* * *
First, my hat tip to Michelle Malkin for this news that should not get swept aside, quoted here in its entirety:
A BRITISH aid worker gunned down in Kabul yesterday was murdered because she was a Christian, the Taleban claim.
Gayle Williams, 34, was shot at close range by two men on a motorbike, in a residential district of the Afghan capital popular with missionaries.
Eyewitnesses said she collapsed in a pool of blood, after the men fired six shots from a pistol, hitting her in the chest and legs.
Daolad Khan, who was working on a building site directly opposite the murder scene, said: “They raced up the street and stopped in front of the lady. They took out a gun and shot her on the spot. Then they rode off.”
Security officials said it was the first time an international aid worker had been killed inside Kabul since 2001.
The Taleban said they carried out the attack on the grounds that Ms Williams was trying to convert people to Christianity. “This woman came to Afghanistan to teach Christianity to the people of Afghanistan,” militant spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said. “Our (leaders] issued a decree to kill this woman.”
Williams was working for a British-based Christian charity called Serve Afghanistan. Staff there insisted she had never tried to convert others.
Rina van der Ende, a spokeswoman for Serve in Kabul, said: “They are here to do NGO aid work. It’s not the case that they preach, not at all.”
Mike Lyth, the London-based chairman of Serve Afghanistan, said he had lost a “close personal friend” who had devoted her life to helping others.
He said: “She was working with disabled children: blind children, deaf children and children hurt and maimed by the fighting.”
Colleagues last night paid tribute to a “selfless” woman dedicated to her work. A message on the charity’s website read: “Gayle was not a woman who thought of herself. Her time and energy were always spent on behalf of others.”
* * *
Terrorism against Christians and Jews around the world gets relatively scant attention in the press. This needs to change. We must seriously begin to acknowledge these murders and reveal the full ongoing extent of the enemy threat for what it is.
Please visit Michele's site (link at left) to see this and other important stories of the day. Thank you.
* * *
Showing posts with label Media Bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media Bias. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Tears for a great country
* * *
The following is a powerful commentary from a woman named Pam (see end of article). The hotlinks aren't working here, probably due to technical ineptitude on the part of yours truly, but they do work when you click over to her original post. /b.
* * *
So here we are, less than a week from an election that could quite literally mean the end of the United States of America as we know her. Paranoia? Perhaps. I never would have believed that my nation could truly be on the verge of voting itself out of existence. But here we are.
The golden child of this presidential election has deep, obvious cracks in his hallowed facade. There are signs that few could miss if they actually look - signs that indicate severe issues. Besides his associations with radicals and terrorists, there are scores of trouble markers.
He appears not to care who supports him. His website does not utilize credit card matching for donations; a test using the names Osama bin Laden, John Galt, and Saddam Hussein to make donations with the same credit card revealed that all the donations went through. In fact, a lot of interesting people have been donating to Obama; and foreign credit are also being accepted. Donations have come from Palestine. Good Will, Loving, and Dela Ware have also made donations. Obama also accepts donations from largely untraceable pre-paid credit cards. His campaign’s response to questions was that “no campaign can fully insulate itself” from these types of issues. John McCain and Hillary Clinton used computer matching (ABS) and citizenship checks for their donations. Obama checks neither.
Barack Obama reflects the far Left in this country - a political sect that wants to cut the military 25% during a time of war. He advocates negotiating with dictators who vow to see Israel and the United States eradicated. He goes to a country where we are fighting a war, and urges them to delay a deal on withdrawal of American troops - so that he can be sure to get the credit for that withdrawal.
Barack Obama doesn’t want you to use his middle name. He doesn’t want you to ask questions about his Marxist leanings, or his radical ties. Yes, he advocates redistribution of wealth, and thinks it’s too bad that the essential restraints of the Constitution limit the ability to act at will. Yes, he intentionally (and “carefully”) chose Marxist professors and friends. But don’t call him a Marxist. Don’t call him a Socialist - or you will be banned from any contact. Yes, he has ties to terrorists. But don’t talk about it. Don’t dare ask about it.
