Crimes Against Humanity and Ugly Hypocrisy. Can Israel Sink Any Lower?
Israel won't extradite Polish Jew accused of WWII genocide Solomon Morel, aka Shlomo Morel, ran to Israel in 1994, after the accusations against him surfaced. "Israel has refused for a second time to extradite to Poland a Jewish man accused of crimes against German prisoners just after the end of World War II, prosecutors said Wednesday." "Morel commanded a communist-run camp for German prisoners in southern Poland in 1945 after Soviet troops had occupied the country. Polish authorities accuse him of genocide by seeking to exterminate German prisoners by starving them to death, depriving them of medical care as well as carrying out torture and sanctioning torture by his subordinates. Polish prosecutors charge that Morel is responsible for the deaths of at least 1,500 prisoners in the Swietochlowice cam" Shlomo Morel Must Stand Trial for Crimes Against HumanityAt the end of World War II, thousands of Jews set up 1,255 concentration camps for German civilians -- German men, women, children and babies. There Jews beat, whipped, tortured and murdered the Germans. "Why, then, for fifty years did people suppress the news of Shlomo Morel? I'd have thought that a man who commanded a concentration camp, who Jews and Germans testified killed thousands of prisoners, who was wanted in Poland but who fled to the Middle East - I'd have thought that Shlomo's story was well worth telling, but Shlomo's not German but Jewish, he didn't flee to Syria but Israel, and for almost fifty years not one American newspaper mentioned him." "Morel, 86, faces charges of crimes against humanity in relation to more than 1500 inmates at a camp in southern Poland, many of whom perished in "barbaric" circumstances." - January 3, 2005 The Sydney Morning Herald "From 1945 to 1949, we suffered starvation, beatings, mass murders and slave labor." -Testimony of Survivor Elisabeth Walter
Monday, July 04, 2005
Another fool (V the K) complains that Reuters is "anti-American" over at "Oh, That Liberal Media"
I explain to him: You think what you do because you are ignorant or in denial. I searched on Google for "Reuters anti-american "
The very first story returned is from "AIM" and it claims "Reuters Anti-American Bias " "AIM" complains about how Reuters covered Jessica Lynch's homecoming but AIM is WRONG!!! The "AIM" story complains "Reuters used the event to replay allegations that the U.S. military had hyped Lynch's ordeal and rescue into a "story of U.S. heroism under fire."
Turns out the allegations were true. The fact is when we finally heard from Jessica Lynch herself, she said the same thing about the US military! Jessica Lynch Says Military Manipulated Her Story " Former prisoner of war Jessica Lynch has accused the military of using her capture and dramatic nighttime rescue to sway public support for the war in Iraq. Lynch said she’s bothered by the military’s portrayal of her ordeal in Iraq. She said the U.S. military manipulated the story of her dramatic rescue — and shouldn’t have filmed it in the first place."
Yeah, I read that article V the K. More proof how off the wall the opinion's of the WSJ are. They bitched, just as AIM did, that the article was "anti-American", IT WAS NOT.
First of all, the WSJ admits that the byline thing is not an issue, "Now, wire-service stories often are collaborations between many reporters and writers; a single byline doesn't necessarily mean the putative author is responsible for every word of the story. If Reuters had stuck to simply reporting the news, this would not be a scandal."
WSJ 's beef is that Reuters included in the story what media critics said about "U.S. government propaganda and credulous reporters." WSJ wanted the article to be typical clueless BS that doesn't point to the culprits with a vague line that the Deanna Wrenn wrote: "reports vary about Pfc. Jessica Lynch and her ordeal in Iraq."
"reports vary"?!? So the government didn't create propaganda? Its all a "misunderstanding," the fault of no one in particular? Typical American reporter BS.
Not only was Reuters right, when we finally heard from Jessica Lynch herself, she complained about the propaganda!
So there is your "Ahem" V the K. Reading comprehension is not your forte. The US government lied and they lied about Tillman too. When the hell are you going to wake up?
Sunday, July 03, 2005
BadLiberal,
Has MSM reporting of the 1979 hostage crisis informed the public about WHY the hostages were taken? This isn't a "snarky" question. Can you answer it?
Insisting that people don't violate the law and that they respect human rights is not "bashing" Holding all Americans to this standard, including US officials, is not "America bashing"
As far as ignorance, the MSM sat on its hands and refused to report the results of a PIPA poll that had startling results: "75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al-Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has actually been found."
Notice how the media played along with the idea that Kerry "accused" US troops of committing war crimes in Vietnam. what the media didn't make clear is that Kerry said "They told the stories at times they had personally ..." The soldiers were the ones saying war crimes were commiteed, but the media played along with the swift boat crap that Kerry was the one claiming it. And when in early 2004 evidence of the war crimes was published in the The Toledo Blade, the MSM sat on their hands again, refusing to inform the American public the war crimes chronicled in the US Army's own documents! The documents made available in the National Archives back up what Kerry had said and put the lie to his critics but MSM didn't report this to the American public! You can hunt for the info or be lucky enough to happen to read the Toledo Blade article that day or the Village Voice article but over all the MSM fails to report truths that you assume they would, truths you assume would be readily available for people to learn about. You assume that truths like these "would be" reported by the MSM and thus be made apparent to you but the fact is they overwhelmingly are not.
WHY were the hostages taken?
The US media overwhelmingly sweeps US crimes under the rug, many don't realize how much the US media bends over backwards to sweep these things under the rug. Notice the US propaganda right now about Iranian president-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Notice how the media avoids saying WHY the hostages were taken? It is off the wall how in the past and still today the majority of MSM refuses to say WHY the hostages were taken.
What the hell right did the US have to refuse to hand over the Iranians' own former leader?(the US did not want to send a message that we don't protect our puppets ) And sure enough, the MSM basically hides these facts when reporting on the events of 1979. Notice that the perfectly responsible demand of a sovereign people to hold their own (supposedly) leader accountable was refused by US leaders and suppressed by overwhelming degree by US media. We are a nation that fought to free ourselves from a king yet this is the ugly hypocritical "dirty business" that US policy makers were willing to do to foreign peoples. Truly disgusting, and it is despicable that MSM works so hard to serve this agenda and suppress this "dirty business".
There has been such extreme suppression of the facts of US policy that you are totally unprepared when one fact slips through in a story. You guys really are pseudo-patriotic indoctrinated totalitarian-minded folks. One little fact (from 115 years ago for God sakes!!!) slips into a story and you guys go bananas? You guys really have problems.
Sharon continues to complain that Reuters wrote "Hendrikje van Andel-Schipper, a former needlework teacher, was born in 1890, the year Sioux Indians were massacred by the U.S. military at the Battle of Wounded Knee." She complains, "it seems odd to me that a feature story with international circulation wouldn't include events that might be better KNOWN by the Europeans."
Sharon,
The fact that the US military fought Indians is a well known fact in Europe, when an artilce says "the year Sioux Indians were massacred by the U.S. military at the Battle of Wounded Knee." it is not an unknown concept.
