What Would the Conservative Biased Press be if a Democrat Praised this Guy? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

host · 10-27-2007, 01:50 PM

(The title of the thread should read:
What Would the Conservative Biased Press Reaction be if a Democrat Praised this Guy?)

Here's the example of a guy, who...in the last four years....was quoted as saying:

Quote:

..."We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory." The Progressive Socialist Party leader has also said he felt "great joy" at the 2002 destruction of the U.S. Space Shuttle Columbia, because it carried an Israeli astronaut."

...So...tell me, how and why, is the right wing indignation fueled, "noise machine".... so muted on the reported "relations" and praise of Mr. Jumblatt, first, 8 months ago, with President Bush, and days ago, by Dick Cheney?

Would Cheney and Blitzer be speaking charitably about a high ranking democrat who met with...or praised, a foreign politician who has made such recent, outrageously inflammatory remarks? ...And, what about "the troops"...weren't John Kerry's remarks about the education level of "the troops", enough to make the entire right go ballistic?

<h3>Who turns the coordinated conservative reaction...."their oft triggered, noise"...on and off..., anyone know?</h3>

Quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20071021.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Vice President
<h2>October 21, 2007</h2>

Vice President's Remarks to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Lansdowne, Virginia

...It's been my privilege, as Roger mentioned, over the years to address the Washington Institute a number of times. In fact, most of you knew me long before anyone called me, Darth Vader. (Laughter.) I've been asked if that nickname bothers me, and the answer is, no. After all, Darth Vader is one of the nicer things I've been called recently. (Laughter.)....

....I've gained much from the wisdom of many in the room today; people like Dennis Ross and, of course, Rob Satloff, as well as from the many other analysts who've been affiliated with the Washington Institute. I'm proud to say your former deputy director, John Hannah, is now my Assistant for National Security Affairs. And you can't have him back yet. John and his staff are on duty night and day, and with his leadership, they're doing a tremendous job.

I'm pleased to be among the many participants in the conference, <h2>a group that includes your key noter, Walid Jumblatt, from Lebanon. I've met with Mr. Jumblatt on a number of occasions, and I admire the courageous stand he's taking for freedom and democracy in his home country. (Applause.)</h2>

This is a period of great consequence for the Middle East, and, as always, the Washington Institute, under Rob Satloff's leadership, is providing a forum for calm, nonpartisan, rigorous discussion. For 22 years, you've brought clear and careful thinking to bear on some of the most complex and vital issues of the age. You've provided a venue for many fine scholars, and you've hosted countless forums for the sharing of ideas and discussions. It's an enormously productive enterprise, and your work is more relevant and useful today than ever before. All of us respect the Washington Institute for its high standards of research, study and insight. And so, for both myself and for the President, I want to congratulate the men and women of the Institute on the exceptional work that you do each and every day. ....

Quote:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../21/le.01.html
CNN LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER

Interview With Walid Jumblatt; Interview With Robert Zoellick; Interview With Garry Kasparov

Aired October 21, 2007 - 11:00 ET

....BLITZER: Walid Jumblatt, the Lebanese parliamentarian, good luck to you. Good luck to all of the people in Lebanon. Be careful over there.

JUMBLATT: Thank you.

Quote:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/0...ange-in-syria/

February 26, 2007, 7:01 pm
A Push for Regime Change in Syria

Lebanon’s Walid Jumblatt, a key figure in the political movement that forced Syria’s withdrawal from Lebanon nearly two years ago, urged the Bush administration to aid opposition groups fighting the rule of President Bashar Assad in Damascus.

Many people say there won’t be a stable Lebanon without regime change in Syria, Jumblatt told a gathering at the American Enterprise Institute after visiting the White House today. The Druze leader said the world needs to change Syrian behavior.

Jumblatt met Bush in a bid to gain more political and military aid for Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora’s government, but he stressed that any efforts to underpin Beirut’s democracy should also involve the support for forces opposing Baath Party rule in Syria.

Jumblatt and other members of Siniora’s government blame Syria for a rash of political assassinations in Lebanon, including the murder of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on Feb. 14, 2005. The Siniora government is currently working with the United Nations in an effort to establish an international court that would try those charged in Hariri’s murder. Jumblatt said he’s confident the legal process will lead to indictments of senior Syrian officials and will cause Assad’s government to be shaken.

That drew a round of applause from the AEI audience. The neoconservative think tank has been among the strongest supporters of the Iraq war and U.S. attempts to promote regime change in Middle East countries like Iran and Syria.

Jumblatt said he pressed American officials to increase political and military aid beyond the roughly $1 billion the U.S. pledged last month at a donors’ conference in Paris. He said more money is needed to deal with Hezbollah, the Iranian-sponsored Shiite militia that controls much of southern Lebanon. In seeking assistance, I need more political and military support against the indirect Syrian occupation of Lebanon, Jumblatt said. Jay Solomon

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0288-515h.html
<center><img src="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/images/20070226-6_d-0288-515h.jpg"></center>
President George W. Bush speaks with members of Lebanon's "March 14" coalition during a meeting at the White House Monday afternoon, Feb. 26, 2007, from left to right, former Lebanese Parliament member Ghattas Khoury; Lebanese Minister of Telecommunications Marwan Hamadeh and Walid Jumblatt, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Lebanon. National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley is seen at right. White House photo by Eric Draper

Quote:

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cg...ast&ID=SP46603

February 7, 2003 No.466

Lebanese Druze Leader: Bush 'Mad Emperor,' Rice 'Oil-Colored,' Blair 'Peacock' With A 'Sexual Complex'; 'My Joy Was Great' at Columbia Disaster

Lebanon's English-language paper, The Daily Star, published a February 3, 2003 article on Walid Jumblatt, a Druze leader in Lebanon and parliamentary opposition member. The article quoted Jumblatt as saying that the true axis of evil was one of "oil and Jews," calling President George W. Bush a "mad emperor," and criticizing British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar. According to the article, Jumblatt also expressed "great joy at the destruction of the Columbia space shuttle." The following is the article in its entirety:[1]

"Great Joy" for Destruction of Columbia Shuttle

"Walid Jumblatt lashed out Sunday against Western politicians and 'the Jews,' calling on Arab leaders to hold popular referendums before allowing in foreign troops for a war against Iraq."

"The Progressive Socialist Party leader also said he felt 'great joy' at Saturday's destruction of the United States space shuttle Columbia, because it carried an Israeli astronaut who had taken part in aggression against 'Lebanon and Iraq.'"

"'The true axis of evil that rules the world today is an axis of oil and Jews,' Jumblatt said at his family home of Mukhtara, Chouf."

Axis of Jews and Oil Leading "Oil-Colored" Rice....

Quote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3284681.stm
Wednesday, 19 November, 2003, 16:39 GMT
US cancels visa for MP Jumblatt

Walid Jumblatt said a letter from the US Embassy in Beirut notified him that his multiple visa had been cancelled.

Last month, Mr Jumblatt described US Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz as a virus that should be destroyed.

The Lebanese MP said he regretted Mr Wolfowitz was unhurt in the 26 October attack, which killed one US soldier.

"We hope that next time the rockets will be more accurate and effective in getting rid of this virus, and his like, who wreak corruption in the Arab lands," Mr Jumblatt said after the attack.

Outspoken politician

The letter sent to Mr Jumblatt by the US State Department was published by Lebanon's Al-Mostaqbal newspaper.

It said his visa - valid until 2007 - had been withdrawn under a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act, according to the newspaper.

The letter - dated 17 November - said the decision had been taken as a visa "cannot be given to an alien who has used the alien's position and prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity".

Mr Jumblatt confirmed the newspaper report on Wednesday.

A leader of Lebanon's Druze community and the Progressive Socialist Party, Mr Jumblatt is known for his outspoken remarks on various issues.

He also heads the third biggest bloc in the 128-seat legislature.

Quote:

http://web.archive.org/web/200501160....cgi?ID=113404

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...Y5NzEyYmQyNTc=

December 16, 2004, The New York Sun, "Lebanese MP Treated Like A King in Paris ," Steven Stalinsky

Over the past few years, France has won the reputation as being the leading anti-American voice of the Western world. Lately, news has been trickling out of France, suggesting that President Chirac has taken his opposition to America to a new level. One example includes allowing the pro-Baath pro-Saddam group "La Resistance" to operate out of Paris. The group's main goal is to support killing American troops in Iraq.

Another example occurred less than two weeks ago when the French government hosted Lebanese parliamentarian Walid Jumblatt, Head of the Progressive Socialist Party, who enjoyed an unprecedented state visit to France. As Ahmad Al-Jarallah, editor-in-chief of the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassah, reported on December 4, "Walid Jumblatt...[was] recently given a send-off befitting a state leader at the Elysee Palace by French President Jacques Chirac." According to the Lebanese Daily Star, "Jumblatt's visit to the French capital was considered by some political figures as historic, and as bringing him merit on the regional and international levels."

This is significant because Mr. Jumblatt is known for his vehement anti-American statements and antagonistic attitude toward America. On November, 19, 2003, it was reported that the state department cancelled Mr. Jumblatt's diplomatic visa following revelations that he expressed regret that the deputy secretary of defense, Paul Wolfowitz, was not killed in a missile attack during a visit to Baghdad.

More recently, Mr. Jumblatt gave an interview to Al-Sharq Al-Awsat on February 12, 2004, in which he said: <h3>"We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory."</h3> The Progressive Socialist Party leader has also said he felt "great joy" at the 2002 destruction of the U.S. Space Shuttle Columbia, because it carried an Israeli astronaut.

The Lebanese MP is also known for espousing conspiracy theories against America. On April 28, 2004, he gave an interview to Al Arabiyya TV, in which he detailed how America was really behind September 11: "Who invented Osama bin Laden?! The Americans, the CIA invented him so they could fight the Soviets in Afghanistan together with some of the Arab regimes. Osama bin Laden is like a ghost, popping up when needed. This is my opinion."

Mr. Jumblatt was asked "Even 9/11?" and answered: "Even 9/11...Why didn't the sirens go off when the four hijacked planes took off?...The U.S. always needs an enemy...According to this plan or ideology of the born-again Christians who formed an alliance with Zionism - Islam is the monster, Islam is the target."

In addition to hating America, Mr. Jumblatt has also spoke against the countries that support America. Lebanon's Daily Star published a February 3, 2003, article quoting him as saying that the true axis of evil is one of "oil and Jews," calling President Bush a "mad emperor," and insulting Prime Minister Blair, Prime Minister Berlusconi, and Jose Maria Aznar, the former Spanish prime minister: "The oil axis is present in most of the U.S. administration, beginning with its president, vice-president, and top advisers, including [Condoleezza] Rice, who is oil-colored, while the axis of Jews is present with Paul Wolfowitz."

In the interview, Mr. Jumblatt described President Bush as someone who "considers himself God's deputy on Earth, threatening and classifying the world [into different camps], and relying on his imperial power...How dangerous emperors are when they go mad... In the same axis we have the trustworthy servant, the imperial servant...pleased with himself and his idiotic laugh, his peacock appearance, none other than Tony Blair...Also joining this axis is the comprador Mussolini of the 21st century, the prime minister of Italy today, Silvio Berlusconi, who seems to want to renew the empire of the Caesars...To complete the picture, we have Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, the Spanish neo-rightist...Aznar and Blair spend a lot of time in front of the mirror every morning, it seems, so that their hair is parted perfectly...People who pay that much attention to their appearance are fascists by nature. Or they have psychological or sexual complexes."

The French government's providing a hero's welcome to Mr. Jumblatt, a self-proclaimed enemy of America, represents something far beyond a simple diplomatic disagreement.

Mr. Stalinsky is the executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute.

ottopilot · 10-27-2007, 03:36 PM

host · 10-27-2007, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

You're right. Are you really surprised?

The question I have is...
...would you raise equal indignation toward a democrat for the same reasons?

In order to raise "equal indignation toward a democrat for the same reasons",,,

...I would have to first be aware that it happened....I'd be extremely surprised to read that a sitting US VP with a democratic party affiliation had publicly praised and met with....more than once.... a prominent foreign political figure on record for advocating the killing, "week in, week out", of American troops, or that a democratic US president had also met with such an objectionable person. If a "democratic did it"....and did not explain to us why someone could say such provocative things about our troops, and about the US president himself, and his motives...... and still be in the apparent "good graces" of the president and his VP.....I would have no reason not to be as outraged at democrats acting in this manner....than I am, now......

In this case....there is a near total US "mainstream" press avoidance of covering this ...whatever the "eff" you want to describe this "winger" hypocrisy as....

...no coverage of Bush's "meet up" at the White House with Jumblatt, eight months ago....and no coverage of Cheney's speech, this week:

http://query.nytimes.com/search/quer...ll&sort=newest

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um...nG=Search+News

<h3>I started this thread because I'm amazed that anyone believes that the press is biased AGAINST the Bush administration or against it's "quirks".....</h3>

.....and I suspect now that the entire, "right wing blogosphere" is literally wired to an "on/off" switch....and in the Jumblatt example, the switch is most definitely....in the "off" position.....

Quote:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/10/...t-anti-semite/
March 10, 2006

Cheney Quotes Racist Anti-Semite to Demonstrate ‘Progress’ In the Middle East

Vice President Dick Cheney, in a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030700739.html">speech this week</a> to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee:

Over the past four years, other free nations have risen in the broader Middle East. … Across that region, the political dialogue has been transformed — and politicians, scholars, students, and men and women from every walk of life are talking about freedom, equal rights, and accountable institutions of government. One leader in Lebanon said: “When I saw the Iraqi people voting, it was the start of a new Arab world…The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.”

The “leader in Lebanon” whose analysis Cheney apparently trusts is Walid Jumblatt, a racist anti-Semite who has celebrated the deaths of U.S. soldiers and referred to Condoleezza Rice as “oil-colored.” A few of Jumblatt’s low lights:

– “We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory.” [Link]

– “The oil axis is present in most of the U.S. administration, beginning with its president, vice-president and top advisers, including (Condoleezza) Rice, who is oil-colored, while the axis of Jews is present with Paul Wolfowitz, the leading hawk who is inciting (America) to occupy and destroy Iraq.” [Link]

– “In November 2003, the United States revoked Jumblatt’s diplomatic visa for wishing out loud that Wolfowitz had been killed in a Baghdad rocket attack.” [Link]

So why did Cheney quote Jumblatt? Maybe because they’re the only two who believe that reform in Lebanon was inspired by the Iraq war: “‘I’ve never heard it from anybody except Walid Jumblatt,’ laughs Jamil Mroue, editor-in-chief of Beirut’s Daily Star newspaper.”

....if you are the president of the US....I guess you can do anything you want to....as long as you have a supportive wife:
<center><img src="http://im.rediff.com/news/2007/oct/25nlook1.jpg"></center>

...and to think....that this is during David Horowitz's and Council for National Policy's Salem Communication's, 1200 radio station network, and the Salem Talk radio nutcase talk hosts', and Salem's townhall.com 's

Quote:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...3-38314cca6f09
<h2>Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week</h2>
By Frontpagemag.com
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, September 21, 2007

Beginning on October 22, student groups across the nation will hold Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week on their campuses. These protest weeks will feature a series of events designed to bring a message to these academic communities that challenges most of what students are taught about the so-called War on Terror both in the classroom and on the quad.

