Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

How Diplomats, Reporters and Human Rights Activists Saved Hamas

by Daniel Greenfield on Saturday, July 12th, 2014

This is article 1200 of 1200 in the topic International

As Israeli airstrikes hit Hamas targets and Hamas rockets fall on Israeli towns, some wonder how did Gaza come to run by Hamas terrorists. The answer is that the world forced Israel to let them in.

In the early 90s, Nissim Toledano, a border police sergeant, was kidnapped by terrorists on the way to work. After an extended search, he was found dead in a roadside ditch.

In response to that attack and numerous other atrocities committed by Hamas, including a planned massive car bombing, Israel made the decision to deport 400 Hamas terrorists. Among them were the past and present day leaders of Hamas.

You might assume that the story ends there. And you would be wrong.

The United Nations issued a unanimous resolution condemning Israel’s deportation of “civilians” and demanding that Israel immediately bring them back, or face sanctions. The United States voted for that resolution, along with three others condemning Israel. Thomas R. Pickering, the American delegate warned that the deportations of Hamas terrorists “do not contribute to current efforts for peace.”

Lebanon refused to officially accept the terrorists. The Red Cross brought them tents and blankets and the media swarmed to take photos of them “shivering from the cold” while drinking coffee outside their tents. Newsweek accused Israel of “Deporting the Hope for Peace”. The LA Times ran a tearful interview with the wife of Mohammed Taamari, a future member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, who was terribly lonely without her husband. Much as after the flotilla raid, the Israeli media condemned the clumsy mishandling of the deportations.

Finally after enough browbeating by James Baker and Warren Christopher, Rabin agreed to take the Hamas terrorists back. In a bizarre charade that would serve as a tragic foretelling of events to come, Rabin agreed to return 100 terrorists immediately, and to take the remainder back in a year.. Now the Hamas terrorists that Rabin took back control all of Gaza, and have been responsible for an untold number of murders.

The terrorists that Israel was forced to accept included current Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh and Hamas’ religious figurehead, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

They included Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas, who last year proclaimed; “They have legitimised the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people”. They included Mohammed Taha, another co-founder of Hamas. They also included Abdel-Aziz Rantisi, another Hamas co-founder, who was responsible for numerous murders of Israelis, who would proclaim, “By Allah, we will not leave one Jew in Palestine”.

They included his son Ayman Taha, who commanded the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, which carried out numerous attacks on Israel, including the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit.

And that is how a failure to drive out those responsible for the kidnapping and murder of one Israeli sergeant led to the capture of an Israeli corporal in 2006. It is also the story of why Gaza was turned over to Hamas in the name of “peace.” It is the story of how the United Nations, the UK and two US administrations pressured Israel into accepting the leaders of Hamas in the name of peace.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Media Matters’ systematic removal of my responses from their website, also most of my responses to their attacks in one place

by John Lott on Friday, July 11th, 2014

This is article 556 of 556 in the topic Media
Media Matters’ practices what I call hit-and-run journalism, where they make an attack and ignore any response that is provided.  I have tried over about seven years to put up comments on their website responding to these claims (often quotes out of context or deliberately misread data).  It appears to me that Media Matters wants to leave their readers with the impression that the other side never provides a response to their claims.

Media Matters has removed all sorts of comments that I have placed on their website (indeed, I never kept count, but it is a lot), even ones that involve me explaining to people why my eyebrows are deformed because of surgery that I had as a kid.  Here is one case recently where they made the mistake of removing my comments, but not the comments that responded to my original post.

 

After Erik Wemple from the Washington Post contacted them about their removal of my comments, some recent ones reappeared.  In this screen shot you can see Media Matters putting back the links to my response to one of their attacks (in this case see the second comment from the bottom).

 

Media Matters apparently told Wemple that my comments were removed because their readers had tagged them as offensive.  But Media Matters only very recently changed their system for putting up comments.  Prior to that they would have to approve someone twelve times before their comments would automatically be posted on their website.  The problem is that their screeners would virtually never let any of my comments through (surely not enough that I ever got close to the magic number of twelve).  This problem over many years had absolutely nothing to do with their readers supposed complaints.

