8/31/2006
How do you compare President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld to Hitler and Chamberlain in the same diatribe? Keith Olberman shows us how.
The nuttiness of the leftist media is so amazing that I don’t even know where to begin. In fact there’s so much wrong with this screed that I’m not even going to bother talking about all of it, just the first sentence where he says “The man who sees absolutes where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning is either a profit or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a profit…”.
Gentle readers, I am here to tell you that I unequivocally believe in absolutes. I believe that we are in a war for our survival. I believe that we are absolutely right in what our nation has done to defend itself. I believe that the war in Iraq is just a piece of the bigger GWOT. I believe that leaking secret surveillance programs to the media is treason. I believe that when the media publishes these secrets, they commit treason. Do with that what you want.
8/29/2006
And I thought Maureen Dowd was nuts…
Take Maureen Dowd’s nutty leftist ideas, add a victim mentality, and a streak of race baiting meanness a mile wide and what do you get? You get the Denver Post’s version — Dani Newsum. In her August sixth post, Ms. Newsum decides to go after Republicans, and Christians — two of her favorite targets. Bare with me though, while I disassemble her screed.
This past week’s vote on raising the minimum hourly wage from $5.15 to $7.25 (over three years) brings the complete moral bankruptcy of today’s Republican Party into ugly relief: acheiving their ends justify the employment of any means - no matter how venal, hypocritical or just plain stupid. The GOP attached a measure to the minimum wage bill that would have cut the estate tax on the very richest Americans by more than $700 billion.
No mention of course that the “very richest Americans” pay most of the taxes already. There’s also no mention that the estate tax is probably the second or third time that income has been taxed already. There’s also no mention of the fact that when she says “the richest Americans” she’s talking about simple farmers that because of the estate tax end up loosing the family farm, farm land that has been farmed by that family for generations. Also note that $700 Billion is an composite sum. The “very richest Americans” would split that $700 Billion amongst themselves. Of course, I have no way of knowing how many people would get that $700 Billion because Ms. Newsum doesn’t bother to define the term “very richest Americans”.
Odd isn’t it, that Republicans demand up-or-down votes when it suits them (usually to install a right wing judge on the federal bench), but hard-pressed working Americans earning the minimum wage or little more aren’t entitled to an up-or-down vote on a bill to increase their hourly wage by $2.
Someone ought to tell Ms. Newsum that when Republicans demand an up or down vote, it’s because the Democrats have been filibustering the nomination and have prevented them from getting any type of vote at all. I’ve heard of no such action involving Republicans and this particular bill. All this was is an amendment to the proposed bill. What Ms. Newsum objects to is the fact that the amendment is there at all.
In 1997 members of Congress were paid $133,600 a year. Today, members receive $165,000; majority and minority leaders “earn†more. Although members of Congress have increased their own salaries by some $31,000 during the last decade, they haven’t raised the minimum wage since 1997. And no surprise of course, it’s Republicans (not all, but most) who oppose not just raising the minimum wage, but the very idea that the federal government should play a role in establishing a compensation rate below which most businesses cannot be allowed to go.
Well, at least there’s one good point in the post — congress is making too much. However, I’ve never heard any Republicans say anything about opposing a minimum wage all together. I find it interesting that Ms. Newsum doesn’t bother to name names in that allegation.
But, facing pressure from a gaggle of so-called “moderate†Republicans who didn’t want to have to explain to voters this election year why their work performance has “earned†them raises totaling more than three times the yearly pay of a full-time minimum wage worker, GOP leaders “endorsed†the measure, but tacked on cuts in the estate tax that would have cost the treasury at least $753 billion over the next 10 years. The GOP add-ons also would have actually cut the hourly pay of minimum wage tipped-employees in seven states
Ahh, so called “moderate” Republicans. Is that anything like the so called “moderate” Democrats which run to the right and govern somewhere left of Michael Moore? Probably so, considering we have such RINO faithful as John McCain. Then she gets to the heart of what troubles her about the Republican add ons; they would supposedly cut the wages of “tip workers”. The problem with that argument is two fold; first of all, I’ve worked as a tip worker and most of the tips they receive they don’t report to the state or federal government. Therefore, a lot of their earnings go un-taxed. Secondly, the article that Ms. Newsum references shoots down the argument as well. If Ms. Newsum had bothered to read past the first couple of paragraphs, she would have known that.
