Calling All Muslims
NY Times Op-Ed writer Thomas Friedman took some time off from his global warming alarmism and decided to write about something important — the lack of outrage in the Muslim community over the Mumbai attacks.
Friedman quite accurately points out that when it comes to dutch cartoons offending Islam, Muslims the world over take to the streets. They can loot, protest, burn cars, trample people, and give fiery sermons in the Mosque. Their white hot rage can burn for a good month or more with no let up.
However, when a group of Pakistani Muslims sneak into India by boat and go on a murderous rampage resulting in the death of 179+ innocent human beings in the name of Islam — we hear nothing.
Is no one outraged by the massacre? Why no protests? Just once, Muslims could take a break from burning president Bush in effigy and direct their rage towards the blood thirsty lunatics that live among them.
Predictably, apologists will say good Muslims cannot speak out in the Middle East because it’s too dangerous for them. Fine, but how do explain Muslims in the U.S. never speaking out? I know you can find an Imam hear and there willing to condemn terrorism when asked about, but you never see group outrage or protests.
The largest concentration of Muslims in the U.S. is in Dearborn, Michigan. Why are they not protesting? Terrorists are perverting Islam and using it as an excuse to murder innocent people around the world — but nobody seems to really care.
No doubt I’ll be called a bigot or intolerant for my views on this, but I’m gonna say them anyway. After studying Islam quite a bit, I’ve come to the conclusion that the terrorists aren’t necessarily perverting Islam. Islam is in fact not a religion of peace as many would have us believe — but a religion of death. Murdering other humans in the name of Islam is not a radical proposition for many Muslims.
You can look at the so-called ‘honor killings‘ that take place even in America to know that. Even after 9/11 you didn’t see demonstrations by Muslims here in America over the atrocities. What you did see was dancing in the street by Muslims in Europe and the Middle East.
That is why I fundamentally do not trust Muslims. I don’t care if they’re American Muslims — I don’t trust them. I’ve seen no evidence to suggest that they can or should be trusted. I think we need to continue to keep immigration from Muslim countries tightly controlled. One only has to look at France, or Britain to know what unchecked Immigration from the Middle East can do.
They now have a parallel society in Britain and France that is capable of organizing violent uprisings around the city anytime something offends their delicate Islamic sensibilities.
We don’t need to welcome in thousands of potential enemies. We don’t need that kind of drama — we don’t want that kind of drama.
-Chris Jones
Message To McCain: Stand Up And Fight!
It is truly a painful experience to watch John McCain day after day give the same boring ass talking points. He just refuses to get emotional and really take it to Obama. People all across this country are outraged about what is happening in this country and how Obama has managed to benefit from it.
This is politics and for some reason John McCain thinks some things are supposed to be off the table. That’s total nonsense, you do whatever it takes to win — Obama damn sure will.
While it may seem trivial in the midst of our current economic woes, Barack Obama’s associations are an issue — a big one. Prior to running for President, Barack Obama surrounded himself with the most radical, left-wing kooks in this country.
If you’re a left-wing nut and live in the greater Chicago area chances are you’re friends with Barack Obama. John McCain refuses to talk about Rev. Wright, Bill Ayres, and Father Phleger. Even if you give him a pass on Ayres, you simply cannot give him a pass on Wright.
The biggest lie of this entire campaign is that Barack never heard Wright give the kind of incendiary sermons we saw on YouTube. That wasn’t the Rev. Wright that he knew! What a crock of shit, when you go back and look at Rev. Wright’s sermons over the last 10 years or so, 90% of them are filled with racist rhetoric and anti-American nonsense.
It’s a damn lie that Barack didn’t know anything about it. The issue is more that Barack is lying about it than what his pastor actually said.
The same thing goes for Bill Ayres. It’s disgusting that any American would even be in the same room with that Weatherman piece of sh*t and his terrorist wife. How could a person even shake hands with a man who did so much to damage America in the 60’s and 70’s. The only reason that thug isn’t doing life in prison instead of radicalizing students is because the wiretap evidence the FBI had on him was thrown out, because a judge said it was illegally obtained.
The man’s guilt was never in question and even today he happily admits his crimes and says he didn’t do enough. Barack Obama was hired by that animal and worked closely with him for years.
