Archive for MSM

MSM Going After Hillary

This is a remarkable video, remarkable because Mika Brzezinski makes sense, and because somehow she was given the green light at msnbc to say this:

BTL, it looks to me like they prefer Lizzie Warren. (Lizzie Warren with an axe…)

– Aggie

Comments (2)

Dutch Courage

So, no one disputes that Egyptian President and Muslim Brotherhood big brother, Mohamed Morsi, is a virulent antisemite, a Jew-hater of the first order.

We told you so 12 days ago.

What is in dispute is how you answer such unadulterated hatred. I like this way:

Dutch Jewish journalist Leon de Winter says he refuses to pay taxes to a government that supports the current Cairo government headed by President Mohamed Morsi.

Remarks made by the Muslim Brotherhood-backed president in a 2010 Arabic-language interview with Al-Quds television, recently translated into English, included the declaration that Jews are the “descendants of apes and pigs.” The vicious slur is among radical Islamist clerics, including those who broadcast virulent anti-Semitic sermons on Egyptian television. Video clips of the sermons are translated by MEMRI, the Middle East Research Media Institute, which monitors Arabic-language broadcasts.

In a recent editorial Winter bluntly labeled Morsi a “seasoned anti-Semite, the leader of a religious-political group that cannot be described as anything other than an Islamic-Fascist movement.”

He went on to write that Morsi is very clear when he speaks in Arabic to his own people, “and not [in English] with [U.S.] President [Barack] Obama on the phone.”

And I don’t like this way:

Question: Why is the White House only now, on January 15, responding to Morsi’s 2010 comments about confronting the “bloodsuckers” and “warmongers” in Israel? The video of those comments appeared fully 12 days ago and made a stir online. How come it took nearly two weeks for Carney to formulate a pro forma denunciation?

The answer: Because he and O were hoping American media would black this story out for them so that they wouldn’t have to address it publicly.

The New York Times rarely touches this stuff. In fact, a harshly critical mega-report about the newspaper’s Middle East coverage was recently released by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA). The Times can’t be too happy about it. “The failure of the New York Times to cover the hate indoctrination leads the pack, in a way,” CAMERA’s head Andrea Levin told me yesterday. “The fact that they deem it to be so unimportant helps to lay down that news decision for others as well. And, to us, it’s one of the greatest derelictions in current news coverage of the conflict.”

MEMRI President Yigal Carmon has a theory:

“This is déjà vu,” he says about the lack of major press coverage of his Morsi material. “Well-meaning journalists have told me that exposing this kind of stuff is serving the enemies of peace. I think quite the contrary. You don’t serve peace by cover-ups. Only by exposure.”

Journalists are not to be tied to a post and set aflame for making a bad choice. No, they are to be burned at a succession of stakes for making any choice at all. Since when did journalism come down to selective exposure? To shaping the “news”, rather than reporting it?

You don’t have to answer that—it’s a question we pose here almost every day. I’m actually astonished anyone cares. They haven’t up till now.

And if you think Morsi is bad, you should see Israel’s “partner in peace”, Mahmoud Abbas:

The story that Araby’s leaders (and more than a few followers) are rabid antisemites is dog-bites-man. Yawn.

The story that the mainstream media seeks to repress the first story, with the gratitude of the American government, is… almost beyond description. That’s why we keep coming back to it here; because we still can’t get our heads around it.

All we know for sure is Walter Duranty would be proud.

PS: Living well is the best revenge:

The Housing and Construction Ministry issued tenders for some 200 new housing units in the West Bank on Wednesday, a day after a US columnist released comments allegedly made by US President Barack Obama in which the American leader harshly criticized Prime Minister Binyamin Netanayahu’s settlement policies.

According to Channel 2, the tenders are for 84 new housing units in Kiryat Arba near Hebron, and for an additional 114 tenders in the West Bank settlement of Efrat.

As we reported yesterday, Jewish Israelis are having more Jewish babies than the bloodless, lifeless rest of the (so-called) developed world. They have to live somewhere.They get to live in Israel, lucky them.

Comments

Af-where-istan?

Don’t tell me, I know this. It’s that little rhombus-y country between Benin and Suriname, right?

Right?