Republicans and the National Restaurant Association, which opposes a minimum wage increase and fought for the tip provision, dispute the Democratic interpretation. They say the legislation is only intended to have an impact when the states in question increase their minimum wage — at which point the increase would come out of a worker’s tips, not an employer’s payroll.
“No provision results in the lowering of wages for any worker. The purpose of the provision is to allow employers with tipped employees to count their employees’ tips as wages for purposes of meeting their minimum wage obligation,” Brendan Flanagan, a spokesman for the National Restaurant Association, said in a statement Tuesday after Democrats began raising concerns.
Back to Ms. Newsums screed…
The estate tax cuts wouldn’t have benefited people who are middle income or working poor. Nope - Republicans would have gladly passed cuts in programs geared to benefit everyday folks in order to pay for the Richie Rich tax cut, while the already well-feathered nests of each of the richest 8,200 estates would have each copped an estimated $1.4 million windfall.
All against a back-drop of the two wars (for now) that are racking up billions - and counting.
Once again, how does she define middle income or working poor. There’s no definition anywhere in her argument. What we do have to go off of is the definition usually used by liberals when describing the “Richie Rich”, “Middle income”, and “working poor”. I can assure you, if you’re making enough to afford a computer and internet service, you most likely don’t fall into the lower two brackets — as defined by Newsum and her ilk.
Then she lets loose with the much anticipated war reference. So what’s her point?
The GOP played its hand, and lost. Democrats and a few Repubs refused to play the GOP’s bullsh– game, and refused to send the bill to a vote. Of course the real losers are the workers of course, but the Republicans will pay a price too. As ugly as it is, this episode is just another chapter in the GOP Book of Horrors.
Whoa, a stunning revelation. Even I wasn’t expecting that. Who did she say didn’t send the bill to a vote? That’s right, Democrats, and a few Republicans (I can guess who they were). Didn’t she say earlier that it was the Republicans that prevented a vote? Let me check…. Yup, indeed, she did blame the Republicans; “Odd isn’t it, that Republicans demand up-or-down votes when it suits them (usually to install a right wing judge on the federal bench), but hard-pressed working Americans earning the minimum wage or little more aren’t entitled to an up-or-down vote on a bill to increase their hourly wage by $2.”
You know, this isn’t hard: the federal government has no business stocking the poolside cabanas and children’s trust funds of the richest, if it’s not willing to first make sure that middle income, working class and working poor Americans can pay their mortgages or rents, go to the doctor and buy medicine - and put food on the family table. And the very least lawmakers can do is have a care for the folks making $5.15 an hour or little more - people who are working at whatever they can find but don’t earn enough to live even modestly.
(FYI: As they did more than 100 years ago, many state governments are taking the lead on the minimum wage issue. Earlier this week the Colorado Progressive Coalition submitted petitions for a state-wide ballot initiative to raise the minimum wage in Colorado from $5.15 to $6.85 an hour, with annual indexing for inflation.)
What about welfare, isn’t that why we have a multi-billion dollar safety net? By the way, the Colorado Progressive Coalition is a private group not attached to the State Government.
But, Jim, you said that she attacked Christians?
Yeah, I’m getting to that.
But Repubs couldn’t have run their con without the support of some incredibly stupid Americans. People who actually believe that having the 10 Commandments on public display, or preventing same-sex couples from saying “I do,†or punishing CBS for daring to broadcast one of Janet Jackson’s mammaries is more important than eating, working for a living wage, being able to pay a doctor or a health clinic. People who believe in a Jesus who inextricably resides in the hateful and sinfully rich temples of James Dobson, Jerry Falwell and the Vatican, rather than with the marginalized and vulnerable. People who are apoplectic over a retailer’s policy urging its employees to say “Happy Holidays,†rather than Merry Christmas, but don’t give a damn about a president who’s unceasing lies have left more than 2,600 American soldiers dead, an ungodly number of Iraqi women, men and children dead and their country in civil war, and America’s internationally standing and influence in flames.
Where do I even begin? I guess all I really have to say about this is that Ms. Newsum is sadly deceived. None of the above grievances have anything to do with the minimum wage. So far as I can tell, it’s just another opportunity to attack the conservative Christian majority.
