate of any would-be heroes who dared attempt anything chivalrous against him. His fangs provided further deterrence, and as one hand clutched his latest trophy, the other was lazily scratching his genitals - mocking us all and forever sealing his glory.
Such blessed communion between man and beast would be impossible in public America today. Lawsuits would abound, animal activists would howl, regulations would be stifling, and insurance costs would be most prohibitive.
Basic economics tells us that the rule of diminishing returns at exponentially increasing costs applies to virtually any endeavor when taken to the extreme. Our liberty to take risks with our own lives is sometimes paid for in the currency of risk to our physical safety. But the reverse is also true, and America has set up elaborate systems of societal mechanisms to provide physical safety to its citizens, but at ever-increasing costs to our liberty.
Under the ever-growing umbrella of health, safety, and welfare, the do-gooder nannies among us have been all too successful at foisting their "protections" upon us. Through lottery-like civil trials and verdicts, our society now strikes fear into the hearts of anyone -- business owner, entrepreneur, or private citizen -- who may dare wish to provide fellow Americans with a chance to have an experience outside of the Nanny's smothering embrace.
This was not always so, and America became what it is today in large part because individuals were once allowed -- encouraged, in fact -- to take on the risks, and corresponding responsibilities, of whatever they chose to do in life. They were encouraged to do this as they saw fit.
As a kid, I sometimes spent summer days at a neighbor's pool -- the only one on our block. The kind, older couple sometimes allowed kids from around the neighborhood to come and swim and play, and they enjoyed watching over us and providing us with sandwiches and lemonade. They didn't necessarily know all the kids on any given day, and there were no waivers of liability required from our parents. These nice old folks were at liberty to provide us and themselves with some of life's simple enjoyments on a summer day, without fear of losing their life savings and property in the event an accident should befall one of us. Foreign roads, exotic temples, and strange creatures aside, how rare is even this simple experience in America today?
When listing in the Declaration of Independence the rights endowed upon all Americans by our Creator, Jefferson did not stop at "life." He understood that liberty and the pursuit of happiness, with all the associated risks, were not only inseparable from life, they defined it.
The AFP reports that Neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups are infiltrating the U.S. Military. Apparently, they seek to take advantage of the top-notch combat training that the military offers.
These clowns are intolerant, violent thugs and represent a potential terrorist threat to America. They're also hard-core racists who hate Blacks, Jews, Italians, Hispanics and Catholics, to name a few.
I've done some research on white supremacist groups and found that most of them have declared solidarity with our Islamist enemies. That solidarity is tied to an important Neo-Nazi premise: that America is controlled by a 'Zionist Occupied Government' (ZOG). It's a relatively new twist on the timeless 'Jews rule the world" canard and it ties in nicely with radical Islam's hatred of Jews and Israel.
I won't provide any links to these groups in this article, but if you're interested in looking into the abyss, google 'Stormfront,' 'Aryan Nations' and Army of God.' After that, google around and find information about how the FBI stripped Aryan Nations of their clubhouse and assets.
On a positive note, the histories of these groups shows them to be prone to easy infiltration by the Feds. They're also pretty easy to flush out into the open, since they have an affinity for displaying Nazi symbolism, collecting Nazi memorabilia, wearing silly uniforms and bragging about their crazy beliefs.
No doubt taking its cues from the New York Times, The New York Daily News has just published details of a foiled terrorist attack on New York's Holland Tunnel. The alleged terrorists appear to have links to Musab Al Zarqawi's network.
The Daily News reports, both to us and to the fanatical enemy seeking America's destruction:
"The FBI has uncovered what officials consider a serious plot by jihadists to bomb the Holland Tunnel in hopes of causing a torrent of water to deluge lower Manhattan, the Daily News has learned.
The terrorists sought to drown the Financial District as New Orleans was by Hurricane Katrina, sources said. They also wanted to attack subways and other tunnels.
Counterterrorism officials are alarmed by the "lone wolf" terror plot because they allegedly got a pledge of financial and tactical support from Jordanian associates of top terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi before he was killed in Iraq, a counterterrorism source told The News.
It's not clear, however, if any cash or assistance was delivered.
The News has learned that at the request of U.S. officials, authorities in Beirut arrested one of the alleged conspirators, identified as Amir Andalousli, in recent months. Agents were scrambling yesterday to try to nab other suspects, sources said. [Emphasis added]
They didn't indicate how many people were the target of the international dragnet but said they were scattered all over the world.
'This is an ongoing operation,' one source said.
