Okay. Are you sitting down? Good. If you are drinking something, put it down. Alright. Here it is: Justice Dept. Proposes Lying, Hiding Existence Of Records Under New FOIA Rule.

Yes, you read that right. Can you believe that? They want to change FOIA so they can LIE to the American public. These people make me use colorful language, the jackwagons.

Here are the particulars:

A proposed revision to Freedom of Information Act rules would allow federal agencies to lie to citizens and reporters seeking certain records, telling them the records don’t exist.

The Justice Department has proposed the change as part of a large revision of FOIA rules for federal agencies. Specifically, the rule would direct government agencies who are denying a request under an established FOIA exemption to “respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist,” rather than citing the relevant exemption.

The proposed rule has alarmed government transparency advocates across the political spectrum, who’ve called it “Orwellian” and say it will “twist” public access to government.

In a public comment regarding the rule change, the ACLU, along with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and OpenTheGovernment.org, said the move “will dramatically undermine government integrity by allowing a law designed to provide public access to government information to be twisted to permit federal law enforcement agencies to actively lie to the American people.”

Well, gee, you think? This is just beyond imagination. Obama’s Administration is FAR from being the transparent one he promised during the 2008 Campaign, not even close, as the article makes clear:

The news is “not surprising, coming from the Obama administration,” said Christopher J. Farrell, director of investigations and research at Judicial Watch.

“The Obama administration is already doing it right now by actively misleading the public concerning White House visitor logs,” Farrell said. “Every day, the Obama administration misrepresents and conceals the true, complete record of who is going in and out of the White House — all the while proclaiming themselves champions of transparency. It’s truly Orwellian. The proposed rule change should be rejected.”

Well, hell yes, it should be rejected. It is obscene that the DOJ would even SUGGEST such a thing, but not surprising given their MO since Obama took office and appointed Eric Holder in charge.

It is especially egregious in light of the claims Obama made about this very act:

Upon taking office, President Obama released a memorandum declaring his administration was “committed to operating with an unprecedented level of openness. Specifically, he pledged to bolster the strength of the FOIA act, calling it “the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open government.” (Click here to read the rest.)

Well, there is only one thing to say here – Barack Obama is a liar. A big, huge liar, as he has demonstrated time after time. When even the Huffington Post has to acknowledge that this Administration is far from transparent, you know it is bad.

You know, whenever I see something like this, or Obama’s recent tripping around the country pronouncing loudly for all to hear that he has no intention of following the US Constitution, and that Congress is superfluous, or shoving Obamacare down our throats, or giving half a billion to a company in Finland to make “green cars that only get 10mpg, and cost $90,000 a PIECE, or Solyndra, or calling Tea Party people (or anyone who opposes his policies) racist, or any NUMBER of things, it really, really pisses me off. It pisses me off at all of those people who threw good judgment out the window and voted for a slogan rather than a qualified candidate, who threatened people who did not support Obama, who engaged in voter and caucus fraud, who stole votes from Hillary, and on and on and on it goes, to put this man into the White House. The damage he and his Administration are doing to this nation expands daily.

So, thanks, all you boneheads who voted for this man, who gave him the most important job in the world on the thinnest of resumes (when you would NEVER hire someone for your own company or school on such flimsy records), who bought into his race-baiting, and engaged in rampant misogyny to support him. Thanks a whole lot for nothing.

Now, what the hell are you going to do to make this right?

Anyway, my aunt sent me the following “Attack Watch” entries, and I just have to share them with you for my last post for a while. They had me cracking up:

“My neighbor removed his Obama bumper sticker. I think he’s a racist.”

“Bless me #AttackWatch for I have sinned. I have muttered naughty words about our Dear Leader 9 times & have doubted his divinity a few times.”

“Ate refried beans & chips for breakfast which is sort of racist foodist – Carbon emissions to follow.”

“#AttackWatch have you cried “uncle” yet? Because we can keep this up all f***in’ day.”

“I saw a kid eating fries with his happy meal yesterday.”

“I did see the price of arugula at the supermarket today.”

“I just parked my private jet in a handicap space, left it running & bought lemonade from little girls in yard w/o a permit!”

“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean a big majority of us isn’t out to get you…”

“Hey #attackwatch I heard the TSA was coming out with a similar website, it’s called AttackCrotch.”

“Rush Limbaugh said he’s reporting himself… so others don’t have to!”

“What a Twit we have as President.”

Ahahahaha. Funny, right? The TSA one is surely accurately named. I hope none of y’all have had to endure one of their pat downs, but I can tell you, just having gone through it again on Sunday, the Attack Watch entry is spot on. Wow. Don’t you feel safer? Ahem.

Here’s a “Top Ten” list of funny Attack Watch tweets:

10) @ScottSwett1 #AttackWatch: I, for one, am honored to be recruited as an informer by our new insect overlords.

9) @iowahawkblog: I’m grateful to live in a country where the totalitarians are so hilariously inept. #AttackWatch

@justkarl: .@Doc_0 #AttackWatch already has a bat-signal, but it’s solar, so it doesn’t work at night.

7) @secupp Watch out, monthly jobless report. @AttackWatch is onto you. #attackwatch

6) @freeulysses Hey #attackwatch my boss just said the purpose of a business is to make a profit for it’s shareholders. Can I like, citizens arrest?

5) @RachelWard301 @attackwatch I sneezed & some guy I don’t know said “God bless you”. I want him arrested for forcing his religion on me. #attackwatch

4) @madisonmom4 #attackwatch I have to turn my husband in, he told my son there’s only 50 states. What a commie

3) @CalebHowe Extra points if you turn in your parents. MT @AttackWatch See a new attack on the President or his record? Use #attackwatch to report it.

2) @johnhawkinsrwn Bush wanted people to say something if they suspected terrorism. Obama wants you to alert #AttackWatch if you think someone doesn’t like him

1) @mkhammer I prince of Nigeria. Please to unleash many riches I send you. Simple help by report @michellemalkin to #AttackWatch. Also, ur credit card.

Ohmygosh, those are hilarious! Feel free to add your own or anything else about which you want to talk.

Friends, this is it for me for a while. My surgery is Thursday (9/22), and I will be away from my computer for a bit. My partner will let y’all know how the surgery went, and what they found while they were in there. Thank you so much for all of the support, the love, and the prayers. It means a lot to me. I’ll miss our conversations, but I look forward to getting back here soon. Until then, take care, hang in there, and keep laughing – it helps to deal with the craziness in the world. Here’s a little tune until next time:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Amen to that. Blessings, friends.

And it is pissing me off. Seriously. I don’t know if it is the off-the-chart pain levels I am enduring, or what, but it is pissing me off that – all of a sudden – the people who were in a position to make clear how inept Obama was, is, and would be, failed to convey that message adequately. No, not Cheney – I mean the media and Democratic political pundits who should have known, and most likely did know, better, but went-along-to-get-along so they could keep blathering on CNN, MSNBC, or whatever channel would have them. They rode this wave of a created back story of who Obama was, one that did not match the REALITY of who he was, by his handlers and string pullers rather than DOING THEIR JOBS, and now, NOW, they are coming out saying, “oh, yeah – Hillary would have been SO much better” after calling her, her husband, and her supporters a bunch of racist gun and Bible toters who could barely get dressed in the morning. All I can say is, BITE ME.

Ahem. Sorry. I have no patience or tolerance for this crap right now. Clinton would have been the best, they knew it then, but sexism trumps all any day of the week, and they sure as hell were not going to support any old (!) woman over a biracial freshman senator. Nosirree bob. Even as I write that one sentence – a freshman senator beating out a woman who had a vastly superior resume was treated like crap by these people in her own party AND in the media. And now they come crying saying it should have been her? Please. They CHOSE him over her. (Photo credit: blackagendareport.com)

It is not like the information wasn’t out there for all the world to see. They chose to ignore it, they chose to cover it up (thank you, JournoListers and the LA Times to name just two more), they failed to vet, they failed to fact check, they failed to keep their emotions in check, they failed, failed, failed at their jobs, and now we are all paying the price. For instance, the NY Times, and other outlets, repeatedly have pushed the meme that Obama is even keeled, even tempered, and unshakeable. It is a pile of horse manure. They have just ignored his snippyness, arrogance, and short fuse because it did not fit the image they – the media – were crafting for him (no doubt at the insistance of the Davids, Plouffe and Axelrod).