More information will be provided soon.  But you can see that I have long complained about Media Matters sanitizing its comment section.  Indeed, I have complained in person several times to people from David Brock on down at least 2008.  I have also made notes about this attempt to shield their readers from my responses on my website (see links below) as well as on Twitter.  A couple of my many responses to Media Matters posts on Twitter can be seen here.



When Media Matters has attacked me, I would write up a response and post a link to the comment on their website.  Here are 23 times that I wrote up and posted, though I haven’t gone through everything that I have written and I am sure that there were more responses.  Below I first show Media Matters’ title and then a link to their claims and then my response.

Click to continue reading “Media Matters’ systematic removal of my responses from their website, also most of my responses to their attacks in one place”
Go straight to Post

Enough! They MUST be stopped!

by Lloyd Marcus on Monday, June 30th, 2014

This is article 191 of 192 in the topic Liberalism

It has become a daily frightening occurrence, hearing politicians, commentators, pundits and stunned Americans say, “That’s outrageous!” “He can’t do that!” “No way!” “It’s against federal law!” “They have no legal authority to force us to do that!” These comments are in response to the daily unprecedented out-of-control tyranny handed down by Obama and his operatives. We are talking arrogance with a capital “A” coming out of the Obama Administration.

For example. The GOP was moving too slow in caving to Obama’s amnesty scheme, so Obama said, screw it, I’ll bypass everyone and make it happen. Obama sent a clarion call interpreted around the world to mean if you can get your kids to the U.S., the kids can stay. http://on.wsj.com/1iCADeR In essence, Obama has made illegal aliens winners of his Open Borders Lottery – free food, health care, legal assistance and education – winning more free goodies than are available to American kids. http://bit.ly/1ilYCEa Like a game show announcer, I expect an Administration official to enthusiastically say to illegals, “But wait, there’s more….A NEW CARRRR!!!”

Around one thousand illegals arrive daily. Over 47 thousand have arrived thus far, an estimated 90 thousand to arrive by September 30th.http://bit.ly/1ilYCEa

Everyone and anyone (gang members, drug dealers and other criminals) are illegally moving to America greeted with open arms by the Obama Administration. Americans who are paying attention are well aware of the impending devastatingly negative impact Obama’s “y’all come” policy will have on our structure as a nation, economy and national security.

Like every other extremely arrogant action by Obama, from blatantly lying about Obamacare to releasing the Taliban five – while everyone expresses disbelief, outrage and concern – nothing happens. The same is the case concerning the disaster happening at our border. Despite bipartisan outrage, the tsunami of illegals continues.

Then, there is the absurd lie from the IRS that Lerner’s emails related to the targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups were lost due to a computer crash. http://bit.ly/1qnxpTV Does this Administration believe they can say and do anything they please and get away with it? The answer is yes. As I stated, the remarkable arrogance of this Administration is becoming legendary.

However, what I find most extraordinarily arrogant and insidious is this Administration’s relentlessly focused efforts to mandate political correctness and implement their socialist/progressive agenda via government overreach. The feds have stepped in to try to force the Washington Redskins to change their name; talk about focusing on the minor while ignoring the major. http://politi.co/1ilTLmq

Think about that, folks. Iraq is falling apart. A gazillion illegals are invading our country. Terrorism is back on the rise. Food prices are through the roof. Forty-seven million Americans are on food stamps. Ninety million Americans are unemployed. Obamacare is a job killing and health care disaster. And what does the Obama Administration focus on: taking extraordinary measures to force the Redskins to change their name. Unbelievable.

My fellow Americans, when is enough enough from this horrifyingly deceitful, conniving, anti-American and evil bunch in DC who are holding our great nation hostage? The mainstream media will never place the best interest of America above Obama. The first black president is their best hope for ramming their dreamed socialist/progressive agenda down the throats of the American people. I get that.

Click to continue reading “Enough! They MUST be stopped!”
Go straight to Post

Friday Afternoon Roundup – Can’t Miss

by Daniel Greenfield on Saturday, June 28th, 2014

Tom Trento’s amazing team have put together another video on my article, The Innocence of Hillary.

