Andrew Sullivan supports Ron Paul for the Republican presidential nomination. That’s a good thing. But he spends a considerable amount of time talking about how the war in Iraq has been lost… Perhaps, trying to convince himself.
Let's be clear: we have lost this war. We have lost because the initial, central goals of the invasion have all failed: we have not secured WMDS from terrorists because those WMDs did not exist. We have not stymied Islamist terror - at best we have finally stymied some of the terror we helped create. We have not constructed a democratic model for the Middle East - we have instead destroyed a totalitarian government and a phony country, only to create a permanently unstable, fractious, chaotic failed state, where the mere avoidance of genocide is a cause for celebration. We have, moreover, helped solder a new truth in the Arab mind: that democracy means chaos, anarchy, mass-murder, national disintegration and sectarian warfare. And we have also empowered the Iranian regime and made a wider Sunni-Shiite regional war more likely than it was in 2003. Apart from that, Mr Bush, how did you enjoy your presidency?
McCain, for all his many virtues, still doesn't get this. Paul does.
First of all, the Left can neither stomach, nor afford, a victory in Iraq. Too much of the Left’s time, effort and momentum has been invested in our defeat in Iraq. Let’s be crystal-clear on that fact.
The stated goals of the invasion have largely been achieved. The biggest goal being the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime.
It’s true that large stock piles of WMD’s were never found. But that makes no difference. Iraq is no longer able to produce WMD’s. So in that sense America was successful. The outcome would have been the same even if large WMD stock piles had been discovered.
Mr. Sullivan goes on to say we have not stymied Islamist terror, but rather stymied terror we helped create. Again, I’ll agree that the initial occupation of Iraq caused an increase in resentment of us, not less. But we have stymied Islamic terror in a very big way. Al Qaeda made Iraq its central front in its war against the West. And we’ve dealt them a mortal blow on two fronts: we’ve beaten them militarily, and American forces now occupy the moral high-ground. They’ve virtually given up on Iraq. An event that is well documented by bloggers and other journalists embedded with front-line troops for more than just a few days.
As for Iran, they are nearly surrounded on all sides by American forces. They obviously feel threatened, so I hope this President and the future President can resolve differences with that country without using military force. Besides, the men and women serving overseas need a well-deserved rest.
Our soldiers have done remarkable work in spite of poor post-invasion planning on account of the current administration, powder-keg politics in Iraq (and here), a biased media, troop-bashing liberals and blow hard politicians who put politics ahead of our national interest.
Read Mr. Sullivan’s entire piece: Ron Paul For The Republican Nomination.
Posted on:
December 17, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Iraqi Freedom, Liberalism, Media Bias . •
No Comments • .
No media bias here…
What the hell is Ms. Burnett’s problem? She’s entitled to her political views in private. But American’s are getting sick and tired of journalists using their highly visible positions to broadcast those political views and passing it off as objective news. And it shows in declining circulation and viewer ship ratings.
UPDATE: Ms. Burnett apologizes
The apology was a good gesture. But in my opinion doesn’t go far enough to address the media bias so pervasive in today’s supposedly objective news outlets. Also, she said “I do have the utmost respect for the President…” I find that hard to believe, because if she did, she wouldn’t have made those comments in the first-place. Video below:
What others are saying…
Bluto from Jawa Report:
Yes, Erin, you did offend a few people, not only those who hold the office of the Presidency in high regard, but also, those who are horrified that the state of modern journalism has sunk so abysmally low that fluffy bits of brainless eye candy, such as yourself, can make a living pretending to know what you’re talking about.
Warner Todd Huston of NewsBusters has the details and a transcript:
On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” back on Monday, Erin Burnett let loose with her real feelings and laid it on the line right on the air, calling President Bush a “monkey” during a business news piece about the Nicolas Sarkozy visit to China.
AllahPundit of HotAir.com:
My thoughts at this hour turn to Rush, who’s made no secret of his respect for Burnett despite her (likely) lefty provenance. Does he call her out on it? Or do her more admirable qualities, intellectual and otherwise, earn her a pass? The big A knows a thing or two about this dilemma himself, and while it’s a bitter pill to swallow, there is ultimately but one ethical solution. Lock and load, brother. Lock and load.
…And about the apology:
Exit question: Would it really be problematic if, say, Julie Banderas started referring routinely to the president as “the Bushitler”? Dude, I’m thinking — no.