The truth was out there, though. Consider the opening paragraphs of this story from a reporter who liked Obama, but was professional enough to be honest about him in his extensive piece, “Barack Obama And Me“:

It’s not quite eight in the morning and Barack Obama is on the phone screaming at me. He liked the story I wrote about him a couple weeks ago, but not this garbage.

Months earlier, a reporter friend told me she overheard Obama call me an asshole at a political fund-raiser. Now here he is blasting me from hundreds of miles away for a story that just went online but hasn’t yet hit local newsstands.

It’s the first time I ever heard him yell, and I’m trembling as I set down the phone. I sit frozen at my desk for several minutes, stunned.

This is an extensive, in-depth piece, which goes into Emil Jones, Obama’s “kingmaker,” and so, so much more. But one other piece I cannot resist putting in since I have mentioned is his fake Southern accent (grrrrr):

My view of Obama then wasn’t all that different from the image he projects now. He was smart, confident, charismatic and liberal. One thing I can say is, I never heard him launch into the preacher-man voice he now employs during speeches. He sounded vanilla, and activists in his mostly black district often chided him for it.

My point, and as Ellen Degeneres would say, I do have one, is that the information was there, from this author, to John Kass, Lynn Sweet, and others in the Chicago area, but the MSM refused to upset the apple cart, supporting the myth of Obama, not the fact of Obama. All I can say is, thanks shitloads for that, you worthless hacks. Look where your complete and utter lack of professionalism got us. Told you I have no patience for this right now.

And for the love of all that is holy, stop pushing Hillary NOW. The time is long past,t he damage done. She is not going to run. She has made that abundantly clear. Party before country, she will not go up against her boss, and even if she did, it is too late. She has already been touting his policies all over the globe. If she now claimed she didn’t support any of them, but hawked them anyway, well, do I really need to finish that thought for you? I didn’t think so.

So, yeah – I have had it with the handwringing, coulda, woulda, shoulda crapola the MSM, and some political pundits, are now peddling. They should have done their homework before the last election instead of crying about it now that the damage is done. They have no one to blame but themselves, and believe you me, they deserve all the blame they get.

Here’s a thought – maybe it isn’t just those in DC who deserve to be liberated from their political positions, but the vast majority of “journalists,” too. I am sure there are a whole bunch of real journalists out there looking for jobs. Wouldn’t that be a refreshing change? Journalists who did the groundwork, did their HOMEwork, and didn’t insert their opinion into their stories? Oh, yes – now THAT is some “change” for which we can “hope.”

Until then, just spare me the current MSM/pundit outrage at what should have been. Clinton was the best choice, bar none, and you backed the wrong horse in that race for the most superficial of reasons. Admit that, acknowledge that, and for heaven’s sake, DO YOUR JOBS already. And stop pissing me off.

How about you?

It’s an open secret that hundreds of Saudi families and nationals were flown out of the States during the days after the attacks. The exodus was organized by Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the U.S., Prince Bandar bin Sulan bin Abdul Aziz, also known as “Bandar Bush” due to his closeness to the Bush family. The ambassador expedited the departures of two families: The Saudi royals and the bin Ladens. But not even the notoriously charming prince could adequately explain why or how 15 out of the 19 hijackers came from a country the U.S. had always claimed as a close ally.

It should, then, be safe to call the Saudi-U.S. relationship a “secret” marriage. Not many Americans know how strong or weak this marriage is, mostly because the Saudis spent billions — and more billions — to spruce up their image or stay hidden from the general public.

The Saudis’ initial attempts at post-9/11 damage control backfired — badly. Exhibit A: Prince Alwaleed bin Talal’s public show of contributing $10 million to New York for disaster relief. Unfortunately for the Kingdom, the prince had the poor judgment to use the opportunity to lecture the U.S. about its foreign policy at the same time. Then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani made it clear that New York had no need for his money.

Realizing that their image needed bolstering, the Saudis did what troubled totalitarian regimes the world over do: They hired a PR firm and a gang of high-powered Washington lobbyists. The PR blitz was a flop.

But this did not stop the Saudis, and now, in an ironic twist, the prince is the second-largest shareholder in Rupert Murdoch’s News Corps, the parent company of Fox News Channel, a notorious source of anti-Muslim rhetoric.

The Kingdom’s ongoing image woes have long been exacerbated by reports of a barbaric judicial system, beheadings, the second class citizen status of women and the complete absence of human rights and religious freedom. The flow of Saudi petrodollars into the coffers of terrorist groups around the world has been reported on, analyzed and criticized for years, to little effect.

It is no secret either that Saudis have also been instrumental in bankrolling and backing discrimination and violence against the Shias, as described by Khaled Ahmed in his book Sectarian War: Pakistan’s Sunni-Shia Violence and Its Links to the Middle East:

According to Barnett Rubin, in 1989, the Afghan mujahideen government-in-exile came into being in Peshawar after the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan. At the behest of Saudi Arabia, the exiled Shia mujahideen of Iran were not included in this government. The Saudis paid over $26 million a week to the 519-member session of the mujahideen shura (council) as a bribe for it. Each member of the shura received $25,000 for the deal which was facilitated, according to Rubin, by the ISI Chief Hamid Gul.

But as the world is watching the developments in the war on terror, the Saudis are out to burnish their image as humanitarians. They know that the someone somewhere might mention the fact that Afghanistan was the training ground and Pakistan was the facilitator, but the majority of the hijackers were the nationals of the Kingdom. Over the last ten years, the situation is Pakistan and Afghanistan has gone from bad to worse, while a major player of this ‘great game’ has kept itself at a distance with its petrodollars.

Given the Saudis’ penchant for funding and exporting extremism and meddling throughout the Muslim world, how would you react if you heard a Saudi prince had bankrolled an expensive research project to create a genetically modified strain of corn that could eliminate world hunger?

The prince does this not for financial gain, but as a gesture of goodwill. The prince also speaks perfect English, appreciates female arm candy and is a target for Islamic extremists at home.

Apparently, the Saudis have found a way to uplift their image.

This prince is a hero, not in a real life of course — but in a Hollywood movie, Unknown. As America prepares to mark the ten year anniversary of 9/11, this pop culture moment is nothing short of extraordinary. The Saudis have achieved a PR coup: Positive product placement. The Kingdom is re-branding.

There’s nothing particularly original about the plot, which consists of a series of predictable spy scenarios — a foreign city, inclement weather, amnesia, car chases, the Cold War, evil multinationals. It’s been done a million times.

But what is totally unexpected is the depiction of a Saudi royal as a generous benefactor, a plot point that is so rare it captures the attention. Even more remarkable is that there have been no debates, no protests, no boycotts, no outrage. The movie came and went without a peep.

Even more intriguing: The film Unknown is based on the novel Out of My Head by Didier van Cauwelaert. There is no benevolent Saudi prince in the original version of the story. So how did this plot twist come about?

Since no one in the press or the world of politics seems to care, it may be a while before we find out.

Mr. Transparency has added yet another position to the White House. That would be the Director of Progressive Media & Online Response. The point of this position? Well, it would seem to smack down any negative story that might arise about Obama. We can’t have THAT, after all.

I am not kidding. This new position will be directed primarily at the online community:

[snip] The post is a new one for this White House. Rapid response has been the purview of the Democratic National Committee (and will continue to be). Lee’s hire, however, suggests that a portion of it will now be handled from within the administration. It also signals that the White House will be adopting a more aggressive engagement in the online world in the months ahead.

Lee has played that role in the past, including writing a semi-infamous White House blog post that said Fox News’ Glenn Beck was lying about the administration on his show. His new gig comes with its own Twitter account, precisely for the purposes of disseminating push back.

An equally telling requirement of Lee’s new job, however, is that of crafting strategy for outreach to the progressive community. Lee has been tasked with that responsibility in his previous incarnations, both as a member of the DNC online team during the ’08 election and as a senior new media adviser with then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).[snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Oh, yes – we cannot have anything negative to say about The One, can we? I mean, really – no one can acknowledge when the Emperor Has No Clothes.