U.S. agents were allowed to take part in the interrogation of Andalousli, a source said."
Great. Now thanks to the Daily News and its secret sources, Amir Andalousli's associates know they're being pursued and most likely now have plenty of time to escape.
The NY Times lowers the bar on treachery and stupidity, and others blindly follow.
This has now passed the point of being ridiculous.
The government is elected by the people; it is the people I blame. I do not feel Israelis are my people any more. They are not the people I used to know that would fight. Sderot is hit every day by kassams, but yet the people living in Tel Aviv don't care. My love of the people has changed.
Doesn't the Torah command not to stand idly by the blood of one's neighbor?
AFP News is running a story about the prominence of US flags across America. The headline of the article is, 'US 'flag epidemic' reaches peak on Fourth of July.'
The story quotes French philosopher and author Bernard-Henri Levy who said, "It's a little strange, this obsession of the flag. Everywhere, in every form, flapping in the wind or on stickers, an epidemic of flags that has spread throughout the city." Levy made that observation while traveling across America.
Now I generally admire Mr. Levy -- an intelligent, courageous man and a great writer but I'm at a loss to explain why he seems puzzled over most Americans' love of Old Glory.
But perhaps I shouldn't be, since in Mr. Levy's country of origin, the flag its citizens are most fond of is ragged, white and displayed on the end of a stick.
It's no secret that the New York Times is one of the most pro-gun control newspapers in America. It's also common knowledge that, in New York, getting a handgun permit is about as easy as finding virtue among its politicians. Even more difficult is procuring a permit to carry a concealed weapon in New York City, one of America's 'bluest' cities.
So how, and why, did Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger, who publishes the New York Times and lives in New York, obtain a permit to carry a handgun?
Over the next few weeks, and in the public interest, TheAutonomist will try to conclusively answer those questions.
In the process, we will seek answers to the following related questions:
When did Sulzberger first acquire his license to carry a concealed weapon?
Why was he granted that license?
Did he receive hands-on weapons training as part of the licensing process?
Is his license to carry current?
Given the difficulty of obtaining such permits in New York City, why was Sulzberger granted one when hundreds, if not thousands, of New York City shopkeepers, taxi drivers and others who do business in high-risk crime areas, are denied them?
Does Sulzberger regularly carry a concealed weapon? If so, why?
Why is Sulzberger pro-gun control when he himself has a permit to carry a concealed handgun?
How does Sulzberger square his choice to carry with his newspaper's hard, anti-gun stance?
Do any other New York Times reporters, photographers, editorialists or executives hold licenses to carry a concealed handgun?
How many of them actually do?
If so, how do they square that with the Times's anti-gun, pro-gun control stance?
Since obviously, we don't have the investigative resources to single-handedly conduct this investigation, we ask help from fellow bloggers, academics and specialists--including experts in handgun laws, gun safety, weapons licensing and gun control legislation -- to assist us. Those with experience in legally procuring copies of individual's firearms applications and licenses are also urged to participate in the investigation. Contact us via email. We respect your confidentiality.
The Autonomist also urges its readers and commenters to assist us in this work. Contact us via email or, if you wish, leave input in the comment section of this post.
New York's gun control laws are the among the toughest in the country and as a result, the good citizens of New York are at a distinct disadvantage in defending themselves against the thousands of rapists, robbers, gang members and sociopaths that pepper New York City and its surrounding boroughs. Yet Arthur Sulzberger and other upper-crust pro-gun control warriors, are not.
Looks like the protesters are on the take again--stealing attention by crash dieting. Cindy Sheehan & Co. are protesting this July 4th by beginning a fast on the steps of the Capitol. Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn have promised to 'pick up the fast' themselves later, and 2,700 others, each taking turns, one day each. Chain fasting. You know, like chain letters. Pass it on.
Maybe anti-war protesters will count for something after all: a slimmer, more fit, more healthy America. Dieting for peace. Only let's hope it doesn't turn them into gourmet gluttons, like it did the murderous Muslims in Guantanamo. (Is that really what Cindy Sheehan wants? Marinated chicken? Tsk, tsk. Gotta watch that fasting thing, when it's done for anything but health.)
Speaking of the treasonous Left and its primary mouthpiece, the New York Times, there's an excellent article on The American Thinker today by J.R. Dunn. Below are some excerpts:
"Is it my imagination, or is there a sudden hush in the shrieking media barrage today? Was it only yesterday that the NYT and WaPo were roaring and thundering, month after month, at President Bush and the GOP—- to surprisingly little effect? Have we run out of phony scandals yet? Where is the Bush = Hitler crowd? . . .
