Tag Archives: japanese

MSNBC Suggests Palin & Bachmann Encouraged Shooting Minorities, Ignores Obama’s ‘We Bring a Gun’ to Fight GOP

On Thursday’s The Ed Show on MSNBC, substitute host Cenk Uygur — also of the Young Turks — blamed conservative opposition to the Ground Zero mosque for acts of violence against Muslims, and charged that the Republican party is the “party of hate.” He soon added: “Then there`s the vitriolic fight against immigrants, undocumented ones and in Arizona just people who happen to look undocumented. And, of course, there`s the grand daddy of all prejudice, fear and hatred stoked up against Muslims in this country. Now, it`s gotten so bad that a young man stabbed a cabbie in the neck and face Tuesday after finding out that he was Muslim.” He eventually asked: “What black person, gay guy or girl, immigrant or Muslim-American in their right mind would vote for the Republican party? They might as well hang a sign around their neck saying I hate myself.” Uygur also recited a list of violent incidents from the past couple of years, while also running clips of conservatives like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and Bill O’Reilly in an attempt to prove that they were responsible for inciting specific violent incidents. At one point, he even used edited clips of Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann in such a way as to suggest that they had encouraged people to shoot Muslims or other minorities. After recounting recent incidents of violence against Muslims, he tied in Palin and Bachmann: CENK UYGUR: If the manufactured rage against minorities and Muslims in particular was not bad enough, Republicans across the country have added an element of violent imagery to top it off. SARAH PALIN, AT PODIUM, UNDATED: It`s not a time to retreat. It`s a time to reload. REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN) AUDIO DATED MARCH 2009: I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue. Palin first used this phrase after the passage of ObamaCare, while the clip in question comes from an event in Nevada from March 27 of this year. And Bachmann’s quote was in reference to the Democratic energy plan. The MSNBC host did not mention that President Barack Obama himself once made a much more direct metaphor about using a gun to fight political opposition as he reassured attendees of a fund-raiser in Philadelphia in June 2008: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun. Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.” More of the context of Palin’s words from the March 27 event, in which she clarified that her words were meant to inspire people to peacefully vote and take part in politics: If we stick to our principles, we’re going to be just fine. Now, when I talk about it’s not a time to retreat it’s a time to reload , what I’m talking about, now, media, try to get this right, okay? That’s not inciting violence. What that is doing is trying to inspire people to get involved in their local elections and these upcoming federal elections. It’s telling people that their arms are their vote. It’s not inciting violence. It’s telling people, don’t ever let anybody tell you to sit down and shut up, Americans. You stand up and you stand tall. And we’re just going to be fine. And more of the context of Bachmann’s statement : “And I’m going to have materials for people when they leave. I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us, having a revolution every now and then is a good thing.” Uygur also never relayed to viewers that the suspect in the stabbing case, Michael Enright, was involved with a liberal, pro-Muslim organization that supports building a mosque near Ground Zero, or that, according to Wednesday’s World News on ABC, anti-Muslim hate crimes are “not on the rise.” ABC News correspondent Jeremy Hubbard: “most recent FBI crime stats show in 2008, there were 123 anti-Islam bias crimes nationwide a number that paled in comparison to at least one other religion [1,055 against Jews]. And even in New York, police say crimes against Muslims are not on the rise.” Instead of informing MSNBC viewers of any holes in his anti-conservative theory, Uygur brought in Mark Potok of the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center to agree with his indictment of Ground Zero mosque opponents. Potok: “I think it`s about as clear as it could be that this comes right out of the really rancid debate around the whole Ground Zero Islamic Center.” Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Thursday, August 26, The Ed Show on MSNBC, with critical portions in bold : CENK UYGUR, ANCHOR: Good evening, everybody and welcome to “The Ed Show.” I`m Cenk Uygur in for Ed Schultz. These stories are hot tonight. The right wing has spent weeks stoking hate on the Muslim community center near Ground Zero. Now that hate-filled rhetoric is turning into real violence and they pretend to be surprised. My commentary on that in just a moment. … Tonight, we start with the party of hate. The Republican Party in this country has been running on hate and division for the last 50 years. First, it was the southern strategy meant to discriminate against African-Americans in order to gain white southern votes. That worked in capturing the south for a generation or more, but they lost the entire African-American vote for even longer. That`s what happens when you slap someone across the face. Then, once that well started to run dry, they apologized. In 2005, Republican Chairman Ken Mehlman told the NAACP he was sorry: Quote, “Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I`m here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.” And then they unapologetically picked their next target, gay Americans. They ran campaigns all across America, premised on taking away rights from gays in this country. Now, one of the architects of that plan, Ken Mehlman, who ran George W. Bush`s campaign in `04 and was the RNC chair in `06, has come out and said he`s gay. Again, our bad, our mistake, not that they`re stopping attacks on that front, I`ll have more on that later. Then there`s the vitriolic fight against immigrants, undocumented ones and in Arizona just people who happen to look undocumented. And, of course, there`s the grand daddy of all prejudice, fear and hatred stoked up against Muslims in this country. Now, it`s gotten so bad that a young man stabbed a cabbie in the neck and face Tuesday after finding out that he was Muslim. He yelled, “Asalaam Alaikum, this is your checkpoint.” Ironically, “Asalaam Alaikum,” means peace be with you. But Islam has been so twisted by conservative demagogues here that a peaceful greeting has been misinterpreted as a war cry and then used against Muslims. Then a man yesterday walked into a mosque in Queens and urinated all over their prayer rugs while yelling that all Muslims were terrorists. Gee, I wonder where he got that idea? NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: Nazis don`t have the right to put up a sign next to the holocaust museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There`s no reason for to us accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center. UYGUR: If the manufactured rage against minorities and Muslims in particular was not bad enough, Republicans across the country have added an element of violent imagery to top it off. SARAH PALIN, AT PODIUM: It`s not a time to retreat. It`s a time to reload. REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN) AUDIO DATED MARCH 2009: I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue. UYGUR: And it hasn`t been just Muslim-Americans who`ve been on the receiving end of this violence. There was Scott Roeder who killed abortion provider Dr. Tiller after hearing provocation like this: BILL O`REILLY, FNC HOST: No matter what you think about the abortion issue, you should be very disturbed by what continues to happen in Kansas. This man, Dr. George Tiller – known as Tiller, the baby killer – is performing late-term abortions without defining the specific medical reasons why. UYGUR: Then there was the guy in Pittsburgh who killed three police officers because he was convinced they were coming for his guns. Gee, I wonder where he got that idea. GLENN BECK, FNC HOST: He will slowly but surely take away your gun or take away your ability to shoot a gun, carry a gun. He will make them more expensive. He`ll tax them out of existence. He will because he has said he would. He will tax your gun or take your gun away one way or another. UYGUR: Then there was the man in Tennessee who shot people inside what he considered a, quote, “liberal church.” He was reading O`Reilly and Hannity`s books on how terrible liberals are, and might have heard a rant like this. BECK: I beg you, look for the words social justice or economic justice on your church website. If you find it, run as fast as you can. UYGUR: Look, this is destructive to our country. It rips us all apart. The demagoguery especially based on race or religion is also destructive to the idea of America. That we are all created equal, and are all equally American. But it`s also destructive to the Republican Party. What black person, gay guy or girl, immigrant or Muslim American in their right mind would vote for the Republican Party? They might as well hang a sign around their neck saying I hate myself. So, in the end, the GOP will be left holding a shrinking part of the U.S. population screaming about how they hate everyone else. That`s a terrible political strategy. Don`t get me wrong. Demagoguing does work in the short run. That`s why they do it. They`ve been doing it since McCarthy because it gives them a temporary leg up in the next election, but in the long run, it kills your own brand. You`re not going to get a