Many McCain supporters across the country are furious that John McCain is being such a pussy. He said at the convention, “Stand Up and Fight!” But for some reason John McCain isn’t ready to do that. With only 28 days left until the election, he’s running out of time.
It’s time to start gouging eyes out (rhetorically speaking) and taking the fight to Barry. It’s time to fight the ACORN thugs who are trying to steal the election. It’s time to name names and call out Chris Dodd and Barney Frank for destroying the economy. It’s time call out Barack Obama for his radical associations including Wright, Phleger, Ayres, and Rezko.
McCain supporters are becoming increasingly more agitated and angry as we get closer to election time, because they don’t think anyone except Sarah Palin is fighting for them.
It’s time to get in this thing John. It’s time to fight.
-Chris Jones
Conservatives Will Support McCain No Matter Who He Chooses
With every passing hour comes word through the political grapevine that John McCain has settled on Romney, or considering Joe Lieberman, or picked Tom Ridge. Even Rudy’ name has been thrown around this afternoon.
Probably the biggest issue surrounding McCain’s VP pick is whether he’ll dare pick a pro-choice candidate as his running mate. A small vocal base of right-wingers is up in arms at the thought of a pro-choice candidate on the ticket. Dire predictions that McCain’s Christian conservative base will turn on him if he picks a pro-choice candidate are all over the right-wing blogosphere. There is however, a growing chorus of folks on the right who think a bold out-of-the-box pick is exactly what McCain needs to win.
I happen to think all the threats coming from the far right are overblown. If McCain were to choose Lieberman, there would be a few supporters who may be outraged, but for the most part I think he could weather the storm just fine. Threats from evangelicals ring hollow because you know they’re gonna vote, and they damn sure aren’t voting for Obama.
John McCain should follow his heart when he picks a running mate. He should block out any threats or ominous predictions and pick the guy he thinks is right. John McCain is as pro-life as you can get. Whether or not his running mate is pro-life is irrelevant.
It’s just plain stupid to cross an otherwise excellent candidate off the list simply because he holds one view you happen to disagree with. The far right will yell, complain, and maybe even throw stuff, but when election day rolls around they’ll vote for McCain.
The real important thing to Christian conservatives is to keep Barack Obama from being elected. John McCain with or without a pro-choice running mate is a godsend compared to Barack Obama and whoever the hell he picks. Barack Obama is the antithesis of everything the far right hold dear. He’s not pro-choice, he’s pro-abortion. He made it clear at the Saddleback forum exactly what kind of judges he would appoint to the Supreme Court.
Barack Obama’s values are San Francisco values and any right-winger who would vote against McCain or not vote at all is an idiot. However, I don’t believe that’s going to happen. Anyone that McCain chooses will be better than the far left dynamic duo of Barack Obama and (fill in the name).
I think Joe Lieberman would be a fantastic pick for John McCain. All the moderate Democrats who feel uneasy about turning the keys to the country over to a freshman Senator would give McCain a second look. All the Democrats who love America and want a warrior in the White House instead of a faux Messiah wuss will give McCain a second look.
Joe Lieberman is a good man. He stood literally completely alone against his own party to support the Iraq war. He was willing to give up his entire career to support a cause that was worthy and just. Like McCain, Joe Lieberman has character and character is a pretty rare commodity these days. Men like McCain and Lieberman will do what’s right even when it’s unpopular to do so.
We have a war going on and an economy that needs fixing, so what John McCain’s running mate thinks about abortion is totally inconsequential. We don’t live in a one issue world, and you’re not always going to agree with a candidate on 100% of the issues. You have to look at the sum total of John McCain and the sum total of Barack Obama and then decide which candidate’s ideals most closely resemble yours.
-Chris Jones
The U.S. Cannot Abandon Georgia
The United States must intervene in the current conflict between Russia and Georgia. We have spent billions training Georgia’s military and have done everything to assist that young democracy. Now in the face of outrageous aggression by Russia, President Bush is going to let that country be destroyed?
If we allow Russia to seize control of Georgia and its valuable oil pipeline then all the President’s talk about spreading freedom and democracy ring hollow. Georgia has been a staunch ally of the U.S. and now their country is being stolen by Russia.
