Sonia Sotomayor’s life story is one thing. It’s a picture perfect American success story. That is, in the America that she grew up in.
Take away the liberal heart-string tugging of her life’s story as a qualification to the Supreme Court, and what you have is a judge whose decisions have been overturned 60% of the time. A judge that upheld racial discrimination in a case now in the Supreme Court, where it is anticipated she will be overturned again.
It is not right-wing spin to say that her version of justice is not ‘blind.’ It’s just that you won’t see it put that way in the mainstream media. An automatic dis-qualifier for anywhere in the judiciary, let alone the Supreme Court.
President Obama picked an ideological soulmate with his nomination of Sonia Sotomayor. His idea of the U.S. Constitution seems to be in line with hers. Being overturned 60% of the time turns out to be a resume enhancement for an Obama Supreme Court nominee.
Which begs the question. Will future generations of Americans have the same opportunities that she had in an Obama-remade America?
In a decision made last August 22, but not reported until now, what the left calls warrantless wiretapping, and the courts call the National Security Agency’s secret eavesdropping program, has been declared constitutional and within the powers given to the president.
The decision marks the first time since the disclosure of the National Security Agency’s warrantless eavesdropping program three years ago that an appellate court has addressed the constitutionality of the federal government’s wiretapping powers. In validating the government’s wide authority to collect foreign intelligence, it may offer legal credence to the Bush administration’s repeated assertions that the president has the power to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping that may involve Americans.
Regardless, Obama has dismantling the most effective tools of the Patriot Act in mind for his first term. A testament to his selections for CIA director and DHS secretary.
To take this tool away is like trying to run a marathon blindfolded. What the left calls warrantless wiretapping of American citizens is this: a call originating from a known terrorist region and coming into the US. Who wants to bet their life that this program hasn’t helped save lives and hasn’t helped to get the bad guys? Will the resentment and refutation of the policies of George W. Bush take precedence over the safety and security of our citizens?
While perusing PEBO’s website, I was excited to see another ‘position’ that Barack Obama and I agree on, getting political motivations out of the Dept of Justice. Frankly, it was encouraging to me that he admits to seeing it. Especially now with U.S. Attorney Patrick (Scooter Libby) Fitzgerald as Special Prosecutor investigating llinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, detailed in this post on Dec. 10.
Q: “What will you do as President to restore the Constitutional protections that have been subverted by the Bush Administration and how will you ensure that our system of checks and balances is renewed?” Kari, Seattle
A: President-elect Obama is deeply committed to restoring the rule of law and respecting constitutional checks and balances.That is why he has pledged to review Bush Administration executive orders. President-elect Obama will also end the abuse of signing statements, and put an end to the politicization that has taken place within the Department of Justice and return that agency to its historic and apolitical mission of fair and impartial administration of justice.
(emphasis added)
Does this mean we can expect to see Barack Obama take it to Fitzgerald? Oh well, maybe I’m not on the same page with Barack on this.
There is a plethora of information ‘out there’ about Democratic Presidential Candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) that, for whatever reason, you may not have heard or seen. Most of it is negative and has to do not only with the kind of people who Obama deals with and has dealt with over his entire political career and before, but also with what Barack Obama has in mind when he speaks of the kind of change he has in mind for our country, his ‘core beliefs’ if you will.
This is a recap of what has been discovered about Barack Obama that the mainstream media has chosen to ignore, for obvious reasons, but, because he is vying for the presidency of the United States, you have a right and a need to know. Please take the time to check it out before you go to the polls November 4th.
I don’t know where this tape was during the primaries, maybe it was ‘the tape’ that was referenced by Clinton campaign staffers but was never released. There is also a video tape of Rashid Khalidi that you will learn about which could also be what was called ‘the tape.’ I don’t know, but either one would have ended his run if it had been released before the Democratic National Convention.