. . . Maybe the Democrats just got it -- that they have now defined themselves to lose the 2006 elections. The Democrat Party stands for open treason in a time of war. Their house journal -- the New York Times -- has made it official, by publishing secrets that will surely end up killing US agents, soldiers and allies in the field. The next big terrorist attack will point the finger of blame at our domestic Fifth Column -- the media establishment. Where will the next terrorist hammer fall? Israel - London - New York City?
Wherever it does, the guilty party is now beyond reasonable doubt in the eyes of millions of Americans." [Emphasis added]
Another member of the Axis of Evil plays chicken with us. Funny how leftwing regimes almost never provide for the needs of their people, but always have enough resources to play with fire.
"I've received a lot of emails from leftists who are concerned to prove that photographing Cheney and Rumsfeld's homes did not actually jeoparidze their security (an impossible claim to prove I may say). I'm glad my blog has served to get people on the leftside of the spectrum to think about actual security issues. Now apply that to the betrayal of the NSA surveillance program and the monitoring of bank transactions and you will begin to comprehend the enormity of what the Times and its supporters have done.
It will be especialy rewarding to think about these matters on the Fourth of July when you can focus on the real question, which is whether you want to keep this country and its freedoms or not."
I add a major point: Most Leftists, at least intellectually speaking, are adolescents. As such, they're always in denial when it comes to facing the awful truth about our Islamist enemies and when assessing the nature of the threat those enemies present to both America and the rest of the civilized world.
They don't think there's a war in progress against people who, as a matter of policy, do this and this and this. To most on the Left, Bush is a far greater threat to our way of life, and to the world than Islamism, so he must be destroyed -- in any way possible.
These folks have the same mindset as their adolescent 1960s prototypes, who in the process of generically flipping their parents 'the bird,' inadvertently did enormous damage to the fabric of this country.
Teenagers don't usually take adult things seriously. Neither does the Left.
We wish all of our readers a happy Independence Day. Let's take a moment today to thank the men and women in our Armed Forces for the sacrifices they make to maintain that Independence.
"Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier.
And, our soldiers don't just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.
For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.
It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom he abuses to burn that flag. "
As you can imagine, over the last few days, we've received a good amount of hate mail from our peace-loving leftwing friends. Most of it was just the usual spittle-flecked vitriol of a non-threatening nature. We get that all the time from 'The Ideology of Peace,' (not to be confused with 'The Religion of Peace.' )
But I also received a few that wished me dead, or physically injured or implied as much. Most had been relayed through an anonymous browsing service. The one below, which is the worst of the worst -- sent to the comment section of this post -- was not. (Not very smart, 'Tom 3.')
66.89.136.254 (Tom 3's IP address)
You fucking wop hosebag. I hope someone puts two slugs in your fucking head.Tom3 Email Homepage 07.03.06 - 1:54 pm #
I love it. Whenever I checkmate the Left, the loonies among them (and there are many) come out to play-- and never show their faces.
"Weakness provokes insult and injury," Thomas Jefferson once wrote to John Jay, "while a condition to punish it often prevents it." This observation brings to mind Israel's problems with the Hamas neo-Nazis, who now threaten "a sea of blood."
A protest organized by FreeRepublic has just begun in Washington, DC, in front of 1627 I Street NW. If you're in the area, attend it. Here's the press release announcing the protest:
WHAT: Groups to Protest Treasonous Reporting by New York Times at Washington, D.C. Bureau on Monday
WHEN: Monday, July 3 at 12 p.m.
WHERE: 1627 I Street NW, Washington, D.C.
The D.C. Chapter of FreeRepublic.com, an independent grassroots conservative organization, and Accuracy in Media (AIM) will hold a demonstration at noon, Monday, July 3, at the Washington, D.C., bureau of The New York Times, 1627 I St., NW, to call for the prosecution of New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., Executive Editor Bill Keller and reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau for giving aid and comfort to al Qaeda by publishing stories exposing national security intelligence programs.
Despite pleadings from the federal government and Democrat and Republican members of the 9/11 Commission, The Times recently published a report detailing lawful surveillance of international banking transactions that was employed to prevent terror attacks.
This report followed The Times' publication last year exposing the federal government’s NSA surveillance of international based phone and electronic communications aimed at preventing terror attacks. Incredibly, The Times was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for that story.