The Week’s events will include speeches about Islamo-Fascism by prominent figures, including former Senator Rick Santorum (Penn State, Temple and UPenn), Sean Hannity (Columbia), Ann Coulter (Tulane and USC), Dennis Prager (UC Santa Barbara), Robert Spencer (Brown, Dartmouth, University of Rhode Island, and DePaul), Daniel Pipes (Northeastern and UPenn), David Horowitz (Columbia, Emory, Ohio State, Michigan and Wisconsin), Michael Ledeen (Maryland), Nonie Darwish (UCLA and Berkeley), Wafa Sultan (Stanford) and radio talk show hosts Melanie Morgan (San Francisco State), Michael Medved (University of Washington), Martha Zoeller (Georgia Tech), Alan Nathan (George Mason), Mark Larson (to be named) and many others.

<h3>A major theme of the Week will be the oppression of women in Islam.</h3> The photo accompanying this article, which shows a teenage girl buried before being stoned to death for alleged sexual offenses, will serve as the poster for the protest Week. The stoning took place in Iran.

The plight of Muslim women will be featured at “teach-in” panels and also at sit-ins in Women’s Studies Departments, designed to protest the absence of courses that focus on Islamic gynophobia. <h2>The silence of Women’s Studies departments in the face of this oppression is a national outrage......</h2>

Our first lady's silence and timely endorsement of that symbol of the oppression of Muslim women....the compulsory wearing of the hajib...should have given David Horowitz and his parrots on campuses....apoplexy....

Dick....George...Laura....you're "antics" have been hushed up by your "noise machine"....and they must be bursting at the gills to "let it out"....why do you hate America? Time to loudly and, in unison...scapegoat some poor unsuspecting democrat...for some contrived, bullshit, reason....dontcha thinK?

If not....the noise makers, forced into silence.... will implode...and we can't have that....next year is an election year.....

ottopilot · 10-28-2007, 05:09 AM

loganmule · 10-28-2007, 10:27 AM

There were no deaths in Iraq last week, and none of the major news networks reported that during prime time...liberal bias? Your example clearly shows conservative bias, and frankly, I'm shocked that someone didn't pick up on it, because it's great news, in the most inflammatory sense.

Wouldn't it be great if news people only reported the complete truth with regard to all significant events, and just stopped there, leaving us to figure out what to make of it? Maybe in an alternate universe, but not here, with the confluence of political influence, both liberal and conservative, and ratings driving the news.

Willravel · 10-28-2007, 10:30 AM

That there were no troop deaths hardly means there were no deaths. Jesus Christ.

host · 10-28-2007, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loganmule

There were no deaths in Iraq last week, and none of the major news networks reported that during prime time...liberal bias? Your example clearly shows conservative bias, and frankly, I'm shocked that someone didn't pick up on it, because it's great news, in the most inflammatory sense.

Wouldn't it be great if news people only reported the complete truth with regard to all significant events, and just stopped there, leaving us to figure out what to make of it? Maybe in an alternate universe, but not here, with the confluence of political influence, both liberal and conservative, and ratings driving the news.

Please be better prepared, when you post. I put a lot of time/effort into my posts.

Quote:

http://www.newshounds.us/2007/10/26/...g_about_it.php
<h3>Kimeade: not one US military person killed in Iraq this week, but no one's talking about it</h3>
Reported by Chrish - October 26, 2007 - 184 comments

On FOX and Friends this morning 10/26/07 host Brian Kilmeade, teasing a later segment with FOX's favorite Iran-Contra figure Oliver North, announced that "not one US military, member of the military, was killed in Iraq for the first time since 2004 this past week, and almost no one's talking about it." Probably because it ain't so.

The website Iraq Coalition Casualty Count has been tracking US and coalition deaths since the beginning of the war. Their figures are confirmed by the Defense Department and the over 1,000 deaths of American contractors in Iraq are reported separately. According to their figures, four Americans have been confirmed killed by the DoD in Iraq since October 19 (one week ago) and two killed soldiers' names have not yet been released, for a total of six, so I don't know what the hell he's talking about.

Even supposing that what he said had been true, it is unreasonable to expect the media to report on the absence of deaths when they don't as a rule report on the mounting deaths. One has to search that information out on the web. When's the last time you heard a newscaster give a to-date casualty figure? Certainly not on FOX, and glaringly absent (like the flag-draped coffins that represent them) on the rest of the mainstream media.

In the actual segment with North, Kilmeade repeated the wishful falsehood, that "In Iraq there were no casualties in the Al-Anbar Province last week, or in Iraq, US casualties..." and he cited other statisitics (which, given the outright provable falsity of his first statement are to be taken with a pound of salt) that shore up the administration's and North's contentions that the situation in Iraq is really improving. The banner reinforced the upbeat assessment: "Iraq Casualties Down - 2nd consecutive decline."

After reciting the positive stats, he said "It sounds like I'm making this up!" Well, yes it does.
North supplemented the favorable appraisal with his personal observations, concluding "this is a war that's being won, it's a war we dare not lose" and lamented that the good news is never covered.

It'll be unavoidable soon, said Kilmeade, because it's going to be an election issue.

The rest of the segment was a lengthy plug for North's FOX program. War Stories.

Yes...it has been a better month, than in the recent past, as far as the number of US troops killed in Iraq. My sister's son was deployed there, a month ago. My wife's son is currently serving in his second combat deployment, in another frontline area of the war. I wish these two members of my family, and all of the rest of US troops in service to our country, injury free deployment and a safe return to the US.

Our soldiers are still dying in Iraq:

Quote:

http://icasualties.org/oif/prdDetail...hndRef=10-2007

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?op...878&Itemid=128
Saturday, 27 October 2007

Multi-National Corps – Iraq
Public Affairs Office, Camp Victory
APO AE 09342

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
RELEASE No. 20071027-01
October 27, 2007

MND-N unit attacked
Multi-National Division – North

TIKRIT, Iraq – A U.S. Soldier assigned to Multi-National Division – North was killed when he sustained small arms fire while conducting operations in Salah ad Din Oct. 25.

The name of the deceased is being withheld pending next of kin notification and release by the Department of Defense.

http://icasualties.org/oif/pdf/20071...ND-B-MND-B.pdf
BAGHDAD – A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and four
others wounded when their unit was attacked with an explosively-formed
penetrating device in a southern section of the Iraqi capital Oct. 25.
Units operating in this area of Baghdad continue to conduct targeted raids
and clearing operations in order to disrupt insurgent and militia elements
operating in this section of Baghdad. Destroying these cells stabilizes the
neighborhoods, further setting the conditions for Iraqi Security Force control.
The deceased Soldier’s name is being withheld pending notification of
next of kin and release by the Department of Defense.

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/...eleaseid=11436
October 26, 2007
DoD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Staff Sgt. Robin L. Towns Sr., 52, of Upper Marlboro, Md., died Oct 24 in Bayji, Iraq, of wounds suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his Humvee during combat operations. He was assigned to the 275th Military Police Company, 372nd Military Police Battalion, Washington, D.C. National Guard.

http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/...eleaseid=11438
October 26, 2007
DoD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Pfc. Adam J. Chitjian, 39, of Philadelphia, Pa., died Oct 25 in Balad, Iraq, of injuries sustained when he came in contact with enemy forces using small arms during combat operations. He was assigned to 3rd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood Texas

....and loganmule....how did the pundits who are not to the left of center in the US....transition from these sentiments about Walid Jumblatt:

Quote:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...our_enemy.html
September 17, 2005
Chirac meeting with our enemy again

According to Al Hayat, French president <h3>Chirac is going to host Walid Jumblatt at the Elysee Palace on Friday. Time and time again, Chirac sides with our enemies and treats them as royalty</h3>; Arafat was the most recent example.

But who is Walid Jumblatt?

<h3>He is a virulent anti—American and anti—Semitic Lebanese politician.....</h3>

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...French...&only
It's Hard Not to Hate the French...

Wed, Dec 1, 2004 at 5:00:42 pm PST

....The French knew perfectly well what sort of vipers they were dealing with at Al-Manar, when they granted permission for this terrorist propaganda outlet to broadcast in France.

In other “hard not to hate the French” news, the American Thinker’s Olivier Guitta reports that head weasel Jacques Chirac is going to host America-hating Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt at the Elysee Palace on Friday: Chirac Meeting Our Enemy Again.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/D...mes_your_enemy
The enemy of your enemy is sometimes your enemy
By Diana West
Wednesday, March 16, 2005

......But the European Union says no, Hezbollah is not a terrorist group.
Or, rather, the European Union says ?non,? Hezbollah is not a terrorist group, because, of course, it is La France that is most vigorously warding off Hezbollah?s scarlet ?T.? Which makes Paris a good and plenty picturesque place for demonstrations to begin. So what if Jacques Chirac said the timing is not right for the terror-tag, even after the disco bombing in Tel Aviv last month, which Israel attributes to Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Syria. Where France is concerned, it never is the right time.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah?s Nasrallah himself -- <h3>Walid Jumblatt?s idea of a great leader and, not incidentally, Jacques Chirac?s idea of a great guest</h3> (he honored the terror kingpin with an invitation to a Francophone summit in 2002) -- has given the European Union the best possible reason to declare his terrorist organization, well, a terrorist organization. As reported by World Net Daily, Nasrallah told Al Manar, which is Hezbollah TV, that being designated a terrorist organization by the European Union would ?destroy? Hezbollah. ?The sources of (our) funding will dry up,? he said, ?and the sources of moral, political and material support will be destroyed.?.......

...to Bush and Cheney both meeting with Jumblatt...in Bush's case....just 17 months after the date of the preceding American "Thinker" attack on Chirac...for doing the identical thing.... and Cheney has publicly praised Jumblatt, at least twice, and admitted on Oct. 21, to meeting with Jumblatt, several times....

Again....how does the "noise making" supporting Bush and Cheney, know when...in unison...to turn it on....and turn it off? Was there a "mem", explaining that Jumblatt had apologized for voicing support for the killing of US soldiers, "week in, and week out"? I didn't get it.....

It's "off" here:
<center><img src="http://www.mahablog.com/wp-content/uploads/scarf6.jpg">
Laura Bush takes a tour lead by Adnan Husseini inside the Muslim holy shrine the Dome of the Rock in the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City, May 22, 2005. White House photo by Krisanne Johnson</center>

.....and it's "off" here:
<center><img src="http://www.mahablog.com/wp-content/uploads/condihijab.jpg"></center>

...but, the GOP/conservative noise machine was switched on full here:

Quote:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...try=25004&only
Pelosi in a Hijab

Tue, Apr 3, 2007 at 11:36:05 am PST

The modern Democratic leadership.
<center><img src="http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20070403PelosiSyria01.jpg">
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, wears a scarf inside Ommayad Mosque during her tour at a popular market in downtown Damascus, Syria, Tuesday April 3, 2007. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi arrived in Syria on Tuesday, the highest-ranking American politician to visit the country since relations began to deteriorate four years ago. <h3>President George W. Bush criticized the trip, saying it sends mixed signals to President Bashar Assad.</h3> (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)
</center>

<h3>There was no criticism from Bush of three republican members of congress who preceded Pelosi in Damascus, the week before:</h3>

Quote:

US congressmen tell Syria to stop destabilizing Iraq , Lebanon
Monday, 2 April, 2007 @ 5:53 AM

Beirut- Three US Republican members of Congress on Sunday told Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to prevent anti-American fighters from infiltrating Iraq, in a rare encounter between the two countries.

Frank Wolf of Virginia, Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania and Robert Aderholt of Alabama were in Damascus ahead of a visit this week by US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi whose inclusion of Syria on her Middle East tour was condemned by the White House.

A US diplomatic source in Damascus said Pelosi would arrive in Damascus on Tuesday and leave the following day. During her stay she would meet Assad and discuss Syrian-US ties and regional issues.

Washington's top Democrat will also tell Syrian officials that Israel is ready to revive peace talks if Damascus stops supporting "terrorism," according to the Israeli government spokesman.

Miri Eisin said Pelosi had asked Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday what she could tell Syrian officials following her visit to Israel.

"It should first of all stop supporting terrorism," Eisin quoted Olmert as telling the speaker. "We will be happy to talk with it if it does so."

Peace talks between Israel and Syria collapsed in 2000 over the parties' inability to agree on the Golan Heights, a strategic plateau that Israel captured from Syria during the 1967 Six Day War and subsequently annexed.

In a statement on the visit by the three republicans released by the US embassy, the lawmakers said they had also repeated their demands at meetings with Syrian businessmen, religious figures and opposition leader Riad Seif.

"In all our meetings... we raised the issue of stopping foreign fighters who are killing American soldiers and innocent Iraqis from entering Iraq through Syria, ending support for Hezbollah and Hamas, recognizing Israel right to exist in peace and security, and ceasing interfering in Lebanon," it said.

Washington, which accuses Syria of helping destabilize neighboring Iraq, supporting groups labeled terrorist by the US State Department and interfering in neighboring Lebanon, has cut contact with Damascus since the February 2005 murder of Lebanon's former prime minister Rafiq Hariri.

The killing was widely blamed on Syria despite its insistence that it was not involved. Pelosi will visit Lebanon on Monday, where she is due to meet parliament -backed Prime Minister Fouad Siniora before heading to Syria

Explaining their visit to Damascus, the three lawmakers said: "We came because we believe there is an opportunity for dialogue."

Syria's official news agency SANA said the US delegation had discussed with Assad "the situation in the region, particularly in Iraq."

The White House has denounced the Damascus visit by Pelosi -- a determined opponent of Republican President George W. Bush's Iraq war policies -- and warned she may hand Assad a symbolic diplomatic victory.

"Assad probably really wants people to come and have a photo opportunity and have tea with him and have discussions about where they're coming from, but we do think that it's a really bad idea," said spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Democratic lawmakers traveling with Pelosi, who was in Israel on Sunday, include House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Tom Lantos and House Government Reform Committee chairman Henry Waxman and Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the US Congress.

Picture: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad (L) meeting with a US delegation in Damascus. ...Three Republican congressmen -- Frank Wolf of Virginia, Robert Aderholt of Alabama and Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704050012

Thu, Apr 5, 2007 6:32pm ET

Send to a friend Print Version
Media quoted criticism of Pelosi for wearing headscarf in Middle East without noting that Rice, Laura Bush have also done so

News reports in the Associated Press and the New York Post, and an editorial in Investor's Business Daily, quoted Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney criticizing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) by saying that "being seen in a head scarf and so forth is sending the wrong signal to the people of Syria and to the people of the Middle East," without noting that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and first lady Laura Bush have both done the same when visiting the Middle East.

An April 5 article in the New York Post asserted, "From the campaign trail in Iowa, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney slammed Pelosi's diplomatic excursion," before offering Romney's quote:

"I just don't know what got into her head, to be completely honest with you," he said.

"Her going to a state which is, without question, a sponsor of terror, and having her picture taken with Assad and being seen in a head scarf and so forth is sending the wrong signal to the people of Syria and to the people of the Middle East."

An April 4 AP report similarly noted Romney's criticism without offering any context. Neither that report nor the Post article made it clear in the text that Pelosi wore the scarf during a visit to the tomb of John the Baptist inside the Umayyad mosque in Damascus and not in her meeting with with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. Romney's quote could be read to suggest that Pelosi wore the scarf during that meeting. A photo accompanying the Post article shows clearly that Pelosi's head was not covered when she met with Assad.

Additionally, an editorial in the April 5 edition of Investor's Business Daily asserted, "Anyone who thinks Nancy Pelosi showing up wearing a scarf around her head visiting a mosque" will lead to peace negotiations "won't even make janitor in the foreign service." The editorial continued, "Speaking of that scarf, one waggish Canadian commentator remarked that 'given the maple leaf-studded head scarf she donned before entering a Syrian mosque yesterday, American House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could have been an ambassador for Canada,' " adding that Pelosi "represented the dovish foreign policy of the land of the maple leaf a lot more than that of a post-9/11 America leading a global war on terror."