I explained this to you in detail:
The massacre at Wounded Knee is considered the last battle between white soldiers and Native Americans. It is known as "The Massacre at Wounded Knee" that is why Reuters thought it was "safe" to use the word "massacred"
The woman is so old that she was alive when the US was still fighting Native Americans.
The reference is fine and only can be an issue with those that insist that only favorable events must be referred to if they relate to the US, even a US government of 115 years ago. The reference puts her birth in a DIFFERENT ERA because it is considered the last battle between the US troops and the Native Americans, it closes a ERA, it is very significant, and thus emphasizes her age. Your examples of a sports game or yet another State being added does not put her birth outside a particular era. Three states were added the year before, two states added in 1890 and another added in 1896, not really dramatic, not closing an era, not life and blood.
The mere fact that it is something that doesn't cast the US government of 1890 in a good light makes you guys go bananas. There really is a problem with rational thought here. To argue that only "innocuous" events must ever be referred to in stories is simply a fanatical position.
You resorted to lies once again. The MSM did not discuss the reason WHY "ad nauseam". But that wasn't even my question . The question was if the MSM was making the public aware NOW. NOW, Sharon, not in 1979.
And you could have watched tons of programs on the main channels and not hear WHY the hostages were taken. Today, you can watch tons of reports mentioning the hostage crissis and not hear about WHY the hostages were taken.
Sharon, you lie once again about how the media behaved.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
The thing with many Republicans is they have such an extremely disorted view of reality. For some reason this guy thinks he has some point to make about the USS Cole bombing and Clinton's response to it. He wrote, Here's a link to Clinton's address where he uttered these words ... Harrumph."
This was 3 months before the end of his term. A plan of finding out who was responsible and of going after them was developed. It was presented to the incoming Bush administration, they rejected it and did not finish making their plan ready until a day before 9/11, 8 MONTHS later, 11 MONTHS after the attack on the USS Cole. I have found no mention by Bush of the USS Cole in the first 8 months of his term. NONE.
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Facts about 9/11. Not Fantasy. Sean P writes, "Oh, and your claim that Bin Laden's attack was soley based on American foreign policy revealed what a delusional subchomsky drone you really are. "
Sean P, you seriously need to do some research, people are manipulating you. People in power, serving special interests who want the foreign policies to go unchallenged, deceive the public about why we are being attacked.
For example when George Tenet quotes the Fatwas he omits the motives, the clear statements about WHY the war is being declared. For example, from the 1998 Fatwa, Tenet quotes "The ruling to kill the Americans ..." but he chops off the end of the sentence that explicitly states WHY the ruling has been made: "in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."
Look at George Tenet's Written Statement for the Record of the Director of Central Intelligence Before the Joint Inquiry Committee 17 October 2002. George Tenet makes the claim that bin Laden "In a series of declarations, he made clear his hatred for Americans and all we represent." and in order to support this lie he omits what the series of declarations explicitly say. The fact is the series of declarations Tenet refers to do not make clear bin Laden's hatred "for Americans and all we represent", what bin Laden's declarations actually make clear is the specific grievances that he states explicitly.
"It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq."
" The people of Islam awakened and realised that they are the main target for the aggression of the Zionist-Crusaders alliance."
"The latest and the greatest of these aggressions, incurred by the Muslims since the death of the Prophet (ALLAH'S BLESSING AND SALUTATIONS ON HIM) is the occupation of the land of the two Holy Places "
"the Zionist-Crusader alliance resorted to killing and arresting the truthful Ulama and the working Da'ees ... They killed the MujahidSheikhAbdullahAzzaam, and they arrested the MujahidSheikh Ahmad Yaseen and the MujahidSheikh Omar AbdurRahman (in America). By orders from the USA they also arrested a large number of scholars, Da'ees and young people - in the land of the two Holy Places- among them the prominent SheikhSalman Al-Oud'a and SheikhSafar Al-Hawali and their brothers; ... We, myself and my group, have suffered some of this injustice ourselves; we have been prevented from addressing the Muslims."
"From here, today we begin the work, talking and discussing the ways of correcting what had happened to the Islamic world in general, and the Land of the two Holy Places in particular. We wish to study the means that we could follow to return the situation to its' normal path. And to return to the people their own rights, particularly after the large damages and the great aggression on the life and the religion of the people. An injustice that had affected every section and group of the people; the civilians, military and security men, government officials and merchants, the young and the old people as well as schools and university students. Hundred of thousands of the unemployed graduates, who became the widest section of the society, were also affected.
Injustice had affected the people of the industry and agriculture. It affected the people of the rural and urban areas. And almost every body complain about something. The situation at the land of the two Holy places became like a huge volcano at the verge of eruption that would destroy the Kufr and the corruption and its' sources. The explosion at Riyadh and Al-Khobar is a warning of this volcanic eruption emerging as a result of the sever oppression, suffering, excessive iniquity, humiliation and poverty."
"The inability of the regime to protect the country, and allowing the enemy of the Ummah - the American crusader forces- to occupy the land for the longest of years. The crusader forces became the main cause of our disastrous condition, particularly in the economical aspect of it due to the unjustified heavy spending on these forces. As a result of the policy imposed on the country, especially in the field of oil industry where production is restricted or expanded and prices are fixed to suit the American economy ignoring the economy of the country. Expensive deals were imposed on the country to purchase arms. People asking what is the justification for the very existence of the regime then?"
LIE: There's overwhelming evidence there was a connection between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government. I am very confident that there was an established relationship there." - Vice President Cheney, 1/22/04 LIE: “The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction.” – President Bush's UN speech, 9/23/03 LIE: “Iraq [is] the central front in the war on terror.” – President Bush's UN speech, 9/23/03 LIE: “You can't distinguish between al-Qaida and Saddam.” – President Bush, 9/25/02 LIE: “There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties.” – President Bush, 9/17/03 LIE:: “There was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda.” – Vice President Cheney, 9/14/03
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Jim, what part of this don't you understand? "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control" , "you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime—Pol Pot or others—that had no concern for human beings.” Americans have tortured to death some of the prisoners in other locations. Don't tell me that torture to death is "less" bad than every specific action done by others that had no concern for human beings. Maybe you are not aware of the horrible crimes including homicides because the MSM did such a poor job informing the public? US Army says prison deaths are homicides Iraqi, Afghan detainee cases documented By Mark Mazzetti, Los Angeles Times | March 26, 2005 "WASHINGTON -- The Army has concluded that 27 of the detainees who died in US custody in Iraq or Afghanistan since 2002 were the victims of homicide or suspected homicide, military officials said in a report released yesterday. The number is higher than Pentagon officials have previously acknowledged, and it indicates that criminal acts caused a significant portion of the dozens of prisoner deaths that occurred in US custody." MSM basically suppressed these facts. those that insist that the media is "liberal" simply do not know what doesn't get reported (and the biggest mouths ( Brent Bozell ) that insists that the media is "liberal" DENIED these facts on TV and then suppressed the info when he was made aware of it)
Some idiot posts this: "NPR was wringing its hands the afternoon of 9-11, pondering the awful things we had done to the poor Arabs that they behaved so impolitely. "
"that they behaved so impolitely."? Don't be a smart ass, no one I heard said it was anything less than horrific. And just because something horrible has been done to us does not mean that the US policies in the Middle East are OK. can you guys get the concept of two wrongs into your head?