The U.S. troop surge in Afghanistan, which began in 2009, ended this week. As the Times aptly notes, the conclusion of one of Obama’s biggest military endeavors has come and gone with little fanfare. The president is doubtless happy about this, as the mission has been far from an unqualified success:

The milestone, which still leaves 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan, went nearly unremarked here, with no statement from President Hamid Karzai or the United States military commander, Gen. John R. Allen, or even from the American ambassador. It was announced on the other side of the planet, by the American secretary of defense, Leon E. Panetta, during a visit to New Zealand. . .

We should all be very glad that we have a Democratic president right now; otherwise the news would be terrible.I We would be seeing a rash of horrible and depressing stories in the newspapers about strategic failure, with unremitting second guessing and belittling of a president who agonized for months before the surge and then saw his plan fail. We’d be hearing non-stop reports in the media about the incompetent and klutzy leader who torpedoed his own policy by announcing a withdrawal date; the man who tried to please everybody and do everything—and failed at all he tried.

The press would be jumping on this narrative. There would be continuous coverage of the disarray in Afghanistan: the soldier’s we’re training are shooting us, the corruption is intensifying, and the opium trade spreading. There would be story after story about how Afghanistan seems little changed after the surge, and how peace is still not at hand. These stories wouldn’t be on the back pages; they’d be perceived as major news with profound implications for America’s global position and the Sunday shows and nightly TV news round ups would be full of talking heads endlessly analyzing each wrinkle of the failure.

The media are covering the story, but as this writer suggests, the coverage would be entirely different under a Republican president. I mentioned to Aggie the other day that if Romney wins—when Romney wins—the relentless drumbeat beat of defeatism and negativity (more like the incessant and annoying drone of a chorus of vuvuzelas) would make civil discourse, even governing, all but impossible. It would be Bush all over again.

Someone I know recently attended a speech given by a fairly well known character of the MSM. In the speech, this news person lamented the partisan rancor in Washington these days. I interrupted to say that’s “code language” wishing that the right would shut up and go away. My acquaintance, fairly liberal, thought about it and agreed that almost every example of needless carping and caviling provided was from the conservative perspective.

When Bush was president, it was patriotic dissent; under Obama’s regime, it’s partisanship, with a scoop of racism, a pinch of obstructionism, and, what the hell, another scoop of racism (straight up) for good measure.

So long, Afghanistan. Been nice knowing you. Not.

Comments

Scorecards! Get Your Terrorist Scorecards!

Can’t tell the terrorists without a scorecard!

Salafist terrorists’ claim of launching missile attacks on southern Israel Saturday night exposes a growing difficulty for Hamas to maintain control over the Gaza Strip.

One house suffered a direct hit from the Grad missile and sustained heavy damage. Another rocket landed in an open area in Be’er Sheva, Israel’s seventh largest city. Be’er Sheva shut down its school system Sunday morning in the wake of the latest attack.

“We claim responsibility for firing two rockets on Friday against the region of Sdot Negev,” said the statement signed by the hard-line Islamist splinter group called the Mujahedeen Shura Council and reported by the French AFP news agency.

The Salafists demanded Gaza’s Hamas rulers release one of its members, Mohammed Rashwan, who was wounded last month in an Israeli air raid against the southern Gaza town of Rafiah.

They accused Egyptian investigators of taking part in Hamas’ interrogation of the prisoner, while urging the “Arab nation to exert pressure on Hamas to stop unfairly pursuing Mujahedeen Shura Council member,” according to AFP.

Yeah, yeah. Whatever.

Hey, a question. Didn’t Rachel Corrie die trying to protect a house from demolition? I mean, I know she died trying to play tag with a front loader, but for the purpose of protecting a building (that might have housed a family or a terrorist tunnel). Where are the ISM activists at a time like this? Southern Israel could use some human shields—besides southern Israelis themselves, I mean.

And where are the media?

Saturday night’s attack was the second time in a little over a week that a terrorist rocket hit a home. Last Friday morning, PA Arab terrorists attacked southern Israel with rocket fire that struck a house in Sderot. No one was physically wounded but a resident was hospitalized in a state of shock.

On Wednesday evening, the IDF foiled an attempt by Gaza-based terrorists to fire a rocket at southern Israel. IAF aircraft hit a terrorist squad in central Gaza, as it was making final preparations to fire a rocket.

No wonder support for Israel is controversial. How many people actually know this happens and how often?

PS: I can’t even bring myself to enjoy the Arab-on-Arab nature of this conflict because, as usual, Israel suffers.