Reformed Chicks Babbling:
BDS in the workplace! How sad! I hope someone comes up with a cure someday.
distributorcap at Daily Kos:
Erin Burnett, the business reporter at MSNBC i guess has some ’splaining to do to her bosses.
i guess Erin doesn’t like her preznit.
Guess not.
Posted on:
November 30, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Media Bias, Videos . •
13 Comments • .
Here we go again. CNN reporting enemy propaganda as news: U.S. forces battle militants in Sadr City. My BS alarm goes off whenever I see reports like this. Especially, when it involves a U.S.-led operation in Sadr City, Baghdad. Why?
Every report seems to focus on how many innocent civilians are either killed or wounded during the operation. Who supplied the news for that particular story?
It is well-known that the Iranian's are conducting operations against coalition interests in the Sadr City. Such operations would include military training and support for militias, psychological-warfare and propaganda aimed at Western media.
Isn't this what the Iranians did through their support of Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine? CNN's report sounds eerily familiar to news stories that have come out of Gaza in years past. You know the story, an aggressive "occupation" force steam-rolls through a neighborhood leaving dead and wounded civilians in its wake. With no apparent reason for being there in the first place. Then pictures of grieving, suffering civilians are shown. Sounds familiar.
Civilians are undoubtedly wounded or killed during military operations in a crowded urban setting and that is tragic. But there is no proof that U.S. forces engage in operations with the intent to cause civilian casualties. My question for CNN is: was a reporter on the ground in Sadr City during the fighting? If so, was he or she a "stringer" or Western journalist? And where is the context for this report?
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — Iraqi officials expressed outrage early Sunday at what they say are civilian deaths in the wake of a massive military operation in Baghdad's Sadr City neighborhood.
The U.S. military said its ground forces are "unaware" of civilian deaths in the early morning raid that it said left 49 "criminals" dead.
An Iraqi Interior Ministry source told CNN that 15 civilians were killed — all men — and 52 other civilians were wounded, including women and children.
Sadr City's mayor, Hassan Adhab, told Iraqi state TV there were 10 "martyrs" — including a mother and her three children — and 42 others were wounded.
Coalition forces were targeting a man they said was a leader in an Iranian-funded kidnapping operation. U.S. military spokeswoman Sgt. Nicole Dykstra told CNN the target was "neither apprehended nor killed today."
Adhab described a bloody scene, saying dozens of sheep were killed in the melee, and military aircraft still hovered over the neighborhood hours after the raid.
He blamed American forces for targeting cars carrying people who were heading to work early Sunday.
"We call upon Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to stop such immoral acts in Sadr City," Adhab said.
When asked about the Sadr City raid, the spokesman for the Baghdad Security Plan said Iraqi forces take every measure to avoid civilian casualties.
"If there are innocent civilian casualties in Sadr City or anywhere else then that is unfortunate," Brig. Gen. Qassim Atta said. "We hope both the Multi-National Forces and the Iraqi Security Forces demonstrate military restraint and respect human rights."
He said al-Maliki will be briefed on the details of the Sadr City raid by the Multi-National Forces.
The U.S. military said the joint ground forces were fired upon as they were clearing several buildings in the "target area."
"Supporting aircraft was called in to suppress the enemy fire, killing an estimated six criminals," a military news release stated.
"The operation's objective was an individual reported to be a longtime Special Groups member specializing in kidnapping operations," the military said. "Intelligence indicates he is a well-known cell leader and has previously sought funding from Iran to carry out high profile kidnappings."
The military said its forces were hit by a roadside bomb as they left the area, but the blast did not cause any casualties among coalition forces.
The Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman said many cars and many homes were damaged in the battle.
The ministry spokesman said the firefight took place between 1:30 a.m. (6:30 p.m. ET) and 6 a.m. (11 p.m. ET) in Sadr City, a densely populated Shiite slum where there is much grass-roots support for Iran and anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
"Special Groups are Shia extremist militant groups trained, funded and supplied primarily by Iran through the Islamic Revolutionary Guards — Quds Force," said U.S. Army Lt. Justin Cole.
"Special Groups have evolved over the past three years into insurgent elements using a cellular structure and operating independently."
"Special Groups operate throughout Iraq," Cole said. "They plan and execute bombings, kidnappings, sectarian murders and more against Iraqi citizens, Iraqi forces and coalition personnel."
Posted on:
October 21, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch, Iraqi Freedom, Media Bias . •
2 Comments • .
Update (September 9th, 2006):
- Clinton's lawyer pressures ABC to "yank the film". Strangely enough there's also speculation that the letter may be a fake.
