Today I contacted Paul Martin, the co-owner of World News and Features whom CNN cited in their claim that Ashraf Masharawi's video of his brother's death in a Gaza hospital emergency room as the result of being fired upon by an Israeli drone was indeed legitimate as shown, and not staged as many right of center bloggers have contended.

I asked Mr. Martin a series of questions about the video, including queries about the apparent inconsistencies in the timeline in various versions as told presented by CNN and Channel 4 as noted by Dan Riehl, and why the family was so adamant that an Israeli drone fired a missile that targeted the two boys playing on the rooftop. Did the family members directly witnessed a drone firing a missile, or did they hear the explosion, go to the roof, see a drone, and assume it was a drone that fired?

I also asked Martin, who is in the business of selling news footage, if CNN and Channel 4 were clients, and if so, if they purchased the edited versions of this Masharawi video, or if they purchased the raw footage to be made into a finished product by these news organizations.

Martin responded this evening via email that:

We plan to post the entire unedited videotape of the whole event, on our website, as soon as we can obtain the whole thing from Gaza... something which can happen when there is an end to hostilities.

There you have it, folks. CNN's alibi hasn't seen the unedited footage, and we can't expect to have them even attempt to provide it until the conflict is over.

Interesting, isn't it?

World News and Features claims to specialize in getting footage delivered from high-threat combat zones to the world's media organizations, and their ace videographer managed to get polished, edited footage of his brother's death in the hands of foreign media organizations within hours of the attack, but now they say we'll have to wait until the war is over to get the kind of raw footage that one would think is their bread-and-butter product.

Fishy?

You don't know the half of it...

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:15 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 381 words, total size 3 kb.

CNN is insisting that the story it aired of a Palestinian videographer filming his younger brothers death is entirely legitimate:

There's no truth to accusations by bloggers that a Palestinian camera crew staged a video showing the death of the videographer's brother after an Israeli rocket attack, said the team's employer.

"It's absolute nonsense," Paul Martin, co-owner of World News and Features, said of accusations leveled by bloggers at videographer Ashraf Mashharawi.

"He's a man of enormous integrity and would never get involved with any sort of manipulation of images, let alone when the person dying is his own brother," Martin said. "I know the whole family. I know them very well. ... [Mashharawi] is upset and angry that anyone would think of him having done anything like this. ... This is ridiculous. He's independent."

Raafat Hamdouna, administrative director at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, said Friday that "Mahmoud Khalil Mashharawi, a 12-year-old, was brought to the hospital, and he was breathing, but he was hit in the head and all over his body by shrapnel. He died later in the hospital. He was treated by the Norwegian team. When he was brought in, he was breathing. The team did their best to save him. I am not really sure if they even tried to rush him to the surgery room, because he was badly hurt."

This is CNN's evidence?

Martin is the co-owner of the news company that employees the videographer; he has an intense vested interest in maintaining the credibility and reputation of his company and employees at all costs.

And precisely what kind of news World News & Features produce [h/t Snapped Shot]?

WORLD NEWS & FEATURES is a unique specialist news and features provider, in the print, audio and video media, specialising in CONFLICT ZONES.

It specialises in high-quality and impeccably-researched content.

It only provides the material to non-competing clients. Under its unique system, each PREMIER CLIENT can brand the material as "From Our Own Correspondent" or "From ABC - Special to ..." or some other agreed wording.

A PREMIER CLIENT can also commission the writing, filming or broadcast of specific stories relevant to that clients region, city or specialised interest.

Premium clients can commission the writing filming, and broadcast of specific stories. Commissioned news, sold at a premium. Isn't that another name for mercenary propaganda?

If so, I wonder who commissioned these... or if they were done pro bono.

HAMAS ALLIES PREPARE FOR RENEWED CONFLICT

ROCKET MEN OF GAZA

DYING TO SMASH ISRAEL WALL SAYS HAMAS

RESIST, SAYS HAMAS ARMED WING

Martin is trusted by Hamas on at least a professional level, and has a financial stake in the credibility of his employee's story. Neither of these conflicts of interest were disclosed by CNN, for the rather obvious reasons it undermines their claim of the story's credibility.

And then there is the apparent discrepancy between the injuries claimed by hospital adminstrator Raafat Hamdouna and the lack of evidence of such wounds in the video footage.

Hamdouna claimed:

"Mahmoud Khalil Mashharawi, a 12-year-old, was brought to the hospital, and he was breathing, but he was hit in the head and all over his body by shrapnel."

The video shot by Ashraf Mashharawi does not seem to support this claim.

While a frame-by-frame analysis shows a possible gash on the lower leg and what may be evidence of blood localized on the lower trunk, there is no evidence of any wound to the head or upper body.

Others that have been following this story also find CNN's affirmation of this story's credibility less than credible, including Charles Johnson and Ed Morrissey.

CNN has also yet to explain what kind of Israeli drone could have fired the purported missile, and what kind of missile would cause the minimal damage shown on the rooftop where it is claimed these boys were killed.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:09 PM | Comments (149) | Add Comment
Post contains 654 words, total size 5 kb.

Mads Gilbert, the radical Marxist Norwegian doctor that was the focus of a Fox News report earlier today for being an anti-Israeli Hamas apologist, has been positively identified as one of two doctors caught faking CPR on a Palestinian boy that "died" in video featured today on CNN.

The segment with Gilbert shows him and another doctor badly faking chest compressions and other life-saving measures on a live boy faking death in what can only be described as political theater. The video claims to be filmed by the brother of a Palestinian teen that claims the boy was one of two purposefully killed by a missile fired at them by an Israeli drone as they played.

Lawhawk, has more on why the fake CPR is so pathetically obvious to those with actual CPR training.

CNN editors who swallowed the story of the poorly-acted video unquestioningly—no doubt because it fit the anti-Israeli narrative familiar to CNN viewers and critics—have now pulled the video without explanation, correction, or retraction.

It has also been determined that the videographer who filmed his brother's "death" is the general manager of a company that hosts web sites for Hamas.

Dr. Gilbert was allowed into Gaza by the Israelis just 2 days ago to provide medical care. He was involved in faking war crimes less than 48 hours later.

Update: The CNN cover-up continues. Saddam Hussein's favorite network has now pulled the video completely from their site, instead posting a text story that continues the propaganda.

I suspect this attempt at avoiding the truth isn't going to work out very well for them.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:04 PM | Comments (46) | Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 3 kb.

Pro-terrorist shills like this clueless twit give other leftist beards for Islamofascist oppression a bad name.