majority of even the white voters you think you`re going for by being the party of hate. They`re much better than that. They`re Americans. So after a couple more Muslims and others get attacked and the passion has died down, America realizes again that there`s no bogeyman coming to get them, the Sharia law is not about to be imposed in Des Moines or Sacramento, they will reject this politics of hate. Then where will the Republican Party be with even less voters, even more marginalized and probably even more angry? We`re witnessing the death pangs of a once great party, the party of Lincoln. That is no more. If they keep going this way, they`re going to go from the Grand Old Party to the sad little party and they`ll only have themselves to blame. Now, tell me what you think in our telephone survey the number to dial is 877-ed-msnbc. My question tonight is, do you think the GOP strategy of hate and fear will backfire? Press one for yes, press two for no. I`ll bring you the results later in the show. Now joining me is Mark Potok, one of America`s foremost experts on hate crimes. He`s the intelligence project director for the Southern Poverty Law Center. Mark, let`s look at what happened today with the cabbie or I should say yesterday getting stabbed. Do you think that`s just, oh, random coincidence that a Muslim cabbie happened to get stabbed yesterday or is this related to all the demagoguery about the so-called mosque near Ground Zero? MARK POTOK, SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: Well, I think it`s about as clear as it could be that this comes right out of the really rancid debate around the whole Ground Zero Islamic Center. I mean, you named some of the villains. No doubt about it, Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin and so on, but we also have major outfits like the National Republican Trust Political Action Committee claiming that the Islamic center will be a celebration of the murder of 3,000 people. You know, that kind of language is not only grotesquely false, but it is obviously demonizing. And that kind of demonization, as you`ve suggested, is precisely what`s leading to what seems to be a real spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes. UYGUR: Mark, that leads to the obvious next question of what can we do about it because, I mean, you see it. They say, oh, the baby killer, “What are you going to do about it?” they`re asking their audience, and then, all of a sudden, somebody kills Dr. Tiller. You know, you see it with the liberal churches. You just saw the whole list. Now they`re doing it with Muslims, but they have First Amendment rights, so what can you do about it? POTOK: Well, one hopes that one can shame some of these political leaders into saying something a little more responsible. You know, you`re speaking about the Republican Party. It`s probably worth remembering that one of the very decent things that President Bush did was immediately after, actually nine days after 9/11, he gave a very important speech in which he talked about Muslims were not our enemies, Arabs were not our enemies. A very specific network of terrorists was our enemy. And I think that Bush actually had the effect of tamping down what could have been an absolutely amazing backlash against Muslims and perceived Muslims. It`s worth remembering immediately after 9/11, there was a 1700 percent rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes. But, by the beginning of the next year, 2002, that had dropped by more than two-thirds. So I think that when political leaders like Bush speak out responsibly, it works. It`s helpful. UYGUR: No, and you do have to give credit to Bush on that, there`s no question about that. What didn`t help is him randomly attacking another Muslim country that didn`t have anything to do with 9/11. That didn`t really help the situation. POTOK: Of course. UYGUR: And it seems the Republicans have gone the more radical since Bush. But one final question for you: What`s happened since Obama took office? Has there been a rise in hate crimes, etc.? POTOK: Well, there has definitely been a rise in threats towards the president, in domestic terrorism aimed at the president and at hate speech essentially revolving around the idea that we have a black man and his black family in the White House. So that`s undeniable. I mean, we`ve seen skin head assassination plots, a guy who wanted to set off a dirty bomb at the inauguration and a whole long list. Many of the cases you mentioned like the man who murdered three officers in Pittsburgh were also influenced by this anti-Obama atmosphere a nd the idea that whites are losing their majority in this country. So this seems to be we`re seeing right now a kind of another spasm of the same kind of hate directed against people who do not look like the white majority. UYGUR: All right, thank you, Mark. We appreciate you coming in.