Along those lines, you likely know that Obama is off on another European Vacation, including going to Moneygall, Ireland to meet a very distant relative. (I am pretty sure my Irish connections are far closer than the 8th cousin Obama will be glad-handing, but hey – I would have to pay for my own damn trip to Ireland., so…) While there, he and Michelle went to a pub and tossed back a pint of Guiness:
(May 22, 2011 – Photo by Pool/Getty Images Europe)

Huh – rather a somber look for someone hanging out in a pub, but whatever. Ahem. He did lighten up, but I thought that photo was intriguing…

But get this – the White House INSISTED upon taking its own water to – wait for it – Buckingham Palace. In London. That one. Where the Queen of England lives. Not just that The Emperor would not drink the water there, he wouldn’t even drink THEIR bottled water. Again, I am not making this up – how could I? I never would even DREAM of something like that.

It is LONDON, not East Jesus, Timbuckto, for heaven’s sake. What is WRONG with this man? His people were worried it might upset his tummy, is the explanation for this (new) slight. He can toss back a Guiness, but not accept a bottle of water from the TRUE Royals. Now that takes some chutzpah, doesn’t it?

Well, who knows how much longer bloggers like me will be able to write these kinds of things before the Office Of “Truthiness*” rains down hard making sure everyone still believes the Emperor has clothes? I guess I better get them in while I can, huh?

One last thing – just what kind of bottled water IS it that His Highness requires? I’m just wondering. Is it laced with gold, frankincense, and myrrh? What do you think?

Though the leader of the government, President Asif Ali Zardari has been blamed for everything going wrong in the country and is regarded as a corrupt individual, until now there has been a perceived upside that Pakistan is being led by an elected government and not a military dictatorship.

This illusion of so-called civilian supremacy silently burst like a bubble when the head of the ISI, General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, and the Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Parvez Kiyani were called before the parliament to answer for their incompetence related to the May 2 raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound. The agenda was to inquire about the U.S. attack and why the state security apparatus was unaware of Osama bin Laden’s presence.

But what happened during the closed door meeting revealed once again that the real power in Pakistan still lies with the army and the ISI, not the politicians.

It had been suggested that heads would roll, the foreign aid and the big chunk of national budget that the army receives would be scrutinized. The parliamentarians dropped the ball again and lost another opportunity to exert their authority over other institutions of the state. Once again it became clear who really runs Pakistan.

The last time a civilian government had an opportunity to put the army in its place was in 1971, following the Pakistan army’s defeat in the war that led to the loss of East Pakistan, which became Bangladesh. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan’s then-president and founder of the Pakistan People’s Party, got off to a promising start by placing former dictator General Yahya Khan under house arrest. He re-organized the Pakistan Armed Forces and boosted the military’s morale. But Bhutto also restored their hubris. Years later, his own appointed Army Chief, General Zia ul-Haq, would overthrow Bhutto’s government and send him to the gallows.

During Zia’s 11 year rule, the Russians invaded Afghanistan and withdrew. The army grew so strong that even after Zia’s death in a plane crash, the new chief of the military did not allow the democratically elected Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, to tour the country’s nuclear facility. She was labelled anti-Pakistan and an American agent.

It is ironic to witness that the opposition party, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), which was created with the support of the army to counter the PPP’s popularity, is now asking the tough questions about covert operations and the finances of the military.

By snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, Pakistan’s ruling party, Bhutto’s PPP, is losing its chance to demonstrate leadership and moral authority. They failed to hold the army accountable for the thousands of civilians and security officers killed in the war on terror in Pakistan. They did not press the chief of the generously-funded army to explain how OBL could have lived in a military garrison town for six years.

These are the same parliamentarians who extended General Kiyani’s tenure. The same parliamentarians who extended ISI Chief General Pasha’s tenure. The boastful parliamentarians who had promised to leave no stone unturned roared like lions for the cameras but behaved like lambs behind closed doors.

It was reported that opposition leader Chaudhry Nisar tried to deliver a speech during the question and answer session, only to be snubbed by General Pasha in front of a full house. Pasha claimed that he ‘knew’ why he was being targeted by the opposition leader, alleging that Nisar had asked him for a personal favor, which he, as DG ISI, refused to extend. An embarrassed Chaudhry Nisar was said to have been taken aback as Pasha continued with his ‘counter-attack’.

Then the tail furiously wagged the dog. General Pasha reportedly offered to resign. Rather than demanding that the ISI chief step down immediately, apparently the parliamentarians did not accept his resignation.

The state run television channel could have returned to its heyday of running prime time programming that kept the country glued to their sets by recording that “closed door” meeting to broadcast later as a drama — or farce.

Some idealistic Pakistanis hoped that the U.S. would finally question the secretly played “double game.” After all, the U.S. supported extensions of Kiyani’s and Pasha’s tenures, claiming that keeping the chiefs in their positions would help to continue the war on terror in an orderly fashion. The U.S. abandoned the people of Pakistan by siding with the army once again, pledging support and failing to attach any strings or conditions to the military aid it provides.

Cowed by Kiyani’s and Pasha’s brazen displays, Pakistan’s parliament passed a resolution that drone attacks should be stopped and that the operations like the one carried out on May 2nd won’t be tolerated in future.

The parliament has an obligation to explain to the public not only how and why Osama bin Laden was living in Abbottabad, but why the Taliban continues to carry out its bloody operations, and why al Qaeda leaders have been given safe haven. The risk of allowing these questions to remain unanswered is that the military will gain more strength over the civilian government.

The parliamentarians who are supposed to represent the people of Pakistan abrogated their responsibility for the sake of staying in office for few more months, while at the same time making it clear who the country’s rulers truly are.

Update below the fold.

I could barely believe my eyes when I saw this headline, “Afghans Angry Over Florida Koran Burning Kill UN Staff.”

This is not a joke. If it were, it would be a sick one, but the reality is much, much worse. Indeed, a mob of over 20,000 people went on a rampage because a copy of the Koran was burned in Florida.

You may recall that there had been a bit of a brouhaha over a church in Gainesville, Florida threatening/promising to burn a Koran to mark the anniversary of 9/11 last year, but they did not. That pesky little fact did not stop this from happening:

[snip] Last year, even though Mr. Jones called off his burning of the Koran, a subsequent wave of protests at NATO facilities in Afghanistan led to at least five deaths. In several of those incidents, Taliban agitators played a role, allegedly spreading rumors that the Koran burning had taken place. However, the Taliban have had little or no presence in Mazar-i-Sharif, one of the most peaceful places in Afghanistan. [snip]

What? Nothing even happened and they killed a bunch of people? Holy crappydoo.

That being said, on March 20th, Rev, Jones and his flock did burn the Koran. Bear in mind, this is a small, way out on the periphery church we are talking about here. Honestly, why do a bunch of Afghans even CARE what this whacko down in Gainesville is doing?

But care they do, and so far, they have killed 7 – SEVEN – UN workers and 5 Afghan as a result. And they weren’t even Americans. Nope:

[snip] The dead included at least seven United Nations workers — four Nepalese guards and three Europeans from Romania, Sweden and Norway — according to United Nations officials in New York. One was a woman. Early reports, later denied by Afghan officials, said that at least two of the dead had been beheaded. Five Afghans were also killed. [snip]

Yes, they went on quite the rampage over this event that happened 11 days ago in a small city in Florida. Holy shit.

(EPA / April 1, 2011)

I’m sorry, but that is just insane. It is just insane. Never mind that it is a bit of a violation of the Big Ten to commit murder, but these people were spurred to action by a sermon in a mosque! I am not kidding you:

[snip] The incident began when thousands of protesters poured out of the Blue Mosque in Mazar-i-Sharif after Friday prayers and attacked the nearby headquarters of the United Nations, according to Lal Mohammad Ahmadzai, spokesman for Gen. Daoud Daoud, the Afghan National Police commander for northern Afghanistan.

After disarming or shooting the United Nations compound’s guards, the crowd surged inside. Mr. Ahmadzai said that eight of the foreign staff workers, whose nationalities were not known immediately, were killed by gunfire, and that two others were captured by the mob and beheaded. Other reports said that the operations center was burned down as well. [snip]

Oh, but wait – it gets better:

[snip]A prominent Afghan cleric, Mullavi Qyamudin Kashaf, acting chief of the Ulema Council of Afghanistan, called for American authorities to arrest and try Mr. Jones as a war criminal.

The Ulema Council recently met to discuss the Koran burning, he said. “We expressed our deep concerns about this act and we were expecting the violence that we are witnessing now,” Mr. Kashaf said. “Unless they try him and give him the highest possible punishment, we will witness violence and protests not only in Afghanistan but in the entire world.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Let me get this straight – these Muslim mobs have murdered over 17 people, including foreign nationals, 5 at the very notion of a Koran being burned, and 12 because one was burned, and they want the MINISTER to be arrested on war crime charges?

