Tag Archives: article

UK Press Finds Possible ‘Muslim,’ ‘Islamic’ Plot to Kill Pope; AP Finds ‘Street Cleaners’

Check out the following headlines in the British press about the arrest of six men who may have been planning to kill the Pope during his visit to England: “Muslim Plot to Kill Pope” (Daily Express) “Pope visit: Five suspected Islamist terrorists arrested over assassination plot” (Telegraph) “Police question six street cleaners held over plot to attack the Pope” (Daily Mail) (2nd paragraph: “Armed officers detained the men, all believed to be Muslims of North African origin, as they prepared to go on shift at a cleaning depot in Central London.”) Yet in neither of two separate articles by the Associated Press ( Nicole Winfield and David Stringer/Victor L. Simpson ) do the writers mention a possible extremist Muslim/Islamic connection. The writers simply identified the suspects as “London street cleaners.” Why is the mention of at least a possible Muslim connection warranted? Because if these men are indeed Muslims who had a lethal plan, it would not mark the first time that Islamic extremists have sought to kill the Pope. Only by sheer luck did Philippine police thwart a terrorist plot to kill Pope John Paul II during a visit to Manila in 1995 . If Ramzi Yousef did not accidently set some explosives on fire in a Manila apartment, the deadly plan, which was less than a week away , likely would have gone forward undiscovered. In addition, the Daily Express reported that the “alleged plot is believed to be the second planned assassination on the Pope recently . In April, Moroccan students Mohamed Hlal, 26, and Ahmed Errahmouni, 22, were deported from Italy, strengthening fears that Al Qaeda were seeking recruits there.” (This also refutes Stringer’s and Simpson’s claim in their article that “there have been no known plots against Benedict in his five-year papacy.”) Like other media outlets, the AP has downplayed the seriousness of the plot. However, the Daily Express quoted a Vatican source , “Publicly the incident is being played down but privately the arrests verge towards the serious side and came as a result of intelligence work .” The two articles by the AP follow dreadful coverage by the AP’s Nicole Winfield earlier this week. In an error-ridden and slanted piece on Monday (9/13/10), she falsely claimed that Pope Benedict XVI had “broken his own rule” in his plans to beatify 19th century Anglican convert John Henry Newman. (Read more about that here .) — Dave Pierre is the author of the heralded new book, Double Standard: Abuse Scandals and the Attack on the Catholic Church .

Visit link:
UK Press Finds Possible ‘Muslim,’ ‘Islamic’ Plot to Kill Pope; AP Finds ‘Street Cleaners’

