"Jewish minister of intelligence, Ronnie Kasrils" writes:
"On the question of my invoking the Nazi parallel with Israel, you fail to acknowledge that I have consistently and pointedly referred to certain comparable measures being employed against the people of Palestine and Lebanon," he said. "I am clearly referring to certain actions and not a total genocidal system such as the Holocaust," Kasrils wrote.
"Mr. Editor, you and the cowardly cabal behind you can ban and vilify me, but as long as I have breath I will continue to protest against Israel's fascist-style brutality and declare 'Not in my name' in the interest of the true values of Judaism and humanity and in support of justice and security for all Christians, Jews and Muslims in the Middle East and further afield."
Here is a decent Jew who is standing up for justice. He is being wronged by the South African Jewish Report because he is telling the truth about Israel.
Kasrils "accused the newspaper of misleading readers into believing that he was calling for the annihilation of Israel and that he was a Holocaust denier."
"The South African Jewish Report is also going head-to-head with the South African Freedom of Expression Institute. In a statement released to the media this week condemning the SAJR's decision not to publish Kasril's letter, Jane Duncan, director of the institute, wrote, "The newspaper is engaging in contradictory behavior by publishing an opinion piece posing questions and then denying the person to whom the questions are being put the right to answer them. The SAJR had the right to editorial independence, but this was qualified by normal editorial ethics, which included 'the sacrosanct principle of the right to reply.'"" - S. African Jewish paper causes storm
Monday, November 27, 2006
WILL GET ATTACKED AGAIN if the let them continue these policies
"a reasonable Administration would not"
Experts say we WILL GET ATTACKED AGAIN. No matter what the size of the attack, why should even a single more American die?
a reasonable Administration would not continue the policies that guarantee that we get attacked again.
I really have to wonder about writers that would use the term "Chomskyite"
These people are in such denial about what the US government's polices are that they must invent stupid words in order to avoid facing reality? Chomsky happens to be right.
I have to wonder what is so damn difficult about realizing that when the US government screws people over it is possible that some of them will lash out.
We have devious people in the press like Thomas Friedman who work to deceive the American people about why it is we were attacked. Thomas Freidman LIES when he writes that bin Laden never mentioned Palestine until after 9/11. It is obvious why he lies to the American people, the same reason the President lies, in order to protect specific foreign policies, in this case US support of Israel. This is the same agenda that the 9/11 Commission served over the American people. 9/11 Commissioners betrayed the American people when they "rejected mentioning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the report." 9/11 Commissioners betrayed the American when they worried that "listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy." 9/11 Commissioners betrayed the American people when they omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report the key testimony in response to Lee Hamilton's question, "what have you found out about why these men did what they did? What motivated them to do it?" They serve special interests who don't want these policies changed so they have the audacity to lie and suppress why it is that the United States is being attacked.
Experts say we WILL GET ATTACKED AGAIN. No matter what the size of the attack, why should even a single more American die?
a reasonable Administration would not continue the policies that guarantee that we get attacked again.
I really have to wonder about writers that would use the term "Chomskyite"
These people are in such denial about what the US government's polices are that they must invent stupid words in order to avoid facing reality? Chomsky happens to be right.
I have to wonder what is so damn difficult about realizing that when the US government screws people over it is possible that some of them will lash out.
We have devious people in the press like Thomas Friedman who work to deceive the American people about why it is we were attacked. Thomas Freidman LIES when he writes that bin Laden never mentioned Palestine until after 9/11. It is obvious why he lies to the American people, the same reason the President lies, in order to protect specific foreign policies, in this case US support of Israel. This is the same agenda that the 9/11 Commission served over the American people. 9/11 Commissioners betrayed the American people when they "rejected mentioning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the report." 9/11 Commissioners betrayed the American when they worried that "listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy." 9/11 Commissioners betrayed the American people when they omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report the key testimony in response to Lee Hamilton's question, "what have you found out about why these men did what they did? What motivated them to do it?" They serve special interests who don't want these policies changed so they have the audacity to lie and suppress why it is that the United States is being attacked.
