Leni Riefensthal’s Latest Flick [UPDATED]
The old girl hasn’t had a script this good since—oh, it’s got to be a good seventy years:
Jim Hoft has the story on the damning video of Barack Obama that the L.A. Times refuses to release.
Writes Jim: “It’s hard to imagine that the LA Times would hold onto a video of Sarah Palin praising an anti-Semitic radical and former PLO operative…”
To pursue the story, let’s hie to Gateway Pundit:
LA Times writer Peter Wallsten wrote about Barack Obama’s close association with former Palestinian operative Rashid Khalidi back in April.
Wallsten discussed a dinner held back in 2003 in honor of Khalidi, a critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights.
Barack Obama has denied his close association with Khalidi, too.
According to Wallsten the evening not surprisingly turned into a classic Jew-bash:
“During the dinner a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.”
One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”
Barack Obama also praised the former PLO operative during the event.
And, Obama confessed that his family often shared dinner with the Khalidis:His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases… It’s for that reason that I’m hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid’s dinner table,” but around “this entire world.”
Did you just get a sick feeling in your stomach? I did. Today, Poland. Tomorrow, France and “this entire world”.
I asked him if he was planning on releasing this video of Obama toasting the radical Khalidi at this Jew-bash. He told me he was not releasing the video. He also would not comment on his source for the video.
Because revealing one’s sources is a cardinal sin in journalism—it might reveal whose work you ripped off:
So much for the conventional wisdom that bloggers write specious claims that cannot be trusted, whereas the mainstream media is the penultimate in accuracy and original reporting. In this case, the blogger–me–was the source material for the untrustworthy thief, the Los Angeles Times reporter Peter Wallsten.
Hey, Peter, still waiting for that mention you promised for using my work. But glad I didn’t hold my breath.
…
Next time you see any article with Peter Wallsten in the byline, ask yourself who wrote it first. Because clearly, it wasn’t him.
Not that we could be surprised at what kind of person he is: he’s a journalist. And probably a frightened one. How would you like to be at the nexus of a story linking Barack Hussein Obama with a Jew-hating, terrorist sympathizing rat turd? No, a different Jew-hating, terrorist sympathizing rat turd. Okay, a third Jew-hating, terrorist sympathizing rat turd. One more and they could play bridge.
I’m so done with asking the question what would happen if the tables were turned: if a Republican were caught doing the same thing, if the people reviled were blacks instead of Jews, etc. Because it does not happen the other way around; it happens this way, over and over.
Just as it happened seventy-five years ago. A charismatic leader who had written about his personal struggles and had already confessed his true ambitions presented himself to a beleaguered public as an agent of hope and change. Capitalism was portrayed as a great evil; its captains and generals (especially the Jews) were demonized. The propaganda machine sputtered and cranked overtime to embed the revised narrative in the nation’s consciousness. Anything off-message was ignored, buried, destroyed. The man who proclaimed himself champion of the Common Man could be quite brutal in the suppression of a common man who questioned that narrative. And the Jews went along with it.
It’s up to each of you to decide how far overboard I’ve gone. I’m not sure myself. But it’s no fantasy to declare that we appear poised to turn ourselves into a one-party state, that we are about to elect as our commander in chief one who does not see America as the greatest good in the world, but the greatest evil—who embraced not just any anti-American revolutionary, but the Mr. Big of 60s radicals; who subscribed not to just any “alternative” church, but to the most black-separatist, white-hating church out there; who praised not just any Palestinian sympathizer, but a PLO operative who sees terrorism as a way to “political enlightenment”.
At least we know how the story ends, don’t we? Lots of John Wayne movies.
UPDATE: More on the theme from Mark Levin.
Carol said,
October 26, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
I continue to be stunned and amazed at the support blacks and Jews give to the Democratic Party. Their utter and complete contempt for both of these groups has been written time and again in brilliant neon lights like the strip in Las Vegas, but still people cling to them. I really don’t see how any rational person could still think that the Democratic Party is on their side. The DP is on the side of power for the DP, and no one else at all.
If I think of the Republican presidents in my lifetime, I don’t see any who were in it for power for the sake of power: Eisenhower - good egg mostly, enforced desegregation, Nixon - definitely had his problems but I don’t think he was the vampire most people make him out to be; I think he was in it to deal with Communism as it needed to be dealt with, Reagan - a vision of freedom for the world, not that he was able to implement it, but he made a damn good effort, Bush the Elder - not particularly effectual but no Machiavelli, Bush the Younger - again, a vision but no Machiavelli and how anyone could think that someone with his personality would be the embodiment of all evil is beyond me.
On the other hand, we have Kennedy - largely inept, Johnson - in love with power but no one in love with him, Carter - just idiotic, no matter his IQ, Clinton - really in love with power for the sake of power, as only a narcissist could be, and now we might be looking at Obama. As demonstrated by the treatment of people who dare to make The One look bad, Obama really is a power-mad narcissist who makes Clinton, who was really only into the power as a route to more poontang, look like a piker.
It’s looking real scary out there people. I will be spending my afternoon making phone calls for McCain-Palin.
AP said,
October 26, 2008 @ 5:28 pm
BTL, I frankly did not make the association until you mentioned it - but the parallels are frightening.
And Carol, I agree that it makes no sense the support blacks and Jews give to the Democratic Party. I read an article that this support, in part, is traced back to the 1920s, where the Republican Party was stricter on immigration and the Democrat Party was much looser. This translated into a lot of immigrants from that time period naturally affiliating with the Democrat Party. Also, the rise of unions had a lot of ties to the Democrat Party as well, providing them additional support.
I see parallels in the future as well with a potential Obama administration and the effects on the future of the Democrat Party. Obama (and the Democrat Congress) will likely grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, which will be a boon to the Democrat Party. Likewise, with the new legislation for the Employee Free Choice Act, better known as Card Check, this will dramatically (and improperly) increase the power of unions - again to the benefit of the Democrat Party. The Republican Party may not recover for decades.
As far as Jews are concerned, I think a lot of Jews think that Obama is “not that bad” - that he’s not an antisemite and that he won’t do harm to Israel. And, because a lot of Jews are social liberals, they convince (or better yet delude) themselves into believing that Obama is better since he will not hurt Israel and he will be better on social issues. I obviously disagree with that. I believe it is my duty, not only as a Jew but also as an American, to tell other Jews what an Obama presidency will include - to make sure that they know that an Obama presidency will be a lot worse than “not that bad.” It’s then up to them to decide what their priorities are.
Bloodthirsty Liberal said,
October 26, 2008 @ 5:51 pm
Carol,
If you made those phone calls from my neighborhood, the ambulance carrying the guys in white suits would show up in short order. People would assume you’d gone off your rocker.
But good luck with it.
- Aggie
Dave B said,
October 26, 2008 @ 9:51 pm
Carol: I think you were a little unfair to Jimmy Carter, I do believe he thought he was going to change the world and worked harder with less fanfare than a lot of presidents. He was just a naive fool and we, as a nation, should have learned an important lesson. Apparently, as of today, we haven’t because we’re about to elect Jimmy Carter II with the same super majority that he had.
AP: Thank you for answering a question I posed on another blog. Like Carol, I can’t for the life of me figure it out. If I were a member of either group I’d feel “used and abused” by the “Democratic Party and would look elsewhere. At the very least I’d make them earn my vote and not walk lock step into the voting booths every election to vote them in office.