If you do, like “Joe the Plumber,“ you may find your DMV and other government files illegally accessed, and your life open to investigation. You may, like Sarah Palin, find your private email hacked and published. You may, like reporter Barbara West, be denied any further access to the campaign. Don’t cross the line, or you will see the consequences. And the Left doesn’t just want to restrict certain speech - it wants to go much further. The Left seeks to mandate speech (the Fairness Doctrine). The Left seeks to ensure that you hear what it wants you to hear - and only what it wants you to hear. If the Fairness Doctrine passes, blogs like mine may be required to publish “both sides” of the story. Even if “both sides” means the truth, and the lie from the Left. I have already decided that I will not comply. If I maintained a bigger blog, with a larger audience and a voice that might make a difference, I might openly defy the order. Realistically, though, I’m not that big. I will simply cease to blog. Much bigger voices may be silenced - the prime target of the Fairness Doctrine is talk radio. Barack Obama may not be a leading voice for the Fairness Doctrine, but if the Left has the House, the Senate, and the White House, do you really think that it won’t get passed? Can you see him using a presidential veto to prevent it?
Barack Obama wants you to stay away from examining his wife’s anti-American statements, associations, or political leanings. He says that family is off limits. Unless, of course, you’re talking about his opponent’s family. How has this campaign been to Sarah Palin’s family? To John McCain’s wife? The press is almost universally in the tank for Obama. CNN distorts quotes to portray Sarah Palin as negatively as possible. Other outlets refuse to cover stories that are negative to Obama - even to the point of refusing to release a tape where his own words might harm his campaign. Those who expose him are detained by countries where he has ties. How do you think people who oppose him will be treated once he is in power?Barack Obama promises that the poor downtrodden masses will be lifted up, and that the evil rich will be taken off their pedestals. So did Lenin.
Barack Obama promises that he will cut taxes for 95% of Americans. But only about half of those he’s promising tax cuts to actually pay taxes. Barack Obama will take your money and decide that someone else who has less deserves it - though you’re the one who worked for it. From each according to his ability; to each according to his need - not his worth, but his need.
Barack Obama promises to restore our standing in the world. We will be liked by a world filled with terrorists, socialists, communists, sellouts, and radicals. What will we have to sell to earn their praise? What is the value of our soul?
Well, it’ll only be four years, you might say. Eight, at most. And then the Left will have screwed things up so badly that they’ll be out of power for a long time. Maybe. But maybe not. During beloved Bill Clinton’s presidency, there was a movement to lift presidential term limits. It died then, but now there’s precedent. In New York, a lifting of term limits is allowing Bloomberg to run again (despite two referendums enforcing a two-term limit). After four years of nothing but positive press, nothing but the pap of propaganda, who will there be to oppose lifting presidential term limits?
If elected, Barack Obama has the potential to make us long for the good old days of Jimmy Carter. A Barack Obama presidency will be far, far worse. For the first time, we will have a socialist president, presiding over a legislature where the Democrats - a party with a significant number of like-minded socialists - rule.
The Republicans, with few exceptions, don’t have the guts to stand up to him. Even if they did, it would likely not do much good - they will not even be able to count on the filibuster. We are headed for a period of time where the checks and balances that form the basis of this government may mean nothing. Elect him, and we will likely have a Socialist president, a rubber-stamping Socialist legislature, and eventually, a rubber-stamping Socialist Supreme Court. We also have a fawning, socialist media - the type that refuses to air a tape in which Barack Obama praises PLO-linked Rafik Hariri as having views that “the whole world“ should hear (for example, that Israel should be obliterated).
How much damage do you think all of that can do in four years? Eight years? Longer?
Recently, a growing chorus of voices are priming the pump. How bad is socialism, really? Would it be so bad to be liked by other nations? Would it be so bad to have those less fortunate lifted up? Would it be so bad if we tried something different? But the beautiful picture they paint of socialism is, and has always been, a lie. And make no mistake - Barack Obama is a liar. He is, like many charismatic leaders before him, one person on the surface, and another when you look any further. Barack Obama is a socialist. He is a radical. He is dangerous. And if he is elected, it could very well mark the beginning of the end for this country as she was meant to be. He says that his opposition is trying to scare you. It doesn’t take that much effort. He’s a pretty scary person.