See the article here:
MSNBC Suggests Palin & Bachmann Encouraged Shooting Minorities, Ignores Obama’s ‘We Bring a Gun’ to Fight GOP

Pot, Pubes, and Promiscuity: 6 OMG Moments Miley Cyrus Will Have in LOL

If you’re a teen singer who wants to act, how do you get people to pay attention? If you’re Justin Bieber on CSI , you kill somebody but leave behind a very incriminating trail of DNA evidence — or, if you’re Miley Cyrus in her new film LOL , you flash someone your Brazilian wax.

Read more:
Pot, Pubes, and Promiscuity: 6 OMG Moments Miley Cyrus Will Have in LOL

Scenes From An Aftermath: 9 Great Reaction Shots From Roger Sterling’s Anti-Japan Tirade

I’m sure there’s something else relatively interesting happening around the culture today, but just one more thing about John Slattery’s performance in last night’s episode of Mad Men . Sure, his Roger Sterling confused us with arcane references and alienated us with virulent, WWII -fueled hatred of the Japanese — with whom he refused to work on a Honda account and whom he insulted with all the grace and class of scorched earth. We laughed, we cried, we mostly gaped –and so did everyone in the show. After the jump, a cross-section of mortification.

Follow this link:
Scenes From An Aftermath: 9 Great Reaction Shots From Roger Sterling’s Anti-Japan Tirade

China’s Nine-Day Traffic Jam Tops 62 Miles

A traffic jam on the Beijing-Tibet expressway has now entered its ninth day and has grown to over 62 miles in length. This mother-of-all delays has even spawned its own micro-economy of local merchants selling water and food at inflated prices to stranded drivers. Can you imagine how infuriating it must be to see someone leave their blinker on for 9 days? Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j7mCeh43Lk-RIXgcK3jGiDODQt0A added by: Tyrannous

With Friends Like These, Who Needs Glenn Beck? Racism and White Privilege on the Liberal-Left