The job of the President of the United States consists of only two tasks. To protect and defend its people, and to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. After you listen to this radio interview that Obama gave in 2001 to an NPR interviewer, you’ll have to ask yourself how this man could even put his and on the bible and take the oath. It is obvious that he feels the founding fathers erred in the creation of this country and its Constitution. And in this interview, he explores ways to fundamentally change it. Not protect it.
Beyond the archived web page from the Socialist New Party is the recognition by the “Progressive Populist” magazine in November 1996 that Obama was indeed an acknowledged member of the Socialist Party.
New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George’s County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.
The Democratic Socialist Party of America published in their July/August Edition of New Ground 47 Newsletter.
The Chicago New Party is increasingly becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base…[T]he NP’s ’96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration.
Years later, Obama still believes that ‘spreading the wealth’ is where it’s at. Which is the anathema to the ‘American Dream.’ Here is where Barack Obama mounts his assault against Joe and middle class Americans.
Isn’t it amazing how the media is all over ‘Joe the plumber?’ Within 24 hours, we know all about this man’s personal and professional business. And for over two years now, the media is still not motivated to tell us about Barack Obama’s alliances with people who hate America, and his proclivity for supporting directions in education that promote socialism. But I will. Then there’s his working for and with ACORN, and so much more.
Looking at Obama’s foreign policy expertise. Beyond telegraphing that he would raid Pakistan’s tribal region, making an already shaky political situation even more fragile with a nuclear power, he is already trumped by Iran with his ‘no preconditions’ talk.
Well isn’t this just too rich? Iran has two preconditions of its own before it will engage in any talks with the United States.
Get all our troops out of the Middle East
End our support of Israel.
Well, I’d say that presents quite a challenge to the Democratic presidential candidate, who has already capitulated to Iran by saying that he would meet with Iran without preconditions.
Are we still believing that Obama is ready to lead?
Are we feeling any safer now? This also, btw, has not been reported by the mainstream media.
It’s not about Obama’s associations, it’s about Obama’s alliances.
By the time a person rises to the level of the leader of his party and becomes their nominee for the office of President of the United States, people already know a lot about what kind of person he is. Like John McCain, they know his history, his legislative background, his core beliefs, and his character. That is, until now. So when you have a candidate for the top spot that has limited legislative experience, no executive experience, and no public presence beyond a well delivered speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, knowing more about who our candidate is rises to a level that it would not otherwise be.
Critics of Obama, and I’ll include myself in this, are wrong when they bring up Obama’s ‘associations’ with unsavory people. Until I read Thomas Sowell’s article regarding who ‘the real’ Barack Obama is, I’ve come to the realization that it is not Obama’s associations that matter as much as his ‘alliances.’
Critics of Senator Barack Obama make a strategic mistake when they talk about his “past associations.” That just gives his many defenders in the media an opportunity to counter-attack against “guilt by association.”
We all have associations, whether at the office, in our neighborhood or in various recreational activities. Most of us neither know nor care what our associates believe or say about politics.
Associations are very different from alliances. Allies are not just people who happen to be where you are or who happen to be doing the same things you do. You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you.
About the names that are part of Obama’s past and present, Sowell writes . . .
Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, William Ayers and Antoin Rezko are not just people who happened to be at the same place at the same time as Barack Obama. They are people with whom he chose to ally himself for years, and with some of whom some serious money changed hands.
Some gave political support, and some gave financial support, to Obama’s election campaigns, and Obama in turn contributed either his own money or the taxpayers’ money to some of them. That is a familiar political alliance- but an alliance is not just an “association” from being at the same place at the same time.
Obama could have allied himself with all sorts of other people. But, time and again, he allied himself with people who openly expressed their hatred of America. No amount of flags on his campaign platforms this election year can change that.
What we do know about the kind of politician Obama is, is not well-known. A testament to the effectiveness of his enablers in the mainstream media in reshaping and repackaging their chosen candidate. Ask yourself if this is the first time you’ve seen or heard this about Barack Obama.
The story of Obama’s political career is not a pretty story. He won his first political victory by being the only candidate on the ballot- after hiring someone skilled at disqualifying the signers of opposing candidates’ petitions, on whatever technicality he could come up with.
