Silent Majorities: A Chain E-Mail Going Around Lately

I got this message in an e-mail today, and like most "chain" mails, there's of course, no author and no specific or directly verifiable information other than the basic, already well known facts. The earliest addy I was able to extract for it was "From: "NANA SCHISLER" " Whether this is the originating or not I can't verify. And odds are, it isn't the start anyways.

But in this e-mail, all that is actually irrelevant, as the core of the message is something I personally believe to be true. But more than me believing it to be true. It IS true. Here's what I mean:

During the weeks immediately following the fall of the World Trade Center Towers, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, The Barracks in Saudi Arabia, the Railway in Spain, the Subway in England, why was there NOT an outpouring of sentiment from the "peaceful" muslim peoples of the world? Why were these, as well as MANY other acts of terror NOT publicly condemned by these "peaceful" muslim groups?

THAT, is the core of this e-mail that I am referring to. The supposed silent majority, that is completely irrelevant, until THEY stand up and do something about it. E-mail message in it's entirety (as I received it) follows;

A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism."Very few people were true Nazis," he said,"but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care.

I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.

"We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals.

The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" the "silent majority" is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel or bayonet.

And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving?" History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life. Lastly, at the risk of offending others, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, can contribute to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand.

End of Message.

Hopefully you see what I mean. Passiveness, it's a cancer of a sort. Left alone, it WILL kill the host. Dealt with aggressively, it can be stopped. And to answer my above questions myself as to WHY no condemnation or sentimental outpouring? Well, it's kinda hard for a people to condemn something the koran itself directs them to do. As for sentiment, well, dhimmitude I GUESS can be considered sentiment. You get to live if your not a muslim, but as a second class, subdued and humiliated citizen. But hey, if that's okay with you, go for it.

Immigration Bill Faces Embarrassing Defeat: Sparks Fairness Act Debate...Again

So, the "Amnesty Bill" faced a ridiculously embarrassing defeat yesterday. 53 Senators actually listened to the constituency and said "Hell, No!" to the Grand Canyon-sized holes riddled legislation. This is a good thing, as it wouldn't have benefited anyone. Well, except illegal aliens like child molesters, gang members, welfare sponges, etc. As for the rest of us, we would have been left to pick up the tab for these 20 million plus. Not a good move in my opinion. And I think it may cost a few people their political careers as well for those who DID vote for it.

But, as always with any victory, there is always a cost. And the cost for this one is the possible revival of the business and controversy debate-killing "Fairness Act." Yes, another monster from the past is rearing its ugly head for all to see. And of course, it will be disguised as a, "now everyone will get equal time on the air for...." It doesn't work. We've seen how badly this "equal opportunity" crap has affected other realms in the past. One example is Title IX, making schools dish-out an equal amount of funding on girls sports as they do on guys sports. While "sports" itself is actually not even mentioned in the Title IX amendment, numerous discrimination lawsuits sprung up based on sports fairness and equality, which inevitably caused many schools to shut down a good portion of their sports programs.

The same goes for this "Fairness" Doctrine. This idealism dates waaaayyy back into the mid 1920's, the regulation of what could be put on the airwaves essentially since there was so little a spectrum of air to use. It eventually became actual Law about 1949. During it's existence, it's done really nothing more than prevent debate and been used by ALL sides of the political field to try and silence their opponents. Threats of licences being revoked, law suits about being granted "free" time on the air while the originating speaker had to "pay" for his air time, etc., etc., etc. And I'm not even gonna start on how badly this contradicts the First Amendment. That in itself is reason enough to NOT revive this Act.

Finally in 1985, a stroke of genius, the doctrine was reviewed by the FCC and they found that it “actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance.” Two years later, the regulation was repealed. Damn that's a looong time to have to put up with that kinda B.S. After its death, the industry boomed and has been beneficial for all. Lib's can have their stations with all their anti-American tirades. Conservatives get their own channels to inform grass roots groups on bogus legislation, (like the amnesty bill), and everything is peachy keen.

But this doesn't seem to be okay to some. Legislators like Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Feinstein and Boxer, Lott, Pelosi, and a host of other Govt. Officials want to revive it. They want this so they can push through their "for the good of the public... but it's really for my own benefit" legislation without opposition. Basically, all it would do is permanently silence ALL sides of controversy and allow legislators to do as they please as there will no longer be any disenting voices.

Article info provided by American Conservative Mag site, Fox News.com, GlennSacks.com, Sen. J. Sessions Site and Wikipedia.

Wouldn't Want To Torture People Now Would We?

In yet another example of why Lib-Dems just crack me up like I mentioned in my previous post, the media just can't keep themselves from doing or saying stupid stuff. I love this! I've found myself in stitches more in the last six years than I have in the entirety of the rest of my life.

This newest show of idiocy involved the brainwashing of a group of school kids that were given the opportunity to meet with the President. 141 students from around the country, the "Presidential Scholars" group, met with President Bush during a regular annual event. Apparently, 50 of them managed to convene with each other (from around the country) and agree on the wording in a hand written letter of their denouncement of the U.S.'s practice of torturing prisoners.

Yeeaaaahhhh. And I'm sure that none of their teachers had anything to do with this one. Wow, 50 out of 141, 35%. That's almost a significantly unimportant amount. I wonder what the other SIXTY FIVE PERCENT had on their minds that wasn't broadcast in the news?

As reported by the Media Research Center and Newsbusters, NBC wasted no time in making sure we all knew about this. NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams highlighted the incident in a 37-second blurb, during which the multi-paged letter was put up on screen with the sentence "We do not want America to represent torture" blown up so it was readable to viewers.

I suppose in some respects, what the media these days spews out could also be considered as torture, but like I said, I find it hilarious. I think it fits more within the boundaries of long term brain washing, or psychological warfare than torture myself. But hey, I'm juss ziss guy you know....

When it comes to torture committed by the U.S., such as the "hideous" acts of making prisoners strip down and pile up on each other, or hooking batteries to their testicles in a "fear tactic." I have just two things to say. Red is positive, black is negative. The next time a Lib-Dem wants to start ranting about torture, point them HERE, or HERE, or make them watch these vids HERE and HERE, and demand they respond to them.

Otherwise, we can just sit back and let them bury themselves in an ever increasing pile of their own B.S.

Article Information provided by Media Research Center, Newsbusters, and Savage Nation.