Georgia’s U.S. trained military is vastly superior to Russia’s in terms of training, but with a force of less than 50,000 they are no match for Russia’s 750,000 poorly trained, poorly led, and poorly equipped drunks. The real problem for Georgia is air power. Georgia has no fighter aircraft or attack choppers while Russia has more than 1,200 attack aircraft.
The latest reports out of Georgia are that more than 50 Russian aircraft are flying above Georgia. With no aircraft the only thing the people of Georgia can do is hide.
Georgia had the third largest troop commitment in Iraq behind Great Britain until this week when the Pentagon began flying Georgian troops home to fight the Russians.
Russia’s intention is to seize control of Georgia’s valuable oil pipeline that carries oil to Turkey. It’s the only pipeline in the entire region that the corrupt Russian government doesn’t control — at least not yet.
I understand that we “need” Russia to back us on UN sanctions against Iran, but that rationale is really pretty absurd. The Russians play lip service to President Bush about the need to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, while at the same time building a nuclear reactor for Iran.
The situation is undoubtedly complicated, but what we absolutely must not do is sit around jawboning at the UN forever. The United Nations is one of the most ineffective and corrupt organizations on the planet and what’s worse is that it’s largely funded by us.
Barack Obama’s tepid response in the beginning and the moral equivalency he drew between a democratic ally of the U.S. and Russia speaks volumes about how he would conduct his foreign policy. His call for UN peacekeeping troops is also ridiculous, because if history is any indicator UN peacekeepers are nothing more than props. UN peacekeepers have never ‘kept peace’ anywhere, and as with everything involving the UN it takes years to see a boot hit the ground.
What the U.S. should do is give Russia a simple ultimatum. Either Russia immediately and unconditionally withdraws from Georgia or we will make Ukraine a part of NATO as early as next week. Russia’s biggest fear is having Ukraine become a part of NATO, and this above all else is our biggest leverage on Russia.
Russia is surrounded by young democracies and if the U.S. allows Russia to topple one democracy it will weaken them all. Georgia has done everything it can to create a free and democratic society after decades of Soviet tyranny.
America has a moral obligation to help its friends when they’re in need, and right now Georgia desperately needs our help.
-Chris Jones
Mainstream Media Running For Cover After Ignoring Edwards Scandal
Most Americans know the media is totally corrupt, and the refusal to cover the John Edwards scandal was the final straw. Now the mainstream media is running for cover while offering a wide range of excuses, but assuring readers that “liberal bias” had absolutely nothing to do with it — nothing at all.
I think Jennifer Rubin at Commentary Magazine said it best:
The Edwards mess is the most recent and visible, but hardly unique, example of the mainstream media’s hear no evil/see no evil approach to newsgathering. How many other stories has the MSM missed, denied or avoided? From Rathergate to Reverend Wright to the success of the surge, the pattern is the same: MSM stalls, shuffles its collective feet, and doggedly ignores information for as long as possible until they can no longer do so with a straight face. The fact that these stories without exception work to the detriment of Democrats is apparently a grand coincidence.
I don’t think the excuses are gonna hold any water with the vast majority of Americans this time. The Edwards story was a defining moment for the mainstream press and they failed miserably. Journalistic standards seem to only matter when the subject of a story happens to be a liberal Democrat.
Howard Kurtz sums up the absurdity of the MSM pretty well in his column this morning:
When critics, especially on the right, accused the media of protecting a Democrat because of liberal bias, journalists were unable to respond, because to do so would be to acknowledge the very thing they were declining to report.
Probably the most laughable excuse that continues to come up over and over again is the Elizabeth Edwards factor. The media was hesitant to cover the story out of sympathy and respect for Elizabeth Edwards given her battle with cancer.
Wow, I had no idea the media was so compassionate. When did this start? Seems a little convenient that the blood sucking vampires that make up the mainstream press had a sudden attack of conscience. The fact that John Edwards is a long time favorite of the far left is a complete coincidence — honesty, I swear.
Maybe I’m just being too cynical. When you really think about it, this sudden attack of conscience by the media may have started before the Edwards scandal. The media didn’t want to cover Rathergate out of respect for Dan Rather’s long and illustrious career. I can only assume the refusal to cover the success of the surge was out of respect for all the slain insurgents. Using the same rationale, I’m guessing that reluctance to cover Rev. Wright in the beginning was out of respect for the church.