Some elements of the Left will tell you that to not vote for him means that you’re a racist. But just because they say something, it doesn’t make it true - the Truth and the Left aren’t close friends anyway. I am not voting for him because I am an anti-socialist. I view redistribution of wealth as an evil. I view unbridled altruism as evil. I view restriction of free speech as a violation of the principles on which this country was founded - principles which formed the basis of the greatest form of government to ever exist on Earth. I define social justice as ensuring that everyone gets a fair shake - that they rise or fail based solely on their own merits - and not because someone propped them up or ensured that they would have what someone else earned. I am not voting for him because I believe him to be a radical, diametrically opposed to what this country stands for - or used to, anyway. I view him as someone who will sell our country out to whomever he sees fit. I am not voting for him because anyone who would enter into a dialogue with Iran deserves contempt, not a seat in the highest office in the land. I am not voting for him because he lacks the character and qualifications to be president.
Maybe the country that I believe in is already gone. Maybe political correctness, socialism, and self-loathing are the values of the new America. I hope not. I hope that this country takes a long look at Barack Obama before next Tuesday, and realizes the threat that he poses to its survival.We will know shortly. We have already started down the slope, but our fingers are still desperately clinging on the edge. Take a moment to fix in your mind the country you have on Monday. You may never see it again.
Paranoia, maybe. But then again, maybe not.
* * *
Pam's editorial is from Iraq War Today. There's a link here on the left of this site.
* * *
The following is a powerful commentary from a woman named Pam (see end of article). The hotlinks aren't working here, probably due to technical ineptitude on the part of yours truly, but they do work when you click over to her original post. /b.
* * *
So here we are, less than a week from an election that could quite literally mean the end of the United States of America as we know her. Paranoia? Perhaps. I never would have believed that my nation could truly be on the verge of voting itself out of existence. But here we are.
The golden child of this presidential election has deep, obvious cracks in his hallowed facade. There are signs that few could miss if they actually look - signs that indicate severe issues. Besides his associations with radicals and terrorists, there are scores of trouble markers.
He appears not to care who supports him. His website does not utilize credit card matching for donations; a test using the names Osama bin Laden, John Galt, and Saddam Hussein to make donations with the same credit card revealed that all the donations went through. In fact, a lot of interesting people have been donating to Obama; and foreign credit are also being accepted. Donations have come from Palestine. Good Will, Loving, and Dela Ware have also made donations. Obama also accepts donations from largely untraceable pre-paid credit cards. His campaign’s response to questions was that “no campaign can fully insulate itself” from these types of issues. John McCain and Hillary Clinton used computer matching (ABS) and citizenship checks for their donations. Obama checks neither.
Barack Obama reflects the far Left in this country - a political sect that wants to cut the military 25% during a time of war. He advocates negotiating with dictators who vow to see Israel and the United States eradicated. He goes to a country where we are fighting a war, and urges them to delay a deal on withdrawal of American troops - so that he can be sure to get the credit for that withdrawal.
Barack Obama doesn’t want you to use his middle name. He doesn’t want you to ask questions about his Marxist leanings, or his radical ties. Yes, he advocates redistribution of wealth, and thinks it’s too bad that the essential restraints of the Constitution limit the ability to act at will. Yes, he intentionally (and “carefully”) chose Marxist professors and friends. But don’t call him a Marxist. Don’t call him a Socialist - or you will be banned from any contact. Yes, he has ties to terrorists. But don’t talk about it. Don’t dare ask about it.