His words rang out with an unmistakable certitude. “This is the most racist place I’ve ever lived,” said the man sitting across from me, a black writer and poet whose acquaintance I had only made earlier that day. His expression made it clear that this was no mere hyperbole spat out so as to get a reaction. He meant every word and proceeded in about twenty minutes to lay out the case for why indeed this place where we were talking — San Francisco — was far more racist, in his estimation than any of several places he had lived in the South. Worse than Birmingham. Worse than Jackson, Mississippi. Worse than Dallas. San Francisco. Yes, that San Francisco. From police harassment to profiling to housing discrimination to a persistent invisibility he’d felt since first arriving, there was no doubt that the ostensibly liberal enclave was head and shoulders above the rest. And it wasn’t his opinion alone. I have heard similar feelings expressed about the Bay Area by peoples of color many times since, as well as about Seattle, Portland, and any number of other supposedly progressive paradises where various “alternative” types (of white folks at least) seem to feel at home. Even those who wouldn’t rank a place like San Francisco as the most racist city in which they’d lived, are often quick to insist that its racism is comparable to what they’ve experienced elsewhere, which is to say, no less a problem. When I’ve recounted these discussions with folks of color living in “progressive” cities to my white liberal friends, they have usually recoiled in shock, followed by a kind of white leftie defensiveness that was, sadly, unsurprising. Their responses to the news that black and brown folks don’t find the history of the Haight-Ashbury district, or the Summer of Love all that inspiring — after all, when Jefferson Airplane and the Grateful Dead were entertaining white hippies in the Fillmore, black folks were fighting for their lives across the way in Oakland — often suggest a desire on their part to believe that the people to whom I’d spoken were seeing things. Unfortunately the pattern is all too common. If people of color complain about racism and discrimination in rural Georgia, no one is surprised. In fact, to many the image is comforting as it fulfills every stereotype, regional and political, that so many folks continue to carry around regarding who the bad guys are. But suggest that racism and discrimination are also significant problems in more “progressive spaces,” even among self-proclaimed liberals and leftists themselves — and that it might be unearthed in our political movements — and prepare to be met with icy stares, or worse, a self-righteous vitriol that seeks to separate “real racism” (the right-wing kind) from not-so-real racism (the kind we on the left sometimes foster). And know that before long, someone will admonish you to focus on the “real enemy,” rather than fighting amongst ourselves. “What we need is unity,” these voices say, “and all that talk about racism on the left just divides us further.” But such arguments, in addition to being terribly convenient for the white folks who typically spout them — since it relieves us of having to examine our own practices and rhetoric — are also horribly shortsighted. Only by addressing our own racism (however inadvertent it may be at times) can we grow movements for social justice. By giving short shrift to the subject, internally or in the larger society, we virtually guarantee the defeat of whatever movements for social transformation we claim to support. It’s worth recalling that at the height of the civil rights movement it was not merely conservatives and reactionaries who were the targets of the freedom struggle. Indeed, some of the harshest criticism was reserved for moderates and even liberals, whether the white clergy whom Dr. King was chastising in his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” or Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. In the case of the latter two, neither their relative liberalism (when compared to their political opponents) or party affiliation insulated them from the legitimate ire of peoples of color and their white antiracist allies. Going back further we should recall that it was perhaps the nation’s most progressive president, Franklin Roosevelt, who not only OKd the internment of Japanese Americans, but who was also willing to cut out virtually all African Americans from the key programs of the New Deal so as to placate southern segregationists in his own party (1). Capitulating to racism, and even practicing it, has a sad pedigree on the left of the spectrum as with the right. And it is time we faced this fact honestly. Distinguishing Racism on the Left from Racism on the Right That said, and before detailing what liberal and progressive racism often looks like, let me be clear: racism on the left is not exactly the same as its counterpart on the right. Whereas conservative theory lends itself almost intrinsically to racist conclusions, for reasons I explained in the first essay, liberal theory is generally egalitarian and intuitively antiracist. Liberal and left-leaning folks typically endorse notions of equality in both the political and economic realms. Likewise, most all on the left outwardly reject the attribution of biological or cultural superiority to racial groups. And those on the left are quick to acknowledge and decry the systemic injustices that have been central to the creation of racial disparities in the United States. So too, virtually all the activists in the civil rights struggle, contrary to the revisionism of folks like Glenn Beck, were decidedly to the left. Liberals and left-radicals populated the movement and provided its energy, while leading conservatives like William F. Buckley and his colleagues at The National Review published paeans to white supremacy in which they advised that integration should wait until blacks had progressed enough, in civilizational terms, to be mingled with their betters. Dr. King — even as conservatives like Beck have tried to co-opt his message and his legacy — put forth a consistently progressive and even leftist politics, in terms of his views on race, as well as economics and militarism. But despite the overwhelming role of liberals and leftists in the struggle for racial equity, and despite the antiracist narrative that dovetails with left philosophy, liberal and left individuals and groups in practice have manifested racism in a number of ways. Racism 2.0: White Liberals and the Problem of “Enlightened Exceptionalism” For years, the insistence by whites that “some of (their) best friends” were black was perhaps the most obvious if unintentional way for these whites to expose their broader racial views as anything but enlightened. Whenever we as white folks have felt the need to mention our close personal relationships with African Americans, it has usually been after having just inserted our feet into our mouths by saying something racially intemperate or even racist in the presence of someone of color. Nowadays, the assurance that “some of my best friends are black” as a way to demonstrate one’s open-minded bona fides has been supplanted by a more tangible and ostensibly political statement: namely, that “I voted for Barack Obama.” Thus, imply the persons stating it (often quite liberal in terms of their overall political sensibilities), don’t accuse me of racism. … full article at link added by: animalia_libero

watch fairy tail episode 41

fairy tail ep 41 妖精的尾巴 41 Fairy Tail (フェアリーテイル, Fearī Teiru?) is a Japanese manga series by Hiro Mashima. It has been serialized in Weekly Shōnen Magazine since August 23, 2006 where it is still on-going. The individual chapters are being collected and published in tankōbon volumes by Kodansha, with 20 released as of March 2010. A young celestial wizard, Lucy Heartfilia, travels to the land of Fiore to join the magical Fairy Tail Guild. Along the way, she meets Natsu Dragneel, a teenage boy

Read more from the original source:
watch fairy tail episode 41

"I’ll Cut Your Fingers Off!’: Mad Men Recapped

The Japanese are coming! It should be cause for celebration at Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce, but instead served as the trigger for an epic orgy of scheming, loathing and throat-slashing agita — just the way we like our mid-season Mad Men . That it entitles Roger Sterling to some of his most historic one-liners is merely a bonus. Let’s break it down.