According to your guys logic, we should never have ended slavery since slaves carried out terrorist attacks against us. We could never ask if slavery was wrong since we suffered such horrible attacks.
Are you guys going to answer this or not?: why do all you guys think it is OK for Bush and others to lie to us about why we are being attacked.
And why do you think these foreign polices must be defended at all costs? Bush and others LIED TO US in order to serve special interests that want the foreign polices to continue, we owe them NOTHING.
"liberals" were not saying that we should "offer therapy" for the terrorists.
Why the hell do you put the word "understanding" in quotes? Another sleazy tactic of twisting the meaning of the word from knowing the facts into sympathizing with the tactic of killing civilians. You are a sleaze. Bush lied about why we were attacked, he said we were attacked because we are the "brightest beacon of freedom and opportunity" that is a lie! We were attacked because of polices that you admitted to. (many people don't even get to this step) So now we know it has do do with propping up oppressive regimes like Israel and other countries in the Middle East, why must we continue these policies? They are immoral, THAT IS WHY BUSH LIED ABOUT WHY WE WERE ATTACKED, because the policies are so wrong that he needed to pretend it wasn't really about them.
Another sleazy tactic is morphing the specific foreign policies into "America" itself. So when you don't like a specific policies, you are simply criticizing politicians or policy makers. When Idon't like specific policies I am, according to you, criticizing America itself. You are so manipulative it is unreal.
No one was saying we should offer therapy to the terrorists. Period. and you didn't answer the question. Do you think Nat Turner's killings were justified?
Also, bin Laden is not waging a campaign "against everything the West represents". He is reacting to specific foreign policies which are indeed horrifically wrong. more importantly, the people carrying out the attacks are reacting to these polices. "The man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks he told his interrogators that although he had developed no special complaint about America in his years here, he [ Khalid Shaikh Mohammed ] felt strongly that U.S. support of Israel was wrong and could be corrected by attacking the United States," Denying this is typical.
So now I must go through explain why these policies are wrong because you are so ignorant that you don't know? IS that it? you don't know that discriminating against people because they are not Jewish is wrong? You don't know that ethnically cleansing hundreds of thousands of people because of their religion is wrong? You don't know that stealing people's land and killing and maiming people is wrong?
discussions of the so called capitalist system
GOOD example someone posted: 3) I highly doubt France's high-speed train system is "economical"; more likely, France loses money on it. There is one thing, however, we can learn from France and that is to build more nuclear reactors. I say: Correct. But roads in the US aren't 'economical' either. The government 'loses' money on them to the tune of 80 Billion (Billion!) each year. " This is a thing many indoctrinated in the capitalist myth simply do not internalize. There are interests that use public money all the time. The thing we are sold over and over again is the "efficiency" of the private sector. The reality of how much public money is pumped into that to keep it afloat is beyond the comprehension of many Americans. And the truth is huge parts of the private sector simply could not work without the propping up of public money.
you wrote, "Don't start sucking your own dick just yet. Capitalism is no myth. There is no free lunch in this world. The OP falsely claimed that France's trains were "economical"; you are free to claim that they need not be economical, but a price has to be paid for them, and it has."
You are really brainwashed. The point is that you are not counting all the costs when you look at the "capitalist" system. What you do is not count all the costs so you can deny top yourself that public money is propping up this or that system. And you are not counting the down side costs of pollution and traffic accidents. Are this costs figured into your efficiency model of car driving?
The person said the train was ec·o·nom·i·cal: Prudent and thrifty in management; not wasteful or extravagant.
This is true. You tried to say that you "doubt France's high-speed train system is "economical"; more likely, France loses money on it." but you missed the person's point that when you look at cars as transportation you leave out some of the costs. The person pointed out that our government "loses money" with the highways, you ignored that point. You must since you bought into the Capitalist myth. A true capitalist system collapses, what we have is state-capitalism with massive subsidies to the private sector and the government and the people bearing costs that you overlook.
Saturday, June 25, 2005
"V the K" mocks, "Nothing wrong with equating uncomfortable air conditioning with genocide"
The document said that detainees were left for 24 hours “chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water,” "Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18, 24 hours or more." The memo further described a prisoner left overnight in an “unbearably hot,” unventilated room. “The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night,” the FBI reported.
rmc complains "NOTHING in the above paragraph compares to the horrors of the Holocaust, the gulags or the Pol Pot regime."
Mrc,
You are either dishonest or you need a class in logic 101. Guys like you really damage public discourse when you misrepresent what someone has said. You keep jumping to the Holocaust, and other specifics. What Durbin said EXPLICITLY and SPECIFICALLY was "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control" , "you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime—Pol Pot or others—that had no concern for human beings.”
And Nazis and Soviets and others have done the same kind of things, not everything done by a Nazi was out and out gas chamber just as not every crime done by an American is out and out mass incineration of tens of thousands of civilians. If you heard about horrible things being done, and Nazis and others have done horrible things to different degrees (not exclusively gassing), then you might assume that the horrible things were done by Nazis or some other oppressors.
There isn't anything unclear with what Durbin said. It is manipulative and dishonest to read into it and insist that only your illogical interpretation is correct and that therefore Durbin has committed an "offense". This is the ugliest of political games playing and it is simply dirty and dishonest tricks.
FBI Agent Corroborates Stories Guantanamo Bay Prisoners Told
"Another detainee, Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al Qosi of Sudan, an alleged paymaster for al Qaeda, has claimed in court documents that Guantanamo Bay interrogators wrapped prisoners in an Israeli flag." An FBI agent witnessed seeing exactly that, a prisoner wrapped an Israeli flag an ISraeli flag: "In an Aug. 16 e-mail, an FBI agent reported observing a detainee sitting in an interview room "with an Israeli flag draped around him, loud music being played and a strobe light flashing."
"On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water," an unidentified agent wrote on Aug. 2, 2004, for example. "Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18, 24 hours or more." "
Further Detainee Abuse Alleged Guantanamo Prison Cited in FBI Memos By Carol D. Leonnig Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, December 26, 2004; Page A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25962-2004Dec25.html
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
The man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel
His name is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and his motivation for the crime of the 9/11 attacks was his objection to the US foreign policy of supporting Israel said the final report of the Sept. 11 Commission.
"After he was captured in Pakistan in early 2003, he told his interrogators that although he had developed no special complaint about America in his years here, he [ Khalid Shaikh Mohammed ] felt strongly that U.S. support of Israel was wrong and could be corrected by attacking the United States,"" reports Los Angeles Times writer Terry McDermott.*
"... in an early version of the Sept. 11 plot, he [ Khalid Shaikh Mohammed ] proposed flying one of the hijacked planes himself, landing it in the United States and, after killing all the men aboard, making a speech urging America to change its Middle East policies."
9/11 Motives shared by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who thought up the idea and directed the plan for the 9/11 attacks, and Mohamed Atta, the man who was the ring leader of the teams that committed the 9/11 terrorists attacks.