By contrast, an April 5 article in the Los Angeles Times noted that the conservative "Family Research Council disapproved of Pelosi for consenting to the Islamic custom of covering her head during a visit to a mosque," and added, "The group said doing so 'is usually seen as a sign of submission in the Muslim world.' " But the article went on to note that "U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and First Lady Laura Bush are among many high-profile women who do the same when in the Mideast."

As early as 6:38 p.m. ET on April 3, Internet gossip Matt Drudge had a picture of Pelosi wearing the scarf on the front page of his Drudge Report website. That picture moved to the top story as early as 7:12 p.m.

<h3>What "hand" turns it on, and turns it off?</h3> How are Bush and Cheney able to meet with a man who expressed enthusiasm over the killing of American soldiers in Iraq...enthusiasm for the destruction of the US space shuttle, accused Bush of involvement in the 9/11 attacks....and the response from the American press is essentially a news "blackout", while the hair trigger, of the conservative pundits, so quickly pulled when Nancy Pelosi visited Syria, and when Chirac received Walid Jumblatt in Paris, in 2005.... is not pulled when Bush receives Jumblatt at the white house, or after Cheney meets with Jumblatt a praises him?

Please explain how it gets turned on and then off....in lockstep?

ottopilot · 10-28-2007, 05:35 PM

ubertuber · 10-28-2007, 05:40 PM

Satire goes in Tilted Humor, not Tilted Politics.

Thanks.

ottopilot · 10-28-2007, 05:58 PM

host · 10-28-2007, 10:40 PM

Lebanon is a wartorn, impoverished nation of 4 million, and Bush annoints a young Saudi from a family now worth $16,700 million, to lead them....

This is the "process" Cheney used to build support for Iraq war...and it's ongoing for Iran war....all of the "think tanks" have joined hands:

Quote:

http://www.swordscrossed.org/node/53
The Overton window.
tacitus - Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 20:05
Tags:

As some may know, I work at a free-market think tank, and as such, qualify as a full-fledged member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. While places like the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute and others are justly famous for their national-level work, it's <a href="http://www.spn.org/directory/">the network of state-level think tanks</a> that are, to my biased mind, the unsung heroes of the movement.

So, with that being said, and mindful of my business-related absence for the latter half of this week, I'm going to share with you a little strategizing exercise from the bowels of the VRWC.

The mission of a think tank is to introduce ideas into public discourse and normalize them within the public discourse. The steps an idea takes to full legitimacy are roughly as follows:

# Unthinkable
# Radical
# Acceptable
# Sensible
# Popular
# Policy

This is a rough continuum. Not all ideas start at the same point, not all make it to the endstate -- and some travel backwards. The think tank, with its advocacy and scholarship, does its best to make sure that its preferred ideas reach their endstate. But how does it do this in a systemic way? How does it stay within the bounds of possibility -- the acceptable, sensible, and popular -- even as it reaches for long-term goals in the radical and unthinkable categories?

One useful tool is the Overton window. Named after the former vice president of the <a href="http://www.mackinac.org/">Mackinac Center for Public Policy</a> who developed the model, it's a means of visualizing where to go, and how to assess progress. Let's say, for example, that you want to make education as free and choice-based as it can possibly be. Let's start by developing a continuum of educational states, from the desired extreme of total freedom, to the undesirable extreme of total statism. It might look something like this:

# No government involvement in education.
# All schools private with government regulation.
# Voucher system with public schools.
# Tuition tax credit with public schools.
# Homeschooling legal.
# Private schools restricted.
# Homeschooling illegal.
# Private schools illegal.
# Children taken from parents and raised as janissaries. ....

.......The bolded items, representing the politically possible amongst all conceivable options, are the Overton window. The idea is to shift that window in the preferred direction. In Michigan today, the Overton window looks substantively different:

# No government involvement in education.
# All schools private with government regulation.

<h3># Voucher system with public schools.
# Tuition tax credit with public schools.
# Homeschooling legal.
# Private schools restricted.</h3>

# Homeschooling illegal.
# Private schools illegal.
# Children taken from parents and raised as janissaries.

Step by step, ideas that were once radical or unthinkable -- homeschooling, tuition tax credits, and vouchers -- have moved into normal public discourse. Homeschooling is popular, tuition tax credits are sensible, and vouchers are acceptable. (On the latter, they've been soundly defeated in Michigan of late, but the point is that they are a part of normal public and political discourse.) The de facto illegality of homeschooling, by contrast, has gone the way of the dodo. The conscious decision to shift the Overton window is yielding its results.

So there's your tip from the VRWC for the day. <h3>It's a methodology that could work for the left as easily as the right, although I'm not aware of a single left-wing think tank (and they are few) that operates so systemically.</h3> If you're of an analytic bent, and want to figure out where a legislative or policy strategy is heading, try constructing the scale of possibilities and the Overton window for the subject at hand. Change can happen by accident, true: but it is just as often the product of deliberation and intent, and it does all of us well to understand the mechanisms by which it occurs.

<h3>I'm going to hazard a guess as to why Bush and Cheney now visit with Walid Jumblatt and Cheney publicly praises the man....and the expected reaction, a loud cacophony from the conservative noise machine, is nowhere to be heard:

Saad Hariri, heir to his ($16.7) billionnaire, former Lebanese prime minister father's legacy and fortune, decided to depart (prodded by a "remember the Maine"-like, "OP") from his murdered father's support for Syria, since the world is supposed to believe that the Syrian president ordered the 2005, massive car bombing assassination of Rafik Hariri, and Saad Hariri's politcal ally, Walid Jumblatt, joined him in the about face move towards the US/Israel and the French and British, the "noise machine" was ordered to STFU about "the affront to the troops" that took place when Jumblatt was invited inside the white house.
The "little people", in Lebeanon and in the USA, should consider that Rafik Hariri departed Lebanon as a sunni peasant, established Saudi citizenship, and raised his fortune and his children in Saudi Arabia, returning to Lebanon in his mid 40's to enter politics, leaving his family in Saudi Arabia, as his son, Saad is doing now. The 2005 voting indicated that Lebanese were resigned to Saad's leadership, not inspired by it. Bush and Cheney are simply desperate for allies, even a flip flopper like Jumblatt, and the Bush regime and the Israelis gained much more from
Rafik's bombing; suggesting that either their sudden good fortune is no coincidence, or the Syrians are too stupid to deserve any suspicion that they've been "set up". Bush and Cheney gravitate towards Saudi billionaires and royalty like moths to flame, despite the lips ervice they pay to highly prinicipled, "democratization. Control of any country by Saudi billionaires, in alliance with the US, only temporarily dampens the powderkeg that will one day blow up in that region. Bottomline here is the "AQ" threat is a Bush/Cheney authored manipulation to further their actual goals, closely aligned with the Israelis. Saad Hariri either has too much money to care how it all turns out, or he's either stupid enough to beleive that the Syrians were stupid enough to kill his father, or he's acting dumb like a fox. If you read all this, you'll know what to watch for, and it should be an entertaining tragedy. No young Americans would enlist in a military that is ordered to participate in any of this charade, if they actually read about it and contemplated it all, first. Thankfully for Cheney, they probably won't do that. Young Lebanese who risk their lives in support of the Hariri/Cheney "alliance, would be better off supporting Hezbullah, a populist movement in comparison.</h3>

Quote:

http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?i...rticle=1&cat=0

Death Toll in Lebanese Fighting at 47
May 21 04:02 AM US/Eastern
By BASSEM MROUE
Associated Press Writer
TRIPOLI, Lebanon (AP) - Lebanese troops tightened a siege of a Palestinian refugee camp Monday where a shadowy group suspected of ties to al-Qaida was holed up, pounding the camp with artillery a day after the worst eruption of violence since the end of the country's civil war.

Lebanese officials said one of the men killed in Sunday's fighting was a suspect in a failed German train bombing—a new sign that the camp had become a refuge for militants planning attacks outside of Lebanon. In the past, others in the camp have said they were aiming to send trained fighters into Iraq.

Saddam El-Hajdib was the fourth-highest ranking official in the Fatah Islam group, an official said Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. El- Hajdib had been on trial in absentia in Lebanon in connection with the failed German plot and is the brother of another suspect in custody in Germany.

Meanwhile, another attack in a Christian neighborhood of Beirut late Sunday raised fears of growing instability across Lebanon.

The violence between the army and the Fatah Islam group in the northern port city of Tripoli <h3>and the adjacent Nahr el-Bared refugee camp</h3> has killed at least 27 soldiers and 20 militants, security officials said Monday.

The clashes are a significant blow to a country already mired in a dire political crisis between the Western-backed government and Hezbollah-led opposition.

<h3>Little is known about the ideology and backing of the Fatah Islam group. Some officials in Lebanon believe it has ties to al-Qaida, and the group has said it follows an al Qaida ideology.</h3> But other Lebanese officials claim it is simply a Syrian-backed group sent by Damascus to destabilize the country after Syria's forced withdrawal from Lebanon in April 2005.

Hundreds of troops, backed by tanks and armored carriers, surrounded the camp early Monday, as black smoke billowed into the air. The militants responded at daybreak by firing back with mortars.

The clashes between army troops surrounding the camp and Fatah Islam fighters began Sunday after a gunbattle raged in a neighborhood in Tripoli, a predominantly Sunni city known to have Islamic militants, witnesses said.

Meanwhile, in Beirut late Sunday, an explosion across the street from a busy shopping mall killed a 63-year-old woman and injured 12 other people in the Christian sector of the Lebanese capital, police said.

The bomb left a crater about 4 feet deep and 9 feet wide, and police said the explosives were estimated to weigh 22 pounds. The blast—heard across the city—gutted cars, set vehicles ablaze and shattered store and apartment windows.

Beirut and surrounding suburbs have seen a series of explosions in the last two years, many targeting Christian areas. Authorities blamed Fatah Islam for Feb. 13 bombings of commuter buses that killed three people, but the group denied involvement.

Syria has denied involvement in any of the bombings, but Lebanon's national police commander Maj. Gen. Ashraf Rifi said Sunday that Damascus was using the Fatah Islam group as a covert way to wreak havoc in the country, with people assuming it's al-Qaida.

"Perhaps there are some deluded people among them but they are not al- Qaida. This is imitation al-Qaida, a 'Made in Syria' one," he told The Associated Press.

The Lebanese Broadcasting Corp. TV station reported Sunday that among the dead militants were men from Bangladesh, Yemen and other Arab countries, underlining the group's reach outside of Lebanon.

A senior Lebanese security official said a high-ranking member of Fatah Islam, known as Abu Yazan, was among those killed.

Hundreds of Lebanese applauded the army's tough response in the refugee camp in a sign of the long-standing tensions that remain between some Lebanese and the estimated 350,000 Palestinians who have taken refuge in Lebanon since the creation of Israel in 1948.

Prime Minister Fuad Saniora said the fighting was a "dangerous attempt at hitting Lebanese security." Mainstream Sunni Muslim leaders, clerics and politicians threw their support behind the army, as did the Palestine Liberation Organization representative in Lebanon.

It also underlined the difficulty authorities have in trying to defeat the country's armed groups which control pockets across Lebanon.

Fatah Islam is an offshoot of the pro-Syrian Fatah Uprising, which broke from the mainstream Palestinian Fatah movement in the early and has headquarters in Syria, Lebanese officials say.

It is believed to be led by Shaker Youssef al-Absi, a Palestinian who was sentenced to death in absentia in July 2004 by a Jordanian military court for conspiring in a plot that led to the assassination in Jordan of U.S. diplomat Laurence Foley. Al-Qaida in Iraq and its former leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi were blamed for the killing.

___

Associated Press Writer Hussein Dakroub in Beirut contributed to this report.

Quote:

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_s..._take_247.html
<h2>Can we take 24/7 news seriously?</h2>

[<a href="http://turcopolier.typepad.com/about.html">Colonel W. Patrick Lang</a> is a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets). He served in the Department of Defense both as a serving officer and then as a member of the Defense Senior Executive Service for many years. He is a highly decorated veteran of several of America’s overseas conflicts including the war in Vietnam. He was trained and educated as a specialist in the Middle East by the U.S. Army and served in that region for many years. He was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. In the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) he was the “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism,” and later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service.”]

<img src="http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/images/2007/05/21/_1287456_artillery_ap300.jpg"> That's an M-48 tank out on a firing range. The Lebanese Army has these. This is an old tank from before the Vietnam period, but, <h3>how new do tanks have to be when used for shelling refugee camps full of civilians? The fighting around the "Nahr al-bared" camp at Tripoli, Lebanon continues.</h3>

Lebanon's political situation remains deadlocked between the US and French supported coalition headed by Siniora and the Iranian supported "opposition" coalition led by Hassan Nasrallah and Hizbullah.

This latter grouping is made up of Hizbullah and Amal Shia, more Sunnis and yet more Christians. The Syrian government tolerates this latter grouping's logistical efforts in and through Damascus from Iran on behalf of Hizbullah.

On the other hand, Prime Minister Siniora's grouping is made up of the allies of Saad Hariri (mostly Sunni Muslims), various hard-line Christian parties (Geagea, etc.) a lot of the Druze and some odds and ends.

The essence of the Lebanese political stalemate has to do with the allocation of political power in Lebanon. Of those elements in the population who have the vote (not Palestinians) the Shia are the most numerous and, in the aftermath of their victory over Israel last Summer, they are demanding a larger, perhaps decisive share in political power in the country. There is also the issue of a UN run tribunal to rule as to who killed Rafik Hariri, but, anyone who thinks about it knows that this is really a "side" issue. If the tribunal decided that Bashar Assad killed Hariri, what would they do, drive to Damascus and arrest him?

The United States and France do not want a larger role for Hizbullah. The United States accepts Israel's definition of Hizbullah as a terrorist group in spite of their toe-to-toe fight against Israel last year and their legitimate status as a political party in Beirut's parliament. France? Evidently, they are looking for love from the United States. It has been lonely for the French lately.

Standing on the sidelines, there are the 350,000 odd permanent Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. They are not Lebanese citizens. They have no political vote, are overwhelmingly Sunni, are excluded from good jobs, and therefore good housing. They are excluded from many Lebanese schools. They and those who came before them have been living in those camps on a kind of "dole" from the UN for a long time, many of them for 50 years. They have no prospects, zero. People who have no prospects are dangerous.

So, they are susceptible to the takfiri jihadi message and influence drifting on the winds of the internets <h3>and in the minds of returned fighters from Iraq. Not surprisingly some of them have accepted the call, the call to drive foreign, kaffir influence out of the Lebanon, the call to vent their rage against a political system that offers them nothing.

The "players" in the Siniora/Hariri coalition do not have clean hands in the matter of the creation and encouragement of Sunni zealotry in Lebanon.</h3> Lebanese political leaders have "played" to the Sunni Lebanese of the north for many years, seeking their support in the maze of Lebanese politics. Did they think that the Sunni Palestinians in the camps would not hear the same message?

So, now we have fighting between the Lebanese Army and Palestinian zealots. What a surprise! If it spreads to camps in the south of Lebanon, the Lebanese Army will be hard pressed. Their commander said so yesterday, urging restraint.

The 24/7 news networks were hard at work today trying to make Syria responsible for the Sunni zealots in the camps. The statement was being made today that these groups were connected to AQ. No evidence was offered, but the assertion was repeatedly made based on the "possibility" that had supposedly been voiced by some nameless person in the Lebanese government. Various Lebanese were asked that question - "Is this Al-Qa'ida?" Nobody could be found who was willing to say that there was an organizational link to Al-Qa'ida, but the question was asked over and over again. This question was paired with another - "Is Syria controlling and "behind" this group?" Nobody could be found who would say that either, but the question was asked over and over again.