It’s all starting to make sense now — or not.
Here’s the best excuse pieces of the day:
-Chris Jones
EDWARDS ADMITS AFFAIR
In an interview to air tonight on ABC, John Edwards admits to having affair and admits he lied about it.
In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.
He also acknowledges that his wife was unaware of his meeting at the hotel where he was confronted by reporters from The National Enquirer.
Edwards is denying the report that he paid Hunter any money to keep quite, but says it’s possible some of his friends or surrogates paid her money.
L.A. Times Blog Acknowledges Edwards Scandal By Posting A Link — Now That’s Brave
I just love how all of the sudden the media is suffering an attack of conscience. 365 days a year the media act like soulless vultures feasting on every aspect of the lives of public figures — especially conservative ones. Facts have long been irrelevant, all the media has ever needed is a whiff of speculation for a front page story.
Remember the NY Times attack on John McCain? A couple of unnamed disgruntled former aides said that maybe he could have had an inappropriate affair with a lobbyist. No one saw an affair, heard about an affair, or caught McCain having an affair with the lobbyist, but the word of two former aides that it could have happened is all the Times needed for a front page story.
Some months later John Edwards, Mr. Poverty, Mr. liberal Democrat gets busted by reporters at 2:00 am visiting his love child and mistress. He runs and hides out in the men’s room until security can escort him from the building and no one in the media dares breathe a word about it. The L.A. times, NY Times, and every other media outlet is suddenly concerned with “getting all the facts” and not “rushing to judgment.”
Fox News interviewed the security guard at the hotel who rescued Edwards from the bathroom and he confirmed what the National Enquirer originally reported. Still the media remains silent, not comfortable that all the facts are in yet.
Give me a break! This is one of the most incredible examples of media corruption in history. It’s so obvious that the media is treating this with kid gloves, because it’s John Edwards. If this story would’ve been about Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, or anyone with an (R) next to their name this would have been front page coast to coast.
Finally the LA Times blog acknowledges the story not by posting it, but putting up a link with a caveat.
We have decided to post, on Top of the Ticket, an item and link to a Charlotte Observer report, quoting Democratic supporters of Edwards on the record as saying that they think he needs to address the National Enquirer report if he hopes to speak at the convention. While we have stayed away from that Enquirer report, because we couldn’t confirm it, this strikes us as a legitimate story — that on-the-record Dems, including a former Edwards campaign manager, are criticizing Edwards’ decision to stay mum on the topic and saying it might affect his credibility enough that he wouldn’t get a speaking slot at the convention. (Those speaking slots haven’t been decided yet, the party says.)
So the LA Times still refuses to cover the story, but acknowledges that Edwards may not be able to speak at the Democratic convention because of the story — the story they won’t cover.
I actually think the media’s continued refusal to cover the story is beginning to eclipse the story itself. John Edwards is being allowed a free pass for his abhorrent behavior and outrageous hypocrisy.
This clown is in the running for VP or Attorney General and he thinks nothing of cheating on his wife while she’s sick with cancer? Maybe it’s just me, but that’s sure as hell not change I can believe in.
(hat tip Jossip)
(image via Co-Ed Magazine)
Gawker Attacks The Fox Flack
I didn’t have a chance to read Gawker’s response yesterday to the NY Time’s latest Fox News hit piece, because I was busy writing my own response.
Several bloggers e-mailed me the link to Gawker’s article and many of them were quite incredulous that I had not read it. They were right, I should have read it. While the underlying premise of the piece is totally wrong, it’s a very entertaining article and I laughed my a*s off while reading it.
Gawker trains its sites on chief FNC flack, Irena Briganti, who Gawker labels “a mouthpiece of Fox boss Roger Ailes.” Her official title is Vice President of media relations.
According to Gawker and testimony from a terribly frightened news media, Irena wields a “bloody hatchet” the likes of which the world has never seen–not even Gawker.
The notorious gossip site goes on to list some of her most offensive and unfair statements over the years to those who’ve dared to criticize Fox.
Here’s the list of her “all time hits”as Gawker calls them:
- When Anderson Cooper chided Fox for running with a false report of Obama going to a Muslim school, Briganti responded with, “Yet another cry for attention by the Paris Hilton of television news, Anderson Cooper.”