The ring leader of the September 11th suicide hijackers also held the same grievance. Mohamed Atta coordinated the other 9/11 terrorists and he was a pilot who flew into the WTC. Ralph Bodenstein, who traveled, worked and talked a lot with Mohamed Atta, is quoted as describing Mohamed Atta as "most imbued actually about Israeli politics in the region and about US protection of these Israeli politics in the region. And he was to a degree personally suffering from that."
The two terrorist pilots who crashed the two planes into the WTC shared the same motivation. Mohamed Atta was the pilot who crashed into WTC1 and Marwan al-Shehhi, the pilot who flew into WTC 2, was focused on the same thing, "when someone asked why he and Atta never laughed, Shehhi retorted,"How can you laugh when people are dying in Palestine?"" - page 162 THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
This motive is shared by the terrorists who first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993. The terrorists sent a letter to the New York Times after attacking the WTC, "We declare our responsibility for the explosion on the mentioned building. This action was done in response for the American political, economical, and military support to Israel the state of terrorism and to the rest of the dictator countries in the region."
That 1993 attack was led by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's nephew, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef. Inspired by the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers, Mohammed later allied with Ramzi Ahmed Yousef "in a plan to blow up as many as a dozen American airliners over the Pacific Ocean." 1 That plan was never successfully executed but Mohammed then conceived of using Airliners to attack targets in the US. "It was then that he sought to interest Bin Laden in an operation to attack the United States from the air." 2
"Bin Laden approved funding for Mohammed's plot in late 1998 or early 1999." "In an early version of the Sept. 11 plot, Mohammed proposed flying one of the hijacked planes himself, landing it in the United States and, after killing all the men aboard, making a speech urging America to change its Middle East policies. Bin Laden eliminated that flourish from the attack plan." 3 Bin Laden no doubt assumed that the public declarations of war that he made more than once demanding that America change its Middle East policies had made it crystal clear why the attacks were being made. "The International Islamic Front for Jihad against the U.S. and Israel has issued a crystal-clear fatwa calling on the Islamic nation to carry on jihad aimed at liberating holy sites. The nation of Muhammad has responded to this appeal. If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans in order to liberate Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal." - Osama bin Laden May 1999
After the 9/11 attack, bin Laden once again made a statement to make the motive clear: "We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel." -Osama bin Laden, October 2001
Bin Laden had underestimated the power of special interests to deceive large numbers of the America public about why the US was being attacked. After the lies that Bush and others told about why America was being attacked, bin Laden once again made an attempt to make the motives clear by pointing out that Bush is hiding the truth: "... the Mujahideen saw the black gang of thugs in the White House hiding the Truth, and their stupid and foolish leader, who is elected and supported by his people, denying reality and proclaiming that we (the Mujahideen) were striking them because we were jealous of them (the Americans), whereas the reality is that we are striking them because of their evil and injustice in the whole of the Islamic World, especially in Iraq and Palestine and their occupation of the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries." -Osama Bin Laden , February 14 , 2003
1 New Plot Details Emerge, By Terry McDermott, LAT July 23, 2004* 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid.
* When reporting on the September 11th Commission's report, only the Lexington Herald-Leader dared go with a headline that reflected the main point: the motives for the crime:"U.S. policy on Israel key motive"When Terry McDermott's Jul 23, 2004 article was published in the LA Times, it didn't have the headline "U.S. policy on Israel key motive".
Suppressing the Motives for the 9/11 Attack is Disgraceful. We need funds to promote the truth. Please Click on the Link and Donate so We Can Free Ourselves from this Hell. Please Donate to Representative Press with Amazon.
US reporters are not reporting these things, there were reporters in the room, I haven't seen any reports about this question being raised. Please Donate and give us the power to fight for the truth. http://tinyurl.com/o2ph2 U.S. Policy On Israel Key Motive for 9/11 Attacks
We were attacked by Al-Qaeda because of specific US Foreign Polices
"Muslims do not hate our freedoms, but rather they hate our policies," a September 2004 report from the Defense Science Board on Strategic Communications concluded.
"Among the policies that Muslims resent, it added, are what they see as "one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights" and long-standing support for what Muslims "collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states.""
The Defense Science Board on Strategic Communications is a 40-member task force made up of diplomatic, military, academic and business experts, which advises the Pentagon on policy matters related to defense.
"Furthermore, the advisory group said when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, it is seen as "no more than self-serving hypocrisy" in the United States' national interest and "patronizing ... at the expense of Muslim self-determination."" Iraqis Hate U.S. Policies, Not Freedom
Also, the final report of the Sept. 11 commission, issued in July 2004, concluded that U.S. policy supporting Israel was a key motive for the 9/11 attacks. "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, said the final report of the Sept. 11 commission."
When reporting on the September 11th Commission's report, only the Lexington Herald-Leader dared go with a headline that reflected the main point: the motives for the crime:"U.S. policy on Israel key motive" When Terry McDermott's Jul 23, 2004 article was published in the LA Times, it didn't have the headline "U.S. policy on Israel key motive".
Terry McDermott writes in his article "New Plot Details Emerge Khalid Shaikh Mohammed lacked the resources, so he took his plan to Bin Laden.", Mohammed was born in Kuwait to parents who had emigrated from Baluchistan, a sprawling, rugged region that lies across the intersection of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. He came to the United States for college, earning an engineering degree from North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University in 1986. After he was captured in Pakistan in early 2003, he told his interrogators that although he had developed no special complaint about America in his years here, he felt strongly that U.S. support of Israel was wrong and could be corrected by attacking the United States."
"Khalid Shaikh Mohammed conceived the initial outline of the attack six years before its execution and brought the plan to Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden because he thought he did not have the resources to carry it out on his own.
The Sept. 11 report ... adds fresh details about the people who conceived and executed it.
The report contains the fullest accounting of [Khalid Shaikh] Mohammed's overarching role from original conception to supervision of details."
"... in an early version of the Sept. 11 plot, he [Khalid Shaikh Mohammed] proposed flying one of the hijacked planes himself, landing it in the United States and, after killing all the men aboard, making a speech urging America to change its Middle East policies. Bin Laden eliminated that flourish from the attack plan."
And the ring leader of the September 11th suicide hijackers also held the same grievance. Mohamed Atta coordinated the other 9/11 terrorists and he was a pilot who flew into the WTC. Ralph Bodenstein, who traveled, worked and talked a lot with Mohamed Atta, is quoted as describing Mohamed Atta as "most imbued actually about Israeli politics in the region and about US protection of these Israeli politics in the region. And he was to a degree personally suffering from that."
"The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem] and the holy mosque [in Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim." These three grievances are the motives listed in the 1998 Fatwa for al-Qaeda's attacks:
1. U.S. occupation of the Arabian Peninsula.
2. U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people.
3. U.S. support of Israel.
see 1998 Fatwanote that I point out that the WHY is suppressed and I expose a specific example (see the1998 Fatwa link!)