<h3>Now, think about it, folks Al-Qa'ida is a virulently anti-Shia Sunni group. Everyone "knows" that Syria supports Hizbullah, a main target of AQ displeasure. So, which is it? Which side does the Syrian government support? Does the Syrian government support both at the same time? </h3> If you believe that, then you really are a sucker for propaganda.

It would be interesting to know who sets the agenda for the content of 24/7 news. Very interesting. pl

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070521/...banon_violence (Dead Link...same "news" story displayed from breitbart.com, above.)

Quote:

Published on March 5, 2007 <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/070305fa_fact_hersh">Seymour Hersh wrote:</a>

American, European, and Arab officials I spoke to told me that the Siniora government and its allies had allowed some aid to end up in the hands of emerging Sunni radical groups in northern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley, and around Palestinian refugee camps in the south.
[...]
Alastair Crooke, who spent nearly thirty years in MI6, [..] Crooke said that one Sunni extremist group, <h3>Fatah al-Islam, had splintered from its pro-Syrian parent group, Fatah al-Intifada, in the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp, in northern Lebanon. Its membership at the time was less than two hundred. “I was told that within twenty-four hours they were being offered weapons and money by people presenting themselves as representatives of the Lebanese government’s interests</h3>—presumably to take on Hezbollah,” Crooke said.

Quote:

http://www.counterpunch.org/lamb05302007.html
May 30, 2007
Sharon's Bastille Day Dream Materializes
Lebanon and the Planned US Airbase at Kleiaat

By FRANKLIN LAMB

Bibnin Akkar, Lebanon, site of proposed US Airbase
Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee Camp

.....Despite opposition from Lebanon's anemic environmental movement, that argues that the pristine area should be left to its many varieties of birds and wildlife, the local community is watching closely.

Not much activity is going on as of May 29, 2007. About 20 Quonset huts, some recently driven stakes, no evidence of heavy equipment or building material. The three man army outpost fellows appeared bored and did not even ask for ID as I toured the whole area on the back of a fine new BMW 2200cc motorcycle courtesy of one of the local militia sniper guys who until two days ago was firing into Nahr al-Bared until the Lebanese army stopped him after the PLO leadership complained.

Lebanese entrepreneurs at Bibnin Akkar, a Sunni community loyal to the Hariri's, and who will be the chief financial winners from the project, see opportunities with thousands of new construction and related jobs coming. One kind fellow who hooked me up last night to intermittent internet via a jerry rigged dial up arrangement on one of his shop's two computers envisages running a fine new internet café with at least 50 wireless computers. Hotels, restaurants and businesses of various sorts are planning expansions to meet the demand of the expected workforce.

Who will not benefit from the building boom will be the 40,000+ Palestinians from Nahr al-Bared which is literally next door to the anticipated project These refugees, who were driven from their homes a in Palestine in 1948 and 1967, from Telezatter by the Phalanges in 1975, and others who came as a result of Israeli attacks on Lebanon in 1978, 1982, 1993, 1996, and 2006, will gain no work from Kleiaat. The reason is that the 70 top trades and professions in Lebanon are denied to the Palestinians under Lebanese law.

Even if the 20,000 Palestinians displaced by the current conflict with Fatah al-Islam are allowed to return, which I expect will be the case, and even if Palestinian fears that the Camps will be demolished are unrealized, as I believe, they will remain destitute, according to UNWRA who considers 10,000 of them 'special hardship cases".

As reported by the NATO headquarters in Brussels, as well as by residents in Bibnin Akkar on May 28, 2007, an American-German-Turkish military delegation toured and surveyed Akkar region. US Embassy 'staff' have reportedly visited Kleiaat airport earlier this year to look over the site. David Welch also had a quick look at the site during his recent visit.

A Lebanese journalist who opposes the base commented on May 28, 2007, "The Bush administration has been warning Lebanon about the presence of Al Qaeda teams in northern Lebanon. And the base is needed to deal with this threat. Low and behold, a new "terrorist group" called Fatah al-Islam appears near Kleiaat at al-Bared camp".

The Pentagon argues that the military base will contribute to the development and the economic recovery in the region, advising the Lebanese government to focus on the financial aspect and positive reflection on the population (95% Sunni) of the region.

Contenders for the billion dollar project, according to the Pentagon procurement office could be Bechtel and Halliburton and other Contractors currently doing projects in Iraq.

The martyred Prime Minister Rafic Hariri, saw potential for the Kleiaat airport as well. But he opposed a US airbase. Instead, Hariri, which the green grocer who sells fruits and vegetables to the Lebanese army patrolling the Tripoli-Syria four lane road in front of Nahr al-Bared, commented, " Rafik Hariri, may he rest in peace, loved Lebanon. But he never saw a piece of real estate he didn't want to develop!" Hariri envisaged a billion dollar Free Commercial Zone and a port, despite Syrian opposition, and had investors lined up before he was murdered. Damascus was opposed to the Hariri dream because the new Port and Free Zone would drain the revenues from the nearby Syrian Port at Lathikiya.

According to Washington observers watching developments, the base has been pushed by elements in the office of the US Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the urging of Israeli operative Elliot Abrams. AIPAC can be expected to do the necessary work in Congress and with House Foreign Affairs, Appropriations, Intelligence, and Armed Service committees hermetically sealed by stalwarts of the Israel Lobby, it can be expected that it will be added as a rider to an unsuspecting House bill coming along.

"We need to get this base built as quickly as possible <h3>as a forward thrust point against Al Qaeda and other (read Hezbollah) terrorists", according to AIPAC staffer Rachael Cohen. Asked if Israel will offer training and advisors to the Lebanese army, Ms. Cohen replied, "we will see what we will see, Lebanon, smezzanon its not about them, its about stopping the terrorists stupid!"</h3>

"The question for Lebanon is whether the Lebanese people will allow the base to be built. Few in North Lebanon doubt that Israel will have access to the base " according to Oathman Bader, a community leader who lives in Bahr al-Bared but has fled to Badawi.

Fatah al-Islam and their allies have pledged martyrdom operations to stop the project, according to the Fatah Intifada, the group that expelled Fatah al-Islam from their camp on November 27, 2006.

According to a columnist at Beirut's Al-Akbar newspaper," a US project like that would split Lebanon apart. No way will Lebanon allow it. Probably every group in Lebanon would oppose it , from the Salafi, Islamists fundamentalist to moderate Sunnis to Hezbollah. Can you imagine the Syrian reaction?"

Commenting on this project, one Arab-American from Boston, doing volunteer work at the Palestinian Red Crescent Hospital, Safad, noted:

"Hopefully the US pro Middle East peace, pro-Palestinian, and pro-Lebanon organizations with better phone and internet connections that exist locally, will join the opposition in Lebanon to this base and fight it in Congress. Welch and the US Embassy in Beirut should be questioned about it"

Franklin Lamb's just released book, The Price We Pay: A Quarter Century of Israel's Use of American Weapons in Lebanon is available at Amazon.com.uk. His volume, Hezbollah: a Brief Guide for Beginners is due out in early summer, 2007.

<h3>Hariri is sunni, as are his Saudi friends.....</h3>

Quote:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...i,%20Ihsan%20A.
Dec 16, 1992

Special to The New York Times

Barely a month after his Cabinet took over, Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri and his plan for rebuilding Lebanon are being attacked by politicians who say he is drawing too close to Saudi Arabia in his effort to raise money.

The criticism, from Muslim and Christian political leaders and newspapers, arises partly from concern that Saudi businessmen may come to dominate Beirut. Mr. Hariri has also been faulted for investing his money in public reconstruction projects while serving as head of the Government.

Mr. Hariri, a 48-year-old billionaire, made his fortune in Saudi Arabia and holds Saudi and Lebanese citizenship.

A group of Saudi businessmen announced on Sunday that they had set up an investment fund for Lebanese reconstruction that eventually would amount to $500 million. For now the Lebanese Government's plans focus on rebuilding the center of the capital, which was demolished in 15 years of factional clashes.

Although Mr. Hariri insists that his business interests are not directly involved, news reports last week said $200 million of his money had been invested in real estate in central Beirut.

"Mr. Hariri must choose between being the Prime Minister of Lebanon or merely the Prime Minister of downtown Beirut," Charles Ayoub, editor of the Christian daily newspaper Ad Diyar, wrote this week.

The Christian daily Nida al Watan warned of what it called a "danger of Lebanon falling under the tutelage of Saudi businessmen."

The naming of Mr. Hariri as Prime Minister has nonetheless stirred optimism among Lebanese after months of economic stagnation and dizzying inflation. The national currency has regained some of its value after a long decline.

Quote:

Lebanese Prime Minister Was First City Investor
Thomas, Kate. Houston Post. Houston, Tex. Nov 11, 1992
Abstract

Kate Thomas discusses billionaire Rafik Hariri, Lebanon's newly named and pro-Syrian prime minister who was an early investor in the 1988 recapitalization of First City Bancorp of Texas.

[quote]

Quote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...nt/4606739.stm

Political ghosts haunt Lebanese poll

By Jim Muir
BBC News, Beirut

Lebanon is holding its first general elections for 30 years, free of the shadow of a Syrian military presence. Jim Muir, who has reported from Lebanon over many years, looks at what has changed in the country - and what has not.

This is an election dominated by the martyrs and ghosts of the past.

In the first round of voting for the 19 Beirut seats, it was the newest martyr, the Sunni Muslim former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, whose image was everywhere, and who swept all before him.

Mr Hariri died instantly on 14 February when his motorcade was caught in a massive explosion which, rightly or wrongly, was instantly and instinctively blamed by most Lebanese on the Syrians.

It triggered the huge demonstrations that brought together hundreds of thousands of people in Beirut with one single demand: Syria, out.

The list put together by Rafik Hariri's son and political heir, Saad, steamrollered the Beirut elections, taking every single seat.

The young Saad, just 35, has no political experience at all. He was running his billionaire father's company in Saudi Arabia when he was suddenly pitchforked into this new life.

Martyrs

<h3>Because the result was a foregone conclusion, the turnout was low - 27% overall, though quite a bit higher among Sunni voters, many of whom felt it a duty</h3> to pay this last act of allegiance to their biggest martyr, whose picture, with or without young Saad, was all over Beirut.

Anyone who is expecting to see a sea of new faces as a result of all this change is going to be disappointed....

But Rafik Hariri is far from being the only martyr whose memory is running in these elections.

Quote:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/...a/03beirut.php
Oct 3, 2007

Saad Hariri still acts like a guest in his own office.

The executive chair behind the imposing hardwood desk remains occupied by a dead man. On it sits a huge portrait of his father, Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister assassinated on Feb. 14, 2005.

Now Mr. Hariri, at 37 the least experienced of Lebanon's factional leaders, bears the shaky hope for a pro-Western, democratic future in this country, where the region's rivalries are often viciously played out.

''I'm the new kid on the block,'' he says of his two years as leader of the Future Movement, his father's political party and the most powerful Sunni Muslim bloc. ''I just need to get smart very quickly.''

It will not be easy. Not just an uncomfortable visitor in his own headquarters, he is also something of a prisoner in them. When in Beirut, he almost never leaves Qoreitem, the four-story compound his father built around an old mansion. The blinds are drawn to deter sniper fire. Army checkpoints block every road to the compound. Visitors are searched repeatedly as they approach the main gate.

Mr. Hariri will leave town again this week to meet President Bush on Thursday.

He will push for more international support for the mission to identify suspects in his father's killing -- a complicated diplomatic effort inherently tied to isolating Syria, the prime suspect in a string of political assassinations here, including his father's. Mr. Hariri has insisted on holding Syria accountable, even as he has adopted a more conciliatory stance toward pro-Syrian opposition groups like Hezbollah and its allies during tense negotiations over how to pick the next president.

One on one, toward the end of a long day's Ramadan fast, Mr. Hariri, who is often shy and diffident in public, projected surprising warmth and affability in an hourlong conversation, but only when the talk turned away from politics.

He joked about his youth and the rigors of a long-distance marriage. Asked about his Saudi-style goatee, the subject of much teasing among Lebanese, he said he grew it on his wife's orders, when they got engaged. He occasionally wants to shave it off, he said, but added, ''I have to get my wife's authorization.''

His wife and three children still live in Saudi Arabia, where Mr. Hariri grew up, reluctant to join him here because of the constant specter of political violence, which has already killed four of his political allies.

He has huge shoes to fill. Rafik Hariri dominated Lebanon since he brokered an end to the civil war in 1991, took over as prime minister and drove the country forward often by sheer force of personality. He resigned in October 2004.

Saad Hariri does not cut the bullish, charming figure that his father did. Less tribal chief and more chief executive, the younger Mr. Hariri cut his teeth on expanding his family's billion-dollar construction empire into telecommunications while his father was running Lebanon.

He is trying to turn his low-key managerial style into an asset. Mr. Hariri says his goal is to move beyond political paralysis and concentrate on Lebanon's economy. He seeks to set a counterexample to the old warlords and politicians who constantly warn of another civil war.

''They need to be in Hollywood to make these allegations,'' Mr. Hariri said. ''They could make some really good scenes from these stories. We need calmer people in Lebanon.''

Whether calm will make the difference is unclear. Hezbollah, backed by Iran, has kept the government paralyzed for nearly a year trying to gain more power.

Most of Mr. Hariri's politicking takes place in private or on television. The family-owned Future TV network broadcasts all of his stiff and somewhat mechanical speeches, and covers another family tradition, the lavish iftars, evening meals to break the fast at the end of each day of Ramadan.

Hundreds of supporters, from a different area of Lebanon each night, throng into a ballroom the size of a basketball court. Enormous photographs of Rafik Hariri line the walls, and when Saad Hariri addresses the guests, after they have eaten mountains of stewed lamb, he is flanked by mirror images of his father's head, each as large as a man.

On a recent evening, Mr. Hariri exhorted followers to join him in mourning ''your first martyr, Rafik Hariri,'' and promised to lead Lebanon out of its political impasse ''and spare it from the danger of becoming once again the field for regional battles.''

One enthusiastic supporter, Mahmoud Bishara, 41, a cement factory owner from the Bekaa Valley, beamed as he posed for a photograph with Mr. Hariri and wished him ''All God's help.'' On his cellphone, however, he had a screen saver with Rafik Hariri's photograph, and demurred when asked whether the younger Mr. Hariri had the power to lead Lebanon's Sunnis.

''If he's not strong enough, he'll draw strength from us,'' Mr. Bishara said.

A former Hariri family associate, Fadl Chalak, 64, offered a more blistering assessment.

''I have a low opinion of all the leaders in this country, and I mean all of them,'' Mr. Chalak said. ''We are sick and tired of living in a continual crisis, construction and reconstruction, so I say for all of them to go to hell.''

Mr. Chalak spent decades as a point man for Rafik Hariri, leading his reconstruction agency and serving as telecommunications minister in one of his governments. But he retired from politics, and expressed little hope for his country. He credited Saad Hariri with intelligence and ''good intentions,'' but said that ''youth is no excuse'' for his lackluster performance.

Mr. Hariri made no excuses for his inexperience but said he would gain inspiration from his father. ''He's here, he's looking over us, I'm sure,'' he said.

<h2>Read the surrounding portion of this transcript; they're supposed to "oversee" Rice and Cheney, and they don't even ask any questions....shiiiiitt !!!!!</h2>

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...?nav=rss_world

....REP. GARY L. ACKERMAN, D-N.Y.: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Madam Secretary, welcome.

For a moment, I'd like to focus your attention on the presidential succession crisis in Lebanon.