Monsanto and Blackwater’s black ops infiltrating websites

NOTE: Internal company documents show Monsanto paid a Blackwater entity (Total Intelligence) over $200,000 to scan “activist blogs and websites”, and suggest the issue of infiltration also arose. — http://www.thenation.com/article/154739/blackwaters-black-ops?page=0 ,0 Over the past several years, entities closely linked to the private security firm Blackwater have provided intelligence, training and security services to US and foreign governments as well as several multinational corporations, including Monsanto, Chevron, the Walt Disney Company, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines and banking giants Deutsche Bank and Barclays, according to documents obtained by The Nation. Blackwater's work for corporations and government agencies was contracted using two companies owned by Blackwater's owner and founder, Erik Prince: Total Intelligence Solutions and the Terrorism Research Center (TRC). Prince is listed as the chairman of both companies in internal company documents, which show how the web of companies functions as a highly coordinated operation. Officials from Total Intelligence, TRC and Blackwater (which now calls itself Xe Services) did not respond to numerous requests for comment for this article. One of the most incendiary details in the documents is that Blackwater, through Total Intelligence, sought to become the “intel arm” of Monsanto, offering to provide operatives to infiltrate activist groups organizing against the multinational biotech firm. Governmental recipients of intelligence services and counterterrorism training from Prince's companies include the Kingdom of Jordan, the Canadian military and the Netherlands police, as well as several US military bases, including Fort Bragg, home of the elite Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), and Fort Huachuca, where military interrogators are trained, according to the documents. In addition, Blackwater worked through the companies for the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the US European Command. On September 3 the New York Times reported that Blackwater had “created a web of more than 30 shell companies or subsidiaries in part to obtain millions of dollars in American government contracts after the security company came under intense criticism for reckless conduct in Iraq.” The documents obtained by The Nation reveal previously unreported details of several such companies and open a rare window into the sensitive intelligence and security operations Blackwater performs for a range of powerful corporations and government agencies. The new evidence also sheds light on the key roles of several former top CIA officials who went on to work for Blackwater. The coordinator of Blackwater's covert CIA business, former CIA paramilitary officer Enrique “Ric” Prado, set up a global network of foreign operatives, offering their “deniability” as a “big plus” for potential Blackwater customers, according to company documents. The CIA has long used proxy forces to carry out extralegal actions or to shield US government involvement in unsavory operations from scrutiny. In some cases, these “deniable” foreign forces don't even know who they are working for. Prado and Prince built up a network of such foreigners while Blackwater was at the center of the CIA's assassination program, beginning in 2004. They trained special missions units at one of Prince's properties in Virginia with the intent of hunting terrorism suspects globally, often working with foreign operatives. A former senior CIA official said the benefit of using Blackwater's foreign operatives in CIA operations was that “you wouldn't want to have American fingerprints on it.” While the network was originally established for use in CIA operations, documents show that Prado viewed it as potentially valuable to other government agencies. In an e-mail in October 2007 with the subject line “Possible Opportunity in DEA—Read and Delete,” Prado wrote to a Total Intelligence executive with a pitch for the Drug Enforcement Administration. That executive was an eighteen-year DEA veteran with extensive government connections who had recently joined the firm. Prado explained that Blackwater had developed “a rapidly growing, worldwide network of folks that can do everything from surveillance to ground truth to disruption operations.” He added, “These are all foreign nationals (except for a few cases where US persons are the conduit but no longer 'play' on the street), so deniability is built in and should be a big plus.” snip Through Total Intelligence and the Terrorism Research Center, Blackwater also did business with a range of multinational corporations. According to internal Total Intelligence communications, biotech giant Monsanto—the world's largest supplier of genetically modified seeds—hired the firm in 2008–09. The relationship between the two companies appears to have been solidified in January 2008 when Total Intelligence chair Cofer Black traveled to Zurich to meet with Kevin Wilson, Monsanto's security manager for global issues. After the meeting in Zurich, Black sent an e-mail to other Blackwater executives, including to Prince and Prado at their Blackwater e-mail addresses. Black wrote that Wilson “understands that we can span collection from internet, to reach out, to boots on the ground on legit basis protecting the Monsanto [brand] name…. Ahead of the curve info and insight/heads up is what he is looking for.” Black added that Total Intelligence “would develop into acting as intel arm of Monsanto.” Black also noted that Monsanto was concerned about animal rights activists and that they discussed how Blackwater “could have our person(s) actually join [activist] group(s) legally.” Black wrote that initial payments to Total Intelligence would be paid out of Monsanto's “generous protection budget” but would eventually become a line item in the company's annual budget. He estimated the potential payments to Total Intelligence at between $100,000 and $500,000. According to documents, Monsanto paid Total Intelligence $127,000 in 2008 and $105,000 in 2009. Reached by telephone and asked about the meeting with Black in Zurich, Monsanto's Wilson initially said, “I'm not going to discuss it with you.” continued added by: JanforGore

Maher: ‘I’m Against a Church Anywhere’

