SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (50595)9/2/2006 3:48:44 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 90947
 
<< "Despicable terrorists? Excuse me, its you that supports Israel, not I..... I blame [every single life lost in Lebanon & Israel] on the American bombs we so generously sent over to Israel." >>

Unbelievable! Israel & the US are the Eeeeevil ones in your twisted fantasy world. And depraved bloodthirsty terrorists like Hezbollah & Al Qaeda are victims of our.... what exactly is it we did for them to declare they want all of us dead?

Here is another dose of reality you will certainly ignore since you have obviously bought into the Big Lie with every fibre of your being. I dare you to follow the links even though the truth will be quite painful for you to face up to.

The media war against Israel

Betsy's Page

Melanie Phillips summarizes all the fabricated stories that the media fell for and promulgated throughout the Israeli-Hezbollah war in Lebanon. There seem to be more examples added every day. She asks the question why the western media fell for so many of these stories.

<<< In short, much of the most incendiary media coverage of this war seems to have been either staged or fabricated. The big question is why the western media would perpetrate such institutionalised mendacity. Many ancillary reasons come to mind. There is the reliance upon corrupted news and picture agencies which employ Arab propagandists as stringers and cameramen. There is the herd mentality of the media which decides collectively what the story is. There is the journalists' fear for their personal safety if they report the truth about terrorist outfits. There is the difficulty of discovering the truth from undemocratic regimes and terrorist organisations. There is the language barrier; there is professional laziness; there is the naive inability to acknowledge the depths of human evil and depravity; there is the moral inversion of the left which believes that western truth-tellers automatically tell lies, while third world liars automatically tell the truth.

But the big answer is that the western media transmit the lies of Hezbollah because they want to believe them. And that's because the Big Lie these media tell -- and have themselves been told -- about Israel and its place in history and in the world today has achieved the status of unchallengeable truth. The plain fact is that western journalists were sent to cover the war being waged against Israel from Lebanon as a war being waged by Israel against Lebanon. And that's because that's how editors think of the Middle East: that the whole ghastly mess is driven by Israel's actions, and that therefore it is only Israel's aggression which is the story to be covered. Thus history is inverted, half a century of Jewish victimisation is erased from public consciousness, victims are turned into aggressors and genocidal mass murderers turned into victims, and ignorance and prejudice stalk England's once staunch and stalwart land.

That's why the fact that hundreds of thousands of refugees from the north of Israel fled to the shelter of strangers in the south; that within one third of Israel, those too poor or old or handicapped or disadvantaged to seek refuge elsewhere were forced to live in shelters for a month in great hardship; that the entire economy of northern Israel was effectively shut down for a month; that thousands of rockets were fired at northern Israel, hundreds every day, many times more than were daily fired at Britain during the Blitz -- that's why none of this was reported in Britain (where as a result such facts, when now related, are received with open-mouthed astonishment) because journalists were told to ignore it all since that wasn't the story their editors wanted. Israel's victimisation simply was not, could not, be the story. The only story was Israel's aggression. But that story is a Big Lie. So a host of lies were transmitted to support it.
>>>

And so what do we know now about media coverage of Israel? Do not trust it. They reflect the increasing anti-Israeli attitudes that we are sadly seeing throughout the world. They are part of the problem because they have so unquestioningly allowed themselves to become part of the media arm of the terrorists. And it is not just Israel but the United States that is the target. The terrorists use the media to spread their propaganda and then turn around and use those dishonest stories to whip up Muslims everywhere into a fury of hatred against the Great and Little Satans. And so much of the media, particularly in Europe, is part of this dishonest cycle.

betsyspage.blogspot.com

web.israelinsider.com



To: tejek who wrote (50595)9/2/2006 4:06:07 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
I read this & kept thinking about you. Imagine that.

A Look Inside Insanity

By Captain Ed on Mouthbreathers
Captain's Quarters

Last night on the way to a meeting, I listened to a caller on the Hugh Hewitt show absolutely wrong-foot the normally unflappable Hugh when the caller suggested that he could prove that Republicans support Satanic control of world events, as long as we had an "open mind". Hugh asked how he could prove that, and the caller said that a website could prove that Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan conspired to murder John Lennon ... and that Stephen King had carried out the hit.

Yes, I mean that Stephen King.

Intrigued, I looked up the website and started knocking around it. If one ever wanted to peek inside the mind of a paranoid schizophrenic, this website -- which is completely earnest -- gives one the best possible potential. In its way, it illustrates all the faulty logic, leaps of conjecture, and paranoid thinking that creates conspiracy theories from Right to Left and in certain parts of the world where such thinking is mainstream. This is Mena airfields and one-world-government on steroids.