That simply defies all logic, common sense, humanity, and religion. That is just insane. Insane. That’s right, I am calling this mob of 20,000 people who attacked guards at the UN because a book was burned insane. I’m sorry, this is not just insane, but crazy, nutso, whacked out, fruit loopy, or any other applicable term. How else to descrivea huge mob went on a rampage at a UN facility over the burning of a book. Yes, it was a religious text, but still – like I said, to kill people over one book being burned is just crazy. Not to mention doing so last year at a NATO facility (about which I had heard nothing) over the RUMOR of a Koran being burned.

I know that this is not the first instance of something like this, fatwas have been called for people from Salmon Rushdie to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, for depictions or even descriptions, of Islam, or Muhammad. And I know that Rev. Jones had been warned about burning the Koran out of fear of repercussions.

But why do we have to kowtow to people who would commit murder over something so relatively minor as burning a holy book? Why do we allow them to dictate to us what we can and cannot do for fear of violence? Isn’t that an extreme form of bullying? Why do we allow it?

Instead of expecting everyone else to walk around on eggshells lest we set them off, how about we expect THEM to not fly off into a murderous rage at the least perceived slight? Why don’t we tell THEM it is unacceptable for them to KILL someone over a cartoon? Or a book? Good grief, if all religious groups reacted the same way, we would be in for a world of hurt. Can you imagine if Christians flew off into a murderous rage every time there was a piece of artwork that depicted Jesus in less than a positive light? Good grief, it would be a whole different world, that’s for sure.

Why are we allowing these radical religious extremists to dictate to us what we can and cannot do? Why are we not demanding that they stop acting so violently or else THEY will face consequences? When we constantly pander to the lowest common denominator, it brings us all down.

Whether one agrees with what Jones did or not, the response in Afghanistan is just crazy. Murdering people over a burned book is insane.

That’s what I think, anyway. What do you think?

*Update: Sunday morning, and the protests over the burning of one Koran continue to rage. More people have lost their lives as a result of the crowds being whipped up. Here is more:

[snip] The Taliban said in a statement emailed to media outlets that the US and other Western countries have wrongly excused the burning a Koran by the pastor of a Florida church on March 20 as freedom of speech and that Afghans “cannot accept this un-Islamic act.”

Nato officials re-iterated their condemnation of the Koran burning in an apparent attempt to quell the rising anger.

“We condemn, in particular, the action of an individual in the United States who recently burned the Holy Koran,” said the statement issued by military commander Gen. David Petraeus and the top Nato civilian representative in Afghanistan, Mark Sedwill.

“We further hope the Afghan people understand that the actions of a small number of individuals, who have been extremely disrespectful to the Holy Koran, are not representative of any of the countries of the international community who are in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people,” the statement said.

On Saturday, US President Barack Obama extended his condolences to the families of those killed by the protesters and said desecration of the Koran “is an act of extreme intolerance and bigotry.” But he said that does not justify attacking and killing innocent people, calling it “outrageous and an affront to human decency and dignity.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Frankly, I don’t cotton to being lectured by the TALIBAN. Nor do I appreciate that NATO and General Petraeus are not putting the blame where it belongs – those who are engaging in these murderous rampages. For THREE freaking days now, they have been raging. That is an extreme, absurd, deluded response by the Afghan people, and to try and appease them in any way, shape, or form, after they are committing these kinds of atrocities is immoral, and reprehensible. We cannot, CANNOT, allow these radical extremists to dictate what we are able to do here in the United States of America. WE CANNOT.

This is so insidious, this twisting of blame and responsibility, the bending over backward to not offend those who hate us. Whether or not the minister should have burned the Koran may be debated, but HE did not kill anyone. These people did. And they alone bear responsibility for their heinous actions and attacks. No one MADE them kill someone.

UPDATE 2: A new report claims Pakistan fanned the flames of anger over the trial and burning of the Koran by Rev. Jones. Apparently, the media wasn’t really covering what he was doing, but a little news brief was picked up by Agence France Presse, thus beginning Pakistan’s pushing this to international heights. Rev. Jones has been tried by a Sharia Court, found guilty of blasphemy, the punishment of which is death.

Here are some of the highlights of how Pakistan pushed this:

[snip] On the evening of March 20, the “trial” went ahead with Jones presiding. It ended with another pastor setting alight a kerosene-soaked copy of the Qur’an.

A brief Agence France Presse (AFP) report said that although the event was open to the public fewer than 30 people attended. A subsequent local media report said the only journalists who turned up on the day were an AFP stringer, several students and an unassigned photographer. A video clip was posted online, however.

The following day, the Organization of the Islamic Conference – the bloc of 56 Muslim-majority nations – issued a statement warning about “unforeseen and volatile consequences of such outrageous and irresponsible acts that could hurt the deep seated religious sentiments of over 1.5 billion Muslims around the world.” Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva drew its attention to the Gainesville incident.

On March 22, Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, in a speech to the federal parliament, condemned the incident “in the strongest possible words,” and Pakistan’s foreign ministry called the burning a “despicable act.”

Dozens of reports on the Qur’an burning appeared in Pakistani media outlets on March 22-23, but the story received negligible coverage elsewhere in the Islamic world. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

There is much more to this, but it seems apparent that this incident was blown into international proportions by Pakistan, then onto even less stable countries like Iran and Afghanistan. And now, over 20 people have lost their lives. That is just appalling, and our leaders need to stop kowtowing over this, IMHO, that is.

(Or the more offensive, homophobic term for Tea Partiers.) Crosshairs! Targets!

The list could go on of the labels attached to groups of people or concepts by the media when they want to discount, demean, belittle, discourage discussion, demonize a group, or frame the issue how they want it to be, rather than how it is.

We saw this just recently with pundits rushing to frame the Tucson shootings as ratcheted up Republican rhetoric – falsely, as the facts later showed – from big time sources like the NY Times (Paul Krugman), Huffington Post (Arianna herself), DailyKos, and on and on. The shooting of Rep. Giffords and the other 18 victims was immediately put in the context of Republican political rhetoric being to blame for the actions of the shooter within a few hours of the event. Now, even though this meme has been proven wrong, pundits continue to say things like, “rightly or wrongly, the issue of civility is now front and center.” Well, it is WRONGLY, but every time they mention it, they continue to perpetuate this false meme. Civility had nothing to do with it at all, but now, whenever this issue comes up, like Pavlov and his dogs, that is what we think.

This ratchet response, ingrained in us by the media, is coming up again this week in terms of Obama’s birth certificate. A couple of articles have surfaced in which the Governor of Hawaii, Neil Abercrombie, in an attempt to dispel once and for all the allegations that Obama is not a natural born citizen, was unable to find his birth certificate. Oops. Apparently, there is a notation of Obama’s birth, but no long form has surfaced.

Additionally, a former Hawaii elections official, Tim Adams, has sworn, under oath, that neither hospital in Honolulu has a record of Obama’s birth. He doesn’t stop there – he goes on to say he was told there was no long form, and also to stop mucking around in this issue.

I am not getting into whether or not Obama is, or is not, a natural born citizen. That is not the point here. Check your response to what I wrote. Even bringing up this issue, no matter how or what has been discovered, is generally discounted as a crazy conspiracy theory, and that it is CRAZY to even mention it.

And that is because that is what we have been told by the media to think (pant, pant, pany, as Pavlov’s dog would do). The mere mention of Obama’s birth certificate brings derision and scorn upon whomever has the temerity to mention it. For the first time, for as long as I can remember, a presidential candidate was not required to present this document, one routinely required for a number of less important jobs. Yet requesting this one piece of paper has created a maelstrom of gigantic proportions.

We all know that by the mere fact of requesting this document, the requester is crazy. The media told us so. So, there.

Just like they told us Hillary was a cold, heartless Iron Bitch.

Just like they told us Sarah Palin was at the root of the Tucson shootings, or is a crazy “Mama Grizzly,” or that she could see Russia from her house (i.e., she’s stupid, got it? C’mon, only a MO-RON would think something like that. Never mind she never said it. Picky, picky.).

Just like they told us Tea Partiers are a bunch of racist yahoos (someone might want to tell Representatives Tim Scott and Col. Allen West that they are racists for belonging to the Tea Party. Ahem.).

I am sure you get the idea. The media is not reporting the news, they are shaping what they want people to believe. Even now, CNN and MSNBC continue to perpetuate this whole civility/Republican rhetoric meme for the Tucson shootings, regardless of the facts. That is not news – that is propaganda.

