By Andrew Alexander
Ombudsman
Sunday, July 18, 2010; A17
Thursday's Post reported about a growing controversy over the Justice Department's decision to scale down a voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. The story succinctly summarized the issues but left many readers with a question: What took you so long?
For months, readers have contacted the ombudsman wondering why The Post hasn't been covering the case. The calls increased recently after competitors such as the New York Times and the Associated Press wrote stories. Fox News and right-wing bloggers have been pumping the story. Liberal bloggers have countered, accusing them of trying to manufacture a scandal.
But The Post has been virtually silent.
The story has its origins on Election Day in 2008, when two members of the New Black Panther Party stood in front of a Philadelphia polling place. YouTube video of the men, now viewed nearly 1.5 million times, shows both wearing paramilitary clothing. One carried a nightstick.
Early last year, just before the Bush administration left office, the Justice Department filed a voter-intimidation lawsuit against the men, the New Black Panther Party and its chairman. But several months later, with the government poised to win by default because the defendants didn't contest the suit, the Obama Justice Department decided the case was over-charged and narrowed it to the man with the nightstick. It secured only a narrow injunction forbidding him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of Philadelphia polling places through 2012.
Congressional Republicans pounced. For months they stalled the confirmation of Thomas E. Perez, President Obama's pick to head the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, while seeking answers to why the case had been downgraded over the objections of some of the department's career lawyers. The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility launched an investigation, which is pending. The independent, eight-member Commission on Civil Rights also began what has become a yearlong probe with multiple public hearings; its report is due soon. Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), a prominent lawmaker in The Post's circulation area, has been a loud and leading critic of how the case was handled. His office has "aggressively" sought to interest The Post in coverage, a spokesman said.
CLICK HERE
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Soros-funded group wants feds to probe talk radio
Says cable-news networks engaged in 'hate speech'
Posted: July 18, 2010
9:17 pm Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A George Soros-funded, Marxist-founded organization with close ties to the White House has urged the Federal Communications Commission to investigate talk radio and cable news for "hate speech."
The organization, calling itself Free Press, claims media companies are engaging in "hate speech" because a disproportionate number of radio and cable-news networks are owned by non-minorities.
WND previously reported Free Press published a study advocating the development of a "world class" government-run media system in the U.S.
The hot new best-seller, "The Manchurian President," by Aaron Klein reveals inside story on Team Obama and its members. Now available autographed at WND's Superstore!
Free Press was one of 33 organizations that drafted a 25-page petition asking the FCC to "initiate an inquiry into the extent and effects of hate speech in media and to explore non-regulatory means by which to mitigate its negative impacts."
"Hate speech thrives, as hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable-television programs
masquerading as 'News,'" claims the petition.
CLICK HERE
Posted: July 18, 2010
9:17 pm Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A George Soros-funded, Marxist-founded organization with close ties to the White House has urged the Federal Communications Commission to investigate talk radio and cable news for "hate speech."
The organization, calling itself Free Press, claims media companies are engaging in "hate speech" because a disproportionate number of radio and cable-news networks are owned by non-minorities.
WND previously reported Free Press published a study advocating the development of a "world class" government-run media system in the U.S.
The hot new best-seller, "The Manchurian President," by Aaron Klein reveals inside story on Team Obama and its members. Now available autographed at WND's Superstore!
Free Press was one of 33 organizations that drafted a 25-page petition asking the FCC to "initiate an inquiry into the extent and effects of hate speech in media and to explore non-regulatory means by which to mitigate its negative impacts."
"Hate speech thrives, as hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable-television programs
masquerading as 'News,'" claims the petition.
CLICK HERE
Pot to kettle: 'You're a racist'
By Joseph Farah
Posted: July 18, 2010
11:33 pm Eastern
© 2010
I often suggest we are living in a world where up is down, black is white, right is wrong and left is … well, no, left is still never right.
That would be "bizarro world," that parallel universe, where everything is backward. That's what I think with regard to the groundless, baseless, irresponsible, false, unjustifiable and unsubstantiated accusations of racism against the tea-party movement by a group seeking the advancement of nonwhites – the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
About the meanest, most hurtful, most ruthless smear you can make about someone in America in 2010 is to label that person a racist – and rightfully so. If anyone hates other people and wishes them ill because of the color of their skin, that person deserves to be vilified and berated.
However, when that accusation is unfairly, inappropriately and cavalierly hurled at people, those doing the smearing are the ones who should be vilified and berated. In fact, they are actually in service to the cause of hate and racism when they cheapen the label and simply use the accusation to attack those with whom they simply have a political disagreement.
And that's really what's going on here with the NAACP. I suspect even the leaders of the organization have some regrets about promoting the resolution condemning the tea-party movement for racism without the slightest trace of evidence. It's backfiring on the group. No sooner was the ink dry on the resolution than the backtracking began.
Ben Jealous, the chairman of the NAACP, suggested the resolution did not actually indict the tea party for racism (which it did). It was more of a warning, he said. Now he demands the tea-party movement repudiate racism.
It's like the old interrogation line, "When did you stop beating your wife?"