The Newest Bush-Bash Rage: At Least Hitler Meant Well

I have a dirty secret. I'm a closet Lib-Dem lover. But I'm coming out! I must fully admit to the public how much I love Lib-Dem's. They say laughter is the music of the soul, as well as various other healing aspects. I, Laugh, DAILY, because of Lib-Dems. These are the funniest people alive. I almost feel like I should be paying them every time they open those holes under their noses.

For example, watch any evening news broadcast. Take your pick, CBS, CNN, NBC or ABC. These are better than ANY sitcom on the air to date. You could literally even take a page, or even three out of pretty much any printed media, say, the New York Times, and use it as a script for a comedy show. These folks are a non-stop riot. I'm thinking of casting Madame Traitor, Jabba the Kennedy and Dirty Harry Reid and casting them in a show. I'll call it, "Lib-Dems say the darnedest things."

Here's what I mean, and you'll get the picture right away on this one. Peter Mehlman, ex-sports writer turned "guru of the world" posted an op-ed article in the Huffington Post titled "At Least They Didn't Meant Well..." In this article, Mehlman elaborates on how bad several other presidents were, but were nothing compared to how terrible Bush is. He continues his rant by making the death-defying leap of comparisons of saying fascists such as Hitler and the gang at least "meant well" when they killed millions. Is this not one of the most hilarious things imaginable? Pardon me a moment while I catch my breath.

The article got a little bit of attention as its presence was made known on both Yahoo News and Newsbusters. Even the Media Research Center found it. Pardon me, still chuckling a bit at the better than Evel Kineval stunt leap.

No matter how much the Lib-Dem crowd rants or raves, no matter how much stink they try to create about "how terrible" Bush is, one thing is for certain. Bush, in all his unmagnificent splendor, (and I can say this as I disagree with some of his choices,) is inevitably going to be labeled one of the BEST presidents we have had. Here is why.

After 9/11 occurred, and the Bush Administration dragged out all the intelligence available, which the Lib-Dems now say was faulty, (although they shouldn't say that as it's the same stuff Billy-boy used when he sacked Iraq with over 400 tomohawks and several days of air sorties,) Bush hit Afghanistan. Then shortly there after, after having bent to the U.N. for a while, (for reasons unknown since we know the U.N. isn't capable of scratching their own asses,) he finally hit Iraq.

How many more successful terrorist attacks of the 9/11 magnitude have we had in the U.S. since we know these guys always one-up themselves? I'll pay the Lib-Dem party ten bucks if they can name one. Okay, let's make it easier. How many successful terrorist attacks of at least 1/2 the magnitude of 9/11 have we had? 1/4 of the mangitude? Any takers? Okay, but this is my last offer, ANY SUCCESSFUL ATTACKS AT ALL? (crickets.)

There you have it. Like I said, personally I don't agree with everything Bush is doing. But the Lib-Dems won't be able to prevent Bush from eventually getting a one of the GREATEST presidents button, short of going to the middle east and personally importing some terrorists to blow some stuff up to prove me wrong. Because that's about what it will take to slow the train they dread.

Article information provided by Newsbusters, YahooNews, Media Research Center and the Huffington Post.

The Supposed "Ugly" Face Of Immigration: Rush Limbaugh?

When we think of the "ugly" face about today's immigration debate, usually it would be associated with something like The Minutemen Project folks reporting illegals, or perhaps even an Arian Nation group with it's swastikas and anti-anything not blond haired/blue eyed. But now, we have a new ugliness face. And it is the face of Rush Limbaugh. At least, that's what Sunday's NBC Nightly News reporter John Yang would have us believe.

In Yang's report, Rush Limbaugh is a "flame fanner" on the debate. A sound bite was played of Rush stating: "They want low-skilled, uneducated, cheap labor in the country -- because that's their next class of victims." Unfortunately, Yang didn't bother to mention that this is a sound clip, now over nine days old. So it was nothing new. Also not mentioned, was the context in which his statement was made. Limbaugh was speaking about the Liberal Democrats and their lust for power. Power in bigger government, more social programs and the need for an exploitable class to keep them. Oops.

It would appear on the surface, that Yang's criticisms are inspired to be just another attack on the Conservative talk show host. Albeit, a late entry, just like the last poor attempt at whipping up an Imus-like fury. The previous sad attempt by liberals was the "Barack the magic negro," parody that had been around for over a month before Rush ever played it on his show. And, just like Yang's sorry excuse for a journalism report, it too will fall flat on its face. The actual reason for the resurgence of old moldy non-news is to hopefully revive the immigration bill, which is set for a new vote tomorrow, (Tuesday.)

No, contrary to Yang's beliefs, no one is buying it. This may be in fact due to less than 20% of the nation having any faith in today's media. Or perhaps it might be due to the bill which has been loosing steam since its inception.

Either way, Liberals would love to see Rush gone, and the borders opened to a tidal wave of new illegals flooding the economy. How else could they justify raising taxes?

Article info provided by Media Research Center and RushLimbaugh.com.

Stem Cells Without Killing: Whatever Will Liberals Do Now?

In an article on gopwing.com, Kathryn Jean Lopez for the Sacramento Bee gives us a heads-up on yet another form of "Actually Promising" stem cell research. A lot of emphasis is being put on the useless embryonic stem cell research, that has yet to provide ANY positive results. NONE at all. Unless you count tumorous masses as a good thing. And yet it is the MOST funded. The least funded forms, that being adult and cord-blood stem cell research, are currently being used to work on over 60+ different diseases and the like.


Lopez revealed in her article that: The scientific journal "Nature" released a study describing trial successes, which showed that adult cells could be reprogrammed to function like embryonic stem cells -- a noncontroversial stem-cell research alternative, the kind we could all rally behind. This does not bode well for the pro-embryonic crowd. Although, noone will be made aware of this as Liberals charge forward with their "cloning" agendas.

I suppose no matter how you look at it, stem cell research will always be a heated debate regardless that some have proven to work, while others fail miserably in every respect. This doesn't even factor in the moral or ethical angles that inevitably come to the forefront.

In the end, no matter which angle you take as your stance, EMBRYONIC stem cell research is a failed field. With all the money being raised by celebrities and some politicians for it, it still has not and will not provide anything of use. Period. Except, as I mentioned above, tumorous masses. Please spare the rest of humanity the relentless barrage of stupidity and get behind what DOES work and continues to work. That being adult stem cell and cord blood research. These are proving to work, are working and continue to do so.

Article info provided by Nature.com, GOPwing.com and Sacbee.com.