War Crime du Jour: Israel Deploys White Phosphorus Shells

When regarding the Christmas massacre conducted against the captive population of Palestine by the Israeli army in the name of the people of Israel's security, one is left to wonder: How deeply into Israel's vast arsenal must the IDF dig before the world's leaders act?

Do we wait until the nuclear option is put on the table? "Bunker busters" are already deployed; cluster bombs and the usual array of missiles, bombs, and bullets rained down on civilians and the civilian infrastructure. Hospitals, universities, police stations, mosques, and apartment blocks. Have we missed anything?

Just reality.

White phosphorus is in the inventory of most of the world's major military forces, including the United States, Great Britain, Russia. It is used for smoke screens, for signaling, and incendiary uses.

Global Security states it bluntly:

Israel used White Phosphorus against HAMAS targets in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead in January 2009. This violated no international laws or conventions.

White Phosphorus in Gaza (as it was in Lebanon) is clearly being deployed as an obscurant, laying down a smoke screen to prevent Hamas terrorists from seeing advancing Israeli forces.

This is done to save the lives of soldiers from being targeted with IEDs and sniper fire, and—though leftists refuse to admit it— to also hopefully save the lives of Palestinian civilians by allowing Israeli soldiers to engage Hamas terrorists at close range with rifle and machine gun fire, rather than use more destructive arial bombing and artillery fire.

As for the "bunker busters" alluded to by the deluded author above, the GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, it too is designed to save lives by using minimal destructive force:

At just 5.9 feet long and 285 pounds, the bombÂ’s small size increases the number of weapons an aircraft can carry, therefore raising the amount of targets it can kill in one sortie. Because of its size and precision accuracy, it also reduces collateral, or unintended, damage in the target vicinity.

It is a small bomb that uses far less explosives that the 500-lb, 1000-lb, and 2000-lb bombs that air forces have had to rely upon in the past that could level several buildings or even a city block even with a precision strike, and being a bunker buster exploding below ground, it further decreases the threat of shrapnel and blast forces to innocent civilians.

As for the blackened bodies in Lebanon he cites as evidence of atrocities... well that was conclusively debunked, as was the fiction pushed by pro-insurgent leftists about the use of WP in Fallujah.

Keep your eyes out: you'll be seeing more of this pro-terrorist propaganda in the days ahead.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:42 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 482 words, total size 4 kb.

Once again, CNN puts its ignorance and dislike of the military center stage:

The U.S. Marine Corps knew of the threat posed by roadside bombs before the start of the Iraq war, yet did nothing to buy protective vehicles for troops, according to a report to be released by the Pentagon.

Additionally, Marine leaders in 2005 decided to buy up-armored, or reinforced, Humvees instead of Mine Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicles to shield troops in Iraq from mines and other explosives -- a decision that could have cost lives, according to the report obtained Tuesday by CNN.

The report by the Department of Defense inspector general was requested by the Marine Corps in early 2008 after a civilian employee with the service complained that bureaucratic delays undermined the program to develop the armored vehicles.

Inspectors found that the decision not to buy MRAP vehicles in 2005 stopped the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, the agency in charge of finding the best protective vehicle from troops in Iraq, from "developing a course of action ... to attempt to obtain funding for [MRAPs]," according to the report.

The report found that the Department of Defense knew before the war started in 2003 of the threats of mines and roadside bombs in Iraq but did nothing to acquire "MRAP-type" vehicles ahead of the invasion.

What the author of this CNN article fails to explain is that you can have either mobility, or you can have armor; you can't have both.

A vehicle that can withstand IEDs built from artillery shells is going to be too heavy (14 tons in some variations) to leave the main roads or even cross many of the world's bridges. The has two significant and lasting effects. It cedes the majority of territory to the insurgents, and also creates targeting funnels where ambushes can be concentrated, increasing the likelihood of Marines being hit by IEDs.

When insurgents know that they face a vehicle with limited mobility, they can then concentrate on building bigger or more effective types of IEDs to defeat that specific vehicle, while simultaneously using the majority or their forces to dominate the surrounding towns and villages.

Historically, the Marines have always chosen mobility over armor, using speed, tenacity, and tactics to overwhelm opposing forces with weapons systems lighter armed and armored than that of their more heavily armed and armored Army counterparts.

It is true that some Marines who died in HMMWVs because of IED strikes may very well have survived strikes by similar weapons on MRAPs, but at what cost?

Would they have had the mobility to strike al Qaeda and insurgent supply lines running though remote areas of the country, or find weapons caches located on farms and in fields far away from the hardened roads that MRAPs require?

Could Marines have penetrated communities and established relations with friendly Iraqis to develop a counterinsurgency program while hiding inside these metal beasts? The answer to these questions is a resounding "no."

MRAPs are great vehicles for their intended purpose of protecting their occupants against IEDS, but their mobility is horrific, and cedes the majority of the battlefield to the enemy, leaving the enemy to pick the time and place of engagement with American forces.

In short, an early deployment of MRAPs into the Iraqi theater of operations may have saved some lives in the short run, but it would have crippled the Marines ability to take the fight to the enemy and put the insurgency on the defensive.

MRAPS and similar vehicles have a time and a place, as does every weapons system, but they are not nearly mobile enough to be as useful in an offensive war against a lightly armed and mobile enemy as are the lighter and less armored HMMWV.

Of course, you don't have to take my word for it. Even Army soldiers used to more heavily armored equipment find the MRAPtoo heavy and slow:

And so we rolled out of FOB Falcon in those giant MRAPs. It seems that most of the seriously experienced combat soldiers do not like MRAPs. Yes, MRAPs are great for the main roads and convoys, but they are too big and too cumbersome, and they get stuck in mud that you could peddle a bicycle through. MRAPs are not offensive vehicles. There is no doubt MRAPs can save lives – they’re like giant vaults on wheels, though I did see the wreckage of one in Afghanistan that had been nearly obliterated. When we’re on the main roads, I love MRAPs, but we will never win wars or major battles with those things, or by staying on main roads. MRAPs need good roads. Good roads are bomb magnets. In Afghanistan, many of the Taliban scoot around on motorcycles, and there is no doubt that mobility is a weapon. We should melt most of the MRAPs down and forge that metal into killing machines like Strykers. The combat vets from 10th Mountain that day were also not fans of MRAPs. And though it’s easy to find MRAP-lovers, the hardcore fighters seem to want more mobility than steel.

Marines encumbered by MRAPs cannot take the battle to the enemy, and Marines that can't take the battle to the enemy will not win wars.

CNN's article is a poorly-researched hit piece designed to attack the credibility and judgement of the Marine Corps.