When confronted at the April 2006 annual Times meeting by AIM editor Cliff Kincaid about the NSA story, Sulzberger said that he and his editors "made the decision that, in the battles between civil liberties on the one hand and national security on the other, civil liberties won." To which Kincaid responded, "Whose civil liberties are you talking about? Certainly not the civil liberties of those Americans who are possible victims of a terrorist attack carried out by the terrorists who are under surveillance. So whose civil liberties are you protecting in this case by going public and alerting our enemies as to what we're doing?" [Emphasis added] Read the rest. "
Since beginning my campaign to hold the New York Times's staff accountable for its treasonous and irresponsible actions in this time of war, this site has been under attack by peace-loving leftists and crazies of all stripes. Without exception, not a single one of those cowards has signed his or her name to the invective and insults aimed at The Autonomist.
I am not intimidated. I will continue my campaign of listing contact numbers and addresses of NY Times editors, publishers, photographers and executives. They're in the public domain, and easily accessible.
A note to readers: When contacting New York Times staff members, please be civil and direct.
For months, this blog has been harassed by a leftist idiot who hides behind the name "Robert" and has a hate-filled radical-Left blog called Thorn Tree. I won't provide a link here, since the guy's site gets only a handful (15-20) visitors per day and he's starved for attention. If interested, Google to find it.
If you go there, here's a taste of what you'll find:
"That cowardly, insane, son-of-a-bitch has gone way too far this time.I'm linking to this for information purposes only for a couple of days and then I'm taking it down and never stop washing my hands. I don't want a permanent link to that filthy bastard.This is just part of the "Coulter syndrome" in which conservatives try to outslime each other in order to get attention. I've deleted half a page of insults I was ready to throw at him, good ones too, but other than showing everyone how low humanity in the grips of ignorant patriotism can go, I'm not wasting any more time.I'm sure your stunt will get your little site lots of hits. Congratulations Rocco, you pathetic motherfucker."
For months, I have banned this guy over and over again, since his self-hatred adds nothing to discussion. But he's so obsessed with leaving his vitriol on my site that he keeps coming back. And back. And back. And being the pathetic, powerless jerk that he is, he solicits moonbat-Left sites like his, to encourage their readers to spam my site.
Come out, come out, Robert--wherever you are. Show us your face, you silly little coward.
Of course, I expect this sort of behavior from the lunatic Left, whose lies, hatred and sabotage we'll continue researching--and exposing.
Oh, yes-- In my picture, I'm standing in front of the entrance to my home. If you do decide to stop by -- (my woman and I love to entertain) -- show up with a nice bottle of wine, some beer or some dessert. Sorry to have to remind you, but I have found most leftists to be notoriously stingy, besides being utter bores.
update: 7/03/2006 2:16PM Yesterday, some mindless, rightwing idiot ran a post urging readers to "hunt down" New York Times employees and their children. He has since edited that segment out of his piece. He also sent readers to this site via a link in the body of that post. Lefty blogs have picked up the idiot's post and are running with it. I don't blame them.
I don't know this clown and I take great offense that his post reads in such a way to imply that I'm working with him. I have no association with the guy and I deeply deplore what he originally said in his post. I've just asked him to de-link me. Hopefully, he'll comply. Below is the text of the message I sent him, which I posted in the comment section of his post:
"Derek, I would appreciate if you'd delink my site from your post. What you originally said in your NYT post is absolutely insane, bordering on evil. I do not appreciate the fact that your post was written in such a way to imply that we're working together. You don't know me, I don't know you, nor do I care to. Although I would have preferred to contact you privately in order to address this matter, you do not provide any way to do so on your site. I thank you, in advance, for your compliance.---Rocco DiPippo"
I've pulled the post on Linda Spillers, the photographer who snapped pictures of Rumsfeld's vacation home for an incredibly (deliberately?) irresponsible New York Times article read by hundreds of thousands of people across the globe, including Bush-hating radicals and terrorist operatives.
The post has served its purpose--we got your attention over the NY Times' lack of consideration for everyday Americans, (who its principals have utter contempt for), our soldiers (who they despise) and our President (who they have a seething hatred of).
Subsequent posts will concentrate on the Times's reporters, editors and executives.
A word or two on some of the comments that were left on that post:
Thanks largely to a handful of leftist moonbats from three radical-Left sites, comments on the Spiller post were getting pretty nasty--and pointless. Using multiple aliases from the same few ip addresses, these clowns kept trying to imply that I wished to harm Ms. Spiller. If you accept that this was my intent, then you must unquestionably also accept that the New York Times deliberately threatened Secretary Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney with violence by revealing the locations of their vacation homes in a time of war against a fanatical enemy that attacked America and murdered 3000 of her citizens on 9/11/2001. Do you?