"If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans in order to liberate Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal." - Osama bin Laden May 1999
"We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine . This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel." -Osama bin Laden, October 2001
Ralph Bodenstein, who traveled, worked and talked a lot with Mohamed Atta (the hijacker pilot who flew into WTC), is quoted as describing Mohamed Atta as "most imbued actually about Israeli politics in the region and about US protection of these Israeli politics in the region. And he was to a degree personally suffering from that."
These facts point to a motive for attacking the WTC in 2001 that is consistent with the motive expressed by terrorists in a letter sent to the New York Times after the 1993 bombing attack of the WTC, "We declare our responsibility for the explosion on the mentioned building. This action was done in response for the American political, economical, and military support to Israel the state of terrorism and to the rest of the dictator countries in the region."
It is also the same motive that Mir Aimal Kasi had for killing CIA employees Frank Darling and Lansing Bennett outside CIA headquarters in Langley,Virginia in 1993 . Mir Aimal Kasi said, "What I did was a retaliation against the US government for American policy in the Middle East and its support of Israel ." Mir Aimal Kasi once professed a love for this country, his uncle testified. "He always say that 'I like America, I love America and I want to go there,'" Amanullah Kasi said at a sentencing hearing for his nephew, Mir Aimal Kasi . Kasi's roommate, who had reported him missing after the shootings, told police that Kasi would get incensed watching CNN when he heard how Muslims were being treated. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Kasi said he did not approve of the attack on the World Trade Center because innocent were killed. He understood, however, the attack on the Pentagon, the symbol of government might.
A deceitful person responded to this info with this: "Gawd, I can't keep track of these Jew hater's positions. The other says Al-Quaeda attacked us, but only because we support Israel. Both blame the Jews. ... that's part of the Anti-Semitism disease. "
What you are doing is unacceptable. You should not be allowed to post libel against those that post the truth. The fact is the motives for the 9/11 attack are straight forward. Even when referring to the motives you refuse to be honest. I did not say we were attacked by al-Qeada "only because we support Israel", I listed all the motives, US support of Israel is half of the reason. You are a dishonest person and you engage in ugly practice of libel in order to suppress the facts about why we were attacked. You really ought to stop wronging other Americans in order to serve the interests of a foreign nation. People need to flag your post, libel is not free speech. See: The man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel
Someone responded to me with,, What a cheezy SPAM that was. They're selling anti FOX anti-Bush propaganda.
Holy crap, you are sad. It had nothing to do with Bush you fool. What it had to do with is a coroporation bowing to pressure not to report harmfull heath effects of a drug injected into cows. We drink milk that is getting contaminated.
Someone responded to me with, "Never heard of those two losers who Fox Fired. Don't care."
You are dumb as shit. "never heard of them" and yet you won't look into it. It is an issue that impacts all of us, why don't you make an effort you clown? ANd why the hell are you calling them "losers"? This warning is "for anyone who drinks milk or consumes other dairy products…and depends on the news media to report suspected health concerns accurately and honestly. " NEWS OF LAWSUIT EXPOSING MEDIA COVERUP OF SUSPECTED DANGER IN MILK
What happends to a good reporter at Fox? They get fired. Read about Jane Akre, Whistle-blowing Fox reporter and Steve Wilson, Whistle-blowing, fired Fox reporter Monsanto and Fox: Partners in Censorship After a five-week trial and six hours of deliberation which ended August 18, 2000, a Florida state court jury unanimously determined that Fox "acted intentionally and deliberately to falsify or distort the plaintiffs' news reporting on BGH." In that decision, the jury also found that Jane's threat to blow the whistle on Fox's misconduct to the FCC was the sole reason for the termination... courts later reversed the jury ruling and basically said that network news can lie, can insist that their reporters lie, and that they can get away with it.
Why the hell don't you take the chip off ypour shoulder ans start acting like a thinking human being?
Friday, June 17, 2005
Buy the movie The Corporation if you want to see exactly how reporters were pressured to present lies as news or to not report it at all
The MSM is really reluctant to deal with the "Downing Street Memo," and some reporters go as far as saying Downing Street Memo Activists are "Wing Nuts," "Paranoid" Read the article: "Los Angeles Times editorial page editor Michael Kinsley opted for sarcasm over serious discussion." (this is the newspaper you guys scream has a "liberal bias")
Read Kinsley's excuses! The MSM doesn't want to cover this story. Explain why the "liberal media" must be pushed so hard to cover this. And you guys never explained why the MSM worked so hard to sell the war.
"The "Downing Street Memo" drum beat is starting to echo outside the blogosphere. As media coverage ticks up, House Dems held a forum to demand more information from the White House on the decision to go to war. " -from AOL News Blogzone "Renewed War Debate Centers Around British Minutes" Why is it MSM must be pushed to cover this story? Why does it have to "tick up"? Why wasn't it big when it was uncovered, why has the MSM been dragging their feet? PDA Supports Conyers Hearing, Rally on Downing Street Memo Why are media talking heads talking nonsense to get out of covering it? Thy say crap like, "this is not new". We heard about Clinton's oral sex over and over and over again. The story about how it is we were manipulated into starting a war with Iraq is a hell of a lot more important than oral sex.
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Sharon,
You LIED when you said MSM reported that the CIA helped put the Ba'ath party into power in the first place. The media DID NOT REPORT THIS yet you claim that they did. You are so incredibly dishonest it is unreal. THAT is the problem. This "everyone knows" crap is a typical way of playing things like that off. I wrote a reporter from Newsday and asked him when he was going to report that Bush's planned war on Iraq was illegal. He said "well, people know. When I say without UN authorization, people know" I pointed out that most people do not know! He thought about it and said OK, he would point it out explicitly in his next article. The next day I got an email form him saying that his editor would not let him.
We have a duty to keep our public officials from committing crimes agisnt humanity. The actions of the US are our responsibility, THAT is why a citizen must speak up and condemn actions that are wrong. The media covers for powerful interests. You are DELUSIONAL if you think crimes by foreigners are not condemned enough in popular culture. Truly delusional. The crimes are condemned all the time and those condemnations are used as a tactic to hide the crimes of US officials. What do I hope to accomplish? I hope people will finally admit that these crimes have happened and continue and that the media is covering for powerful interests and that we can stop these crimes. You said that the media informed the public about how the Ba'ath party got into power, YOU LIED. (and you never post proof of your claim, we are all waiting)
You are extremely ignorant of economics as it impacts average Americans. We have had a 30 year decline in real wages adjusted for inflation. Wages peaked in 1973! The real wages of working people have declined for 30 years and they fell again in 2004. Your ignorance is yet more proof that MSM is simply not performing as you assume, they are not making the general public aware of the situation.
Sunday, June 12, 2005
Chomsky on Anarchism by Noam Chomsky New Book!
Chomsky Movie:Noam Chomsky: Rebel Without a Pause
-
No response? You guys can't deal with the facts. You really don't understand how mainstream media is behaving. Even your "democracy" claim is a rewrite of the recent events. You absorb what you are expected to and you don't notice it contradicts the facts. The Bush administration was fighting against elections if you remember. (for God sakes guys, you like in an Orwellian world and you are totally unaware of it) You seriously don't remember that the Bush team was resisting elections in Iraq?