Another U.S. School Bows To Sharia: Why Am I Not Surprised

In yet another NOT-shocking move, another U.S. school bows to the will of sharia law. This time, it's an elementary school in the San Diego School District. As listed on both Pipeline.org and Campus-watch.org, Carver Elementary school (grades K-8) in the San Diego School District has a "school with-in a school" segregation for 100 somali muslim students from a failed charter school. These students get special privileges as well, to include one hour allotted for prayer (muslim only), the teaching of arabic language (way to incorporate) and an extra break time, to account apparently for the amount of time spent in prayer. So much for that church/state separation.

It should also be known that no pork or other offensive food is served AT ALL in the cafeteria to meet halal standards. As you can see, in true multicultural fashion, the school is going to extremes to cater to this "elitist" class of kids.

All of this became public when a substitute teacher Mary-Frances Stevens made a report to the local school board in which she claimed that Carver’s Muslim children were being led in Islamic prayer by a teacher’s aide. Steven’s, who subbed at the school on March 8 stated that the lesson plan she was given included the allotting of one hour for prayer. The teacher’s allegation of religious indoctrination led to an investigation.

When confronted by the apparent double standard which elevates Muslims over Christian and Jewish students, school principal Kimberlee Kidd attempted to explain, “I think there are so many misconceptions." Misconceptions??? Not likely. It's as obvious as it can be. And it's being permitted. The actions taken by Carver’s officials have made them agents whereby Sharia [Islamic religious law] has been extended into a region of the public domain. Where is the misconception here?

Radical muslim groups are intent upon shoving Sharia down the throat of the majority culture, and multicultural bound extreme liberals [which includes many school administrators] are happy to have allies which help them continue the attack on the Judeo-Christian underpinnings of America.

In the SignOnSanDiego.com site by the San Diego Tribune, Kidd was quoted as saying: she and her staff had expected questions about the Arabic program when the schools merged. But people were tolerant, she said. So it surprised her someone would complain now when “things are settling down and feeling right.” Shouldn't surprise her in the least. The shock to her is probably that "people found out" what was going on.

No doubt, it will be even more of a shock when Carver starts cranking out "little jihadists" like this place in New York. Well, it won't shock me as I am writing this. But it may others. That's right, six years after 9/11, still no memorial but we get a school to train up MORE suicide bombers. And for those who don't want to believe that's possible, check this out:

The links on the AAFSC's website tell a different story.
Under the heading "Islam" a link to the Council on Islamic Education [CIE] opens to a downloadable syllabus for a course titled "Hirabah-Not Jihad" that begins:

"The purpose of this activity is to acquaint students with the concept of jihad. The lesson discusses the distinction between jihad as a principle of social justice, and as a military institution entrusted to authorities in society. Students learn about the categories of illegitimate violence in society, namely rebellion and terrorism, brigandage and other forms of mayhem against the public. Students should be able to:

• define jihad in its literal and applied meanings, as a principle and as an institution
• describe legitimate conduct of war according to Islamic law
• differentiate between rebellion, (baghy), and terrorism, (hirabah), according to Muslim jurists
• explain how Muslim jurists characterize hirabah, and describe the basis for their judgment that it is a serious, punishable criminal act ."

Americans and NYC taxpayers will no doubt be reassured to know that one of their new public schools will be instructing Arab and Muslim students in the nuances of jihad and under what circumstances it can be justified and practiced. You can read all this yourself HERE.

So, on we go into the great void of bowing to political correctness as it screws us over ever more each day. I suspect we'll all need to speak arabic pretty soon, so make sure you sign up for those classes early.

Article info provided by SignOnSanDiego.com, Pipeline.org, Campus-watch.org.

Liberal In BBC News: Puts Up "Troop Movement" Form On Website

Boy-o-boy, talk about "spread butt cheeks, insert size 12 boot." An unknown individual at the BBC News posted a submission form for people to report on British Military troop movements. The wording of the request was: "Are you in Iraq? Have you seen any troop movements? If you have any information you would like to share with the BBC, you can do so using the form below."

What kinda nut-job does something like that, except someone looking to cause a bit of mayhem amongst their own soldiers. Our own journalists here in America are stupid, but not even they would do something like that. To do so would be to commit career suicide in effect, as the backlash that would ensue would even eclipse the Dan Rather "falsified" Reserve memo about Bush that caused his instant resignation.

In the article by Telegraph.co.uk , it stated that the BBC was accused last night of risking the safety of British forces in Iraq after trawling for information on troop movements in the war-torn country. Politicians reacted in disbelief to the revelation that for over two hours yesterday, the BBC News website carried a request for people in Iraq to report on troop movements.

Ooooohhh, disbelief. They should be calling for a short rope and a tall tree. So far there has been no word as to why anyone at the BBC would be even requesting this type of information, or if any information had been gathered. A BBC spokesman refused to identify the "traitor," erm, I mean journalist who posted the message, but he (the treasonous bastard) was reminded that this was not appropriate. How stern of them. That doesn't even constitute a slap on the wrists. More along the lines of, "well, we were going to slap his wrists, but that seemed a bit too harsh a punishment."

According to the British Ministry of Defense, they were not even aware of the affair yesterday until alerted by The Daily Telegraph. Dr. Liam Fox, the Shadow Defence Secretary said, "I am appalled because it shows either a wilful disregard for the safety of our Armed Forces or a shocking lack of understanding about their safety. It makes me wonder who makes these decisions. The BBC now needs to have urgent discussions with the Armed Forces as to how this message came about." How about discussions with a firing squad?

Article information provided by the Telegraph.co.uk website.

Gays Highjack Civil Rights Movement

On June 14th, in yet another one of many slaps in the face of legitimate civil rights takeovers, the Gay crowd, being led by openly lesbian U.S. Representative Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and liberal Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) are now pushing House Resolution 431 on what was the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Loving v. Virginia decision legalizing interracial marriages.

Basically, the gays are running out of road before they plunge over the proverbial bridge and are doing whatever they can to try and justify their lifestyle choice. In this maneuver, they are attempting to equate gay marriage with interracial marriage. Now THERE'S a jump and a half in trying to equate those two. The Freedom to Marry group, in part of it's larger agenda campaign, is running full-color ads in magazines and newspapers trying to tie the two together. How sad. Are their lives really that terrible that they have to conduct hostile take-overs of actual civil rights victories?

“The homosexual hijacking of the civil rights movement is an insult to every person who fought against racism and segregation during the 1960s,” said TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. “Homosexuals have no shame when it comes to exploiting every noble social movement in our culture. These radical groups routinely come up with a new ‘holiday’ or special week in order to push their agenda upon the rest of us—and if you protest against this callous exploitation of important historical events, you’re labeled a homophobic bigot.”