- Peggy Noonan recalls the sounds of 9/11.
- Redstate has the video clips from the film that democrats don't want you to see.
Update: Blackfive weighs in with 9/11 Truthers & Clintonistas in the Crosshairs.
Uncle Jimbo says:
On top of this ABC has a miniseries that follows the completely feckless response of Clinton’s national security team to 8 years of provocation by bin Laden and AQ. The Clintonistas are predictably appalled at having the inherent weakness of the current Democrat party on national defense so brutally exposed. They have been coasting on nostalgic feel good memories of peace and prosperity when the stock market soared, there was a Hummer in every driveway, and people worldwide loved us. Except the internet bubble burst draining away all that faux-prosperity, as it turned out we weren’t actually at peace we were just failing to act as our enemies continued to attack us, and trust me nobody loved us then either.
Update: Another e-mail from the executive director of the Democratic National Committee
Note: I'm not a registered democrat and I actually wrote a letter via their website encouraging ABC to air the film as scheduled. They obviously didn't read my letter.
It would seem that the entire demcratic party machine is rallying against this movie. Which begs the question, what are they so worried about, and why are they trying to shield the public from seeing it?
Dear Fellow Democrat,
This is it: crunch time for getting the slanderous ABC television docudrama "The Path to 9/11" yanked off the air. The network schedule has this slanderous attack on Democrats slated to start on Sunday night, September 10, at 8 o'clock — and as long as it stays on the schedule, we have work to do.
http://www.democrats.org/pathto911/send
Here's the good news: the suits at ABC and the Walt Disney Company have started panicking under pressure, thanks to your ferocious response to the outrageous decision to put this irresponsible miniseries on the air. But until Disney quits defending its plan to broadcast conservative propaganda — fraudulently presented to Americans as "based on the 9/11 Commission Report" — the company should plan to keep taking every bit of heat we dish out.
Here's a quick catch-up on developments over the last 48 hours:
- President Clinton, through his attorney, rebuked ABC for producing a "factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate" miniseries — and walked the network through three make-believe scenes in the "the Path to 9/11" that defame people and misrepresent events during his administration.
- Clinton's spokesman later stepped up the pressure, condemning Disney as "despicable" for "airing a fictional version of what is a serious and emotional event for our country. No reputable organization," he said, "should dramatize 9-11 for a profit at the expense of the truth."
- The families of September 11 victims have weighed in on the controversy, telling "entertainers" not to "promote misleading or incorrect information as fact to the public."
- House and Senate Democratic leaders hammered Disney president and CEO Robert Iger, in letters that questioned the company's commitment to its "reputation … as a corporation worthy of the trust of the American people and the United States Congress."
- Scholastic has pulled teaching materials off its website and has scrambled to adopt a plan to help teachers show students "the differences between factual reporting and a dramatization," but is still encouraging teachers to show their students this propaganda.
Thanks for helping to make all this happen by joining over 150,000 Americans who told Disney president Robert Iger to keep this cheap right-wing miniseries off our airwaves. But our work isn't done. Before we deliver your letter today, tell your family, friends, neighbors and colleagues to insist that Disney and ABC live up to its duty to tell the truth:
http://www.democrats.org/pathto911/send
Thank you,
Tom
Tom McMahon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee
Update (Sept. 8th):
Democratic efforts to censor
FREE SPEECH (again)
Below is a copy of an e-mail that is being circulated by the democratic party.
Hi,
The ABC television network — a cog in the Walt Disney empire — unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for a new "docudrama" called "The Path to 9/11". ABC has thrown its corporate might behind the two-night production, and bills it as a public service: a TV event, to quote the ABC tagline, "based on the 9/11 Commission Report".
That's false. "The Path to 9/11" is actually a bald-faced attempt to slander Democrats and revise history right before Americans vote in a major election.
The miniseries, which was put together by right-wing conservative writers, relies on the old GOP playbook of using terrorism to scare Americans. "The Path to 9/11" mocks the truth and dishonors the memory of 9/11 victims to serve a cheap, callous political agenda. It irresponsibly misrepresents the facts and completely distorts the truth.
Join me in telling Walt Disney CEO Robert Iger to keep this propaganda off the air.
http://www.democrats.org/page/
petition/pathto911/ftvala
Thanks!
Please allow me to translate the meaning of the langauge used in the e-mail:
The ABC television network — a cog in the Walt Disney empire — unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for a new "docudrama" called "The Path to 9/11". ABC has thrown its corporate might behind the two-night production…
Translation: We're VICTIMS of "big business" again.