"beneath the layers of encomia to the Bush administration’s commitment to Iraqi democracy lies the buried history of how the first free elections in Iraq’s modern history actually came to be. From the very start, the administration was determined to install its handpicked favorites in positions of power in Baghdad and to exclude Iraqis with broader public support." You don't remmeber that "the Bush administration found itself locked in a tenacious rearguard action to prevent democratic elections and ensure that political power would be wielded only by its trusted Iraqi lieutenants."? Defeated by Democracy Reported as triumph, Iraq elections were really Bush team’s nightmare
Friday, June 10, 2005
Ben Stein is bitching about a New Yorker article called 'The Spy Who Loved Us," by Thomas Bass, about Pham Xuan An.
I will go to the library and check out the article but I should point out that Ben Stein is an ass. The "liberal" media has not made clear the enormous wrong that US policy makers inflicted upon the people of Vietnam, we had no right at all to do what we did to those people.
We violated the basic principle of democracy by undermining the will of the Vietnamese people.
The 1954 Geneva agreements did not "partition" Vietnam but separated two military zones by a temporary demarcation line that "should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary," pending the unification elections of 1956 that were the heart of the accords. Elections were supposed to be held, unifying the country. The Geneva agreement divided into two zones, not two countries; our government lied about this. The US backed Diem who refused to go through with the 1954 provision calling for nationwide elections in 1956. THIS is going against democracy! Why did Diem refuse? Because he knew as did others that he would lose the election, President Eisenhower said that Ho Chi Minh would win 90% of the vote in a free election. The CIA supported the repressive Vietnamese ruling the South--who were not only repressive but were also greedy. WE HAD NO RIGHT TO DO THIS! (The Vietnamese have a right to govern themselves and vote for the system they want!) We blocked elections in Vietnam because it was obvious Ho Chi Minh was going to win there. The Kennedy administration escalated the attack against South Vietnam from massive state terror to outright aggression in 1961-1962. We were not 'defending' South Vietnam. As Chomsky says, "I have never seen in thirty years that I have been looking carefully, one phrase even suggesting that we were not defending South Vietnam. Now, we weren't: we were attacking South Vietnam. We were attacking South Vietnam as clearly as any aggression in history. But try to find one phrase anywhere in any American newspaper, outside of real marginal publications, just stating that elementary fact. It's unstable."
Sunday, June 05, 2005
Black Jack writes, LAT always looks the other way when evidence of Clinton's crimes surfaces.
brutal conquerors, occupiers, suppressing another people.
Israel's Mr. TV Criticizes Occupation of West Bank & Gaza In Israel, one of the country's best known television personalities is making headlines for his criticism of Israel's actions in the Occupied Territories. The man -- Haim Yavin -- is known in Israel as Mr. TV. He was the longtime anchor of the news on Israel's Channel One. Until this week, most Israelis had never heard him express his opinion on political matters. But that has all changed this week with the broadcast of a new film he personally shot about settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. During the film, Yavin says "Since 1967, we have been brutal conquerors, occupiers, suppressing another people." The New York Times reports that the film has been so controversial that Yavin's own employer -- the state-run Channel One -- refused to air the film. Instead it is airing on the commercial Channel 2. Israel's Mr. TV Criticizes Occupation of West Bank & Gaza
Monday, May 30, 2005
Letter to President Bush Concerning "Downing Street Memo"
As citizens and taxpayers, we believe it is imperative that our people be able to trust our government and our commander in chief when you make representations and statements regarding our nation engaging in war. As a result, we would ask that you publicly respond to these questions as promptly as possible. 1) Do you or anyone in your administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document? 2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization to go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time? 3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate? 4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq? 5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states? - from Representative John Conyers, Jr's letter to President Bush sign the letter now:Write Bush about the Downing Street Memo
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Guys, this isn't a game. Bolton is a threat to our security.
PLEASE! REPUBLICAN Voinovich is pleading that you don't subject America to a Bolton confirmation.
Stand up and support a man who is opposing a wrong based on principle. Voinovich is a Republican and obviously he is concerned about the harm that Bolton can do. Voinovich said in his letter, "In these dangerous times, we cannot afford to put at risk our nation's ability to successfully wage and win the war on terror with a controversial and ineffective ambassador to the United Nations.
"I worry that Mr. Bolton could make it more difficult for us to achieve the important U.N. reforms needed to restore the strength of the institution." He said Bolton's lack of interpersonal skills, tendency to abuse people who disagree with him and propensity to stray from his mission made him unsuitable for the job.
write the media and tell them to show this video of Bolton for God sakes!! (WHY isn't the media showing this video of Bolton?)
Write your Senators!! Also write Senator Voinovich ans support his efforts!!
Dear Senator Voinovich,
Please confront the mainstream media for not showing all the dirt on Bolton. The mainstream media is keeping the public ignorant of just how dangerous Bolton is by not showing them.
Ask the media why they aren't showing America the examples of Bolton in action (see the clips below) Mainstream media is simply not showing all of Bolton that needs to be shown. Seantor, please confront the mainstream media and demand that they show America what you already know. Demand that the media aloow the public to see ow exxtreme Bolton is. The clips are available, WHY AREN'T WE SEEING THEM ON TV?
Senator Voinovich, you can amplify out efforts to defeat a Bolton confirmation by issuing a press statement asking why the media is shielding the public from these dramatic clips of Bolton.
Over at "Oh, That Liberal Media!" Black Jack responds to the facts with this: "I looked at it ... I just took a second look and came to the same conclusion: Viscous anti-American twerps smear our troops with bogus charges"
Black Jack, now you are really embarrassing yourself. Do you have absolutely no respect for yourself at all? Are you lying when you said you looked at it twice? Otherwise you are showing readers here that you are mentally challenged.
You are making it crystal clear that you simply cannot be reasoned with. If you have this extreme a problem, why the hell don't you see a doctor instead of annoying people who are trying to have a logical discussion?
In case you missed it: Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker said, "Although other major news organizations had aired charges of Qur'an desecration based only on the testimony of detainees, we believed our story was newsworthy because a U.S. official said government investigators turned up this evidence. So we published the item."
Red Cross Says It Told U.S. in 2002 About Alleged Mishandling of Koran "The International Committee of the Red Cross said yesterday that it repeatedly expressed concern to the U.S. government in 2002 and early 2003 about a series of credible detainee allegations that military guards at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba had mishandled and shown disrespect to the Koran."
"Contrary to White House spin, the allegations of religious desecration at Guantanamo such as those described by Newsweek on 9 May 2005 are common among ex-prisoners and have been widely reported outside the United States. Several former detainees at the Guantanamo and Bagram airbase prisons have reported instances of their handlers sitting or standing on the Koran, throwing or kicking it in toilets, and urinating on it.