Exactly who at the tea-party movement is supposed to do that? There are no prominent national leaders of this decentralized movement. This is a spontaneous, grass-roots effort – barely 18 months old. Are the tens of millions of Americans who identify with this movement supposed to denounce racism in unison?
For what it's worth, I'm going to do something historic right now. As the author of "The Tea Party Manifesto," a book that seeks to give the movement a mission statement upon which to build a consensus, I'm going to take the liberty to speak right here and now for the tea-party movement – just this once.
LINK
Posted: July 18, 2010
11:33 pm Eastern
© 2010
I often suggest we are living in a world where up is down, black is white, right is wrong and left is … well, no, left is still never right.
That would be "bizarro world," that parallel universe, where everything is backward. That's what I think with regard to the groundless, baseless, irresponsible, false, unjustifiable and unsubstantiated accusations of racism against the tea-party movement by a group seeking the advancement of nonwhites – the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
About the meanest, most hurtful, most ruthless smear you can make about someone in America in 2010 is to label that person a racist – and rightfully so. If anyone hates other people and wishes them ill because of the color of their skin, that person deserves to be vilified and berated.
However, when that accusation is unfairly, inappropriately and cavalierly hurled at people, those doing the smearing are the ones who should be vilified and berated. In fact, they are actually in service to the cause of hate and racism when they cheapen the label and simply use the accusation to attack those with whom they simply have a political disagreement.
And that's really what's going on here with the NAACP. I suspect even the leaders of the organization have some regrets about promoting the resolution condemning the tea-party movement for racism without the slightest trace of evidence. It's backfiring on the group. No sooner was the ink dry on the resolution than the backtracking began.
Ben Jealous, the chairman of the NAACP, suggested the resolution did not actually indict the tea party for racism (which it did). It was more of a warning, he said. Now he demands the tea-party movement repudiate racism.
It's like the old interrogation line, "When did you stop beating your wife?"
Exactly who at the tea-party movement is supposed to do that? There are no prominent national leaders of this decentralized movement. This is a spontaneous, grass-roots effort – barely 18 months old. Are the tens of millions of Americans who identify with this movement supposed to denounce racism in unison?
For what it's worth, I'm going to do something historic right now. As the author of "The Tea Party Manifesto," a book that seeks to give the movement a mission statement upon which to build a consensus, I'm going to take the liberty to speak right here and now for the tea-party movement – just this once.
LINK
Friday, March 12, 2010
Demonizing the Tea Party the Chicago Way
By Frank Salvato
web posted April 12, 2010
"So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss. If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose. If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself." – Sun Tzu, 6th Century, BC.
One way to tell how effective the Tea Party movement has been is to gauge the severity of the attacks on the movement by its detractors. It is fair and logical to deduce that the more severe the attacks, the more threatened the attackers feel. Judging from the most recent attacks on the Tea Party movement – and because the Progressives and Liberal Democrats are completely invested in "feelings" instead of facts – those opposed to limited government and the constitutional rule of law are feeling quite threatened.
Anyone paying attention to the mainstream news media has noticed a recent uptick in the number of news stories about the Tea Party movement. While media outlets such as FOX News, The Washington Times, BigGovernment.com, NewsMax.com and talk radio portray the Tea Party movement in a favorable light, the "alphabet media," its cable brethren and the Progressive blogs are painting the movement as having emanated from the fringe; a group consisting of a bevy of Timothy McVeigh's on steroids. Truth be told, this isn't because they are grossly ideological in their reporting – although that lends to the zealousness of their actions – as much as it is a coordinated tactic to neuter the power of the Tea Party movement. The Progressive's attacks on the Tea Party movement are straight from Rules for Radicals; they are a textbook Saul Alinsky play...and they are only going to get more vicious as the 2010 and 2012 elections approach.
To give but a brief overview of who Saul Alinsky was, DiscoverTheNetworks.org describes him thusly:
"Born to Russian-Jewish parents in Chicago in 1909, Saul Alinsky was a Communist/Marxist fellow-traveler who helped establish the dual political tactics of confrontation and infiltration that characterized the 1960s and have remained central to all subsequent revolutionary movements in the United States. He never joined the Communist Party but instead became an avatar of the post-modern left.
"Though Alinsky is rightfully understood to have been a leftist, his legacy is more methodological than ideological. He identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens could follow, and tactics that ordinary citizens could employ, as a means of gaining public power. His motto was, 'The most effective means are whatever will achieve the desired results.'"
The culmination of Alinsky's life work comes to us in the form of his book, Rules for Radicals. It is the quintessential handbook for all Progressives and especially for Progressives in politics, advocacy and in government. Hillary Clinton chose to write about Saul Alinsky for her senior thesis at Wellesley College. And Alinsky's own son, L.David Alinsky, said this of Barack Obama after the 2008 Democratic National Convention:
"Barack Obama's training in Chicago by the great community organizers is showing its effectiveness...It is an amazingly powerful format, and the method of my late father always works to get the message out and get the supporters on board. When executed meticulously and thoughtfully, it is a powerful strategy for initiating change and making it really happen. Obama learned his lesson well.
