Tuesday, March 31, 2009
by Larry Simons
March 31, 2009
I came across this story yesterday of Billo being interviewed by The Hollywood Reporter's Paul Bond. It did not surprise me at all that it was chock full of lies, omissions and just plain O’ Reilly-style spin (the kind he claims he’s free of).
Let’s analyze, shall we? (my analysis in purple)
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: WHY ARE ACTORS SUCH FREQUENT TARGETS OF "THE FACTOR"?:
O'Reilly: My job is to watch the powerful. A performer has a forum that other people do not, and all we ask is that they be fair. If they believe something and use their TV show, movie or concert to spout off about it, that's fine. But if we have some questions about their beliefs, I think they should answer them -- and not be drive-by people.
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: WHO ARE THESE DRIVE-BY PEOPLE YOUSPEAK OF?:
O'Reilly: I take it case by case. We took on George Clooney over the 9/11 charities, and we were absolutely right, but Clooney does a good job with Darfur. We took on Bruce Springsteen for things he has done at concerts because we want to know what his frame of reference is. These are powerful people, and we're not going to give them a free ride. If there was somebody screaming right-wing stuff, we'd do the same thing.
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: WHAT'S THE MOST FUN YOU'VE HAD ON THE AIR?:
O'Reilly: That's a tough one. I think it's the three interviews I did with President Bush. That's the hardest interview for any journalist, to interview a president, because you can't cross a certain line, and presidents all come in with what they want to say. To get them out of that rehearsed deal is very hard. The three interviews I did with Bush were instructive because I went up to that line.
(Can’t cross a certain line? You can’t? Not with a President? If it’s one person in the world that you should be holding their feet to the fire, it should be the President. You said that actors are powerful people and you’re not going to give them a free ride. Who’s more powerful than the President? You’re going to hold actors accountable but NOT the President? Cut the bullshit loofah boy, you didn’t cross any line with Bush because you were too busy shoving your big honker up his ass! Then you said [about actors], “If there was somebody screaming right-wing stuff, we'd do the same thing”. Oh really? You just said you can’t cross a certain line with a President! Who was more right wing than Bush?)
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: WHAT'S THE ANGRIEST YOU'VE BEEN ON THE AIR?:
O'Reilly: There was an attorney for people who oppose Jessica's Law (to punish sex offenders) that really got me. If you can't protect little kids, we should just pack it up as a country. And after 9/11, a kid in his 20s whose father was killed at the Twin Towers. I was all set to do a sympathetic interview, but the kid started saying the USA attacked the towers and killed his father. I just said, "Oh my God. Do you realize how many other people are suffering tonight in addition to you? How could you possibly say that?" I was very angry at that kid. And the Barney Frank thing (in which O'Reilly called Frank a "coward" during an October debate over Fannie May and Freddie Mac). But I really wasn't angry; I just needed to scold him because he was blaming everyone else, even though some of this economic mess is his fault.
(Actually, if we are to judge anger by appearance alone, then you’re lying. You have NEVER been more angry at anyone on the air than you were with Geraldo Rivera on April 5, 2007 over an illegal immigrant issue. I thought Billo was going to literally rip Rivera’s head off and shit down his neck. I actually agreed with Billo on this topic but I’m quite sure Billo “didn’t mention it” because Geraldo is his fellow FOX News stooge.)
Here’s the clip:
(And let’s not forget this classic outburst!)
(I know, I know. He wasn’t “on the air” there. I know. I just wanted to show Billo really pissed off. Also, in Billo’s answer above he mentions “a kid in his 20’s whose father was killed in the Twin Towers”. That was Jeremy Glick, who completely kept his cool the entire time Billo shouted like a raving lunatic. Also, Glick happened to be right---and that was what pissed Billo off the most. Billo “forgot to mention” this fact. Also left out was the fact that Glick reported after that interview was over, Billo said to Glick [off air], “Get out of my studio before I fucking tear you to pieces.”)
Here’s the story of this:
(Billo also said he had been angry with an attorney for people who opposed Jessica’s Law [to punish sex offenders] and said, “If you can't protect little kids, we should just pack it up as a country.” Yeah Billo, we all know how much you “protected” 11-year-old kidnap victim Shawn Hornbeck by denying the Stockholm Syndrome when you said, “The situation here, for this kid, looks to me to be a lot more fun than what he had under his old parents. He didn't have to go to school, he could run around and do whatever he wanted…there was an element here that this kid liked about this circumstance.” Then he said he’d apologize if he was wrong. Seven months later, after the trial when the gruesome details were released about the sexual, abusive ordeal Hornbeck went through, O’ Reilly went on air telling his viewers the grisly details, but NEVER apologized.)
Then O’ Reilly was asked if there was any actors whose political views disturbed him so much that he wouldn’t see their movies. O ‘Reilly answered “Sean Penn”. Then was asked:
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: SOMEONE WILL READ THAT AND ACCUSE YOU OF ENCOURAGING A NEW BLACKLIST ERA:
O'Reilly: Not at all. He's a great actor, and if you hire him, you'll get a good performance. I'm just not going to give a guy who gives aid and comfort to people like (Iran president Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez and Saddam Hussein, when he was alive, my 10 bucks. That's my right as an American.
(No, Billo. Sean Penn has just badmouthed Bush very frequently and you equate being anti-Bush with supporting terrorists. Goodness Billo, if you were spinning any more, you could turn back time like Superman.)
I love these next three questions.
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: WHAT'S THE REACTION YOU GET AT A RESTAURANT OR A STARBUCKS OR SOME OTHER PUBLIC PLACE?:
O'Reilly: I get preferential treatment, although I don't want that. I very rarely have problems. Look, I'm 6-foot-4, and I don't look like I'll be receptive to bad behavior.
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: DO YOU NEED BODYGUARDS?:
O'Reilly: On occasion, if I have to go into a large crowd and be stationary.
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: WHAT'S THE WORST REACTION YOU HAVE EVER HAD IN PUBLIC?:
O'Reilly: Nothing. Never in 12-and-a-half years of doing this. We have had death threats here, and Fox security people are excellent. We know that the far-left loons bait on the Internet and they would do damage if they could.
(Which is it, Billo? Are you safe from harm or are you in danger? Nothing has happened in 12 years and you get preferential treatment but you need bodyguards? You said you very rarely have problems. “Rarely” means that you have had problems, but you said “NEVER, in 12-and-a-half years" have you had a bad reaction in public. You have problems, you don’t have problems. This flip-flopping is giving me whiplash. Geesh!)
THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: ANY OF THOSE DEATH THREATS RESULT IN ARRESTS?:
O'Reilly: We've had a few people convicted of crimes. I'm not going to get into descriptions.
(Because there weren't any.)
(“far-left loons”---translation: people who disagree with Billo and quote him word for word)
Saturday, March 28, 2009
I guess she didn’t "love his nuts"
by Larry Simons
March 28, 2009
Last month, 44 year old Vince Shlomi, better known as the "ShamWow" guy, who is a successful pitchman for household items such as the ShamWow! and the Slap Chop, was arrested on a felony battery charge after striking 26 year old hooker, Sasha Harris at his South Beach hotel.