A FEW QUICK THOUGHTS ON COCHRAN

1. Beating a Senate incumbent is still really hard. Even when the votes go your way, the incumbents have any number of dirty options at their disposal. It happened in Alaska. Now it happened again.

The system itself is corrupt and winning an election means beating the system. The bigger the election, the harder the system pushes back. It’s an elastic effect. Scale that up and you can see how hard winning the White House becomes.

This is why the left started at the bottom. It’s much easier to take over organizations from the top than the bottom. You have to become the system before you can beat the system.

2. The Tea Party brand has been severely damaged. That is to be expected. Even the left doesn’t stick with a brand. It uses innumerable front groups. The Tea Party brand should be retained as feeders for recruitment, but it might be wiser to route actual work through groups branded with names like “Reform” and “Change”.

And that takes me to…

3. The ongoing problem on the right is that it talks ‘extremist’ and legislates ‘moderate’ while the left talks ‘moderate’ and legislates ‘extremist’.

That’s a big part of why Obama is in the White House and conservatives are still struggling to make headway.

Obama isn’t in the White House because Americans woke up Communist one morning. I know that “Free Stuff” is a popular theory, but people always liked free stuff. The larger welfare population helped shift the balance, but if Obama had been a non-viable candidate, there would have been no balance to shift and it would have done him as much good as it did Jesse Jackson or Dukakis.

Obama is in office because much of the country believes that he is a moderate and a centrist.

The left can get away with it because it talks centrist and lives radical. If the right is ever going to do better than another liberal Republican, its candidates are going to have to talk like liberal Republicans while legislating well to the right.

It is doable. Rand Paul has been doing the talking part well enough. Unfortunately he talks the talk so well because he actually is well to the left.

And that’s the bigger problem.

Lefty candidates can have a certain amount of trust from the base because they are committed to an ideology. Obama’s supporters knew that he was for gay marriage and racial polarization no matter what he said. The right needs candidates who are ideologically committed so that trust stops being an issue.

NOT A ONE

There can be no conservative case for amnesty because there is no such thing as a conservative case for a policy that will not have a conservative outcome.

The only meaningful argument for a policy is based on outcomes.

If the outcome of a conservative policy is more liberalism, it was never a conservative policy to begin with. That is the simplest and most reliable acid test of any “conservative” policy agenda.

1 2 3 4 5
Go straight to Post

Media Matters’ systematic removal of my responses from their website, also most of my responses to their attacks in one place

by John Lott on Thursday, June 19th, 2014

This is article 555 of 556 in the topic Media
Media Matters’ practices what I call hit-and-run journalism, where they make an attack and ignore any response that is provided.  I have tried over about seven years to put up comments on their website responding to these claims (often quotes out of context or deliberately misread data).  It appears to me that Media Matters wants to leave their readers with the impression that the other side never provides a response to their claims.Media Matters has removed all sorts of comments that I have placed on their website (indeed, I never kept count, but it is a lot), even ones that involve me explaining to people why my eyebrows are deformed because of surgery that I had as a kid.  Here is one case recently where they made the mistake of removing my comments, but not the comments that responded to my original post.

After Erik Wemple from the Washington Post contacted them about their removal of my comments, some recent ones reappeared.  In this screen shot you can see Media Matters putting back the links to my response to one of their attacks(in this case see the second comment from the bottom)

Media Matters apparently told Wemple that my comments were removed because their readers had tagged them as offensive.  But Media Matters only very recently changed their system for putting up comments.  Prior to that they would have to approve someone twelve times before their comments would automatically be posted on their website.  The problem is that their screeners would virtually never let any of my comments through (surely not enough that I ever got close to the magic number of twelve).  This problem over many years had absolutely nothing to do with their readers supposed complaints.

More information will be provided soon.  But you can see that I have long complained about Media Matters sanitizing its comment section.  Indeed, I have complained in person several times to people from David Brock on down at least 2008.  I have also made notes about this attempt to shield their readers from my responses on my website (see links below) as well as on Twitter.  A couple of my many responses to Media Matters posts on Twitter can be seen here.