If you do, like “Joe the Plumber,“ you may find your DMV and other government files illegally accessed, and your life open to investigation. You may, like Sarah Palin, find your private email hacked and published. You may, like reporter Barbara West, be denied any further access to the campaign. Don’t cross the line, or you will see the consequences. And the Left doesn’t just want to restrict certain speech - it wants to go much further. The Left seeks to mandate speech (the Fairness Doctrine). The Left seeks to ensure that you hear what it wants you to hear - and only what it wants you to hear. If the Fairness Doctrine passes, blogs like mine may be required to publish “both sides” of the story. Even if “both sides” means the truth, and the lie from the Left. I have already decided that I will not comply. If I maintained a bigger blog, with a larger audience and a voice that might make a difference, I might openly defy the order. Realistically, though, I’m not that big. I will simply cease to blog. Much bigger voices may be silenced - the prime target of the Fairness Doctrine is talk radio. Barack Obama may not be a leading voice for the Fairness Doctrine, but if the Left has the House, the Senate, and the White House, do you really think that it won’t get passed? Can you see him using a presidential veto to prevent it?
Barack Obama wants you to stay away from examining his wife’s anti-American statements, associations, or political leanings. He says that family is off limits. Unless, of course, you’re talking about his opponent’s family. How has this campaign been to Sarah Palin’s family? To John McCain’s wife? The press is almost universally in the tank for Obama. CNN distorts quotes to portray Sarah Palin as negatively as possible. Other outlets refuse to cover stories that are negative to Obama - even to the point of refusing to release a tape where his own words might harm his campaign. Those who expose him are detained by countries where he has ties. How do you think people who oppose him will be treated once he is in power?Barack Obama promises that the poor downtrodden masses will be lifted up, and that the evil rich will be taken off their pedestals. So did Lenin.
Barack Obama promises that he will cut taxes for 95% of Americans. But only about half of those he’s promising tax cuts to actually pay taxes. Barack Obama will take your money and decide that someone else who has less deserves it - though you’re the one who worked for it. From each according to his ability; to each according to his need - not his worth, but his need.
Barack Obama promises to restore our standing in the world. We will be liked by a world filled with terrorists, socialists, communists, sellouts, and radicals. What will we have to sell to earn their praise? What is the value of our soul?
Well, it’ll only be four years, you might say. Eight, at most. And then the Left will have screwed things up so badly that they’ll be out of power for a long time. Maybe. But maybe not. During beloved Bill Clinton’s presidency, there was a movement to lift presidential term limits. It died then, but now there’s precedent. In New York, a lifting of term limits is allowing Bloomberg to run again (despite two referendums enforcing a two-term limit). After four years of nothing but positive press, nothing but the pap of propaganda, who will there be to oppose lifting presidential term limits?
If elected, Barack Obama has the potential to make us long for the good old days of Jimmy Carter. A Barack Obama presidency will be far, far worse. For the first time, we will have a socialist president, presiding over a legislature where the Democrats - a party with a significant number of like-minded socialists - rule.
The Republicans, with few exceptions, don’t have the guts to stand up to him. Even if they did, it would likely not do much good - they will not even be able to count on the filibuster. We are headed for a period of time where the checks and balances that form the basis of this government may mean nothing. Elect him, and we will likely have a Socialist president, a rubber-stamping Socialist legislature, and eventually, a rubber-stamping Socialist Supreme Court. We also have a fawning, socialist media - the type that refuses to air a tape in which Barack Obama praises PLO-linked Rafik Hariri as having views that “the whole world“ should hear (for example, that Israel should be obliterated).
How much damage do you think all of that can do in four years? Eight years? Longer?
Recently, a growing chorus of voices are priming the pump. How bad is socialism, really? Would it be so bad to be liked by other nations? Would it be so bad to have those less fortunate lifted up? Would it be so bad if we tried something different? But the beautiful picture they paint of socialism is, and has always been, a lie. And make no mistake - Barack Obama is a liar. He is, like many charismatic leaders before him, one person on the surface, and another when you look any further. Barack Obama is a socialist. He is a radical. He is dangerous. And if he is elected, it could very well mark the beginning of the end for this country as she was meant to be. He says that his opposition is trying to scare you. It doesn’t take that much effort. He’s a pretty scary person.