We learned of the JournoListers coordinating efforts to advance Obama’s candidacy for president, keeping important stories that might impact his chances out of their respective mediums. That was behind closed doors.

But now, media personalities are getting more blatant about it. Just recently, the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank calls out for a “Palin-Free February.” Yes, he has put a call out to his fellow commentators to not write or talk about Sarah Palin at all in the month of February.

Now, what kind of responsible journalist, or commentator, for that matter, would even consider such an action, except to continue to shape opinion about this figure? In his article (which you can read if you really want to give him the traffic), he makes some other (predictable) snide comments about Sarah Palin. That is the meme, after all – she is to be derided, demeaned, and ridiculed at every step, dontcha know, lest anyone start to take her seriously as a potential candidate. We cannot have THAT, after all. Rather than straight reporting, or basing commentary on, oh, I don’t know, let’s say, FACTS, now we just make shit up as if the person said or did it, then attack him/her for it mercilessly until the person become a mere caricature, and should anyone else still actually like them, they are nothing but a bunch of ignorant gun-totin’ hayseeds who likely don’t have a row to hoe anyway, so who cares what they think? Stupid heads.

And that is where our media is today. They set up these ratchet responses to labels, and dare anyone to stray from their definition or their insistence on who/what those labels represent, tearing down anyone who is foolish enough to disagree. They attack, deride, persecute until the person breaks, then respond with a, “see?? We TOLD you they were x, y, z…” They create the meme, then do everything in their power to make it true.

So, I reckon since I mentioned the whole Obama Birth Certificate thing now, no matter what I did or did not say, I will, forever after, be labeled a Birther. So, what the hell – for good measure, the government carried out 9/11!!! They did! There is no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon! Tea Party members are racist America-haters! Sarah Palin is personally responsible for the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, and should be thrown in jail immediately!!! (Snark, snark, snark – just in case that was not abundantly clear.)

Hey, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em, right? Wrong. We must stop this insanity with our media. When (formerly) great newspapers like the Washington Post and the New York Times become rumor-mongering rags, we are in serious trouble. Legitimate questions deserve legitimate answers, not derision. Serious investigative journalism must be restored to our media outlets, not regurgitating press releases from this or that party. Rather than allowing loud-mouthed pundits to determine the news, how about having some actual journalists (if you can still find them) to report the news, rather than craft the news? We must stop allowing them to silence us if we do not agree with their manufactured outrage and meme.

Just a thought. But hey, I am just a Birther/Truther/Tea Partier/Mama Grizzly Wannabe/Crosshair Target-er. So what do I know?!

What a blessing. This is just the kind of good news that is welcomed as we continue to deal with a struggling economy, political bickering, severe storms across the country, creating all kinds of havoc. Wow.

Here is some of what Rep. Giffords can anticipate while in rehab: [snip]

(Dr. Edwardo) Lopez said that for patients with traumatic brain injuries, or TBIs, there is a basic comprehensive method that almost all rehabilitation centers follow, which is exactly what Giffords and her family can expect in her continuing recovery.

“This phase of inpatient rehab provides the patient stability because the patient still requires day to day nurse care, this is the best time for her to begin a structured program,” he said.

Before Giffords’ current doctors at University Medical Center in Tucson were able to consider moving her into a rehab program, Lopez said there are certain criteria that a patient in her condition must meet, with the most important being medical stability.

“The patient must be able to tolerate at least three hours of daily therapy. There can be breaks and resting periods. The first phase would be to see how her tolerance to upright activity is without any major changes in the cardiovascular system or to vital signs,” he said. “The goal is gradual build up of endurance.”

Once Giffords is transported successfully to TIRR Memorial Hermann and settled into her room, there will be a number of medical professionals she will deal with on a daily basis, Lopez said.

“She will of course continue receiving physical therapy, which is anything related to mobility and strengthening of her body. The use of various equipment and devices facilitates this process,” he said.

Lopez said she will also get treated by occupational therapists. Their job is to deal with activities of daily living, like personal hygiene, dressing and bathing, as well as other cognitive components. They try to get patients to develop their attentiveness and ability to respond to questions. It will also be the duty of the occupational therapists to work with Giffords’ surgeons and decide what kind of therapy her damaged eye requires.

Speech therapy for Giffords will address all language and speech issues. It will also help her in her ability to swallow.

“A neuropsychologist team will provide a more formal type of testing to where the patient is cognitively in regards to sensory and motor function as well as arousal,” Lopez said.

In addition to daily therapy with a physical, occupational and speech therapists, Lopez said TBI units definitely have vast experience in the use of psychopharmacological agents that might help in the healing process and the deficits that patients may have. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

This is great news, indeed. I hope, and pray, for the Representative’s full recovery, and for all of those who were injured in this horrible attack.

And while we are talking about Tucson, and the shooting, here is a tidbit from the Fox News All Stars discussing the “civility” issue, the one the Left was able to frame this attack as being the root cause of Loughner’s insanity. With no evidence then or now to justify this meme. Pay particular attention to Dr. Krauthammer’s response, and then the discussion with Stephen Hayes:

Um, so what’s the deal with SEIU?? Their behavior has been outrageous for quite some time. Who could forget their showing up on the door of a Bank of America bigwig, banging on the door, and terrorizing a 14 year old boy? That poor child had to hide in the bathroom. And that was after they had assaulted a Tea Party member down in Florida.

But apparently, they didn’t get the memo that Obama put out, on this ginned up issue about civility. Even discounting that manufactured issue, how about Michelle’s connection to WalMart, about which I wrote just this Thursday?? Oopsy daisy – is there a little disconnect between this SEIU (ACORN) union? Possibly. Still, their tactics have been out of control for some time now, and this is just one more illustration of the same violent behavior they have exhibited for a while. That they continue to be tolerated is shocking in and of itself.

Wow. Who knows, maybe this crafted “civility” issue will be the beginning of their undoing. One can hope. And one can hope that Rep. Giffords continues down the road of recovery.

It’s Friday. Thank heavens!

A team of 250 federal investigators and 130 local detectives trying to understand why Jared Lee Loughner went on his alleged killing spree has conducted more than 300 interviews with family, friends and neighbors since the shooting. But they remain stumped about what ultimately prompted the 22-year-old’s descent into violence. [snip]

What? There wasn’t a ton of Tea Party pamphlets in Loughner’s bedroom? He didn’t have an “I Heart Sarah Palin” tattoo or anything? Out of all of those interviews, explosive rhetoric from the Right did not jump out at all of these investigators??

Wow. Imagine that.

The article continues:

Investigators have had little success gaining information from either the uncooperative Loughner or his parents, who have told authorities that they had little recent contact with their son, law enforcement sources said.

With so little help coming from the immediate family, investigators are probing associates and witnesses for details that could help them fill out a portrait of Loughner, a task one source described as completing a “jigsaw puzzle.”

[...]

It could take weeks for investigators to fully determine Loughner’s state of mind in the days leading up to the rampage, the sources said. Virtually every member of the FBI’s 200-person Phoenix field division, coupled with 50 additional agents from Washington and Tucson and more from the Capitol Police and the U.S. Marshals Service, have fanned out across southeastern Arizona. About 130 detectives from the Pima County sheriff’s office also are involved.

Investigators have had little success gaining information from either the uncooperative Loughner or his parents, who have told authorities that they had little recent contact with their son, law enforcement sources said. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

There is a clear answer as to why this young man did this – he is mentally unstable. That is the only snap assumption to be made. It had nothing – nothing – nothing to do with any of those folks targeted by the Left. What they did was cruel, irresponsible, and amounted to hate mongering.

Sarah Palin was on The Hannity Show, Sean being another target of the Left. I do not watch him, as a rule, but do make exceptions, like when Sarah Palin is on, which she was on Monday night. Despite the immediate framing by some on the Left that she has now been made small (gee – I wonder who set out to do THAT?), she seems resolute, clear, articulate, and, well, sad. In case you missed it, here is part of the interview:

I have to say, whenever I see her speak, I gain more respect for her. Who among us could be so reasoned, so calm, so solemn, after the vicious, hateful, mean spirited attacks on not just HER, but her family, as well. After what she went through just in the past 10 days, after being demeaned and belittled for defending herself, being accused of “interjecting” herself after those on the Left falsely accused her of contributing to this heinous crime, her tone was just right.