Despite his words today about “change” and “cleaning up the mess in Washington,” Obama was not on the side of reformers who were trying to change the status quo of corrupt, machine politics in Chicago and clean up the mess there. Obama came out in favor of the Daley machine and against reform candidates.
Senator Obama is running on an image that is directly the opposite of what he has been doing for two decades. His escapes from his past have been as remarkable as the great escapes of Houdini.
Barack Obama is also in tune with educator William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist that also taught at the University of Chicago. They both co-chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which calls itself “a public-private partnership improving education for 1.5 million urban and rural public school students,” it gave to some of the same groups — partnering with ACORN to manage funding for schools and giving over $1 million to the Small Schools Network.
Stanley Kurtz, a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, found the collaborative’s original application when going through Annenberg’s archives.
Asked to comment, Yvonne Williams-Kinnison, executive director of the collaborative’s parent group, the Coalition for Improved Education in South Shore said, “I don’t want to put more fuel on the fire. You can call us back after the election…. I don’t want to compromise the position.”
Wouldn’t you be surprised to find that the curriculum is more about turning the current educational system, and our culture upside down. It goes along these lines as written by Afrocentrist scholar Jacob Carruthers . . .
‘The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy,” Carruthers wrote in his 1999 book, ‘Intellectual Warfare.’ ‘Some of us have chosen to reject the culture of our oppressors and recover our disrupted ancestral culture.’
“One of Ayers’ descriptions for a course called ‘Improving Learning Environments’ says a prospective K-12 teacher needs to ‘be aware of the social and moral universe we inhabit and…be a teacher capable of hope and struggle, outrage and action, teaching for social justice and liberation.”
So does Obama agree with Ayers’ view of education?
Presumably as keeper of the CAC’s purse strings, Obama paid attention to where the money went. His seal of approval would have been needed to fund Ayers or anyone else asking for a grant. So does Obama agree with Ayers’ ideas for reforming education? Because they are radical and extreme, to say the least.
Two years ago, Bill Ayers spoke at the World Education Forum in Caracas, Venezuela. The event was hosted by none other than that great friend of the U.S., Hugo Chavez. Here’s more from IBD: “With Chavez at his side, Ayers voiced his support for ‘the political educational reforms under way here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution…I look forward to seeing how all of you continue to overcome the failures of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane.”
So I guess Ayers believes the problem with education is that it’s “capitalist,” and that education’s purpose is “revolution.”
Since Obama helped provide the funds for many of Bill Ayers’ education reform projects back in Chicago, I have to assume he agreed with the principles behind them. I hate to think how Obama as President would “reform” education, and where he’d distribute our precious education dollars.
There are two more educators that the Obamas are familiar with. That would be Rashid and Mona Khalidi, co-founders of the The Arab-American Action Network, a virulently anti-Israel organization that strongly supports the Palestinian Arab terrorist movement. From 1976 to 1982, Mr. Khalidi was a director in Beirut of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA. Later he served on the PLO “guidance committee” at the Madrid peace conference.
Rashid and Mona Khalidi became close friends of Barack and Michelle Obama during the time when both Barack and Rashid taught at the University of Chicago (1992-2003). At a lavish farewell party for Khalidi in Chicago in 2003, when Khalidi left his prestigious position at the University of Chicago for an even more prestigious one at Columbia University in New York, Obama gave Khalidi a glowing eulogy. He said that he and his wife Michelle had been frequent dinner guests of the Khalidis, and that the Khalidis had frequently babysat for the Obama children.
Here is more on Khalidi once he got to Columbia University by two writers who attended a conference on the Middle East conflict titled “One State or Two? Alternative Proposals for Middle East Peace.”
The “one state” solution is a euphemism for the destruction of the Jewish state – a trope of the most extreme rejectionist elements within the Palestinian movement and their allies in Syria and Iran.