Some elements of the Left will tell you that to not vote for him means that you’re a racist. But just because they say something, it doesn’t make it true - the Truth and the Left aren’t close friends anyway. I am not voting for him because I am an anti-socialist. I view redistribution of wealth as an evil. I view unbridled altruism as evil. I view restriction of free speech as a violation of the principles on which this country was founded - principles which formed the basis of the greatest form of government to ever exist on Earth. I define social justice as ensuring that everyone gets a fair shake - that they rise or fail based solely on their own merits - and not because someone propped them up or ensured that they would have what someone else earned. I am not voting for him because I believe him to be a radical, diametrically opposed to what this country stands for - or used to, anyway. I view him as someone who will sell our country out to whomever he sees fit. I am not voting for him because anyone who would enter into a dialogue with Iran deserves contempt, not a seat in the highest office in the land. I am not voting for him because he lacks the character and qualifications to be president.
Maybe the country that I believe in is already gone. Maybe political correctness, socialism, and self-loathing are the values of the new America. I hope not. I hope that this country takes a long look at Barack Obama before next Tuesday, and realizes the threat that he poses to its survival.We will know shortly. We have already started down the slope, but our fingers are still desperately clinging on the edge. Take a moment to fix in your mind the country you have on Monday. You may never see it again.
Paranoia, maybe. But then again, maybe not.
* * *
Pam's editorial is from Iraq War Today. There's a link here on the left of this site.
* * *
LA Times Disgrace: front page news
Or at least it should be. This journalism scandal is the latest blogosphere news, justifiably at the top of the list.
The question isn't whether the Los Angeles times has a video tape of mainstream media's favorite presidential candidate at a posh Jew-bashing dinner party. The rag has admitted they have a tape of the would-be president knee-deep in an event praising PLO operative and anti-Semite Rashid Khalidi, and they've already written a tepid story about it.
But this "news" institution adamantly refuses to air the damning tape itself. What happened to people's right to know? Or do we only have the right to know about wardrobes and tax returns?
The Times knows full well the damage this shocking, quite probably election-losing look at reality that video would create. In their infinite wisdom, they've decided what we don't need to see.
Not surprisingly, domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn were apparently on hand for the videotaped fete. And just to be clear, the media darling candidate and his wife weren't eight years old at the time, either. These particular wine glasses were raised in recent history. We're not talking the exploratory identity-forming adventures of a college student. This is a US senator in post 9-11 America.
Los Angeles Times, your ideology-driven suppression of vital news is obscene.
Leading the charge against this incredible affrontery are Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit, Michelle Malkin, and other alternative-media notables; Newt Gingrich and others have offered large rewards for copies of this tape. Make no mistake, Rashid Khalidi is not this candidate's only anti-Israel connection, but seeing him in the room with a smile on his face is more than enough to open some eyes.
Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times is working hard to secure its rightful place in the bottom of readers' catboxes.
In this nightmare of an election year, the challenge each day is deciding which of the dozens of insults to reason and attacks on liberty is most noteworthy. Today it's no contest.
Looking at this situation more broadly, talk radio needs to continue its campaign to warn people about the dangers of an America like the one we're seeing, where mainstream news picks a side and stumps without apology while liberal politicians demand the end of talk radio under the guise of the fairness doctrine.
Liberty in America will just be a memory if this tide isn't turned. Will we allow a so-called fairness doctrine to turn us into an Orwellian nightmare?
The question isn't whether the Los Angeles times has a video tape of mainstream media's favorite presidential candidate at a posh Jew-bashing dinner party. The rag has admitted they have a tape of the would-be president knee-deep in an event praising PLO operative and anti-Semite Rashid Khalidi, and they've already written a tepid story about it.
But this "news" institution adamantly refuses to air the damning tape itself. What happened to people's right to know? Or do we only have the right to know about wardrobes and tax returns?
The Times knows full well the damage this shocking, quite probably election-losing look at reality that video would create. In their infinite wisdom, they've decided what we don't need to see.