Here’s the story from The Smoking Gun:
"According to an arrest affidavit, Shlomi met Sasha Harris, 26, at a Miami Beach nightclub on February 7 and subsequently retired with her to his $750 room at the lavish Setai hotel. Shlomi told cops he paid Harris about $1000 in cash after she "propositioned him for straight sex." Shlomi said that when he kissed Harris, she suddenly "bit his tongue and would not let go." Shlomi then punched Harris several times until she released his tongue. The affidavit, a copy of which you'll find here, notes that during the 4 AM fight Harris sustained facial fractures and lacerations all over her face (she is pictured here in mug shots snapped following busts in 2008 and 2005). After freeing his tongue, a bleeding Shlomi ran to the Setai lobby, where security summoned cops. Harris refused to cooperate with officers, who recovered $930 from her purse. "Both parties had a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from their persons," police reported. In a brief telephone interview, Harris declined to answer TSG questions about her run-in with Shlomi, though she did say she is considering a lawsuit against the pitchman. Asked if she worked as a hooker, Harris declined comment. As seen in the below mug shot, Shlomi was also injured during the fracas and, court records show, was treated at Mount Sinai Medical Center. While Shlomi and Harris were both arrested for felony aggravated battery, prosecutors this month declined to file formal charges against the combatants."
Vince "ShamWow" Shlomi
Hooker Sasha Harris
I just hope that Vince is no fraud and uses the products he peddles and had a big ShamWow handy to sop up his bleeding tongue! Maybe she didn’t "love your nuts" Vince, but she sure did love that tongue!
I realize this has nothing to do with politics, but it was just so damned funny, I couldn’t not post it. Plus, I love the ShamWow guy! Get well Vince. I’m sure you’ll bounce back and be pitching another gadget real soon. Maybe the "Slap-A-Ho"!
The Slap Chop (you’re gonna love his nuts!)
The Slap Chop ("you’re gonna love my nuts" remix)
Friday, March 27, 2009
by Larry Simons
March 27, 2009
This site is usually reserved for political commentary but I just had to pay tribute to one of my favorite singers, Dan Seals, who died on March 25 after his struggle with mantle cell lymphoma.
Seals racked up a string of big hit singles in the 1970’s as part of England Dan & John Ford Coley (pictured above) and had 11 #1 singles as a crossover country artist in the 80’s and 90’s. He was 61.
Here is a list of his most famous songs: (my personal faves in bold)
“I’d Really Love To See You Tonight”
“Nights Are Forever Without You”
“It’s Sad To Belong”
“Gone Too Far”
“We’ll Never Have To Say Goodbye Again”
“Love Is The Answer”
“Meet Me In Montana”
Here is my video tribute to Dan Seals
Journalist whores for the establishment Popular Mechanics are trotted out again to deny the existence of manifestly provable internment camps in America
Paul Joseph Watson
March 27, 2009
Fox News blowhard Glenn Beck is up to his old tricks again - after attempting to convince the public that he was some kind of crusader against the new world order he is now giving a platform to arch-yellow journalist debunker James Meigs of Popular Mechanics in a pathetic attempt to discredit so-called "conspiracy theories" behind FEMA camps.
After announcing yesterday on his show that he called Meigs three weeks ago to have him look at the issue of FEMA camps, Beck then attacks the credibility of the Internet before turning to Meigs, who states that Popular Mechanics has assigned one of their illustrious reporters to the issue, presumably from the same pool of reporters who made such infantile, glaring and agenda-driven botch jobs of "debunking" 9/11 truth.
Despite admitting that they haven’t deeply researched the issue, Meigs makes it clear that they have already decided it "isn’t true" - proving once again that the whole process isn’t about really getting to the bottom of the issue, it’s about debunking a perfectly provable fact by means of strawman tactics and deceitful reasoning.
"It looks from our early reporting like a classic conspiracy theory," claims Meigs, adding, "Little grains of truth all adding up to something that really isn’t true."
Beck and Meigs are going to go full court press in attempting to debunk the issue a week on Monday - April 6th.
Little grains of truth that add up to something that isn’t true? This is quite rich coming from a guy whose military-industrial complex rag is put out by by Hearst Publishing - the very progenitors of the term "yellow journalism".
The fact that 9/11 truth groups tore Meigs a new one on innumerable occasions in pointing out his voluminous childlike research errors doesn’t seem to have dampened his enthusiasm to be a journalistic whore for the establishment.
Meigs is also probably hoping that Beck’s naive audience forgets the fact that Popular Mechanics is infested with "journalists" with direct ties to government, the CIA and Homeland Security.
But who are we to question the expertise of James Meigs? The illustrious former editor of those serious and scholarly publications Video Review and Entertainment Weekly.
Little grains of truth that add up to something that isn’t true?
The fact that internment facilities inside America have been built and prepared for the incarceration of American citizens is not a "conspiracy theory," it is a manifestly provable fact, and we have tirelessly written article after article documenting the reality of FEMA camps.
Legislation currently working it’s way through Congress mandates the establishment of "national emergency centers" to be located on military installations.
The purpose of such facilities is to provide "temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster," the expansion of which under FEMA is codified under HR 645, otherwise known as the National Emergency Centers Act.
Ominously, the bill states that the camps can be used to "meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security," an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse.
The issue of containment camps re-gained national attention three years ago when it was announced that Kellogg, Brown and Root had been awarded a $385 million dollar contract by Homeland Security to construct detention and processing facilities in the event of a national emergency.
The language of the preamble to the agreement veils the program with talk of temporary migrant holding centers, but it is made clear that the camps will also be used "as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency."
Following the story, first given wide attention by Prisonplanet.com, the Alternet website put together an alarming report that collated all the latest information on plans to initiate internment of political subversives and Muslims after the next major terror attack in the US.
The article highlighted the disturbing comments of Sen. Lindsey Graham, who encouraged torture-supporting former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to target, "Fifth Columnists" Americans who show disloyalty and sympathize with "the enemy," whoever that enemy may be.
It is important to stress that the historical precedent mirrors exactly what the Halliburton camp deal outlines. Oliver North’s Reagan era Rex 84 plan proposed rounding up 400,000 refugees, under FEMA, in the event of "uncontrolled population movements" over the Mexican border into the United States.
The real agenda, just as it is with Halliburton’s gulags, was to use the cover of rounding up immigrants and illegal aliens as a smokescreen for targeting political dissidents. From 1967 to 1971 the FBI kept a list of persons to be rounded up as subversive, dubbed the "ADEX" list.
As recently highlighted by author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of close to one million "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.
Discussions of federal concentration camps are no longer the rhetoric of paranoid Internet conspiracy theorists, they are mainstream news.
Halliburton, through their KBR subsidiary, is the same company that built most of the major new detention camps in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A much discussed and circulated report, the Pentagon’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program, has recently been updated and the revision details a "template for developing agreements" between the Army and corrections facilities for the use of civilian inmate labor on Army installations."
