Tuesday, August 22, 2006


Liberal Site MediaMatters.org Stumbles Over Bush "Vow"

"Progressive" liberal website MediaMatters.org complains over "media ignoring Bush vow" -- in other words, his statement that "[W]e're not leaving (Iraq) as long as I'm President":


On the surface, this appears to be a rather innocent, honest complaint. Upon doing a little bit of research, however, it becomes clear that the media did, in fact, not ignore his statement. Among the reporting I found on the statement:

CBS News - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/21/politics/main1915076.shtml?source=RSS&attr=HOME_1915076

AP - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060822/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_23

United Press International - http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060821-115708-8046r

BBC - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5272656.stm

The Columbus Dispatch - http://www.dispatch.com/national-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/08/22/20060822-A1-01.html

The Editor and Publisher - http://editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003020104&imw=Y

The San Francisco Chronicle - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/22/MNGRNKMSGV1.DTL&feed=rss.news

Australian Broadcasting Corporation -http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1720539.htm

I'm not sure where MediaMatters' writers are looking, but they obviously seem to be quite mistaken. Even if their point had merit, I still don't think it's significant at all. Why? Because Bush made almost the exact same statement about nine months ago! See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4181186.stm. Bush said in his speech (August 24, 2005), " So long as I'm the President, we will stay, we will fight and we will win the war on terror." MediaMatters' writers apparently seem to think that this latest August 2006 "vow" by Bush should be plastered all over the front pages of every newspaper in the country, yet they convienently forget that Bush is merely standing by his former statements -- big deal, hardly original or shocking news.

Monday, August 21, 2006


Iranian President: "The Iranian People Will Force You to Bow and Surrender"


Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: When they talk about a "New Middle East," they mean a Middle East that is held captive by America, England, and the Zionist regime. When they talk about a "New Middle East," they do not mean progress, development, independence, or freedom for the countries [of the region]. They oppose independence, freedom, and progress. Look at Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon, and other places. I say to them: The peoples of the region have awakened. It so happens that our peoples are also calling for a New Middle East. The Middle East that our peoples want is a free Middle East, which is not under the control of America and England.
Those who were involved in planning this barbaric attack, those who supported this barbaric attack, and those who prevented the cease-fire are accomplices in the crimes of the Zionist regime, and must be placed on trial. To be more specific, America and England purport to support human rights, freedom, and democracy. When a cat's leg is run over by a municipal vehicle in some city, they hold a mourning ceremony. But they had the audacity to postpone the cease-fire for at least three weeks. They explicitly declared that the Zionist regime should be allowed to crush the resistance, and to occupy the land, and that [only] then would there be a cease-fire. I want to declare loud and clear, so that the whole world will hear: These two countries are not worthy of being members of the Security Council.
If you want to have good relations with the Iranian people in the future, you should acknowledge the right and the might of the Iranian people, and you should bow and surrender to the might of the Iranian people. If you do not accept this, the
Iranian people will force you to bow and surrender.

Well, at least he's honest.


AP Article - CAIR Asks for "Balanced News" Regarding Muslims

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) asks for "balanced news" in the mainstream media in this piece:

August 18, 2006

(AP) Media portrayals of Muslims often contain so much bias that they've helped fuel an "Islamic-phobia," experts said Thursday during a panel discussion at the National Association of Black Journalists' national convention in Indianapolis. "We're given the most extreme manifestations and there is no balance," Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said of American media coverage. "It shouldn't be 95 percent negative and 5 percent positive. It shouldn't be just about Ramadan. It needs to be more than that. "The panel, which also included a newspaper columnist, university administrator and community activist, showcased the diversity of the nation's Muslim community. Between 30 and 45 percent of Muslims in the United States are black, said Faheem Shuaibe, an imam of Masjidul Waritheen and director of the Clara Mohammed School in Oakland, Calif.Islam, with an estimated 1.2 billion followers, is the world's second-largest religion behind Christianity. Panelists said reporters should find positive stories about local Islamic communities and avoid stereotypical phrasing such as "Muslim garb" when referring to clothing such as a hijab, or head covering, that some Muslims wear. Still, the responsibility to help Americans disconnect the word "Islamic" with "terrorist" also lies with religious leaders, panelists said."There has to be another side presented," said Brenda Shaheed, a vice president of the historically black Martin University in Indianapolis who has practiced Islam for more than 30 years. "If I learned about Islam through the images in the media, there's nothing that would attract me to it."

Media bias against Muslims? "There has to be another side represented"? What about media bias against the Jews? What about the Reuter's photo doctoring scandal, greatly exaggerating damage caused by the Israeli Air Force to Lebanon and shattering the ethics of journalism? What about the AP's Green Helmet fiasco, unearthing dead children from graves or taking them out of ambulances to stage photo-ops? What about the AP's racist, anti-semitic "expert" used often in news stories in the Mideast, Azzam Tamimi? Or the anti-semitic, pro-terrorist rally in Washington, D.C. that the media dressed up to be nothing more than a human rights march? U.S. News and New York Times pseudo-photojournalism? What about the racist remarks of the Muslim and black nationalist supporters of Cynthia McKinney that didn't receive airtime on any mainstream media TV news (except Fox News) before her concession speech? The list goes on and on. CAIR even has had a major photography scandal of its own -- convienently ignored by the mainstream media, of course. As evidenced by these and other scandals, fakes, and cover-ups, the mainstream media has consistently and relentlessly shown an anti-Israel bias throughout the past couple of months and CAIR issues these statements. I totally agree with Ms. Shaheed -- seeing what I've seen recently, there's nothing indeed that would attract me to Islam.

Sunday, August 20, 2006


Spinning The Truce

Here's an article from a couple days ago on Al-Jazeera that I found interesting:


Al-Jazeera says, "Israel may oppose the inclusion of troops from countries that do not have diplomatic relations with the Jewish state." The article continues, "Objections from Israel could complicate efforts to swell the UN force to 15,000. " "Countries that do not have diplomatic relations with the Jewish state," unfortunately, is simply PC code for countries that do not even recognize Israel's right to exist.

Malaysia in particular has made its animosities towards Israel painfully clear -- its PM, Mahathir Mohamad, said in 2003: "Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them...They survived 2,000 years of pogroms not by hitting back, but by thinking. They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal rights with others. With these, they have now gained control of the most powerful countries." In a call-to-arms of sorts, Mahathir also noted, "There must be a way. And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strengths, to plan, to strategize and then to counter-attack."

Combined with the pathetic response of approximately 50 French peacekeepers (as opposed to the promised thousands), it's little wonder that Israel is suspicious of this truce.


A Beginning

What is the purpose of this blog? It is my hope that it will ignite honest discussion and critical thinking about radical Islam and the current situation in the Middle East without the mainstream media's propensity to spin facts and news stories to suit various agendas. It also will seek to understand the Israeli/West-Arab conflict in its historical context, slicing through media fluff, fakery, and revisionism. The blog is open for comments, but I would advise posters to follow only two simple rules:

1. No Flaming.

2. No Political Correctness.

Let the discussion begin...

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Add to Google

Add to My AOL

Subscribe in Bloglines

Site Meter