- Briganti attributed Keith Olbermann’s attacks on Bill O’Reilly to his “personal demons, and said “In the meantime, we hope he enjoys his paranoid view from the bottom of the ratings ladder and wish him well on his inevitable trip to oblivion.”
- When Christiane Amanpour said CNN and Fox were intimidated by the Bush administration and practiced self-censorship in the run-up to the Iraq war, Briganti responded, “Given the choice, it’s better to be viewed as a foot soldier for Bush than a spokeswoman for al-Qaeda.”
I don’t think I’ve laughed that hard in a while. Those are so good, that frankly, someone have them bronzed and placed in the lobby at Fox. You just don’t hear zingers that good everyday. Clearly, Irena Briganti can pretty well neuter any FNC critic with a single sentence.
The guy who wrote the Gawker piece is named Hamilton Nolan and he used to write for PR Week. He admits that he’s still bitter about his failed attempt to write a profile of Briganti a couple of years ago. He tried to get quotes from people who’d previosly been carved up by Briganti, but most were too fearful to talk. Incredibly, one person he asked immediately called Briganti and told her about the article he was writing.
When I worked at PRWeek a couple of years ago, I tried to write a profile of Briganti. This, after several people who had dealt with her assured me that she was the single meanest flack in the entire media world (which is true). I sent emails out to a list of people in the media that Briganti had publicly insulted. And what happened? Some turned me down, citing fear of her. Some didn’t respond, out of fear. And one, in what I still consider to be the biggest bitch move I ever saw as a reporter, ran straight to Irena, telling her that a PRWeek reporter was out to smear her. This—from a reporter who had already been publicly smeared by Briganti—is akin to the kid whose response to being bullied is to grovel and try to please the bully further.
Briganti expertly strung me along for months, promising interviews in the near future and then pushing back the date continuously. Eventually the profile fell apart and never got written. She’s good at what she does. She is still quite willing to offer negative tidbits about her competitors to this day.
I recommend everyone read the entire Gawker piece as it’s quite entertaining. I think the bottom line here is that Irena Briganti is the best PR Flack in the business and it irritates the hell out of everyone that she works at Fox. If you look closely you’ll notice a trend when it comes to Fox News. They tend to have the best of everything. The best news coverage, the best anchors, the best ratings, and of course the best PR department. Oh yeah, they also have the best Bill O’Reilly–sorry MSNBC.
The media becomes more dishonest and corrupt with every passing year, and trying to damage Fox News has practically become an Olympic sport. Kudos to Roger Ailes for having the right good sense to hire someone who doesn’t take any sh*t.
The liberal media is about as vicious a beast as anything you’re likely to come across in life. They love personal attacks and they don’t take prisoners. Which is why I find it particularly amusing that a lone Fox News flack has “got’em on the run,” to borrow a line from the President.
If anything, Irena deserves a raise.
-Chris Jones
Myth-Busting: Europe Hates Bush
The liberal media loves to get all weepy talking about how much President Bush has made Europeans hate America. Lefties love to opine that countries around the world will be celebrating when Bush leaves office. However, when you look at the geopolitical developments in recent years they tend to tell a very different story.
Rachel Marsden sums it up perfectly in her new column:
The foreign media may tell us that the public over there despises Dubya, yet they’re constantly electing folks who share his post 9/11 beliefs and policies. (Keep in mind that before 9/11, even Bush was known as a center-right pragmatic politician who had no interest in nation building or foreign intervention.)
Rachel is absolutely right about that. Every single European leader who was hostile and uncooperative with the Bush Administration has since been booted out of office and replaced with a pro-American leader.
Probably the best example of this is France. When Bush took office Jacques Chirac was President of France. If you wanted anti-American, then Chirac was your man. Chirac personally disliked President Bush and the feelings were allegedly mutual. The French President was not only a constant impediment at the UN, but an asshole to boot.
So if the French are so opposed to Bush and his so-called “cowboy diplomacy” then why did Chirac lose the election to ultra pro-American candidate Nicolas Sarkozy? France is now America’s staunchest ally in Europe now that Sarkozy is in office. Unlike Chirac, Sarkozy is also a reliable ally in the War On Terror.