Monday, November 13, 2006
Republican Dirty Tricks
A good video that exposes the Republican Dirty Tricks. PASS IT ON TO EVERYONE. Republican Dirty Tricks
The National Republican Congressional Committee's Ad Tricks the Public.
This is another example of Republican Dirty Tricks.
The National Republican Congressional Committee's Ad Tricks the Public.
This is another example of Republican Dirty Tricks.
MR. RUSSERT: Let's watch.
(Videotape of National Republican Congressional Committee campaign ad):
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Hi, sexy. You've reached the live, one-on-on fantasy line.
AD ANNOUNCER #1: The phone number to an adult fantasy hotline appeared on Michael Arcuri's New York City hotel room bill while he was there on official business. And the call was charged to Oneida County taxpayers. Arcuri has denied it but the facts are there. Who calls a fantasy hotline and then bills taxpayers? Michael Arcuri.
WOMAN: Bad call.
AD ANNOUNCER #1: The National Republican Congressional Committee paid for and is responsible for the content of this message.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Now, here are the facts, and they're not disputed by anybody, from the local Utica, New York, newspaper. "What the record shows: A bill ... shows a call costing $1.25 to the number 800-457-8462. The call was made at 3:26 p.m. Jan. 28 and was billed for one minute. ... Phone records show a call made at 3:37 p.m. using his calling card to the number 518-457-8462"--the same numbers exactly are right. "That number, he said, is for the office of the New York state Department of Criminal Justice Services." An aide inadvertently dialed the wrong area code. Everyone admits it, and yet you put an ad on suggesting that this guy is calling sex hotlines. Is that fair?
( No, it isn't fair and Republicans don't care. )
MR. RUSSERT: You said you're responsible, that's what the banner says. You can take it down if you wanted to.
REP. REYNOLDS: I paid for it. The committee paid for it, it was pulled down.
MR. RUSSERT: Is it, is it fair? Is it fair?
REP. REYNOLDS: Politics isn't always fair, Tim ...
Pass this video, Republican Dirty Tricks
Sunday, November 05, 2006
The Innermost Belly of the Neoconservative Beast
The Innermost Belly of the Neoconservative Beast
"The American Enterprise Institute sits in the innermost belly of the neoconservative beast. ... The American Enterprise Institute's current wish list features, at the very top, a military attack on Iran, followed by such subsidiary enabling measures as prosecuting journalists, strengthening domestic surveillance programs still further, and a reflexive defense of Israel as the highest imperative. "- The AEI, Iran and a Free Press
"The American Enterprise Institute sits in the innermost belly of the neoconservative beast. ... The American Enterprise Institute's current wish list features, at the very top, a military attack on Iran, followed by such subsidiary enabling measures as prosecuting journalists, strengthening domestic surveillance programs still further, and a reflexive defense of Israel as the highest imperative. "- The AEI, Iran and a Free Press
Thursday, November 02, 2006
We can make this work if people just never figure it out
"Are you referring to ..."
No Mike, I am referring to the fact that Bush and other Republicans know damn well what they did with Kerry's speech. As Dick Armey said: "misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage"
Two days ago the ugly game was exposed in detail by Chris Matthews and Dick Armey:
MATTHEWS: Kerry was trashing Bush himself and Bush says, "Don't say those terrible things about my troops!"
ARMEY: Right.
MATTHEWS: So, this is a bit of theater orchestrated well by the White House. They have got the American Legion commander out there making a statement. They got him to do it. I'm sure -- I assume that most of these people did not read the whole statement of Kerry yesterday, but they are happy to jump on the quote they got.
ARMEY: A fundamental premise of politics is: We can make this work if people just never figure it out.
The Republican interpretation is dishonest, it doesn't make sense because "getting stuck in Iraq" only makes sense as policy. Are we to believe that a well educated soldier doesn't get stuck but a poorly educated one does? That doesn't make sense, clearly "getting stuck in Iraq" is about a policy. If Kerry meant what the Republicans want to pretend he meant, he would say "if you don't get education you could end up in the army or end up being sent to Iraq." Even Jay realizes that Kerry was talking about Bush and not the troops.