8/28/2006
The gesture may have been crude, but I can certainly understand Hitchens’ reaction. To have to sit behind a desk and do verbal combat with a leftist the likes of Maher while the Moonbat left audience sneers and jeers at everything you have to say is enough to drive even the calmist person bats. Oh yeah, notice that Maher tries to compare Bush to an Islamofacist nutcase (Ahmadinejad) who has publicly stated a number of times that he wants to wipe Israel off the map (I removed the profanity).
Christopher Hitchens: “Who wants a Third Word War? The Iranian President says that one member state of the United Nations should be wiped physically from the map with all its people. He says the United States is a Satanic power. Members of his government, named members of his government have been caught sponsoring deaths squads. He’s lied, he’s lied to the European Union about his nuclear program-â€
Bill Maher: “But you know that a lot-â€
Hitchens: “He says the Messiah is about to come back. Who’s looking for a war here?â€
Maher: “So does George Bush, by the way [audience applause]. That’s not facetious [audience applause continues].â€
Hitchens: “That’s not facetious. Your audience, which will clap at apparently anything, is frivolous. [oohs and groans from audience, Hitchens gives them the finger] F– you, f– you. [groans continue]â€
Maher: “I was just saying what the President of Iran and the President of America have in common is that they both are a little too comfortable with the idea of the world coming to an end.â€
Hitchens: “Cheer yourself up like that. The President has said, quite a great contrast before the podium of the Senate, I think applauded by most present, in his State of the Union address, that we support the democratic movement of the Iranian people to be free of theocracy — not that we will impose ourselves on them, but that if they fight for it we’re on their side. That seems to be the right position to take, jeer all you like.â€
Flopping Aces has the video
8/22/2006
“New Formula Offered” …. Yeah Right!
Western diplomats were offered Iran’s response to the carrot and stick package given to them a few weeks ago. Iranian officials had the following to say about the response:
Iran’s response has offered a “new formula” to resolve the dispute over Iran’s nuclear activities.
That’s all well and good, I’m glad that’s the way they see it. To me it just looks like more of the same. Iran turned away IAEA officials on Monday when they showed up to inspect one of Iran’s nuclear facilities and they are currently running a bunch of military exercises geared toward putting the fear of Allah into their neighbors.
Even so, Iran on Monday twice showed its determination to push ahead with its nuclear program. It turned away International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors from an underground site meant to shelter its uranium enrichment program from attack, and its top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that Tehran will continue to pursue its nuclear activities.
Sure sounds like a new formula to me… stall, sabre rattle, ignore toothless UN resolutions and proposals.
8/19/2006
That’s basically what the staff editorial in the NYT is calling for today.
If ever government whistle-blowers needed protection from official retaliation it is now, in the secrecy-obsessed Bush administration. Federal employees daring to disclose fraud and abuse in their bureaucracies have been under virtual siege, isolated as pariahs and shipped off under gag orders to lesser jobs in far-off places.
You see, the problem is that the Times trys to lump leakers of inconsequential things like $500 toilet seats in with leakers of the big stuff like intelligence programs.
The best display of Congressional intent would be for lawmakers to not just reaffirm the 1989 law but to extend it to all the national security bureaucracy and to private contractors. The nation’s need for timely whistle-blowers has been painfully driven home by gaffes in pre-9/11 homeland security, the premises for the Iraq invasion, and the administration’s illicit intelligence gathering at home.
Obviously in a time of war this just can’t happen. I agree to an extent that we should have transparency in government, but when media blabbermouths try to extend that transperancy to traitors that put our nation at risk for another terror attack, they’ve gone way too far.
8/18/2006
I’ve been looking for an update on this. I wrote about it Monday. Fox and other outlets (understandably) seem to be keeping a pretty tight lid on the story, so I’m not sure how much we’ll ever hear, but here’s the latest:
At the end of Wednesday’s On The Record, Greta Van Susteren asked Shep Smith if there have been any updates on the kidnapping. Smith said:
“Olaf Wiig, a freelance photographer who has worked for Fox News for sometime, and our national correspondent, Steve Centanni, as many of our viewers know, both taken in Gaza by armed, hooded gunmen, a number of days ago. Actually on Monday. There’s been no official word on their condition, though there have been calls throughout the Arab world for their release. We have kept the information to just the facts as we know them for reasons which I’m sure are clear to our viewers. Most often when journalists are captured within Gaza, they are returned within 24, 48 hours. That has not the case here, though there are indications of some kind that this may in fact resolve itself. And we have been led to believe now that Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig have not been harmed in any way. It’s our hope that we’ll all be seeing them again very soon, Greta.”