When Media Matters has attacked me, I would write up a response and post a link to the comment on their website.  Here are 23 times that I wrote up and posted, though I haven’t gone through everything that I have written and I am sure that there were more responses.  Below I first show Media Matters’ title and then a link to their claims and then my response.

Click to continue reading “Media Matters’ systematic removal of my responses from their website, also most of my responses to their attacks in one place”
Go straight to Post

Fox News is far more trusted than other TV news: The Public Religion Research Institute and The Brookings Institution poll

by John Lott on Thursday, June 19th, 2014

This is article 554 of 556 in the topic Media
msnbcmedia

Via Erik Wemple’s blog at the Washington Post with the title “Ouch: MSNBC barely registers in media study”:

The failure of any outlet to reap a wider Democratic/liberal audience, suggests the report, could stem from ideological diversity within the Democratic Party (46% liberal, 31% moderate and 20% conservative). . . .

An alternative explanation is that there is relatively little difference between Broadcast News, CNN, and Public Television.  Possibly MSNBC’s and the Daily Show with Jon Stewart’s performances is so small because there are relatively few hard leftists.

Go straight to Post

Shame on Jonathan Capehart

by Lloyd Marcus on Wednesday, June 18th, 2014

This is article 553 of 556 in the topic Media

Mr Capehart, your Washington Post hit piece insidiously designed to smear Chris McDaniel who is a decent and honorable man goes beyond the pale of low-rent race-baiting politicking. But, I get it. You are black which grants you carte blanche to irresponsibility yell racism in a crowded political theater whenever it fits your fancy. http://wapo.st/1ou6Ht4

We know the drill. You want to take out a bold, outspoken, popular conservative Republican, by calling him/her a racist. The accused Republican is then supposed to cower in fear and spend time and resources explaining when they stopped figuratively beating their wife. Well, that “ain’t” happening this time. As a black American, I find your tactic deplorable, divisive, racist and evil.

Yes, I said evil. In our sophisticated times, the “e” word is seldom used. But, I call it like I see it. In typical Democratic party manipulative, race-baiting and hate inspiring fashion, you guys take everything to it’s ultimate extreme.

For example. McDaniel along with millions of Americans have had enough of Obama’s unlawful power grabs, trashing of the Constitution, lies and bullying of Americans who dare to challenge him. Obama even said, “We punish our enemies.” http://bit.ly/1i28vHa

You Mr Capehart have despicably attempted to smear and silence McDaniel and the millions of Americans who oppose the tyranny of Obama acting like our king. You have attempted to brand them a bunch of anti-government extremists, racists and gun toting fanatics in solidarity with murderers. Your accusation is outrageous. Dear Lord, have you no shame? Whatever happened to reasonable political debate?

But that is how you guys roll on the Left these days. No tactic is too low, too despicable or too racially polarizing. National race relations be damned as long as your liberal, big government advocating candidate wins and the socialist/progressive agenda is further implemented. Long gone is my dad’s Democratic Party.

The mission of the Democratic Party is tyranny. Agree with everything we force down your throats or we will destroy you; expect an audit from the IRS, a visit from the EPA or armed federal agents showing up at your home.

Mr Capehart, your unconscionable attempt to gin-up hate will fail. My faith tells me that good triumphs over evil. Chris McDaniel is a good man; a strong conservative voice for We the American People. http://bit.ly/U0cPvJ

With millions of Americans in his corner, McDaniel will emerge victorious in the June 24th Mississippi runoff election. We have right and God on our side.

© Lloyd Marcus

Go straight to Post

"I Used To Be A Democrat" and "Do Liberals Ever Listen To Themselves?"

by Burt Prelutsky on Friday, June 13th, 2014

This is article 190 of 192 in the topic Liberalism

It’s true that for a long time, an inexcusably long time, I was a registered Democrat. But even then, I never called myself a liberal. Because I came of age in the 1960s, I associated liberals with the punks I knew who called cops “pigs,” called soldiers “baby killers” and used any and all means to dodge the draft, and then had the hypocrisy to announce they did so because they were avowed pacifists.