One such incident (during which the Koran was thrown into a pile and stepped on) prompted a hunger strike among Guantanamo detainees in March 2002. Regarding this, the New York Times in a 1 May 2005, article interviewed a former detainee, Nasser Nijer Naser al-Mutairi, who said the protest ended with a senior officer delivering an apology to the entire camp. And the Times reports: "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans." (Neil A. Lewis and Eric Schmitt, "Inquiry Finds Abuses at Guantanamo Bay," New York Times, May 1, 2005, p. 35.)
"More than any other newspaper, the New York Times influences how policymakers, journalists and the general public understand important issues. Unfortunately, Times' news reporters continue to misrepresent the Israeli/Palestinian conflict by failing to acknowledge the broad international consensus that Israel's settlements and West Bank Wall violate international law. Times' reporters instead present Palestinian and Israeli views using a 'he said, she said' formula, without an appropriate framework to help readers evaluate competing claims." International Law Not Fit to Print: The New York Times and Israel/Palestine
Kenneth Tomlinson, the Republican chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is aggressively pressing PBS to correct what he considers "liberal bias."
About the the Newsweek Quran desecration story, I don't think it is accurate to say "the source recanted"
I think "recanted" is what the White House and Mainstream Media want the public to think, the details get ignored. It is actually the case that the source is not sure the evidence is in the particular report that Newsweek cited but that "it might have been in another document"
I think this is how information gets twisted or ignored to fit what powerful interests want. The media is playing along with powerful interests. The fact is the MSM has not made it clear. This is what I found in an AP report: "Whitaker added that the magazine's original source later said he could not be sure he read about the alleged Quran incident in the report Newsweek cited, and that it might have been in another document."
From the same AP article: "...a review of the military's investigation concluded "it was never meant to look into charges of Quran desecration."
There are facts there that undermine the entire premise of the "liberal media". Brent Bozell has exposed the fact that his (and your) premise is wrong since mainstream media didn't effectively report the Army's own reports about the homicides. Bozell was ignorant of the reports and he is supposed to be the top guy in analyzing mainstream media for "bias"! Not only that, Bozell has access to the media an is spreading disinformation.
Once again Brent Bozell displays his ignorance:
JENSEN: But in the context of the proved abuses by U.S. officials in these prisons, not just in Guantanamo, but in others, Abu Ghraib and, of course, in Bagram, we have a repeated record of up to and including homicide in these prisons. So is it so hard to believe...
BOZELL: Oh, come on. Just stop that. Just stop that.
(CROSSTALK)
JENSEN: No, the record is clear.
BOZELL: Just stop that.
JENSEN: So, if you want to talk about what the United States news media had and has not done, my argument is—would be, it has not been aggressive enough.
Now, did “Newsweek” perhaps represent a source‘s words improperly? Yes. Should it be corrected? Yes. But it doesn‘t go to the question of this pattern of abuse in U.S. facilities, both in Guantanamo and in the Middle East and Central Asia.
SCARBOROUGH: Brent Bozell, respond.
(CROSSTALK)
BOZELL: Let me put you on the record right now. You cite me the evidence of American soldiers murdering people in prisons. (Bozell's denial is incredible. It also highlights the fact that the mainstream media is not performing as Bozell insists. Here is just one citation: US Army says prison deaths are homicides )
JENSEN: Well, these are in reports that...
(CROSSTALK)
BOZELL: No, don't give me reports. You give me the evidence.
JENSEN: No, the evidence is from the Army's own reports. There have been homicides in these prisons. We have photographic evidence of the routine sexual humiliation of prisoners.
BOZELL: I'm didn't say about routine sexual humiliation. I talked about murders. You're accusing the American military of murder. If you don't back it up, back off.
(CROSSTALK)
JENSEN: Well, I'm not at my computer. I'll send you the sites tomorrow, Brent. You might want to put them up on your Web site.
BOZELL: In other words, you can't do it?
JENSEN: No, I can. If you want to talk about the—if you don‘t believe the government's own reports about homicides in these prisons...
(CROSSTALK)
BOZELL: I'm saying, don't make allegations you can't back up on national television.
JENSEN: I'll back them up to you tomorrow, Brent. Give me a call.
BOZELL: Send it tomorrow.
JENSEN: The point is that there's a pattern of this kind of abuse. And to pretend that this story about the Koran is sort of fanciful I think is to ignore reality.
I also think that you're willfully distorting the reality of these protests in places like Afghanistan. These are not simply a reaction to this. These are not simply spontaneous protests. There's a political process going forward in Afghanistan. And many people, not just ex-Taliban or al Qaeda, but many people, disagree with the U.S. occupation. They disagree with long-term presence of U.S. military troops.
And this event is being used - yes, it's being used to whip up people's opposition, but that opposition is real.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. I'll tell you what, Professor. I invite you back tomorrow night. If you could get us those names.
Brent Bozell is one of the biggest mouths that scream about a supposedly "liberal media" On Scarborough Country of May 16 Bozell and Scarborough continue the suppression of the fact that the Army has said that soldiers have committed homicides. and gave the false impression that it didn't happen! (note mainstream media has basically not reported the story or severely under-reported it.)
Not only is Brent Bozell wrong, his ignorance shows that the mainstream media did not report this story effectively where he would know about it. Remember, an entire trend of not reporting, a clear bias in the direction of hiding evidence of homicides that the US Army itself has admitted.
David Ben Gurion's quote was posted on Craigslist: "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" *SEE NOTE BELOW:
You asked, "I have tried to find the source for this "quote" ... Please can somebody tell me where"
I posted: David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), p. 99. *NOTE: Full quote is here: Conversation between David Ben Gurion and Nahum Goldmann 1956 from The Jewish Paradox
You responded to the source of the Ben Gurion quote with: ""the jewish paradox" hahaha ... you just made my point!!! A whole book dedicated to maligning Jews .... and I am supposed to believe the quotes contained therein? Tell me When and where Ben Gurion said this statement, and in what context. Surely the ORIGINAL text must exist somewhere besides a jew hater book or website ... or maybe not? DBG NEVER made those comments or anything resembling them ....."
You really are an obnoxious fool. You never read the book and know nothing about it, so stop with your BULLSHIT! Do you even know who the author of the book is?
"Together with Chaim Weizmann and David Ben Gurion, Nahum Goldmann is one of the truly towering figures of modern Jewry and has often been called one of the architects of modern Israel." (from the front flap of The Jewish Paradox)
Also "in 1934 Goldmann and Stephen Wise laid the foundations of the World Jewish Congress. ... Between 1956 and 1968 Goldmann combined the presidency of World Jewish Congress with that of the World Zionist Organization." The Jewish Paradox p2 Introduction by Leon Abramowicz
OK guy? You don't know what the hell you are talking about, so stop with your hahaha's. Yes, David Ben Gurion said the quote, he said it directly to Nahum Goldmann in 1956. In the copy of The Jewish Paradox I have right in front of me the quote is on page 99.
$8.8 Billion dollars is missing, the Coalition Provisional Authority doesn't know where the money went. $8.8 Billion dollars The US was the main power controling the Coalition Provisional Authority and $8.8 Billion dollars is missing.
“At least $8.8 billion in Iraqi funds that was given to Iraqi ministries by the former U.S.-led authority there cannot be accounted for, according to a draft U.S. audit set for release soon.”