Comedian Bill Maher took his anti-religion, anti-conservative views off HBO and into the mainstream Sept. 13 during an appearance on NBC’s “Tonight Show.” Maher told host Jay Leno he’s against the Ground Zero Mosque, because he’s “against a mosque anywhere. I’m against a church anywhere, or a Hindu temple or a synagogue.” Maher declared that houses of worship are “places that people go to retell nonsense stories from a time before men understood what a germ or an atom was, or where the sun went at night. They try to telepathically communicate with their imaginary friend. These are places that fleece people, and scare people and they perpetuate mass delusion. We shouldn’t build any of them.” But Maher conceded that because the First Amendment protects freedom of religion, “they should be able to build them anywhere.” He also attacked conservatives and Sarah Palin, calling her an “evil dingbat.” Maher, 54, referred to the Tea Party as “the Pee Party,” describing members as “nativist bed-wetters who somehow control our national dialogue.” “They’re just, they’re afraid of a mosque being built inNew York,” he said. “They’re afraid of guns. You know, they think Obama, who like every other pussy Democrat, has never said a single word about gun control, but they’re very sure that he, he and his negro army are coming after, coming after their guns. You know what? If you think he’s coming after your guns, you need to get out of your chat room, and have your house tested for lead. He’s not coming after your guns or your Bible or your fishing pole or your chewing tobacco and there’s not a monster under your bed. That’s the ab lounger you ordered and never used.” Maher did acknowledge one difference between Christians and Muslims many in the media overlook. “They have nuts and we have nuts,” Maher said, talking about Muslims and presumably non-Muslims. “Their nuts are a lot more numerous and lot more violent. That mouth breather down inFlorida who was going to burn a Koran, what would have happened? Nothing. To retaliate, you know, they could have burned our most sacred book, ‘Eat, Pray, Love.;” No, they could have burned the Bible and nothing would have happened, okay? So you have to recognize that difference, too.”

NYT’s Deadpan Howler: ‘Lawmakers Were Apparently Unaware’ of New ObamaCare 1099 Requirements

New York Times reporter Robert Pear ought to consider moonlighting as a stand-up comic in the tradition of Steven Wright . Wright’s deadpan delivery is legendary. Pear’s deadpan lines in his article about the immense paperwork burden heading the economy’s way in the form of requiring IRS 1099 forms to be issued to each and every person paid $600 or more during the course of a calendar year for any and all goods provided or services rendered are remarkable. Of course, if Pear chooses to get on stage with his act he’ll have to come up with a more humorous topic. The nightmare that could be visited upon American business and really the American economy is pretty stunning — and don’t for a minute think that individuals with hobbies that break even or possibly lose money every year and don’t ordinarily bother to file tax returns for their activities (because they aren’t required to) aren’t going to be affected. What follows are a few of the choice one-liners found in Pear’s September 11 article (“Many Push for Repeal of Tax Provision in Health Law”) that appeared in the paper’s Sunday print edition on Page A25: The reporting requirement is expected to lead to a significant amount of revenue — $17 billion over 10 years — to help pay for the expansion of coverage and other health initiatives. I told you this guy Pear is a laugh riot. He actually expects readers to believe that businesses will spent untold millions on forms, postage, and handling of literally hundreds of millions and possibly billions of 1099 forms but will, even though these costs are fully deductible, still have to fork over $1.7 billion more every year in personal and corporate income taxes. In reality, where Pear, the Times, and Washington’s lawmakers clearly don’t live, the amount collected after considering the effect of the extra costs imposed will necessarily be much less, and could conceivably be a big fat zero. (the 1099 reporting provision) drew little attention at the time — it was one of more than 15 revenue-raising measures in the bill — and many lawmakers were apparently unaware of it when they voted for final passage of the legislation. Wow, is this guy a master of understatement or what? Surely a reporter of Mr. Pear’s pedigree will recall that Nancy Pelosi infamously said just weeks before the bill’s final passage that “… we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Robert Pear, New York Times reporter extraordinaire, know that “many lawmakers were apparently unaware of it when they voted for final passage” because they were directly unaware of anything in the bill. Why? Because they never read it, period. Pear had help with the final howler I’ll cite from Nina Olson, national taxpayer advocate at the IRS, whom the New York Times reporter should consider taking on as a standup sidekick: “The I.R.S. will face challenges making productive use of this new volume of information reports,” Ms. Olson said. “Challenges?” Shoot, they’ll have to rent hundreds of thousands of square feet of office space just to accommodate the tidal wave of incoming paper, find a server farm to store the data that comes in electronically, and employ and army of people to enter the data and sift through it. Seriously, the fact that Congress even has to engage in the exercise of repeal shows how derelict those who voted for ObamaCare sight unseen really were. That’s not funny, and that the topic deserved a more informative treatment by the Times should be, well ap-Pear-ent. A related post is at BizzyBlog.com .