The plan is clearly to swallow up disenfranchised groups like prisoners, immigrants and Muslims at first and then extend the policy to include ‘Fifth Columnists,’ otherwise known as anyone who disagrees with the government or exercises their Constitutional rights.
Respected author Peter Dale Scott speculated that the "detention centers could be used to detain American citizens if the Bush administration were to declare martial law."
Daniel Ellsberg, former Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary of Defense, called the plan, "preparation for a roundup after the next 9/11 for Mid-Easterners, Muslims and possibly dissenters. They’ve already done this on a smaller scale, with the ’special registration’ detentions of immigrant men from Muslim countries, and with Guantanamo."
Furthermore, In 2002, FEMA sought bids from major real estate and engineering firms to construct giant internment facilities in the case of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack or a natural disaster.
Okanogan County Commissioner Dave Schulz went public in 2003 with his contention that his county was set to be a location for one of the camps.
In May 2006, we exposed the existence of a nationwide FEMA program which is training Pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for the implementation of martial law, property and firearm seizures, mass vaccination programs and forced relocation.
A whistleblower who was secretly enrolled into the program told us that the feds were clandestinely recruiting religious leaders to help implement Homeland Security directives in anticipation of a potential bio-terrorist attack, any natural disaster or a nationally declared emergency.
The first directive was for Pastors to preach to their congregations Romans 13, the often taken out of context bible passage that was used by Hitler to hoodwink Christians into supporting him, in order to teach them to "obey the government" when martial law is declared.
It was related to the Pastors that quarantines, martial law and forced relocation were a problem for state authorities when enforcing federal mandates due to the "cowboy mentality" of citizens standing up for their property and second amendment rights as well as farmers defending their crops and livestock from seizure.
It was stressed that the Pastors needed to preach subservience to the authorities ahead of time in preparation for the round-ups and to make it clear to the congregation that "this is for their own good."
Pastors were told that they would be backed up by law enforcement in controlling uncooperative individuals and that they would even lead SWAT teams in attempting to quell resistance.
Though some doubted the accuracy of this report at the time due to its fundamentally disturbing implications, the story was later confirmed by a KSLA 12 news report, in which participating clergy and officials admitted to the existence of the program.
This program is continuing under the Obama administration with churches declaring that Barack Obama’s presidency is appointed by God and that Obama himself is "God’s minister".
In another detention camp related development, last May it was revealed that the federal government is accepting bids on the contracts from county governments or private companies to build and run "family detention centers" on both coasts and on the Southwestern border.
Again, as with REX 84, the precedent is to deal with an influx of immigrants.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) already runs two similar camps, one of which hit the headlines at the end of 2006 after residents in Taylor Texas held protests outside the The T. Don Hutto detention facility.
One of the last acts of Congress in 2006 was to send President Bush a bill that establishes a $38 million program of National Park Service grants to preserve Japanese POW internment camps in Hawaii, California, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and Idaho. Is this really in the name of historical interest or does it dovetail with programs on the books to intern hundreds of thousands of dissidents in a time of crisis?
"What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?", asked former Congressman Dan Hamburg of the watchdog group Voice of the Environment, Inc. in a article carried by the San Francisco Chronicle last year.
"Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and non citizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." Hamburg co-wrote with Lewis Seiler.
The article continued:
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the removal of "all removable aliens" and "potential terrorists."
Over the past decade we have witnessed an extreme acceleration of the physical implementation of a framework and infrastructure ready to receive those who will not go along with a coordinated destruction of traditional American values and freedom.
You do not need any confirmation one way or the other on this issue from James Meigs, Fox News or Glenn Beck, who has a track record as one of the most insidious corporate propagandists on television.
Just over a year ago Beck was on TV every week telling CNN viewers that Ron Paul supporters, libertarians and the anti-war left were terrorist sympathizers. Beck inferred that the U.S. military should be used to silence such dissenters, a theme we revealed to be a direct talking point that could be traced back to a September 2006 White House directive.
Glenn Beck is a modern day Judas Iscariot, attempting to co-opt the legitimate movement of millions of Americans furious at the abuse and conduct of their government. His invitation to have the corporate crony journalistic prostitutes at Popular Mechanics "debunk" the manifestly provable existence of internment camps in America tells us everything we need to know about where his sympathies really lie.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Billo’s answer to blaming rape victims: Posing as rape victim advocate? A new low, even for this prick
by Larry Simons
March 24, 2009
Just when I keep thinking Billo could not reach new lows, he does just that. It’s incredible how loofah boy continues to accomplish the miraculous. He’s the gift that keeps on giving. All kidding aside, this time it gets a bit more serious.
Monday on FOX News’s #1 propaganda outlet, The O ‘Reilly Factor, Billo had the audacity to attack bloggers, calling them “far left loons” for, once again, simply posting word for word portions of his own 2006 radio show in which he blamed rape/murder victim Jennifer Moore for her plight.
Calling it “a preposterous lie”, he then went on to say that The O ‘Reilly Factor has done more for the victims of crime in America than any other TV program with the exception of America’s Most Wanted, but naturally, offered no proof of that.
Billo then mentions the 2006 Radio Factor broadcast and tells his zombies that the entire commentary of that program has been “posted at Bill O’ Reilly.com” incase anyone wants to hear it. What Billo fails to reveal is why he does not just play the clip of him blaming Jennifer Moore for her rape/murder on the air. No, instead he tells his sheep to “go to his website” to listen to the full clip.
Yeah, Billo, as if your own fans are really going to follow up on that and actually go to the website and check it out. The fact that they watch your show to begin with means that they have no interest in facts or doing research, so going to your website will be the last thing they do. They take your word for everything and follow like good, obedient sheep. That’s why they are sheep. Sheep do not research and investigate.
Then Billo accuses NBC News of “encouraging the loons” to protest The Alexa Foundation “causing Alexa and her family major grief”. Again, no proof NBC News did any encouraging, and no proof Alexa Branchini or her family suffered any grief. Branchini herself was not even on the show during this segment. Does Billo want us to believe this woman and her family suffered grief and then didn’t have the thoughtfulness to ask her to be a guest so she could share her story?
Billo then says, “perhaps the worst garbage came from the far-left group ‘Center for American Progress’ headed by John Podesta. A woman named Amanda Terkel led that charge.” Then Billo plays a clip of his stalker/thug producer Jesse Watters ambushing Terkel while she was on vacation in Winchester, VA over the weekend.
Watch the clip
Notice in the clip, as with all ambushes done by FOX News, that Watters asks questions that require Terkel to automatically be prepared for a response, as if it was a scheduled interview.
Naturally, when Watters asks questions like, “What did Bill O’ Reilly say?”, unless a complete word for word dialogue doesn’t instantly pop out of Terkel’s mouth, it will be viewed as ‘ahhhh, she has no clue what she’s talking about---liar!’ I thought she did well despite being ambushed. My only complaint was that I thought she was too nice. I would have taken that microphone out of that fucking little twerp Watters’ hand and shoved it so far up his ass, he would have thought it was one of his butt-fuck sessions with Billo.
During the ambush, Watters asks Terkel, “What was the Mel Gibson component to Bill’s analysis?” Then, when Terkel has no clue what the hell this prick is talking about, Watters says, “You didn’t hear it, did you? Because you’re just dishonest.” Well, needlenuts, I heard the “Mel Gibson component” and here’s the facts asshole. When the entire clip is played in it’s context, it incriminates Billo MORE! This is the very reason why Watters, after hearing that Terkel didn’t know what it was, didn’t simply just tell her what it was!
For those not following this story, this is the “Mel Gibson component”: On Billo’s radio show on August 2, 2006, the same program in which he made the Jennifer Moore comment, he compared Moore’s situation with the Mel Gibson arrest in July 2006 when Gibson was drunk and admitted anti-Semitic remarks. Billo said this:
“I think it’s safe to say that if Mel Gibson didn’t get drunk, he wouldn’t be in this terrible situation he finds himself in. And if a young woman, 18-year-old Jennifer Moore of Harrington Park, NJ, didn’t get drunk, she’d be alive today.”
The idiocy of this comparison is mind-numbing. Gibson’s drunkenness altered his own behavior. Moore’s drunkeness, although it may have made her more vulnerable and unaware, did not cause her rape and murder. Getting drunk does not control the behavior of someone else. Her rape and murder resulted because of the criminal and sick actions of another. This is what Billo and his stalker/thug Jesse Watters did not want you to hear. This is why neither Billo or Watters said it out loud during this segment or played the clip. Once again, the full context incriminates Billo even more, as I highlighted previously.
Since Billo or Watters refuse to play or even SAY the full context, I downloaded it and made a YouTube clip of it, so the whole world can hear it. Sad when you have to come to Real Truth Online to get Billo’s FULL CONTEXT!. Enjoy.
Here is the full context of Billo's comparing the stories of Mel Gibson and Jennifer Moore: (I highlighted the segment that most media outlets reported to which Bill cried "out of context", so that you can see that the remainder of Billo's dialogue provided no justification for the outrageous things he said nor the "out of context" complaint)
“…and then you have young people like Miss Moore. Let me tell you her story. On Friday night, July 28 (2006), she went out with a girlfriend into New York City to club, and what these young girls do, they have phony ID’s because it’s 21 to drink in New Jersey and New York, and they go from club to club in downtown Manhattan, and they get bombed.
And, uh, then they come out and God knows what’s gonna happen to them, ‘cause there’s predators everywhere in a big city like this. So, anyway, these two girls come in from the suburbs and they get bombed and their car is towed because they’re moronic girls and, you know, they don’t have a car so they’re standing there in the middle of the night with no car.
And, then they separate because they’re drunk, they separate, which you never do. Now Moore, Jennifer Moore, 18, on her way to college, she was, uh, 5 ft 2, 105 lbs, wearing a miniskirt and a halter top with a bare midriff. Now again, here you go. So, every predator in the world’s gonna pick that up at 2 in the morning. She’s walking by herself on the west side highway, and she gets picked up by a thug, alright?
Now, she’s out-of-her-mind drunk. And the thug takes her over to New Jersey in the cab and kills her and rapes her and does all these terrible things to her. And the thug is so stupid, he uses her cell phone and the cops trace it back to him, and they arrest him, charge him with murder. He had a prostitute girlfriend with him, she’s charged an accessory to murder. But, Jennifer Moore is in the ground, she’s dead.
Alright, now she’s 18..18 years old, and she lives at home. So, what, what’s..is there a parental responsibility here? Now, I think back to my own when I was 18. When I was 18, I was pretty much on my own here, on my own. Alright, I was in college and I came back and lived at my parents house on Long Island during the summer. But I was never there and I didn’t have any curfew. My parents didn’t know what I was doing. I worked during the day painting houses and I’d go out with my dopey friends at night and raise hell.
Now I never drank. I didn’t get drunk, so I didn’t have to worry about that. But I had a car and I was zipping around, and you know, if I wanted to stay out all night, I was gonna stay out all night. Nobody told me what to do when I was 18. …But today, if I’m a, if I have an 18 year old daughter, and if it was a guy, ehh, probably not the same standard, but if I had a daughter who’s 5’ 2”, and 105 pounds, I’d say that daughter would probably have a curfew living under my roof. I’m not letting a daughter run around all night…uh, just for safety reasons.
OK, so, the reason the reason that Jennifer Moore is dead is ‘cause she got drunk…alright. The reason Mel Gibson is in the trouble of his life, and you know, his family, you gotta really feel bad for them. He’s got a bunch of kids and his wife and all that, is ‘cause he got drunk.”
Then Billo talks about Mel Gibson and other celebrities for the next minute before he takes phone calls. According to Billo, here are the things (in order) that Jennifer Moore did that made her deserve a death sentence:
1. Got drunk
2. Came out of the bar
3. Let her car be towed
4. Stood around in the middle of the night
5. Separated from her friend
6. Wore a miniskirt and a halter top with a bare midriff
7. Walked by herself
8. Gets a ride
You could call some of these things ‘not so smart’ maybe, but deserving of being raped and killed?
One of the most disturbing elements to this story is the fact that we are talking about a man (O’ Reilly) who has made controversial and outrageous comments about rape victims and kidnapped children (Shawn Hornbeck) in the past. He was invited to speak at a fundraiser for an organization that helps rape victims, and here he has his producer, Jesse Watters, obtain the address of Amanda Terkel, and sit outside of her apartment and wait for her to leave in order to track her down for an ambush interview!
So, not only has Billo showed disrespect for women in the past, calling Jennifer Moore and her friend “moronic” and sexually harassing ex-O' Reilly Factor staffer Andrea Mackris, but now even after the Alexa Foundation speaking event, O’ Reilly still displays very disturbing behavior with women.
Also, two other big fat lies on O’ Reilly’s part is the fact that no one ever criticized the Alexa Foundation in any story or coverage. Amanda Terkel did not, or Newshounds, or Media Matters or MSNBC. No one, but, well…..me. I criticized them, why didn’t I get any negative press? The other big fat lie is the fact that O’ Reilly claimed in August 2007 that:
“The Factor" occasionally sends out producers to confront people who will not answer serious questions about controversial things they do, like judges giving child rapists probation, for example. Now, some object to displays like these. But we feel they're a vital tool in holding public servants accountable for their actions, and we do not go after people lightly. We always ask them on the program first, or to issue a clear statement explaining their actions.”
Terkel is neither a public servant, nor was she ever once asked to be on O’ Reilly’s show to discuss this.
Here is an explanation of what Amanda Terkel said she experienced:
– The Stalking: Watters and his camera man accosted me at approximately 3:45 p.m. on Saturday, March 21, in Winchester, VA, which is a two-hour drive from Washington, DC. My friend and I were in this small town for a short weekend vacation and had told no one about where we were going. I can only infer that the two men staked out my apartment and then followed me for two hours. Looking back, my friend and I remember seeing their tan SUV following us for much of the trip.
– The Ambush: Shortly after checking into our lodgings, we emerged and immediately saw two men walking toward us calling out my name. Watters said he was from Fox News, but never said his or his companion’s name, nor did he say he was with The O’Reilly Factor.
– The Surprise Attack: Watters immediately began asking me why I was causing “pain and suffering” to the Alexa Foundation. He never gave me the context for his questions. Confused, I repeatedly asked him what he was talking about and whether he could refresh my memory, but he just continued shouting his question.
– The Evasion: I said that it was inappropriate for O’Reilly to imply that just because a woman may be drunk and/or dressed in a certain way, she should expect to be raped. Watters asked me whether I had listened to the interview (which I had) and claimed that O’Reilly had made the comments in the context of a commentary on Mel Gibson/drunkenness. When I tried to ascertain why he was attacking ThinkProgress in particular — even though other sites had also covered the story — he said that we were part of the “smear pipeline,” which also included the “Soros-funded” Media Matters. He ignored my comments when I asked if Fox News also smears people.
– Setting A Guilt Trap: Watters ended the charade by demanding that I look into the camera and apologize to the Alexa Foundation and rape victims. I told them that I don’t speak through Fox News and if someone from the Alexa Foundation would like to personally call me, I’d be happy to speak with that person.
– More Stalking: The camera man then continued to film me as I walked down the block. After a few minutes while I waited at the light to cross the street, Watters called him back and they left.
Here’s Jon Stewart’s take on Bill O’ Reilly’s hypocrisy on people’s “right to privacy”. Keep in mind, Terkel is neither a public servant, nor was she previously asked to be on The Factor.
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||M - Th 11p / 10c|
|Bill O'Reilly's Right to Privacy|
One glaring thing stands out to me about all of this. From the time that Billo was invited to speak at the Alexa Foundation luncheon until Monday night, guess how many stories Billo did on this? That’s right, ZERO. He did mention it on his site, but just where he was going to be and when. No mention of the controversy surrounding it, or the fact that there was over 900 names signed on a petition created by the Concerned Citizens Against Sexual Violence to have the Alexa Foundation cancel O’ Reilly’s appearance. Billo waited until after his speaking event to reveal the story as to not bring attention to this huge story that had exploded on the internet weeks prior. What a complete FRAUD.
Amanda Terkel was on Olbermann tonight to discuss Bill O’ Reilly, the Fraud:
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Left-wing blogger Andy Ostroy re-institutes free speech on his blog, then censors my comment despite not violating any rules
by Larry Simons
March 21, 2009
Left-wing blogger and fraud Andy Ostroy has now proven to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that he cannot handle the same rightly-deserved criticism that he dishes out to other media figures and politicians on his blog The Ostroy Report.
As far back as early November 2008, when Rahm Emanuel was appointed to Chief of Staff by President Obama, I had been sending Ostroy posts every so often (maybe 5 or 6) about the fact that Rahm Emanuel’s father, Benjamin, was in a terrorist militant group called Irgun in the late 1940’s. The Irgun was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Palestinian civilians by bombing houses, hotels and villages. I wanted Ostroy to address this since it was now his guy in the White House. I wanted to see if Ostroy had the integrity enough to hold his own party’s feet to the fire if the occasion warranted it.
In fact, in his own site’s header, it boasts, “we're not afraid to criticize our own when warranted.” If this story does not warrant it, what story does? Ostroy has not posted any of my comments since he had enabled comment moderation, so none of his readers even saw my posts.
Just yesterday (March 20), Ostroy joined the free speech club again and lifted his ban on moderating comments, so I wasted no time re-posting the ‘Rahm Emanuels’s father was a terrorist’ story here on his blog. This is what I wrote.
(click to enlarge)
Notice that the comment I left was at 7:02 P.M. and the previous post was left at 9:52 A.M. by an anonymous blogger.
When I logged back on roughly 9 hours later, I saw that my post had been deleted and Ostroy had this message for me:
(click to enlarge)
Notice on this screen shot that my 7:02 P.M. comment had been deleted and in its place was Andy Ostroy’s comment left at 9:49 P.M. and then I left another different comment at 4:46 A.M. shown in full here:
(click to enlarge)
What I found interesting is that on Thursday evening, Andy posted this message for his readers:
“This may come as a shocker, but this blog does not exist so that crazies can run up a hundred nasty, derisive comments every time I write something. There are thousands of people who read and appreciate what I write here and on Huffington--whether they agree with me or not--and my priorities are not with the few kooks who insist on hijacking the message board and doing viscious battle with each other every 5 minutes. Those of you who write vile, racist, anti-semetic things--or horribly cruel things about the dead--have no place here. Being able to comment on my blog is a priviledge, not a right. Perhaps I will soon lift the moderating and see what happens. If you all behave yourselves, then fine. But we'll switch right back to comment moderating the second I see the same sort of juvenile nonsense that took over this board before. It's all up to you, not me.”
Then, early Friday morning (after Ostroy apparently had a dream about how cool it would be if he actually took advantage of The Bill of Rights) he posted this message:
“Comment moderation has been lifted. I am hereby trusting my mature, responsible readers to engage in civil debate. But again I warn, a return to the days of hate-fiiled nonsense will bring an instant return to comment moderation. Ball's in your court, gang.”
Then, of course, I posted the somewhat lengthy message seen above in screenshot 3. How interesting it was for me to take a stroll down 'The Ostroy Report posting lane' and find other comments by bloggers that actually did violate Ostroy’s aforementioned posting policy and yet their comments remained. Here are a few examples:
On a story Ostroy wrote on October 31, 2008, an anonymous writer said, “I will not miss Sarah Palin's dumb husband and her stupid kids: Blog, Flap, Bristol-Myers, Dune, Rug, and Blitzen.” Ostroy allowed this comment.
On a story Ostroy wrote on October 22, 2008, a blogger by the name of ‘bacci40’ said about another blogger, “i prayed to god that you get ass cancer and your brains fall out--you are an evil shit.” Ostroy allowed it.
On a story Ostroy wrote on November 7, 2008, a blogger by the name of Melissa said, “Now the freaks are buying up guns because they think Obama's gonna take them away. Sick fucks (can I use the F word?) If not you can replace it with anything that means ignorant, fearful, moron.” Ostroy allowed it.
On just the previous story before the AIG story, Ostroy called Dick Cheney “The Dick”. I found it funny and I laughed, but if Andy was to follow his own standards of decency as he lays out in his posting policy, would he call someone “The Dick”? I would like to think NOT.
The bottom line here is this: I do not violate any rules that Andy Ostroy lays out for his readers to follow. I post hard questions and actual facts that are hard for an Obama supporter to swallow. So, in Ostroy’s panic (in not being able to address my questions and facts) he is forced to the utilize the old, tiresome dodge, deflect and ignore tactic that I have run into so many times with would-be 9/11 debunkers.
Ostroy’s only option is to divert attention away from my post by, well, first of all deleting it, then by saying my comments are “inflammatory” and “antagonistic”. By deleting my comment and then using words like “inflammatory” to describe it, shows that Andy has no respect for his readers since he is intentionally providing them with the kind of editing and spin that would make O’ Reilly proud! His readers wake up the next day and see his comment, saying that my comment was “inflammatory”, yet they are deprived of seeing what I actually said. This is what true frauds are made of folks.
Another diversion tactic is to say that someone’s post is “off topic”. Who cares? As long as the subject of the post is not way off, threatening or completely childish, it shouldn’t matter what the comment says. If Ostroy posted a story about the Iraq war and my post talked about Sean Penn’s performance in Milk, then I could understand the “off-topic” defense. But to say someone is off-topic when they post facts about something that should be headlines on every newspaper in the country is downright disingenuous.
It’s the equivalent of me posting a story on my blog about gas prices and then the next morning we have a terrorist attack and the blogger makes a comment about the attack and I say, “Stay on topic or you’ll be banned, pal.” How ridiculous that would be, but that’s exactly what Ostroy does on his blog. For that reason, he is well on his way to being a 2009 Fraud of the Year nominee!
Ostroy has deleted the comment I posted in screen shot #3 above:
(click to enlarge)
This just shows you how afraid the left-wing is of cold hard facts. They love dishing it out when they are condemning others, but I have clearly showed that they go to great lengths to avoid answering the tough questions when it comes to members of their own party. I have proven that Andy Ostroy is a complete FRAUD.
I posted this comment this morning at 9:29 A.M.
(click to enlarge)
Stay tuned for the deletion!
Like clockwork, it was deleted, but the deletion did not come without a threat from Ostroy. He threatened to report me to Blogger.com depsite the fact that I have not violated one of Blogger's rules. Here was my post to Ostroy:
(click to enlarge)
Blogger.com's rules state:
"Here are some examples of content we will not remove unless provided with a court order:
Personal attacks or alleged defamation
Parody or satire of individuals
Distasteful imagery or language
Political or social commentary
This is what Blogger.com will ban people for:
PORNOGRAPHY AND OBSCENITY (I have not done this)
HATEFUL CONTENT: Users may not publish material that promotes hate toward groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity. (I have not done this)
VIOLENT CONTENT: Users may not publish direct threats of violence against any person or group of people. (I have not done this)
COPYRIGHT (I have not done this)
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION (I have not done this)
IMPERSONATION (I have not done this)
UNLAWFUL USE OF SERVICES (I have not done this)
SPAM, MALICIOUS CODES AND VIRUSES (I have not done this)
There you have it. When the left-wing are faced with hard facts and questions, it's not enough that they just ignore you and censor you, they also threaten you even when you have not done one thing they accused you of.
Friday, March 20, 2009
March 19, 2009
Appearing on the Alex Jones Show today, founder-pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church and presidential nominee of the Constitution Party for the 2008 U.S. Presidential election, Chuck Baldwin, talked about the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report designating Baldwin, Ron Paul, Bob Barr supporters and Libertarians as terrorists.
Infowars broke the story on March 11 after Alex Jones received the MIAC document from an anonymous source in the Missouri police.
"The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as ‘militia’ influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties," Kurt Nimmo wrote for Infowars.
On March 13, Paul Joseph Watson, Kurt Nimmo and Alex Jones expanded coverage of the MIAC report.
Mr. Baldwin asserted his strong opposition to the document and Missouri police efforts to characterize mainstream political parties and their supporters as domestic terrorists. The MIAC report specifically links these supporters to "militia" influenced terrorists. "Police are educated in the document that people are are anti-abortion, own gold, display an assortment of U.S. flags, or even those that talk about the film Zeitgeist, view the police as their ‘enemy’ and conflates them with domestic terrorists like Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph and other domestic militia groups who have been charged with plotting terrorist attacks," Infowars and Prison Planet reported.
In addition, Baldwin said he collaborated with Ron Paul and Bob Barr on a letter that will be sent to Missouri officials protesting the MIAC report. Mr. Baldwin indicated that if the letter does not result in a repudiation of the MIAC report and its absurd allegations, he and fellow letter signatories will consider legal action.
Chuck Baldwin will send a copy of the letter to Alex Jones. Infowars will post the letter.
Here is Chuck Baldwin interviewed by Alex Jones (March 19, 2009)
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Legislation intensifies fears about Obama’s civilian national security force
Paul Joseph Watson
March 19, 2009
The House passed a bill yesterday which includes disturbing language indicating young people will be forced to undertake mandatory national service programs as fears about President Barack Obama’s promised "civilian national security force" intensify.
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act, was passed yesterday by a 321-105 margin and now goes to the Senate.
Under section 6104 of the bill, entitled "Duties," in subsection B6, the legislation states that a commission will be set up to investigate, "Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."
Section 120 of the bill also discusses the "Youth Engagement Zone Program" and states that "service learning" will be "a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency."
"The legislation, slated to cost $6 billion over five years, would create 175,000 "new service opportunities" under AmeriCorps, bringing the number of participants in the national volunteer program to 250,000. It would also create additional "corps" to expand the reach of volunteerism into new sectors, including a Clean Energy Corps, Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps and Veterans Service Corps, and it expands the National Civilian Community Corps to focus on additional areas like disaster relief and energy conservation," reports Fox News.
The Senate is also considering a similar piece of legislation known as the "Serve America Act," which also includes language about "Youth Engagement Zones".
Fears about Obama’s plans to create involuntary servitude were first stoked in July 2008, when Obama told a rally in Colorado Springs, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded."
Despite denials that Obama plans to institute a mandatory program of national service, his original change.gov website stated that Americans would be "required" to complete "50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year". The text was only later changed to state that Americans would be "encouraged" to undertake such programs.
In addition, Obama’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, publicly stated his intention to help create "universal civil defense training" in 2006.
"The bill’s opponents — and there are only a few in Congress — say it could cram ideology down the throats of young "volunteers," many of whom could be forced into service since the bill creates a "Congressional Commission on Civic Service," reports Fox.
"We contribute our time and money under no government coercion on a scale the rest of the world doesn’t emulate and probably can’t imagine," said Luke Sheahan, contributing editor for the Family Security Foundation. "The idea that government should order its people to perform acts of charity is contrary to the idea of charity and it removes the responsibility for charity from the people to the government, destroying private initiative."
Lee Cary of the conservative American Thinker warns that Obama’s agenda is to, "tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda."
CFR luminary Gary Hart hit back at critics, claiming in a Huffington Post piece that, "Resistance to expanded public service programs can be expected from the ideologically sclerotic, those who occupy the negative ground between government as the problem and government as our enemy."
The frightening prospect of Obama’s mandatory government servitude is covered in-depth in Alex Jones’ new documentary blockbuster, The Obama Deception. Subscribe to prison planet.tv now to watch the film in high-quality, watch it for free here or buy the DVD, make copies and spread the word.
Here are the traitors that voted for this bill
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
UCLA professor conflates Judaism and political doctrine of Zionism in an attempt to argue criticism of Israel is racist
Paul Joseph Watson
March 17, 2009
A prominent L.A. Times editorial confuses the political movement of Zionism with semites as a race in an attempt to argue that anti-Zionism is worse than anti-Semitism and should be treated as a hate crime.
The op-ed, written by Judea Pearl, the father of murdered journalist Daniel Pearl, asks in its headline, Is anti-Zionism Hate? The question is answered by the sub headline, "Yes. It is more dangerous than anti-Semitism, threatening lives and peace in the Middle East."
