WaPo Admits Republican Base Is United On War

April 30th, 2007

This is actually a stunning admission to see on the front page of the DNC’s Washington Post:

GOP’s Base Helps Keep Unity on Iraq

Lawmakers Not Backing War Pay Price

By Jonathan Weisman
Monday, April 30, 2007; A01

With public opinion tilting firmly toward ending U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq, Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest (R-Md.) might have expected praise for his votes that would start to bring the troops home. Instead, at town hall meetings on the Eastern Shore, the former Marine and Vietnam combat veteran has been called a coward and a traitor.

After Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) voted for a nonbinding resolution opposing President Bush’s troop increases, reaction in his district was so furious that local GOP officials all but invited a primary challenge to the reliable conservative. Inglis responded with multiple mailings to his constituents, fence-mending efforts and a video message on his House Web site pleading his case. On subsequent Iraq votes, he has not strayed from the Republican fold.

The experiences of the few Republicans to vote against the war help explain the remarkable unity that the party has maintained in Washington behind an unpopular president. Just four Republicans — two in the House, two in the Senate — voted last week for a $124 billion war funding bill that would require troop withdrawals to begin by Oct. 1, legislation that Bush has vowed to veto.

That cohesion reflects the views of the GOP’s core voters, who see the war in Iraq in fundamentally different terms than Democrats and political independents do, said Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Voters from those groups tend to see unremitting gloom, but Republican base voters continue to see a conflict that is going reasonably well, with a decent chance of military success…

But this article is almost unique in the reportage from our watchdog media. It is reminiscent of what President Nixon called “the silent majority.” Who are only silent insofar as our watchdog media steadfastly ignores them.

One proof of this is just hard it is to find a single photo of anyone supporting the war on the wire services. In fact, it is almost impossible. Even a Google image search only turns up photos of people who “support the troops” at best.

In the minds of our one party media the people who actually support the fight against Islamic terrorism are both silent and invisible.

22 Comments »


“Erotic Art” Show Takes On Muslim Taboos

April 30th, 2007

Meanwhile, in another corner of the Muslim world we have this, via France’s AFP:


Beirut erotic art seeks to shatter Arab taboos

by Salim Yassine Sun Apr 29

BEIRUT (AFP) - Two women painters in Lebanon are pushing the boundaries with a new exhibition called “Erotika,” in which their depictions of female sexuality have sparked mixed reactions.

Using vivid colours, the pair are showing images of fetishism, homosexuality and even masturbation in a Beirut art show they hope will help to break taboos in the usually conservative Arab world.

Artists Nayla Karam and Maria Sarkis are displaying their Warhol-like pop art in a joint exhibition at a gallery in the Lebanese capital’s northern Christian suburbs.

In “Auto-eroticism” for example, Sarkis presents a sensual depiction in green and pink of a woman who may be masturbating, a hand under her panties.

In yet brighter colours but smooth lines, another painting called “The Mirror” shows a close encounter between the faces and breasts of two apparent lesbians.

“I’ve been working on the theme of eroticism for a year. The ‘morally correct’ is a relative question which changes with time,” Sarkis told AFP…

Another painting by Sarkis called “Submission” portrays the face of a woman wearing a black harness. “Sado-masochism” shows a torso with coloured stripes.

“Our paintings are not pornographic — this is modern art. Sexuality and fantasies are part of reality. Why hide them?” Sarkis asked…

In “Drained,” a naked woman presses her thighs against her chest and her forehead against her knees, resting after sexual intercourse.

“Second journey” shows a double image of the body of a woman, in an apparent reference to multiple orgasms.

“We do not want to shock people. We allow our inspiration to guide us. One of our greatest pleasures is to see the different reactions of people, depending on their own fantasies,” Karam said…

The exhibition has triggered conflicting reactions among visitors…

The artists would have been killed if they lived in an Islamic neighbourhood,” he said.

Abdallad Dadur, owner of the “Surface” gallery that is staging the exhibition, said he was “proud of these young people who are expressing themselves without any complexes.

“Once more, the Lebanese are at the forefront of moral freedoms in the Arab world.”

It will be interesting to see what happens to these “artists” if when the holy worthies of Hezbollah takes over.

2 Comments »

French Pay To Make Muslim Women Virgins Again

April 30th, 2007

A minor detail buried in this article from those champions of women’s rights at Reuters:

Photo

Muslim women in France regain virginity in clinics

By Alexandra Steigrad Sun Apr 29

PARIS (Reuters) — Sitting in a cafe near the Champs Elysees, the 26-year-old French-born woman of Algerian descent looks like any other Parisian. But two months ago, she did something none of her friends have done.

She had her hymen re-sewn, technically making her a virgin again.

“I’m glad I had it done,” said the woman, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity. “I wanted to reconstruct part of my life, to reconstruct myself so that I could feel better about myself.”

This 30-minute outpatient procedure, called “hymenoplasty” and costing between 1,500 and 3,000 euros ($2,000-$4,000), is increasingly popular among young women of North African descent in France.