Read more from the original source:
"I’ll Cut Your Fingers Off!’: Mad Men Recapped

Olbermann Rips ‘Racist’ Nugent for Speaking at Beck Rally He’s NOT Going To

Keith Olbermann on Friday evening once again stuck his foot in his mouth on national television when he bashed Ted Nugent for appearing at Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally next Saturday. Problem is Nugent is booked at the Boise Knitting Factory Concert House that night, and won’t be attending the Beck event. But this actually wasn’t the only fact Olbermann got wrong on MSNBC’s “Countdown,” for he also accused Nugent of making racist remarks while giving a concert in Dubuque, Iowa, a few weeks ago. Turns out that was 100 percent false as well (video follows with transcript and commentary): KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: But our winner, Ted Nugent, former musician. He doesn`t have a call in phony advice show and he was never on anything as big as “Seinfeld,” so it has taken nearly two weeks for this to get out. At the Mississippi Moon Bar in Dubuque, Iowa, August 5th, Mr. Nugent looked out over his audience and, according to the “Dubuque Telegraph Herald” said, quote, “there is a lot of white people in this crowd. I like that. This is a white town.” Witnesses say he then pointed to at least one member of the audience and questioned that man`s race. Why would overt racism from a prominent right wing nut job and gun freak take two weeks to get national attention? Because Ted Nugent hasn`t been famous since about 1977. But here`s the punch line: one of the speakers at the Beck-apocalypse August 28th, the anniversary of Martin Luther King`s “I Have a Dream Speech” near the Lincoln Memorial? Ted Nugent. I know. I know. You thought he was dead, today`s worst person in the world. Well, Keith, according to the schedule at the Knitting Factory website, Nugent is performing there on August 28: Nice job of research there, Keith! Of course, as Tommy Christopher pointed out shortly after Olbermann’s faux pas, it appears the “Countdown” host once again blindly relied on the shills at Media Matters who wrongly wrote about this issue early Friday afternoon. Making matters worse, a photographer that was in the crowd at the Mississippi Moon Bar in Dubuque on the evening in question has flatly contradicted what Olbermann, Media Matters, and the Telegraph Herald claimed: Although the Telegraph Herald seemed to be reporting that Ted Nugent put on a racially biased show last night, what I head [sic] him say in his opening monologue was this: “Hey there sure are a lot of white people in this crowd. You need to do something about that.” He later said, heavy on the sarcasm, “Dubuque is a white town.” If anything, Nugent showed how much he honored and respected black performers of the past such as Wilson Pickett, Ray Charles, Chuck Berry and James Brown among others. He said at one point that all American soul came from these black performers who gave their blood, sweat and tears to the music. He even launched into an American Soul retrospective with songs such as Soul Man and Hey Baby. So, it appears Olbermann and the shills he foolishly allows to do his research for him got this issue totally wrong. General Electric and NBC must be so proud of their employees involved with this prime time MSNBC program!  That said, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Olbermann to retract this nonsense next week for that requires character.

Go here to see the original:
Olbermann Rips ‘Racist’ Nugent for Speaking at Beck Rally He’s NOT Going To