Let’s hope Shep’s right…
Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin
Nutcase Causes Trouble on Cross Atlantic Flight
Judging by the account in the story, there’s no doubt that this woman has serious mental problems. Whether or not what she did was malicious or a function of her mental problems is up to the court to decide. What I want to know is how — after being screened twice — did she get hand lotion, cigarette lighters, and other banned substances on this flight from London’s Heathrow to the US? Me thinks that maybe someone needs to have a serious talk with the screeners at Heathrow.
Mrs. Mayo demanded to speak with an air marshal, saying the contents of her bag would be of interest. Her bag contained a screwdriver, body lotion, several cigarette lighters and a bottle of water. The affidavit did not say how she smuggled the items on board, despite being screened twice at London’s Heathrow Airport.
Truly frightening.
That’s what a lot of people are asking this morning after reading the NYT’s joyous reaction to Diggs–Taylor’s decision yesterday. From the staff op-ed today:
Ever since President Bush was forced to admit that he was spying on Americans’ telephone calls and e-mail without warrants, his lawyers have fought to keep challenges to the program out of the courts. Yesterday, that plan failed. A federal judge in Detroit declared the eavesdropping program to be illegal and unconstitutional. She also offered a scathing condemnation of what lies behind the wiretapping — Mr. Bush’s attempt to expand his powers to the point that he can place himself beyond the reach of Congress, judges or the Constitution. [emphasis mine — TR]
Considering that it was the Times who broke the wiretap story, Dean Barnett (writting for Hugh) thinks it’s their reluctance to owning up to agenda journalism. I’ve got to agree. I mean, it really is odd that they would be so modest about their accomplishment, isn’t it?
Of course, if Diggs–Taylor had been acting as a judge, rather than an activist we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now. Baseball Crank does a good job of pointing that out.
Hat Tip: Dean Barnett @ Hugh Hewitt
8/17/2006
Terrorist Surveilance Program Shot Down By Detroit Judge
The safety and security of the nation took a big hit today when Judge Anna Diggs Taylor shot down the Terrorist Surveilance Program. Taylor is a Carter apointee to the Federal Court. Her biography makes it a point to note that she has used her positions to further civil rights — a fact, that I’m sure thrilled the ACLU (the plantiff in the case).
An attorney and judge, Anna Diggs Taylor was the first African-American woman appointed to a federal judgeship in Michigan and later became the first African-American woman to be named chief federal judge in the Eastern District of Michigan. Taylor has used her positions to advance civil rights throughout the United States.
The problem is that we don’t need an activist judge deciding cases that determine the safety of the country. We need a judge who will be a judge of the law as it is already written.
The NYT states her position as “It was never the intent of the Framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights…â€
The plantiff’s reaction was one of elation:
“It’s another nail in the coffin of executive unilateralism,†said Jameel Jaffer, a lawyer for the plaintiffs with the A.C.L.U.And Anthony Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U., said Judge Taylor’s ruling “confirms that the government has been acting illegally, in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment.’’
Unfortunately, the only “nail in the coffin” this provides is for the safety of Americans. The good news is that all this really means is that the ACLU has found an activist judge that will rule in their favor. The court battles on this issue are far from over.
Although she ordered an immediate halt to the eavesdropping program, no one who has followed the controversy expects the litigation to end quickly. The Justice Department said it was preparing its response to the ruling, and it was widely assumed that that response would include a request to postpone enforcement of Judge Taylor’s decree pending appeals.
The request for a stay of enforcement could be lodged with Judge Taylor herself, or with the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Here’s a link to a PDF format of the judges ruling.
Update: Jeff Goldstein has the quote of the day on this subject.
Even still, it’s amazing that we’ve reached the nuance point where only by revealing secrets can we show that the secrets in question should not be revealed, lest they damage programs meant to protect us from attacks, which only work while details of how they work remain secret.
Perhaps we can just tie stones to the NSA program, put it in a lake, and see if it floats. If it does, it is clearly unconstitutional and should be hanged. If it drowns from the weight of its own revealed legality, everyone will know for certain that it wasn’t, in fact, unconstitutional. Which, helluva lot of good that does us, sure.