I don't. But I do think that the NY Times's abject hatred of the Bush Administration manifests itself in news stories that play fast and loose with America's right to defend itself. No one elected the smug adolescents of the New York Times who seem to think they have the right to decide what is, and what is not, in the best interests of U.S., or others, security.
We elect representatives to do that and the last time I checked, no one appointed Pinch Sulzberger or Peter T. Kilborn, or Eric Lichtblau or James Risen or Philip Shenon or Janet Robinson or anyone else working at, or for, the New York Times (or any other newspaper or media outlet) to make those decisions.
The Times's hatred of George W. Bush, coupled with its sickening anti-U.S. stance and its endless reliance on a foul false moral equivalence to justify that stance, now endangers 280,000,000 Americans--including everyone who works in the media.
Who will stop the Times?
I say it's now up to private citizens to lead the charge against NY Times treachery, since, by and large, our government lacks the required courage to address the issue at hand: treason.
Take action now. Cancel your Times subscription. Abandon its website. Email and call its employees, editors and reporters to express your outrage. Let's get going.
A common ploy of the Left: destroy the messenger when he or she hits home with a good point, instead of discussing or arguing the merits of that point. In all fairness, some leftwing commenters made intelligent points on the Spiller post and made them well. We welcome you to this site and hope you'll comment here regularly.
I don't moderate comments or call for registration, since it kills the raw nature of exchanges between commenters. Though, in my opinion, most anonymous posters are cowardly jerks afraid to sign their names to what they write, we've had a few that were excellent. But if you troll here just to spread misinformation, you'll be banned. Sign your comments. Doing so implies ownership. If you believe what you write, sign it. Grow some cajones.
The importance of Spiller's photo in the context of the Times article, is directly tied to the words of the reporter who wrote the story revealing the location of a security camera on Rumsfeld's property. In other words, that picture without the words accompanying it, meant nothing. But once hitched to the text of the article, it meant a thousand words.
Though everyone, including Spiller, who contributed to the "travel" article bears responsibility for its content, New York Times editors had to approve of the story and the photo before either was printed. They bear ultimate responsibility for the piece, so we'll now be exclusively concentrating on public interest stories about them.
Readers, keep your tips coming.
post updated 7/3/2006 12:15 AM
update: 7/3/2006 12:25 AM To our regular readers: Due to the endless and overwhelmingly mindless leftist attacks on this site, comments will be moderated until further notice. Sorry for the inconvenience.
New Paltz is also the home of some very powerful people. One is New York Times Publisher Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger. Well, actually Mr. Sulzberger owns two homes in New Paltz, though one is just five minutes away from the other.
It's said that the name of the first estate is "Mount-a-War-Against-Bush" and the other is "Mount-a- War-against-Cheney-and-Rumsfeld." (Note that "Berg," which is part of Mr. Sulzberger's name, is German for "mountain.")
To serve the public interest, Mr. Dan Riehl offers some breathtaking, birds-eye view photographs of the two estates. However, for those who wish to view this twin marvel for themselves, they can take the 85 mile drive to 14 SPRINGTOWN RD and 41 CRAGSWOOD RD, where the exquisite homes are located. (Below are detailed driving directions.)
Directions to the Sulzberger Estates (Courtesy of Google Maps)
1.Turn right at West Side Hwy/West St - go 1.7 mi
2. Continue on 11th Ave/West Side Hwy - go 0.5 mi
3. Bear left at 12th Ave/West Side Hwy - go 1.9 mi
4. Continue on RT-9A N - go 5.4 mi
5. Take exit 14 to Geo Washington Br/Cross Bronx Expwy (I-95)/W 178 St - go 0.9 mi
6. Merge into I-95 S - go 1.0 mi
7. Take the Palisades Parkway exit 74 - go 0.5 mi
8. Merge into Palisades Interstate Pky N - go 19 mi
9. Take the I-287 W/I-87 exit 9W to Albany - go 0.4 mi
10. Merge into I-287 W/I-87 N - go 9.0 mi
11. Continue on I-87 N toward Albany - go 46 mi
12. Take the RT-299 exit 18 to New Paltz/Poughkeepsie - go 0.7 mi
13. Turn left at Main St - go 1.7 mi
14. Turn right at Springtown Rd.
15. The first house of the Sulzbergers is a half mile down the road. To get to the second house, continue down Springtown Road for 2.5 miles, and turn left on Cragswood Road. The house is about a "pinch" more than half a mile down.