And to hear that her children have also received death threats is nothing short of shocking. What the hell is wrong with people???

Wow. I must say, when Gov. Palin said, “If the Left didn’t have double standards, they would have no standards at all.” Well, it sure seems that way, doesn’t it?

Love her, hate her, be indifferent to her (I swear, I said the same thing about Hillary Clinton, didn’t I? The media/Leftists did the same thing to her to a degree.)), she does not deserve this kind of horrendous treatment. No one does. The hue and cry if this kind of attack was directed at any one news personality or Democratic governor would be deafening. But when it comes to Palin, the only thing that is deafening are these hellacious attacks on this woman with the sole purpose of destroying her, and her family as well. It is reprehensible.

It will be a relief is when this meme, this lie, about what caused Loughner to go off, is put to rest once and for all. Since so many FBI agents and local personnel have found no link whatsoever to Palin, Hannity, the Tea Party, or others, surely this must put an end to this lie. Those who continue to perpetuate this false, destructive, meme should get their comeuppance, and it cannot come soon enough for me.

Frankly, I think Palin should sue the shit out of the ones who put this out there. What they have wrought against her, and her children, is obscene, and they should be held to account.

Yuck. I don’t know about you, but after hearing about the kinds of attacks Palin, and her family, have endured, I feel like I need a break. In case you need a bit of a break, too, I have another way in which you can view your taxpaying dollars at work. I got the following from my niece, whose husband is a Gunnery Sergeant, and stationed in the Middle East for a year. Anyway, I hope you enjoy:

After dealing with this craploa, the raging hatred, the cruelty, of those who, unfortunately, have access to the MSM, and are using it to attack someone, this was a welcome relief. Or at least it was for me. How about you?

Once again, revising history, and having their baseless meme become the theme of the week. That would be the Left, beginning with “Heckuva Job” Sheriff Dupnik, who kicked off the “report” of the shootout in Tucson as being the result of rhetoric.

Oh, yes, you may not know this, but President Obama called Sheriff Dupnik to thank him. I just bet he did, since Sheriff Dupnik got the ball rolling blaming Gov. Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and other Conservatives, for this heinous crime. There continues to be no evidence whatsoever that rhetoric had anything to do with this – in fact, quite the opposite.

Surprisingly, though, some of the bigger media outfits refuse to correct the original unsubstantiated claims against Palin, et. al. I am not kidding. People like George Stephanopoulos refuses to issue a correction. Sadly, pathetically, he is not alone. How about this one:

[snip] CNN’s Piers Morgan, who takes over longtime television newsman Larry King’s timeslot next week, tweeted, “This now deleted image from Sarah Palin website will be reason this terrible shooting has huge political ramifications,” linking the map Palin made of targeted congressional districts for the 2010 midterm elections. [snip}

Or this from Candy Crowley to Dick Durbin:

[snip] CNN’s State of the Union anchor Candy Crowley asked Senator Majority Whip Dick Durbin, Illinois Democrat, “I guess that the undertow — and certainly it’s not an undertow on the Internet — but the undertow with politicians now speaking publicly is, well, the Republicans and the Tea Party and Sarah Palin have gone way too far in their rhetoric; it’s been violent rhetoric, and therefore this sort of thing happens. Are you making that direct connection?”

She asked Durbin that in response to Durbin saying, “we live in a world of violent images and violent words, but those of us in public life and the journalists who cover us should be thoughtful in response to this and try to bring down the rhetoric, which I’m afraid has become pervasive in our discussion of political issues. The phrase ‘don’t retreat, reload,’ putting crosshairs on congressional districts as targets, these sorts of things, I think, invite the kind of toxic rhetoric that can lead unstable people to believe this is an acceptable response. And I think that we all have an obligation, both political parties — and let me salute the senior senator from Arizona, John McCain, whose statement yesterday was clear and unequivocal that we are not accepting this kind of conduct as being anywhere near the mainstream.” [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Uh, yeah. Way to walk back this fallacious meme there, George, Candy, and Piers.

Yet now, “Civility” has become the catch phrase of the week, used by Obama in the so-called “Memorial Service” on Wednesday night. Yes, it is being used as a way not to encourage civil debate, but to stifle any debate at all.

This is quite a coup. Especially as the House is getting ready to begin a new session, with their first order of business being the repeal of Obamacare. Now the discussion by the pundits is how the Republicans are going to handle this, will everyone be separated at the State of the Union, or will they break with tradition and sit all together, and on, and on, and on.

I am not opposed to civility in the least. I am a Southerner, after all, and many of us do still have manners down here. We know it is better to bite our tongues sometimes instead of giving a tongue lashing. But that is done out of respect, not out of a desire to censor. It seems to me that what is going on post-Tucson is more of the latter, than the former, especially given the way the entire discussion (if one can call baseless, horrendous allegations a “discussion”). For some reason, it only seems to apply to one side. Guess which one? Again, that is not being civil, that is silencing – there is a world of difference.

Speaking of Obama’s campaign speech in Tucson, I have to say this. I am beyond disgusted that the whole event has been framed as being about HIM, about what he will say, will this bump up his approval numbers, etc., etc. This service was SUPPOSED to be in honor of those whose lives were senselessly taken from them. Not about President Obama and if he could take yet another shot at “defining” his presidency. Because you know Fort Hood didn’t count.

And not that it should – I don’t think ANY funeral/memorial service should be used for this kind of political gain. It is disturbing how so many are comparing this speech to Clinton’s Oklahoma City bombing speech, a clear ideological attack on our government. Or Bush’s speech after 9/11, a clear, orchestrated, attack on our country. This heinous crime was neither of those things. Rather, it was the actions of one deranged man, who, by all accounts, had no ideological gripe.

Obama is getting praise heaped upon him for taking advantage of this horrible shooting by giving a campaign speech. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, the primary target of Paul Krugman, Keith Olbermann, DailyKos, and too many other personalities and blogs to list here., is getting nothing but scathing attacks for her attempt to defend herself from these scurrilous attacks. She is not supposed to speak out, she is not supposed to respond, she is supposed to shut up and go away. That was the point of these baseless assertions in the first place, to so discredit her, to claim, as Michael Daly did, that she had “Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ blood on her hands…”

Ah, yes – so civil this discourse from the Left.

This is so disturbing to see how this tragedy has been shaped. My ridiculous “representative,” Jim Clyburn, had the audacity to play the race card in putting down Sarah Palin’s response. Oh, yes he did, and he was sexist to boot:

[snip] “You know, Sarah Palin just can’t seem to get it, on any front. I think she’s an attractive person, she is articulate,” Clyburn said on the Bill Press radio show. “But I think intellectually, she seems not to be able to understand what’s going on here.”

“I have some experiences that maybe she does not have,” he said. “When I see and hear things today that are reminiscent of that period of time, I am very, very concerned about it, because I know what it led to back then, and I know what it can lead to again.” [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Wow. Let me just say, Clyburn is by far NOT the sharpest knife in the drawer, so for him, of all people, to make that assertion about Palin is just laughable. Clyburn continues to stoke the flames that the Tucson shooting had anything to do with Palin at all. That is not just wrong-headed, it is plain wrong to incite people against someone based on lies, rumor, and innuendo. Clyburn is the worst kind of “offender,” too, attacking her for her rhetoric while not minding his own. What a piece of work he is.

But Clyburn got what he wanted, with Obama’s willing assistance – to transform this tragedy to essentially be a put down of Sarah Palin, and conservatives in general. The media is their willing accomplice, from Fox to MSNBC (not surprisingly, the viewers of MSNBC are far more likely to believe Palin, et. al, ARE responsible for what happened to Rep. Giffords and the other victims. And they claim Fox is biased? Spare me.).

To think this all started by an unprofessional sheriff placing blame where it didn’t belong, and a bunch of opportunists jumping on the bandwagon. Wow. And no amount of facts to the contrary will alter THEIR rhetoric. That is unethical, immoral, cruel, offensive, and hypocritical. But they got their way, so what do they care?