Ain't that the honest truth. The mere mention of anything that isn't PRO-homo these days seems to raise more ire than Don Imus' nappy haired ho's comment. What happened to the days when school text books like my 9th grade sociology class that specifically labeled "gay" as deviant behavior? And I'm only in my 30's, so it's not THAT long ago. And we KNOW it's a behavior, not something your born as.

Lafferty noted that homosexual groups such as the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) already have their “Day of Silence” on school campuses throughout the nation. There are also Gay Pride Week celebrations, a National Coming Out Week, “Gay Days” at Disneyland, Gay History Month, the National Transgender Day of Remembrance, “Safe School” events and more. “The way things are going, every day of every month will eventually be a homosexual-inspired event of some kind. Homosexuals seem determined to hijack every day of the year and every historical event in our past. This is absolute nonsense.”

We DO NOT need more bogus laws or bills promoting the gay agendas of the 3-4% of the population cluttering up our society. This bill 431, and other like it such as 1592 which will be coming back up soon or the resurgence of 777 need to be slapped down, and preferably their authors should be tossed out of office for going against what the constituency wants.

Info in this article provided by the Traditional Values Coalition.

Bloggers "Full Of Stupidity" Says Al Neuharth

So, a guy who admits in his own newspaper column, the he has to buy diapers for HIMSELF, says that bloggers are "full of stupidity." If he needs diapers for himself, I guess we can just as easily say he's full of something as well.


Al Neuharth, the founder of the USA Today newspaper had a Q & A with another paper, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle. During this little gabfest, Neuharth expounded on such things as shows like Rush Limbaugh being "idiotic" but it doesn't upset him. He finds them amusing. But being the rights oriented old codger he is he added, "I also think that from my perspective that it's OK for idiots like him to voice their opinion because that's what this country is about and that's what the First Amendment is about." How considerate of him.


Neuharth went on to mention that, he has "become convinced, although a little reluctantly, that all the bloggers on the Internet have a right to all of their stupidity, too. And there's a lot of it." OOPS! Not the best way to maintain your readership. My subscription just got cancelled for that one. So much for supporting that first amendment thingy he had just brought up. I suppose he also thinks YouTube needs to be shutdown as well? He added after that, "but I really think we're better off with those kinds of opinions and dissenting voices than we would be if we or the government tried to control them." No kidding? Thank you ever sooo much for not "twisting" the knife in my back, instead just wiggling it around a bit as you pulled it out.


The comments were Neuharth's response to the Question given:


We are...ripped by the right-wing conservative talk show hosts and others who just brand the mainstream media as worthless. Do we deserve that?...And what can we do about it?


Uh, yeah, the media DOES deserve it. Period. With as much bias as they spew out on a regular basis as shown by a UCLA study, I'd say that the "ripping" is very much deserved. Stack that on top of that, my previous blog about how the public DOES view the media and Hollywood as being a major part of the decline of values, looks like there's a pretty good argument standing against Neuharth.


But then, I'm sure he'd just find this "mildly amusing."

See the full Media Research Center's article HERE .

Article info provided by the Media Research Center, UCLA News and the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.

Media and Hollywood's Negative Effect on America

When people wake up and discover the rapid decline in values in this country, they can point directly not only at themselves for allowing it, but at Hollywood and our wonderful "balanced and UN-biased" journalists as the cause. In a special report by Brian Fitzpatrick of the Culture and Media Institute, he highlights many of the finer points of a country under siege by the Leftist media and Hollywood. A sidebar of that report shows exactly what the media deemed as the highest priorities of their reporting. What "they" believed was important and what "they" believed we needed to know.

A survey was conducted by the professional polling firm of Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates in December 2006 for the Natural Cultural Values. The polling company collected data from a total of 2,000 American citizens aged 18 or more, 1,000 by telephone interviews and 1,000 via the Internet. The margin of error for the entire sample is +/- 2.2 percent at the 95 percent confidence level.


Here are just a few of the surveys findings:

• An overwhelming majority of Americans agrees that the media are very influential, and that they are harming our nation’s moral values. Americans place heavier blame on the entertainment media, but they hold the news media responsible as well.
• 74 percent of American adults believe moral values in America are weaker than they were 20 years ago.
• 64 percent of Americans agree the media are an important factor in shaping moral values in this country.
• 68 percent of Americans say the media have a negative impact on moral values in this country.
• 73 percent of Americans say the entertainment industry is having a negative impact on moral values in this country.
• The more a person watches television, the less likely he will be to accept responsibility for his own life and for his obligations to the people around him.
• The more a person watches television, the less committed he is to classical virtues such as honesty, reliability, and fairness.
• The more a person watches television, the more permissive his attitudes toward sexual issues like sex outside of marriage, abortion and homosexuality are likely to be.
• The more a person watches television, the less likely he is to value religious principles and obedience to God.
• The more a person watches TV, the less likely he is to believe the media are influencing the nation’s moral values.

As you can see by the results of the survey, people DO see the media and Hollywood as being a primary cause of the decline of the American culture and values. So why isn't the media and Hollywood changing their tune? Such as shunning from a bestiality movie at Cannes instead of promoting it. No one person can say. Aside from a staggering list of reasoning's like "electro-shock therapy" wherein, we get used to something, it becomes more acceptable. Just like listed in the last few bullets of the above mentioned survey.

Here's what I mean. The surveys sidebar gave the top 25 highlights that USAToday believes the public should have been informed of, rather than actually important issues:

1. 9/11 Coverage (2001)

2. FOX Network is born (1986)

3. The Oprah Winfrey Show (1986)

4. The Sopranos (1999)

5. NYPD Blue (1993)

6. The O.J. Simpson Trial (1994)

7. The Simpsons (1989)

8. The Cosby Show (1984)

9. The Real World (1992)

10. Johnny Carson’s last show (1992)

11. Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction (2004)

12. Dan Rather leaving CBS Evening News (2005)

13. Thirtysomething (1987)

14. Dawson’s Creek (1998)

15. American Idol (2002)

16. Seinfeld (1990)

17. Ellen comes out (1997)

18. The Apple commercial (1984)

19. Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown (1992)

20. The Jenny Jones Show murder (1995)

21. The Civil War (1990)

22. Jon Stewart on The Daily Show (1998)

23. Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill hearings (1991)

24. Lonesome Dove/War & Remembrance (1989)

25. The M*A*S*H finale (1983)

As you can see by their "important" list, with exception to the 9/11 coverage, FOX news and the Cosby show, it's a veritable bubbling cauldron of shows that promote open sex, homosexuality, lack of respect for authority, etc., etc., etc. No wonder the country is going to crap, and will continue to do so unless the PUBLIC themselves begins to stand up and take notice.

Emerging Super Powers: Russia AGAIN? YouTube

Last Friday's (June 8th,) Washington Times contained an article by R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. about the emergence of three countries as future super powers. Those countries included Saudi Arabia, Iran and amazingly enough, Russia. Tyrrell Jr. explained that these countries are the major producers of oil and natural gas, and Russia is one of the main producers of BOTH of those energy sources. Tyrrell Jr. noted one economist, Philip K. Verleger Jr., believes that with regard to Russia and its energy reserves, WE ARE in the second round of the Cold War. That's a far cry from what democrats have been touting as Pres. Bush "trying to start" another Cold War.

Tyrrell Jr. went on to mention how as summer approaches, and we climb into our gas guzzlers to head out on vacation, leaving our always lit and air conditioned homes, (cough* Al Gore's 10,000 sq. ft. home, cough*) that we should really start considering our energy needs.

Presidential nominees are jockeying for position, telling us that they will make us "energy independent." Some people believe that $3 a gallon, or there abouts is highway robbery, when in fact, when adjusted for inflation, we are paying the same amount for gas as we did in 1981. Some people even want the energy companies investigated. Tyrrell Jr. described all this as political schizophrenia, and that neither goal is possible any time in the near future as America has only five percent of the worlds population and consumes 25% of the worlds energy. The world overall uses about 85 million barrels a day, or roughly the same amount as it is capable of producing.

Currently, we're paying about $70 a barrel for oil. Oil experts such as Boone Pickens predict $80 a barrel by the end of the year. Verleger predicts $100 per barrel before the end of 2008. Since the world uses pretty much what it is able to produce every day, and the two strongest economies, being the U.S. and China, will most probably have increased their usage by the end of summer, these predictions are highly likely. Since the world most probably won't be able to produce more than 85 million barrels a day, imagine what will happen to gas prices by then?

These revelations may be the driving force behind Russia rapidly becoming a super power once again with its rich mineral resources. This will be high on Pres. Vladimir Putin's mind. As a former KGB Agent, Putin's purpose was, at the time, anti-American. And unfortunately, America has already fallen prey to the psychological warfare initiated decades ago by the then Soviet Union. In an interview with former KGB Agent and defector Yuri Bezmenov, Bezmenov explains how and what has already happened to America and how this can play into Putin's ideals. You can watch the video HERE on YouTube. Bezmenov describes how, even with overwhelming evidence, people will refuse to believe the truth. This sounds A LOT like the Liberal Left.

In the end, Americans need to stop making snap judgements, and start educating themselves on the issues. That is unless, they all want to be speaking Russian in 20 years.

Information in this article provided by the Washington Times and Interview with Yuri Bezmenov.

"Landmark" Immigration (Amnesty) Bill Defeated: Was Full Of Holes

The Highly touted "landmark" immigration bill was pulled from the voting floor by Sen. Reid due to lack of support. On last Thursday nights NBC World News segment, Charles Gibson gave a teaser of "the landmark compromise on immigration is in big trouble on Capitol Hill. Some Senators are saying if we can't pass this, we can't pass anything." Gibson continued with praising the bill as "the best hope for doing something on immigration." While George Stephanopoulos kept his attacks short and direct by blaming conservatives directly for its defeat with, "They (Senators) are getting a lot of cross pressures, Charlie, particularly on the conservative side." For the most part though, there has been little coverage of such a "landmark" bill in the media. Read the transcripts HERE.

The following night, (Friday) Gibson simply recounted his previous assertions that the landmark bill is showing that our political system is incapable of handling as serious issue as big as immigration. Stephanopoulos chimed in on Gibson's remark with, "Certainly not this big problem, Charlie, even though, as I said, a majority of Americans support it." Unfortunately, Stephanopoulos failed to mention just how small a majority it is. Just over half of the country favors some sort of amnesty. Among Republicans, there's more of a ten percent margin against it. For more on the polling, check HERE.

Too bad so many people really know so little of the bill itself as there hasn't been much in the way of public exposure of it. Most people decide with their emotions rather than logic or rationalization. If people KNEW what all the bill actually contains, the public outcry against the bill would be amazing. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama highlighted TWENTY loopholes in the bill that would make a good portion of the public quickly change their mind.

A statement in the press release portion of Sessions' web page is as follows: “I am deeply concerned about the numerous loopholes we have found in this legislation. They are more than technical errors, but rather symptoms of a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation that stands no chance of actually fixing our broken immigration system. Many of the loopholes are indicative of a desire not to have the system work.”

Here are just a few of those loopholes:

Legal Status Before Enforcement: Amnesty benefits do not wait for the “enforcement trigger.” After filing an application and waiting 24 hours, illegal aliens will receive full “probationary benefits,” complete with the ability to legally live and work in the U.S., travel outside of the U.S. and return, and their own social security card. Astonishingly, if the trigger is never met and amnesty applications are therefore never “approved,” the probationary benefits granted to the illegal alien population never expire, and the new social security cards issued to the illegal alien population are not revoked.

Some Child Molesters Are Still Eligible: Some aggravated felons – those who have sexually abused a minor – are eligible for amnesty. A child molester who committed the crime before the bill is enacted is not barred from getting amnesty if their conviction document omitted the age of the victim. The bill corrects this loophole for future child molesters, but does not close the loophole for current or past convictions.

Gang Members Are Eligible: Instead of ensuring that members of violent gangs such as MS 13 are deported after coming out of the shadows to apply for amnesty, the bill will allow violent gang members to get amnesty as long as they “renounce” their gang membership on their application.

These are but a few of the loopholes, and as you can see, they won't "improve" the quality of any ones life here in America. To read the rest of the loopholes, look HERE.

Information in this article provided by the Media Research Center, ABC News, Sen. Jeff Sessions web page.

Never A Shortage Of "Bush-bashing" Or Other Liberal Dunces

Over the last couple of days we've seen everything from more of the "Bush-Bashing-Brigade," to major media outlets believing they were "OK" to curse-out conservatives on air, to a new strategy for a Cold War.