Being in my 20s myself, I knew these people and I knew it was fear of battle or being bossed around by top sergeants, typically tough guys from the South, that motivated them to head off either to Canada or to one of the many left-wing shrinks who were willing to lie about their mental disorders and or verify they were homosexuals.

Fifty years later, they’re still hypocrites, but instead of being college students, they’re running colleges, TV networks, movie studios, solar panel companies and the New York Times. And, what’s more, they continue to lie. Most recently, a sample of journalists lied to a pollster about their political affiliation, a mere 28% admitting to being Democrats and 50% claiming to be registered Independents.

Inasmuch as we already know that at least 90% of those in the news game always vote for liberals and that their campaign contributions are even more lopsided than that, you have to wonder why they even bother lying about something as transparent as their political bias. All you really have to do is turn on the network news or pick up a daily newspaper, Time magazine, the New Yorker, Vanity Fair or any of the slick glossies devoted to fashion and cosmetics, to realize that they should, by all rights, be paid directly by the DNC for their propaganda efforts.

Ever since I heard the head of the NBA drop the hammer on Clippers owner Donald Sterling, I found myself wondering where Commissioner Adam Silver, who is nearly as spooky-looking as James Carville, got off thinking he had the authority to take the team away from its rightful owner. I mean, who the heck does he think he is? Harry Reid?

Even I know that California is a community property state, and I certainly knew that Sterling had a wife named Shelly because I kept hearing that she was suing her husband’s ex-paramour for the return of the two million dollars the old fool had lavished on her in the form of cash, cars, condo and, unfortunately for the big mouth, a cellphone.

If I know anything about Jewish wives and, regrettably, I do, Commissioner Silver would have an easier time trying to pry my dog’s chew toy away from her than taking the Clippers away from Mrs. Sterling.

It doesn’t happen too often, but every once in a while someone forwards something to me from the Internet that I haven’t seen before and that actually grabs my attention. In this case, it was a series of ways that one could easily identify a liberal. I mean aside from asking them if they happen to be journalists, judges, social workers, teachers, professors, illegal aliens, actors, musicians or convicted felons.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Because he is black, Americans suffer and die

by Lloyd Marcus on Thursday, June 12th, 2014

This is article 981 of 988 in the topic Obama

Clearly, no amount of unprecedented unlawful power grabs, narcissistic behavior, blatant lies http://bit.ly/1bIzuBy, and ignoring of the Constitution will sway the mainstream media and the Democrats from their loyalty to Obama. Why? The answer is Obama is black, which makes him their ultimate weapon of mass destruction able to nuke traditional America. Obama’s mission is to cram his radical socialist/progressive dream for America down our throats.

Obama’s reign of terror is but a mere preview of things to come if the MSM and Democrats are successful in duping Americans into handing Hillary Clinton the keys to the Oval Office. Just as Obama has ruled as America’s first king, Hillary will be our first Queen. Anyone who dares to criticize or oppose Queen Hillary’s radical liberal agenda will be branded a sexist and severely punished – subjected to a high tech lynching, their politically battered carcasses left on public display to ward off other outspoken conservatives/Republicans.

The frightening inconvenient truth is the MSM, Democratic Party, and Obama consider American suffering and loss of life acceptable collateral damage to protect Obama and implement his agenda. His black skin provides Obama perfect political cover, similar to an impenetrable suit-of-armor, providing the Left with a unique golden opportunity to implement all of their unsellable liberal utopian fantasies. The best interest of the American people even takes a backseat to the Left’s and Obama’s obsession with appeasing our enemies.

Please allow me to recap incidents over the past 5 years which confirm that Team Obama (the MSM and Democrats) believes protecting their golden child and his agenda despicably trumps American lives.