In bringing professor Khalidi to Morningside Heights from the University of Chicago, Columbia also got itself a twofer of Palestinian activism and advocacy. Mr. Khalidi’s wife, Mona, who also served in Beirut as chief editor of the English section of the WAFA press agency, was hired as dean of foreign students at Columbia’s SIPA, working under Dean Anderson. In Chicago, the Khalidis founded the Arab American Action Network, and Mona Khalidi served as its president. A big farewell dinner was held in their honor by AAAN with a commemorative book filled with testimonials from their friends and political allies. These included the left wing anti-war group Not In My Name, the Electronic Intifada, and the ex-Weatherman domestic terrorists Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers. (There were also testimonials from then-state Senator Barack Obama and the mayor of Chicago.)
Obama’s relationship with ACORN goes way back. And as a community activist and attorney representing ACORN in Chicago in 1995, he participated in worsening the sub-prime mortgage scheme that eventually brought down not only our economy, but the global economy. ‘Giving’ mortgages to people who could not pay them.
It is his relationship with ACORN and his political ambitions in Chicago that surrounded him with America haters like William Ayers and Rev. Jeramiah Wright, all driven by the socialist agenda of something known as the Cloward-Piven strategy.
The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:
“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)
No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:
The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.
ACORN’s voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:
1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.
2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.
3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.
By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation’s wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.
Look around at the state of affairs today in the economy and in voting registration and related activities and what do you see? Do you see Barack Obama or a Democrat administration trying to shore-up the voting process by something as secure as a photo ID? I don’t think so. Why?
Obama aided ACORN as their lead attorney in a successful suit he brought against the Illinois state government to implement the Motor Voter law there. The law had been resisted by Republican Governor Jim Edgars, who feared the law was an opening to widespread vote fraud.
And what caused the mortgage crises? The roots of it go back to a law called the Community Reinvestment Act, passed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977, under pressure from a community activist movement that started in Chicago.
In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of “redlining”-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.
And ACORN’s involvement in the mortgage crises is compounded, thanks to help from, guess who, Chicago lawyer Barack Obama.
ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining.Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.
I don’t know how Barack Obama can say with a straight face how he has no ties to ACORN, how he so easily dismisses them as a community group that merely helps low-income people. He is clearly and deliberately deceiving you, and the media lets him get away with it. When he says that, he is telling just as big a lie as ‘I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.’ Barack Obama is not being honest with the American people about who he is and where he wants to take this country. Examining his character and his past is not a distraction from the ‘real issues’ as his campaign will have you believe. First, we need to know who he is.
Before getting interested in politics, the mention of the word acorn conjured up images of squirrels for me. Now that ACORN is an acronym, Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, it conjures up images of socialist squirrels of the human kind. And front and center in ACORN is the Democrat(ic) party’s candidate for president, Sen. Barack Obama from Illinois.
Rather than have 100 percent of any recovery realized by reselling these mortgages going to either retiring the national debt or being returned to the people whose money they used (that would be you and I), or a combination of the two, the original bailout plan was to give 20 percent of it to ACORN. This was a major objection of the Republicans in the House. Which also explains to me, why they were kept out of the process.
Now that ACORN is front and center in the minds of those that are paying attention to the current financial crisis, we all need to know why, for Democrats, they are front and center in the proposed bailout, especially since they are instrumental in creating the problem in the first place.
When I saw the heading of William E. Jackson, Jr.’s column in Editor & Publisher, ‘Delivering Propaganda, As If It is Toothpaste,’ it got my attention. But to learn that it was the documentary ‘Obsession‘ that he was talking about, my next thought was, maybe he should have targeted the NYT and the MSM with a title like that, ‘Delivering Propaganda,’ instead of this documentary.
That documentary has a history to it that Mr. Jackson apparently is not aware of, or chose to ignore. Because of pressure from the CAIR crowd, it was pulled from a multi-faceted series on PBS about radical Islam and the War On Terror. It correctly shows radical Islam for what it is, what it does, and what it believes.