Let's start with the Rosie 2.0, also known as Katie Couric. On Wednesday night's CBS Evening News (who's rating's are equal to that of Al-Jazeera these days,) kicked of her G-8 report with a conversation with CBS reporter Jim Axelrod. Couric labeled Bush as an antagonist by his adamant stand to have a missile shield placed in Eastern Europe. Couric believed, quite incorrectly I might add, that the main topic of the G-8 was to be climate concerns, "but they're being overshadowed by the dispute between President Bush and Russia's President Vladimir Putin over NATO plans to install a defensive missile shield." Sorry, but I must have missed that entry in the "official G-8 program guide" that said Global Warming was the priority.

Let's jump now to Ex-CBS co-host Bryant Gumbel. Gumbel was co-hosting on Tuesday's syndicated Live With Regis and Kelly. The discussion was about the inadvertent slip of the lip, allowing a curse word out by accident. Gumbel himself became infamous for this when he was caught on-air calling Robert Knight, then with the Family Research Council, a "F-ing idiot" when Knight asserted, that the Boy Scouts should be allowed to ban gays from leadership positions. Knight's remark was made AFTER the Supreme Court had upheld a decision to allow the Boy Scouts to do so. Gumbel, like Couric, also incorrectly believed that he was right to refer to Knight in this manner since he found Knight's assertion "infuriating." Gumbel has never apologized to Knight for this remark by the way.

One last trip around the block lands us on the "all-knowing" Jack Cafferty and the Amazing Cafferty Files. Wednesday night's Situation Room on CNN featured Cafferty quoting Mikhail Gorbachev's recent attack on Bush. Cafferty referred to the ex-Soviet leader's comments such as "arrogance," "lack of credibility," and the all popular "reigniting the Cold War with Russia" references. Cafferty rounded off the majority of the quotes with "the U.S. is backing itself into a corner," angle. With exception to Israel, and Great Britain (who we will probably soon lose,) the U.S. has for the most part, been alone in the world for quite some time. So where is the news here?

Perhaps we should just mop up in the middle east real quick, pull all our troops back to our own borders, and send all the ammo Israel can use to them, and just sit back and watch the rest of the world collapse in on itself. This is a definite result since we would also stop paying for all the U.N.'s little escapades. After that's all over, then we can start cleaning up the mess. But then were would the liberals be if they didn't have U.S. soldiers dying to report on?

Read more about these and other blatantly stupid media maneuvers HERE at the Media Research Center.

California Dem's Give A Big F.U. To The Populace And Pass GAY Bill Anyway

In a not-so-shocking move yesterday, (June 5, 2007) the California state assembly told the California populace to 'F'-off, and passed the Gay marriage bill by a vote of 42 to 34. This was a "just barely made it" bill passage. The 42 Democrats who voted for this bill have decided, against the will of the majority of the California population, that they will pass a bill, (Assembly Bill 43) even though in 2000 over 60% of the state passed Prop.22 which specifies marriage as being between one man and one woman.

For now, this is a victory for homosexual Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco (also no surprise,) even though his two previous attempts were defeated. But it is a fleeting victory, as the public is not likely to sit idly by and just let it go. The publics "Will" was defied, and it will eventually cost the Democrats. When over 100 of 120 legislative districts say NO, trouble will follow when you defy them.

Unfortunately, there were two Demo's that voted NO on the bill that may also be caught in this crossfire. Wilmer Amina Carter of San Bernardino and Nicole Parra of Bakersfield both voted no on the bill, and should be commended for their stance. Three other Demo's abstained from the vote, Mike Davis of Los Angeles, Juan Arambula of Fresno and Cathleen Galgiani of Stockton.

The bill will now go before the State Senate to be decided there. This is where the public needs to make their voices heard. Californians need to contact the Senators and tell them that California is not in favor of blatant homosexual marriages, and that those who vote FOR it do so at their own political risk.

There is no doubt as to which "party" is PRO-Homosexual when it was all democrats ramming the passage of this bill down their constituencies throats. They know that they can't get this legislation passed with a vote through the public, so they will do it however they can. Even if it means telling Californians to 'F'-off.

Article information provided by the Traditional Values Coalition .

Muslim Agenda Spreads To More Campus'

Debbie Schlussel strikes again. In her Post on her own website, Debbie reveals more about Dearbornistan, Michigan's own University of Michigan choosing to go ahead and install foot washing stations on campus. The decision to build these facilities was apparently approved by a single individual, U of M-D Vice Chancellor Robert G. Behrens, without having to consult the committee of University Regents to get approval. Behrens is spending your tax dollars WITHOUT your consent folks.

Debbie's post echos my own blog posts, 1 & 2, about the same thing happening in Minnesota. In my posts, Katherine Kersten of the Minneapolis-St.Paul Star Tribune wrote about Minneapolis Community and Technical College considering building these same "foot-washing stations" for their muslim student population. These washing stations being proposed in Minnesota, will be built with tax-payer funds, just like Michigan.

Both Kersten and Schlussel report on the follow-up agendas of groups like MSA, CAIR and CIE, after the foot washing stations are installed. Kersten mentioned that such changes as permanent muslim prayer spaces, ritual washing facilities, separate food and housing for muslim students, separate hours at athletic facilities for muslim women, paid imams or religious counselors, and campus observance of muslim holidays. Schlussel reports other changes to be made such as Ramadan Iftar Accommodations, Eid Holidays, Prayer Room and Break Accommodations, Faculty Sensitivity Training, Jummah, Surveys / Advocacy and Halal Food.

Most importantly, is the simple double standard involved and blatant violation of church and state occurring in these instances. But since the ACLU won't touch this, we can automatically determine that it is intentionally a separation of "every church EXCEPT islam" and state.

When questioned by Kersten, the Minnesota campus Director of Legal Affairs, Dianna Cusick, said the college, a public institution, has a strict policy of not promoting religion or favoring one religion over another. "The Constitution prevents us from doing this in any form." When Schlussel asked U of M-Dearborn spokesman Terry Gallagher, why a religious accommodation was being made for Muslims, he informed Schlussel that if another religion approaches U of M-D, it will consider the request. Consider the request?; knowing full well that universities are constitutionally barred from endorsing a religion or even two religions.

Minnesota and Michigan aren't alone in this. Boston University, Cal State-Fullerton, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Washington University of St. Louis, are all installing foot baths. As tax payers, each and every one of you, you need to make YOUR VOICES heard. Notify your legislators and voice your concerns as their "constituency."

Article information provided by Debbie Schlussel , Katherine Kersten for the Minneapolis-St.Paul Star Tribune .