No exact figures exist to say how many such operations are done, but the woman’s surgeon says he gets three to five queries and performs one to three hymenoplasties each week. Demand has been rising for the past three or four years.

Doctor Marc Abecassis, whose office is near the chic Champs Elysees, sees the rise in religion among France’s five million Muslims fuelling this trend. His patients are between 18 and 45 years old, Muslim, born both in France and in North Africa.

“Many of my patients are caught between two worlds,” said Abecassis. They have had sex already but are expected to be virgins at marriage according to a custom that he called “cultural and traditional, with enormous family pressure.” …

A leading Muslim spokesman said Islam says bride and groom should be virgins before marriage, but did not take a clear stand for or against hymenoplasties.

“If someone committed a sin, the essential thing is to repent,” said Lhaj Thami Breze, head of the Union of French Islamic Organizations.

For many doctors, resewing the hymen goes against their ideals of sexual freedom and personal liberty.

“The surgery is an attack on women’s dignity,” said Professor Jacques Lansac, president of The National College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians of France. “We will not take part in a market that places value on the quality of a woman — if she’s good or not. It is an attack on women’s liberty.”

He also argued that any doctor who performed these operations at state hospitals violated France’s legal separation of church and state

Surprisingly, French social security reimburses some of the cost of the operation in cases of rape or trauma. “Ninety-nine percent of the time, the claim is a fraud,” he added.

Still, Abecassis defended the operations and said he helped patients who could not pay his 2,500 euro fee. “This surgery gives them another chance,” he said. “It’s a rehabilitation. For many, it’s the only solution.” ..

That these women would feel compelled to do this is bad enough. But that the French taxpayers get to pay for this preposterous procedure adds insult to injury.

Maybe it’s time Muslim men got over their seemingly endless neuroses about sex.

28 Comments »

Muslim Bomber Kills 32 Muslims At Muslim Funeral

April 30th, 2007

From the terrorist enablers at Reuters:


Suicide bomber kills 32 at Iraq funeral

By Dean Yates

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A suicide bomber wearing a vest packed with explosives killed 32 people when he blew himself up among mourners at a Shi’ite funeral north of Baghdad on Monday, Iraqi police said.

The attack took place inside a crowded mourning tent in the town of Khalis in volatile Diyala province, police said.

More than 52 people had been wounded, police said.

Since U.S. and Iraqi forces launched a security crackdown in Baghdad in February, militants including al Qaeda have increasingly focused their attacks outside the capital.

Diyala, a religiously mixed area, has been the scene of fierce fighting between U.S. troops and al Qaeda as well as Sunni Arab insurgents. Last month, U.S. commanders sent a force of armored vehicles and 1,000 extra soldiers to the province.

Residents said the funeral had been for the son of a Shi’ite family. The son had been killed by gunmen, they said…

This is not to be confused with the Muslim bomber who killed 60 Muslims in the Muslim holy city of Karbula the other day.

They are so religious, you know.

3 Comments »


Five UK Terrorists Get Life For Plotting Bombings

April 30th, 2007

From their collegues at Al Jazeera:

Photo

Britons get life over bomb plot

April 30, 2007

A judge has jailed five Britons for life for plotting to carry out al-Qaeda-inspired bomb attacks across Britain at targets ranging from nightclubs to trains and a shopping centre.

Judge Michael Astill told the court on Monday: “The sentences are for life. Release is not a foregone conclusion. Some or all of you may never be released.

“You are considered cruel, ruthless misfits by society.”

The group planned to use 600kg of ammonium nitrate fertiliser to make explosives to be used in bombings in revenge for Britain’s support to the United States in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks, prosecutors said.

Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, Anthony Garcia, Jawad Akbar and Salahuddin Amin were convicted of conspiring with Mohammed Momin Khawaja, a Canadian, to cause an explosion likely to endanger life.

Garcia and Khyam were found guilty of possessing an article for terrorism - the fertiliser - and Khyam was also convicted of having aluminium powder, an ingredient in explosives.

The men had denied all charges.

Khyam’s brother, Shujah Mahmood, and another man, Nabeel Hussain, were found not guilty of being involved in the plot.

During the trial, prosecutors said the men had only to decide on a target when they were arrested in 2004.

Court papers, which could be detailed only after the trial, showed that police observing the gang had established links between them and two of the four men who later carried out the London suicide bombings in July 2005, killing 52 people.

Spies had seen Mohammed Sidique Khan, the suspected ringleader of the July 7 bombings, and his accomplice, Shehzad Tanweer, with the men in the days leading up to their arrest.

Police swooped on the suspects about 16 months before four British Muslims carried out the attacks on London’s transport system.

The main prosecution witness in the case was Mohammed Babar, a Pakistan-born American who has admitted to terrorism-related offences in New York.

He said he was the men’s accomplice and had helped get materials to make the bombs.