Sarkozy is in fact so pro-American that he’s known as “Sarko The American” in France. He actually ran on a platform of improving relations with the United States. Now how could a man like that be elected by people who hate America? I guess Bush stole that election also.
Then there’s Germany. Gerhart Schröder was Chancellor of Germany when President Bush took office. Like Chirac, he went out of his way to be uncooperative with President Bush and U.S. foreign policy in general. He also had an unhealthy crush on Russian President Vladimir Putin, but that’s a story best saved for another time.
If the Germans wanted an antidote to President Bush as the media would have us believe, then why was he booted out of office and replaced by Angela Merkel?
Like Sarkozy, Merkel has done everything possible to repair relations with America. She has been a strong ally in the War On Terror and enjoyed a warm relationship with President Bush.
In Italy, Silvio Berlusconi was elected Prime Minister this year. He’s a long time ally of the U.S. and also enjoys warm relations with President Bush.
Britain also remains a close ally. When Tony Blair was replaced by Gordon Brown the media gleefully predicted a colder relationship with the Bush Administration. Unfortunately for liberals, that also hasn’t panned out. Brown announced this week that the U.K. will be sending even more troops to Afghanistan at President Bush’s request.
Are there people in Europe who hate America? Absolutely. In fact we’ve people in America who hate America, but they certainly don’t represent the majority.
The overwelming majority of Europeans do not harbor any ill feelings towards America or to President Bush, the media just wishes they did.
Rather than pushing our allies away, President Bush has in fact made our relationship with European countries stronger than ever. He will leave office with the most important countries in Europe once again on our side.
-Chris Jones
‘Recount’ Proves Democrats Tried To Steal The Election
I just finished watching “Recount” starring Kevin Spacey that the far-left has been promoting all week. To be honest, I was very surprised how the movie turned out. I figured it would be 90 minutes of red meat for the far-left crowd who still suffer sleepless nights thinking about how Bush “stole” the election in 2000.
Cosmetically the film turned out as I anticipated it would. Democrats were depicted as righteous crusaders who only wanted to do the right thing and make every vote count. Republicans on the other hand led by former Secretary of State James Baker were meant to be depicted as political thugs who used a combination of dirty tricks and favors to get George W. Bush elected.
I emphasize meant because Republicans didn’t come off in the film that way at all. Besides Katherine Harris who was made to look extra foolish in the movie (only extra), everyone else came of looking pretty cool. Republicans looked like the cool customers while the Democrats looked frantic and shrill (like they do now).
What really surprised me about the film was the overall message it conveyed. What “Recount” actually succeeded in doing was totally smashing the far-left’s narrative over the last eight years that Bush “stole” the election.
The Gore camp was depicted in the movie as trying to get a recount in certain Florida counties because those counties were mostly poor minorities who “tend to vote for Democrats.” Throughout the movie Democrats shamelessly used Jessie Jackson to try and get blacks riled up about allegedly being disenfranchised.
The Gore camp purposely tried to swing the vote in Gore’s favor by manipulating poor minorities and fabricating stories of disenfranchisement and crying about dimpled chads.
The movie portrayed Republicans as merely following the law to its conclusion. The Bush camp won because of the excellent legal work by James Baker, as well as a little good old fashioned luck. It was mostly luck that kept the (win at all costs) Gore camp from doing everything short of orchestrating a kidnapping to get Gore a few hundred more votes.
The 2000 election certainly was a debacle and served to expose very serious flaws in our nation’s voting system. In my opinion if your too old, too blind, or too stupid, to punch the right hole on your ballot you probably shouldn’t be voting.
That said, voting is not rocket science and we trust computers to store medical records and classified intelligence. We just successfully landed a new spacecraft on Mars to test soil samples, and our military is the most technologically advanced fighting force the world has ever seen.
All this and the United States of America really cannot design a voting system that everyone can use?
We can fire a cruise missile half-way around the world and into an open window, or drop a GPS guided bomb through an air shaft on a building, but we still can’t create a voting system that’s accurate 99.99% percent of the time?
Maybe the Google guys should start work on “Google Voting” for their next project.
You know they could do it.
-Chris Jones
-
-
Subscribe
-
Blog under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
Posts