Perhaps before questioning the judgment of others, they should start by looking at their motivations and biases first.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:30 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 933 words, total size 6 kb.

1 You can't argue with physics. I learned these elementary facts in high school. Even if you didn't learn them, it's intuitive to figure out that a panther can move more quickly than an elephant and get into tight places the elephant can't get into. I am appalled by how ignorant journalists are. Instead of inquiring into the Marine Corps' reasoning about these vehicles, they just wanted to take a cheap shot.

Posted by: miriam at December 10, 2008 02:24 PM (QEaZv)

2 "A civilian whistle-blower working with the Marine Corps on the MRAP program wrote a scathing report about delays in the procurement process in early 2008." Hmmm... how exactly does one get to be a "whistle-blower?" What's the 401K plan like? Since they're not clear on this, can I guess that it's just a schmuck that works for the manufacturer and is passed that the USMC simply didn't buy his friggin' product?

Posted by: tsmonk at December 10, 2008 03:57 PM (E8R20)

3 It doesn't surprise me at all that journalists don't know what they're talking about. That's normal. What is aggrevating though, is the necessity for long and complicated explanations they generate. Of course, these explanations are to people who are only marginally interested in listening to them and have no background on which to base an even small understanding on. The stupidity just goes on and on.

Posted by: Tonto at December 10, 2008 05:18 PM (Qv1xF)

4 My position is "Don't DIS the Marines". Also, if the Marines need funding to have the best armored equipment, GET THE FUNDING TO THEM!!! Then let commanders decide what is the best in each given situation. I am 100% thankful for those who serve in our armed forces, and I want them to have the best of the best in each given situation to achieve goals and protect and defend their lives. The ins and outs of this sitch, I don't completely understand. But I support what it takes to keep our troops safe and achieve their objectives and want funding for it. That's REALLY the reason why we pay federal taxes: for our troops to be kept safe, etc., and to have the best of equipment, etc. Give it to them!! (And don't dis them... whoever would criticize our troops.)

Posted by: l at December 10, 2008 09:25 PM (tdrxf)

5 I know from my days as a grunt that I would trade speed over flac jackets everytime and none of us wore the damn things.

Posted by: tjbbpgob at December 11, 2008 01:22 AM (I4yBD)

6 I remember Wolf Blitzer interviewing a Marine approximately two years ago. It was just after the incident where an AAAVP7 was hit by a huge IED. Blew it clear off the ground and it landed upside down. This is a fully armored vehicle almost thirty feet long that weighs 22 tons. Wolf's first question to the Marine information officer was, "Would these Marine's be alive today if they had been in an uparmored HUMVEE?"

Posted by: Have Blue at December 11, 2008 03:53 AM (WuPk/)

7 "The U.S. Marine Corps knew of the threat posed by roadside bombs before the start of the Iraq war..." Not to be nit-picky, but we've known about the threat and dangers of road-side bombs since the advent of gunpowder! As CY noted, its a trade off between mobility and armor. The real reason journalists create the demand for up-armored HMMWVs is a direct coorelation to the risk adverse society modern humans have become. In today's society, no one can be injured, no one can die and if someone does, someone else must take the blame. It is utter bull! Quite frankly, we can make our soldier's completely impervious to all attacks, the problem is, they wouldn't be able to move more than a few yards a day because of the weight and mobility limitations. I agree the loss of life is tragic, but it is war, and I expect that people will get hurt and die, we just need to stop trying to find someone to blame for it. Accept the risk or don't do it, but quit trying to make the world into a risk free society, it's a losing battle.

Posted by: David M at December 11, 2008 10:03 AM (gIAM9)

8 OK... reality Check... Most of the guys I've talked to here would rather be in HMMWVs (1114 or 1151 variants) than the MRAP. Granted, the MRAP is impressive as far as being able to take a hit, buh the fact remains that most MRAPs, (what I call the "Uparmorded PT Cruiser") only carrys 4 to 6 people... in and when the 'shytte' hits, these things don't have a hell of a lot of manpower.... granted, they keep the guys alive, but what good is it if they get on site, and they only have 4 guys (besides crew) to deal with businesss? Thats my question...

Posted by: Big Country at December 11, 2008 05:58 PM (vuy4X)

9 The mainstream media should stop sitting around getting drunk and trying to solve the world's problems and just report the f'n news.

Posted by: DoorHold at December 14, 2008 12:27 PM (DA32L)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Via Hot Air's headlines comes Kathleen Parker's self-serving idea:

Actively pursuing information through print media and participating in high-level conversations -- even, potentially, blogging -- makes one smarter.

The ISI insists that higher-education reforms aimed at civic literacy are urgently needed. Who could argue otherwise? But historian Rick Shenkman, author of "Just How Stupid Are We?" thinks reform needs to start in high school. His strategy is both poetic (to certain ears) and pragmatic: Require students to read newspapers, and give college freshman weekly quizzes on current events.

Did he say newspapers?! Shenkman even suggests government subsidies for newspaper subscriptions, as well as federal tuition subsidies for students who perform well on civics tests. They could be paid from a special fund created by, say, a "Too Many Stupid Voters Act."

Not only would citizens be smarter, but also newspapers might be saved. Announcements of newsroom cuts, which ultimately hurt quality, have become routine. Just this week, USA Today announced the elimination of about 20 positions, while the Newark Star-Ledger, as it cuts its news staff by 40 percent, lost almost its entire editorial board in a single day.

In his book, Shenkman, founder of George Mason University's History News Network, is tough on everyday Americans. Why, he asks, do we value polls when clearly The People don't know enough to make a reasoned judgment?

Of course, what Parker fails to mention is that The People don't know enough to make a reasoned judgement largely as a result of these same newspapers taking roles as advocates for one political theology instead of acting as unbiased journalists. The public, while underinformed but not nearly as ignorant as today's newroom and editorial board advocacy organizations would like, recognize the naked cheerleading and overt bias of the MSM, and quit buying their product.

Parker, Shenkman, and others with a stake in todays dying media want to legislate a market for a substandard product. Too bad for them, the People aren't as uneducated as they would like.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:33 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 351 words, total size 2 kb.

Gail Collins and now Thomas Friedman of the New York Times have both asked President Bush to step down early, ushering in a new era of hopechangegood prior to Obama's January 20 inauguration.

Both offer daft if different excuses for their need to hurry Bush into history, but perhaps they simply want to be able to write about Obama while still a columnist with the fast-failing Times, and they aren't exactly convinced the Old Gray Lady will be above ground when the scheduled transition occurs.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 05:01 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.

Maryland Gomez, 61, was killed early Saturday morning when a tornado destroyed her home in Kenly, North Carolina. The Raleigh News and Observer ran the photo above, dominating page 1A above the fold in their Sunday paper. The photo is credited to Cary News photographer named Michael McLoone, and shows a Gomez family photo of the victim amid the wreckage of her home.

I may very well be wrong, but I suspect that this photo is staged.

Tornadoes are capable of astounding choreography, dancing over one home without disturbing a shingle, only to smash a neighboring home to kindling. Sometimes they'll even demolish an entire home, only to leave items in a single room almost untouched.

But I find it very hard to believe that:

this particular tornado,
on this particular night,
smashed this particular home,
and killed this particular woman,
and placed this particular photo,
ripped so delicately from its frame,
on this particular half of a smashed table,
with no human intervention,
while all beyond it is chaos.

Update: The N&O responds via email:

...There was no staging or Photoshop manipulation involved in the photo My [sic] Michael McLoone from the tornado aftermath. The situation was exactly as the photographer found it, and was not altered. This was indicated by the photographer in his communication with the photo desk on that day, and I have confirmed that in another conversation. Several friends, family members, and neighbors had been through the site, working to recover belongings of the family, and others had brought items found nearby back to the scene, where they were left.

It appears that the family photograph may have been placed on the table by human hands in the aftermath of the storm; the editors are simply claiming that the photographer was not responsible for the manipulation.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:20 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.

That more people read this spoofed version of the NY Times today than the real print edition, or that the radical left wing stories offered in the spoof are probably too right wing for the real newspaper's editorial board?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:35 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

Boynton, Beach, FL:

A woman who lived with her ex-partner on the city's south side stabbed her former lover more than 200 times with a Phillips-head screwdriver and then tried to conceal the killing, police said.

After committing the crime, Carol Anne Burger, 57, a writer who friends described as engaged and eager to move on with life, reported her old flame missing and then, a day later, shot herself to death in her backyard, police said.

[snip]

Burger, upset at the disintegration of her relationship and disgusted with the U.S. during the past several years, sometimes talked of moving to Panama or Mexico to start again.

That she had recently lost her job didn't help the bouts of depression she sometimes experienced, said her close friend and confidante, Helen Gale.

But when the Web site The Huffington Post tapped Burger to cover the election from Florida this month, the job seemed to give her renewed focus. Burger burned to write a story for the site's front page and poured herself into the work, Gale said.

This lady obviously had serious psychological issues. The article also states she came to hate the United States "during the past several years."

Uh-huh.

I wonder how much eight years of the self-induced hysteria we know as "Bush Derangement Syndrome" and the requisite feelings of impotent rage and looming oppression fed into her existing problems.

May God be with both families as they deal with this senseless tragedy.

Update: Perhaps interested in keeping up appearances, the Palm Beach Post has now removed all references to Burger's disgust of the United States.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:28 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.

Orson Scott Card eviscerates those Democratic Party flacks that call themselves journalists.

A taste of The Last Honest Reporter:

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means . That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time — and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter — while you ignored the story of John Edwards's own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That's where you are right now.

It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

There's much more at the link.

Card, by the way, is a Democrat.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:35 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 3 kb.

I'm going to start doing something I should have done long ago. When I catch a journalist committing fraud or nakedly partisan political journalism, I'm join to make sure that I name them, and not just the organization they work for.

Today's poster child for journalistic corruption is James V. Grimaldi of the Washington Post.

What kind of dishonest, biased journalism is the Washington Post reporter James V. Grimaldi guilty of?

In Exclusive: Verizon and AT&T Provided Cell Towers for McCain Ranch, corrupt reporter James V. Grimaldi tries to insinuate that Cindy McCain is guilty of some sort of ethical violation because Verizon Wireless and AT&T installed portable cell phone towers to provide coverage at McCain's home in Hidden Valley near Sedona, Arizona.

Unethical reporter James V. Grimaldi writes:

Ethics lawyers said Cindy McCain's dealings with the wireless companies stand out because her husband is a senior member of the Senate commerce committee, which oversees the Federal Communications Commission and the telecommunications industry. He has been a leading advocate for industry-backed legislation, fighting regulations and taxes on telecommunication services.

I have a few simple questions for morally bankrupt Washington Post reporter James V. Grimaldi:

• Other than Stanley Brand, a former House counsel for Democrats, what are the names of the ethics lawyers you spoke with, and what positions have they held within the Democrat Party?
• Are any of the ethics lawyers you spoke with currently active as paid consultants or volunteers for Barack Obama's presidential campaign?
• Did Democratic operative(s) in Obama campaign suggested this story to you?
• Did you ever had any intention of directly informing your readers that the Secret Service requested these cell towers as a security issue?

Yes, you heard that right. Ethics-challenged Washington Post reporter James V. Grimaldi did his level best to obscure the fact that it was the Secret Service that requested these portable cell towers, as stable communications are a vital part of protecting the lives of Presidential candidates.

This isn't journalism. This is partisan politics.

It's nice to know what kind of corrupt reporters the Washington Post is willing to hire in men such as James V. Grimaldi, and the kind of political hit pieces they're willing to run as legitimate news stories.

Update: Jonathan Martin at The Politico confirms the Secret Service request:

A representative for the Secret Service confirms Verizon's statement earlier tonight that the company only put in a temporary cell service facility near the McCain ranch in Arizona at the request of the agency.

"We made a request of Verizon in I believe May that was covered under our contract and they did address our immediate needs," said Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:28 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 460 words, total size 3 kb.

Don't have any proof of rage-filled bigots at McCain-Palin speeches, even though you just know in your shriveled little heart that they have to be there?

Never fear. You can always just make it up.

The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled "kill him" when presidential hopeful Barack Obama's name was mentioned during Tuesday's Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.

The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Oabama's[sic] name a man in the audience shouted "kill him."

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

"I was baffled," he said after reading the report in Wednesday's Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:46 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.

The New York Times could save some money if they fired fired the middlemen and simply let the Obama campaign post directly to their blogs.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.

The Weathermen were not a 1960s group.
The Weathermen formed in 1969, declared war on "AmeriKKKa" (yes, that is where the popular spelling you hear in the rants of Rev. Jeremiah Wright and on left-wing political blogs comes from) in 1970, and carried out a string of attacks that finally ended with the arrests of the final remaining Weathermen, now called the May 19 Communist Movement, in 1985. One remaining Weatherman, Elizabeth Duke, is still a fugitive from the FBI and is considered armed and dangerous.

Calling the Weathermen a 60s terrorist group, when it did almost all of its bombing in the 1970s and 1980s, is as intellectually honest as calling Duran Duran a 50s rock and roll band because Simon Le Bon was born in 1958.

Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are domestic terrorists.
They not an "anti-war activists" nor "radicals." Activists and radicals organize protests and sit-ins and harass elected officials.

A person that uses a bomb instead of a ballot is a terrorist. A person that leads a group of individuals that likes to use bombs instead of ballets is a terrorist leader. As this particular group of terrorists waged war against their own country, they are called domestic terrorists.

Contrary to a meme being pushed by interested parties, the Weather Underground killed innocent people.
Brian V. McDonnell an officer with the San Francisco Police, was ripped apart by shrapnel Feb 16, 1970. He succumbed to his injuries two days later. Officer Robert Fogarty was permanently injured in the same blast. FBI mole Larry Grathwohl says Bill Ayers built the bomb, and that Bernadine Dohrn placed it on the station window ledge. Nyack, NY Police Officer Waverly Brown and Sergeant Ed O'Grady, along with Brinks guard Peter Paige, were killed in an armored car robbery that was a joint operation between the Weather Underground and elements of the Black Liberation Army in 1981.

In addition to their successful homicide bombings, the Weather Underground failed in several attempts at mass murder.
On March 6, 1970, a pipe-bomb being constructed in a Greenwich Village townhouse detonated, killing three Weathermen and causing two others to flee. Recovered amid the rumble were four 12" dynamite-filled pipe-bombs and several fused eight-stick bundles of dynamite that had been destined for a non-commissioned officers dance that night at Fort Dix, NJ, targeting American soldiers and their civilian dates. The attack would likely have been the worst terrorist attack on American soil prior to Timothy McVeigh's attack in Oklahoma City.

Lesser known mass murder attempts of the Weathermen that same year included the attempted bombing of the Detroit Police Officers' Association, which Ayers wanted to occur when the building was fully occupied. An FBI mole within the Weathermen, Larry Grathwohl tipped police. A 13-stick bundle of dynamite was recovered and defused. A separate bombing targeting Detroit police foiled by Grathwohl involved 2 bombs, using 44 sticks of dynamite.

In 1984, Weathermen Susan Rosenberg and Linda Evans were arrested while transporting 740 pounds of explosives and a cache of almost two dozen weapons, including a submachine gun.

Barack Obama and Bill Ayers do not cross paths casually, but have a lucrative multi-decade relationship.
Barack Obama and Bill Ayers met no later than 1987, where the worked together in the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools. There is some speculation that Ayers and Obama may have met even earlier in New York, perhaps as far back as 1984, but that connection hasn't been firmly established.

Ayers was instrumental in forming the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and arranged for Obama to be chairman of the Board of Directors over more qualified Board members. Obama returned the favor by funneling more than a million dollars in grants to Ayers' Small School Workshop. Obama and Ayers served together for years on the Board of Directors of the Woods Fund. Obama was also a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, which may have influenced several grants made to Ayers.

Barack Obama "didn't know the history" of Bill Ayers' and Bernadine Dohrn's terrorist past when he kicked off his political career in their home in 1995.
Barack Obama has known Bill Ayers at least since 1987, and perhaps as far back as 1983-84. Bernardine Dohrn, once publicly labeled "the most dangerous woman in America" by none other than J. Edgar Hoover, was also well known as the inspiration for the 1988 movie Running on Empty. Subtle terrorists they were not.

Both Ayers and Dohrn were very well known throughout Chicago for their role in the "Days of Rage" riots and their terrorist leadership, and were minor celebrities among the radical leftist community Ayers, Dohrn, and Obama shared in Hyde Park.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:28 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 789 words, total size 5 kb.

1 1987? Brinks robbery/murders in 1981? Only six years difference. Quite a bit different than claiming a 9 year olds ignorance.....

Posted by: SouthernRoots at October 09, 2008 09:47 PM (EsOdX)

2 It's interesting when you put it together: Acorn. Subprime Meltdown. Bogus loans given to people who could never pay it back. Banks teetering on the edge with unstable loan portfolios. Hedge funds using short selling to challenge the valuation. And George Soros behind it all, from the funding of Acorn, the promotion of Obama and the run on the banks. Read George's book "The Alchemy of Finance" where he explains his method of not waiting for, but engineering disequilibrium in markets. George used Obama to sue Bank of America to force them to issue these loans. Each loan was a promise that Soros knew couldn't be kept - just like the Bank of England's unsustainable currency position. Given sufficient leverage, Soros could kick the leg out and give the U.S. a reason to vote for a Marxist candidate he had made. Look at the leverage used to set the market on fire. Why now? Why the sudden short selling? Why the rumors spread in the market by others controlled by Soros to cause bank runs? And how convenient that a candidate emerges with more than a decade "disappeared" from his life, other than phantom traces to socialist parties which also have their ties to Soros. If you're looking for the man pulling puppet Obama's strings, look no further.

Posted by: TheMule at October 09, 2008 10:24 PM (kjqFg)

3 Bernadine Dohrn was employed as an associate at the same law firm as Michelle Obama. Barack Obama would meet Michelle while he was a summer intern at that same law firm. Did Dohrn meet Michelle Obama there? Or did the community activist Barack Obama meet Ayres before 1988? Dohrn: "In 1982 she spent seven months in jail for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigating the 1981 Brink's robbery and murders in Rockland County." http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E4D71739F933A25751C0A963948260 "From 1984 to 1988, Dohrn was employed by the prestigious Chicago law firm Sidley Austin." Wiki entry, mistakenly attributed to the above Times article. Apparently taken from her CV http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/clinic/dohrn/dohrnBeCV.pdf Michelle Obama: "grew up in the South Shore community area of Chicago" "She graduated from High School in 1981." "Following law school, she was an associate at the Chicago office of the law firm Sidley Austin, where she first met her husband." "She obtained her Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree from Harvard Law School in 1988." "She met Barack Obama when they were the only two African Americans at their law firm and she was assigned to mentor him while he was a summer associate." Wikipedia. Barack Obama: "After four years in New York City, Obama moved to Chicago to work as a community organizer for three years from June 1985 to May 1988 as director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland (Roseland, West Pullman, and Riverdale) on Chicago's far South Side." "Obama entered Harvard Law School in late 1988" "During his summers, he returned to Chicago where he worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley & Austin in 1989." Wikipedia

Posted by: just wondering at October 09, 2008 10:51 PM (wREmy)

4 Barack Obama is a dangerous, dishonest, grasping politician. He didn't care that these people were terrorists. He either agreed with them, or he didn't care what they'd done, so long as it benefitted him. Either way, he is an empty, soulless opportunist. No one, and I mean NO ONE, comes up through the Chicago machine clean.

Posted by: jana at October 10, 2008 12:08 AM (vSRlG)

5 Admit it guys, you just don't like cause he's black

Posted by: Richard Hurts at October 10, 2008 02:27 AM (HqXvs)

6 "Admit it guys, you just don't like cause he's black Posted by Richard Hurts at October 10, 2008 02:27 AM " I'm going to write a letter to Jerry Lewis, and see if we can't get the congenitally stupid a spot on the telethon this year. I mean come on, it isn't even a complete frigging sentence now...

Posted by: Conservative CBU at October 10, 2008 04:02 AM (M+Vfm)

7 come on Richard,give it a rest.this has absolutly nothing to do w/the guys skin color.its as plain as the nose on your face,hes a dirty polition(sp)

Posted by: 1903A3 at October 10, 2008 05:28 AM (0JFRo)

8 Richard, What WOULD you do without your one size fits all excuse for everything, and every situation in your life?

Posted by: Bill Smith at October 10, 2008 06:46 AM (x9fYa)

9 Richard, are you actually trying to claim that we should give Mr. Obama a pass on associating with a known terrorist because of his skin color? Is a dark skin tone an excuse for doing anything reprehensible?

Posted by: C-C-G at October 10, 2008 07:13 AM (kbd0j)

10 This is a bundle of truths, half-truths and suppositions. Ayres is reprehensible, he is also a "Chicago Citizen of the Year" and the Annenberg Challenge is funded by a famous Republican. When the economy is in free fall, this is the best you can do? Does it really make sense to poison the well for someone who is at this point is likely as not the next president? Perhaps it is too much to expect patriotism from one who calls himself, at least in part, a "Confederate." My son, in case you are unaware, those boys actually did attack the United States and killed millions.

Posted by: IrishJazz at October 10, 2008 08:08 AM (LMKaU)

11 The Republicans better come up with something a bit more relevant to Americans than Ayers if they wish to have any chance in the election

Posted by: John Ryan at October 10, 2008 08:54 AM (xrV8E)

12 You might want to proof read this thing again...

Posted by: Reason at October 10, 2008 10:35 AM (z2S93)

13 Peeps -- Richard "Dick" Hurts? Don't rise to the troll bait. And John Ryan: don't worry -- Ayers, Wright, Rezko, Khalidi, Fanny, and Fred ... get your "Hillary 2012" stickers ready ... the big O is headed to footnote-dom

Posted by: jamie hunt at October 10, 2008 11:13 AM (WgbqK)

14 Ummm, yeah, speaking of Traitors and enemies of the USA. What's the deal with the whole "Confederate" thing. Oh, and of course a country that enshrines slavery in it's constitution and starts a war over the right to abuse and exploit other human beings isn't at all racist. And you complain about the Weather Underground...

Posted by: Terry Robbins at October 10, 2008 11:36 AM (uHiz2)

15 Everyone, could it be that Richard's comment was written "tongue-in-cheek"? To Terry Robbins: Very good Terry, an excellent example of attacking the messenger and not the message. But really, we all know that events precipitated 145 years ago by democrats are just as relevant today as those democratic candidates lie about now. After all, it was predominantly members of the democratic party that led the southern rebellion and wrote that very confederate constitution of which you eloquently write. From Slavery, the KKK, the WWI anti-German riots, eugenics, Japanese Internment, to the poisoned race-bating we see today are all products of "progressive" democratic party politics. When you play politics with race, then race - not the individual - becomes important. And the extremes of such politics can spawn things like the Weather Underground. Which is why we complain about it. Have a nice day.

Posted by: Sparkey at October 10, 2008 12:25 PM (nl8zZ)

16 Ayres is reprehensible, he is also a "Chicago Citizen of the Year" and the Annenberg Challenge is funded by a famous Republican. So what you're saying is that you know nothing about Chicago politics.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 10, 2008 01:37 PM (NV3P1)

17 Oh man, this is the smoking gun: "Barack Obama and Bill Ayers met no later than 1987, where they worked together in the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools." Better Chicago schools?! Son of a terrorist bitch! How dare Obama want better schools! I bet some of those schools had monkey bars too, and I don't know if you've seen an Al Queda training video lately, but it doesn't take much to connect the dots.

Posted by: Irwin Handleman at October 10, 2008 01:46 PM (2LJbm)

18 Just a tip: if you're going to write a "media primer" that makes a bunch of factual claims about somebody, you might want to provide some evidence to back those claims up. Like, maybe, links.

Posted by: Sean at October 10, 2008 02:56 PM (qXFLk)

19 Sean, perhaps you're new here, but every single fact in this post--and they are all documented facts unless otherwise noted as just possible connections--have previously been covered on this site, most within the past few weeks, and generally multiple times. Check out the October and September archives, or if you have fears that I may not be playing things honestly, simply Google things for yourself. When I composed this post I made sure to use dates and names and specific details, because I know the media will never trust me (which is fair, as I've learned to never trust them), but if they plug the data I provided into their research tools and find the same thing, it might eventually sink in that the Obama-Ayers is exactly as I described.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 10, 2008 04:02 PM (HcgFD)

20 I might suggest Lexapro, I think your Paxil script might be doing you more harm than good at this point.

Posted by: Tommy Gnosis at October 10, 2008 05:28 PM (MhJuU)

21 I see the trolls have invaded this thread. When does troll season open?

Posted by: C-C-G at October 10, 2008 06:09 PM (kbd0j)

22 Now try to connect. Ayers is a socialist, besides Weatherman. He's well connected to members of Democratic Socialist of America in Chicago. DSA Chicago supported Obama's first political stunt under New Party. Obama launched his career in Ayer's living room. ACORN leaders in Chicago are members of DSA Chicago. Obama's lectures in Harvard showed that he's teaching people to be radical against the American system of government and economy. Obama worked with ACORN in his Chicago days. Obama is a member of Black Liberation Theology Church of Jeremiah Wright. Wright is a supporter of DSA Chicago. Many ACORN people are member of Wright's Church, the TUCC. Many Jeremiads are now member of DSA Chicago. Note that BLT principles are consistent with the overall platform of modern American communism by CPUSA and DSA. ACORN uses young people to be progressive, especially in participating in the Election. ACORN is and operative implementing Fusion Strategy of Communist Michael Harrington. Harrington chose Democratic Party as its host. That's why many communists and socialists in Chicago run under Democratic Party. Fusion strategy has been implemented in many states...now debunked as election fraud activities. Ayers and Obama's work for the youth and juveniles (outside and inside of prison cells)have been long and massive. This is why Obama is so popular in universities and other schools. Ayers stepson is now working in Venezuela to support socialism growth, and a major supporter of Pres. Chavez. Both Communist Party of USA and DSA (all chapters) including other parties Working Families Party (a major proponent of New Party's Fusion Strategy) have long given their Support to Obama since the primaries. Bill Clinton called them the Far Left. Note that modern communism and socialism in America has a platform of "anti-war" and appeasement. CODEPINK and MOVEON are party to UN manifesto in 2001 to protest the impending declaration of war on terror by Bush (i.e., prior to declaration). Funny, Barack's speech against the war on terror exactly matched the CODEPINK and MOVEON anti-war meme. Reading Barack's two memoirs, we will see that the above connections and dots are consistent with his own memoirs and recollection of his own ideas. The two memoirs can only be written by a socialist or communist. Either Ayers had ghost-written Obama's memoirs or not, Obama is really a socialist. MSM, being too liberal, helped in conceiling the facts on the dirty background of Obama. Obama is really a Manchurian Candidate of the Socialists and Communists.

Posted by: Rivendell at October 11, 2008 01:32 AM (nx0Ey)

23 Just a tip: if you're going to write a "media primer" that makes a bunch of factual claims about somebody, you might want to provide some evidence to back those claims up. Like, maybe, links. And now that you've cleared that up, Sherlock, get to work on the whole "moon landing" hoax.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 11, 2008 02:28 AM (NV3P1)

24 In the context of the upheavals of the 60's- 70's, I would argue that the police were combatants ina domestic civil war, and were therefore perfectly legitimate targets of the Weathermen and Black Panthers. The police departments of Detroit and Chicago were almost all white at the time, and continually terrorized the mostly black citizenry of those cities, as well as antiwar protestors. The most concrete examples are the "police riot" at the '68 Democratic Convention, and the brutal murder of Panther Fred Hampton by Chicago's finest. I realize not all cops are bad people, but when you wear that uniform you choose a side, and you accept the consequences.

Posted by: Lev Bronstein at October 11, 2008 09:34 AM (7gEl9)

25 "I realize not all cops are bad people, but when you wear that uniform you choose a side, and you accept the consequences." Well, this is a step up from pretending to care about the police, so I'll give you that. What are you, Bronstein - another rich white Parlor Pink trying to live out your revolutionary fantasies through cute little brown people? And speaking of "terrorizing" the Black community, David Horowitz wrote in "Radical Son" that the Panthers used beatings, intimidation, and murder to extort protection from the Black communities where they conducted their operations.(BTW - the sources he cites include writings by the Panthers themselves; they can't be dismissed as Conservative "misinformation".) The Panthers even murdered White radicals who supported them. Something for all the Bronsteinesque keyboard revolutionaries out there to keep in mind - no?

Posted by: Nine-of-Diamonds at October 11, 2008 10:53 AM (1aw/n)

26 yes it is true, when you put on a police uniform, you choose a side.....it is called 'good'. This is the side defending ordinary innocent people from dangerous criminals. Is that a bad thing?

Posted by: realityman at October 11, 2008 12:00 PM (cYu3d)

27 I live a million miles away and have learnt all I care to about Ayers in less than an hour (I mixed my research between left, right and his own propaganda). That a possible president can miss this (for even a few years) is questionable. McCain's Keating Five is not of the same league...and this seems to be only one amongst many contradictions with The One. (By the way..'That One'...is relatively easy to see can be replaced with "That Guy", or "That Dude" (that one senator sitting right there maybe?)). While I have heard some quite bad stories of McCains personal conduct over the years (unconfirmed)...I have also read (unconfirmed) his boot camp friend discount racial prejudice. The article was from a few years ago (probably 2000 election...but i the US media public domain) and not overly in McCain's favour...although his convictions were still evident. It also made me think (3 elections later is it?)...a definite survivor (already proven...I just mean politically), and determined. Also - that McCain was all over Fannie and Freddie for you guys a few years ago. Obama's position at that time? Or his campaign contributions from said couple I wonder? McCains too for that if anyone knows. The comparison would be interesting.

Posted by: Outside Observer at October 12, 2008 04:33 AM (mIxfh)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

As if there was any doubt about the media being nothing more than an extension of the Obama campaign:

A READER AT A MAJOR NEWSROOM EMAILS: "Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working." I asked permission to reprint without attribution and it was granted.

The Anchoress hears it also to no one's surprise.

If you recall, several weeks ago Charlie Gibson used a doctored quote when interviewing Sarah Palin.

Gene Johnson of the Associated Press was the person (I hesitate to use the term journalist at this point) who purposefully truncated the quote to make it mean something entirely different, and so I contacted his superior, and noted he had clearly violated APs code of ethics by doctoring the quote.

After a period of silence, I asked the AP "In what way is altering a subject's quote to change the entire context of the quote, and present an entirely false interpretation of what the subject clearly said, not at odds with the Associated Press' ethics policy?"

The response?

"the remark could be interpreted in different ways"

Yes, when you allow persons to slice and dice quotes until they sound like what the media wants the victim to sound like, it certainly can.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:37 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

Obama/Sulzberger '08:

Though these facts are a matter of public record, the New York Times, in what can only be explained as a willful disregard of the truth, failed to research this story or present any semblance of a fairminded treatment of the facts closely at hand. The paper did manage to report one interesting but irrelevant fact: Mr. Davis did participate in a roundtable discussion on the political scene with...Paul Begala.

Again, let us be clear: The New York Times -- in the absence of any supporting evidence -- has insinuated some kind of impropriety on the part of Senator McCain and Rick Davis. But entirely missing from the story is any significant mention of Senator McCain's long advocacy for, and co-sponsorship of legislation to enact, stricter oversight and regulation of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- dating back to 2006. Please see the attached floor statement on this issue by Senator McCain from 2006.

To the central point our campaign has made in the last 48 hours: The New York Times has never published a single investigative piece, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Obama campaign chief strategist David Axelrod, his consulting and lobbying clients, and Senator Obama. Likewise, the New York Times never published an investigative report, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson and Senator Obama, who appointed Johnson head of his VP search committee, until the writing was on the wall and Johnson was under fire following reports from actual news organizations that he had received preferential loans from predatory mortgage lender Countrywide.

Therefore this "report" from the New York Times must be evaluated in the context of its intent and purpose. It is a partisan attack falsely labeled as objective news. And its most serious allegations are based entirely on the claims of anonymous sources, a familiar yet regretful tactic for the paper.

We all understand that partisan attacks are part of the political process in this country. The debate that stems from these grand and sometimes unruly conversations is what makes this country so exceptional. Indeed, our nation has a long and proud tradition of news organizations that are ideological and partisan in nature, the Huffington Post and the New York Times being two such publications. We celebrate their contribution to the political fabric of America. But while the Huffington Post is utterly transparent, the New York Times obscures its true intentions -- to undermine the candidacy of John McCain and boost the candidacy of Barack Obama -- under the cloak of objective journalism.

I'm not sure of Goldfarb's last claim. When was the last time anyone thought the Times practiced objective journalism?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 458 words, total size 3 kb.

Should we take Marc Ambinder's critique of the Barack Obama/William Ayers story seriously, when he knows so little about it that he can't even spell the terrorist's name properly?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:45 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

(h/t Instapundit)

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:29 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

As much as we in the blogosphere love to the describe nonsensical utterings of journalists, pundits, and talking heads as "self-parodying," it is rare that national news outlets truly earn that as well as the Washington Post editorial board has done with their editorial lamenting the demise of the D.C. gun ban and the passage of a House Bill that seeks to normalize D.C. citizen's rights along the lines of those recognized throughout most of the rest of the country.

The hysteric and unsigned op-ed, Open Season on the District, is really quite a wonder to behold.

THE U.S. SENATE represents the last, best hope to stop the mindless push to enact a dangerous gun law in the District. And stop it the senators must.

That "dangerous gun law" would bring the district's gun laws in line with the majority of gun restrictions in the United States, areas that have far less gun crime that historically have far less gun crime than D.C. a fact the editors purposefully avoid mentioning.

The House voted yesterday to adopt a measure that would gut the District's gun laws and that goes far beyond the Supreme Court's finding this summer of an individual right to bear arms. The bill would prohibit the District from requiring that weapons be registered -- the most reasonable and benign of measures. It would allow ownership of semiautomatic handguns and rifles and would place no age restriction on gun possession. And it would effectively strip the District of the ability to enact any regulations that could be seen as unduly burdening gun ownership. If even registration is seen as unduly burdensome, that leaves little room and little hope for other reasonable provisions.

Weapons registration, far from being "reasonable and benign," is recognized as a prelude to confiscation, and historically been used as such around the world. As a result, registration is very unpopular in the United States and is shunned in most cities and states.

Likewise, semi-automatic handguns and rifles are by far the most popular firearms purchased and owned in America today. The Post editorial board, like many who have a visceral dislike of firearms and little or no practical experience with them, either confuses semi-automatic weapons with machine guns (fully automatic weapons), or seeks to confuse and alarm the uninformed reader.

As for the comment on age restrictions, that is a purposeful deception verging on outright fabrication by the Post, and demands a correction. By Federal law, citizens must be 18 to possess handguns or handgun-only ammunition, and 21 to purchase handguns in the United States. It is true person of any age may possess a long gun (shotgun or rifle), but must be 18 by federal law to purchase one. The applicable law was designed so that minors can possess (hold, use) a firearm to participate in shooting sports. Clearly, the Post is engaging in fear-mongering to scare their readership to adopt their fear-based point-of-view.

The bill is not only a slap in the face to home rule, it is an affront to common sense and safety. How are police supposed to trace guns used in crimes if they are unregistered?

This is a pair of non-sequiturs.

"Home rule" does not excuse governments on any level in the United States from violating the Constitution, and that includes the District of Columbia. Somehow, I rather doubt the Post would venture forth with the home rule argument if the subject in question was the restriction of their First Amendment freedoms to engage in deceptive editorializing.

The registration of a firearm is irrelevant in tracing a weapon actively being used in crime, and once such a gun is confiscation the serial number is used for an ATF trace, currently used in every state, including the vast majority of those without gun registration.

How are they to protect lawmakers, dignitaries, visitors, workers and residents when guns are treated like any other product to be bought and sold with no restrictions?

Again, the "no restrictions" claim is more than hyperbole, it is a purposeful, calculated lie, as the federal laws alluded to above make clear.

As for protecting Americans and visitors, we've been doing precisely that throughout the rest of the United States for several hundred years with most areas suffering a far lower gun-related felony crime rate than D.C., this is another misleading question based upon a false assertion.

While many gun rights advocates tout their bona fides as law-and-order types, they apparently have no trouble ignoring the testimony of scores of police chiefs and law enforcement officers across the country who believe that sensible regulation saves lives.

Of course many police chiefs view gun restrictions favorably. Their primary and most immediate concern is to keep their officers alive, and if forced to admit it, their secondary concern is to minimize legal risk to teh department. A disarmed citizenry poses a lower risk to the police both legally and practically, and minimizes the chances of police being successfully sued in court for wrongfully killing an armed citizen. As police know they cannot be sued for failing to prevent crimes, they would much rather have their officers encounter disarmed victims at a crime scene than show up to find an armed and agitated citizen standing over a dead rapist or armed robber.

It doesn't mean that their preferences are better for anyone than themselves.

And never mind that even Justice Antonin Scalia, among the most conservative jurists in the land, went out of his way in District of Columbia v. Heller to note that a constitutional right to keep and bear arms and reasonable government regulation -- including registration and a ban on assault weapons -- are not mutually exclusive propositions.

Another non-sequitur. Scalia's opinion as a SCOTUS justice is not designed to be a law unto itself. His job is to interpret laws and determine if they meet Constitutional standards. The author of this editorial can just as easily argue that Scalia's opinion in Heller would support H.R. 6842, the very law this editorial so obtusely and emotionally argues against.

The drafters and supporters of this bill have done what many thought was impossible: They've made Justice Scalia look like a liberal.

Again, hyperbole that does not advance their argument, but which perhaps further advances the argument that they are finding it difficult to base their opposition on anything other than gut-level fears.

The National Rifle Association championed the bill, and House Democratic leaders caved in to its demand that the bill be brought to a vote after the organization threatened to withhold endorsements of conservative Democrats in tight races this year. Conscientious senators of both parties must now stand up to these intimidation tactics and prevent a dangerously bad bill from becoming law.

Unlike the editors of the Post, who have decided that they will attempt to tell you how to think, I'll do what they will not.

Here is the full text of House Resolution 6842, otherwise know as the National Capital Security and Safety Act. Read it for yourself.

Note that the law merely extends Second Amendment rights commonly held in the rest of the 50 states to citizens of Washington, D.C, and abolishes a patently silly D.C. law that arbitrarily labeled nearly every magazine-fed firearm machine guns.

And once you've read the law, and noted how the Post has chosen to misrepresent it, wonder how you can ever trust them to objectively report or editorialize on any subject, ever again.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:53 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 1257 words, total size 8 kb.