Link:
NYT’s Deadpan Howler: ‘Lawmakers Were Apparently Unaware’ of New ObamaCare 1099 Requirements

Newt Gingrich Slammed For Saying Obama May Hold ‘Kenyan, Anti-Colonial’ Worldview

Fueling the myth mongering that Barack Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said in a recent interview that the president may follow a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” worldview. Speaking to the National Review, Gingrich pointed to a recent Forbes article by conservative writer Dinesh D'Souza which attempted to trace the origins of Obama's personal and political philosophies. “What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?” Gingrich asked. “That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.” “This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president,” Gingrich added. “I think he worked very hard at being a person who is normal, reasonable, moderate, bipartisan, transparent, accommodating — none of which was true,” Gingrich continues. “In the Alinksy tradition, he was being the person he needed to be in order to achieve the position he needed to achieve. … He was authentically dishonest.” Considering D'Souza's and Gingrich's prominence within conservative intellectual circles, it stands to reason that their article and interview respectively, will be much discussed in the week ahead. Certainly, it appears, Democrats aren't shying away from pointing to the content as evidence that the GOP is top-heavy with extreme rhetoric and elements. “This crushes the hopes of those who thought Gingrich could bring ideas instead of smears to what the GOP was offering,” said DNC Press Secretary Hari Sevugan. “He's not a reasonable man that some thought he could be. He's proven he's just like the rest of them. With a worldview shaped by the most radical and fringe elements of the Republican Party, which are more dominant with each passing day.” added by: TimALoftis

Slate Affiliate Equates Newt Gingrich With Koran Burner Jones

Imagine for a moment you were the editor of a magazine owned by the Washington Post and Newsweek. Would you a day before the ninth anniversary of 9/11 publish an article with the following headline: The Talibanization of America Viewed from Pakistan, the rise of U.S. Islamophobia looks depressingly familiar.  Seems rather inflammatory hours before such a solemn day in America, don’t you think? Yet, such was published Friday by Foreign Policy magazine, an affiliate of the Slate Group.  Sadly, the contents  – which in paragraph three equated former House Speaker Newt Gingrich with prospective Koran burner Terry Jones – will likely be even more offensive to the vast majority of Americans  especially  on September 11: In Pakistan, “Talibanization” is a label used to describe regressive and parochial conservatism, not just the political ascendancy of Mullah Omar and his extremist disciples. When we use the label “mullah,” it is not the same thing as honoring someone by calling him “Father” or “Reverend.” Instead, we’re most likely referring to a person’s narrow-mindedness, bigotry, and possible racism. So when we try to explain to fellow Pakistanis how the United States is much grander than the pettiness of Quran-burning circuses or mosque-defying extremists, we don’t use the same labels that Americans would. Describing the ideological kith and kin of opponents of the Park51 project — including the fringe element of folks like Terry Jones and his flock at the Dove World Outreach Center — with terms like the moral majority, far-right evangelicals, or even neocons is useless. Instead, when we try to explain what is happening in America, we simply say that a great country is going through a kind of Talibanization — led by mullahs like Newt Gingrich, Pamela Geller, and the occasional Terry Jones. Isn’t that special? So, as far as this author is concerned, the highly-esteemed former Speaker of the House is the same as a nutty Pastor in Florida that up until a few weeks ago almost nobody in America ever heard of. But that was just the beginning of the nonsense on display at this Slate affiliate: What if we didn’t present the Quran-burners and mosque-attackers as part of a fringe movement of ideologically driven extremists? Then of course, the only other possibility is for us to accept that International Quran Burning Day and the controversy over the Park51 community center both in different ways signify mainstream America’s growing discomfort with Islam. Simply put, if the Islamophobia of an American fringe is in fact not on the fringes, but in the mainstream, then the United States has an Islamophobia problem. But therein lies the problem, for this whole idea of Islamophobia is a fiction created by America’s press that’s been negligently presented as a mainstream fear rather than a fringe sentiment in a dishonest attempt to change the public’s view of the Ground Zero mosque. If the media had done a better job of describing what this issue was really about when the Islamic center was first proposed rather than taking sides and presenting a distortion that impugned the overwhelmingly large percentage against the project, this wouldn’t have resulted in as significant a controversy here or abroad. That our press, as they have been doing at almost every turn lately, championed the minority view against the very citizens they serve is at the heart of this so-called Islamophobia. As it pertains to Jones, had these same media outlets completely ignored his attention-getting stunt, this too wouldn’t have represented a problem either here or throughout the Arab world. Unfortunately, that’s not the way this FP op-ed contributor saw things: In the places where the 9/11 attacks were planned, financed, and conceived, meanwhile, the warm and fuzzy Islam of America’s suburbs is a nonexistent fantasy. On the Muslim Main Street, in Saudi Arabia, in Afghanistan, and in flood-ravaged Pakistan, Muslims can’t see past the Talibanized narrative of the U.S. mid-term election. Just as the mainstream news media in America cannot be held responsible for transforming Terry Jones from a walking punch line into an international celebrity, mainstream media in a country like Pakistan can hardly be blamed for reporting Jones’s shenanigans to 180 million — mostly Muslim — Pakistanis. On Sept. 10, as Afghans celebrated Eid, many decided to protest against the Islamophobic events planned in Florida. During the protests, NATO troops, surrounded by angry protesters, opened fire, killing at least one person in Badakshan province. It is easy to become partisan in assigning blame for this death. Many will blame Terry Jones. Others will blame the media. Many others will blame the mullahs who stoked Afghan anger. No doubt, some pundit at Fox News will blame the protester himself, and most people in Afghanistan will blame NATO. It barely matters anymore who pulled the trigger in Badakhshan. The point is that progressive thought is being lost in the places where it would matter the most. In the nine years since 9/11, there has not been a single domestic Muslim reawakening in any of the Organization of the Islamic Conference’s almost 60 Muslim-majority countries. In countries like Pakistan, mosque leaders still make the same anti-American references. They still exhibit the same resistance to change. They still get treated with kid gloves by governments that are run by culturally dislocated Muslims. Is this America’s fault? The United States today is a nation deeply divided along political lines. It’s currently impossible to generate a consensus view on how to stimulate our economy, how to bring down healthcare costs, or how to solve the looming crises involving the unfunded liabilities associated with Social Security and Medicare. In fact, we can’t even create a consensus as to whether or not Social Security and Medicare are looming crises. But we should be held responsible for what foreigners think when we can’t even get our own people to agree on simple matters facing our own country? This seems especially absurd when one considers the number of things many Americans are deeply confused about. As Newsweek humorously noted  a few weeks ago:  21 percent of Americans believe in witches 20 percent believe the sun revolves around the earth 41 percent don’t know Judaism is older than Christianity Less than 25 percent can name two members of the Supreme Court 63 percent of young Americans can’t find Iraq on a map; 90 percent can’t find Afghanistan 60 percent can’t identify the three branches of our government With all of our money, media, and education, we can’t properly inform our own people. Yet we should be responsible for controlling the thought processes of foreigners thousands of miles away with governments employing their own methods of propaganda to reach their own goals? Preposterous!  With this in mind, maybe this FP op-ed contributor should look at himself for answers, for he is more a part of the problem than the solution. After all, nowhere in his article did he mention the facts concerning the canard that is American Islamophobia. Maybe if he informed his readers that FBI statistics show hate crimes against Muslims in this country are a rarity compared to those against blacks, Jews, and gays, they’d realize that this really isn’t the problem the media are making it out to be. And maybe if he ignored Terry Jones, rather than mentioning him six times in this piece, the exploits of this fringe Pastor wouldn’t be a propaganda tool in the Arab world. At the very least he and his ilk should go to great lengths telling their readers that a tremendously small percentage of Americans support Koran burning as a protest against Islam. What this FP op-ed contributor and virtually all our liberal media don’t seem to understand is that America’s enemies abroad are looking to conflate anything that happens here or involves us internationally to foment anti-American hatred in their countries. This has been going on for decades and didn’t start after 9/11.  As such, if this FP op-ed contributor and all liberal press members would more accurately report events here rather than sensationalize everything in order to paint the most negative picture of the average American citizen, our enemies would have less fuel to add to their propagandist fires. I would say this was pretty darned obvious if not for that Newsweek presentation previously mentioned. 

See the article here:
Slate Affiliate Equates Newt Gingrich With Koran Burner Jones

Santorum’s Google Trouble a Warning to Conservatives in Internet Age

Here’s a delightful little story from the Sept./Oct. issue of Mother Jones, the far-left political magazine. It’s called “Rick Santorum’s Anal Sex Problem,” and, with its helpful creative artwork, it’s not something you want to read over lunch. Thanks to the efforts of a vindictive liberal writer, anyone Googling conservative former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum is fairly likely to get an unpleasant surprise. Among the top three results will probably be a nauseatingly offensive website based on making “Santorum” a “sexual neologism,” according to Mother Jones’ Stephanie Mencimer. Back in 2003, Santorum expressed a traditional Catholic view on the issue of homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Then talking in general about “orientations” always excluded from understandings of marriage, he included pedophilia and bestiality along with homosexuality. “The ensuing controversy,” wrote Mencimer, “prompted syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage, who’s gay, to start a contest, soliciting reader suggestions for slang terms to “memorialize the scandal.” Having selected the nastiest entry, “Savage launched a website, and a meme was born.” Once launched, the smear site “eventually it eclipsed Santorum’s own campaign site in search results; some observers even suggested it may have contributed to Santorum’s crushing 18-point defeat in his 2006 campaign against Bob Casey,” Mencimer wrote. Whether that’s the case or not, the damaging site remains, and remains a problem for Santorum’s future political aspirations. The site “hasn’t been updated for years,” but it still comes up high in the Google results. It’s been linked to over 13,000 times “compared with only 5,000 for Santorum’s own, real site, America’s Foundation,” according to the article. Mencimer talked to Internet PR and search engine experts who called the site “devastating” and said Santorum should “consider buying paid search results for his name.’ The article claims that Santorum “would very much like to be president.” If so, Savage, not content to let his website do its passive work, threatens to “‘sic my flying monkeys on him’ – in other words, mobilize bloggers to start posting and linking to his site again.” Mencimer explained that “Savage has not forgiven Santorum for his seven-year-old comments: ‘Rick would have prevented me and my partner from being able to adopt my son,’ he points out.” And that would be a shame, not to raise a child in an environment where differing opinions are met with vitriolic and gross scatological personal attacks. Why, he might not grow up to be a tolerant liberal.

Original post:
Santorum’s Google Trouble a Warning to Conservatives in Internet Age

Inconvenient Truth: 10 Times More Hate Crimes Against Jews Than Muslims

If you believed the media, you would think that hate crimes against Muslims was a growing epidemic in America. Just Monday, the New York Times had a front page story hysterically noting a “torrent of anti-Muslim sentiments and a spate of vandalism.” “The knifing of a Muslim cab driver in New York City has also alarmed many American Muslims,” wrote Laurie Goodstein in the second paragraph of her article titled “American Muslims Ask, Will We Ever Belong?” Unfortunately, as Michael Doyle reported on August 28, the most recent data concerning hate crimes in this country paint a very different picture than what Goodstein and others in the media have been dishonestly portraying of late: Hate crimes directed against Muslims remain relatively rare, notwithstanding the notoriety gained by incidents such as recent vandalism at the Madera Islamic Center. Jews, lesbians, gay men and Caucasians, among others, are all more frequently the target of hate crimes, FBI records show. Reported anti-Muslim crimes have declined over recent years, though they still exceed what occurred prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. In 2008, 105 hate crime incidents against Muslims were reported nationwide. There were 10 times as many incidents that were recorded as anti-Jewish during the same year, the most recent for which figures are available. The San Francisco Examiner broke those numbers down a little further: According to the latest hate crime statistics available , there were 1,606 hate crime offenses motivated by religious bias in 2008. A closer look: 65.7 percent of them were committed against Jews. Against Muslims? 7.7 percent. Another interesting data point: 4.7 percent of hate crimes in 2008 were motivated by anti-Catholic bias. Another 3.7 percent were anti-Protestant. So from a raw numbers perspective, there were more hate crimes against Christians in America in 2008 than there were against Muslims. Given our large Christian population, it’s true that each Christian is far less likely to be victimized, but the numbers still show that religious haters have not been singling out Muslims. Some data provided by USA Today last November also helps to put this in perspective: The number of attacks on blacks increased 8% to 2,876, accounting for seven of every 10 race-motivated crimes. Hate crimes based on sexual orientation increased 3% to 1,297,although the number of people victimized went up 13% to 1,706. So, in 2008, the last year such statistics were available, there were 2,876 hate crimes against blacks, 1,297 against gays, and 1,055 against Jews. Yet, with only 105 such disgusting acts committed against Muslims, America’s media want you to believe this nation is Islamophobic. Consider their premise as you watch the following video of a pro-Palestinian rally that took place in Washington, D.C., Friday (h/t Right Scoop ): Imagine the wall-to-wall, 24 hour media coverage that would ensue if rabbis at a pro-Israel rally spoke with such vitriol about Muslims. On the flipside, filmmaker Oliver Stone in July said America’s “Jewish-dominated media” prevent Adolf Hitler from being portrayed in his proper context. The prior month, the historically anti-Semitic Helen Thomas said Jews should go back to Germany or Poland and “get the hell out of Palestine.” A month before that, Comedy Central’s website offered an astonishingly anti-Semitic video game wherein one character said, “You lied to me, Jew producer.”    A month before that, a report was released showing that anti-Semitic acts around the world had more than doubled in 2009 reaching levels never seen since figures started being kept on such things, and our media almost totally ignored these disturbing findings.  Yet America’s an Islamophobic nation – don’t you ever forget it!

View post:
Inconvenient Truth: 10 Times More Hate Crimes Against Jews Than Muslims

FREE EDDY LEPP ANIMATION

www.HenryHemp.com tell em Bongwater Bob sent you. added by: hunzedog

Building 7 Implosion: The Smoking Gun of 9/11

Shortly after the explosive destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers, a third high-rise building was destroyed. It wasn’t hit by an airplane. The characteristic signs of controlled demolition were everywhere. Although it received little media attention at the time, the third-worst structural building failure in modern history occurred on September 11, 2001. World Trade Center (WTC) Building 7 was a 47-story, steel-framed, fire-protected, high-rise office building located about a football field’s length from the WTC North Tower. Unlike its two taller cousins, WTC 7 was never hit by an aircraft, yet it fell to the ground suddenly, displaying the classic signatures of explosive controlled demolition. A careful examination of this evidence shows why more than 1,200 architects and engineers are demanding a new and open investigation into all the crimes of 9/11, starting with this aspect, which is most obviously inconsistent with the official account. The evidence discussed in this article was ignored, mishandled, and/or covered up by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the federal agency last tasked with explaining the unprecedented destruction of the World Trade Center high-rises. The collapse of WTC Building 7 represents one of the worst structural failures in modern history. The official story suggests that fires weakened the structures, resulting in a gravitational collapse. The evidence, obvious to so many researchers but omitted from NIST’s Final Report, supports a very different conclusion – one that points squarely to explosive controlled demolition. If WTC 7 was intentionally brought down, then clearly it becomes a ‘smoking gun” that must be investigated. Who were the terrorists that had access to this highly secure building, occupied in part by the CIA, FBI, Dept of Defense, IRS, SEC, and others, and the technology required to prepare it for demolition? The 1,200 Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth present the scientific forensic data, evidence, and eyewitness and video testimony. We do not speculate as to who might have been responsible or how they have, so far, gotten away with the crime of the century. The destruction of the Twin Towers must be re-evaluated as well in light of the WTC 7 revelation. We therefore call for an unimpeachable investigation with subpoena power into the destruction of all three WTC skyscrapers. We ask you to do your part as a citizen to join us in making it happen. Find out how you can help at AE911Truth.org. more at link…lots to read, lots to watch, lots to know! Richard Gage, AIA, Gregg Roberts, and David Chandler Infowars.com September 3, 2010 Can you handle the Truth? What will you do when you finally figure it out? The Truth hurts (I'm from NY…it took me years to look at footage), but Knowledge is power; it will protect your emotions from fear, depression and negativity and guide you towards safety, happiness and positivity. The New World Order is real and I'm gonna kick their a$$ with or without you. added by: rodstradamus