Eight Years of Bias: The Liberal Media vs. the War in Iraq

The peaceful departure of the last U.S. combat forces from Iraq this week was another milestone towards the successful end of a war that many liberal journalists declared lost four years ago. Since early 2009, the war in Iraq has been a relatively low priority for the national press, which has focused on decrying the war in Afghanistan and cheerleading the Obama administration’s aggressive domestic agenda. But over the last eight years — since journalists began decrying what they termed the Bush administration’s “rush to war” in August 2002, a full seven months before the first bombs fell — the Media Research Center has analyzed TV coverage of the Iraq conflict. The bottom line: reporters were obvious skeptics from the very beginning, and did all they could to push withdrawal and defeat before George W. Bush’s surge strategy saved the day. A quick review of the media’s approach over the past eight years, with many links to the additional information that can be found at www.MRC.org: ■ Pre-War Opponents. Contrary to prevailing liberal mythology , all three networks (especially ABC) tilted their pre-war news in favor of Bush administration opponents. Covering the congressional debate over using force, for example, the networks gave a majority of soundbites (59%) to the losing anti-war side , or roughly double the percentage of Senators and Representatives who actually voted against using force (29%). Despite the claim that the media never “asked tough questions,” an MRC study of all Iraq stories on ABC’s World News Tonight during September 2002 discovered that ABC reporters were nearly four times more likely to voice doubt about the truthfulness of statements by U.S. officials than Iraqi claims.  Reporters also sanitized the “peace” movement , masking the radical affiliations of left-wing organizers while showcasing more sympathetic “middle class” demonstrators. ■ Combat Coverage. When the U.S. and its coalition partners began carefully targeted bombing of government buildings Baghdad on March 21, 2003, then-MSNBC anchor Brian Williams compared it to notorious attacks during World War II that killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians: “That vista on the lower-left looks like Dresden, it looks like some of the firebombing of Japanese cities during World War II.” Writing in the New York Times the next morning, reporter David Chen compared it to the terrorist attack on New York City : “For some, the bombing brought back particularly visceral and chilling memories. They could not help thinking about Sept. 11, and how New York, too, was once under assault from the skies.” But worst of all was NBC/MSNBC correspondent Peter Arnett , who reported lies about U.S. use of “cluster bombs” against Iraqi civilians. Arnett was later fired for denouncing the U.S. in a Saddam propaganda video just days before the regime toppled: “Clearly, the American war planners misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces….Now America is re-appraising the battlefield, delaying the war, maybe a week, and re-writing the war plan. The first war plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance; now they are trying to write another war plan.” ■ Capture of Saddam Hussein: When the former Iraqi dictator was captured in December 2003, ABC anchor Peter Jennings sniffed that “there’s not a good deal for Iraqis to be happy about at the moment. Life is still very chaotic, beset by violence in many cases, huge shortages. In some respects, Iraqis keep telling us life is not as stable for them as it was when Saddam Hussein was in power.” For a despot who killed hundreds of thousands of his own people, the coverage was surprisingly sympathetic. “The tyrant has fallen. But for some, he’s a fallen hero ,” CBS’s Kimberly Dozer relayed. “Saddam Hussein also gave Iraqis dignity and pride. He became a symbol of defiance across the Arab world, never backing down from a fight….Those who loved him and those who hated him still can’t separate the man from the country in their minds. For many, his humiliation is their own.” ■ Waves of Bad News. In 2005, Iraq was a mixed bag — historic democratic elections, but continued violence. But an MRC study that year showed the network coverage emphasized the bad news. Out of 1,712 evening news stories, the lion’s share (848, or 61%) focused on U.S. casualties, bombings, kidnappings or political setbacks, compared to just 245 (14%) that reported positive developments. (The remainder were mixed or neutral.) An MRC study of cable news coverage in 2006 found that all three networks emphasized bad news, although the Fox News Channel aired nearly as many stories about coalition success in Iraq (81) as CNN (41) and MSNBC (47) combined. The media’s inordinately negative tone was both frustrating and perplexing to those with first-hand knowledge of the situation. On November 22, 2005, for example, the Washington Times ran a lengthy op-ed from an anonymous Marine in Iraq: “Morale among our guys is very high. They not only believe they are winning, but that they are winning decisively. They are stunned and dismayed by what they see in the American press, whom they almost universally view as against them….They are inflicting casualties at a rate of 20-1 and then see s*** like ‘Are we losing in Iraq?’ on television.” ■ Hyping Misdeeds, Hiding Heroes. In 2006, the networks jumped on unproved charges of a Marine “massacre” at Haditha, with more than 200 minutes of coverage in three weeks. Referring to the killing of hundreds of Vietnamese civilians back in 1968, ABC’s Terry Moran wondered “Will Haditha be the My Lai of the Middle East?” But allegations of a heinous war crime have so far been unfounded: Of the eight Marines originally charged, one has been found not guilty and charges against six others have been dismissed. The trial of the last Marine, Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich , begins next month. While the networks were excited by charges of wrongdoing against U.S. servicemen, an MRC study of coverage from 2001 through 2006 found those news organizations gave just 52 minutes to the stories of America’s highest-decorated soldiers in the war on terror. Fourteen of the top 20 medal recipients up to that time had gone completely unmentioned by the broadcast networks. ■ Battling Bush’s Surge: The Bush administration’s attempt to salvage the situation in Iraq met with a blizzard of hostile coverage in January 2007. Ex-NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw scoffed that sending more troops to Iraq would “seem to most people…like a folly.” NBC’s White House reporter David Gregory suggested even White House insiders have lost faith: “As the President prepares to start a new phase of the war in Iraq, the White House is fending off charges that key figures in the administration have concluded the war is lost.” Over on CBS, correspondent Lara Logan counseled that an earlier experiment adding 12,000 troops into Baghdad “made absolutely no difference….In fact, security here in Baghdad got even worse.” The networks remained openly skeptical eight months later as General David Petraeus gave Congress his first status report on the operation. “Insurgent attacks are down,” ABC’s Terry McCarthy noted on the September 9, 2007 World News Sunday, the day before Petraeus testified before Congress. But “Iraq remains a very violent place….Life in central Iraq is still deadly dangerous.” CBS’s David Martin contended: “Victory is not at hand, not even in sight.” ■ Little Time for Good News. By late 2007, however, the surge strategy denigrated by network correspondents had borne obvious fruit. But the reaction of the broadcast evening newscasts was to begin walking away from the Iraq story. Network coverage dropped from 178 stories/month in September 2007 to just 68 stories/month in November 2007. By February 2008, coverage had dropped to barely 40 stories/month . The end of combat operations is really a postscript to what should have been the big headline, the success of the U.S. surge strategy in smashing the al-Qaeda fueled insurgency that was plaguing Iraq in 2006.