While this first example is before his presidency, it does illustrate the cold, callous political calculating nature of Obama, the man. As an Illinois Senator, Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act “three” times. http://bit.ly/1hgh1ll The law would authorize hospital staff to provide medical assistance and try to save the lives of babies who miraculously survive abortions. Before the law, hospital staff was legally forced to simply place the baby into a room until it died. To secure the radical feminist vote, Obama insidiously voted against allowing staff to assist these feisty infant survivors – acceptable collateral damage to furthering his political ambitions.

Following the capture of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving Boston Marathon bomber, Obama’s DOJ immediately took actions which suppressed vital intelligence gathering. http://bit.ly/TirvFW Why would Obama so swiftly end all questioning of the Muslim terrorist regarding future planned attacks on America? Unconscionably, protecting Obama’s false narrative that terrorism is no longer a threat overrides national security (American lives).

Four Americans, including our brutally tortured U.S. Ambassador, Chris Stevens, were killed during an Al-Qaeda terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The Obama administration’s behavior before and after the attack is the epitome of cold, hardhearted political cover-up and posturing.

In a nutshell, the Administration denied Ambassador Stevens’ desperate pleas for extra security before the attack. Following the attack, the Administration blatantly lied to the American people about the cause of the attack.

In a cold, calculated act of political deceit, Secretary of State at the time Hillary Clinton lied to the parents of the victims while looking them in the eye and shaking their hands.

Click to continue reading “Because he is black, Americans suffer and die”
Go straight to Post

THE NATTERING NABOBS OF THE LEFT

by Burt Prelutsky on Wednesday, June 11th, 2014

This is article 552 of 556 in the topic Media

Whenever I think about liberals, I feel the wires in my brain begin to sizzle. What in the world makes them say and do such absurd things? For instance, why do journalists insist on lying about their political affiliation? When half of them claim to be Independents and only 20% confess to being registered Democrats, whom do they think they’re fooling? After all, their friends and relatives, as well as their colleagues, know better. But so do the rest of us.

Last year, after spurning several years of invitations to attend a monthly gathering of former L.A. Times employees, I broke down and drove out to Pasadena for one of the geezer luncheons. Because even though I had written a weekly humor column for the paper for 11 years, I had always been a freelancer (no pension, no health insurance) and therefore only knew one person at the get-together. After we ate, the few of us who were first-timers were asked to stand up and describe what we had been doing since leaving the paper.

Because, unlike nearly everyone else in the room, I hadn’t severed the connection because I had reached retirement age, I spoke about the movies and TV shows I had written. If I had stopped there, all would have been well. But, throwing caution to the wind, I mentioned some of the books I had written.

Even though this was supposed to be a collegial affair, the mere fact that some of the titles were “Liberals: America’s Termites,” “Barack Obama, You’re Fired!” and “67 Conservatives You Should Meet Before You Die,” was enough to have these seemingly civilized ladies and gentlemen start booing and hissing me.

Now keep in mind, these were people in their 60s, 70s and 80s. For most of their careers, the Times wasn’t, as it has been for the past two decades, a propaganda outlet for the radical left wing of the Democratic Party.

So don’t let anyone tell you that journalists are even slightly objective when it comes to politics. Even after they’ve retired, they remain partisan pinheads.

The results of a Gallup poll should be a matter of some concern to Republicans. It seems that only 42% of us are looking forward to the midterm elections, while 50% are less enthusiastic than usual. While it’s true that the numbers are even less encouraging for Democrats, I simply don’t get it. Why wouldn’t Republicans be chomping at the bit when it comes to having the opportunity to turn Harry Reid, currently the second most powerful politician in America, into just another cantankerous old jerk from an irrelevant state?

On top of that, with two years left in his term, if the Democrats maintain control of the Senate, Barack Obama might very well have the opportunity to replace one of the aging conservative justices on the Supreme Court with another Kagan or Sotomayor clone, providing the liberal clodhoppers with a 5-4 majority that could serve as a toxic reminder of Obama for the next 30 or 40 years.

The president of Nigeria is named Goodluck Jonathan. If we were given to bestowing similar names on our own offspring, we might have someone named Cursed Obama in the White House, although I grant “Barack” is bad enough.

Click to continue reading “THE NATTERING NABOBS OF THE LEFT”
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin