Sunday, September 23, 2012
New mainstream media tactic: ignore responses from counter-jihadists, then claim they didn't respond
From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer
Over the years at Jihad Watch I've exposed many "journalists" who are in the tank for Islamic supremacists, including Niraj Warikoo, Michael Kruse, Kari Huus, and many, many others -- but this latest tactic to abet the defamation of counter jihadists is something new. "SI Advance Lies to Readers to Advance Hamas: Maura Grunlund Was Unavailable for Comment," by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, September 22:
It has become a pattern in the mainstream media: if they don't like what I say, if it makes too much sense for them or they can't spin it in a negative enough light, they pretend I didn't say it at all. Edith Honan of Reuters did the same thing recently.
Yesterday Maura Grunlund of the Staten Island Advance sent me this email:
Dear Pamela: Will the “savage” ads be appearing on Staten Island? Is it true that you opposed the proposed MAS center in Midland Beach on Staten Island? What response do you have to the following comments by Hesham El-Meligy of Staten Island?
This is the same fascist group that sabotaged the Midland Beach Mosque process.
The 2 partners/founders of that fascist hate group are Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer who on June 6, 201 organized a rally at Ground Zero against the Park 51 Community Center that was attended by all text book nut cases. Two extremist Egyptian Christians attended to support and film the rally, but were almost killed by the crowd thinking they are Muslims because of the way they looked and spoke. Three days later, they bussed in large numbers to attend and sabotage the Midland Beach Civic Association Meeting that was designed to allow the community to meet the people of MAS and get to know them. Long before the meeting, this fascist group bombarded the area with flyers and emails containing all kinds of islamophobic material, such as the last thing the terrorist said before striking the twin towers was Allah Akbar. That flyer had an image of the burning twin towers. They had established relations with some of the most hateful from the area who were manning the microphone that night and allowed
Robert Spencer to be the first one to ask questions and he took 10 full minutes.
I sent her back this answer yesterday:Robert Spencer does not in New York State, let alone NYC. I saw him with Pamela Geller and Frank Santarpia (the head of the Staten Island Tea Party) after the meeting was ended as if they were cheering each other on a job well done.
Dear Pamela: Will the “savage” ads be appearing on Staten Island?
We plan to roll them out everywhere we can.
Is it true that you opposed the proposed MAS center in Midland Beach on Staten Island?
Yes. The MAS is a Muslim Brotherhood entity. The Brotherhood is dedicated in its own words, according to a captured internal document, to "eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house."
What response do you have to the following comments by Hesham El-Meligy of Staten Island?
Smears and defamation. It's "fascist" now to stand against the murders of innocent civilians, and to defend the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law?But in the story below, Maura Grunlund writes: "Ms. Geller, who didn't respond to a request for comment..."
So I sent this to her a short while ago:
"Ms. Geller, who didn't respond to a request for comment,"Below is the my email responded to your request for comment 9/21/12.
Maura Grunlund's email is email@example.com. The paper's contact link is http://www.statenislandadvance.com/index.html. Write to both and let them know what you think of their style of "journalism": ignoring responses from people they don't like and advancing Hamas' agenda.You lied. Does your editor know you are deceiving your readers? Why wouldn't you publish my response? You should lose your press credentials.Your answer will be published.
Staten Island spokespersons respond to 'Savage' anti-Muslim ads scheduled to appear in subway stations Maura Grunlund, Staten Island Advance, September 22
STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- "Savage" anti-Jihad ads are bringing the politics of religion in the Middle East and North Africa speeding into New York City faster than the subway trains on which they'll be seen, starting Monday.
The ads are sponsored by Pamela Geller, an anti-Muslim blogger (Atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com) who opposed the Muslim American Society (MAS) in its unsuccessful attempt to open a center in Midland Beach -- although the MAS ultimately established its current location in Dongan Hills.Note again the savage defamation of the term "anti-Muslim." This is tantamount to painting a target on my back, and Maura Grunlund knows it. My work is not anti- any group of people, and to portray it as such is to serve the Islamic supremacist propaganda agenda of portraying it as "racist." What race is jihad terror against innocent civilians? My work is in defense of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and equality of rights for all against a violent and repressive ideology that denies all three. Muslims as well as non-Muslims would benefit if free societies prevail over the Islamic supremacist imperative to impose Sharia.
Ms. Geller also was one of the people who protested passionately against the Park51 Community Center and Muslim prayer space now located near the 9/11 World Trade Center site in Manhattan.The protest was never against a "Muslim prayer space" being "located near the 9/11 World Trade Center site." The protest was against a multistory triumphal mosque being built at Ground Zero. And we stopped it; it has not been built. If the Islamic supremacists start to build it, we will be there.
Meanwhile, Ms. Geller's infamous "savage" ads that are headed to New York City have sparked widespread controversy for their use on public transit in San Francisco, Calif. Ms. Geller also has filed suit to post the ads in the public transit system in Washington, D.C.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority initially refused to run Geller's ad but has no choice because U.S. District Court Judge Paul Engelmayer ruled that is protected speech under the First Amendment, according to the Associated Press.
As a result, Ms. Geller reportedly plans to post ads with the following statements in 10 New York City subway stations: "In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad."
"We recognize the freedom of speech, and her right to be a bigot and racist, but we also recognize the responsibility of New Yorkers to denounce that bigotry," said Awad, referring to the ads.
Ms. Geller, who didn't respond to a request for comment, alleges on her blog that CAIR is connected to HAMAS and the Muslim Brotherhood. She points to CAIR's status as an unindicted co-conspirator in a U.S. Department of Justice prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development where five former foundation leaders were convicted in 2008 of funneling millions of dollars to HAMAS.
Awad described Ms. Geller's comments about CAIR as "arguably one of the most poorly thought-out conspiracy theories of the year.
"Geller has invested her time and energy into resuscitating attention on CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator, an issue that has already been settled by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Department of Justice in CAIR's favor."Awad is lying. Actually, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals did not remove the unindicted co-conspirator designation. It just said that it shouldn't have been made public. This has been public knowledge for almost two years; why couldn't Maura Grunlund find it? And why doesn't she mention any of this? According to Robert Spencer, "CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups....Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror, and...CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements....CAIR’s California chapter distributed posters telling Muslims not to talk to the FBI."
Obama is the OPEC President
By: Marita Noon
/ Townhall.com / Finance
Industry experts have come up with a variety of explanations as to why the price of crude oil suddenly dropped from “a four month high of $117.95”—with American gasoline prices at “the highest ever level for this time of the year”—to “their lowest in six weeks.” A wide range of reasons are offered: expiring futures contracts; doubts about the pace of global economic recovery; the restart of production, shipment, and refining following hurricane Isaac; a bigger than expected increase in US crude oil stocks; a decrease in the spread between WTI and Brent; improved vehicle-mileage standards; and even the fat fingers of a trader.
One week ago, when oil prices reached their current peak, Iran’s oil minister, Rostam Qasemi, said that crude oil ought to be at least $150 a barrel. The reason? “Current oil prices were not high enough to threaten the world economy.”
Make no mistake. The Arab world is well aware of the potential choke-hold the countries have on the “world economy,” and they like the control position. They enjoy it when American presidents grovel, and even bow. They know we have to come to them and press for more production every time the geopolitics—much of which they control—heats up the price of oil. Addressing the “highest ever,” “for this time of year” gasoline prices of $3.87 a gallon, the Financial Times states: “The White House is watching.”
There are rumblings about a release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
A current AP article heralds: “Gas prices, not jobs stats, are key numbers for voters.” The subtitle hammers the point: “Gas prices and grocery bills are more likely to sway voters than the monthly jobs report, economists and pollsters say. Gas prices are nearing $4 per gallon and could be key in deciding the presidential race.”