Continue reading here:
Eight Years of Bias: The Liberal Media vs. the War in Iraq

Help ban crush videos in the US

Crush videos, among other “fetish videos,” feature small live animals, such as kittens, puppies, mice and bunnies, being slowly tortured in the most horrific ways imaginable; including being burnt alive, cut with pruning sheers, nailed to the floor, skinned alive, beaten, stabbed, and having their limbs broken. All of these videos share a common theme: the animals are incrementally crushed by a woman in high heels. Most people view these materials for “sexual gratification”, but these videos are becoming increasingly popular just for their shock value alone. The crush fetish can be also linked to “paraphernalia,” which is an atypical sexual arousal to nonhuman objects and humans alike being caused physical distress. Crush videos are becoming increasingly popular across America, and will escalate to epidemic proportions due to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling to legalize them. It’s not hard to find such sites on the Internet with any search engine-keep in mind it’s now perfectly legal to download and watch. Minors can access these materials with a click of a button. If The Supreme Court says, “Okay fine, It’s free speech,” please first examine the damage it causes both human and nonhuman lives, and society as a whole. Freedom of speech has its limits when it places a society in danger, such as the ban on child pornography as it leads to violence of children. Films that exploit, torture, and kill animals for entertainment purposes also puts society in danger, for it is destructive by inciting violent and antisocial behavior, thereby endangering our citizens. Adults showing their own children these videos can cause emotional damage and lead to Antisocial Personality Disorders. This is not only considered child abuse, but is one of the leading disorders found in serial killers. While there are many factors that contribute to someone becoming a serial killer, the one constant they share is animal abuse. In short, there is nothing socially redeeming about “crush videos” and animal torture videos when used for entertainment and financial purposes. However, relating to educational or for political and sociological purposes, this should be the exception – such as speaking against, or educating the public about the realities of dog fighting or other issues and how it affects a society, such as the making of a violent criminal or serial killer. Sign the petition added by: crystalman