Comments (1)

Just As Being Deceased Doesn’t Impair Your Ability To Vote If You’re A Democrat…

being dead is no reason for a journalist not to get a statement.

Because journalists have a beeline to the other world.

Less than 48 hours after the Washington Post published a major, 5,000 word exposé that portrays Mitt Romney as a homophobic, high school bully, the story has started to unravel. Jason Horowitz’s profile alleged that Romney high school chum Stu White has “long been bothered” by an unconfirmed incident in which Romney supposedly cut the hair of a fellow student. But White wasn’t present at the alleged incident, Romney doesn’t remember it, the alleged victim has been dead for eight years, and White only learned about the incident decades after it supposedly happened.

In response to that, the Post today airbrushed the story. Until today, Horowitz’s story read:

“I always enjoyed his pranks,” said Stu White, a popular friend of Romney’s who went on to a career as a public school teacher and has long been bothered by the Lauber incident. “But I was not the brunt of any of his pranks.”

Today it reads:

“I always enjoyed his pranks,” said Stu White, a popular friend of Romney’s who went on to a career as a public school teacher and said he has been “disturbed” by the Lauber incident since hearing about it several weeks ago, before being contacted by The Washington Post. “But I was not the brunt of any of his pranks.”

The Post did not publicly acknowledge that alteration for hours — more on that below. It just appeared in the online version. Also today, Lauber’s family has come out to contradict key parts of the story, and they further suggest that the Post smeared their deceased family member, who obviously is in no position to defend himself. Despite Lauber’s having been deceased since 2004, the Horowitz story directly quotes him, through another so-called witness to the haircut event. Is it standard Post practice to quote the dead, and use them as props in political stories?

Thursday afternoon I tweeted and emailed Horowitz directly about the White discrepancy. Horowitz never responded and has gone silent on Twitter, but today, the Post quietly altered the story to clean up that problem. The paper is evidently paying attention to criticisms of the story, but not responding directly to queries about it. This morning, I emailed the Post ombudsman about the White timeline problem and the Lauber family’s reaction to Horowitz’s story. I sent the ombudsman two polite emails on the subject. The ombudsman, Patrick B. Pexton, has not responded at all. But while I have been putting this report together, the Post did publish an editor’s note regarding the White timeline.

Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this story reported that White “has long been bothered” by the Lauber incident. White later clarified in a subsequent interview that he has been disturbed by the incident since he learned of it several weeks ago from a former classmate, before being contacted by The Washington Post.

The editor’s note raises more questions: Who is the classmate, and where did the classmate hear about the haircut story? In what context did the unidentified classmate tell it to Stu White? It’s possible that Horowitz brought it up to the classmate over the course of working on the story, who then told it to White. If that’s the case, Horowitz tainted the witnesses.

The Jason Horowitz story is no small matter. Its release coincided perfectly with the week’s messaging from President Obama. It depicted Obama’s rival, Mitt Romney, in a sharply negative light. It was a front-page, 5,000+ word story that must have taken weeks or even months to write. Significant resources went into the production of that story. Yet the Post has gone silent as cracks have started to appear in it.

I have sent Mr. Pexton a third email on the subject, asking questions raised by the editor’s note. The ombudsman, who is supposed to be the readers’ representative at the newspaper, has not responded.

It is beginning to look like the Washington Post made it up entirely:

The older sister of Mitt Romney’s former high school classmate said she has no knowledge of any bullying incident involving her brother and the GOP presidential candidate.

When ABC News showed her the story, Christine Lauber’s eyes welled up with tears and she became agitated.

She described her brother as a “very unusual person.”

“He didn’t care about running with the peer group,” Christine Lauber said. “What’s wrong with that?”

Betsy Lauber, one of John Lauber’s three sisters, spoke with ABC News Tuesday night regarding the accuracy of the story.

“The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family,” she said.

Romney has since apologized for what he said were “pranks” in high school but has said he doesn’t remember the specific event.

Romney said “homosexuality was the furthest thing from his mind” when it came to the jokes he played on classmates.

So we’ll never know and it doesn’t matter. I am soooo much more interested in Obama’s applications to college (did he apply as an American citizen?) and please, please, please tell us what he studies and what his grades were. I am not interested in the high school record of either man. But, since the can of worms has been opened, how were Obama’s high school grades? I asked because he started out at an ok college and transferred to an Ivy League school. What is the story there?