Kerry's sentence right before it was another dig at Bush so they know damn well the context was about Bush. It takes balls for Bush to pretend that a joke against him was against the troops. Bush is willing to upset the troops by pretending that Kerry was insulting them, THAT IS REALLY LOW!
LOOK at what the Republicans are doing to the troops. The Republicans have no respect for the troops, the Republicans are using them as a prop in a desperate attempt to score political points right before an election.
Like I said, "the Republicans are playing an ugly game, they don't care if they hurt the troops by making them think a politician is mocking them when he was not."
See A fundamental premise of politics
deniers of what you admit were atrocities
"Did atrocities occur in VietNam? Of course they did!" - USMC Pilot
USMC Pilot, you are now admitting what others here deny. Will they attack you? Others, including Jay, call what you admit happened "lies." Is that OK with you? You try to make some other point while ignoring the fact that others here are deniers of what you admit were atrocities.
And what is the problem with Kerry recalling the testimony of over 150 honorably discharged vets? He DID NOT say "the entire military" as you claim. In fact, if someone giving the misimpression that it was the "the entire military" makes you angry then you should be angry at all those that misquote Kerry because they are the ones that omit the words "at times" and give a false impression.
Guys, the Republicans are playing an ugly game, they don't care if they hurt the troops by making them think a politician is mocking them when he was not. The Republicans are using the troops as a prop in their efforts to gain political ground for the election. It is shameless.
Let's not skip past the fact that former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) admitted the truth: the Rebublicans are playing a dishonest game with Kerry's words: "It's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage. ... A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out."
USMC Pilot, you are now admitting what others here deny. Will they attack you? Others, including Jay, call what you admit happened "lies." Is that OK with you? You try to make some other point while ignoring the fact that others here are deniers of what you admit were atrocities.
And what is the problem with Kerry recalling the testimony of over 150 honorably discharged vets? He DID NOT say "the entire military" as you claim. In fact, if someone giving the misimpression that it was the "the entire military" makes you angry then you should be angry at all those that misquote Kerry because they are the ones that omit the words "at times" and give a false impression.
Guys, the Republicans are playing an ugly game, they don't care if they hurt the troops by making them think a politician is mocking them when he was not. The Republicans are using the troops as a prop in their efforts to gain political ground for the election. It is shameless.
Let's not skip past the fact that former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) admitted the truth: the Rebublicans are playing a dishonest game with Kerry's words: "It's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage. ... A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out."
the reason the amoeba is angry
Keven quotes Wikipedia, "Self described “Independents” make up the largest voter group in American politics" "please correct me if I’m wrong." Kevin refers to the Independents as "the Angry Amoeba." Here is my comment on his article:
It sounds incredible doesn't it? I only started to try to see if it is correct but let's just say it is for the sake of argument. Also, I think it is probably true since this source also says that it is true, it says it is true now having changed from decades ago: "In the mid twentieth century, party identification was a badge of honor. According to the National Election Studies program at the University of Michigan, fifty years ago 47 percent of voters identified with the Democrats and 28 percent with the Republicans, while just 23 percent were independents. In the year 2000, however, those numbers were almost reversed, with 40 percent of American voters describing themselves as independents, 34 percent as Democrats, and 24 percent as Republicans."
Isn't it incredible that the media doesn't have an Independent view represented every time they talk to a Republican and a Democrat? This is part of the reason I think you are concluding that there is no "vital center." I think the media simply doesn't present it so it seems like there isn't. This is part of the power of the media. Kat was right about the fact that the media is powerful and what that means, "Because you cannot know any different, you will base your decisions on what I have told you. If I have done my job well you will make the decision I want you to make." The huge part of the power is what they omit. MSM omits the Independent view because MSM's focus is around centers of power and powerful interest put their money behind what is often called "the two parties." The mainstream media could have on people who identify themselves as part of the Amoeba you mention but they do not do so for the most part, basically all the political energy is framed as Democratic or Republican.
I argue that powerful interests fear the angry amoeba and that powerful interests are catered to by excluding Independents from the media as much as we see. Compromise options COULD BE discussed in the mainstream media if they simply allowed it or didn't restrict it to the large degree that see that they do. A functioning media is essential to a functioning democracy. I think this is part of the reason the amoeba is angry.