Pearl is a professor at UCLA and the president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, which includes amongst its honorary members Bill Clinton, the Queen of Jordan and writer Eliezer Wiesel, who has attracted controversy for his support of Jewish terrorist group Irgun and his indifference to historical massacres of Palestinians.
Noam Chomsky criticized Wiesel for once stating, "I support Israel—period. I identify with Israel—period. I never attack, never criticize Israel when I am not in Israel."
The L.A. Times article essentially tries to argue that everyone, particularly academia, should adhere to Wiesel’s mantra and refrain from criticizing the government of Israel and its policies. It does so by deliberately and underhandedly conflating Jews, Israel and Zionism into one single entity.
Pearl states that criticism of Zionism is "discriminatory," "immoral," and "dangerous," because it "rejects the very notion that Jews are a nation — a collective bonded by a common history — and, accordingly, denies Jews the right to self-determination in their historical birthplace."
Jews are a nation? That’s news to me - last time I checked Judaism was not a race or a nation, it was a religion.
Very early in the article, Jews, Zionism and Israel have lost all definition and are conflated as one and the same.
"Anti-Semitism rejects Jews as equal members of the human race; anti-Zionism rejects Israel as an equal member in the family of nations," writes Pearl, further conflating Zionism with some kind of biblical legacy by claiming that, "Jews are a nation first and religion second….the unshaken conviction in their eventual repatriation to the birthplace of their history has been the engine behind Jewish endurance and hopes throughout their turbulent journey that started with the Roman expulsion in AD 70."
Again, Pearl’s agenda is to veil Zionism with the camouflage of Judaism and the country of Israel. Zionism is not a country and it does not have a biblical history to ally it with Judaism as Pearl attempts to argue. According to the dictionary definition, Zionism is a "movement of world Jewry that arose late in the 19th century with the aim of creating a Jewish state in Palestine." It has no connection whatsoever with "the birthplace of their history" or "the Roman expulsion in AD 70″ as Pearl claims.
Additionally, labeling Jews as a race is completely asinine. One can make the case that semites are a race, but even in this case such a definition would include "any of various ancient and modern people originating in southwestern Asia," according to Wikipedia.
In attempting to make the case that Zionism wholly represents Jews as a race of people and Israel as a country, Pearl tries to scoff at and downplay the massive number of Jews who oppose the Zionist political doctrine.
Groups such as Jews Not Zionists, True Torah Jews Against Zionism, and Neturei Karta - Orthodox Jews United Against Zionism, represent a significant number of Jews who make the case that "The ideology of Zionism is in total opposition to the teachings of traditional Judaism".
"There are in fact many Jewish movements, groups and organizations whose ideology regarding Zionism and the so-called "State of Israel" is that of the unadulterated Torah position that any form of Zionism is heresy and that the existence of the so-called "State of Israel" is illegitimate," according to the JewsNotZionists organization.
As we have vehemently argued, Zionists are attempting to equate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism as a means of silencing opposition to their brutal political agenda. This has nothing to do with protecting Jewish people against racism and everything to do with shutting down criticism of the Israeli government and its warmongering policies which, with the support of the U.S. elite, have made life a living hell for both Jews and Muslims in the Middle East for centuries.
by Larry Simons
March 17, 2009
Liberal left-wing blogger and Obama supporter, Andy Ostroy, is not new to the comment moderation censorship game that many of his left-wing buddies (Crooks and Liars, Dave Neiwert) are involved in, but Ostroy has outdone the others. By censoring comments and then lying that he ever did and then continuing to censor even after he has lied about not censoring puts him in a class all by himself!
This is not the first time I have run into freedom of speech haters from the left-wing. Back in November, the liberal site Crooks and Liars completely blocked me from even accessing their site just for not bowing down to their newly elected puppet, Barack Obama.
I went to Ostroy's blog, The Ostroy Report, yesterday and posted a comment on one of his stories about why AIG is paying bonuses to its executives after they have received government bailout money. Keep in mind, before you read our following exchange in posts, that I have previously posted on Ostroy’s blog numerous times (since Obama appointed Rahm Emanuel as his Chief of Staff) that Emanuel’s father, Benjamin, was a member of the terrorist militant group Irgun in the late 40’s (only to never ever have any comment I posted about Benjamin Emanuel approved).
This was my post to Ostroy’s AIG story and his reply:
Larry: "The answer is EASY Andy----government should TAKE BACK the money---I should say OUR money. But Obama wont do that now, will he? Know WHY????? Because Obama was put into power by the EXACT SAME corporate elitists that he now supports! Hey Andy, did you see that filmmaker Alex Jones has a new movie out today call The Obama Deception? Why dont you watch it? Of course you wont watch it---you wont even post my comment!"
Andy: "Larry, you must stop ending every post with "you won't even post my comment!" I'm sure it's fun to bask in your persecution complex, but if you haven’t noticed, I have no problem posting your comments--whether I agree with them or not--so long as they are not filled with nastiness and ad hominen attacks. So, it's all up to you, brother. Just simply obey the rules of decency and civility like the others who post here regularly, and you'll be fine....with no need to continue with your standard ending."
This was my response:
Larry: "OK, first let me address Andy. Andy, you are 100% wrong. I have posted many MANY comments on here that did not attack, name call, or use ANY ad hominem attack--I broke NO rule of posting and you simply did not post it. In fact, EVERY SINGLE comment where I have mentioned why you NEVER do a story on the FACT (not theory) but FACT that Rahm Emanuel's father, Benjamin, was a Zionist terrorist as a member of the militant group Irgun in the late 40's---and he's STILL ALIVE and living in Chicago. You have NEVER EVER posted even ONE comment where I have mentioned this. Hmmm, do I smell the word "liar"?? If you post THIS comment Andy, it will be the FIRST time EVER you've posted a comment where I have mentioned Irgun terrorist and father of Rahm Emanuel, Benjamin Emanuel. Notice, not ONE ad hominem attack. "Liar" is not an ad hominem attack since you actually DID lie."
Upon awaking the same morning (hours later) I went to Ostroy’s site and found that he did not post my comment. I know this for a fact because he allowed another comment that was posted 7 hours after I posted mine (at 11:12am). Here was my response:
Larry: “...and AGAIN you do not post my comment mentioning Benjamin Emanuel when I did not violate ONE rule of your posting policy. Hmmmmm. I know this for a FACT because I posted my comment roughly around 4am this morning (March 16) and you have allowed another person's comment on your blog since then (above at 11:12am, March 16) and where is MY comment, nowhere to be found. I LOVE how I have PROVEN that you cannot stand facts Andy. You just cannot and WILL NOT post anything about Benjamin Emanuel, will you? Hmmm, why IS that Andy? I think we all KNOW why. Calling you a FRAUD is an ad hominem attack when I have PROVEN you are one?? That's funny!”