<h3>Support for the Cedar Revolution may be the president's biggest potential win in the Middle East</h3>. And right now that success is just four dead men away from disappearing.

That's the remaining number of parliamentarians that Syria and Iran and their terrorist proxies need to kill in order to destroy the majority and restore Lebanon to its status as a fiefdom.

If losing Gaza was a disaster, try losing Lebanon.

Our response here has been, frankly, inadequate. And I'd like to suggest the following steps to be considered urgently.

First, America's commitment to Lebanon's sovereignty and independence needs to be reiterated by the president in a specific major address.

Damascus and Tehran and the entire Middle East need to hear explicitly that the United States will not accept resumption of foreign domination of Lebanon; that we insist, and mean it, that foreign states refrain from interfering in Lebanon's constitutional process; that we consider the assassination of Lebanese parliamentarians as acts of international aggression; that we will never sacrifice the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to appease other states; and that we will push for the special tribunal to include all assassination's since Rafik Hariri in its purview.

If a presidential statement was important for Burma, it is equally important for Lebanon.

Second, the president should immediately impose economic and political sanctions against the Syrian regime, specifically, President Assad and his family and his coterie of close associates. Their assets in the United States should be frozen, and their travel to this country should be barred. The very same steps should be taken against their proxies in Lebanon.

The president has expansive sanctioning powers under U.S. law that are not even close to being exhausted with regard to Syria.

Third, the United States needs to raise the profile of this crisis much higher. Security Council resolutions are not enough.

ACKERMAN: A formal international contact group should be established with the explicit mission of protecting Lebanon's sovereignty and independence.

Further, I believe the president should appoint a single figure in the United States government to be responsible for managing this crisis.

Fourth and last, the House has twice and the Senate once passed resolutions supporting Lebanon and pledging our continued readiness to put our mouth -- our money where our mouth is.

<h3>Currently, we're getting out-bid in Lebanon by two countries, whose combined GDP is just a third of our national defense budget. If you believe we need more resources to prevent disaster, Madam Secretary you have to ask for them. That support is here.</h3>

Madam Secretary, I know that you and the president have more than enough to handle. Your plate is full. But there's not going to be another chance to save Lebanon. We have to act now.

I summarized these points in a letter that I will give to you, but in the remaining time, I'd like to hear your initial response.

RICE: Thank you very much, Congressman.

First of all, I think that there are a number of ideas that we have been -- you've cited that we've been looking at and others that they will very well be worth doing.

So, thank you for your letter and we'll examine it very closely.

I'm a very firm believer in the point that Lebanon is really one of the key elements in getting a policy that will promote moderation and be able to resist extremism. And we've tried to be very active in Lebanon.

I would say to you that the diplomacy on Lebanon is extremely active right now. I was with my French counterpart just a few weeks ago on this issue, with my British counterpart about it just a couple of days ago.

We are working also on the premise that -- or on the basis that there should be no effort to make Lebanon in any way set aside constitutional processes that would lead to a president of the United States of America would consider illegitimate in some fashion.

Now, the Lebanese are having their discussions. But we know who our allies are in Lebanon and we're in very close contact with them about what is acceptable to them and what is not.

<h2>The president, for instance, met with Saad Hariri just, I think, about 10 days ago. So -- and Walid Jumblatt was just here and met with Mr. Hadley.</h2>

RICE: I was unfortunately out in the Middle East.

But we've been very active with the March 14th group, and we're going to stay active with them.

We are trying to call attention to the fact that the Syrian and Syrian-backed forces are trying to either intimidate or literally destroy the very people who would be able to bring about a democratic solution in Lebanon.

So, we're very focused on this issue, Congressman.

We are trying, as well, to make sure that the tribunal is fully funded, so that it can go ahead and begin its work.

Mr. Brammertz is about to make a report pretty soon. The tribunal needs to be ready to go.

As to resources, we requested and received $770 million in the last supplemental. We believe that that is the appropriate amount for now. It includes budget support; it includes security support.

And I would just note that if you talk to most Lebanese, when they faced this challenge up in the Palestinian camps against that, sort of, Al Qaida-look-alike operation, it was really American help in terms of ammunition and support that arrived with unaccustomed speed to help the military to carry out that task.

Admiral Fallon was just there. Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman was just there. And so, we are pressing very hard ahead with our allies in Lebanon.

But I'm very much where you are: We need to do as much as we can because this is a crucial moment for Lebanon. And I welcome very much looking at your ideas.....

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafik_Hariri
Fortune

By the 1980s, Hariri entered the Forbes top 100. In 2002 Hariri became the fourth-richest politician in the world. Forbes estimated his personal and family's fortune at $4.3 billion on its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires">2005 World's richest people.</a> After his assassination, <h2>his family inherited a total of $16.7 billion in 2006, which drew some questions which haven't been explained by the Hariri family on how $4.3 billion became $16.7 billion in the course of the year after the assassination.</h2> All his family members appeared on the Forbes' list of billionaires in 2006.

Rafik Hariri had interests stretching from Riyadh to Paris to Houston. Until returning to Lebanon, his son Saad Hariri ran Saudi Oger, a USD $3.15 billion (sales) construction conglomerate. Oger paid $375 million to increase its ownership in Arab Bank in order to keep out interested Arab-American investors.

In 1990, on the occasion of the graduation of his son, Bahaʻa, from Boston University, Mr. Hariri made the naming gift for what became The Rafik B. Hariri Building, home of Boston University's School of Management.

Quote:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/Rank_7.html

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/7625.html
#158 Bahaa Hariri
Age: 39
Fortune: inherited
Source: Inheritance

Net Worth: 4.1

Country Of Citizenship: Switzerland
Residence: Geneva, Switzerland, Europe & Russia
Industry:
Marital Status: married, no children

Boston University, Bachelor of Arts / Science

Eldest son of slain Lebanese prime minister Rafik. Carved out successful career in investment management outside the family fold from Geneva, his home base. More recently, led successful $6.5 billion bid for Turk Telekom, the largest privatization in Turkey to date. Also heavily involved in family's Al-Abdali real estate development project in Jordan that is working to rebuild the city center of Amman. Chairs two soccer clubs in Lebanon. His mother Nazek, brothers Saad, Fahd and Ayman, and sister Hind are all billionaires (see all).

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/4R2O.html

#158 Saad Hariri
Age: 35
Fortune: inherited
Source: Construction, investments

Net Worth: 4.1

Country Of Citizenship: Saudi Arabia
Residence: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Middle East & Africa
Industry: Engineering/Construction
Marital Status: married, 2 children

Georgetown University, Bachelor of Arts / Science

Second son of Rafik Hariri, slain prime minister of Lebanon who also founded Saudi Oger, a now $3.3 billion (sales) construction firm. Georgetown University graduate and Saudi business maven has focused on politics since his father's death. The Cuban-cigar-loving leader of Lebanon's Future Bloc won seats in parliament last spring and is considered a likely candidate for prime minister. But the nation's president is blocking him from taking that post. Because of the frictions and safety concerns, spent most of the year away from Beirut in Riyadh. Mother Nazek, his three brothers Bahaa, Fahd and Ayman, and his sister, Hind, are all individual billionaires (see all).

loganmule · 10-30-2007, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

The entire thread should go under humor.

Agreed.

Host and Will, the point I was making (I'll try to be clearer next time) is that we can't count on accuracy, much less absence of political bias, on EITHER side of the media's polital fence. Is there a media presence with conservative bias? Sure. Is there a media presence with liberal bias as well? Absolutely. How can people be expected to filter out all personal bias, whichever direction it leans (although some admittedly do it pretty well, while others totally suck)? Surely you aren't naive enough, host, to believe that www.newshounds.us, a site whose motto is "We watch FOX so you don't have to" is just keeping FOX honest on their "fair and balanced" schtick.

Sorry to get your blood pressure up. I completely agree with the point you said you were intending to make. It's just that for every FOX, there's a MoveOn.org. If your point is that the conservative bias is more egregious, that seems to me to go more to the issue of whose ox is being gored.

host · 10-31-2007, 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loganmule

Agreed.

Host and Will, the point I was making (I'll try to be clearer next time) is that we can't count on accuracy, much less absence of political bias, on EITHER side of the media's polital fence. Is there a media presence with conservative bias? Sure. Is there a media presence with liberal bias as well? Absolutely. How can people be expected to filter out all personal bias, whichever direction it leans (although some admittedly do it pretty well, while others totally suck)? Surely you aren't naive enough, host, to believe that www.newshounds.us, a site whose motto is "We watch FOX so you don't have to" is just keeping FOX honest on their "fair and balanced" schtick.

Sorry to get your blood pressure up. I completely agree with the point you said you were intending to make. It's just that for every FOX, there's a MoveOn.org. If your point is that the conservative bias is more egregious, that seems to me to go more to the issue of whose ox is being gored.

Okay, loganmule...lemme get this straight. You're maintaining that there is no mainstream news media bias in favor of Bush, Cheney, and the conservative POV. If your opinion holds merit, can you explain this?

<h2>A foreign "guy". shits all over "our troops", our shuttle astronauts, Condaleezza Rice, and our president.</h2>

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...202095_pf.html
U.S. Envoy at Home With a Gun and a Plane

By Al Kamen
Friday, March 3, 2006; A15

.....Back in 2003, after insurgent rockets missed then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz in Baghdad, Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt famously said: "We hope that next time the rockets will be more accurate and effective in getting rid of this virus and his like, who wreak corruption in Arab lands."

In early 2004, he noted: "We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory." He said he felt "great joy" at the 2002 space shuttle disaster because an Israeli astronaut died in it.

He has also said that the real axis of evil is one of "oil and Jews," and called President Bush a "mad emperor."

"The oil axis is present in most of the U.S. administration, beginning with its president, vice president, and top advisers, including [Condoleezza] Rice . . . . while the axis of Jews is present with Paul Wolfowitz ," he continued.

Jumblatt had been denied a visa a couple years ago on the grounds that he endorsed terrorism.....

<h2>....and, he's on record as being unrepentant...(if it's even possible to "repent" for what he had said about our "heroes" , and our president...)</h2>

Quote:

THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION
A Saban Center for Middle East Policy Briefing
THE STRUGGLE FOR LEBANESE INDEPENDENCE:
ONE YEAR AFTER HARIRI'S ASSASSINATION
Monday, <h2>March 6, 2006</h2>
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m.

(Bottom of page 3....)

...MR. JUMBLATT: With me is the article whereby I've
insulted the policy of the States on a personal level and on a political
level. I know I have said that, but that's the past. <h2>I don't regret it, but I
have said that....</h2>

<h2>And...for his "trouble", the "guy" is, soon after his vicious, hateful, remarks.... praised by Dick Cheney, (more than once...) and invited to visit with president Bush at the white house:</h2>

Quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0288-515h.html
<center><img src="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/images/20070226-6_d-0288-515h.jpg"></center>
President George W. Bush speaks with members of Lebanon's "March 14" coalition during a meeting at the White House Monday afternoon, Feb. 26, 2007, from left to right, former Lebanese Parliament member Ghattas Khoury; Lebanese Minister of Telecommunications Marwan Hamadeh and Walid Jumblatt, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Lebanon. National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley is seen at right. White House photo by Eric Draper

Quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20071021.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Vice President
<h2>October 21, 2007</h2>

Vice President's Remarks to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Lansdowne, Virginia

...It's been my privilege, as Roger mentioned, over the years to address the Washington Institute a number of times. In fact, most of you knew me long before anyone called me, Darth Vader. (Laughter.) I've been asked if that nickname bothers me, and the answer is, no. After all, Darth Vader is one of the nicer things I've been called recently. (Laughter.)....

....I've gained much from the wisdom of many in the room today; people like Dennis Ross and, of course, Rob Satloff, as well as from the many other analysts who've been affiliated with the Washington Institute. I'm proud to say your former deputy director, John Hannah, is now my Assistant for National Security Affairs. And you can't have him back yet. John and his staff are on duty night and day, and with his leadership, they're doing a tremendous job.

I'm pleased to be among the many participants in the conference, <h2>a group that includes your key noter, Walid Jumblatt, from Lebanon. I've met with Mr. Jumblatt on a number of occasions, and I admire the courageous stand he's taking for freedom and democracy in his home country. (Applause.)</h2>

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/10/...t-anti-semite/
March 10, 2006

Cheney Quotes Racist Anti-Semite to Demonstrate ‘Progress’ In the Middle East....

<h2>The reaction by almost all of the US news media, and all prominent conservative pundits to the contrast documented above is....silence!</h2>

<h3>The following is the history and background to what is described above:</h3>

Quote:

http://www.state.gov/g/rls/rm/2005/42793.htm
Remarks on Release of Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2004
Paula J. Dobriansky, Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs
Washington, DC
February 28, 2005

(As delivered)

Good morning. On behalf of Secretary Rice, who could not be here today, it is my pleasure to present the State Department’s annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. These reports are a key part of this Administration’s activities to promote human rights and democracy around the world--part of President Bush’s forward strategy of freedom.

I would like to thank Ambassador Mike Kozak, the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, his staff, and other colleagues in the State Department who played a role in the compilation of these important reports.

Our approach on human rights is set clearly and unambiguously by President Bush. In his inaugural address, he stated: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world." In his State of the Union address, he elaborated that: "Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace." In other words, the United States will work globally to promote democracy, as democracy is the best guarantor of human rights.

Promoting human rights is not just an element of our foreign policy--it is the bedrock of our policy, and our foremost concern. These reports put dictators and corrupt officials on notice that they are being watched by the civilized world, and that there are consequences for their actions. With these in hand, we look forward to the day when all nations are part of the growing community of democracies, and tyranny and slavery exist only as a sad chapter in human history.

We find ourselves in an era of monumental advancement for human rights and democracy. As the President noted in Bratislava just last week, there was a rose revolution in Georgia, an orange revolution in Ukraine, and most recently, a purple revolution in Iraq. <h2>In Lebanon, we see growing momentum for a ‘cedar revolution’ that is unifying the citizens of that nation to the cause of true democracy and freedom from foreign influence.</h2> Hopeful signs span the globe, and there should be no doubt that the years ahead will be great ones for the cause of freedom.

As these reports show, there is much to do. Freedom and the ability to choose one’s government still elude many people and many portions of the globe. In much of the broader Middle East, people are increasingly conscious of the freedom deficit in the region and eager to taste the freedom and liberties that are being enjoyed elsewhere. If freedom and democracy work in Muslim nations like Indonesia, Turkey, Afghanistan and Iraq, why should they not be the norm in Iran, Libya, Syria and Saudi Arabia? Cuba’s government remains a blight on the stunning advancement of freedom worldwide. China’s human rights conduct remains one of the top concerns of the U.S. Government. Throughout China and notably in Tibet, affronts to the dignity of human life abound. In North Korea and Burma, citizens languish under repressive regimes which do not govern for their people but rather against them. We are concerned with circumstances in many other parts of globe, and we detail them concisely in these reports.

But our message today is one of hope and promise. This report is the embodiment of President Bush’s commitment that the United States will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with those who live in tyranny and hopelessness and struggle for a better life. Our message to these true patriots of their nations is that you are not ignored and you are not forgotten. Furthermore, we will not excuse those who are responsible for your oppression. The months ahead will see intensive efforts by this Administration to advance the President’s bold agenda to support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture. In this journey, our principles--our commitment to freedom and the rights of individuals--are our compass. These reports are our map. ....

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2005Mar2.html
The Branding of Lebanon's 'Revolution'

By Jefferson Morley
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Thursday, March 3, 2005; 6:00 AM

On the streets of Beirut, they call it the "intifada for independence." In the corridors of Washington, they prefer to call it the "Cedar Revolution."