Four-dollar-a-gallon is widely believed to be the current tipping point at which the public goes berserk and beseeches the president to do something—though as CNBC anchor Brian Sullivan chirps “for the majority of the country, $4 gas isn’t going to doom our economy... it looks like $5 is the new $4 when it comes to gas prices and the economy.” While President Obama obviously can do little to calm the radicals rioting in the streets, burning our flag, and shouting anti-American epitaphs, with November 6 in his sight, Obama can ask OPEC for more oil—and more oil supply lowers the price of gasoline and increases his re-election chances. In the tight race, he needs every possible advantage.
Iran’s representative on the board of governors of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), Mohammad Ali Khatibi, gloats: “The United States is trying to artificially bring down prices by pressing oil producing countries to raise output.”
Enter Saudi Arabia—the kind and caring Saudis. Yes, the very same Saudi Arabia ruled by King Abdulla with whom President Bush held hands and to whom President Obama scraped and bowed. There are apparently no news reports on a White House emissary visiting King Abdulla to press for increased output, yet, as the Financial Times reports: Saudi Arabia “has been offering extra oil to its customers.” (Italics added)
Maybe Michelle Malkin was wrong when she said about President Bush: “The hand-holding has gotten us nowhere—and in fact, has made us less secure.” Not likely.
The same Financial Times article quotes “a Gulf-based oil official,” who said that last week’s high oil price was “too high” and that the kingdom “would like to see oil prices back to $100 a barrel.”
So, days apart from each other, we have neighboring OPEC countries saying that prices aren’t “high enough” and that they are “too high.” Which is your truth depends on your goal. Iran’s comment references threatening the world economy—to them it isn’t “high enough.” Saudi Arabia is less ideological; more self-preservationist—to them it is “too high.” But, too high for what?
America has long been known as the Saudi Arabia of coal. Now, we are called the Saudi Arabia of natural gas—even the Saudi Arabia of wind. Recent US discoveries are reported as containing four to six times the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. We could well be the Saudi Arabia of oil—which would mean we don’t need them, and we can supply our own needs and much of the world’s. Without US dollars, how would they drive their Ferraris, adorn themselves with designer goods, and send their children to private American schools?
Question: Saudi Arabia thinks oil prices are “too high” for what?
Answer: Too high for President Obama to get re-elected.
Saudi Arabia is betting on Obama; they have a vested interest in his victory. They know that if Obama gets a second term, America’s riches in natural resources will stay in the ground, and we’ll remain dependent on them. Therefore, Saudi Arabia has “pledged to keep output high to meet demand” “through the end of the year”—might we say, through the election?
Upon hearing my premise, former Texas Railroad Commissioner Elizabeth Ames Jones—with whom I shared the platform at a speaking engagement Friday night, agreed, and added: “Obama doesn’t need to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, he’s got Saudi Arabia doing it for him.”
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has promised to build the Keystone pipeline and develop domestic resources—both of which will bring more North American oil to market, increase supplies, lower prices, and loosen the choke-hold OPEC maintains on the world economy.
If Mitt Romney wins, OPEC loses.
If the US average gasoline price stays above $4 a gallon, OPEC knows that Obama’s chances of re-election are diminished, but if they can keep prices low by pumping more “through the end of the year,” it helps Obama’s re-election efforts.
If Obama wins, OPEC wins. If OPEC wins, America loses. There is no win/win.
No wonder OPEC is betting on Obama.
Taxpayers of the World Unite
By: Charles Payne
/ Townhall.com / Finance
Northern Italy is leaning toward a move to reinstate borders from before the country was unified so the industrious part of the nation can keep more of the prosperity that comes from the sweat of their brow but finds its way to the south in the form of welfare payments to people chilling on the beach.
In Belgium the last fifty years has seen the old school smokestack economy of the south collapse with the result being a welfare nation that sucks up the overwhelming majority of government spending and employment. In Flanders, they are not amused. I actually thought there would be two countries there by now.
In the current issue of the Economist, there is an article titled "The Great Divide" which speaks to a situation in England where "economically, socially and politically, the north is becoming another nation." Public sector employment is rampant in the north while capitalism reigns in the south. There is no talk of civil war or sedation, but there are political implications that will resonate louder before getting better.
Siege of Barcelona
An article in this week's Time magazine focused on Barcelonans dancing the sardana and singing for their enemy's blood along with political chants in celebration of their national holiday. More than 1.5 million people took to the streets in a new "nationalist fervor" that according to Time has never drawn more than 50,000 (I read a piece in British Guardian from July of 2011 that said 1.0 million people took to the street to demand independence). Why all of a sudden so many people in the streets itching to secede from Spain?
Barcelona is the second largest city in Spain with sixty-eight municipal parks and per capita income that's 21% above the European Union average. It is the capital of Catalonia, which has a history of immense pride and achievement despite repeated conquests by others. It was founded by Phoenicians and Greeks, then absorbed by the Carthaginians, then conquered and controlled by Romans, Visigoths, Moors, Franks and Spain. It seems each of these conquests had its own version of a siege on Barcelona.
There was a siege in 1473, 1651-1652, 1706 and finally 1713-1714, which ended on September 11th of that year and was the backdrop for the latest cry for independence.
Barcelona was a mini-empire in the 14th century that covered Sicily, Malta, Sardinia, Valencia, parts of France and parts of Greece. A combination of plague, banking collapses and competition from Genoa eroded the empire.
Archduke Charles v Philip (Felipe) V of Spain
Catalonia sided with the Archduke Charles of Austria who also had the backing of England and the Netherlands to conquer and reclaim Spain, which had the backing of France, for the Hapsburg Empire, in the War of Spanish Succession. It should be noted that King Charles II of Spain was the last of the House of Hapsburg whose gene pool died out after thousands of arranged marriages between cousins. When the fighting was over, 400,000 people died and Spain lost much of its empire.
> Minorca and Gibraltar went to Great Britain
> Spanish Netherlands, Naples, Milan and Sardinia to the Hapsburgs
> Sicily to Savoy
Still, some history books say King Philip won the war. He certainly won Catalonia, which had abandoned an agreement to support the Hapsburg invaders. Spain took out its anger on Catalonia whose language and customs were forbidden, inducing the celebratory public circle dance- the sardana. The region was shut out of international trade until 1778, but once it was allowed to compete, it did so magnificently. The region became the center of Spain's industrial revolution, focused on cotton, wine, cork and iron. Its economic success coupled with the European-wide Romantic Movement saw the culture and language return.
Success brought a flood of people into the region that saw the city swell from 115,000 to over one million inhabitants. These newcomers reshaped the region and embraced a mix of anarchist and Marxist rule. Thankfully, that reign was short-lived and the region embraced its capitalistic DNA.
Fast forward to last week's protest, and there is a clear message for those that would hijack the success of capitalism for systems that could never generate prosperity from scratch. Moreover, these systems also doom prosperity.
In the aftermath of the Romney gaffe, I find it interesting that maybe he's sparked something, or should I say the spies that filmed his fundraiser, may have opened a can of worms not intended. Taxpayers are patriots, yet in America, those paying the bulk of federal income taxes have been portrayed as valueless, mean and greedy. Maybe they'll join their brethren around the world, tired of creating the money that feeds their less fortunate neighbors only to have those recipients demanding more while offering less. Those with very little economic skin in the game should still have a voice but so too should those carrying the load.
There may have been a Eureka moment yesterday those proponents of share the wealth didn't expect. They have been selling victimhood as a rationalization for the nanny state of giant government. Americans have always rejected this notion, but as we have seen before including in Barcelona, prosperous nations sometimes try something new. It only happens when there is a sense that the pie has stopped growing, so panic and poverty pimps spark a run on wealth generated and owned by others. Those others are going to fight back.
And still the story changes...
By: Diane Sori
So it seems that Barack HUSSEIN Obama lied to us yet again...only this time four of our people were murdered because of it.
Obama needs to get his story straight on what happened at our embassy in Benghazi, Libya. Hard to believe that he still refuses to call this a terrorist attack. He instead continues to bloviate the rhetoric that outrage over an anti-islam YouTube film was the cause of the attack.
While Obama did originally refer to ‘acts of terror’ in his initial statement in the aftermath of the attack, he has since backed away from using those words or describing the attack as pre-planned and coordinated.
Guess his fellow muslim brethren got to him and told him to tow the line or else.
“You hate to think that the president would purposely mislead the American people, but it sure looks like it to me' said Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), the House Armed Services Committee Chairman.
And while you really don’t want to think that, with Barack HUSSEIN Obama as president what you hate to think is reality I’m afraid...and a very sad reality at that.
"They (Ambassador Stevens and the others) were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy," said Matthew Olsen, Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, in response to a question at a Senate hearing discussing the attacks.
At the same hearing, Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she agreed with Libyan officials who said the attack was indeed premeditated, planned and linked to the September 11th anniversary. Collins also was very concerned that NO Marines were guarding the embassy and that embassy security was handled by foreign nationals.
Foreign nationals who might very well have been the Muslim Brotherhood as some new intel is saying. The Muslim Brotherhood...the very same nefarious group that’s trying to crash our legal system and bring Sharia Law to America might very well have been the foreign nationals in charge of security at our embassy.
Nice...real nice (insert sarcasm and disgust here).
And now to make matters even worse, new information is surfacing about Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, the Navy SEALS who were in Benghazi as part of a security contractor force. These two heroes, and YES they are true heroes, were safely away from the embassy in another part of the city when they heard that that the main embassy building was under attack. Doherty and Woods left their secure location to go help those at the embassy reach safety in a second annex, thus saving many lives. Unfortunately, that building later came under attack by rocket fire and here is where both died.
Doherty was in Libya to search for shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles...a high priority mission after the initiated after the fall of Gadhafi. Woods, a registered nurse and certified paramedic, worked in diplomatic security in posts from Central America to the Middle East. These men knew and lived through the harsh realities of war in Iraq but the Libyan people were NOT supposed to be our enemies. Sadly, because of Barack HUSSEIN Obama they now were, and these two brave heroes found that out with their lives.
Bottom line, thanks to Barack HUSSEIN Obama Iraq didn’t kill them but his failed Mid-East policies did.
While the militia suspected of killing Ambassador Stevens, our Information Officer and the two brave SEALS, has been driven out of its base in Benghazi, the damage has been done, and Obama still refuses to see the truth...or more likely Obama refuses to tell the truth about what happened that fateful night.
And now here’s another kicker...reports are surfacing about an intercept between a Libyan politician sympathetic to al Qaeda and the February 17 Brigade, the Libyan militia that was supposed to provide local security to the embassy. In the intercept, the Libyan politician asks an officer in the brigade to have his men stand down for an impending attack...stand down for an impending attack...meaning without a doubt that this attack on our embassy was a pre-planned coordinated attack NOT some spur of the moment protests over a poorly made comical internet movie.
And it gets even better as Obama and Hillary keep condemning and blaming the movie for the attack even going so far as to have the US embassy in Pakistan pay for advertisements on Pakistani TV showing them saying just that.
Talk about being in bed with the enemy...more like a treasonable offense if you ask me.
So until someone...anyone at this point...tells ‘We the People’ the real truth about what went on that night we will have to rely on media reports but we all know how reliable those are NOT.
We demand answers as too why four of our people died but will we get them...only time will tell so until then, as always, November 6th can’t come soon enough for me.