No movie distributor would carry it, probably out of fear. And no major TV network would air it. It was that powerful of a presentation. So now that it is literally given away, Jackson calls it propaganda. Newspapers isn’t the only distribution method for Obsession. They are also using direct mail.
His article illustrates why some think that the mainstream media serves as the marketing wing of the DNC, and in some cases, al-Qaeda.
It is good to see some progress being made. It will be better to see that they have the perpetrator under arrest. But for now, we know this much . . .
A person who identified himself as a witness tells 10 News that agents with the FBI served a federal search warrant at the Fort Sanders residence of David Kernell early Sunday morning. Kernell lives in the Commons apartment complex at 1115 Highland Ave. David Kernell is the son of Mike Kernell, a Democratic state representative from Memphis.
No surprise there, if true. Bi-partisan condemnation, including jail time for the perpetrator is what would be surprising. The fraud involved in hacking the private email account is one felony, and disseminating that information is another.
Unfortunately, there is not a good history for prosecution in cases such as this. In December, 1996, Alice and John Martin who recorded a cell phone conversation of Newt Gingrich, which ended up in the hands of ‘Baghdad’ Jim McDermott, then ranking member of the House Ethics Committee, who turned it over to the New York Times for publication, never served time. And neither did McDermott. He was ultimately ordered to pay over $700,000 in damages and court costs. That’s it. He is still in Congress. So I wouldn’t get my hopes up for real justice in this case either. Now, if the shoe were on the other foot?
The political forum hosted by minister Rick Warren Saturday night gave us a view of both candidates that none of the previous so-called debates produced. Avoiding campaign talking points, the questions Warren asked exposed the belief systems, character, and motivations of both men. And the country was better off for it.
I came away feeling like Sen. John McCain did the best that I’ve ever seen him do. Judging from reviews of others, this seems to be the overall assessment. Even from Democrats. And Obama’s performance was replete with indecision, obfuscation, and inexperience.
We all know that words mean things. And no one knows that better than Sen. Barack Obama, who made a big deal about it in a stump speech somewhere. Remember ‘Words, Just Words?‘
McCain came across decisive and confident. Obama, on the other hand, came across as indecisive and less confident, to the point of floundering for a way to end his sentence. Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director characterized Obama’s performance as ‘trying to impress Warren (or to put another away) not offend Warren.’ I saw it as Obama trying not to offend his base.
Two answers that Obama gave were especially revealing about his character and belief system.
On the subject of Christianity. Warren asked ‘What does it mean to you to trust in Christ and what does it mean on a daily basis? I mean, what does that really look like?’ Obama sets the stage with this quite acceptable answer.
But what it also means, I think, is a sense of obligation to embrace not just words but through deeds the expectations that God has for us. And that means thinking about the least of these. It means acting – well, acting justly and loving mercy and walking humbly with our God.
Next question, about abortion.’At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?
McCain answered it in five words, ‘at the point of conception.’ By contrast, Obama said ‘. . . answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.’ Just a minute earlier, he was saying how he was thinking about the very least. What, the unborn, the absolute very least, don’t count? Words, just words?
He then said he is in favor of limits on late-term abortions. Well, except for the fact that he voted against a bill that would allow a live-birth aborted baby, a failed abortion, to live. What happened to the very least among us? Words, just words?
The next subject was about the Supreme Court. ‘Which existing Supreme Court Justice would you not have nominated?’ He caught himself in saying that Justice Thomas was inexperienced, which would have virtually undermined his own candidacy. But he started off with Justice Clarence Thomas. His response . . .
I don’t think that he. I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of a lot of Constitution.
Then, Barack Obama, the constitutional lawyer, said he does not like the way Justice Thomas operates. He explained himself this way . . .
One of the most important jobs of I believe the Supreme Court is to guard against the encroachment of the Executive branch on the power of the other branches and I think that he has been a little bit too willing and too eager to give an administration whether it’s mine or George Bush’s more power than I think the Constitution originally intended.