At least the majority of Americans see through this political ploy, yet it continues to be played up to the hilt by the media, and the politicians. Unfortunately, they are the ones with the loudest voices, and they won’t leave this alone until we all accept their lie as the truth…

There is no need to rehash the numerous assaults on Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, or those lumped together and labeled “Conservatives” (presumably, anyone who does not have a LD – Lefty Democrat – after their name), in the wake of the Tucson shooting. From the very first press conference with Sheriff Dupnik, rhetoric, presumably only conservative rhetoric, was blamed for this horrible tragedy. Many, many blogs, news organizations, and pundits, including the economist, Paul Krugman, jumped on the “Blame Palin!!!” bandwagon (though Mr. Krugman might do well to stick to his area of expertise). Yes, even as they claim, “we don’t have any evidence to support this yet, BUT it is all Palin and Limbaugh and Beck’s fault…”

Indeed, we have heard it all, from my ridiculous representative Jim Clyburn calling for the restoration of “The Fairness Doctrine,” which isn’t all that fair, to calls for limited Freedom of Speech (who gets to decide what can and cannot be said?), to insisting Palin used “Crosshairs!!!” on her map, akin to the bullseye used by the Democrats, but essentially meaningless in a culture that frequently uses military imagery (“war room,” “marshal our forces,” “hit the target,” etc.) as common parlance, particularly in the political arena. We heard it over and over again: it is all the fault of Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Beck et.al, that this heinous act was committed in Tucson.

After all these blatantly false charges have been levied, what does Time Magazine’s Mark Halperin think Palin and the Conservatives should do about these offensive comments being hurled their way? Turn the other cheek. That’s right, he thinks they should do nothing about it, not stand up for themselves, not defend themselves, not retort, not say a peep. Ah, yes – that Freedom of Speech thing gets another gratuitous hit from those in the media.

Now I know people might think, me being a minister type and everything, that I would concur with Halperin’s assessment. I do not. There is such a thing as disparaging another person’s character, abusing them with words, bullying them, all of which has happened in the public arena, with the mindless assistance of the MSM. For someone to then expect that person, in this case, Palin, to just take it, remain silent, be mute, is an insult to the divine within the person who has been maligned. No victim of abuse, of lies, of rumor and innuendo, should be expected to take the abuse silently. No one. And that is just what he is asking Palin to do.

Thankfully, Palin refused to accept the silencing Halperin (and others) wanted to impose upon her. No. This morning, Governor Palin made a statement regarding the recent tragedy in Tucson, and the attempts to connect her to the actions of a madman:

Well said. And a very measured response, I might add. No wonder they are so afraid of her.

But of course, those on the Left are not happy with this statement, oh no. Piling on with Halperin is former Clinton/Gore advisor, Peter Mirijanian, who just this morning attacked this statement because Palin didn’t APOLOGIZE for what happened in Tucson. Not only that, she waited too long to come out with a statement (I guess he missed that she said she took time to reflect on the tragedy that had occurred). Most importantly, though, she didn’t grovel for forgiveness for the actions of someone who took matters into his own hands out of his own mental illness.

Again – there has been ZERO connection between what Loughner did in Tucson and ANY political rhetoric. None. Absolutely none. Yet that is not stopping some of these folks from continuing to demand Palin apologize.

But apologize for what? Seems to me, they are demanding that she apologize for her very existence. And once she has done that, she needs to be quiet, and just go away.

This is the same thing they did to Hillary Clinton, by people in her own party. This is the same thing too many women in this country endure: the powers-that-be wanting to silence us. If there is any correlation between what happened to Giffords and Sarah Palin, it is that they are both strong, outspoken women. And for that, Giffords has paid a horrendous price, though one from which we all hope and pray she recovers (thank HEAVENS doctors now think her survival is guaranteed).

Palin is paying a price, too, at the hands of those who claim they are now speaking out for civility. In their very claims, they are being uncivil, leveling false charges against a political opponent in an attempt to silence, demean, destroy her. But she will not be silenced. And for that, I salute her.

So, what do you think? Is Mark Halperin smoking something? What did you think of Palin’s statement? Is it a leap to make this about women? Let’s hear it!

UPDATE: So while those on the left are sanctimoniously calling for more “civility” in language, would you like to guess what the result has been of their followers toward Sarah Palin? If you guessed DEATH THREATS, you would be right. Below is a video compilation of some of the threats Palin has received. I warn you – this is NOT for the faint of heart:

Such “civil discourse,” indeed. This is just frightening. Talk about “unhinged” (President Clinton) and ratcheting up political discourse. If something happens to Sarah Palin, will Markos be apologetic? Arianna Huffington? Sheriff Dupnik?? Yeah, I didn’t think so, either…

Why all of the name calling? Because if my “esteemed” (cough, choke) Congressman has his way, we will lose our right to free speech, so I figure I better get it all out now. Yessiree, he thinks we need to have some “parameters” set forth, as this Post and Courier article makes clear:

U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in Congress, said Sunday the deadly shooting in Arizona should get the country thinking about what’s acceptable to say publicly and when people should keep their mouths shut.

Clyburn said he thinks vitriol in public discourse led to a 22-year-old suspect opening fire Saturday at an event Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords held for her constituents in Tucson, Ariz. Six people were killed and 14 others were injured, including Giffords.

The shooting is cause for the country to rethink parameters on free speech, Clyburn said from his office, just blocks from the South Carolina Statehouse. He wants standards put in place to guarantee balanced media coverage with a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, in addition to calling on elected officials and media pundits to use ‘better judgment.’

‘Free speech is as free speech does,’ he said. ‘You cannot yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater and call it free speech and some of what I hear, and is being called free speech, is worse than that.’

Clyburn used as an example a comment made by Sharron Angle, an unsuccessful U.S. senatorial candidate in Nevada, who said the frustrated public may consider turning to ‘Second Amendment remedies’ for political disputes unless Congress changed course.

Clyburn said the man accused of shooting Giffords did just that.

‘He saw a Second Amendment remedy and that’s what occurred here and there is no way not to make that connection,’ Clyburn said. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest, and some of the comments are pretty good, especially the one from “Superrog” who suggests to Clyburn, “Bite me.”.)

From where did this claim originate? Well, according to Politico, from a Democratic operative:

[snip]One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did.

“They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

Another Democratic strategist said the similarity is that Tucson and Oklahoma City both “take place in a climate of bitter and virulent rhetoric against the government and Democrats.” [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

With absolutely zero evidence, the Democrats endeavored, and have been fully assisted by the media, in propagating a complete fallacy about the actions of this madman in Tucson. They are, in essence, engaging in the very “virulent rhetoric” of which they are accusing Republicans and Tea Partiers. They don’t seem to see the irony – make that hypocrisy – of their actions. Or if they do, they just don’t care. And Clyburn with his race-baiting of the Clintons is particularly guilty of political rhetoric, oh hell – let’s call it what it was – a LIE, that had major consequences.

Indeed, these claims were made essentially from the outset, as Sheriff Paul Babeu makes clear in the following clip:

And why? Why would a sheriff make such an absurd claim about the motive? Why did the left seize on this tragic horrible situation in which six American citizens were gunned down, and fourteen others, including a US Congresswoman, were seriously injured? What in the world could be the logic here? Just to gain a political edge? Could they really be that callous, that repugnant, to use the deaths and grave injuries of others just to punish their political enemies?

It sure seems that way, especially considering the restraint many on the Left called for after Major Hasan opened fire on a number of his fellow soldiers, as Ed Morrissey wrote about this weekend. We were told not to assume it was because he was Muslim, that we didn’t know what was going on, all of the facts were not in, etc., etc. Well, turns out it WAS because he is Muslim, but yes, restraint until the facts are known is solid advice. It is a shame they were so quick to (incorrectly) judge this time around. But, wow, were they ever, including Paul Krugman of the New York Times:

Wow. Krugman has no idea who Loughner is, but that doesn’t stop him from making these wild accusations. The entire media has been a willing partner in putting forth this propaganda as to rationale for the shooting. How else can you classify it as anything other than propaganda? The print media, bloggers, and television networks have been all too willing to CREATE this rumor, and put it forth as fact, though everything that is coming out NOW clearly demonstrates how false their meme is.

That the Democrats, including my assholic representative, Jim Clyburn, and their willing accomplices, the media, are choosing to use this tragedy for political gain is simply obscene. It is callous, it is the absolute worst kind of grandstanding, and it is reprehensible. They should be ashamed of themselves, though I doubt that emotion can even filter through the sanctimony and political opportunism they are demonstrating repeatedly over this tragedy.

The focus should be on how this clearly deranged man passed his FBI background check, why his repeated death threats were not taken more seriously, and how the system failed, not trying to blame a group who had absolutely nothing to do with this heinous crime.