The most pathetic part of this website comes from a handwritten letter from Stephen King himself, who apparently tried to take pity on the nutcase (also named Steve) who obsesses about this theory:

<<< Dear Steve,

I didn't kill John Lennon and I think you know that as well as I do, inside the wall of denial that you've put up. Your interest in me is a way of allowing you to avoid dealing with your own mental and spiritual problems. Let it go, why don't you, and find more constructive outlets for your considerable talents? Meantime, here is a fascinating book about the man who really did kill John.

Best, Stephen King >>>

I'm impressed that King actually tried to talk the man down from his mental ledge, and King even sent him a copy of Let Me Take You Down, a book about Mark David Chapman. Unfortunately, the conspiracy nut believed that the book was a coded message that King used to threaten his life. I'd say that King might want to review his security situation.

It's a sad and extreme example of what happens when people stop looking for rational answers and instead adopt the lazy but satisfying belief that massive conspiracies exist just out of sight which explain everything wrong in the world.
It's an impulse we see all too often, and the end result brings us to imagine that politically liberal novelists conspire with conservative politicians to murder entertainers, among other impossibilities.

captainsquartersblog.com

hughhewitt.townhall.com

lennonmurdertruth.com



To: tejek who wrote (50595)9/2/2006 5:27:12 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 90947
 
I read this & kept thinking about you. Imagine that.

George Bush: The Last Barrier Against Fascism!

Power Line

We haven't commented on the new movie, Death of a President, which pretends to be a retrospective look at the assassination of President George Bush and its consequences over the ensuing years. Tonight, though, I caught up with this account of the film in the Daily Mail, and several thoughts fell into place.




Liberals have been announcing the imminent Nazification of America for some years now, and yet...to the presumed embarrassment of nutballs like Keith Olbermann and Howard Dean...the dark night of fascism stubbornly refuses to fall. Not only has Bushitler refrained from rounding up liberals and putting them to the sword, the heady air of freedom has never been headier.

In many social circles, people not only dare to launch vicious attacks on the President, they risk ostracism if they fail to do so. It's not quite the repressive atmosphere that liberals were expecting. Are liberals setting up overseas bank accounts so they are ready to flee when the crackdown comes? Um, no. Indeed, liberals appear serenely confident that no adverse consequences will follow from their accusing the President of every crime known to humanity. They go happily about their business, secure in the knowledge that their hysterical attacks on the President are bullshit.

To date, President Bush has failed even to accuse his critics of a lack of patriotism, let alone imprison or behead them. This is not what has traditionally been characterized as fascism.

And yet, liberals are convinced deep down inside that we conservatives are all Nazis at heart. How to reconcile that conviction with the facts? Easy! President Bush is the one person standing between America and the Dark Night! When he is assassinated--by someone further to the right!--all heck breaks loose. Because it was Dick Cheney who was the chief Nazi all along:


<<< The new President, speaking from a 'secure location' soon nicknamed Bunker One, announced that 'those who celebrate death will learn to taste it soon enough'. Dick Cheney appeared unfazed by the day's gruesome events.

At home and abroad, the gloating over Bush's death soon gave way to a sober realisation that he had actually been a check on Dick Cheney's ruthless way of defending America from enemies at home or abroad.

Executive orders authorising detention without trial of citizens as well as aliens suspected of 'terrorist affiliations' and closing America's borders were signed off with astonishing alacrity, as were military plans to strike regimes that had celebrated Bush's death. >>>


The American people, always suspect in the Left's eyes, fall in with the totalitarian spirit of the times, and war ensues around the globe:


<<< Cheney's re-election campaign in 2008 was conducted in a virtual state of emergency, with him addressing the Republican convention by 3D video link from a secure location. The mood of ongoing crisis, combined with the choice of Jeb Bush as his Vice President, widely seen in America as a tribute to the slain President, ensured him a landslide.

For a man with a history of heart problems, Cheney's survival for almost ten years as president during what the New York Times called 'Our Time of Troubles' was remarkable.

'I thrive on crisis,' Cheney explained, 'it was peace that got me tense.' Occasionally he was short of breath, but Cheney even turned this to his advantage. Images of President Cheney in a wheelchair at Thanksgiving 2010 were carefully choreographed to recall Franklin Roosevelt in charge of the war effort 70 years earlier.

Despite the mayhem since Bush's murder, most Americans had preferred to stick by Dick Cheney. His no-nonsense manner reassured, even as crises kept recurring. >>>


Guantanamo Bay has been another source of frustration for liberals. Despite their efforts to portray Gitmo as the Gulag of our time, our soldiers there continue serving culturally-appropriate foods to the prisoners--generally resulting in substantial weight gains--and handling their Korans with gloves. Once President Bush is out of the way, though, Guantanamo Bay finally turns into the sort of place the liberals wanted to see all along:


<<< The Guantanamo Bay camp was enlarged to accommodate the internees. Castro's regime protested. The ailing Fidel wasn't really in charge any more and his brother, Raul, tried to boost his own public image by organising a mass march to the U.S. base.

Whatever the younger Castro meant to happen, the carefully orchestrated crowds began to pull at the fences around the camp and then to try to climb it.

What happened next is disputed. The U.S. Marines guarding the camp claimed Cuban secret policemen shot at the people trying to climb into the base to stop them escaping from communism. The Cuban authorities said their security forces opened fire to defend the protesters, who were being attacked by the Yankee soldiers. Soon 113 people, including women and children, were dead. >>>


Death of a President is liberal wish-fulfillment, with America careening toward totalitarianism and the world in flames. And all that was necessary was for President Bush to be put out of the way! The rest of us conservatives are fascists...it's only that pesky President Bush that stands in our way. Yes, I see it now...it all makes sense. No wonder it was a conservative who assassinated him!

Death of a President is insane, of course. Nevertheless, it appears to represent an effort by at least one group of leftists to bring their fantasies more nearly in line with reality, by acknowledging the absurdity of their beliefs in the context of the world we live in, and creating an alternative universe in which liberal fantasies are no longer stupid.

Well, it's only a movie.

powerlineblog.com

dailymail.co.uk



To: tejek who wrote (50595)9/2/2006 5:56:09 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
I read this & kept thinking about you. Imagine that.

They Never Cease To Shock

By Lorie Byrd on Moonbats
Wizbang

John Hawkins and other bloggers occasionally quote outrageous statements they find posted at The Democratic Underground. Some of those quotes are pretty shocking, but since the posters are anonymous I sometimes wonder if they are all written by crazed liberals or if some are left by jokesters. I find that preferable to believing there are so many crazy people out there.

This blog post from Robert at Thorn Tree is on the front page, though, not hidden in the comments section or part of a message board. The post is in reaction to the news of a film depicting the assassination of George Bush, which I blogged here yesterday.


<<< Several comments to make on this:

First of all to all the lefty bloggers out there falling all over yourselves to say "Of course, I wouldn't want the president killed", shut the hell up. You know you would do a little dance if someone whacked that idiot. You just want to appear "above" such a thing.

Secondly, the only real problem I have is that he's gunned down. Too quick. A flash of pain and then the big dirt nap. For Bush I would prefer bone cancer, flesh-eating bacteria, or perhaps one of those deadly four hour erections we keep hearing about.

Alright, seriously. I would prefer Bush spend the rest of his life in a cell, tried and convicted of war crimes, but somehow I just don't think it's going to happen. So I can only hope for him to suffer in some other way.

Sad that I've been reduced to wishing great physical agony and death to my fellow humans but I truly believe that he deserves to suffer. Many right bloggers refer to my kind of hatred as Bush Derangement Syndrome, but I prefer to call it a yearning for karmic justice. This president has overseen the most criminal, arrogantly stupid, and homicidal administration in American history. He, and his partners in crime, deserve whatever horrors that karma may have in store for them.

As for Bush's cheerleaders on the Internet, such as the creepy Anchoress (who, by the way, is another right wing blogger that doesn't allow comments because she's such a coward) I can only hope that someone they care for deeply dies in one of Bush's wars of choice.

That seems fair.

Been saving up lots of dark thoughts. Can you tell? >>>

Update: Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy thinks this is just a small sampling of such anti-Bush craziness.

bamapachyderm.com

See D.J. Drummond's related post below.

wizbangblog.com

feeds.wizbangblog.com

rightwingnews.com

thorn-tree.blogspot.com

wizbangblog.com



To: tejek who wrote (50595)9/2/2006 6:30:25 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 90947
 
I read this & kept thinking about you. Imagine that.

    Democrats have a page in their playbook that they use 
often and it works almost every time. Make an assertion,
even when it is contradicted by facts... and then repeat
it over and over again until it becomes conventional
wisdom. When the facts emerge and it is clear that most,
if not the entire thing, was a liberal fantasy, the damage
will have been done and since the media was so instrumental
in spreading the misinformation, they will call very little
attention to the correction.

Never Mind

By Lorie Byrd
Townhall.com Columnist
Friday, September 1, 2006

I watched entirely too much television as a child. I was a big fan of Saturday Night Live and loved the Emily Litella character. For those unfamiliar with Litella, she was played by Gilda Radner and was a little old lady who did commentary on the SNL Weekend Update segment. She was hard of hearing and was constantly confusing words. She would rant on and on, slapping the desk all the while, about one outrage or another until Chevy Chase explained to her that, for example, the report she heard was about bussing schoolchildren, not busting them. She would pause a moment, smile a sweet little smile, look into the camera and say, “Never mind.”

There have been quite a few “never mind” media opportunites during the Bush years. They range in significance from such incorrect stories as that of the plastic Thanksgiving turkey in Baghdad, to stories such as those of widespread rape and murder in the Superdome following Hurricane Katrina. Michelle Malkin once used a reference to Emily Litella when writing about the “Gitmo Koran flushing” story. Few of the “never minds” have gotten the prominent play that the original inaccurate reports received though. More distressing is that many of them have passed unrealized at all. Instead of even a “never mind,” too often we have gotten dumb silence.

So how does the media set a story straight, after it has peddled an alternate reality version for months or even years? Does it even attempt to do it? The blogger known as the Anchoress described the process, “.Once a narrative has been constructed, it’s damn near impossible to get the press to deconstruct it… On the rare occasions in which they are forced to deconstruct something on…page 13 of section A, rather than page 42 of section C…you see this sort of weird and toothless pudding, which in no way resembles the fevered and morally-outraged musings, rants and outright accusations of the last three years.”

There are plenty of examples that would fit the Anchoress’ description of fever pitched accusations and assertions followed by mealy-mouthed, and incredibly quiet corrections and retractions, but perhaps none so much as the Valerie Plame story. How does the news media reverse course on a story that it has reported for years as fact, when it learns, through new revelations, such as the recent one regarding Richard Armitage, that the storyline reported for so long was incorrect? Never mind?

Actually we have not gotten a “never mind” out of the mainstream media yet in the case of Valerie Plame. The mainstream media will probably never tell the true story behind Joe’s grand frog marching fantasy. It is an incredible story really -- amazing that so many in the media regurgitated Wilson’s conspiracy theories as if they were fact. It is amazing that the story took off at all in spite of contradictory statements from Bob Novak from the beginning, who claimed that Plame’s identity did not come from a partisan gunslinger and was only offered in response to his question about why Wilson might have been chosen for the Niger trip. Amazing that it continued in spite of revelations that those 16 words were not incorrect after all. Amazing that even after Joe Wilson’s statements were found to be inconsistent with documentation uncovered by a Senate committee, that the story remained the same.

The Wilson fantasy was reported for years, as fact, in countless set up pieces to fawning interviews with Wilson. That reporting had very real consequences. It was Joe Wilson's claim that Bush lied about the “16 words” that started the "Bush lied" mantra. We now know that many of the claims that "Bush lied" were actually lies themselves, but that has gotten scant little attention.

Democrats have a page in their playbook that they use often and it works almost every time. Make an assertion, even when it is contradicted by facts (in this case by Novak's statement from day one) and then repeat it over and over again until it becomes conventional wisdom. When the facts emerge and it is clear that most, if not the entire thing, was a liberal fantasy, the damage will have been done and since the media was so instrumental in spreading the misinformation, they will call very little attention to the correction.

In the same piece referenced above, the Anchoress wrote of the “incurious press.” For all of the attention given Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, the supposed victim of a vindictive, out-of –control administration willing to surrender national security to satisfy a political vendetta, there is very little curiosity, except for in the blogs, when it comes to determining how the media could have gotten so much of the Plame story so wrong.

A famous politician speaking to Matt Lauer on the Today Show once said of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, “the great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy…” She was wrong about that one. DNA proved that the “great story” there really was about a President who was reckless enough to have an affair with an intern in the Oval Office and then use his power to orchestrate a coverup. She did have a point, though. Sometimes the “great story” isn’t the one the media is telling, Sometimes it is just as interesting to find out how a story, especially one revealed to be incorrect in so many ways, came to be believed by so many journalists and so widely reported in the first place.

townhall.com

snltranscripts.jt.org

michellemalkin.com

theanchoressonline.com

slate.com

washingtonpost.com

cbsnews.com

villainouscompany.com