Even more importantly, journalists, how can we have a functioning society if the people entrusted with sharing important news just refuse to do their jobs?

Coincidentally the Obama administration decided to make an issue of gay marriage just as this story broke. Is there a single adult in America with an IQ higher than a turnip who believes that wasn’t coordinated between the White House and the media?

– Aggie

Comments (2)

Gingrich Makes Sense


He’s talking my issue folks – media bias.

– Aggie

Comments

Newsweek: Hey Conservatives! Why Are You So Dumb?

Can this be real?

newsweek.jpg

Nothing like civilized, fair, balanced, thoughtful media with my morning coffee.

– Aggie

Comments (3)

This Is How CNN Describes The Terror Attack In Israel Yesterday

Israeli family of 5 killed in ‘terror attack,’ military says

Israeli family of 5 killed in ‘terror attack,’ military says

CNN, like NPR, is a “news organization”. They employ “journalists”.

Five members of an Israeli family were killed in the West Bank early Saturday morning in what the Israeli military is calling a “terror attack.”

According to a military spokeswoman, an intruder entered the Israeli settlement of Itamar near the northern West Bank city of Nablus around 1 a.m., made his way into a family home and killed two parents and their three children.

Military units were searching the surrounding area for the assailant, the spokeswoman said. The military would not provide more details. But local media reported that the attack was made with a knife, and neighbors reported hearing shots fired as well.

Military spokesman Maj. Peter Lerner said more than one person may have carried out the crime.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demanded that the Palestinian Authority assist in finding those responsible and “halt the incitement in the mosques and via the Palestinian Authority-controlled media.”

He did not explicitly blame Palestinians for the deaths.

“This is a heinous act of a murder of a whole innocent family — parents, children and baby — while they were sleeping in their home on the Sabbath night,” Netanyahu said. “Israel will not accept such a heinous murder and will act strongly to keep the safety of the lives of Israeli citizens and punish the murderers.”

He added, “We all know, as do those who want to strike at us will know, that the future of the settlements will not be decided upon by terror.”

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad denounced the killings.

“I say that in regards to what happened (Saturday) in Itamar settlement — and the victims were a toddler and two children, the father and mother — exactly as we have always said against violence … we refuse this and condemn it,” Fayyad said, according to his spokesman, Ghassan Khatib. “We refuse and condemn violence, whatever the reasons are or the perpetrators or targets or victims.”

The White House condemned the slayings “in the strongest possible terms” and said the killers of the “heinous” act must be held “accountable.”

“There is no possible justification for the killing of parents and children in their home,” it said in a statement.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton added that she was “shocked and deeply saddened” by the incident.

“The murderers must be found and brought to justice,” she said, asking the Palestinian authorities “to assist in every way possible.”

Comments (6)

News From Other Universes: It’s Bush’s Fault.

One of the things that this blog does best is to peek into the lives and thoughts of our neighbors in nearby universes. Today we look at the NY Times and how they have interpreted the failure of Barack Obama to close GITMO.

People in this universe look at Obama’s promise to close GITMO and he decision not to, and say either: He lied! or He’s finally accepting reality.

People in other universes often blame Bush.

The Prison That Won’t Go Away
Published: March 8, 2011

The prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, has long been the embodiment of Bush-era arrogance and lawlessness, and Barack Obama raised the hopes of millions around the world in 2008 when he campaigned on the promise of closing it. On Monday, that promise crumbled, the victim of Congressional spinelessness and President Obama’s inability to create political support for a way out of the moral quagmire created by his predecessor.

The president announced that military commission trials for detainees would resume at Guantánamo after a two-year suspension. That became inevitable in December after members of Congress from both parties, in an act of notable political cowardice, banned moving those trials to the United States. The ban, inserted in a needed defense bill, also makes it virtually impossible to release prisoners to other countries willing to take them.

The White House says the president remains committed to closing Guantánamo, but, given the political cast of Congress, it seems likely that the prison camp will remain a scar on the nation’s conscience for years.

To be fair, the NY Times is also blaming Congress. They are circling their wagons around this empty suit of a President, hoping to protect his sorry behind.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

More On NPR: Ann Althouse Nails The Left

Brilliant.

There is a short, short video piece, made a few days ago, of a discussion between Professor Althouse and a Leftist (not sure who he is). He is arguing that if a politician gives a speech, and someone in the crowd makes a racist remark, the politician should interrupt the speech to address/scold the miscreant. She says that the media feels that way when it works for democrats, but not when a conservative has been harmed.