Olbermann: JFK News Timed & Bush Wants A Cold War

What would ever do without Liberals? Perhaps enjoy "relatively conspiracy-free" lives for one thing. On Monday's MSNBC's (better known as MS-LSD) Countdown (to no ratings), Keith Olbermann tried to stir up suspicion that the JFK terror plot was intentionally revealed the day before the second Democratic Debate, as reported by the Media Research Center. Olbermann went a step further by trying to implicate Fox News Channel by tying in the fact that New York Police Department Commissioner Ray Kelly, is the father of FNC reporter Gene Kelly.

Talk about going off on a wild tangent, Olbermann continued by giving a twisted theory that Bush was attempting to stir up another Cold War with Russia due to the failures of Iraq. We wouldn't want to mention the fact that Vladimir Putin announced to the world that they were prepared to take steps, including pointing missiles at targets in Europe.

Olbermann kicked off his ramblings by teasing a soundbite of U.S. attorney Roslynn Mauskopf, who referred to the danger of "unthinkable devastation" at JFK Airport if the plot were successful. The Countdown host quipped: "Yeah, well, so would me blowing up the moon with Mentos and a liter of Coca Cola." Is it just me, or can anyone else see the blatant idiocy of a contrast such as that?

After his attempt to instigate a "cold war" theory, Olbermann mentioned how it was "possibly an attempt to obscure the unending nightmare in Iraq, where, if the present rate continues, 140 American service personnel will have died by the first of July." I don't know about anyone else, but personally, I think it's WRONG to make predictions on how many U.S. Service men and women will die. Make predictions on football games, horse races, etc. NOT on peoples lives.

The shows caption for June 4th was 'The 'Nexus of Politics and Terror.' During which, Olbermann tried to tie in Fox News Channel asking, "why was the JFK Airport plot revealed by a U.S. attorney in the middle of a U.S. attorneys scandal and by the father of a Fox News reporter? And why, on this Saturday, the coincidences have begun again. We will review that." And remember, the Moon Landing was actually filmed in a sound stage, and there was a 3rd gunman firing on John F. Kennedy, and even though the originator of the "Bigfoot" icon came forward to say he made it up, we have exclusive footage of "the real Bigfoot." Next theory please.

Olbermann's rant went on to list a series of "coincidences," many of which were replays of previously broadcast items from a 2005 broadcast he did. He simply added Fort Dix and the JFK plots to the list to total 13 now.

In the end, all Olbermann really mangaed to do was embarrass himself (as usual) with the odd theory of a return to a Cold War, attempt to downplay a potentially disastrous terrorist plot, and give a partial lineage of an FNC correspondent. Wow, what remarkable reporting.

Information for this article provided by the Media Research Center , MSNBC , Times Online , World Net Daily .

More Media Silence: Former ACLU chief admits guilt

In yet another surprisingly un-shocking move by the bias media, there seems to be deathly silence over the conviction/admitted guilt by former Virginia ACLU head Charles Rust-Tierney. A google search for "former ACLU chief admits guilt" gets you no results from any major media outlet within the first three pages. Not CNN, not the NY Times, not ABC-CBS-NBC. None of them.

This is no big surprise as the nation moves ever forward into the sexual abyss that Hollywood and the rest of the media is pushing us to. Tierney pled guilty to multiple counts of what a U.S. magistrate described as "the most perverted and nauseating and sickening type of child pornography" she ever had seen."

Charles Rust-Tierney you may remember, is the Virginia ACLU individual who fought to force public libraries in Virginia to allow "unrestricted" access to the internet and all filters be removed. Yet, Tierney is reported to have purchased and downloaded a good portion of this "smut" on his own child's computer. Tierney even used his own credit card and his own e-mail address to access and purchase an estimated $1,000 in graphic and violent child pornography during 2005 and 2006 from at least five different sites, according to Virginia's North Country Gazette.

The federal indictment alleged he "knowingly received multiple computer files that contained photo and video depictions of minor teenage and prepubescent children engaging in sexually explicit conduct." Magistrate Theresa Buchanan said the material included an extended video featuring the sexual torture of children.

Another confidence un-booster, is the fact that Tierney was also a youth sports league coach in the area. This speaks loads to the effect that perhaps youth organizations should begin running background checks on potential participants, those who would be in close proximity to children. I wonder how many monsters could be flushed out of organizations such as AYSO or the YMCA. Even the Boy Scouts/Girls Scouts of America.

Yet, with the wealth of information available over the internet regarding this story, the media refused to speak word one about it. It saddens me to know that FOX News didn't even cover it from its early stages. One would expect at least them to have mentioned it.

Once the case came nearer to closing, some outlets began to report it, but it still remains to be more than a snippet here or there in the major outlets. Fox News' Bill O'Reilly called it a "horrifying" case. And he noted that the two "biggest left-wing outfits in the country – the New York Times and NBC News – ignored the story entirely." CBS News, CNN and most of the big city liberal newspapers also failed to cover the Rust-Tierney arrest, Fox said. But that was about the extent of it.

As I have mentioned in some of my other posts, THE PEOPLE need to start calling the media's BLUFF on their "objective journalism" and start holding them accountable. Most of the major media outlets are already struggling as it is, to maintain any remnant of their viewership. If people start taking responsibility and notifying these outlets that their blatant bias is becoming "old-hat" and tedious, and perhaps contacting the sponsors, maybe they will find need to "alter" their output.

Information in this article provided in part by WorldNetDaily .

NY Times: JFK Plot Rates pg. 30 / U.N. Rates Front Page

Not that we would expect anything better from one of the most, dare I say prestigious, print media outlets. The New York Times chose to bury an International newsworthy story 30 pages into their paper, (check the bottom right of the picture under the title "INSIDE") while yet another Guantanamo story headlined.

As reported by Ben Johnson on FrontPageMag, the terror plot, which had the potential to obliterate a good portion of the NYTimes' readership, was also reduced to not being a terrorist act in true form. The plot as reported by the NYTimes, was mainly designed to destroy inanimate objects; i.e., the airport itself, aircraft, fuel tanks, and didn't mention the possibilities of civilian casualties at all that could have extended all the way to Queens.

It also minimized the existing threat to the airport itself saying that the Airport was never in imminent danger as the plot was only in the preliminary phase of planning. They also mentioned how safety shut-off valves would have "almost" certainly prevented the fuel tanks from igniting the fuel line networks. Since one of the plotters was a former employee of the airport, I think that kind of negates the safety features.