In a media age, such branding could be crucial. The name given to Lebanon's popular political movement is shorthand for its historical roots and its future direction. The label will help shape how the world understands Lebanon's small but telling part of the ongoing struggle for democracy throughout the Middle East.

The "intifada" brand emerged on Feb. 18 when Beirut's Daily Star reported that the opposition leaders, outraged by the Feb. 14 assassination of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, were "calling for an 'intifada for independence'" as they stepped up attacks on the government.

The Jerusalem Post reported that "the so-called civilian intifada . . . has done what years of civil war and internecine fighting failed to achieve. It brought the citizens of Lebanon together as Lebanese."

When the protests forced the resignation of the pro-Syrian prime minister on Monday, the Daily Star quoted opposition leaders saying "the resignation marked the 'first success of the peaceful intifada' it waged on the government." A correspondent for the Morocco Times uses the same phrase.

And when the Daily Star interviewed an 18-year-old student at Hariri's grave on Wednesday, she said, "we came to thank him for starting this peaceful intifada for Lebanon's freedom."

It's easy to see why the Bush administration prefers not to adopt the "intifada" label. Intifada is an Arabic word meaning "shaking off." It was coined by Palestinians during their spontaneous uprising against Israeli military occupation in 1987. To speak of Lebanon's "intifada" places this month's events in the tradition of the Palestinians' struggle against Israeli occupation. And it implies that Syria, a decaying Arab autocracy, and Israel, a favorite U.S. ally, have something in common as occupying powers.

All of those ideas are credible on the streets of Beirut, where Israel is remembered and reviled for its 1982 invasion. The Israeli Defense Forces, led by then defense minister Ariel Sharon, launched a surprise attack designed to install a friendly government in Beirut. Israel's bid to dominate the country collapsed amid fierce factional fighting and massacres that devastated Beirut and killed upwards of 10,000 civilians. In the ensuing chaos, the Syrian military moved in, effectively installed their own friendly government, and demanded the Lebanese go along.

Given this history, the "Cedar Revolution" brand is more congenial to the Bush administration. <h2>It was coined by Undersecretary of State Paula Dobriansky in a Feb. 28 news conference that touted President Bush's foreign policy.</h2>

"In Lebanon, we see growing momentum for a Cedar Revolution that is unifying the citizens of that nation to the cause of true democracy and freedom from foreign influence," Dobriansky declared. "Hopeful signs span the globe and there should be no doubt that the years ahead will be great ones for the cause of freedom."

The Cedar Tree is the national symbol and depicted prominently on the Lebanese flag. The brand name portrays the anti-Syrian protest movement as essentially an effort to recover Lebanon's national tradition. It gives the movement a Lebanese, not an Arabic, face. It evokes benevolent nature, not unpleasant memories of Israeli military might. It fits rather more comfortably with Bush's foreign policy notion that "freedom is on the march" in the Middle East.

But no one in the Lebanese press is talking about "the Cedar Revolution." The cedar tree is the traditional symbol of the country's Maronite Christians, derived from a reference in the Christian Bible (Psalms 92:12, "the righteous flourish like the palm tree, and grow like a cedar in Lebanon."), according to the Flags of the World Web site. It was incorporated into the Lebanese flag in 1943 when Christians were a majority of the population and the much poorer Shiite Muslims living in the dusty south were all but shut out of power.

That era is gone. Today, Shiites are the biggest single ethnic/religious grouping in Lebanon. They are represented by Hezbollah, the Shiite political party that holds 12 seats in the 128-member parliament. Denounced by the United States as a terrorist organization, Hezbollah is respected across the Lebanese political spectrum for driving the Israelis out of southern Lebanon in 2000. In the words of the newsweekly Monday Morning "the alliance between Damascus and Hezbollah is now decisive" in maintaining the country's pro-Syrian political order.

That's why opposition leader Walid Jumblatt is calling for dialogue with Hezbollah. Jumblatt says he disagrees with Washington's (and France's) insistence that Hezbollah disarm immediately.

Al Manar, Hezbollah's TV station and Web site, reported Wednesday that Jumblatt's representative will soon meet with Hezbollah's leadership.

Hezbollah, it is safe to say, wants no part of a U.S.-backed "Cedar Revolution." But it might be persuaded to join an "intifada for independence," especially if the new government would allow it to keep its weapons after Syria departs.

A lot hangs on how the Lebanese brand this moment in their political history.....

One, lonely voice, a "liberal" columnist, calls it what it is:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...202095_pf.html
U.S. Envoy at Home With a Gun and a Plane

By Al Kamen
Friday, March 3, 2006; A15

<h2>....Is U.S. Eating Jumblatt's Bitter Words?</h2>

The enemy of my enemy, as the saying goes, is a truly wonderful chap -- even if he had also been my enemy.

Back in 2003, after insurgent rockets missed then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz in Baghdad, Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt famously said: "We hope that next time the rockets will be more accurate and effective in getting rid of this virus and his like, who wreak corruption in Arab lands."

In early 2004, he noted: "We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory." He said he felt "great joy" at the 2002 space shuttle disaster because an Israeli astronaut died in it.

He has also said that the real axis of evil is one of "oil and Jews," and called President Bush a "mad emperor."

"The oil axis is present in most of the U.S. administration, beginning with its president, vice president, and top advisers, including [Condoleezza] Rice . . . . while the axis of Jews is present with Paul Wolfowitz ," he continued.

Jumblatt had been denied a visa a couple years ago on the grounds that he endorsed terrorism.

But he's coming to town next week to meet his pals. Such as? Well, Rice -- who visited him at his home in Lebanon last week -- national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley and, yes, World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz.

On the Hill, Jumblatt, who's a member of the Lebanese parliament, is visiting with Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) and John E. Sununu (R-N.H.) and others.

How did this happen? Simple. Jumblatt became anti-Syrian and even joined the mighty Coalition of the Willing in 2005.

"It's strange for me to say it," he told Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, "but this process of change" to democracy "has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it."

Jumblatt. A guy you can count on........

Quote:

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=1&gl=us
THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION
A Saban Center for Middle East Policy Briefing
THE STRUGGLE FOR LEBANESE INDEPENDENCE:
ONE YEAR AFTER HARIRI'S ASSASSINATION
Monday, <h2>March 6, 2006</h2>
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m.

(Bottom of page 3....)

...MR. JUMBLATT: With me is the article whereby I've
insulted the policy of the States on a personal level and on a political
level. I know I have said that, but that's the past. <h2>I don't regret it, but I
have said that....</h2>

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...07.html?sub=AR
Sins of Commission?

By Al Kamen
Wednesday, <h2>March 8, 2006</h2>; Page A17

....Our new pal, Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt , speaking at the Brookings Institution on Monday, held up Friday's column item about his viciously anti-American, anti-Semitic musings.

<h2>"With me is the article," Jumblatt said</h2>, "whereby I've insulted the policy of the States on a personal level and on a political level. I know I have said that, but that's the past....

[/quote]

<h2>Consider the reaction from the white house and the conservative "universe", to these much milder "transgressions":</h2>

Quote:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405280003
Fri, May 28, 2004 12:59pm ET

Following former Vice President Al Gore's May 26 speech (sponsored by MoveOn.org and delivered at New York University), conservative commentators echoed misleading statements released by the Republican National Committee (RNC).

In one "RNC Research Briefing," the RNC recycled an attack on MoveOn.org, stating, "Two Ads Comparing President Bush To Adolf Hitler Appeared On MoveOn.org Voter Fund Website," referring to ads that were submitted for a contest held by MoveOn.org. However, as the non-partisan Columbia Journalism Review's website The Campaign Desk noted in its "Distortion" column, while "at least one [ad] was posted briefly on the organization's website ... MoveOn quickly removed it and disassociated itself from the offending ads."

Barbara Comstock -- former director of the Office of Public Affairs at the Department of Justice under Attorney General John Ashcroft and former director of research and strategic planning at the RNC -- seems to have taken a cue from her former employer, writing in a May 27 National Review Online commentary, in reference to MoveOn.org executive director Eli Pariser, "His group has promoted ads comparing Bush to Hitler." Comstock also echoed another part of the RNC release that described MoveOn.org's call for peaceful anti-terrorism responses following the September 11 terrorist attacks, writing, "Gore's top speaking destination of choice not only opposes the war in Iraq, they opposed the war in Afghanistan, too. Just days after September 11, MoveOn.org put out a statement saying, 'We recognize that we are now in a world where indiscriminate military actions can make us less safe....'"

Rush Limbaugh took the RNC assertion about the ad one step further during his May 26 radio show, saying, "MoveOn.org, this is the wacko bunch that is doing ads equating Bush with Hitler." A May 27 article by David Horowitz (co-written by Ben Johnson and published in Horowitz's online FrontPage Magazine) contained similar comments: "Gore appeared before the MoveOn.org, a radical group which had already compared Bush to Hitler."

The Campaign Desk noted that on CNN's American Morning on May 27, Republican convention communications director Mark Pfeifle also repeated the "stunningly false" charge that MoveOn.org "has run ads that compare the president to Hitler."

The RNC statement goes on to make other assertions, including taking financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros to task for calling the September 11 attacks "spectacular," although although CIA and FBI officials have used the word "spectacular" in a similiar context. A July 2001 CIA briefing warned of Osama bin Laden's intentions to attack the United States: "The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests." Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet, in his March 9 testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, warned, "A spectacular attack on the U.S. homeland remains the brass ring many strive for with or without Al Qaeda leadership." And CNN reported on March 13 the comments of an FBI counterterrorism official who said, "I believe that we in the U.S. will be hit with another terrorist attack, whether it's a 'spectacular attack' like 9/11..."

The RNC release concluded with another attack on MoveOn.org: "New Ad Featured On MoveOn.org Website Accuses President Bush Of Using 'Funds From Foreign Governments To Finance The Killing Of Innocent Civilians' And Of Having 'Established Links With Known Terrorist Organizations.'" But, in fact, the ad is not new -- nor is it a MoveOn.org ad. It was one of the ads submitted to MoveOn.org's contest last December.

Quote:

http://www.wave3.com/Global/story.as...14024&nav=0RZF
White House Spokesman Lashes Out At Kerry's Remark On Education And Iraq

Nov 7, 2006 12:37 PM

(WASHINGTON) -- The White House accused Sen. John Kerry on Tuesday of troop-bashing, seizing on a comment the Democrat made to California students that those unable to navigate the country's education system "get stuck in Iraq."

"Senator Kerry not only owes an apology to those who are serving, but also to the families of those who've given their lives in this," White House press secretary Tony Snow said. "This is an absolute insult."

Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran and Bush's rival in 2004, fired back, saying the president and his administration are the ones who owe U.S. troops an apology because they "misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it."

"This is the classic GOP playbook," Kerry said in a harshly worded statement. "I'm sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did. I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium."

Snow was asked about the comment which Kerry made during a campaign rally Monday for California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides. The White House spokesman was clearly ready, consulting his notes to read a fuller account of Kerry's statement and unleashing a sharp attack.

<h3>The Massachusetts senator, who is considering another presidential run in 2008, had opened his speech at Pasadena City College with several one-liners, joking at one point that Bush had lived in Texas but now "lives in a state of denial."

Then he said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."</h3>

Snow said the quote "fits a pattern" of negative remarks from Kerry about U.S. soldiers and suggested that whether Democratic candidates -- particularly those running on their military service backgrounds -- agree with their 2004 standard-bearer should be a campaign litmus test.

Unsubstantiated allegations about Kerry's Vietnam War heroism from a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth figured prominently in the 2004 Kerry-Bush race. Even Kerry has blamed his slow and uncertain response to the group's claims for helping doom his White House chances.

Snow said a lot of Americans have joined the military since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

"As for the notion that you can say this sort of thing about the troops and say you support them, it's interesting," the press secretary said.

A potential rival to Kerry in 2008 -- Republican Sen. John McCain -- said in a statement that Kerry "owes an apology to the many thousands of Americans serving in Iraq, who answered their country's call because they are patriots and not because of any deficiencies in their education."

Like Kerry, McCain is a decorated Vietnam veteran.

House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also called on Kerry to apologize, labeling his comments "disrespectful and insulting to the men and women serving in our military."

<h3>If anyone can post examples that counter my claim that Bush/Cheney were successful in achieving a near total "lock down" of negative reaction...from the press, and from their usually quite shrill conservative chorus, when it came to responding to a sudden, very public embrace of the pariah, Walid Jumblatt, I'd love to see it.</h3>

The very shrill chorus, encompassing almost all of US news media and conservative bloggers, and an army of pundits, most evident at Salem Comm. radio newtwork, and their townhall.com, and the voices at foxnews when it is "unleashed", reacts as one....on cue, as it did against John Kerry on the eve of the 2006 mid-term election, and in 2004, against moveon.org.

I think that I've stumbled upon a phenomena even more disturbing. This example of predicted reaction to the Bush/Cheney "warming" to Jumblatt....not happening...despite defiance on Jumblatt's part....despite Jumblatt formerly attacking everything that Bushworld holds "dear", supports my contention that:

<h3>A.) The notion that there is a "liberal bias" in the reporting of the US working press is absurd....as in the exact opposite is much closer to the truth.

B.) The notion that conservative professional or grassroots pundits act independently to defend any ideals or strongly held "principles" (as in, strong support for "the troops"), indeed...the notion that they speak out independently, at all, is....an effing joke, as the "Jumblatt pass" shows.

C.) The notion that either Bush or Cheney "means what he says, and says what he means", is not evident in the "pass" they've accorded to Jumblatt. Bush and Cheney do not even respect their supporters enough to keep their Jumblatt capitulation and ass kissing private, and they've put a lid on their press and pundit chorus that is so tight that there is not even a "hey, what is going on here?", murmer.... Indeed, Bush and Cheney have so little regard for their adoring, "faithful, attack on cue", chorus of apologists, they have acted as if no explanation for their "Jumblatt pass", is even neccessary.

D.) The "Jumblatt Pass" makes the press and the pundits appear to be puppets of extremely arrogant dictators....desperate dictators, willing to overlook any grave past transgression, willing to shred anything that they've rallied support for in the past, as long as they think that it legitimizes their foreign policy objectives. Hey, we've got Jumblatt "on board" !!!
</h3>

<h2>Mercifully, no one from the press will print or broadcast an opinion that kissing Jumblatt's ass , now, either adds credence to his past offensive remarks, or serves to display Bush and Cheney as ridiculous and desperate, now.</h2>

Loganmule, you failed to explain the examples I've previously posted on this thread in support of my contention that only a national press with a conservative bias could or would ignore my examples of a blatant, unexplained, "disconnect" in the prrior rhetoric and reaction of Bush and Cheney, compared to their curious "relations" recently with Walid Jumblatt. Since they offer no explanation for what they've had to ignore and dismiss to arrive at their recent public posture with Jumblatt, it is all the more important for the working press to ask Bush and Cheney how they can ignore what Jumblatt has said, and his unrepentant, public, reaction to what little reporting there has been about his vile comments.

dc_dux · 10-31-2007, 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loganmule

....

Sorry to get your blood pressure up. I completely agree with the point you said you were intending to make. It's just that for every FOX, there's a MoveOn.org. If your point is that the conservative bias is more egregious, that seems to me to go more to the issue of whose ox is being gored.

That captures the issue in a nutshell.

Conservatives have a propensity to raise the "MoveOn.org" flag when the discussion turns to bias.....yet fail to acknowledge that there is no valid comparison between a purported news organization like Fox and an advocacy organization like MoveOn.org.

ricky_cooper · 11-15-2007, 09:19 PM

Yes you are right. But i want to add more to this topic. Check out the link.

Ustwo · 11-15-2007, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

That captures the issue in a nutshell.

Conservatives have a propensity to raise the "MoveOn.org" flag when the discussion turns to bias.....yet fail to acknowledge that there is no valid comparison between a purported news organization like Fox and an advocacy organization like MoveOn.org.

Oh god not this shit again.

Try Fox vrs CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC

We won't even get to web site bullshit like moveon or the even more insane daily KOS.

I don't care about fringe bias, sites like littlegreenfootballs don't pretend to be 'neutral' any more than moveon. Its the 'main stream' media pretending to be neutral that is the real concern.

You turn on Rush Limbaugh you know you are getting a conservative, he puts it all over his web site, you turn on our old buddy Dan Rather, and you get a raging liberal pretending to be a neutral media source.

Charlatan · 11-15-2007, 10:16 PM

The difference between Limbaugh and Rather should be that Rather is a news journalist and Limbaugh is a columnist.

The difference should be that a news journalist strives to present the news as objectively as possible. A columnist offers opinions.

Trouble occurs when these two different types of journalist start to slip into each other's realms (i.e. Limbaugh presents his information as something other than opinion or Rather infuses his news with his own bias).

The media today is not as cut and dry as it perhaps once was. Journalists can and do shift their roles and increasing straddle the fence on which side of the news/commentary continuum they are sitting. As a result it becomes increasingly important for the consumers of news and information to be aware of how things are being presented. Aware of the bias going in or at least have more than one source for their news and information so they can sift for something resembling the "truth".

host · 11-16-2007, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Oh god not this shit again.

Try Fox vrs CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC

We won't even get to web site bullshit like moveon <h3>or the even more insane daily KOS.</h3>

I don't care about fringe bias, sites like littlegreenfootballs don't pretend to be 'neutral' any more than moveon. Its the 'main stream' media pretending to be neutral that is the real concern.

You turn on Rush Limbaugh you know you are getting a conservative, he puts it all over his web site, you turn on our old buddy Dan Rather, and you get a raging liberal pretending to be a neutral media source.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...21&postcount=6

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I'm guessing that in his world view, the article is just so off base its wrongness should speak for itself? This is really why I stopped reading his threads so long ago, there is such a disconnect between the articles and what he says they say, or support. <h3> I am assuming he gets this stuff from a KOS like web site or the like.</h3>

Correct me if you disagree,and can post a fact based argument.
I post on, and read other posts on a grassroots driven political website forum. My political POV is very close to what polls confirm is aligned with a majority view on the major issues of our day....
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh.htm
the Iraq war, the job effectiveness of Bush and Cheney and their credibility. On abortion, Social Security, progressive income tax, inheritance tax, health insurance reform, I seem to share the majority view, and you can throw in global warming, too.
On protecting the government from religious encroachment, yup, I'm there.

Now, let's look at what you've posted,and what you've overlooked about this thread's subject, and your own politics and the folks aligned with your political POV......in contrast to mine, your views seem amazingly similar to those of wealthy CNP members who have purchased the opposite of a grassroots driven political agenda, hence the partisanization of the DOJ voting enforcement division:

Quote:

YouTube - Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote ...
Paul Weyrich, "father" of the right-wing movement and co ...
[Click for more information] Watch video - 40 sec - Rated 5.0 out of 5.0
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw

Ustwo, .... I AM dailykos.com:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/23/83421/6520

Yup, it's me, that "host", posting "over there", too, just as I do here. It's a "forum", Ustwo, 'ceptin fer "the stuff" MarKos, and a few other "extreme left" participants who I suspect he gives "mod level" site privileges to, post.

More than 99 percent of what displays on the dailykos.com pages is provided by otherwise ordinary members of the public. I've never had a private exchange with anyone on that site (I have on this one, though...), "we" don't meet to "fix" or co-ordinate an "agenda". If you read the reaction to my post at "kos" accessed at the preceding link, you'll quickly see, I got a "reception" very similar to the one I get when I post here....

Why don't you register and then post at dailykos.com , Ustwo? You get to set the agenda there, at least once a day. They don't permit you to post a diary the same day that you register, and they limit initiation of new topics to one per day, but there is no limit on the replies you can post in reaction to the topics posted by others.

<h3>What is your actual objection, Ustwo? Dailykos.com is a grassroots driven forum, just as this is.</h3> I happen to be one of thousands of blades of grass who together provide the content there, and the "agenda".

<h3>Who are YOUR "reasonable". "troop luvin", "terrorist fightin", "patriotic 'Murkins", Ustwo? Are they Bush or Cheney, or Weyrich, Epperson, Altzinger, or maybe the "gang" of bloggers/talk radio pundits, featured on Salem Radio and their townhall.com website. Maybe it;s the three guys above and their militantly partisan compadres at the Council for National Policy. So you embrace the agenda of a group of "extreme right", evangelical billionaire, CNP members, Ustwo....are they a "grssroots movement", from your POV?</h3>

I suspect you view "Kos" as a mirror opposite of this:

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Townhall.com
Townhall.com
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Townhall.com is a web-based publication primarily dedicated to conservative United States politics. It was previously operated by the Heritage Foundation, but is now owned and operated by Salem Communications. Townhall.com, which publishes daily, features more than 80 columns (both syndicated and exclusive) by writers such as Neal Boortz, William F. Buckley Jr., Ann Coulter, Larry Elder, Jonah Goldberg, Rebecca Hagelin, Paul Jacob, David Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Robert Novak, Thomas Sowell, Jacob Sullum, and Cal Thomas. It also publishes news from the Cybercast News Service. Its columnists often appear as guest commentators on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, and the FOX News Channel.

[edit] Purchase by Salem

In May of 2006, Salem Communications purchased Townhall.com. Salem named Chuck DeFeo as the site's new manager, and Hugh Hewitt as the site's "Executive Editor". The site, which was relaunched on July 4th of 2006, reflected Hewitt's ambition to create a clearinghouse for conservative New Media and activism; it kept the deep stable of conservative commentators and columnists, but added an ambitious slate of new features, including podcasts of Salem network and local talk shows, blogs run by Salem talk show hosts, links to send feedback to politicians and sign petitions, and a facility to allow any user to set up a blog on the Townhall.com server.

The difference, Ustwo, is that Kos was started, and the site is still owned by an individual, a guy who once voted for Reagan. Townhall.com is part of unified, media message, closely coordinated with the "bloggers" who are also radio talkshow hosts, ala Limbaugh, broadcast daily on more than 1200 Salem radio stations. From the beginning, townhall.com has been either a part of heritage.org, or Salem, and they are both COUNCIL FOR NATIONAL POLICY, (CNP):

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Weyrich
Paul M. Weyrich (born October 7, 1942, in Racine, Wisconsin) is a US conservative political activist and commentator.

He is widely considered one of the founders of the American New Right and an important strategist for the social and religious conservative movements. He is less well-known as an advocate for mass transit and rail transportation. He is an ordained protodeacon in the Melkite Greek Catholic Church. Weyrich is a regular columnist for NewsMax.[1] Weyrich supports 2008 conservative presidential candidate Mitt Romney.[2]
....*Conservative activism

Born in Racine, Wisconsin, Weyrich became involved in politics while a student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and was active in the Racine County Young Republicans from 1961 to 1963 and in Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign. He spent his early career in journalism as political reporter for the Milwaukee Sentinel newspaper and, in radio, as a reporter for WAXO-FM in Kenosha and as news director of KQXI in Denver.

In 1967, he became press secretary to Republican U.S. Senator Gordon L. Allott of Colorado. While serving in this capacity, he met Jack Wilson, an aide of Joseph Coors, patriarch of the Coors brewing family. Frustrated with the state of public policy research, they founded Analysis and Research Inc. in 1971, but this organization failed to gain traction.

[edit] Founding the Heritage Foundation

In 1973, with the financial backing of Coors, <h3>Weyrich and Ed Feulner founded the Heritage Foundation as a think tank to counterbalance prevailing sentiment on taxation and regulation, which they considered to be anti-business.</h3> While the organization was at first only minimally influential, it has grown into one of the world's largest and most respected public policy research institutes and has been hugely influential in advancing conservative policies.

The following year, again with support from Coors, Weyrich founded the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress (CSFC), an organization that trained and mobilized conservative activists, recruited conservative candidates, and raised funds for conservative causes.

Under Weyrich, the CSFC proved highly innovative. It was among the first grassroots organizations to raise funds extensively through direct mail campaigns. It also was one of the first organizations to tap into evangelical Christian churches as places to recruit and cultivate activists and support for social conservative causes. Indeed, they proved such a wellspring that, in 1977, Weyrich co-founded Christian Voice with Robert Grant and two years later founded with Jerry Falwell the Moral Majority. Weyrich coined the phrase "Moral Majority."[3]

Over the next two decades, Weyrich founded, co-founded, or held prominent roles in a number of other notable conservative organizations. Among them, he was founder of the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization of state legislators; <h3>a co-founder of the Council for National Policy, a strategy-formulating organization for social conservatives</h3>; co-publisher of the magazine Conservative Digest; and national chairman of Coalitions for America, an association of conservative activist organizations. The CSFC, reorganized into the Free Congress Foundation (FCF), also remained active....

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feat...frequency.html
News: How the rise of Salem Communications' radio empire reveals the evangelical master plan

By Adam Piore
Illustration: John Hersey

December/January 2006 Issue

....Salem’s stations allow the religious right to share information, mobilize allies, and galvanize public opinion. During the Terri Schiavo battle, Dobson took to Salem’s airwaves and told listeners: “A woman’s life hangs in the balance. We really have to defend this woman, because if she dies, the lives of thousands of people around the country can be killed, too. There’s a principle here: It’s a paradigm of death versus a paradigm of life.” Dobson’s cohost then reeled off the phone numbers of Florida legislators. Salem’s founders are as politically skilled as their hosts. Time magazine recently named Epperson—who’s twice run for Congress as a Republican—as one of “the 25 most influential evangelicals in America” in a cover-story package that asked “What Does Bush Owe Them?” Atsinger is a Bush Pioneer, meaning he gave $100,000 to the president’s reelection campaign. In the 1990s, he helped revolutionize California politics, first by running Christians for local school boards and then backing candidates who took over the legislature. In 2000, the two men, along with a close political ally, funneled $780,000 into a California state ballot initiative to ban gay marriages.<h3> Both have served on the board of the Council for National Policy, a secretive and exclusive network of conservative activists and moneymen.</h3>

In 2004, Atsinger cochaired Americans of Faith, a massive, church-based, get-out-the-vote campaign, and Salem ran hundreds of radio spots urging Christians to vote. A Salem affiliate in Pennsylvania sponsored an Operation Vote caravan that registered voters, offering them prizes of cars and cash. Epperson and Atsinger were “spark plugs to take voter registration to the next level,” says NRB’s Wright. They also contributed $15,000 to John Thune’s campaign to defeat Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, and Salem host Kevin McCullough solicited funds for Thune on his Salem-sponsored blog.

For all their political activity, Atsinger, 66, and Epperson, 69, have shunned the spotlight. Atsinger declined to discuss his activism, and Epperson would rather talk about the Bible. He’s particularly fond of Romans, in which Paul describes the plight of those who’ve turned away from God: “So they are without excuse, for though they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him. But they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools.”

Says Epperson: “I personally am happy the president won. But we’ve been very careful as a company to be nonpartisan. We talk about issues and urge people to vote their conscience. Democrats can be more credible by looking at the issues we care about and being responsive to our issues.”

In other words, get with the program. .....

<h3>Ustwo, your political views are uncannily similar to those of a group of extremely conservative, billionaire and mega-millionaire, christian evangelical zealots. This is not a grassroots movement, Ustwo. It is political ideology and activist agenda funded by some of the wealthiest and most politically and religiously extreme folks in the US, a kind of christian evangelical GOP corporatism. Even as a "Kos" diarist, I don't feel comfortably opposite enough , compared to these heritage/CNP/"Gop for Jesus" "activists". How comfortable are you, politically allied with them in every way that is not connected with their religious agenda? How do you separate that part, UStwo?</h3>

...and don't forget, you're posting on a thread that features proof, right off of linked whitehouse.gov web pages, that Bush and Cheney have both received with open arms, publicly without explanation, a foreign person on record as enthusiastic over frequent deaths of American troops in Iraq and in reaction to the accidental deaths of shuttle astronauts, framed with the question of how an alleged "liberal press", would let the POTUS and the VP, get away with embracing such a person, without having to explain their reasons for ignoring his offense against America's bravest. Now, you seem uninterested in this controversy, as well.

Ustwo · 11-16-2007, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

The difference between Limbaugh and Rather should be that Rather is a news journalist and Limbaugh is a columnist.

The difference should be that a news journalist strives to present the news as objectively as possible. A columnist offers opinions.

Trouble occurs when these two different types of journalist start to slip into each other's realms (i.e. Limbaugh presents his information as something other than opinion or Rather infuses his news with his own bias).

The media today is not as cut and dry as it perhaps once was. Journalists can and do shift their roles and increasing straddle the fence on which side of the news/commentary continuum they are sitting. As a result it becomes increasingly important for the consumers of news and information to be aware of how things are being presented. Aware of the bias going in or at least have more than one source for their news and information so they can sift for something resembling the "truth".

Thats a good point, but in the end I'll have more respect for someone like Limbaugh then a Rather, the reason being one isn't trying to influence while hiding.

I think the issue is the media was NEVER cut and dry, its always been biased, hell this country was founded around a biased press.

At some point though the media put on a veneer of respectability and trust, but it was only a veneer. With only a few major outlets, who would you turn to if something was biased? You could tell your friends, you could make your own newsletter at great expense but you would need to be a crusader.

Enter the information age. Whats happened is this veneer has been exposed for what it is. Quite suddenly we went from almost no fact checking and analysis of the press to 1000's of educated people picking it apart.

Years ago Dan Rather did a piece on the Vietnam war which was complete bullshit. He interviewed 'soldiers' who were never there who committed war crimes that never happened. It REALLY upset vet groups, but unless you were in those groups you never heard of it.

Then he tried the same type of thing with the Bush 'documents'. Within hours, littlegreenfootballs demonstrated those were obviously word documents, a few hours later, its on drudge, the next morning its on Limbaugh, it can't be ignored. I don't recall which major news organization ran with it first, but they didn't have a choice by then.

Now this isn't all good. Personally I didn't care if Clinton was getting a hummer from some fat chick in the oval office. If I were married to Hilary I'd be cheating too, its a political marriage. The story was deliberately buried by the main stream press, now I'm not sure if they would have done the same if the president was GHB, but thats another story. At any rate, that can't be ignored either, because one guy with a web site got wind of it.

Still I think over all its a good thing, but it requires now more than ever that the person reading is educated and understand this sort of thing, something which is sadly lacking.

roachboy · 11-16-2007, 10:46 AM

there is nothing like a considered statement about political bias in the press from ustwo in particular above: only the repetition of conservative mediascape memes. so there's nothing persuasive about the claims--you either accept them as a priori or you dont.

and i dont.

i am not a fan of judith regan per se, but i applaud this lawsuit and hope that (a) she wins and take down fox "news" with her and that (b) sooner or later this gets some actual coverage in the american press. that it hasnt is baffling to me: faux news is self-evidently a conservative political operations, roger ailes is self-evidently a rightwing hack. faux news is a joke. it shold be revealed as a joke.