8/15/2006
Intercepted Phone Call Breaks Up Airliner Plot
Ok, so I’m a day or two late with this one. It looks like an intercepted phone call may have played a big part in stopping the plot to blow up US bound airliners.
A senior Pakistani security official told The Associated Press that Rauf’s arrest prompted an accomplice in the southern city of Karachi to make a panicked phone call to a suspect in Britain, giving the green light for the airliner plot to move forward urgently.
“This telephone call intercept in Karachi and the arrest of Rashid Rauf helped a lot to foil the terror plan,” the official said.
Although, there is no mention of whether our Terrorist Surveillance Program played a part in this, one has to wonder if maybe, just maybe the Democrats will be able to see the benefit of having a program like this around.
8/14/2006
So, I’ve found a new plugin for WordPress that adds Technorati tags to the end of the post. It’s supposed to help you — the reader — find out who else is talking about this stuff, and what they have to say.
At any rate, I’ve learned some more programming, and I’ve learned that it’s really easy to screw up your template… And, so begins the long process of adding tags to my most recent posts. Let me know what you think of the new feature… is it worth it? Email me and let me know.
Two Fox News Jounalists Kidnapped
There are breaking reports [here and here] that two Fox News Journalists have been kidnapped by Palestinian terrorists in the Gaza strip.
Palestinian gunmen ambushed a car carrying a Fox News crew in Gaza City on Monday and kidnapped two of the journalists inside, according to witnesses and Fox. “We can confirm that two of our people were taken against their will in Gaza,” Fox News said in a statement.
A Fox employee in Gaza, who declined to give his name because he was not authorized to release information about the incident, said the two kidnapped people were reporter Steve Centanni, a U.S. citizen, and a cameraman from New Zealand.
The men, along with a bodyguard, were parked near the headquarters of the Palestinian security services when two trucks filled with gunmen pulled up and boxed them in, according to the employee. The gunmen took the two out of their sports utility vehicle, which was marked “TV,” and drove away, he said.
Let’s all say a prayer for the safety of these guys. I hope they both make it home safe!
And the Nutroots respond predictably. Sad, really sad.
Karma for FUX News!
That’s what they get for calling themselves “Fair and Balance” when they know they’re really not. Ha ha ha ha!!!
I wonder if he was trying to be profane, or if he just doesn’t know how to spell?
8/10/2006
Politics Can Wait For Another Day
Captain Ed reminds us that we should have spent the day thankful that the plan was foiled. Instead many of us chose to use it as a chance to take political pot shots.
One of the benefits of spending most of the day unable to post — besides actually getting work done at the office — is that I can spend a little time gaining perspective on the events of the day. Today that means reviewing the coverage of the foiled plot by Islamists in the UK to bomb a series of commercial flights, an operation that could have killed almost as many people as al-Qaeda did on 9/11. The discovery of the plot and the arrests of the terrorists should have been a cause for celebration — but instead, people decided to spend the day taking partisan swipes at each other.
Almost no one appeared immune from this impulse. George Bush gave a short and to-the-point statement regarding the necessity of fighting terrorism and managed to avoid partisanship, instead focusing on working together to achieve security. Even before that, though, it seemed like politicos could not wait to use the event to score political points. Joe Lieberman used it to attack Ned Lamont. Harry Reid, John Kerry, and Ted Kennedy all leaped at the chance to bash the Bush administration for diverting efforts against terrorism into Iraq — and bear in mind that the UK and US stopped the terrorist attack.
And don’t even get me started on the media, which couldn’t even wait for Heathrow to reopen before trying to figure all the political angles.
Do you want to know what the big story of the day really was? We beat the terrorists — again — and saved lives. Perhaps we could have spent the day reflecting on that and the need for continuing vigilance. The politics could have, and should have, waited for another day.
Huh, and I thought we lived in the United States of America
Our allies in Britain have stopped a plan to blow up several airliners in flight. British authorities have said it would have been mass murder on an unimaginable scale.
LONDON — British authorities said Thursday they had disrupted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up several aircraft heading to the United States using explosives smuggled in hand luggage, averting what police described as “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.”
Officials raised security to its highest level in Britain — suggesting a terrorist attack might be imminent — and banned carry-on luggage on all trans-Atlantic flights. Huge crowds formed at security barriers at London’s Heathrow airport as officials searching for explosives barred nearly every form of liquid outside of baby formula.