Not surprisingly, domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn were apparently on hand for the videotaped fete. And just to be clear, the media darling candidate and his wife weren't eight years old at the time, either. These particular wine glasses were raised in recent history. We're not talking the exploratory identity-forming adventures of a college student. This is a US senator in post 9-11 America.
Los Angeles Times, your ideology-driven suppression of vital news is obscene.
Leading the charge against this incredible affrontery are Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit, Michelle Malkin, and other alternative-media notables; Newt Gingrich and others have offered large rewards for copies of this tape. Make no mistake, Rashid Khalidi is not this candidate's only anti-Israel connection, but seeing him in the room with a smile on his face is more than enough to open some eyes.
Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times is working hard to secure its rightful place in the bottom of readers' catboxes.
In this nightmare of an election year, the challenge each day is deciding which of the dozens of insults to reason and attacks on liberty is most noteworthy. Today it's no contest.
Looking at this situation more broadly, talk radio needs to continue its campaign to warn people about the dangers of an America like the one we're seeing, where mainstream news picks a side and stumps without apology while liberal politicians demand the end of talk radio under the guise of the fairness doctrine.
Liberty in America will just be a memory if this tide isn't turned. Will we allow a so-called fairness doctrine to turn us into an Orwellian nightmare?
Under such a doctrine, the blog you are now reading could well be illegal.
Think about it.
Meanwhile, here's one of many places to check out the story:
http://tinyurl.com/5bbm57
* * *
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Write Turn Cafe: where to begin?
* * *
Journalism's 'sub-tabloid' assault on truth and America
* * *
One of my dreams is that this election, among other things, creates a tipping point of awareness in America. Outrageously biased and undeniably agenda-driven, our behemoth mainstream journalism machine needs to be outed once and for all, held accountable for countless grievances against truth.
When journalists are encouraged by their editors to indulge in lies, clear distortions, and deliberate misdirection, it's unacceptable not to hold the institutions accountable.
With freedom of the press comes serious responsibility, and we the people need to demand a more ethical journalism.
* * *
Journalism's 'sub-tabloid' assault on truth and America
* * *
One of my dreams is that this election, among other things, creates a tipping point of awareness in America. Outrageously biased and undeniably agenda-driven, our behemoth mainstream journalism machine needs to be outed once and for all, held accountable for countless grievances against truth.
When journalists are encouraged by their editors to indulge in lies, clear distortions, and deliberate misdirection, it's unacceptable not to hold the institutions accountable.
With freedom of the press comes serious responsibility, and we the people need to demand a more ethical journalism.
* * *
Notes to self: a few other nagging issues
* * *
The Ayers Problem: well, he wasn't eight years old when Ayers appears to have written much of that amazing autobiography; helpful friends you've got there, Barry
The Citizenship Question: Berg may be flaky, but I think he's onto something; Mr. Candidate, please show us the proof and then we'll be quiet about it
The Constitutional Crisis: who decides who has "standing" to bring suits and why; the decay of our Constitution
The Economy 1: if you're part of the problem, you can't be part of the solution; Raines and those dems too close to our economic collape for comfort
The Economy 2: 40% pay no taxes so you can't lower taxes for 95% of Americans without it becoming a welfare state; all math answers are not created equal
The Deification Project: we haven't heard you deny you're the messiah; candles and shrines for the annointed one
voter fraud
media bias
campaign contribution fraud, domestic
campaign contribution fraud, foreign
lies and distortions to citizens
unsavory alliances with frightening agendas
new world order/ global village/ UN problem
appeasement of enemies
reduced millitary strength
hanging Israel out to dry
the Africa problem
the Indonesia problem(s)
the Michelle-writes Most-whites-in-the-US- are-racist problem
Rules for Radicals phrases in speeches
the Rezco association and home loan problem
the Marxist agenda problem
the "No More Pre-existing conditions exclusion" plan for insurance collapse
the end of 401K?
the end of talk radio (Fairness Doctrine)?
To be continued...
draft; work in progress.
* * *
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