And to make the point that relates to this, people need a real and fair way to exercise their democratic rights. the amoeba is angry because it is getting screwed over. It does matter if large parts of the amoeba are being deceived and manipulated by mainstream media and they never figure it out. People need to know the truth otherwise they really are not making choices without true freedom. If you come to my store and I deceive you into thinking I am selling you a sofa yet I ship you a thimble, you don't share the blame for why you ended up with a thimble, I am to blame because it wasn't fair for me to do that. I can't misrepresent what it is I am selling you and think you share blame for you being conned. The same goes for those that run our media and it applies to the "evil politicians" you refereed to in "If This Country Goes Down, It’s Taking Me With It." And this point is important because you take issue with me blaming "evil politicians."
I think what former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) said just 2 days ago on October 31 is something everyone should think about. Dick Armey said: "a fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out." Armey's amazingly honest admission about conning the public reveals what goes on in political discourse. Chris Matthews had asked him if what the Republicans were doing was "making it look like they've got Kerry saying something" and Armey admitted, "it's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said, you isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it, then feign moral outrage. And Democrats have been doing it for years."
It sounds incredible doesn't it? I only started to try to see if it is correct but let's just say it is for the sake of argument. Also, I think it is probably true since this source also says that it is true, it says it is true now having changed from decades ago: "In the mid twentieth century, party identification was a badge of honor. According to the National Election Studies program at the University of Michigan, fifty years ago 47 percent of voters identified with the Democrats and 28 percent with the Republicans, while just 23 percent were independents. In the year 2000, however, those numbers were almost reversed, with 40 percent of American voters describing themselves as independents, 34 percent as Democrats, and 24 percent as Republicans."
Isn't it incredible that the media doesn't have an Independent view represented every time they talk to a Republican and a Democrat? This is part of the reason I think you are concluding that there is no "vital center." I think the media simply doesn't present it so it seems like there isn't. This is part of the power of the media. Kat was right about the fact that the media is powerful and what that means, "Because you cannot know any different, you will base your decisions on what I have told you. If I have done my job well you will make the decision I want you to make." The huge part of the power is what they omit. MSM omits the Independent view because MSM's focus is around centers of power and powerful interest put their money behind what is often called "the two parties." The mainstream media could have on people who identify themselves as part of the Amoeba you mention but they do not do so for the most part, basically all the political energy is framed as Democratic or Republican.
I argue that powerful interests fear the angry amoeba and that powerful interests are catered to by excluding Independents from the media as much as we see. Compromise options COULD BE discussed in the mainstream media if they simply allowed it or didn't restrict it to the large degree that see that they do. A functioning media is essential to a functioning democracy. I think this is part of the reason the amoeba is angry.
And to make the point that relates to this, people need a real and fair way to exercise their democratic rights. the amoeba is angry because it is getting screwed over. It does matter if large parts of the amoeba are being deceived and manipulated by mainstream media and they never figure it out. People need to know the truth otherwise they really are not making choices without true freedom. If you come to my store and I deceive you into thinking I am selling you a sofa yet I ship you a thimble, you don't share the blame for why you ended up with a thimble, I am to blame because it wasn't fair for me to do that. I can't misrepresent what it is I am selling you and think you share blame for you being conned. The same goes for those that run our media and it applies to the "evil politicians" you refereed to in "If This Country Goes Down, It’s Taking Me With It." And this point is important because you take issue with me blaming "evil politicians."
I think what former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) said just 2 days ago on October 31 is something everyone should think about. Dick Armey said: "a fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out." Armey's amazingly honest admission about conning the public reveals what goes on in political discourse. Chris Matthews had asked him if what the Republicans were doing was "making it look like they've got Kerry saying something" and Armey admitted, "it's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said, you isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it, then feign moral outrage. And Democrats have been doing it for years."
A fundamental premise of politics
A fundamental premise of politics
Does anyone still believe that Kerry was talking about the troops and not what is logical, about Bush's policy which has us stuck in Iraq?
The internal logic shows Kerry was talking about Bush.
I think people can see (IF THEY THINK ABOUT IT) that if someone was talking about being dumb and then sent to Iraq but what would eduction have to do with the differance betwen stuck and unstuck if it was not a policy you had control over?
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) was INCREADIBLY honest when he admitted what was going on: On the October 31 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Armey said of the attacks on Kerry's remarks, "Well, it's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage." When host Chris Matthews stated that Kerry "was trashing Bush," Armey responded, "Right," and went on to say, "A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out."
Problem is, some of you at Wizbang, when you are fooled by the Republican lies, you won't admit it because of pride. Look at what Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) said above and think it over a while, I think it could open your eyes to what is really going on in this country.
A fundamental premise of politics
Kerry has NOT "slammed the troops for 35 years."
You are using a dishonest quote in order to pretend that what Kerry said in 1971 was an accusation. It was not an accusation, Kerry was just relating the testimony of soldiers. He was reporting what the soldiers said, and not making an accusation against them. Kerry was quoting them, not accusing them. THEY told the stories in THEIR testimonies:
"... over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans
testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia ... men who were reliving their
experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this
country, in a sense, made them do.
They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut
off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human
genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies,
randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of
Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and
generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the
normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which
is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
You guys start your quote by omitting all that comes before Kerry says "they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks" Republicans omit this so they can pretend that Kerry was accusing them. Republicans omit this so they can hide the fact that he was actually quoting them, not accusing them.
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) displayed INCREADIBLY honesty when he admitted: "It's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage. ... A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out."
The game Republicans play with the 1971 statements is just one example. Think about what Dick Armey, a Republican from Texas, admitted to. Think about it.
Does anyone still believe that Kerry was talking about the troops and not what is logical, about Bush's policy which has us stuck in Iraq?
The internal logic shows Kerry was talking about Bush.
I think people can see (IF THEY THINK ABOUT IT) that if someone was talking about being dumb and then sent to Iraq but what would eduction have to do with the differance betwen stuck and unstuck if it was not a policy you had control over?
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) was INCREADIBLY honest when he admitted what was going on: On the October 31 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Armey said of the attacks on Kerry's remarks, "Well, it's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage." When host Chris Matthews stated that Kerry "was trashing Bush," Armey responded, "Right," and went on to say, "A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out."
Problem is, some of you at Wizbang, when you are fooled by the Republican lies, you won't admit it because of pride. Look at what Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) said above and think it over a while, I think it could open your eyes to what is really going on in this country.
A fundamental premise of politics
Kerry has NOT "slammed the troops for 35 years."
You are using a dishonest quote in order to pretend that what Kerry said in 1971 was an accusation. It was not an accusation, Kerry was just relating the testimony of soldiers. He was reporting what the soldiers said, and not making an accusation against them. Kerry was quoting them, not accusing them. THEY told the stories in THEIR testimonies:
"... over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans
testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia ... men who were reliving their
experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this
country, in a sense, made them do.
They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut
off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human
genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies,
randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of
Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and
generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the
normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which
is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
You guys start your quote by omitting all that comes before Kerry says "they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks" Republicans omit this so they can pretend that Kerry was accusing them. Republicans omit this so they can hide the fact that he was actually quoting them, not accusing them.
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) displayed INCREADIBLY honesty when he admitted: "It's pretty standard fare in political discourse. You misconstrue what somebody said. You isolate a statement, you lend your interpretation to it and then feign moral outrage. ... A fundamental premise of politics is we can make this work if people just never figure it out."
The game Republicans play with the 1971 statements is just one example. Think about what Dick Armey, a Republican from Texas, admitted to. Think about it.
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Sen. Allen's political thugs assault a citizen trying to ask questions
In America we have a right to question politicians running for public office.
But Senator Allen's political thugs assault a citizen trying to ask questions.
See video and pass it on
Is this the kind of America you waant to live in?
But Senator Allen's political thugs assault a citizen trying to ask questions.
See video and pass it on
Is this the kind of America you waant to live in?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