Moreover, we should concern ourselves with those fighting for their lives, and for the families of those fallen as a result of Loughner’s actions. That would be the appropriate response, not trying to curb our speech, or make up blame to heap on others, thus fueling the very vitriol that is being decried.

The Democrats, and the media, are way out of line on this one, and they need to rectify this situation immediately. They can begin with an apology to Sarah Palin, and maybe, just maybe instead of spouting off with nothing more than lies, rumor, and innuendo, they can just shut the hell up already. Talking to you, Rep. Clyburn.

Does Pakistan suffer today because of his death? Yes. Does it change anything on the ground? No. 

He was slain because he called the notorious blasphemy law as black law. He stood up for a Christian woman who was accused of blasphemy and was sentenced to death by a local court. Taseer wanted his government to repeal the blasphemy law that was incorporated in the 1980s by the military dictator General Ziaul Haq. It was a legitimate demand. In his own words, “these are man made laws and men can correct this”. 

These black laws will now be repealed or not? This does not change anything on the ground either. 

Nothing will change on the ground because nothing changed a decade ago when a Christian cricket player on the national team was allegedly forced to convert. Nothing changed when pop singers one after another started denouncing their own careers and joined the elite mullah ranks. Not a thing changed when two boys were lynched publicly just last year. These were the obvious symptoms of a society turning intolerant, self-righteous, and violent. A society without the respect for law and order. 

It changed nothing back then, it will not change anything now. Hence, the events that followed Salmaan Taseer’s gruesome murder are disturbing. These events have nothing to do with a religion, or its preaching, but everything to do with the mindset that has been developed over the years. Evidently, this mindset is irrespective of class. The jubilant response on Facebook and YouTube was not by the uneducated and madrassa clan. A Pakistani blogger summed it up well: “If you go through the profiles of Qadri supporters on Facebook, you’d think Justin Bieber was the cause of extremism in Pakistan.” 

The killer’s overwhelming welcome at the courts by men who know how and why a law is made demonstrates that the liberals – a minority in Pakistan – have been reduced to an endangered species.  

And that is what has changed. And that is what matters today on the ground in Pakistan. 

Do a little math. The killer is a 26 year old man and hails from a semi-urban area. He joined the Elite force in 2003 which means he was 18 then. General Musharraf toppled a democratic government in 1999, and the killer must have been 14. And this is the age group that’s using the Internet, Facebook, YouTube and blogs more aggressively. This is the age group that went through a whole “moderate enlightenment” phase fully sponsored by Pervez Musharraf and shamelessly supported by George Bush for almost over a decade. And this is the group that has the street power in Pakistan. This is the group that is the future of Pakistan. Its mind has been infiltrated by private television, launched during Musharraf’s era. Instead of promoting freedom of speech, it promoted violence, illiteracy and conspiracy theories. It produced the “I-know-more-than-you-know-coz-I-like-that-anchor-and-you-dont-watch-that-show” minds, whereas before young men from the same age group used to extract influence from their family heads. 

The dual game of the military government ten years ago, fully supported and encouraged by the US government, produced a whole generation that detests its own constitution and Western freedom of speech values. This generation is the raw material available to and exploited by religious groups, ready to kill and get killed. My philanthropist friend Manzur Ejaz believes that the right wing in Pakistan is organized and has ideological strength. It has been supported by the State machinery through an education system and infested state institutions, while its opposition lacks committed people, organization and a cause. 

This sorry state of Pakistan is pretty much an example of Martin Niemoller’s ‘First They Came.’ 

They came first for the Communists,

and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.



Then they came for me

and by that time no one was left to speak up.

This existing situation has nothing to do with the drone attacks carried out today or the policy changed in favor of Pakistan. The ruling party was once considered a liberal group, but now its own members and sitting ministers publicly announced that they will shoot a blasphemer themselves. They align themselves with so-called “moderate” Muslim politicians like Imran Khan who have practiced Western values but sympathise with the Taliban. 

This indicates that now the dominant political philosophies are right, center to right and very right groups. It has men that have a soft heart for fundamentalists. The absence of a left–because the representative parties or groups were systematically dismantled by military dictators–will bring more extremism. 

Persons with liberal thoughts need protection, which requires some strategy as well as strength. It has to organize itself and build an anti-mullah manpower. It’s a war now, and decisions taken today will reflect the systems adopted in the future. And that will change everything on the ground.

–
Crosspost: ThePakistanUpdate.com

An old friend of mine sent me an article recently from NPR, “Teacher Suspended After Stopping Anti-Gay Talk.” My friend was a high school teacher for many years (and now teaches on the community college level), so naturally, this would pique her interest. Mine, too.

But the headline is a bit misleading, I think. It makes it sound like a kid was bullying by using homophobic language. That was not the case:

[snip] On Oct. 20, McDowell told a student in his classroom to remove a belt buckle with the Confederate Flag, the symbol of the southern confederacy that seceded from the United States over slavery, kicking off the Civil War in the 1860s.

She complied, but it prompted a question from a boy about how the flag differs from the rainbow flag, a symbol of pride for the gay community.

“I explained the difference between the flags, and he said, ‘I don’t accept gays,”’ said McDowell, 42, who was wearing a shirt with an anti-gay bullying message.

McDowell said he told the student he couldn’t say that in class.

“And he said, ‘Why? I don’t accept gays. It’s against my religion.’ I reiterated that it’s not appropriate to say something like that in class,” McDowell said Monday.

McDowell said he sent the boy out of the room for a one-day class suspension. Another boy asked if he also could leave because he also didn’t accept gays.

“The classroom discussion was heading in a direction I didn’t want it to head,” McDowell said.

McDowell soon received a reprimand letter from the district that said his actions violated the students’ free speech rights as well as school policy. It also said he “purposefully initiated a controversial issue” by the wearing the T-shirt featuring the anti-gay bullying message.

“I thought it was a really great, teachable moment,” McDowell said of his decision to remove the student from class. [snip]

I have a few problems with the way the teacher handled this situation. It did not seem to me that the young man was gay-bullying, but giving his religious belief, which he is allowed to have, much as I (and apparently, the teacher) disagree with him. As long as he was not bashing anyone, that is. A number of mainstream religions teach that homosexuality is a sin, and a number still do not ordain LGBT people. That this student holds such a religious belief is his right, as long as he does not take it out on anyone. Again, much as I disagree with that religious belief, the student has the right to his beliefs.

I think the more “teachable moment” would have been to keep him in the classroom. Maybe discuss how, even if our religious beliefs differ, we can, and should, treat people with respect, and stand up for “the least of these,” to couch it in language the young man may have understood. It was a perfect opportunity to discuss the bullying that has been occurring in our school across the country, and how it isn’t just against gay kids, but “nerds,” small kids, etc. That was the teachable moment in my mind.

I think the t-shirt the teacher wore was provocative, even if it was in support of ending the recent bullying cases making the headlines. Given that he was clearly stating a position, he should have expected that some people might have taken umbrage with it. And, he should have been willing to engage, and really TEACH, rather than dismiss.

And I think this was a discussion more suited to a Social Studies class than an Economics class. While I appreciate – very much – the teacher’s intent, he infringed upon the young man’s rights by, well, being intolerant of the student’s beliefs. In his attempt to stop bullying, he, in essence, bullied this kid. Since the teacher had the power, he was able to toss out someone with whom he disagreed rather than have a real discussion.

That is to say, this teacher seemed to violate the student’s right to free speech, which is also the conclusion of ACLU attorney:

[snip] Jay Kaplan, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan’s LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) Legal Project, credits McDowell for trying to create a “welcoming environment for all students.” But Kaplan said the “teachable moment” would have come if the students stayed in the classroom.

“We believe, based on those statements — as offensive and upsetting as they were — they were protected speech,” Kaplan said. “The only way we’re going to create a better environment in schools is to start talking about this.”

Kaplan said Howell schools have expressed interest in accepting the ACLU’s offer to provide in-person training to students, faculty and staff. He said such training could provide a better understanding of what can be said and done. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

That sounds like a positive step for the Howell schools, and a better way to go about creating an atmosphere conducive to these kinds of discussions. I am glad to learn they are open to this

I’m glad Md. McDowell is aware of this issue, and doing what he can to end gay-bashing/bullying in his school, but there are ways that are more effective than others to accomplish that goal. The kind of intolerance he demonstrated by kicking the student out sends the wrong message, and will simply breed resentment, not enlightenment.

At least that’s what I think. What do you think?