And the brilliant part is that she remembered the conversation and connected it to the fact that NPR’s Schiller sat there quietly while his potential donors were making antisemitic comments.

Will the Left be upset by his silence? Historically, I would say that the Left has always gone along with Jew hatred, so this is unlikely to break the mold.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

Your Government: Spreading Women’s Rights In Afghanistan?

Not so much

I always wonder where the feminists are when this kind of stuff rears its ugly head.

When the U.S. Agency for International Development sought bids last March for a $140 million land reform program in Afghanistan, it insisted that the winning contractor meet specific goals to promote women’s rights: The number of deeds granting women title had to increase by 50 percent; there would have to be regular media coverage on women’s land rights; and teaching materials for secondary schools and universities would have to include material on women’s rights.

Before the contract was awarded, USAID overhauled the initiative, stripping out those concrete targets. Now, the contractor only has to perform “a written evaluation of Afghan inheritance laws,” assemble “summaries of input from women’s groups” and draft amendments to the country’s civil code.

The removal of specific women’s rights requirements, which also took place in a $600 million municipal government program awarded last year, reflects a shift in USAID’s approach in Afghanistan. Instead of setting ambitious goals to improve the status of Afghan women, the agency is tilting toward more attainable measures.

“If you’re targeting an issue, you need to target it in a way you can achieve those objectives,” said J. Alexander Thier, director of USAID’s Office of Afghanistan and Pakistan Affairs. “The women’s issue is one where we need hardheaded realism. There are things we can do, and do well. But if we become unrealistic and overfocused . . . we get ourselves in trouble.”

A senior U.S. official involved in Afghanistan policy said changes to the land program also stem from a desire at the top levels of the Obama administration to triage the war and focus on the overriding goal of ending the conflict.

Sounds like realpolitick to me. As opposed to those nasty neocons, you know, the ones that kept blathering on about protecting the rights of women and minorities in the region. That was so George W. Bush, so yesterday. Today we really don’t give a darn what happens to those poor saps. We have The One in the White House; we have extended the hand of His Oneness to the world, and look how much better things are!

Just remember this, please, Leftists:

“Gender issues are going to have to take a back seat to other priorities,” said the senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “There’s no way we can be successful if we maintain every special interest and pet project. All those pet rocks in our rucksack were taking us down.”

And don’t get too hung up on negativity, ok? Dump the pet rocks, relax, be cool.

– Aggie

Comments (2)

Unlike David Brooks, Obama Is Concerned About Newly Formed Islamist Regimes

Hope ‘n Change favors the Bernard Lewis/Samuel Huntington world view?

And the policy adjustments will be to encourage Americans to spend more time spent viewing Al Jazeera?

The Obama administration is preparing for the prospect that Islamist governments will take hold in North Africa and the Middle East, acknowledging that the popular revolutions there will bring a more religious cast to the region’s politics.

The administration is already taking steps to distinguish between various movements in the region that promote Islamic law in government. An internal assessment, ordered by the White House last month, identified large ideological differences between such movements as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and al-Qaeda that will guide the U.S. approach to the region.

“We shouldn’t be afraid of Islam in the politics of these countries,” said a senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe internal policy deliberations. “It’s the behavior of political parties and governments that we will judge them on, not their relationship with Islam.”

Islamist governments span a range of ideologies and ambitions, from the primitive brutality of the Taliban in Afghanistan to Turkey’s Justice and Development Party, a movement with Islamist roots that heads a largely secular political system.

None of the revolutions over the past several weeks has been overtly Islamist, but there are signs that the uprisings could give way to more religious forces. An influential Yemeni cleric called this week for the U.S.-backed administration of President Ali Abdullah Saleh to be replaced with Islamist rule, and in Egypt, an Islamist theoretician has a leading role in drafting constitutional changes after President Hosni Mubarak’s fall from power last month.

A number of other Islamist parties are deciding now how big a role to play in protests or post-revolution reforms.

Really? That’s not what we were told as the revolution was unfolding in Egypt, was it? I wonder where Hamas fits on the spectrum of nothing-to-worry-about Islamic regimes? After all, Hamas is an off-shoot of those boy scouts, The Muslim Brotherhood.

– Aggie

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »