Survey: Cruise, Simpson, Clinton Seen As Liars
...The survey of more than 1,000 men and women 18 and older also found most people believe politicians tell more lies than business leaders, journalists, celebrities and pro athletes combined.
Bill Clinton is seen as a bigger liar than both George W. Bush and Richard Nixon.
Among the top celebrities perceived as liars are: O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson, Robert Blake, Kobe Bryant, Donald Trump, Tom Cruise, Jude Law and Brad Pitt.
Link
From:
About me: “'But I don’t want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked. 'Oh, you can’t help that,' said the Cat. 'We’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.' 'How do you know I’m mad?' said Alice. 'You must be,” said the Cat, 'or you wouldn’t have come here.'” -Lewis Carroll
Wednesday, November 30
Well that depends on what the definition of "is" is
posted by Jessica at 3:32 PM | Permalink |
The stupidity never ends.
CBS jumping through butt to sign Katie Couric. Insiders say this confirms "suits" are idiots
This just in….
From reliable sources at the nets in NY and DC. CBS is pulling out all stops to get Katie Couric to replace Dan Rather to front the “CBS Evening News.” Insiders say it would be like replacing an idiot with an imbecile.
From reliable sources at the nets in NY and DC. CBS is pulling out all stops to get Katie Couric to replace Dan Rather to front the “CBS Evening News.”
...Insiders say there is much headshaking by practical people at both networks. In the words of one older newsroom type, “They just don’t get it. Couric and Rather are both distrusted by Middle America. These guys never get more than 50 miles away from the Empire State Building unless it’s to go to The Hamptons and they think they know what America wants.”
Insider went on to say “Couric has zero news background. Forget about the fact that she would gush and blush over every Frenchman who wanted to say the U.S. was horrible; can you imagine her trying to cover a breaking news event? When the Challenger blew up, Rather had the “deer in the headlights” look all day. Can you imagine Couric trying to anchor a WTC type event? She would have spent her airtime complaining that the North Tower just fell on her favorite little Parisian bistro in the West Village area!”
This just in….
From reliable sources at the nets in NY and DC. CBS is pulling out all stops to get Katie Couric to replace Dan Rather to front the “CBS Evening News.” Insiders say it would be like replacing an idiot with an imbecile.
From reliable sources at the nets in NY and DC. CBS is pulling out all stops to get Katie Couric to replace Dan Rather to front the “CBS Evening News.”
...Insiders say there is much headshaking by practical people at both networks. In the words of one older newsroom type, “They just don’t get it. Couric and Rather are both distrusted by Middle America. These guys never get more than 50 miles away from the Empire State Building unless it’s to go to The Hamptons and they think they know what America wants.”
Insider went on to say “Couric has zero news background. Forget about the fact that she would gush and blush over every Frenchman who wanted to say the U.S. was horrible; can you imagine her trying to cover a breaking news event? When the Challenger blew up, Rather had the “deer in the headlights” look all day. Can you imagine Couric trying to anchor a WTC type event? She would have spent her airtime complaining that the North Tower just fell on her favorite little Parisian bistro in the West Village area!”
posted by Jessica at 1:44 PM | Permalink |
Tuesday, November 29
Just because it's called satire doesn't mean it isn't true.
Pelosi Offers Cure for GOP ‘Culture of Corruption’
Scrappleface
Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, today offered some rare advice to Republicans about how to deal with what she calls the GOP’s “culture of corruption,” just a day after Rep. Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham, R-CA, resigned after pleading guilty to federal corruption charges.
“The problem with Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay and Scooter Libby is not that they allegedly broke the law,” said Rep. Pelosi, “because the law is a fluid concept that is valid, or not, at any given moment depending on the latest judicial ruling. So, the Republican problem is bad timing. They did these unethical things at a time when they are still illegal, instead of working to get a favorable court ruling first.”
The House minority leader cited abortion, homosexual marriage and the recent Supreme Court eminent domain decision as examples of unethical and formerly illegal behavior that are now available to many law abiding citizens.
She contrasted the Republican “culture of corruption” with her own party’s “culture of constitutional correction.”
“If you want to leak the names of CIA agents, or accept bribes in exchange for legislative favors,” Rep. Pelosi said, “you have to get some judge to make it constitutional first. Forty years ago a woman couldn’t legally abort her husband’s baby so she could marry her girlfriend and live in condo built on a site that city council confiscated from a poor retired couple. But now, it’s totally legal for many Americans.”
posted by Jessica at 8:35 PM | Permalink |
Children's Author the Most Hated Conservative in America?
Hillary Clinton, Alan Colmes, Andrew Sullivan among prominent liberals who assail popular kid's book, liken it to Nazi propaganda. Conservative author laughs off allegations. "What else would you expect from liberals?"
Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) November 29, 2005 -- Judging from the reaction of liberal pundits and politicians, George W. Bush is no longer the most despised conservative figure in America. That distinction might just belong now to Katharine DeBrecht, a children's author and mother of three.
What catapulted DeBrecht, an unassuming housewife, to this dubious and unlikely distinction? Blame it on her recently released children's book, “Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed” (Kids Ahead; hardcover: $15.95; ISBN 0976726904), an illustrated story that portrays cartoon versions of left-wing icons Hillary Rodham Clinton and Ted Kennedy taxing and regulating a lemonade stand run by two young entrepreneurs. The book has been widely condemned as liberals have called DeBrecht everything from a Nazi to a Maoist.
But the most widely reported criticism of the book came from one of the subjects of its satire. The Congressional newspaper The Hill quoted the spokesman for Clinton -- who is attempting to appear more moderate in preparation for an expected run for the presidency in 2008 -- issuing a snippy retort. Press secretary Philippe Reines mocked the book, saying, “(I) can't wait for the sequel, 'Help! Mom! I Can't Read This Book Because Republicans Have Cut Literacy Programs!'” He later insinuated that the book had not sold well.
Contrary to the spokesman's assertions, DeBrecht's book has been a brisk seller ever since it was announced. The title has consistently ranked among the top selling children’s books on Amazon, and at one point it hit #1 on the Barnes & Noble bestseller list. The book has been on the market for only two months and a third printing is already underway.
The facts notwithstanding, Hillary Clinton's acolyte is not the only prominent liberal to assail “Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed.” Fox News talk show host Alan Colmes told DeBrecht that her book is “brainwashing,” and MSNBC host Ron Reagan said to the author on air that he wanted to do his own children's book portraying conservatives as “hating black people.”
Liberals in the blogosphere have been even less kind to DeBrecht. Blogger and former New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan incorrectly asserted that the book contained a nude likeness of Congressman Barney Frank and, though he eventually retracted his error, he went on to liken it to the propaganda of Chinese dictator Mao Tse-Tung. The popular Web site Democratic Underground named DeBrecht to its “Top 10 Conservative Idiots” list, and Daily Kos, the most trafficked left-wing blog, likened the book to Nazi propaganda.
“What else would you expect from liberals?” shrugs DeBrect. “They've been foisting their ideological agenda on children for years, and now they're beside themselves that someone would write a book for families who believe in traditional values. I guess it gets in the way of their attempts to erode personal responsibility and undermine families, faith, and free markets -- which are critical to establishing a welfare state.
“Evidently liberals think that children's books about socialist fish and gay kings are OK,” DeBrecht added, “but a story about hard work and self-reliance is too extreme.”
Link
*From the upcoming release, "Help! Mom! Hollywood is in My Hamper"
posted by Jessica at 12:32 PM | Permalink |
Politically Correct Holiday Songs
In an effort to help Michael Newdow, the liberals, and Satan take the Christ out of Christmas, I thought I'd compose a handy list of revised 'holiday' songs, guaranteed not to offend anyone other than the 95% of the country who have no problem with Christmas whatsoever.
O Come All You Disenfranchised Voters
O Little Town of Mosul
Come Thou Long Expected Hillary '08
Holy Lamb of PETA
Away in a Hybrid
O Holiday Tree
We Wish You a Merry Gay Marriage
Joy to the Ozone Layer
It Came Upon a Tax Break for the Rich
Deck the Abortion Clinic
Hark the Herald Gansta Rappers Sing
O Come, O Come Illegal Immigrants
Go Tell It on the Mountain (that Bush lied)
The 12 Days of Selfish, Greedy Consumerism
I think there's a market for it. How 'bout you?
O Come All You Disenfranchised Voters
O Little Town of Mosul
Come Thou Long Expected Hillary '08
Holy Lamb of PETA
Away in a Hybrid
O Holiday Tree
We Wish You a Merry Gay Marriage
Joy to the Ozone Layer
It Came Upon a Tax Break for the Rich
Deck the Abortion Clinic
Hark the Herald Gansta Rappers Sing
O Come, O Come Illegal Immigrants
Go Tell It on the Mountain (that Bush lied)
The 12 Days of Selfish, Greedy Consumerism
I think there's a market for it. How 'bout you?
posted by Jessica at 10:23 AM | Permalink |
War on Christmas Update:
No more 'holiday' trees at Capitol
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert has told federal officials that the lighted, decorated tree on the West Lawn of the U.S. Capitol -- known in recent years as the "Holiday Tree" -- should be renamed the "Capitol Christmas Tree," as it was called until the late 1990s.
The Capitol's senior landscape architect confirmed the name switch yesterday for The Washington Times. "It was known as the 'Holiday Tree' for several years and just recently was changed back to the 'Capitol Christmas Tree.' This was a directive from the speaker," said Capitol architect Matthew Evans.
"The speaker believes a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree, and it is as simple as that," said Ron Bonjean, spokesman for the Illinois Republican.
The Capitol tree, traditionally overshadowed by the White House's "National Christmas Tree," was renamed a "holiday tree" several years ago, according to the Capitol Architect's offices, in an effort to acknowledge the other holidays of Kwanzaa and Hanukkah -- although no one seemed to know exactly when the name was changed or by whom. (And the odds on it not being a white liberal are what?) continued...
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert has told federal officials that the lighted, decorated tree on the West Lawn of the U.S. Capitol -- known in recent years as the "Holiday Tree" -- should be renamed the "Capitol Christmas Tree," as it was called until the late 1990s.
The Capitol's senior landscape architect confirmed the name switch yesterday for The Washington Times. "It was known as the 'Holiday Tree' for several years and just recently was changed back to the 'Capitol Christmas Tree.' This was a directive from the speaker," said Capitol architect Matthew Evans.
"The speaker believes a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree, and it is as simple as that," said Ron Bonjean, spokesman for the Illinois Republican.
The Capitol tree, traditionally overshadowed by the White House's "National Christmas Tree," was renamed a "holiday tree" several years ago, according to the Capitol Architect's offices, in an effort to acknowledge the other holidays of Kwanzaa and Hanukkah -- although no one seemed to know exactly when the name was changed or by whom. (And the odds on it not being a white liberal are what?) continued...
posted by Jessica at 10:08 AM | Permalink |
Monday, November 28
Ass-stupid Liberal Quote of the Day:
Celine Dion's "In Defense of Rioting,"
Sure to be assigned reading in public schools by next fall.
posted by Jessica at 6:54 PM | Permalink |
Maybe these kids can join the therapy group of the kids traumatized by the Smurf Village bombing video.
PETA Tells Kids to Run From Daddy
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, has begun a campaign to scare children into becoming vegetarians.
The group, which formed to stop animal testing of consumer products but made its name by attacking women in fur coats with fake blood, is producing comic books that portray fathers as homicidal maniacs.
The handout, titled "Your Daddy Kills Animals," features a grinning lunatic gutting a fish, and warns kids to keep their puppies and kittens away from Dad because he's "hooked on killing."
"PETA is trying as hard as it can to portray the ordinary angler as a demonic, sadistic, cruel killer. This is what PETA does — it paints caricatures of ordinary people to try to convince the rest of us that we shouldn't want to emulate them," said David Martosko, of the industry lobbying group Center for Consumer Freedom.
But PETA insists that its comic is not outlandish.
"The scientific facts are that fish feel pain in the same way as dogs and cats. It's no more acceptable to hook a fish through the mouth and drag them into your boat and slice them in half than it would be to do the exact same thing to a dog or a cat," said Bruce Friedrich, vegan campaign coordinator for PETA.
Publicity stunts are nothing new for PETA, which has run ads featuring naked women in cages and people dressed in animal suits warning about the dangers of eating meat. But some critics feel the kid-targeted campaign goes too far.
"This is traumatizing kids by the thousands. There's going to be long-term psychological damage from these kids being exposed to the material that PETA puts in front of them on a regular basis," Martosko said.
But, Friedrich countered, "They can certainly find stuff that is more in your face on the Internet, more in your face on Saturday morning cartoons. We don't need to shelter our kids quite that much."
The pamphlet follows a previous one that painted Mom as a "chicken killer." PETA claims its only goal is to reduce meat consumption by changing children's eating habits. Critics insist alienating children from their parents isn't in anyone's best interests — human or animal.
Link
posted by Jessica at 3:34 PM | Permalink |
Things that make you go 'bwahahaha'...
Authorities Seize Hilton's Illegal Monkey
Paris Hilton reportedly broke down and sobbed after animal authorities took away her pet monkey.
The sexy socialite is said to have been devastated after Los Angeles officials ordered her to hand over the primate - named Baby Luv - because it's classified as an illegal pet.
The blonde heiress, who bought the monkey during a trip to Las Vegas last summer, allegedly refused to part with her hairy friend so authorities went to her home to confiscate the animal.
An insider is quoted in Britain's Daily Star newspaper as saying: "Paris adores animals but she's too impulsive and often buys exotic pets without understanding how to care for them or whether they can legally be kept as pets."
The source added: "She recently fell in love with a baby kangaroo while filming in Queensland and asked for it to be boxed up and shipped back home. But she was forced to send it back when she discovered they grow up to be very violent."
"It's the same with Baby Luv. She had no idea she was breaking the law when she smuggled him into LA."
No monkey jokes. It's just too easy
Driver:Paris, I believe that is somebody's child.
Paris: I want it! I WANT IT!!!!!
posted by Jessica at 12:11 PM | Permalink |
Things that make you go 'hmm'...
50 Cent and Kanye West are the only ones selected to be GQ's "Men of the Year" who have no false modesty about it — both of the hip-hop stars justify their big egos in the mag's pages. But they also have more on their minds than just themselves.
Like George W. Bush, for one.
50 thinks the president is "incredible ... a gangsta." "I wanna meet George Bush, just shake his hand and tell him how much of me I see in him," 50 told GQ. If the rapper's felony conviction didn't prevent him from voting, 50 said he would have voted for Bush. (Damn it. Doesn't be know that all felons are supposed to vote Democrat? Get the memo, Fiddy) Meanwhile, Kanye basically called Bush a racist on national television (basically? no no, did) , and has since rethought his strategy for speaking out. "When NBC edited it out on the West Coast, that was a wakeup call," West told the magazine. "It let people know how censored we still are. This is supposed to be America, but you can't get your opinion out. (Oh Sweet God. It was a telethon to raise money for the storm-ravaged victims of a hurricane, not a town hall meeting, dumbass) There's all kinds of things I want to say, but I need to pace myself, to make sure my opportunities to say these things aren't taken away too abruptly." Kanye says after giving us entertainment, his next goal is to give us "inspiration." (I know 'Gold Digga' gives me inspiration...) 50's next goal? He wants to market a condom. ... (Heh. Like the Clinton condom line in China?)
Link
posted by Jessica at 11:40 AM | Permalink |
Sunday, November 27
Bruce Willis comes out fighting for Iraq's forgotten GI heroes
ANGERED by negative portrayals of the conflict in Iraq, Bruce Willis, the Hollywood star, is to make a pro-war film in which American soldiers will be depicted as brave fighters for freedom and democracy. (How novel.)
It will be based on the exploits of the heavily decorated members of Deuce Four, the 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry, which has spent the past year battling insurgents in the northern Iraqi town of Mosul.
Willis attended Deuce Four’s homecoming ball this month in Seattle, Washington, where the soldiers are on leave, along with Stephen Eads, the producer of Armageddon and The Sixth Sense.
The 50-year-old actor said that he was in talks about a film of “these guys who do what they are asked to for very little money to defend and fight for what they consider to be freedom”.
Unlike many Hollywood stars Willis supports the war and recently offered a $1m (about £583,000) bounty for the capture of any of Al-Qaeda’s most wanted leaders such as Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri or Abu Musab al- Zarqawi, its commander in Iraq. (How Philistine.)
Willis visited the war zone with his rock and blues band, the Accelerators, in 2003.
“I am baffled to understand why the things I saw happening in Iraq are not being reported,” he told (P)MSNBC, the American news channel.
He is expected to base the film on the writings of the independent blogger Michael Yon, a former special forces green beret who was embedded with Deuce Four and sent regular dispatches about their heroics.
Yon was at the soldiers’ ball with Willis, who got to know him through his internet war reports on www.michaelyon.blogspot.com. “What he is doing is something the American media and maybe the world media isn’t doing,” the actor said, “and that’s telling the truth about what’s happening in the war in Iraq.”
Willis is likely to take on the role of the unit’s commander, Lieutenant-Colonel Erik Kurilla, 39, a Bruce Willis lookalike with a chest full of medals, more hair than Willis and a glamorous blonde wife.
He was injured in August after being shot three times by insurgents “in front of my eyes”, Yon recorded in his blog: “He continued to direct his men until a medic gave him morphine and the men took him away.”
Kurilla now has a titanium plate in his leg. He met Willis at the ball and said that his men were “very excited and appreciative that he was there.” (Yes, Virginia, there are conservatives in Hollywood.)
Deuce Four has a chequered history. (Which the press will ineviatably focus all its attention on when the movie comes out.) For decades it was a segregated black unit commanded by a white officer. It was disbanded in 1951 but veterans felt hurt that its past was considered to be a stain on the army and it was revived in the mid-1990s.
When the battalion arrived in Mosul in November last year the city was under threat from insurgents. “We faced very heavy fighting for about three months,” Kurilla recalled. “Every patrol was making contact with enemy forces. We would hit them where they slept, where they worked and where they ate.”
Today the picture was very different, he said. “I have watched a city that was in absolute chaos turn into one that has a viable Iraqi security force, which is taking the lead in fighting the terrorists.”
Yon, 41, went to Iraq after a friend from high school, Scott Helveston, a former navy Seal, was hanged from a bridge in Falluja in an incident that shocked the world. Yon had never blogged before but was the author of Danger Close, a book about his experience as a green beret when he killed a man in a bar-room brawl. He was charged with murder and acquitted on the grounds of self-defence.
“When I landed in Baghdad I was immediately struck by how much of a war zone it was,” Yon said. “Explosions were going off constantly. It was full-on.”
His first experience of Mosul was worse: “I got attacked on my first mission. One of our vehicles got hit with a car bomb and three guys were killed.”
In May, Yon took a photograph of a soldier from the Deuce Four cradling a little Iraqi girl who had been fatally wounded by a suicide bomber. (Nah, she was probably purposefuly shot by Dick Cheney himself, reports CNN.) He sensed that the inhabitants of Mosul were turning against the insurgents. “People began to realise that all the insurgents ever did was break things and kill people,” he said. “It started to switch from a firefight to an intelligence war. People started to talk more to us. They would pull us over and give us tips.” (Shh!!!! The Iraqis love the insurgents like a fat kid loves cake.)
The Iraqi security forces began to take pride in their work, Yon added: “These guys were getting slaughtered but they continued to volunteer and fight. It’s very dangerous now to be a terrorist in Mosul. They’re still out there but it’s not like it was.”
Willis said it would be wrong for Americans to give up on Iraq just as progress is being made. “The Iraqi people want to live in a world where they can move from their homes to the market and not have to fear being killed,” he said. “I mean, doesn’t everybody want that?" (Yes. Just as long as they don't drive SUVs.)
Link
Future headline prediction:
"Pro-US Military Film Opens to a Surprise $50 Million Weekend; Analysts Stunned"
posted by Jessica at 6:16 PM | Permalink |
NEW IDEA FOR ABORTION PARTY: AID THE ENEMY
November 23, 2005
In the Iraq war so far, the U.S. military has deposed a dictator who had already used weapons of mass destruction and would have used them again. As we now know, Saddam Hussein was working with al-Qaida and was trying to acquire long-range missiles from North Korea and enriched uranium from Niger.
Saddam is on trial. His psychopath sons are dead. We've captured or killed scores of foreign terrorists in Baghdad. Rape rooms and torture chambers are back in R. Kelly's Miami Beach mansion where they belong.
The Iraqi people have voted in two free, democratic elections this year. In a rash and unconsidered move, they even gave women the right to vote.
Iraqis have ratified a constitution and will vote for a National Assembly next month. The long-suffering Kurds are free and no longer require 24/7 protection by U.S. fighter jets.
Libya's Moammar Gadhafi has voluntarily dismantled his weapons of mass destruction, Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon, and the Palestinians are holding elections.
(Last but certainly not least, the Marsh Arabs' wetlands ecosystem in central Iraq that Saddam drained is being restored, so even the Democrats' war goals in Iraq are being met.)
The American military has accomplished all this with just over 2,000 deaths. These deaths are especially painful because they fall on our greatest Americans. Still, look at what the military has done and compare the cost to 600,000 deaths in the Civil War, 400,000 deaths in World War II and 60,000 deaths in Vietnam (before Walter Cronkite finally threw in the towel and declared victory for North Vietnam).
What is known as a "hawk" in today's Democratic Party looks at what our military has accomplished and — during the war, while our troops are in harm's way — demands that we withdraw our troops.
In an upbeat speech now being aired repeatedly on al-Jazeera, last week Rep. John Murtha said U.S. troops "cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home." Claiming the war is "a flawed policy wrapped in illusion," Murtha said the "American public is way ahead of us."
Fed up with being endlessly told "the American people" have turned against the war in Iraq, Republicans asked the Democrats to show what they had in their hand and vote on a resolution to withdraw the troops.
By a vote of 403-3, the House of Representatives wasn't willing to bet that "the American people" want to pull out of Iraq. (This vote also marked the first time in recent history that the Democrats did not respond to getting their butts kicked by demanding a recount.)
The vote is all the more shocking because of what it says about the Democrats' motives in attacking the war — as well as alerting us to three members of Congress we really need to keep an eye on.
It is simply a fact that Democrats like Murtha are encouraging the Iraqi insurgents when they say the war is going badly and it's time to bring the troops home. Whether or not there is any merit to the idea, calling for a troop withdrawal — or "redeployment," as liberals pointlessly distinguish — will delay our inevitable victory and cost more American lives.
Anti-war protests in the U.S. during the Vietnam War were a major source of moral support to the enemy. We know that not only from simple common sense, but from the statements of former North Vietnamese military leaders who evidently didn't get the memo telling them not to say so. In an Aug. 3, 1995, interview in The Wall Street Journal, Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, called the American peace movement "essential" to the North Vietnamese victory.
"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American anti-war movement," he said. "Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses."
What are we to make of the fact that — as we now know — the Democrats don't even want to withdraw troops from Iraq? By their own account, there is no merit to their demands. Before the vote, Democrats could at least defend themselves from sedition by pleading stupidity. Now we know they don't believe what they are saying about the war. (Thanks to that vote, the Islamo-fascists know it, too.)
The Democrats are giving aid and comfort to the enemy for no purpose other than giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There is no plausible explanation for the Democrats' behavior other than that they long to see U.S. troops shot, humiliated, and driven from the field of battle. They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors.
COPYRIGHT 2005 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
November 23, 2005
In the Iraq war so far, the U.S. military has deposed a dictator who had already used weapons of mass destruction and would have used them again. As we now know, Saddam Hussein was working with al-Qaida and was trying to acquire long-range missiles from North Korea and enriched uranium from Niger.
Saddam is on trial. His psychopath sons are dead. We've captured or killed scores of foreign terrorists in Baghdad. Rape rooms and torture chambers are back in R. Kelly's Miami Beach mansion where they belong.
The Iraqi people have voted in two free, democratic elections this year. In a rash and unconsidered move, they even gave women the right to vote.
Iraqis have ratified a constitution and will vote for a National Assembly next month. The long-suffering Kurds are free and no longer require 24/7 protection by U.S. fighter jets.
Libya's Moammar Gadhafi has voluntarily dismantled his weapons of mass destruction, Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon, and the Palestinians are holding elections.
(Last but certainly not least, the Marsh Arabs' wetlands ecosystem in central Iraq that Saddam drained is being restored, so even the Democrats' war goals in Iraq are being met.)
The American military has accomplished all this with just over 2,000 deaths. These deaths are especially painful because they fall on our greatest Americans. Still, look at what the military has done and compare the cost to 600,000 deaths in the Civil War, 400,000 deaths in World War II and 60,000 deaths in Vietnam (before Walter Cronkite finally threw in the towel and declared victory for North Vietnam).
What is known as a "hawk" in today's Democratic Party looks at what our military has accomplished and — during the war, while our troops are in harm's way — demands that we withdraw our troops.
In an upbeat speech now being aired repeatedly on al-Jazeera, last week Rep. John Murtha said U.S. troops "cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home." Claiming the war is "a flawed policy wrapped in illusion," Murtha said the "American public is way ahead of us."
Fed up with being endlessly told "the American people" have turned against the war in Iraq, Republicans asked the Democrats to show what they had in their hand and vote on a resolution to withdraw the troops.
By a vote of 403-3, the House of Representatives wasn't willing to bet that "the American people" want to pull out of Iraq. (This vote also marked the first time in recent history that the Democrats did not respond to getting their butts kicked by demanding a recount.)
The vote is all the more shocking because of what it says about the Democrats' motives in attacking the war — as well as alerting us to three members of Congress we really need to keep an eye on.
It is simply a fact that Democrats like Murtha are encouraging the Iraqi insurgents when they say the war is going badly and it's time to bring the troops home. Whether or not there is any merit to the idea, calling for a troop withdrawal — or "redeployment," as liberals pointlessly distinguish — will delay our inevitable victory and cost more American lives.
Anti-war protests in the U.S. during the Vietnam War were a major source of moral support to the enemy. We know that not only from simple common sense, but from the statements of former North Vietnamese military leaders who evidently didn't get the memo telling them not to say so. In an Aug. 3, 1995, interview in The Wall Street Journal, Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, called the American peace movement "essential" to the North Vietnamese victory.
"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American anti-war movement," he said. "Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses."
What are we to make of the fact that — as we now know — the Democrats don't even want to withdraw troops from Iraq? By their own account, there is no merit to their demands. Before the vote, Democrats could at least defend themselves from sedition by pleading stupidity. Now we know they don't believe what they are saying about the war. (Thanks to that vote, the Islamo-fascists know it, too.)
The Democrats are giving aid and comfort to the enemy for no purpose other than giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There is no plausible explanation for the Democrats' behavior other than that they long to see U.S. troops shot, humiliated, and driven from the field of battle. They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors.
COPYRIGHT 2005 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
posted by Jessica at 10:49 AM | Permalink |
Wednesday, November 23
On a shallow note...
Okay, so I buy my People's Sexiest Man Alive issue, because I admit, as long as I don't have to hear their views on free trade agreements, I like ogling pretty male celebrities.
I'm happily flipping through the issue when I come across the section "Maureen Dowd: Why We Love Smart Men." No, you didn't read that wrong. It wasn't "Why Smart Men Don't Love Maureen Dowd," which would have far more basis in reality. Oh, no. The author(ess) of "Are Men Necessary" found it necessary to tell me why Anderson Friggin' Cooper and Patrick "Father Fitzmas" Fitzgerald are sexy. Note to MoDo: Cut the pandering. They're not. Although one does wonder if her being attracted to gay men has something to do with the fact that she's single. Nah, who am I kidding? There are plenty of other reasons. Not withstanding the fact that all of the "smart" men on her sexy list are insanely (some clinically so) liberal, why is Maureen Dowd writing for People Magazine in the first place? Reason #535 I don't read The Paper of Record is so I won't be subjected to her simultaneous menopausal gender-baiting and junior high-harpy rantings. Don't make me have to avoid her in my trash magazines too.
Incidentally, Margaret Cho was there to write up "Why We Love Funny Men," but at least she's, I don't know, part of the entertainment industry.
Someday I will open up a crap magazine like People and see Ann Coulter's list of sexy men, or possibly Peggy Noonan's, and then I will go purchase more sweaters to see me through cold, cold reality of Hell having frozen over.
I'm happily flipping through the issue when I come across the section "Maureen Dowd: Why We Love Smart Men." No, you didn't read that wrong. It wasn't "Why Smart Men Don't Love Maureen Dowd," which would have far more basis in reality. Oh, no. The author(ess) of "Are Men Necessary" found it necessary to tell me why Anderson Friggin' Cooper and Patrick "Father Fitzmas" Fitzgerald are sexy. Note to MoDo: Cut the pandering. They're not. Although one does wonder if her being attracted to gay men has something to do with the fact that she's single. Nah, who am I kidding? There are plenty of other reasons. Not withstanding the fact that all of the "smart" men on her sexy list are insanely (some clinically so) liberal, why is Maureen Dowd writing for People Magazine in the first place? Reason #535 I don't read The Paper of Record is so I won't be subjected to her simultaneous menopausal gender-baiting and junior high-harpy rantings. Don't make me have to avoid her in my trash magazines too.
Incidentally, Margaret Cho was there to write up "Why We Love Funny Men," but at least she's, I don't know, part of the entertainment industry.
Someday I will open up a crap magazine like People and see Ann Coulter's list of sexy men, or possibly Peggy Noonan's, and then I will go purchase more sweaters to see me through cold, cold reality of Hell having frozen over.
posted by Jessica at 3:30 PM | Permalink |
Signs You Have Too Much F*^%ing Money:
Cruise Buys Sonogram Machine for Katie
Tom Cruise has made an unusual purchase for his fiancee Katie Holmes _ one that will let them see the development of their baby. "I bought a sonogram machine," Cruise says on ABC's "Barbara Walters Presents: The 10 Most Fascinating People of 2005," to air Nov. 29 (10 p.m. EST). Excerpts of the interview are published in the latest issue of People magazine, on newsstands Friday.
The 43-year-old actor said the couple will do their own sonograms, which show fetus development with ultrasound waves. Cruise said he will donate the machine to a hospital after the baby is born. Sonogram machines range in cost from $25,000 to $200,000.
Holmes' pregnancy was announced in early October. The couple, who have been dating since April, became engaged in June.
"We are gonna get married next summer or early fall," Cruise told Walters. "We don't have a date set yet."
Cruise said he didn't know if the baby is a boy or a girl. He has two children, Connor, 10, and Isabella, 12, from his marriage to Nicole Kidman. It will be the first child for 26-year-old Holmes.
Link
R. Kelly: [singing] I was just standing here.
Tom Cruise locked himself in the closet.
Then John Travolta come and now,
John Travolta in the closet too.
Please, Tom Cruise and John Travolta come out the closet!
But then I calm myself down,
and I pull out my gun! [grabs woman]
If Tom Cruise and John Travolta don't come out the closet,
I'm gonna cap this bitch!
posted by Jessica at 2:42 PM | Permalink |
Tuesday, November 22
Ass-stupid Liberal Quote of the Day:
posted by Jessica at 5:22 PM | Permalink |
“Mamas, Don’t Let Your Sons Grow Up to be Gay Cowboys”
Discontented with the fact that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, The Chronicles of Narnia, and King Kong will make approximately eleventy billion dollars at the box office this season, Hollywood liberals (redundant, I know) are gearing up for a fight over-- gay cowboys? Brokeback Mountain stars Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal as two cowboys who give in to their forbidden love for one another and must deal with the consequences. Yeah, I don't watch Lifetime movies when they're free. I'm certainly not paying 10 bucks for one. But because I am a Republican with a low tolerance for angsty cowboy melodrama, I am an intolerant homophobe, just like all my red state brothers and sisters. For this and other liberal fairy tales, tune in to this week's West Wing.
As reported November 6th on The Drudge Report:
“New York Daily News critic Jack Mathews predicts the gay cowboy movie, which takes place in Wyoming, may be ‘too much for red-state audiences, but it gives the liberal-leaning Academy a great chance to stick its thumb in conservatives' eyes.’”
Silly, rabbit. We don’t give a crap.
The Academy Awards have always been an opportunity for pseudo-sophisticates with too much money and too little education to pat themselves on the back and tell each other how wonderful they are. But I think the tide really turned in 1999, when Shakespeare in Love beat out Saving Private Ryan for Best Picture and its star Gwyneth Paltrow beat out Cate Blanchett for Best Actress. Since then, every year these awards become less and less about merit and more about politics and money. A Beautiful Mind won an Oscar for Best Picture. No really, it did. Master and Commander was up for one. Seriously, y’all! Nicole Kidman and Renee Zellweger manage at least one nomination between them per year. For what? Who knows? They’re shiny and pretty and as thin as the awards themselves!
If Hollywood is the in crowd of America’s high school, then the Oscars are their prom night and homecoming all wrapped into one. The prettiest, most popular kids always get the coolest table prizes. Occasionally someone will stumble onto a win based on actual talent, but mostly it’s all about picking the hottest dress and most “socially relevant” tripe to star in. The rest comes down to aggressive Oscar campaigns that would make the mafia blush. The best smack down was always between Dreamworks and Miramax, a.k.a Steven Spielberg and Harvey Weinstein, who collectively spent the equivalent of the GNP of Southeast Asia each awards season to make sure their pet projects ended up on top. (For the record, Harvey won battle after battle for awhile there, but I think he’s currently unemployed, so the war goes to Steven). **Correction: Harvey Weinstein is not unemployed. His new production company just released its first film, the hideously miscast crap thriller Derailed, which is currently chugging along down the mediocrity line. So obviously, I was wrong.** Thirty-thousand dollar dresses and multi-million dollar publicity campaigns, and these are the people always begging the rest of us to donate money. Think about it.
There are many reasons to watch the Academy Awards. To see who’s sleeping with whom this hour, to see who’s wearing whom, and to play “Spot the Socially Aware Ribbons,” but the movies themselves are no longer one of them. In addition to industry politics, this is also due partially to the Academy’s stubborn refusal to nominate movies anyone has actually seen.
Take a look at seven of the highest grossing (ergo, most watched) films of the new century. The Passion of the Christ managed 3 nods, for cinematography, makeup, and sound. The three Harry Potter movies racked up a whopping 5 nods between them, for musical score, art direction, and visual effects. The Lord of the Rings trilogy, for all its dozens of awards nominated for and won, ratcheted only a single nod in any acting category, for Ian McKellan, who subsequently lost.
Meanwhile, Oscar Darlings of the 21st century deemed worthy enough to warrant the top honors have included The Cider House Rules (abortion is good!), The Insider (smoking is bad!), The Hours (lesbianism-yay!), The Pianist (directed by forced ex-patriot, statutory rapist Roman Polanski), Million Dollar Baby (thumbs up for euthanasia!), and perhaps most importantly, Fahrenheit 9/11(Down with America!!), which has not only the honor of being the most fallacious film to ever win Best Documentary, but also allowed professional ass-clown Michael Moore to spew hate speech all over primetime television. It was so bad other liberals booed him.
So oooh, go ahead and nominate your gay cowboy movie. The only reason any of these movies make it all the way to the Oscars is in the hopes that they will piss off red-state conservatives. The Hours was a god-awfully bad movie. It was boring, the acting was bland, and the overall tone made you think, like Virginia Wolfe, that suicide just might be the only way out. But it let a lot of people without the slightest clue wax on about how hip they were about lesbianism, and more importantly, how vilely homophobic the flyover states were. That’s why these movies do sucktastic box office, you know. Not because of the acting, writing, or directing, but because the rest of us just don’t “get it.” I get it all right. Just like the popular kids rigged Carrie’s prom queen election to toss pig blood on her, Hollywood sets us up with these films they want and expect us to hate, just so they can point their fingers at how intolerant we are. Their emotional maturity was stunted at sixteen. Unfortunately, they must never have bothered to watch any of their movies all the way through. It never works out well for the popular kids.
"They're really good those boys and they did a great job. It's very brave of them."- Madonna, after seeing an advanced screening of Brokeback Mountain.
Sorry, but no, that is not bravery. Brave is risking your life to topple a murderous ideology while large groups of white liberals protest you, not getting paid large amounts of money to make out with another guy on camera. But Hollywood does not realize this, because Hollywood is under the delusion, like Madonna, that they are important. And like Madonna, they aren’t.
You know what would be really brave? Hiring actual gay actors to play gay cowboys, not straight ones whose girlfriends co-star (Dawson’s Creek’s Michelle Williams, mother of Ledger’s newborn baby). That’s just stupid. It’s not like there aren’t any homosexual actors available in Los Angeles. Hell, half of the industry prides itself on being (insert prefix here)-sexual. If Hollywood were oh so concerned with accurately portraying homosexuality onscreen, Ellen DeGeneres would have an actual film career. To be fair, Ellen isn’t a size zero with hair extensions and a boob job, so she probably wouldn’t land a leading role even if she were straight. If the producers REALLY wanted to be brave, they’d have made a version of Brokeback Mountain starring Nathan Lane and Alexis Arquette.
I mean, where’s the sweeping love story of Siegfried and Roy, of Merchant and Ivory, of Sponge bob and Tinky Winky? (Just kidding, of course. Siegfried and Roy are TOTALLY straight).
The movie industry is obsessed with pretty. Irregardless of how horrific the conditions of the film might be, war, holocaust, grocery shopping, the stars look really pretty doing it. This is why “going ugly” virtually guarantees an actress an Oscar nomination. It’s “brave.” Ann Coulter wrote about how Hollywood has to create alternate realties in which Democrat candidates are actually attractive and competent. I say the only thing Hollywood likes more than casting beautiful liberal politicians is casting beautiful lipstick lesbians.
Actresses who have portrayed lesbians in television and film include:
Charlize Theron
Liv Tyler
Naomi Watts
Alyssa Milano
Drew Barrymore
Angelina Jolie
Mischa Barton
Sharon Stone
Jennifer Lopez
Yup, those are some butch dykes right there. In fact, the only butch one in the bunch played a serial killer (Monster). When the soap opera One Life to Live portrayed a gay man as a killer, it was mocked in Entertainment Weekly. When Charlize Theron did it, she won an Oscar (Thus proving that ugly wins every time). As for the portrayal of gay men in Hollywood, they typically fall into one of two categories: 1) comic relief (Sean Hayes, Will & Grace) or 2) AIDS patient (Tom Hanks, Philadelphia). This is the welcoming tolerance of Hollywood. Lesbians get to become lipstick fantasies for straight men (Wild Things, Bound), while gay men get to either be zany (The Birdcage) or teach us a very important lesson by dying (the upcoming Rent).
Critics will say that the reason gays portrayed so stereotypically is all because of the red states. Yeah, and we’re the reason black, Hispanic, and Asian actors can’t catch a break either. We hate fat people, too. The same year liberals gave the first black (who happens to be half-white) woman a Best Actress Oscar, conservatives nominated the first black woman to be Secretary of State. Halle Berry was the voice of the people. Condoleezza Rice was a stooge for Bush. You do the math.
Asked about whether or not audience reaction was the main factor in openly gay actors losing work, openly gay actor Ian McKellan responded,
"Bullshit, I think that anyone who believes [that audiences would not accept gay actors] is just battling homophobia within themselves." He has pointed out that one of the first roles offered to him after the public revelation of his homosexuality was that of a notorious womanizer, former British cabinet minister John Profumo.” Link
Yes, tell me something. If it’s so acceptable to be gay in the blue states, why do Tom Cruise and Kevin Spacey sue the hell out of anyone who says that they are? I have come to dislike both of them immensely, but trust me; it has nothing to do with their sexuality. (Except maybe for Spacey’s continual assertion that he is straight, damn it, straight!!! That’s just annoying).
“Director Irwin Winkler, who recently made De-Lovely (2004), about Cole Porter's life as a gay composer, acknowledged that the fear of being ‘outed’ as a gay actor still permeates Hollywood. ‘Most of the actors that are gay,’ he said, ‘are not openly gay at all and there are some that we know that if we talked about them . . . would be pretty upset.’"
Link
Well, it could be worse. They could be outed as Republicans.
posted by Jessica at 5:02 PM | Permalink |
Maybe the Oompa-Loompas will have him.
Back in 2003 Johnny Depp said, "America is dumb, it's like a dumb puppy that has big teeth that can bite and hurt you, aggressive."
Depp also said that he'd like his kids to see "America as a toy, a broken toy. Investigate it a little, check it out, get this feeling and then get out."
A short while ago the actor left the U.S. for a tranquil life in France.
What a difference some youthful jihad in the streets makes.
A recent headline on the Contact Music Web site read: "Depp: 'I can't stay in riot ravaged France.'"
Depp described the riots in France as "insane," stating that "setting cars on fire is the new strike."
"I went there [to France] to live because it seemed so simple. Now it's anything but. I don't know how they'll recover from this."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1526959/posts
posted by Jessica at 4:33 PM | Permalink |
Tuesday, November 15
Might I be the first to introduce little "Hubbard Holmes-Cruise."
From 10.5.05
Tom & Katie Expecting a Baby
Tom Cruise's fiancée, Katie Holmes, is pregnant with the couple's child, Cruise's spokesperson, Lee Anne DeVette, tells PEOPLE exclusively. "Tom and Katie are very excited, and the entire family is very excited," says DeVette. Cruise, who has two children, Connor, 10, and Isabella, 12, with ex-wife Nicole Kidman, began dating Holmes in mid-April. He proposed to her atop the Eiffel Tower in Paris in June. DeVette says there is no wedding date set. DeVette would not comment on the baby's gender or say how far along the pregnancy is. The rep did say that Holmes, 26, "has never felt better."
Tom & Katie Expecting a Baby
Tom Cruise's fiancée, Katie Holmes, is pregnant with the couple's child, Cruise's spokesperson, Lee Anne DeVette, tells PEOPLE exclusively. "Tom and Katie are very excited, and the entire family is very excited," says DeVette. Cruise, who has two children, Connor, 10, and Isabella, 12, with ex-wife Nicole Kidman, began dating Holmes in mid-April. He proposed to her atop the Eiffel Tower in Paris in June. DeVette says there is no wedding date set. DeVette would not comment on the baby's gender or say how far along the pregnancy is. The rep did say that Holmes, 26, "has never felt better."
Convert!!!!
"R. Kelly: [singing] Well I was just standing here, and Tom Cruise locked himself in the closet. I asked myself why won't Tom Cruise just come out the closet? Nobody has no answers, and so I pull out my gun! Tell my why Tom Cruise in the closet or else I'm going to shoot someone!"
- South Park
posted by Jessica at 5:24 PM | Permalink |
Kids, alcohol really does kill brain cells. Just look at Uncle George.
From 10.4.05
So let me get this straight. You're going to keep quite about being a liberal by shouting that you're a liberal as loud as you can. Yep. Don't let this happen to you. Stay in school, kids! Stay in school!!!
Clooney vows to keep quiet about politics Ocean's Eleven star George Clooney is urging his fellow Hollywood stars to keep quiet when it comes to politics, because he fears celebrity endorsements could wreck their favourite candidates' chances of victory.Democrat Clooney and a number of screen stars have recently come under attack for voicing their political views.And the actor, whose father Nick Clooney was recently defeated in his bid to be elected the congressional representative for Kentucky, has now vowed to be a lot more politically low-key.He says: "My father ran for congress last year. I couldn't campaign for him and I knew I couldn't, because I'd hurt him. They tried to get me to get on the John Kerry train and I said: 'We'll hurt him. They'll use us as 'liberal'.'
"Now, I would argue that (throughout) American history, it's pretty hard to find a time when liberals were on the wrong side of an issue. We thought that the conservative view was: 'Witches should be burned at the stake.' Moderate view was: 'Well, just in case,' and the liberal view was: 'There's no such thing as witches.'"We thought women should be able to vote and blacks should be allowed to sit at the front of the bus and Vietnam was wrong. We haven't really been on a lot of wrong sides for us to be sort of used as this bad word.
(Actually, this is patently absurd and untrue, but I guess you have go to college to learn the 'secret' knowledge that Abe Lincoln was a Republican, a Democrat interred the Japanese, and that Vietnam is a PARADISE since we left it.)"But we hurt candidates right now, so we can do fundraisers quietly and make some money. But I think it's dangerous to get up and talk about it."
(The candidates are hurting themselves. What you're hurting, dear celebrities, is your own careers. But I'm sure this year's massive box office slump had NOTHING to do with the 2004 elections. Nope, nothing at all.)
So let me get this straight. You're going to keep quite about being a liberal by shouting that you're a liberal as loud as you can. Yep. Don't let this happen to you. Stay in school, kids! Stay in school!!!
Clooney vows to keep quiet about politics Ocean's Eleven star George Clooney is urging his fellow Hollywood stars to keep quiet when it comes to politics, because he fears celebrity endorsements could wreck their favourite candidates' chances of victory.Democrat Clooney and a number of screen stars have recently come under attack for voicing their political views.And the actor, whose father Nick Clooney was recently defeated in his bid to be elected the congressional representative for Kentucky, has now vowed to be a lot more politically low-key.He says: "My father ran for congress last year. I couldn't campaign for him and I knew I couldn't, because I'd hurt him. They tried to get me to get on the John Kerry train and I said: 'We'll hurt him. They'll use us as 'liberal'.'
"Now, I would argue that (throughout) American history, it's pretty hard to find a time when liberals were on the wrong side of an issue. We thought that the conservative view was: 'Witches should be burned at the stake.' Moderate view was: 'Well, just in case,' and the liberal view was: 'There's no such thing as witches.'"We thought women should be able to vote and blacks should be allowed to sit at the front of the bus and Vietnam was wrong. We haven't really been on a lot of wrong sides for us to be sort of used as this bad word.
(Actually, this is patently absurd and untrue, but I guess you have go to college to learn the 'secret' knowledge that Abe Lincoln was a Republican, a Democrat interred the Japanese, and that Vietnam is a PARADISE since we left it.)"But we hurt candidates right now, so we can do fundraisers quietly and make some money. But I think it's dangerous to get up and talk about it."
(The candidates are hurting themselves. What you're hurting, dear celebrities, is your own careers. But I'm sure this year's massive box office slump had NOTHING to do with the 2004 elections. Nope, nothing at all.)
posted by Jessica at 5:22 PM | Permalink |
The full article, which is even better.
From 10.3.05
Clooney: Liberal 'As Loud As I Can'
Actor George Clooney tells Newsweek's Film Critic David Ansen he's upset 'liberal' has become a dirty word. "It blows my mind, because [unlike conservatives] we don't have to put the word 'compassionate' in front of it to say we actually give a s--t about people. (Except for people with morals. Or people who don't agree with us. We hate those bastards.) I'm going to keep saying 'liberal' as loud as I can and as often as I can," he says in the October 10 issue (on newsstands Monday, October 3).
Ansen talked to Clooney while he was in New York promoting the New York Film Festival debut of "Good Night, and Good Luck," a film co-written and directed by the former star of "ER" Made for a mere $7 million, it's a 90- minute, black and white movie about journalist Edward R. Murrow and his historic confrontation with Red-baiting Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy in the 1950's.
It's a passionate, serious, impeccably crafted movie tackling a subject Clooney cares about deeply: the duty of journalism to speak truth to power. (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.DanRatherCindySheehanKatrinaHAH) .It also happens to be the most compelling movie of the year so far, writes Ansen (who notes that compared to Into the Blue and Cry Wolf, the latest Honda commercial was pretty compelling as well.)
"Good Night" arrives, post-Katrina, at what feels like a watershed moment in the relationship between the press and the presidency, and a turnaround in the public's attitude toward TV news, writes Ansen. Clooney wants us to remember what reporting at its best can be. "In the end it all comes down to journalists," he says. "They're the first writers of history. There is no civil rights movement without journalists. There is no end of McCarthy. It's been a tough time for journalists -- if you ask a tough question of this administration, on a rare occasion when they have a press conference (Bite me, Batman), you're put in the back of the room (Yup, if I had a nickel for every softball question tossed at Scott McClellan, I'd be able to buy an Italian villa too. Oh wait.) , or you're Maureen Dowd and you get your credentials pulled. (No, Maureen Dowd had her credentials pulled because to be considered a "journalist," you have to write above a third grade level, which she is clearly incapable of doing). To question anything about them is meant to be unpatriotic." (No, clearly stating how much you dislike your country is unpatriotic. Listen to but a smidge of any White House press conference, and you'll see there ain't much difference) .
And "Good Night" is only one example of how Clooney is shedding his party boy persona and becoming more of an "actorvist." (Oh God, they're naming themselves now) This past year he found himself picking out restaurants for a casino that he and partner Randy Gerber will open in Las Vegas. (Woo-hoo! Taking Daddy's entire paycheck on a bad hand of blackjack is soooo compassionate!!)
"At the same time, I'm at the G8 Summit in a room with Paul Wolfowitz and Bono trying to get $50 billion in relief for Africa," (Because I have absoluetly no idea of my appropriate place in society) he says. "I'm in this weird place: I have this beautiful house in Italy and I have these social agendas. I don't want to give up that lifestyle because I enjoy it, but I also feel that I have a responsibility. So the way I try to rationalize that, and it may just be Irish Catholic guilt, is, for instance, with this casino 25 percent of anything it makes will go the Make Poverty History campaign ('The other 75% will go to bitches and beer.' Bitch, please) . It's the only way I can reconcile being successful." (No, successful isn't the word you're looking for. That would be hippocrite. Gimongous, flaming hippocrite to be precise. Once more with feeling: Bite me, pretty boy.)
Clooney: Liberal 'As Loud As I Can'
Actor George Clooney tells Newsweek's Film Critic David Ansen he's upset 'liberal' has become a dirty word. "It blows my mind, because [unlike conservatives] we don't have to put the word 'compassionate' in front of it to say we actually give a s--t about people. (Except for people with morals. Or people who don't agree with us. We hate those bastards.) I'm going to keep saying 'liberal' as loud as I can and as often as I can," he says in the October 10 issue (on newsstands Monday, October 3).
Ansen talked to Clooney while he was in New York promoting the New York Film Festival debut of "Good Night, and Good Luck," a film co-written and directed by the former star of "ER" Made for a mere $7 million, it's a 90- minute, black and white movie about journalist Edward R. Murrow and his historic confrontation with Red-baiting Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy in the 1950's.
It's a passionate, serious, impeccably crafted movie tackling a subject Clooney cares about deeply: the duty of journalism to speak truth to power. (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.DanRatherCindySheehanKatrinaHAH) .It also happens to be the most compelling movie of the year so far, writes Ansen (who notes that compared to Into the Blue and Cry Wolf, the latest Honda commercial was pretty compelling as well.)
"Good Night" arrives, post-Katrina, at what feels like a watershed moment in the relationship between the press and the presidency, and a turnaround in the public's attitude toward TV news, writes Ansen. Clooney wants us to remember what reporting at its best can be. "In the end it all comes down to journalists," he says. "They're the first writers of history. There is no civil rights movement without journalists. There is no end of McCarthy. It's been a tough time for journalists -- if you ask a tough question of this administration, on a rare occasion when they have a press conference (Bite me, Batman), you're put in the back of the room (Yup, if I had a nickel for every softball question tossed at Scott McClellan, I'd be able to buy an Italian villa too. Oh wait.) , or you're Maureen Dowd and you get your credentials pulled. (No, Maureen Dowd had her credentials pulled because to be considered a "journalist," you have to write above a third grade level, which she is clearly incapable of doing). To question anything about them is meant to be unpatriotic." (No, clearly stating how much you dislike your country is unpatriotic. Listen to but a smidge of any White House press conference, and you'll see there ain't much difference) .
And "Good Night" is only one example of how Clooney is shedding his party boy persona and becoming more of an "actorvist." (Oh God, they're naming themselves now) This past year he found himself picking out restaurants for a casino that he and partner Randy Gerber will open in Las Vegas. (Woo-hoo! Taking Daddy's entire paycheck on a bad hand of blackjack is soooo compassionate!!)
"At the same time, I'm at the G8 Summit in a room with Paul Wolfowitz and Bono trying to get $50 billion in relief for Africa," (Because I have absoluetly no idea of my appropriate place in society) he says. "I'm in this weird place: I have this beautiful house in Italy and I have these social agendas. I don't want to give up that lifestyle because I enjoy it, but I also feel that I have a responsibility. So the way I try to rationalize that, and it may just be Irish Catholic guilt, is, for instance, with this casino 25 percent of anything it makes will go the Make Poverty History campaign ('The other 75% will go to bitches and beer.' Bitch, please) . It's the only way I can reconcile being successful." (No, successful isn't the word you're looking for. That would be hippocrite. Gimongous, flaming hippocrite to be precise. Once more with feeling: Bite me, pretty boy.)
posted by Jessica at 5:17 PM | Permalink |
Because he and his Italian villa annoy the crap out of me...
From 10.3.05
Clooney Proudly Wears 'Liberal' Label
George Clooney is mad that liberal has become a dirty word (as opposed to "conservative," "christian," and/or "patriotic," which one can PROUDLY proclaim to be *snort*) .
"I'm going to keep saying 'liberal' as loud as I can and as often as I can (and by "liberal" I mean "self-important actor who will never win an Oscar") ," Clooney told Newsweek magazine in an interview about the film "Good Night, and Good Luck," which he co-wrote and directed (and approximately 43 people will see) .
The black-and-white film about journalist Edward R. Murrow will be in theaters nationwide on Oct. 14. Clooney plays the(completely bipartisan, I'm sure) role of CBS producer Fred Friendly.
The 44-year-old actor is taking on another politically charged role later this year, as real-life CIA agent Robert Baer. The film, "Syriana," is a drama about terrorism, oil and the Middle East (and co-stars less attractive liberal asshat Matt "never voted" Damon) .
To prepare for that role, he has gained 30 pounds, trimmed his hairline and grown a beard, he told Newsweek. The movie will probably get him in "a lot of trouble" politically, he said (Except that no one with any modicum of political power could care less and will buy tickets to see King Kong instead).
Clooney Proudly Wears 'Liberal' Label
George Clooney is mad that liberal has become a dirty word (as opposed to "conservative," "christian," and/or "patriotic," which one can PROUDLY proclaim to be *snort*) .
"I'm going to keep saying 'liberal' as loud as I can and as often as I can (and by "liberal" I mean "self-important actor who will never win an Oscar") ," Clooney told Newsweek magazine in an interview about the film "Good Night, and Good Luck," which he co-wrote and directed (and approximately 43 people will see) .
The black-and-white film about journalist Edward R. Murrow will be in theaters nationwide on Oct. 14. Clooney plays the(completely bipartisan, I'm sure) role of CBS producer Fred Friendly.
The 44-year-old actor is taking on another politically charged role later this year, as real-life CIA agent Robert Baer. The film, "Syriana," is a drama about terrorism, oil and the Middle East (and co-stars less attractive liberal asshat Matt "never voted" Damon) .
To prepare for that role, he has gained 30 pounds, trimmed his hairline and grown a beard, he told Newsweek. The movie will probably get him in "a lot of trouble" politically, he said (Except that no one with any modicum of political power could care less and will buy tickets to see King Kong instead).
posted by Jessica at 5:14 PM | Permalink |
Oh yeah? Well pis on you AND your waffles.
From 9.30.05
Belgian song "Down with America" going on the air
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1487410/posts
"Down with America" is the title of a recent song by the popular Belgian musician Raymond van het Groenewoud. Written in Dutch and published by EMI , "Weg met Amerika" ("Down with America") will be available in record shops as of next week, and was played on Belgian state radio last Thursday and Friday.
Incitement to hatred against people based on (i.a.) nationality is a crime in Belgium. In practice however, this law is only enforced when Arab, muslim or African minorities are criticized. Hate speech against the Americans or the British remains unsanctioned, as was recently shown when the leftist newspaper De Morgen published an article that complained about the British, "with their unique mixture of wantonness and arrogance, their pathetic addiction to drink, their bad taste, and actually just their ugliness and thickheaded presence".
In January 2003, the Flemish commercial radio station Q-Music was sanctioned by the Flemish Council for Disputes in Radio and Television, after a complaint from the Center for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism (CEOOR). In their radio show, presenters Erwin Deckers and Sven Ornelis had described Venus and Serena Williams as 'monkeys'. The CEOOR decided that their way of reporting was "a gross insult to all our non-white citizens. The vulgar language [...] contributes to the banalization of racist speech. Hence, the program incited to hate based on race."
More and more, it seems that racist or semi-racist expressions are punished when they originate from popular culture or from right-wing politicians and are directed against muslims, Arabs or Africans, but that similar expressions remain unpunished when they come from 'progressive' artists and leftist intellectuals and are directed against the Americans, the British or the Dutch. In my opinion, the CEOOR and its policies are leading us to a less tolerant society, with more social irritation, distrust and friction. When the state tries to control the thoughts and minds of the people, it will only lose their respect.
Belgian song "Down with America" going on the air
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1487410/posts
"Down with America" is the title of a recent song by the popular Belgian musician Raymond van het Groenewoud. Written in Dutch and published by EMI , "Weg met Amerika" ("Down with America") will be available in record shops as of next week, and was played on Belgian state radio last Thursday and Friday.
Incitement to hatred against people based on (i.a.) nationality is a crime in Belgium. In practice however, this law is only enforced when Arab, muslim or African minorities are criticized. Hate speech against the Americans or the British remains unsanctioned, as was recently shown when the leftist newspaper De Morgen published an article that complained about the British, "with their unique mixture of wantonness and arrogance, their pathetic addiction to drink, their bad taste, and actually just their ugliness and thickheaded presence".
In January 2003, the Flemish commercial radio station Q-Music was sanctioned by the Flemish Council for Disputes in Radio and Television, after a complaint from the Center for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism (CEOOR). In their radio show, presenters Erwin Deckers and Sven Ornelis had described Venus and Serena Williams as 'monkeys'. The CEOOR decided that their way of reporting was "a gross insult to all our non-white citizens. The vulgar language [...] contributes to the banalization of racist speech. Hence, the program incited to hate based on race."
More and more, it seems that racist or semi-racist expressions are punished when they originate from popular culture or from right-wing politicians and are directed against muslims, Arabs or Africans, but that similar expressions remain unpunished when they come from 'progressive' artists and leftist intellectuals and are directed against the Americans, the British or the Dutch. In my opinion, the CEOOR and its policies are leading us to a less tolerant society, with more social irritation, distrust and friction. When the state tries to control the thoughts and minds of the people, it will only lose their respect.
posted by Jessica at 5:08 PM | Permalink |
Dated, but sad news.
From 9.30.05
Gay Penguins Break Up
New York City's most famous gay penguin couple has split up.
Even worse, one of them has taken up with a female penguin new to the Central Park Zoo), the New York Post reports.
Silo and Roy, two male chinstrap penguins native to the South Atlantic, made local headlines six years ago when they came out with their same-sex relationship.
Since then, the pair have successfully hatched and raised an adopted chick — after trying to incubate a rock — and become role models for six other same-sex couples among penguins at the zoo.
That all ended when Scrappy, a single female newly arrived from SeaWorld in San Diego, caught Silo's eye.
"Silo and Roy stopped spending as much time together or building a nest," said John Rowden, curator of animals at the zoo.
Silo promptly moved in with Scrappy, building a new nest with her. Zookeepers were at a loss to explain Silo's sudden conversion.
"Why does anyone bond? Why do people want to get married and divorced?" said Dr. Dee Boersma, penguin expert at the University of Washington in Seattle. "Presumably, they've got their reasons."
Silo and his hot-feathered home-wrecker have yet to produce an egg, but they've been busy trying.
On Thursday, Roy, all alone, sat disconsolately at the edge of the penguin area, staring at the wall. (All joking aside, this is perhaps the saddest thing I've ever read. I really do want to go give him a great big gay penguin hug.)
"If you got divorced, would you want to see your old mate around?" reasoned Boersma.
Besides, she added, "he's probably courting other penguins, getting ready for next season."
posted by Jessica at 5:04 PM | Permalink |
From 9.9.05
But a few of the appropriate, well-thought out responses from the Left this week. Once again, guys, thanks. Don't offer any help or solutions or anything. Just keep yappin'.
I have no idea what they're doing. But I will tell you this: You know, God is looking down on all this, and if they are not doing everything in their power to save people, they are going to pay the price.”
- Ray Nagin, Mayor of New Orleans
"The bystander-in-chief, of course, is George W. Bush, whose whining self-obsession perfectly embodies what America has done to itself."
– Boston Globe columnist James Carroll
“President Bush has come very late with very little,” said Rev. Jesse Jackson, describing the dire scene in New Orleans as looking like “the hull of a slave ship.”
"Kanye West said during a concert on NBC that George Bush doesn't care about black people, which I don't believe. What I do believe is that neither he nor anyone else cares enough about them. And if you're a black person in New Orleans, what else are you supposed to think? The facts are the facts."
–Don Imus, nationally syndicated radio host
"What we witnessed...was the dangerous incompetence and staggering indifference to human suffering of the president and his administration."
- New York Times columnist Bob Herbert
"It's not your fault that 30 percent of New Orleans lives in poverty or that tens of thousands has no transportation to get out of town… C'mon, they're black! ... Can you imagine leaving white people on their roofs for five days?... On Day 3, when you finally left your vacation home, I have to say I was moved by how you had your Air Force One pilot descend from the clouds as you flew over New Orleans so you could catch a quick look of the disaster."
- Michael Moore, professional ass clown.
“I don't think anybody ever anticipated the criminal negligence of the Bush administration in this situation."
- Sean Penn, actor
"The federal government's lethal ineptitude wasn't just a consequence of Mr. Bush's personal inadequacy; it was a consequence of ideological hostility to the very idea of using government to serve the public good."
– New York Times columnist Paul Krugman
''Oh, they're stealing 20 pair of jeans or they're stealing television sets. Who cares? They're not going to go too far with it,'' she said. ``Some of the people who do that -- they're so poor they've never touched anything in their lives. Let them touch those things for once… How come it's so easy to send planes in another country to kill everyone in a second, to destroy lives? We need to be there right now to rescue the rest of the people.''
- Celine Dion, singer
Gore urged that the Bush administration be held accountable for the government's inadequate relief response, particularly "when the corpses of American citizens are floating in toxic floodwaters five days after a hurricane struck."
-Al Gore, not the President.
But a few of the appropriate, well-thought out responses from the Left this week. Once again, guys, thanks. Don't offer any help or solutions or anything. Just keep yappin'.
I have no idea what they're doing. But I will tell you this: You know, God is looking down on all this, and if they are not doing everything in their power to save people, they are going to pay the price.”
- Ray Nagin, Mayor of New Orleans
"The bystander-in-chief, of course, is George W. Bush, whose whining self-obsession perfectly embodies what America has done to itself."
– Boston Globe columnist James Carroll
“President Bush has come very late with very little,” said Rev. Jesse Jackson, describing the dire scene in New Orleans as looking like “the hull of a slave ship.”
"Kanye West said during a concert on NBC that George Bush doesn't care about black people, which I don't believe. What I do believe is that neither he nor anyone else cares enough about them. And if you're a black person in New Orleans, what else are you supposed to think? The facts are the facts."
–Don Imus, nationally syndicated radio host
"What we witnessed...was the dangerous incompetence and staggering indifference to human suffering of the president and his administration."
- New York Times columnist Bob Herbert
"It's not your fault that 30 percent of New Orleans lives in poverty or that tens of thousands has no transportation to get out of town… C'mon, they're black! ... Can you imagine leaving white people on their roofs for five days?... On Day 3, when you finally left your vacation home, I have to say I was moved by how you had your Air Force One pilot descend from the clouds as you flew over New Orleans so you could catch a quick look of the disaster."
- Michael Moore, professional ass clown.
“I don't think anybody ever anticipated the criminal negligence of the Bush administration in this situation."
- Sean Penn, actor
"The federal government's lethal ineptitude wasn't just a consequence of Mr. Bush's personal inadequacy; it was a consequence of ideological hostility to the very idea of using government to serve the public good."
– New York Times columnist Paul Krugman
''Oh, they're stealing 20 pair of jeans or they're stealing television sets. Who cares? They're not going to go too far with it,'' she said. ``Some of the people who do that -- they're so poor they've never touched anything in their lives. Let them touch those things for once… How come it's so easy to send planes in another country to kill everyone in a second, to destroy lives? We need to be there right now to rescue the rest of the people.''
- Celine Dion, singer
Gore urged that the Bush administration be held accountable for the government's inadequate relief response, particularly "when the corpses of American citizens are floating in toxic floodwaters five days after a hurricane struck."
-Al Gore, not the President.
posted by Jessica at 4:54 PM | Permalink |
Ass-stupid liberal alert.
From 9.3.05
Sen. Ted Kennedy has sent out a shrill fundraising letter accusing Republicans of posing an "imminent danger to the nation.”
He even accuses President Bush, along with Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, of "poisoning” the water and air.
The letter, which seeks contributions for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, begins: "The reckless abuse of power by George Bush and his right-wing allies is an imminent danger to the nation and must be stopped.”
The letter singles out for defeat Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Katherine Harris, "the notorious GOP state official who gave George Bush the presidency in 2000,” who is running for the Senate from Florida.
Despite the significant progress that has been made in Iraq, the letter states that the administration’s "claims of progress bear no relation to reality.” Kennedy cites no particulars.
Kennedy, never a close friend of the Pentagon, chastises the GOP with the charge that the White House "ditched a major defense bill just before the August recess.”
The letter goes so far as to claim that the Republicans have "poisoned our air and water by repealing key provisions of our hard-won environmental protection laws.”
The letter sent out under the letterhead of the long-time Senator from Massachusetts also charges the administration with "packing the federal courts with right-wing judges” and characterizes the right-wing agenda as a "radical grab for power.”
Kennedy complained the White House is refusing to "cough up key background information on John Roberts.”
The letter seeks contributions of "$50, $75, or even more,” which will "help put a democratic majority back in control of the senate in 2006!”
Sen. Ted Kennedy has sent out a shrill fundraising letter accusing Republicans of posing an "imminent danger to the nation.”
He even accuses President Bush, along with Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, of "poisoning” the water and air.
The letter, which seeks contributions for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, begins: "The reckless abuse of power by George Bush and his right-wing allies is an imminent danger to the nation and must be stopped.”
The letter singles out for defeat Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Katherine Harris, "the notorious GOP state official who gave George Bush the presidency in 2000,” who is running for the Senate from Florida.
Despite the significant progress that has been made in Iraq, the letter states that the administration’s "claims of progress bear no relation to reality.” Kennedy cites no particulars.
Kennedy, never a close friend of the Pentagon, chastises the GOP with the charge that the White House "ditched a major defense bill just before the August recess.”
The letter goes so far as to claim that the Republicans have "poisoned our air and water by repealing key provisions of our hard-won environmental protection laws.”
The letter sent out under the letterhead of the long-time Senator from Massachusetts also charges the administration with "packing the federal courts with right-wing judges” and characterizes the right-wing agenda as a "radical grab for power.”
Kennedy complained the White House is refusing to "cough up key background information on John Roberts.”
The letter seeks contributions of "$50, $75, or even more,” which will "help put a democratic majority back in control of the senate in 2006!”
posted by Jessica at 4:50 PM | Permalink |
From 9.3.05
CLOONEY'S ATTACK ON AN AGE OF DISHONESTY
Hollywood star GEORGE CLOONEY has slammed modern broadcast journalism, because he fears viewers are fed lies they want to hear instead of "a common truth".
The OCEAN'S TWELVE heart-throb is amazed by how standards in newsrooms have regressed, despite the ever-growing array of channels, and insists moral standards leave much to be desired.
He recalls, "When I was growing up there were three networks and basically the same information.
"Now, because we've fractioned into little pieces, you go look for the things that reinforce what you already believe to be fact and don't get a common truth."
http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/clooneys%20attack%20on%20an%20age%20of%20dishonesty
He then went on to add, "Don't you miss the days when everyone in the media was liberal and only gave news from a liberal perspective? I mean, yeah, it was just like today, but regular people didn't know it. Man, I hate when the unwashed masses realize that Big Brother is watching." The Perfect Storm star, whose most recent project was pissing off the entire country of Italy finished by saying, "Oh yeah. It has recently been brought to my attention by my less haggard-looking friend Brad Pitt that there are people starving in Africa. So you should send money right away. But make sure to save some so you can come visit my brand new Vegas casino. Loosest slots in town, baby!"
posted by Jessica at 4:41 PM | Permalink |
Umm...Whoops?
From 9.3.05
CIA videos reveal the missed chances to kill Bin LadenYosri Fouda and Nick Fielding
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1764035,00.html
PREVIOUSLY unseen footage of Osama Bin Laden taken by a CIA spy drone reveals how close the Americans came to killing the Al-Qaeda leader two years before the September 11 attacks.
The pictures were filmed by a Predator unmanned aircraft and show Bin Laden, in white robes, with a small group of followers at a training camp near Khost in eastern Afghanistan at the end of 1999. The drone was one of the first to be used in Afghanistan by the CIA, but because of bureaucratic wrangles it was unarmed.
The pictures, thought to be the first spy plane footage of Bin Laden to be published, have been obtained from American sources by Al-Jazeera, the Arabic language television station. “We had no doubt over his identity. Bin Laden can clearly be seen standing out from the rest of the group next to the buildings,” said Michael Scheuer, a former CIA officer who headed Alec Station, the agency’s unit which tracked Bin Laden during the 1990s.
He added: “Nobody at the top of the CIA wanted to take the decision to arm the Predator. It meant that even if we could find him (Bin Laden) we were not allowed to kill him.”
The pictures are part of a mass of evidence now emerging of the missed opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden and his associates before they launched the terror attacks on America in 2001.
They include at least three further occasions in Afghanistan between 1998 and 2000 when the CIA had Bin Laden in its sights but was prevented from acting. There were divisions between the agency and the White House over who would have the authority to fire and the legality of killing the Al-Qaeda leader.
On one occasion a satellite photographed the Al-Qaeda leader on a hunting trip, but the White House ordered the CIA not to launch a missile attack after finding out that princes from a friendly Arab country were in his party.
On another occasion a raid by local tribesmen on Bin Laden’s base in Kandahar, southern Afghanistan, was called off after American officials could not agree on whether it should go ahead.
The third episode, also in Kandahar, involved a human spotter tracking him for five days, but the decision was taken not to attack because of fears over civilian casualties.
The missed opportunities are documented in Blinking Red, an Al-Jazeera series beginning this week to mark the fourth anniversary of September 11.
It describes how Bill Clinton’s administration turned down an offer from the Sudanese government to help to capture Bin Laden when he was living in Khartoum in the early to mid-1990s. It also shows how the Americans “lost” two of the September 11 hijackers despite having them under surveillance. The two men later entered America.
"Hello, Bill, this is your legacy calling. Dude, you're on your own."
CIA videos reveal the missed chances to kill Bin LadenYosri Fouda and Nick Fielding
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1764035,00.html
PREVIOUSLY unseen footage of Osama Bin Laden taken by a CIA spy drone reveals how close the Americans came to killing the Al-Qaeda leader two years before the September 11 attacks.
The pictures were filmed by a Predator unmanned aircraft and show Bin Laden, in white robes, with a small group of followers at a training camp near Khost in eastern Afghanistan at the end of 1999. The drone was one of the first to be used in Afghanistan by the CIA, but because of bureaucratic wrangles it was unarmed.
The pictures, thought to be the first spy plane footage of Bin Laden to be published, have been obtained from American sources by Al-Jazeera, the Arabic language television station. “We had no doubt over his identity. Bin Laden can clearly be seen standing out from the rest of the group next to the buildings,” said Michael Scheuer, a former CIA officer who headed Alec Station, the agency’s unit which tracked Bin Laden during the 1990s.
He added: “Nobody at the top of the CIA wanted to take the decision to arm the Predator. It meant that even if we could find him (Bin Laden) we were not allowed to kill him.”
The pictures are part of a mass of evidence now emerging of the missed opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden and his associates before they launched the terror attacks on America in 2001.
They include at least three further occasions in Afghanistan between 1998 and 2000 when the CIA had Bin Laden in its sights but was prevented from acting. There were divisions between the agency and the White House over who would have the authority to fire and the legality of killing the Al-Qaeda leader.
On one occasion a satellite photographed the Al-Qaeda leader on a hunting trip, but the White House ordered the CIA not to launch a missile attack after finding out that princes from a friendly Arab country were in his party.
On another occasion a raid by local tribesmen on Bin Laden’s base in Kandahar, southern Afghanistan, was called off after American officials could not agree on whether it should go ahead.
The third episode, also in Kandahar, involved a human spotter tracking him for five days, but the decision was taken not to attack because of fears over civilian casualties.
The missed opportunities are documented in Blinking Red, an Al-Jazeera series beginning this week to mark the fourth anniversary of September 11.
It describes how Bill Clinton’s administration turned down an offer from the Sudanese government to help to capture Bin Laden when he was living in Khartoum in the early to mid-1990s. It also shows how the Americans “lost” two of the September 11 hijackers despite having them under surveillance. The two men later entered America.
"Hello, Bill, this is your legacy calling. Dude, you're on your own."
posted by Jessica at 4:39 PM | Permalink |
More insane race-baiting from the left.
From 9.3.05
Kanye West Rips Bush During NBC Concert
Appearing two-thirds through the program, he claimed "George Bush doesn't care about black people" and said America is set up "to help the poor, the black people, the less well-off as slow as possible."
http://entertainment.tv.yahoo.com/entnews/ap/20050902/112572168000.html
Here's what was actually said:
"I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family and they say we are looting, you see a white family and they say they are looking for food. And, you know, its been five days because most of the people ARE black. And even for me to complain, I would be a hypocrite because I would turn away from the TV because it’s too hard to watch. I’ve even been shopping before even giving a donation, so now I’m calling my business manager right to see what is the biggest amount I can give. And just to imagine, if I was down there and those are my people down there. If there is anybody out there that wants to do anything that we can help about the way America is set up the help the poor, the black people, the less well off as slow as possible. Red cross is doing as much as they can. We already realize a lot of the people that could help are at war right now, fighting another way. And now they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us." "George Bush doesn’t care about black people."
Pardon me while I heave all over my keyboard. Once the liberal hatemongers have succeeded in starting the riots they can't wait to cover, let's hope an angry mob goes "looking for food" at Kanye's big-ass multi-million dollar mansion. Maybe he can call his widdle business manager to airlift him to the safety of Diddy's nearest compound.
Kanye West Rips Bush During NBC Concert
Appearing two-thirds through the program, he claimed "George Bush doesn't care about black people" and said America is set up "to help the poor, the black people, the less well-off as slow as possible."
http://entertainment.tv.yahoo.com/entnews/ap/20050902/112572168000.html
Here's what was actually said:
"I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family and they say we are looting, you see a white family and they say they are looking for food. And, you know, its been five days because most of the people ARE black. And even for me to complain, I would be a hypocrite because I would turn away from the TV because it’s too hard to watch. I’ve even been shopping before even giving a donation, so now I’m calling my business manager right to see what is the biggest amount I can give. And just to imagine, if I was down there and those are my people down there. If there is anybody out there that wants to do anything that we can help about the way America is set up the help the poor, the black people, the less well off as slow as possible. Red cross is doing as much as they can. We already realize a lot of the people that could help are at war right now, fighting another way. And now they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us." "George Bush doesn’t care about black people."
Pardon me while I heave all over my keyboard. Once the liberal hatemongers have succeeded in starting the riots they can't wait to cover, let's hope an angry mob goes "looking for food" at Kanye's big-ass multi-million dollar mansion. Maybe he can call his widdle business manager to airlift him to the safety of Diddy's nearest compound.
posted by Jessica at 4:29 PM | Permalink |
I'm here to report the thoroughly annoying news that myblogsite is shutting down their services, so I'm losing the blog I had been posting to. I guess that means I'm back here for now.
posted by Jessica at 11:15 AM | Permalink |