As always with the liberal media, the suspects are treated with sympathy and compassion. The plot originator, Russell Defreitas who is 63 years old, was described by the NYTimes as “divorced and lost touch with his two children.” Once homeless, he moved into an apartment where “the weather was rough on his health and the cold was tough on his arthritis.” He now lives on “a run-down block full of graffiti.” He liked jazz, “especially the saxophone.” Friends described him as a “polite man” and “not that bright” – not bright enough to pull off a serious attack. Since the four conspirators wanted to inflict mass casualties in a scale that the WTC could not match, and were in contact with the extremist muslim group Jamaat al-Muslimeen in Trinidad, I'd say the potential for action existed. So far, only three have been apprehended. The fourth is still at large, perhaps providing JaM with all the collected information they themselves intended to use. As reported by the NY DailyNews, the conspirators had extensive surveillance knowledge of the airport.

To the NYTimes credit, they did manage to mention that it was an "informant" that lead to the arrests of the three that are currently in custody, and a fourth being sought. The plotters were so taken by an informant that they were sure God had sent him to them. This shows the importance of "inside" work when it comes to dealing with groups like this. Since they are essentially in "our backyards," they have to work with people they may not necessarily trust to get their supplies. Otherwise, Law Enforcement officials say they have to go by educated guesswork to catch them.

But none of that information fits the NYTimes liberal agenda, erm, I mean newsworthy ideals. They wouldn't want to feature a story that might justify the War on Terror, or worse in their eyes, cause a Republican to be elected in '08.

So instead of the most reported story in the nation as a headline, we get yet another beat down story about Guantanamo and the fact that a 15 year old is being detained there. A 15 year old that threw the grenade that killed Sgt. First Class Christopher J. Speer, and seriously wounded another soldier.

As Mark J. Mershon, the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s New York office said, the JFK plotters based their actions on “a pattern of hatred toward the United States and the West in general.” One suspects the same could be said of the New York Times.

Information for this article from FrontPageMag , NYDailyNews , FreeRepublic , and YahooNews .

LACK Of Outrage Over Al Qaeda Torture Chambers / Media Deathly Silent

During our wonderful Abu Grahib "torture" scandal where terrorist prisoners were forced to wear panties on their heads and other "humiliating" acts, there were more than 6,000 reports by the media about it. Basically, the terrorists were forced to go through, what most of us would call "Fraternity-grade Hazing." How awful. Heaven forbid they actually be injured in the process.

Flash forward to May 2007, American and Iraqi troops acting on tips from local residents raid several locations believed to be Al Qaeda safe-houses, and manage to rescue (reports vary) 5 hostages. These hostages included a child. Total rescued is supposedly around 42 hostages from multiple locations. Graphically descriptive "how-to" instruction manuals of torture processes and photos of those hostages' tortured bodies were released to the public. But the sound of a pin-drop could be heard over the media outlets airwaves. WHAT THE HELL IS THAT ABOUT?

Understandably, the American public should be ashamed of those in the armed forces that would intentionally act to discredit their fellow comrades in arms as they did in Abu Grahib. America is held to a higher standard than the rest of the world. But WHY, is the media not saying anything about it? Or perhaps even the U.N. denouncing it? Not even our own politicians on the Left are speaking up. The U.N. did however manage to release a denouncement of Guantanamo over a lie about a Koran being flushed at the same time this torture cell was raided.

I'll tell you why the media is silent over this, but I think you already know. It's because none of them want us to win. Unfortunately, that's the way it is. And it will continue to be so, UNTIL, the People themselves start calling on the media, the politicians and that wonderful establishment known as the United Nations, to be held accountable.

Here are just a few of the online posts I was able to locate over this, none of which will ever been seen in the media. As the Fox News (who were the ONLY ones to report on this) motto goes; "We report, You decide." I like that, how about you?

Media Research Center
The Smoking Gun
Don Surber / TownHall
FrontPageMag
Operation Iraqi Freedom
FoxNews

Like it says, "You Decide."

Iraq Extremes: CBS Says Surge Failure/ABC Says Surge OK

The Media Research Center reports that two major media outlets see different ends to the Troop Surge. CBS says it will fail. ABC says it has the potential to work.

CBS Evening News' David Martin says "U.S. military officers tell CBS News the troop surge, which has now reached full strength, stands no chance of succeeding by September." Martin based this apparently, on a Baghdad briefing by Lieutenant General Ray Odierno who said September may be to early to judge the Surges effectiveness.

Similarly, the LA Times said: U.S. military leaders in Iraq are increasingly convinced that most of the broad political goals President Bush laid out early this year in his announcement of a troop buildup will not be met this summer and are seeking ways to redefine success. This assertion is presumably being based on MAJOR goals set to be completed by September may not be fulfilled. These goals include Oil-sharing revenues between Sunni, Shiia and Kurdish, as well as provincial elections and incorporating more Sunni's into the government.

On the other side of the spectrum, ABC World News' Charles Gibson took an opposite approach by introducing the view of "U.S. military's number two commander, Lieutenant General Ray Odierno, made a dramatic assertion today saying that he believes 80 percent of the Sunni and Shiite insurgents can be convinced to lay down their arms." Jonathan Karl also added "relatively junior commanders, Lieutenant Colonels, have been given authority to negotiate directly with insurgents." Odierno said during the briefing that, "I'm empowering them and trying to give them some tools to reach out because there are insurgents reaching out to us."

Further supporting this was an interview with Gen. David Petraeus on ABC News.com, who recently met with his commanders and troops in the Anbar Province and was pleased with what he was briefed on. Only six months ago, some U.S. commanders believed the entire province was lost to al Qaeda. Now, local sheiks have turned on the foreign-controlled al Qaeda fighters, tired of their extreme political and religious views. Gen. Petraeus said, "You now have local security forces that are truly fighting for their local areas and, of course, they can figure out who al Qaeda is a heck of a lot better then we can." Gen. Petraeus also mentioned how the Baghdad issue is affected by progress like this. "If you are going to secure Baghdad, you have to get into the belts that surround Baghdad. That's where the car bomb factories are."

Regardless of which "side" of the war your on, criticizing a plan before its completion, more so, its initial conception, is pretty asinine. Personally, I do not believe that upwards of 80% of insurgents want to lay down their arms. That just seems to me, a little too optimistic. But I do believe there are those that do, and that is key with the amount of intelligence that can be gathered from them.

So before people go spouting off about how everything is failed, and there's no chance of it working, yada yada yada, let's actually let our military do its job and see what results. That includes YOU, yeah..., there in the Congress. Button your lips until September! Then you can spew your daily doses of Anti-American sentiment.

Article information gathered from Media Research Center, ABCNews, CBSNews and LA Times.