I went on his site again (around 1:30am, March 17) after he posted a new story about Dick Cheney only to see the same 7 comments under the AIG story, further solidifying the fact that he really did exclude my comment because this made it the second time now there was evidence he visited his site. So, I posted another comment:
Larry: “lol----you said "...I have no problme posting your comments--whether I agree with them or not--so long as they are not filled with nastiness and ad hominen attacks."---you might as well have added, "and as long as they dont mention Zionist terrorist Benjamin Emanuel"---this is probably the 8th post Ive sent since the terrorist's son Rahm was appointed Chief of Staff---and you have posted NONE of them and every single post had ZERO ad hominem attacks or nastiness. So, tell me Andy, why dont you post ANY comment I send that has the words "terrorist" and "Ben Emanuel" in them? Just curious.”
He wondered why I had the nerve to utter the words, “you won't even post my comment!", when in fact he has not posted any of my comments about Benjamin Emanuel. Move over David H. Willis and Billo, we have a up-and-coming Fraud of the Year candidate in our midst!
Sunday, March 15, 2009
by Larry Simons
March 15, 2009
Watch as Congressman Ron Paul destroys actor Stephen Baldwin over the issue of legalizing marijuana. Ron Paul supports legalization and Baldwin opposes it. What I personally found interesting in this debate was Baldwin's usage of the terms "faith-based" and "conservative" as if to make the point that if you support legalization of marijuana, then you do not have faith in God, nor are you conservative...as if to say it's only those evil liberals who support this. In reality, Ron Paul is a Christian and a true conservative and Republican, unlike the total phony "conservatives" (McCain, Romney, Giuliani) that Ron Paul ran against in the election.
Baldwin's attempt at false word associations probably fooled the average religious stooge, but of course, it did not fool me. It was a victory for Ron Paul hands down. All of Baldwins arguments and points were completely obliterated by Ron Paul, including the stupid point brought up by Baldwin that marijuana is addictive and a "gateway" drug and then says, "If we legalized marijuana, there's no question that the number of deaths related to people being impaired under the influence of marijuana is going to increase." But yet fails to mention the fact that alcohol is addictive and the number of alcohol-related deaths each year is about 100,000. In fact, here's the breakdown:
5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.
The number of marijuana-related deaths per year is..are you ready?....literally ZERO (at least, no evidence of it). But, you you don't see any laws saying alcohol is illegal, do you? Sure, you have to be a certain age, but it's still LEGAL despite the staggering amount of casualties it produces. Marijuana is illegal, despite there being not one shread of evidence that it led to even ONE death.
watch the Ron Paul smackdown
Naturally, the typical moron will say, "So, you're a pothead huh? You big drug addict!" In reality, I have never done a drug in my life. I just agree with Congressman Paul that the government should stay the HELL out of my personal freedom of choice, especially when there's no evidence that marijuana harms or has harmed anyone!
The ironic thing about Stephen Baldwin is, he's the one who looks stoned!
Vice-President had his own military hit squad that carried out executions abroad
Paul Joseph Watson
March 12, 2009
Award-winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh dropped another bombshell this week when he revealed that former Vice-President Dick Cheney had his own SS-style political assassination unit that reported directly to him.
Hersh told a University of Minnesota audience on Tuesday, “After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet.”
Hersh then went on to describe how the Joint Special Operations Command was an executive assassination unit that carried out political`assassinations abroad. . “It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently,” he explained. “They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. … Congress has no oversight of it.”
The revelation that Cheney had his own private assassination unit is not too far removed from Hitler’s notorious SA (Sturmabteilung), the much feared para-military wing of the Nazi party who were used to beat, torture and kill political opponents of the Nazi party in 1930’s Germany and the Waffen SS, who were later used in the war to carry out executions and war crimes.
The SA were later targeted by Hitler during the Night of the Long Knives, a brutal purge to eliminate political adversaries both inside and outside of the Nazi party. Hundreds of people were executed in cold blood by the Gestapo and the SS.
Tellingly, German courts and cabinet quickly swept aside centuries of legal prohibition against extra-judicial killings to demonstrate their loyalty to Hitler. The Waffen SS was deemed beyond prosecution despite it blatantly being involved in egregious and ongoing war crimes, as well as domestic assassinations.
The Joint Special Operations Command, Cheney’s assassination unit, is also described as an area of ‘extra-legal’ operations.
“It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on,” Hersh stated. “Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us.”
And it’s still going on. None of Obama’s reversals of Bush executive orders say anything about abolishing the Joint Special Operations Command. Indeed, the specialist unit is an integral part of Obama’s vastly expanded bombing raids and other incursions in Pakistan.
John Dean: Cheney is guilty of ‘murder’ if Hersh claims are true
David Edwards and Rachel Oswald
March 14, 2009
Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh’s bombshell earlier this week that Vice President Dick Cheney controlled an “executive assassination ring” continues to reverberate throughout Washington, with Nixon aide John Dean going so far as to accuse the former VP of murder if the charges are true.
MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann visited the issue on his show Countdown Thursday night where he discussed the legal implications of Hersh’s allegations with Dean, who was White House legal counsel under President Richard Nixon.
“It’s potentially a war crime,” Dean said of the reported assassination ring. “It’s potentially just outright murder and it’s clearly in violation of the Ford Executive Order.”
Hersh told the students at the University of Minnesota on Tuesday that the assassination squad was “a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently. In the Bush-Cheney Days, they reported directly to the Cheney, Cheney office. They do not report to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or to Mr. Gates, the secretary of defense. They report directly to him. Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring, essentially.”
“If this is true you have to prosecute this. There is no way around this,” said Olbermann, noting the 1976 executive order of President Gerald Ford which explicitly outlawed the engagement of political employees in political assassination. Cheney was Ford’s chief of staff at the time the order was issued.
“By the time Cheney was back in the West Wing it appears that Cheney had forgotten his own boss’s executive order, or worse, he had decided to ignore it,” Olbermann said.
Dean told Olbermann that “the President’s the only one you can argue who may have the authority to engage in assassinations.
Newsweek editor Howard Fineman shared with Olbermann his own investigation into the veracity of Hersh’s claims. Fineman said his talks Thursday with sources in the intelligence community had revealed that while they are skeptical of the existence of any assassination ring, they had too much respect in Hersh’s reporting to dismiss the allegations outright and that they warranted further study.
However, not everyone is buying the claims made by Hersh. The Weekly Standard’s Bill Roggio writes, “Hersh has made a living of making fantastic claims that don’t quite live up to the hype. Chalk this one up as another Hersh fantasy.”
Claims by the CIA that the Hersh allegations were “utter nonsense,” are not surprising, said Fineman.
“If there is in fact such a thing… and the CIA was kept in the dark about it, the last thing they would want to do right now is to admit it,” Fineman said.
Fineman said he has been told by aides to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who has proposed forming an independent ‘Truth Commission’ to investigate abuses of the Bush administration, that not many members of the Senate have signed on to the proposal as of yet.
However, the new allegations by Hersh may be shocking enough to push more senators over to Leahy’s side, Fineman said.
“This could be that thing, depending on how much it pans out,” Fineman said. “One more really serious allegation…I think you’re going to see a lot of senators wanting to join Sen. Leahy’s side on this.”
This video is from MSNBC’s Countdown, broadcast Mar. 12, 2009.