Quote:

Regan opens Fox's can of worms

Thursday November 15, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

OJ Simpson in a TV interview with Judith Regan about how the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman would have taken place had he actually committed the crimes, on the Fox channel. Photograph: Michael Yarish/EPA

At first glance, the lawsuit by former book publisher Judith Regan against News Corporation, parent company of "fair and balanced" Fox News, has a certain similarity to the Iran-Iraq war: it's hard to work up a rooting interest in either side.

Regan, among other things, has shepherded the literary careers of celebrity authors such as Rush Limbaugh, OJ Simpson and porn star Jenna Jameson, eliciting surprise among some that her writers had read a book, let alone written one. Her most recent fame came from her role as the paramour of the former New York City police commissioner Bernard Kerik, meeting him for assignations in a city apartment intended to provide respite for 9/11 rescue workers.

Article continues

News Corporation owns, among other properties, the New York Post, the 20th Century Fox movie studio, DirecTV, the Fox Network, Fox News and the recently acquired Wall Street Journal.

The Fox News chief, Roger Ailes, is a long-time Republican activist dating back to the days of the Richard Nixon administration, and a close associate of former New York mayor and Republican presidential candidate Rudolph Giuliani.

Ailes managed Giuliani's first and unsuccessful race for mayor in 1989, and Giuliani later officiated at Ailes's wedding. When Fox News was a start-up, then-Mayor Giuliani pushed so hard to force cable networks such as Time-Warner to carry it that a federal judge hearing a subsequent lawsuit blocked the mayor's plan to put Fox on a city-owned channel, calling it "special advocacy" to "reward a friend and further a political viewpoint". Guiliani was a highly visible tablemate and guest of Ailes and Fox at the most recent White House Correspondents' Dinner.

Ailes had for years been caustically critical of Cable News Network, calling it the "Clinton News Network" because of the friendship between Bill Clinton and former CNN president Rick Kaplan, although his criticism seemed to be based on Kaplan's access to Clinton rather than anything that actually appeared on CNN.

Despite Ailes's old claims of outrage, his close personal and professional relationship with Giuliani, in which both parties have provided direct support to the other, is at the very least unusual. And it is beyond unusual for a former campaign manager to direct coverage of his old candidate.

That's what makes the suit interesting. Regan's 70-page filing, in spite of its frustrating lack of elaboration on its most spectacular allegations, paints a picture at considerable variance from the 24-hour news network's "fair and balanced" slogan.

Her central point, which might seem credible to anyone who has seen a Sean Hannity-Giuliani televised lovefest, is that Fox's coverage of the presidential race is determined by its desire to promote Giuliani. In fact, she alleges in court papers that "a senior executive" had advised Regan to "lie to, and withhold information from, investigators concerning Kerik".

Indeed", it adds, "another News Corp. executive similarly advised Regan not to produce clearly relevant documents in connection with the government's investigation of Kerik".

That, Regan asserts, led to a concerted campaign to discredit her. "The smear campaign", she says, "was necessary to advance News Corp.'s political agenda, which has long centred on protecting Rudy Giuliani's presidential ambitions".

If that can be proven, it's contemptible. And if it emerges that one of those executives was Ailes, how much damage might that do to Fox News? We may never know who those executives were; Fox would appear to have a strong incentive to settle this matter before it gets anywhere near the courtroom. Even Regan might not really want to harm either Giuliani or Fox - she might just want lots of money.

If the suit does move forward and Regan can substantiate her claims, it will provide a critical boost for her lawsuit, which one employment lawyer called a "very well-drafted complaint". The lawyer, who asked not to be identified because she is not familiar with the details of Regan's contract, says an employer has to justify a firing for cause by showing that the employee did something fraudulent, illegal or in violation of company policy, particularly if damage to the company's reputation ensues. The misbehaviour has to be willful, deliberate, negligent or intentional.

But the most interesting stuff in the complaint is the part that she musters less dudgeon over. It calls into question whether Fox News has any relationship beyond its name with news.

This "senior executive", she says, tried to go beyond withholding facts from federal investigators that might hurt Guiliani or Kerik, his partner in the security consulting firm Giuliani Partners. "In fact", the suit says, "as is typically done when Fox News on-air talent and commentators receive their 'talking points', this executive attempted to influence any information that Regan might be asked to give regarding Kerik".

She also makes one final interesting about lawyers for News Corp. In discussions over an anti-Regan article in the New York Post that Regan says was totally fictional, her complaint alleges that the lawyers acknowledged that the article in question was per se defamatory, but they offered her a dubious reassurance: "No one believes what they read in the New York Post."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2211642,00.html

what is amazing is the extent and depth of conservative nihilism with respect to information: it seems that they know their arguments are idiotic and their grip on the world tenuous at best (on a good day, when kismet works)---so the strategy is to provide streams of pre-chewed conservative firendly infotainment to enable a flight away from information, away from complexity, away from the world and into a simplified fantasy duplicate of the world.

so faced with an implicit choice between arguments about the world and information that cannot be jammed into those arguments, conservative media prefers to jettison information, replacing it with revisionist factoids and american flag graphics, with jingoism and arbitrary ad hominem.

information be damned: its fantasy we want. all american captialist worshipping fantasy we want. dan rather is a bad man. we want happy wars with patriotic coverage and no information about disaster. fantasy we want: smooth, unstriated fantasy.

i seriously hope that the fuckwits at fox believe their own nonsense enough to fight this, and that it goes to court. because if it goes to court, faux news will burn. but i suspect that they'll settle.

Ustwo · 11-16-2007, 12:03 PM

The amusing thing to me is that story itself is in the Guardian, bastion of Liberal Bias. I have no input as its all just allegations, without any substance or proof.

And the wheel turns around and around.

roachboy · 11-16-2007, 12:15 PM

so what you are saying, ustwo, is if you dont like the information, it is ok to dismiss the source in with a glib quip or two.

seems to me that you demonstrate the main contention in my post above: that the contemporary populist american right opposes accurate information, opposes complexity, because the arguments they invest in cannot stand up to it. but rather than reconsider the arguments, note the problems, the move is to undermine information itself. and this with cliches, stock phrases, memes: as if those are adequate.

they arent.

and you wonder why folk laugh at conservative argumentation, do not take it seriously.

healer heal thyself.

Ustwo · 11-16-2007, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

so what you are saying, ustwo, is if you dont like the information, it is ok to dismiss the source in with a glib quip or two.

seems to me that you demonstrate the main contention in my post above: that the contemporary populist american right opposes accurate information, opposes complexity, because the arguments they invest in cannot stand up to it. but rather than reconsider the arguments, note the problems, the move is to undermine information itself. and this with cliches, stock phrases, memes: as if those are adequate.

they arent.

and you wonder why folk laugh at conservative argumentation, do not take it seriously.

healer heal thyself.

*sigh*

roachy, you fail to see the irony here. we have a story about alleged bias at a 'conservative' news outlet (without substance) in a publication believed by any conservative who has ever read it to be perhaps one of the worlds most liberally biased major publication.

there was no information in that story. the story was all allegations and it even stated that none of the major claims were in any way backed up. its an 'if' this is true story, which is nothing more than an opinion piece. this person, of dubious character, filed a lawsuit that says this, oh wouldn't it be so great if it were true and we caught those dastardly conservatives?

do you expect discussion on completely unfounded allegations? hey maybe its true lets talk about it as if it were. i ask were you so critical of dan rather when his bias in attempting to influence a presidential election was laid bare? should we dig up those posts to find your opinion?

there is no information in that article, post one that has some and i will get back to you.

Quote:

At first glance, the lawsuit by former book publisher Judith Regan against News Corporation, parent company of "fair and balanced" Fox News, has a certain similarity to the Iran-Iraq war: it's hard to work up a rooting interest in either side.

yes thank you mr writer, we now know what side you come from.

host · 05-11-2008, 10:57 AM

<h2>Whoops!!!......</h2>

Looks like our president doesn't know what he's doin'.....

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/10/wo...gewanted=print
May 10, 2008
Hezbollah Seizes Swath of Beirut From U.S.-Backed Lebanon Government
By ROBERT F. WORTH and NADA BAKRI

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Heavily armed Hezbollah fighters seized control of much of western Beirut on Friday, patrolling the deserted streets in a raw show of force that underscored the militia’s refusal to back down in its escalating confrontation with the American-backed government.

Hezbollah allies also forced a government-allied satellite television station off the air and burned the offices of its newspaper affiliate, as Sunni fighters loyal to the government largely melted away after three days of the worst sectarian clashes Lebanon has seen since its 15-year civil war.

Those humiliating blows <h3>made clearer than ever the power and determination of Hezbollah, a Shiite group backed by Iran and Syria, and its allies. By Friday afternoon, armed Shiite fighters were riding joyfully through west Beirut in a long column of trucks, cars and scooters, shouting and firing their weapons into the air in a raucous victory celebration.</h3>

The government majority issued an urgent appeal for help from other nations on Friday evening, calling Hezbollah’s actions an “armed coup” against Lebanon and its democratic system using “weapons sent by Tehran.” <h2>Some government lawmakers, including the Druse leader, Walid Jumblatt, and Saad Hariri, the son of the assassinated former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, spent the day holed up in their compounds</h2>, protected by Lebanese Army contingents and the police.

In Washington, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States was “deeply concerned” about the continuing violence and condemned Hezbollah as “undermining the legitimate authority of the Lebanese government.” ....

Everything changed on the morning of 9/11......

loquitur · 05-11-2008, 04:05 PM

So, host, what do you suggest be done about Lebanon? I'd be interested to hear your prescription.

reconmike · 05-11-2008, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

So, host, what do you suggest be done about Lebanon? I'd be interested to hear your prescription.

host · 05-11-2008, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

So, host, what do you suggest be done about Lebanon? I'd be interested to hear your prescription.

Doesn't it seem now that the ass kissing of "troops hatin" Walid Jumblatt and of the boy billionaire, al Hariri, might not have been the best moves that Mr. Bush could have pursued, for the past three years?

This thread has been a study in how not to do it. Why, in god's name, would our president and his secretary of state and yes girl, Condi Rice, think that either courting Jumblatt or corrupt Saudi-ized billionaire al-Hariri a more appealing tactic than what Hezbollah can offer the Lebanese <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/packages/khtml/2006/07/19/world/middleeast/20060719_MIDEAST_GRAPHIC.html">majority</a>?

The farce is that Bush protrays the US as the shi'a "liberator" in iraq, then buys off the sunni leaders in Anbar, while inviting the enemy of US troops and NASA astronauts, Jumblatt, to the white house.

Why would the Lebanese masses be attracted to Jumblatt or to al Hariri and his Saudi fortune? Last time I looked, Saudis are mostly sunni.

None of this was ever thought out before the Iraqi invasion. The "winning" side in Lebanon, now, in Iraq, and in Iran, is shiite. Saddam was a counter, a stabilizing influence. He and his sons were "the solution". There is a vacuum, created by Bush/Cheney and their neocon associates.

The sunnis have the money, but not the numbers. An idiot should have been able to see that the borders in the region were artificial and that removing Saddam would strengthen the shi'a majority throughout the region, and by default, Iran.

If the commitment to "democracy" is anymore than rhetoric, why don't we try withdrawing our troops and put the bulk of the challenge to deal with this mess in the hands of the Saudis? This is a regional problem, and there is no US backed military solution....not while we require 25 percent of the world's entire daily oil production.

This is where our foreign policy situation must separate from Israel's, but AIPAC and other neocons keep perceptions in the US from heading towards any possibility of separate goals and priorities. It will happen though.

The British, in 1920, set up an arrangement in Lebanon and in Iraq that centered on sunni rule. Gertrude Bell was of the opinon that the shi'a were not rational enough to rule Iraq to British standards. Sunni rule can only be accomplished via deception or at the point of a gun.

We're discovering what was known in 1920...the shi'a are a problem. Saddam countered and controlled their ambitions. Now, nobody does. HELLO???????

Bush has put the US in a position where it cannot set up sunni rule in any country because it is viewed as a "Saddam like" arrangement...and it is too complex for the geniuses in the US government to ever pull off....it isn't 1920, anymore.....and the US cannot accept shi'a majority rule in Iraq or shi'a rule in Lebanon, no matter what the majority in either country want or will tolerate, because it is viewed as strenghtening Iran.

So the US gravitated towards Jumblatt and al-Hariri and the two are cowering in safe houses, with no appreciable popular support.....

We can kill hundreds of thousands more, and lose thousands more of our own troops, and interfere with our own oil supply, but it isn't going to change the demographics and politics of the region. We made a huge foreign poliy error in 2003. and now we pay.....unless we decide to kill millions, and then who will we be when we're done? A bunch of Bushes and Cheneys?

God help us!

10-27-2007, 03:36 PM	#2 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	edit Last edited by ottopilot; 12-26-2007 at 12:35 PM.. Reason: -5 pts. spelling

10-28-2007, 05:09 AM	#4 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	edit Last edited by ottopilot; 12-27-2007 at 08:27 AM..

10-28-2007, 05:35 PM	#8 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	edit Last edited by ottopilot; 12-26-2007 at 12:14 PM.. Reason: censored

10-28-2007, 05:40 PM	#9 (permalink)
ubertuber spudly Location: Ellay	Satire goes in Tilted Humor, not Tilted Politics. Thanks. __________________ Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

10-28-2007, 05:58 PM	#10 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	edit Last edited by ottopilot; 12-26-2007 at 12:33 PM..

10-28-2007, 10:27 AM	#5 (permalink)
loganmule Junkie Location: midwest	There were no deaths in Iraq last week, and none of the major news networks reported that during prime time...liberal bias? Your example clearly shows conservative bias, and frankly, I'm shocked that someone didn't pick up on it, because it's great news, in the most inflammatory sense. Wouldn't it be great if news people only reported the complete truth with regard to all significant events, and just stopped there, leaving us to figure out what to make of it? Maybe in an alternate universe, but not here, with the confluence of political influence, both liberal and conservative, and ratings driving the news.

10-28-2007, 10:30 AM	#6 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	That there were no troop deaths hardly means there were no deaths. Jesus Christ.

11-15-2007, 09:19 PM	#15 (permalink)
ricky_cooper Upright	Yes you are right. But i want to add more to this topic. Check out the link. __________________ Conservative Blog

11-15-2007, 10:16 PM	#17 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	The difference between Limbaugh and Rather should be that Rather is a news journalist and Limbaugh is a columnist. The difference should be that a news journalist strives to present the news as objectively as possible. A columnist offers opinions. Trouble occurs when these two different types of journalist start to slip into each other's realms (i.e. Limbaugh presents his information as something other than opinion or Rather infuses his news with his own bias). The media today is not as cut and dry as it perhaps once was. Journalists can and do shift their roles and increasing straddle the fence on which side of the news/commentary continuum they are sitting. As a result it becomes increasingly important for the consumers of news and information to be aware of how things are being presented. Aware of the bias going in or at least have more than one source for their news and information so they can sift for something resembling the "truth". __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

11-16-2007, 12:03 PM	#21 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	The amusing thing to me is that story itself is in the Guardian, bastion of Liberal Bias. I have no input as its all just allegations, without any substance or proof. And the wheel turns around and around. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-16-2007, 12:15 PM	#22 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	so what you are saying, ustwo, is if you dont like the information, it is ok to dismiss the source in with a glib quip or two. seems to me that you demonstrate the main contention in my post above: that the contemporary populist american right opposes accurate information, opposes complexity, because the arguments they invest in cannot stand up to it. but rather than reconsider the arguments, note the problems, the move is to undermine information itself. and this with cliches, stock phrases, memes: as if those are adequate. they arent. and you wonder why folk laugh at conservative argumentation, do not take it seriously. healer heal thyself. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

05-11-2008, 04:05 PM	#25 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	So, host, what do you suggest be done about Lebanon? I'd be interested to hear your prescription.