…and bills it as a public service: a TV event, to quote the ABC tagline, "based on the 9/11 Commission Report".
That's false. "The Path to 9/11" is actually a bald-faced attempt to slander Democrats and revise history right before Americans vote in a major election.
Translation: Only WE are allowed to revise history, and only WE are allowed provide a public service.
The miniseries, which was put together by right-wing conservative writers, relies on the old GOP playbook of using terrorism to scare Americans.
Translation: We're being VICTIMIZED by the vast right-wing conspiracy again. And since we're not strong on national security, we'll resort to accusing republicans of scaring the public instead of drawing up an effective plan of our own.
"The Path to 9/11" mocks the truth and dishonors the memory of 9/11 victims to serve a cheap, callous political agenda. It irresponsibly misrepresents the facts and completely distorts the truth.
Translation: We think Fahrenheit 9/11 was a much more accurate and honorable portrayal of the failures that led to the September 11th. So much so, we invited its producer to sit with us at our 2004 national convention.
Also on the story:
Good commentary:
Update (Sept. 8th):
Stephen of MediaBlog over at NRO is reporting that senate democrats may have issued a veiled threat regarding Disney's broadcast license if they don't cancel the mini-series.
This is simply outrageous. I guess free speech is only good enough for liberals and terrorist statesmen that agree with their cause. The democrats are making complete jackasses of themselves. You can't revoke a television network's broadcast license because they air a film containing views you don't agree with.
Update (Sept. 7th):
LGF has links showing the democratic party is officially trying to censor ABC network programming.
Update (Sept. 6th):
Hugh Hewitt may have evidence that ABC may have edited the film under pressure from liberals.
I had to interrupt a busy workday to post this example of utter hypocrisy from democrats.
This party has been campaigning as the vanguard of free speech in its opposition to NSA wiretaps, its defense of the New York Times after the paper revealed classified information about counter-terror programs that help to keep us safe, and its opposition to the renewal of the USA Patriot Act.
From UPI :
WASHINGTON, Sept. 6 (UPI) — An upcoming TV mini-series about the origins of the Sept. 11 plot is provoking angry complaints from Democrats about the portrayal of the Clinton administration's response to terrorism.
"The Path to 9/11," a five-hour dramatization laying out the history of the Sept. 11 plot from the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, will be aired over two nights on the anniversary of the attack next week by ABC Television.
The movie is billed as a dramatization based on the report of the U.S. commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11 and circumstances leading up to it. According to a disclaimer shown at the beginning of each episode, it "has composite and representative characters and incidents, and time compressions have been used for dramatic purposes."
But a portion of the film showing an aborted effort to capture al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden before the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa has aroused the ire of some of the officials portrayed.
Here's where the hypocrisy begins:
And Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., called on ABC to show disclaimers throughout each episode, not just at the beginning. "ABC has a responsibility to make clear that this film is not a documentary, and does not represent an official account of the facts surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks," she said.
I don't recall democrats calling for disclaimers throughout Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11? Furthermore, the Clinton liberals are doing everything they can to prevent ABC from airing the film "as-is." That in and of itself should tell you this is going to be one good film.
The mini-series is actually an accurate portrayal, albeit re-enacted, of what really happened in the years leading up to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. It's time the country learned the truth about what happened instead of buying into the liberal myth that it was all George W. Bush's fault.
In one scene, CIA operatives working with Ahmed Shah Masud (sic), the charismatic Afghan mujahedin leader who fought al-Qaida and their Taliban sponsors, are assembled on a hillside above bin Laden's residence at Tarnak Farms. "It's perfect for us," says "Kirk," a composite character representing several of the CIA operatives and analysts involved in the hunt for the terrorist leader.But the team is forced to abort the mission when Berger hangs up on them in the middle of a conference call, after telling them he cannot give the go ahead for the action."I don't have that authority," he says."Are there any men in Washington," Masud asks Kirk afterwards in the film, "or are they all cowards?"
Former national security advisor to President Clinton, Sandy Berger, had this to say:
"The incidents depicted did not happen," said Berger in the statement. "They are not contained in the Sept. 11 Commission report, which is the most authoritative review of the events before and after the attack."
This coming from a man who plead guilty to stealing classified documents from the National Archive. (I wonder what he was trying to hide…)
Read the entire UPI article: Analysis: Sept. 11 miniseries under fire.
Other commentaries: Blackfive, Hugh Hewitt, Little Green Footballs, HotAir, JunkyardBlog, Sticky Notes.
Posted on:
September 9, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Counter Terrorism, Domestic Politics, Elections 2006, Media Bias, al-Qaeda . •
5 Comments • .
Reuters Canada:
OTTAWA (Reuters) - One of Canada's top television reporters has been suspended from her job for praising the country's increasingly troubled military mission in Afghanistan, the company said on Friday.
Christine St-Pierre, a veteran Ottawa correspondent for French-language public broadcaster Radio-Canada, wrote an open letter to Canada's 2,300 troops telling them to ignore mounting criticism of the mission.
Five Canadian soldiers were killed last weekend, prompting ever louder calls for Ottawa to review the mission. One opposition party wants the troops to come back next February, two years ahead of schedule.
"We owe you all our respect and our unfailing support … dear soldiers, your tears are not in vain, your tears are brave," St-Pierre wrote in the letter, which Montreal's La Presse newspaper published on Thursday.
Radio-Canada suspended her for breaching internal regulations that stipulate employees are not allowed to express their opinions on controversial issues.
Entire article (H/T: Allahpundit), Radio-Canada reporter hit for backing Afghan mission.
I grew up in Canada, so I know how liberal-minded the country is. Many Canadians view the Afghan conflict as America's war. In fact, a recent poll claims that a majority of Canadians blame American foreign policy for the terrorist attacks on 9/11. So why should they send troops to Afghanistan, right?
(Some American's react to the poll results.)
How different would the poll results have been had the terrorist plot, by militant islamists, to destroy several Canadian targets succeeded? Who's foreign policy would Canadians have blamed then? Anyone who blames a nation's foreign policy as having caused a terrorist attack is seriously misguided. The terrorists are the cause of the attack. Not the other way around.
Disagreeing with a nation's foreign policy does not give a rogue group of people the right to murder nearly 3000 innocent civilians. Terrorist groups like al-Qaeda do not represent a State or foreign government. So they can not be held accountable for their actions in the traditional sense.
Furthermore, these people (the terrorists) made a conscious decision to use violence instead of petitioning their respective governments to raise grievances against the United States. Many governments in the middle east repress their constituents and when challenged, they simply deflect criticism by blaming the United States or Israel.
I think Christine St-Pierre did the right thing by praising the troops in harms way. Too few reporters and news agencies do that these days. It makes me wonder… would she have been suspended if she had criticized the mission instead? Probably not.
If you want to see the brave actions of Canadian troops at work, check out one of my previous posts…
Posted on:
September 9, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Afghanistan, Canada, International, Media Bias . •
1 Comment • .
Just under the headline from the article, "End of an Affair", in today's Washington Post (H/T: Powerline):
It turns out that the person who exposed CIA agent Valerie Plame was not out to punish her husband.
It turns out that the person most responsible for ending Valerie Plame's career at the CIA was her own husband, Joe Wilson. Moreover, it wasn't Bush, Cheney or Karl Rove who leaked the identity of Valerie Plame. It was Richard Armitage.
I won't hold my breath waiting for an apology from the Bush-Deranged appeasement junkies at the Daily Kos. But I'll take this article from the Washington post as an apology (of sorts) from left-leaning mainstream media.
Here's what it all boils down to:
Mr. Armitage was one of the Bush administration officials who supported the invasion of Iraq only reluctantly. He was a political rival of the White House and Pentagon officials who championed the war and whom Mr. Wilson accused of twisting intelligence about Iraq and then plotting to destroy him. Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak "in an offhand manner, virtually as gossip," according to a story this week by the Post's R. Jeffrey Smith, who quoted a former colleague of Mr. Armitage.
Perhaps my favorite passage:
It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House — that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson — is untrue. The partisan clamor that followed the raising of that allegation by Mr. Wilson in the summer of 2003 led to the appointment of a special prosecutor, a costly and prolonged investigation, and the indictment of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on charges of perjury. All of that might have been avoided had Mr. Armitage's identity been known three years ago.
And last, but not least:
Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming — falsely, as it turned out — that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.
I guess this means the recent lawsuit filed by Wilson and Plame against high-level administration officials isn't going to gain any more momentum. In fact, I said before, that lawsuit won't amount to anything.
So how are left-wing democrats reacting to the news? Below are some highlights from Democratic Underground forum:
Mugsy: Armitage source of Plame leak??? Deafeningly silent bombshell? (excerpt)
So what is the story here? I know there's more too it, and the fact regarding the way the Bush Administration *used* this information to discredit Wilson and justify their war can not be disputed, but the deafening silence around here on the subject bothers me.
The deafening silence is a result of the fact that these people were wrong to accuse the administration of a conspiracy in the first-place.
A comment from a DU member with some sense:
AValdoux: Outing Armitage…
…vindicates Rove. The Libby trial will (sic) a "legal technicality driven by partisan politics".
Case closed.
Yet another Bush-Deranged comment:
librechik: wake me up when the fat lady sings
I'm sick of their jury poisoning crapola.
And I don't believe Armitage is the end of the story–but I do believe he is a "nice enough guy" to fall on his sword for the cause–especially if there are no punishments involved in a "silly booboo."
Read the entire article: End of an Affair
Posted on:
September 1, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Intelligence, Media Bias . •
2 Comments • .
UPDATE: AllahPundit posted the Centanni / Wiig hostage video over at HotAir.com (audio enhanced).
UPDATE: New Group Claims Fox News Kidnappings
A previously unheard of Palestinian group, the Holy Jihad Brigades, claimed responsibility on Wednesday for kidnapping a Fox News cameraman and correspondent, Al-Jazeera satellite TV reported.
Read more.
Fox News Channel reporter Steve Centanni and freelance cameraman Olaf Wiig are still missing a week after they were kidnapped in Gaza by unknown gunmen. I am surprised at the lack of persistent MSM coverage of the kidnapping. Especially by competing news agencies.
Michelle Malkin has more information about what's been going on, on her blog.
Posted on:
August 22, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Homeland Security, International, Israel - Palestine, Media Bias . •
2 Comments • .
In the short span of five years since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the flight that went down in a Pennsylvania countryside this country and the World has slowly lost its collective mind.
The United States found itself fighting a ground war in Afghanistan, Iraq and other low-intensity conflicts around the World. During this time some of America's own citizens in government and the population at-large have seen fit to wage war against our president and his administration. In fact, since September 11th, 2001 the World has become more polarized than ever. The divide between the Right and Left side of the political spectrum has increased to the point of sheer madness.
If you survey the political landscape today here's what you might observe:
A World that condemns a stable democracy in the middle east for defending itself against a known terrorist group.
A World that would sooner criticize a modern army for using tactical weapons designed to minimize civilian deaths, while ignoring terrorists and criminals who explode bombs in public places full of women and children. Where some argue that no matter how horrific the outcome, the bombers were justified in their actions. After all, they don't have tanks and jets and other weapons of modern warfare…
A World that overlooks the words of a man who has threatened several times to "wipe" another country off the map. In fact, just the other day I read about several fellow Americans who are angry because one of our most prominent journalists was too rude while interviewing this man who has pledged to annihilate another nation. These fellow Americans even expressed sympathy for this man while accusing their own leader of being far more threatening. I'm sure these people feel the press isn't rude enough to their own president. I don't recall our president ever threatening to completely eliminate another nation.
We are living in a time when fascist dictators are exalted as heroes even though some manipulate oil and energy markets to further their own political goals and line their own pockets. While our own democratically-elected leaders are condemned as liars and thieves in spite of our own programs and billions of dollars in aid doled out to improve the lives of impoverished people around the World.
We live in a World where, not even five years after a savage attack on three thousand of our fellow countrymen and global citizens, some are fighting tooth-and-nail to condemn and dismantle programs our president has instituted to protect us from another attack. More or less because of the political party he belongs to.
A World that views super-heroes as villains, and villains as the heroes. Where a woman who loses her son in a war she didn't like becomes the face of a movement that believes our president is more evil than Osama bin Laden.
A World media that is being manipulated by a group of self-proclaimed victims of so-called American imperialism. Even though that's just an excuse made by a culture obsessed with death instead of life. A culture that has been paralyzed and hijacked by religious extremists with fascist dreams who use religion to justify their crimes against humanity and fear mongering to maintain control. A media which marvels at the tactics and skill of our enemy while downplaying the achievements of our own army.
A World in which human rights groups are quick to criticize America for its treatment of prisoners while remaining silent when our enemies cut the heads off their own prisoners in front of television cameras while proclaiming "God is great" over and over again like brainwashed monkeys.
A World in which we've become so blinded by political correctness that we can't see the forest for the trees. Where many people on the Left side of the political landscape deny the existence of terrorism. And where there is a belief that our own government planned and staged the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11th.
Posted on:
August 17, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, International, Leftwing Watch, Media Bias, Miscellaneous . •
No Comments • .
More Posts »