The Homeland Security threat level has been raised to red now for all trans-Atlantic flights from Britain, and to orange for other foreign and domestic flights.
The administration raised the threat level for flights from Britain to “red,” designating a severe risk of terrorist attacks. All other flights, including all domestic flights in the United States, were put under an “orange,” alert — one step below the highest level.
The plan is believed to be connected to Al-Qaeda.
Chertoff said the alleged plot appeared to be engineered by al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attack against the United States.
“It was sophisticated, it had a lot of members and it was international in scope,” said Chertoff. “It was in some respects suggestive of an al-Qaeda plot.”
8/7/2006
Today’s LA Times editorial breathlessly exclaims in it’s last line “…Given this nation’s history, it has a moral and strategic imperative to pursue reconciliation with Vietnam.”. I’m confused though, what history do we have with Vietnam that would make it imperative that we pursue reconciliation with Vietnam?
Perhaps, the columnist is speaking of our involvement in the Vietnam war. However, I don’t see how that makes it a moral imperative that we normalize trade relations with them. I mean, wasn’t it the communist North Vietnamese — who are still in power — who captured and tortured (real torture, not the stuff that passes as torture with the liberal crowd in today’s society) our soldiers, sailors, and airmen?
Furthermore, Congress passed a trade bill in 1974 that denied communist countries normal trade relations. I don’t see any reason to change that now. One of the key foreign policy goals of this country for many years has been to spread the same kind of freedom we have here at home. It’s the old carrot and stick ploy; if you allow the people to pick their government, if you give up communism, then we’ll have normalized relations with you. Vietnam hasn’t done that yet. I know there will be those out there that say “President Bush has granted Vietnam temporary normal trade relations since 2001″. That’s true, and, in my opinion, it was the wrong move to make.
The United States has a special obligation as the gold standard of freedom. We must hold countries that want to do business with us to certain standards. Those standards shouldn’t change because of money, or liberal angst over involvement in a war forty years ago.
8/6/2006
Reuters published this photo of supposed damage caused by an Israeli air strike. The problem is that the photo is fake. That much is clearly obvious because of the repeating smoke patterns at the top of the photo. So, the photo is clearly a very poor edit from photoshop, that’s old news in the blogosphere. However, there’s one thing that I haven’t heard anyone talking about — the photog that took (and doctored) the Beirut photo is the same photog that took many of the Qana photo’s that have been questioned by many blogs. The following quote comes from a YNET news story:
“I’ll second the cloned smoke…but it looks so obvious that I don’t know how the photographer could have gotten away with it,” wrote one user.
After further research, Johnson posted a photograph he says is the original image taken before distortions were made, showing much lighter smoke rising.
Other blogs have also analyzed the photographs, and reached similar conclusions, such as Left & Right , which states: “The photo has been doctored, quite badly.”
The author of the Ace of Spades blog wrote: “Even I can see the very suspicious “clonings” of picture elements here. And I’m an idiot.”
The Hot Air blog also looked at the photo, describing the image as “the worst Photoshop I have ever seen.”
Adnan Hajj, the photographer who sent the altered image, was also the Reuters photographer behind many of the images from Qana – which have also been the subject of suspicions for being staged.
“A photographer who would blatantly falsify an entire ‘news’ image would certainly not be above posing and staging photographs of rescue workers,” Johnson concluded.
Of course, simply suspending Adnan Hajj is not enough. I think Adnan should be fired, and it’s obvious that Reuters needs to change it’s hiring practice when it comes to hiring local photogs to cover this war. The way things are going now — the public isn’t getting a news story, their getting propaganda.
8/2/2006
Yeah, yeah, I know I promised pictures. Here they are.
8/1/2006
***Updates below the fold***
There has to be! For anyone who would do something as disgusting as this.
A French language Lebanese publication, citing an unnamed source in Hezbollah, has claimed that the organization placed a rocket launcher on the roof of the notorious building in Qana to provoke an Israeli attack and brought invalid children inside to serve as victims and blacken Israel’s name. [Emphasis Mine — TR]
Speaking as someone who is physically challenged, I am saddened and disgusted that anyone would do something this evil. Furthermore, I am disgusted by anyone who can’t find the courage to take sides in this fight! We as a civilized nation simply MUST stand against the evil that is islamofacism.