"I am proud to see that my father's model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday."
LINK
web posted April 12, 2010
"So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss. If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose. If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself." – Sun Tzu, 6th Century, BC.
One way to tell how effective the Tea Party movement has been is to gauge the severity of the attacks on the movement by its detractors. It is fair and logical to deduce that the more severe the attacks, the more threatened the attackers feel. Judging from the most recent attacks on the Tea Party movement – and because the Progressives and Liberal Democrats are completely invested in "feelings" instead of facts – those opposed to limited government and the constitutional rule of law are feeling quite threatened.
Anyone paying attention to the mainstream news media has noticed a recent uptick in the number of news stories about the Tea Party movement. While media outlets such as FOX News, The Washington Times, BigGovernment.com, NewsMax.com and talk radio portray the Tea Party movement in a favorable light, the "alphabet media," its cable brethren and the Progressive blogs are painting the movement as having emanated from the fringe; a group consisting of a bevy of Timothy McVeigh's on steroids. Truth be told, this isn't because they are grossly ideological in their reporting – although that lends to the zealousness of their actions – as much as it is a coordinated tactic to neuter the power of the Tea Party movement. The Progressive's attacks on the Tea Party movement are straight from Rules for Radicals; they are a textbook Saul Alinsky play...and they are only going to get more vicious as the 2010 and 2012 elections approach.
To give but a brief overview of who Saul Alinsky was, DiscoverTheNetworks.org describes him thusly:
"Born to Russian-Jewish parents in Chicago in 1909, Saul Alinsky was a Communist/Marxist fellow-traveler who helped establish the dual political tactics of confrontation and infiltration that characterized the 1960s and have remained central to all subsequent revolutionary movements in the United States. He never joined the Communist Party but instead became an avatar of the post-modern left.
"Though Alinsky is rightfully understood to have been a leftist, his legacy is more methodological than ideological. He identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens could follow, and tactics that ordinary citizens could employ, as a means of gaining public power. His motto was, 'The most effective means are whatever will achieve the desired results.'"
The culmination of Alinsky's life work comes to us in the form of his book, Rules for Radicals. It is the quintessential handbook for all Progressives and especially for Progressives in politics, advocacy and in government. Hillary Clinton chose to write about Saul Alinsky for her senior thesis at Wellesley College. And Alinsky's own son, L.David Alinsky, said this of Barack Obama after the 2008 Democratic National Convention:
"Barack Obama's training in Chicago by the great community organizers is showing its effectiveness...It is an amazingly powerful format, and the method of my late father always works to get the message out and get the supporters on board. When executed meticulously and thoughtfully, it is a powerful strategy for initiating change and making it really happen. Obama learned his lesson well.
"I am proud to see that my father's model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday."
LINK
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Thursday, November 5, 2009
12 People Killed and 31 Wounded in Fort Hood Shooting
Suspected Gunman Is Identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan
By EMILY FRIEDMAN and RICHARD ESPOSITO
Nov. 5, 2009
Twelve people have been killed and 31 wounded in a shooting spree at a Texas military base in a murderous rampage that officials believe was carried out by an Army officer.
The suspected gunman was identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, told Fox News that military sources informed her that the gunman was about to be deployed to Iraq.
The shooter was killed and two other suspects, who are also soldiers, have been apprehended, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone said.
--
LINK
By EMILY FRIEDMAN and RICHARD ESPOSITO
Nov. 5, 2009
Twelve people have been killed and 31 wounded in a shooting spree at a Texas military base in a murderous rampage that officials believe was carried out by an Army officer.
The suspected gunman was identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, told Fox News that military sources informed her that the gunman was about to be deployed to Iraq.
The shooter was killed and two other suspects, who are also soldiers, have been apprehended, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone said.
--
LINK
Monday, October 26, 2009
George Bush's Opinion Of Islam. No, Not THAT George Bush!
Take a look at this posting over at Sultan Knish. A must-read essay citing research by the 19th century clergyman and historian George Bush, who was also the author of the first American biography of Mohammed.
A sampling of Sultan Knish's essay...
A sampling of Sultan Knish's essay...
Take Bush's critique of Mohammed's progressive revelation of the Koran:Now, go read the whole thing. There's much more!
He declared himself appointed to promulge a new revelation in successive portions, the aggregate of which was to constitute the Bible of his followers. The original or archetype of the Koran, he taught, was laid up from everlasting in the archives of Heaven, being written on what he termed the preserved table, near the throne of Allah, from which the series of chapters communicated by Gabriel were a transcript. This pretended gradual mode of revelation was certainly a master stroke of policy in the impostor.
...Had the whole volume been published at once, so that a rigid examination could have been instituted into its contents as a whole, and the different parts brought into comparison with each other, glaring inconsistencies would have been easily detected and objections urged which he probably would have found impossible to answer. But by pretending to receive his oracles in separate portions, at different times... he had a ready way of silencing all cavils, and extricating himself with credit from every difficulty, as nothing forbade the message or mandate of to-day being modified or abrogated by that of to-morrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