Based on the emails I've been receiving, KosKiddies have been furiously digging for my personal info. Relax Kidz, it has been easily accessible for days.
David Horowitz reports that the NY Times, in apparent retaliation for the backlash over its decision to publish U.S. security secrets, has published details of Donald Rumsfeld's and Dick Cheney's summer homes including, (in Rumsfeld's case), the location of security cameras on the property.
By repeatedly exposing details of programs essential to fighting al Qaeda, the New York Times endangers all Americans. It has now directly endangered the lives of Secretary Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney.
I issue a call to the blogosphere to begin finding and publicly listing the addresses of all New York Times reporters and editors. Posting pictures of their residences, along with details of any security measures in place to protect the properties and their owners (such as location of security cameras and on-site security details) should also be published.
Let's start with the following New York Times reporters and editors:
update:7/01/2006 4:56 PM: In the public interest, I've just published an article on Linda J. Spillers, who photographed Donald Rumsfeld's vacation home for the NY Times article. Should you have any questions for her, Linda's contact information is in the article. Pulled
update: 7/2/2006 10:30 AM It's a beautiful holiday weekend. Pack a lunch and your camera and take a relaxing drive to New Paltz, New York to enjoy the fresh, country air. Don't miss "Weekends With the Sulzbergers," another fascinating Autonomist article in the public interest. (Anyone for a dip in Pinchie's pool?)
update: 7/2/2006 4:06PM Tune in this evening for four more hard hitting Autonomist public interest stories regarding the "Paper of Record.":
"Risen Shine: How James Risen of NSA fame destroyed the life of Wen Lee Ho with Impunity"
"Philip Shenon and Judith Miller: Tipping Off the Islamist Enemy and Living the Good Life!"
"Janet Robinson (NYT CEO): Lifestyles of the Rich, Arrogant, Unpatriotic and Left"
" Always a 'Journalist', Never a Citizen: A Visit to Eric Lichtblau's Neighborhood" (Complete with aerial view!)
update: 7/03/2006 2:10PM Yesterday, some mindless, rightwing idiot ran a post urging readers to "hunt down" New York Times employees and their children. He has since edited that segment out of his piece. He also sent readers to this site via a link in the body of that post. Lefty blogs have picked it up and are running with it. I don't blame them.
I don't know this clown and I take great offense that his post reads in such a way to imply that I'm in cahoots with him. I have no association with the guy and I deplore what he originally said in his post. I've just asked him to de-link me. Hopefully, he'll comply. Below is the text of the note I sent him, which I posted on the comment section of his site:
"Derek, I would appreciate if you'd delink my site from your post. What you originally said in your NYT post is absolutely insane, bordering on evil. I do not appreciate the fact that your post was written in such a way to imply that we're working together. You don't know me, I don't know you, nor do I care to. Although I would have preferred to contact you privately in order to address this matter, you do not provide any way to do so on your site. I thank you, in advance, for your compliance.---Rocco DiPippo "
To our readers: Thanks for keeping the info and suggestions coming! You're doing a great service, (in the public interest, that is.)
During that time, the park will be off limits to everyone except Muslims. The park's owners expect up to 28,000 members of the religion of peace to be on hand when the event is held.
In preparation for that influx, prayer areas and halal food stalls will be set up throughout the park. Liquor will not be sold, nor will gambling be featured.
Will stoning pits, forced amputation clinics and clitoridectomy booths be available for the enjoyment of the Muslim horde?
Alton Towers has no plans to feature a "Jew Only Day" or a "Christian Only Day" or a "Buddhist Only Day" any time soon, since those would likely offend Muslims.
The terrorist group Hamas bit off more than it could chew when some of its members kidnapped an Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit.
Israel has responded to his abduction by striking targets in Gaza, a territory it recently turned over to the Palestinians, who have, (of course), used it as a staging ground from which to lob rockets into Israel. Once again, Israel's suicidal strategy of appeasement has born poisonous fruit.
Now, in the face of increasingly outrageous demands for Shalit's safe return, Israel has threatened to assasinate the Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismael Haniyeh, if Corporal Shalit is harmed.
I predict that Shalit will be killed, Israel will annihilate Hamas and then reclaim the Gaza strip. Leftwing "human rights" groups, always sympathetic towards thugs and murderers (as long as they have dark skin) will lament the deaths of Hamas members while ignoring or minimizing the slaughter of Shalit. The "international community" will demand that Israel return Gaza to the Palestinian animals. And Israel will not comply.