$8.8 Billion in Iraqi Funds Missing What in God’s Name is Going On? Al Franken writes, "The Sunday morning after the White House Correspondents dinner, I ran into Senator George Allen at a brunch thrown by John McLaughlin and his wife. Allen had never heard of the missing $8.8 billion, or at least that's what he told me. And he's on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
By Griff Witte Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, May 5, 2005; Page A22
Investigators have opened a criminal inquiry into millions of dollars missing in Iraq after auditors uncovered indications of fraud in nearly $100 million in reconstruction spending that could not be properly accounted for.
The money had been intended for rebuilding projects in south-central Iraq. But auditors with the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found that of $119.9 million allocated, $7.2 million could not be accounted for at all, and $89.4 million in reported spending could not be backed up with sufficient documentation, according to a report released yesterday
Delete or dot, dot, dot
More of media's service to Zionism. (this kind of stuff goes on all the time)
Latest example, MSNBC had quoted Galloway's comment, "“I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.” on their page about Galloway's testimony but has now removed that sentence.Check the link to see what MSNBC did (I will put a copy of this page at my web site because it won't stay forever at Google News.)
Also, Reuters felt it necessary to use an ellipsis to replace the word "pro-Israel" in the lead, quoting Galloway this way: "neo-con … pro-war, Republican lynch mob"
My letter to Reuters:
Regarding Sue Pleming's May 17, 2005 article about British MP George Galloway.
An ellipsis was used to replace the word "pro-Israel" in the lead. Pleming, quoting Galloway, wrote: "neo-con … pro-war, Republican lynch mob"
Why was an ellipsis used in the lead? In the third paragraph, Galloway's unedited sentence was used: "I want to turn the tables on this neo-con, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob."
No answer from Reuters yet.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Someone on craigslist is claiming that no women were abused at Abu Ghraib Prison! The denial is increadible, did they read the Taguba report?!? It clear states, "A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee"
Also, Senior US military officers who escorted journalists around Abu Ghraib on Monday admitted that rape had taken place in the cellblock where 19 "high-value" male detainees are also being held. source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1214698,00.html
Also, Professor Shaker, a political scientist at Baghdad University, recalled her abuse, "He pointed the laser sight directly in the middle of my chest," said "Then he pointed to his penis. He told me, 'Come here, bitch, I'm going to fuck you."
Chomsky points out how our economy really works, most Americans are ignorant of this fact. I was flipping through the channels and just happened to catch a mention of something called the "National Nanotechnology Initiative" for a few seconds on the History Channel. It said that the budget was $961 million in 2004. I thought "holy crap", yet another example that puts a lie to the "Capitalist economy" that the public is brainwashed with.
I looked up the "National Nanotechnology Initiative" on the Internet and found it was yet another example of government money being given as a gift to the private sector. The average American is fed the story that we are a Capitalist economy and that companies invest in their business and reap the returns. The reality is that huge amounts of taxpayer money is used to keep big companies in business, welfare for the rich that many Americans are unaware of.
From the Funding page of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, this paragraph is very revealing: "The Federal government historically has funded R&D where there is potential for a technology to greatly impact the national economy, but where adequate private investment is lacking due to early stage technical risks. The success of this investment strategy is reflected in papers supporting recent patents, nearly two-thirds of which cited federal support for the relevant research."
This violates the basic logic of our so called "Capitalist System"! The average American is sold the story that Capitalists take the risks with their money, that they invest in business and that they deserve the huge returns because they risked their own money. The above sentence is another example that exposes the fact that the big boys play by different rules.
"Federal funding for nanotechnology R&D has increased sixfold, from $116 million in 1997 to an estimated $961 million in 2004. The 2005 budget request that President Bush has sent to Congress calls for a total NNI budget of $982 million, which represents an additional 2% increase." Funding THis now at a time when the little people are told that they must tighten their belts yet the super rich get their handouts increased.
Keep in mind that the Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) is just one of the federal R&D programs that pump taxpayer money into private pockets. Chomsky explains, " It’s not simply the subsidies to agribusiness and the protection, that’s a small part of it; the major part is that there is a dynamic state sector in the economy which is the core of economic innovation and development. Research and development takes place mainly in the state sector. Take the entire new economy, computers, telecommunications, the internet, now biotechnology and so on, the costs are largely socialized through various mechanisms such as the institution we’re now talking in (MIT) which is part of the system. Costs are socialized, risks are socialized and if anything comes out decades later it’s handed over to private power"
Isn't the real story that a senior government source "got it wrong". And why are so many people so quick to believe that this senior government source actually "got it wrong" and not that he changed his story because of all the negative reaction. Notice that the detail about where the story came from is not made clear in most of the mainstream media.
Why are so many people willing to believe the story was false? Isn't it more likely that the senior government source has simply backed away from the story because of the pressure?
Keep in mind what Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker has said the information about the Quran desecration came from "a knowledgeable U.S. government source,"
DINO HAZELL Associated Press Writer Dino Hazell writes, "Whitaker says that the magazine's information came from "a knowledgeable U.S. government source," and before it published the item, writers Michael Isikoff and John Barry sought comment from two Defense Department officials. One declined to respond, and the other challenged another part of the story but did not dispute the Quran charge, Whitaker said.
But on Friday, a top Pentagon spokesman told the magazine that a review of the military's investigation concluded "it was never meant to look into charges of Quran desecration. The spokesman also said the Pentagon had investigated other desecration charges by detainees and found them 'not credible.'"
Whitaker added that the magazine's original source later said he could not be sure he read about the alleged Quran incident in the report Newsweek cited, and that it might have been in another document."
Note that the senior government source isn't saying that the story is false!Is the mainstream media making this clear?
Like I said, this isn't the first report of this kind of thing. There have been verified reports of abusing Muslims.
Verified: "An FBI agent saw a prisoner draped with an Israeli flag, accompanied by loud music and flashing strobe lights."
(The "New York Times story on the FBI documents neglects to mention this torture-by-Israeli-flag" )
Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker also said, "Although other major news organizations had aired charges of Qur'an desecration based only on the testimony of detainees, we believed our story was newsworthy because a U.S. official said government investigators turned up this evidence. So we published the item."
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
This quote is another example of the continuing insult to the American people: "If our nation’s cultural underpinnings are in conflict with religious dogma and values that are intent on replacing or even eradicating them, should not children and their teachers be made aware?"
It is disgrace that there are people and organizations duping fellow citizens about why we are targets of terrorism.
At the end of World War II, thousands of Jews set up 1,255 concentration camps for German civilians -- German men, women, children and babies. There Jews beat, whipped, tortured and murdered the Germans. "Why, then, for fifty years did people suppress the news of Shlomo Morel? 
I'd have thought that a man who commanded a concentration camp, who Jews and Germans testified killed thousands of prisoners, who was wanted in Poland but who fled to the Middle East - I'd have thought that Shlomo's story was well worth telling, but Shlomo's not German but Jewish, he didn't flee to Syria but Israel, and for almost fifty years not one American newspaper mentioned him." 
Posts