Here is another case where the party line trumps reality. Or in this case, the Constitution. There is only one job of a Supreme Court Justice, and by default is the most important one. That is, to decide cases based on the Constitution. Period. End of story. End of job description. The separation of powers was designed so that no branch, including the Judiciary, could do exactly what Obama expects it to do. It all comes back to the ideology of the liberal Democrats, which is, to use the Supreme Court to make laws that the Legislative branch cannot.
But that’s never stopped him before. On MSNBC’s Morning Joe show this morning, former Ambassador to the U.N. Richard Holbrooke perpetuates the media spin about Iraqi PM alMaliki and the timetable and McCain. In speaking about Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Holebrooke portrays McCain as being at odds with both Bush and alMaliki regarding a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq when they are all, in fact, on the same page.
The reality is that the timetable the three are in agreement with is more Table than Time, based on progress on the ground and political progress in Baghdad, not on the calendar. They next interviewed Andy Card, former Chief of Staff for Bush, who corrected Holebrooke’s spin. And much to their amusement, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski laughed at him.
What is most amusing, or disturbing, about the hosts on the show, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, is that they could not discern the difference between the two.
If we weren’t talking about war and warfare, this would be funny. You don’t have to look hard to see the bias of the media. Scott Shane, a reporter for the New York Times just outed the identity of the CIA agent that interrogated Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and nobody seems to care. And it was no accident either.
Fearing retribution, the agency asked the paper not to name the CIA analyst. The paper ran his name anyway, saying it generally withholds names only in the case of ‘victims of sexual assault or intelligence officers operating undercover.’ While the operative was not serving undercover, the fact that he interrogated the architect of the 9/11 plot was classified. Naming him added nothing to the Times story.
Remember too the record of New York Times when it comes to national security of the United States . . .
The New York Times previously disclosed the existence of the Bush administration’s secret National Security Agency program for intercepting calls of suspected terrorists when one leg of the call is in the U.S. It also disclosed the administration’s SWIFT program for tracking the worldwide financial transactions of terrorists.
Starting with the Valerie Plame debacle, who still insists that Dick Cheney outed her, when we all know, the media included, that it was Richard Armitage that outed her, and Scooter Libby is the only one who gets charged. No actions taken against Armitage.
Now, we have surrogates of Barack Obama and the far left attempting to diminish John McCain’s military experience to something equal to Obama’s, which is zip, zero, nada. They’re saying he’s not a hero, he’s a loser who got himself shot down and participated in a propaganda video.
Today, no one is asking any questions or jumping in front of TV cameras, and generally foaming at the mouth like Democrats were when the whole Plame/Wilson theater production took place. There is no effort afloat in Washington to put that reporter or the New York Times in front of a Senate Intelligence Committee (I know, its an oxymoron) with the aim of getting the Justice Department (another one) involved. Amazingly, there’s no curiosity whatsoever about it.
Who tortured Scott Shane to go so far as he did, to really jeopardize the welfare of that agent and his family when he published the agent’s name that interrogated KSM?
When I saw the heading of William E. Jackson, Jr.’s column in Editor & Publisher, ‘Delivering Propaganda, As If It is Toothpaste,’ it got my attention. But to learn that it was the documentary ‘Obsession‘ that he was talking about, my next thought was, maybe he should have targeted
the NYT and the MSM with a title like that, ‘Delivering Propaganda,’ instead of this documentary.
That documentary has a history to it that Mr. Jackson apparently is not aware of, or chose to ignore. Because of pressure from the CAIR crowd, it was pulled from a multi-faceted series on PBS about radical Islam and the War On Terror. It correctly shows radical Islam for what it is, what it does, and what it believes.
No movie distributor would carry it, probably out of fear. And no major TV network would air it. It was that powerful of a presentation. So now that it is literally given away, Jackson calls it propaganda. Newspapers isn’t the only distribution method for Obsession. They are also using direct mail.
His article illustrates why some think that the mainstream media serves as the marketing wing of the DNC, and in some cases, al-Qaeda.
related links: Delivering Propaganda, As If It is Toothpaste | Obsession – Radical Islam’s War Against The West