The prosecution said the men had discussed targets - including London’s biggest nightclub, the Ministry of Sound - gas, water and electricity supplies, synagogues, trains, aircraft, and a large shopping centre, Bluewater, to the east of the capital.

Babar said some of the suspects had also suggested poisoning fast-food takeaways and beer at soccer matches.

“The only sensible conclusion is that al-Qaeda does sit behind it [the plot],” a senior British counter terrorism detective said.

The suspects were arrested on March 30, 2004, after the fertiliser was discovered in a storage facility in west London.

Another story that will be ignored by our watchdog media.

Except for the terrorist sympathizers, who will soon be claiming they are martyred heroes.

9 Comments »

Sony Uses Slaughtered Goat To Promote Game

April 29th, 2007

From FOXNews:


Sony Video Game Launch for ‘God of War II’ Features Gory Stunt With Freshly Killed Goat

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Sony used a freshly slaughtered goat to promote the company’s new violent video game for its PlayStation 2 console, the Daily Mail reported.

The dead animal’s still-warm corpse was used as the highlight and centerpiece during a launch party for “God of War II.”

Sony challenged guests to reach inside the goat’s carcass and eat offal, which were bought elsewhere and intended to resemble the animal’s entrails.

The company then further caused outrage when it used images from the party in its official PlayStation magazine. After being contacted by The Daily Mail, however, Sony issued an apology and promised to recall the materials…

Could this story have something to do with this development reported by the New York Times’ owned International Herald Tribune:

U.S. advertisers reach out to Muslim consumers

By Louise Story
Friday, April 27, 2007

NEW YORK: For years, few advertisers in the United States have dared to reach out to Muslims.

Either they did not see much potential for sales or they feared a political backlash. And there were practical reasons: Muslim-Americans come from so many ethnic backgrounds that their only common ground is their religion, a subject most marketers avoid.

Now, though, that is beginning to change.

Grocers and consumer product companies are considering ways to make their goods follow Muslim rules, which forbid pork, gelatin and pig fat, often used in cosmetics and cleaning products. Retailers are looking into providing longer skirts even during the summer months, and mainstream advertisers are planning to place some commercials on the satellite channels that Muslims often watch.

“I think Muslims have had to draw into themselves,” said Marian Salzman of JWT, a large advertising agency in the WPP Group that plans to encourage clients, including Johnson & Johnson and Unilever, to market to American Muslims. “It puts an increased burden on a marketer, post-9/11, to say, ‘Look, we understand.’ ”

Marketing to Muslims carries some risks. But advertising executives, used to dividing American consumers into every sort of category, say that ignoring this group - estimated to be about 5 million to 8 million people and growing fast - would be like missing the Hispanic market in the 1990s.

Companies in the Detroit area, where there is a dense population of Muslims, are leading the change. A McDonald’s there serves halal Chicken McNuggets; Walgreens has Arabic signs in its aisles. And now, Ikea, which recently opened a store in the suburb of Canton that has had trouble attracting as many Muslim customers as hoped, has been touring local homes and talking to Muslims to figure out their needs.

The store there plans to sell decorations for Ramadan next fall and is adding halal meat to its restaurant menu. Catalogues will be offered in Arabic, and female Muslim employees will be given an Ikea-branded hijab, to wear over their head if they wish.

Marketing to Muslims is, of course, mostly intended to increase the companies’ sales. But advertising has also long been a mirror of changes in society…

Get your new PlayStation games before the Eid al-Adha rush.

4 Comments »

About Yesterday’s Huge Impeachment Events

April 29th, 2007

This is how yesterday’s worldwide impeachment events have been breathlessly hyped for weeks at sites like AfterDowningStreet:

April 28, 2007: Impeachment Summer Begins This Spring!

George Bush and Dick Cheney have lied the nation into a war of aggression, are spying in open violation of the law, and have sanctioned the use of torture. These are high crimes and misdemeanors that demand accountability. Since Congress doesn’t seem to get it, on April 28 Americans from Miami, Florida to North Pole, Alaska are going to spell it out for them: IMPEACH!

Use the new ImpeachMap to find out what’s going on in your area, post a new action, or find people to team up with.

RED markers indicate A28 actions being planned. BLUE markers show people who are looking for others to team up with. GREEN markers represent actions that need some financial help. And the AIRPLANE markers show where we will have A28 ImpeachPlanes towing IMPEACH banners over different cities. You can now add a red marker to post your action or add a blue marker to signal that you’re looking for people to join up with. Please be sure to include your e-mail address in your marker description so we, and others, can contact you!

The theme of the day is spell it out, and we’re going to put the word IMPEACH! everywhere on April 28. If you’re in Miami you can join the Unwelcoming Party for George Bush, who will speaking at Miami Dade College that day. If you’re in San Diego you can tell Nancy Pelosi to put impeachment back on the table. And there are more than 100 hundred other actions planned around the country! It’s time to say NO to impunity for lying, spying, and torture–and YES to H. Res 333, the bold Articles of Impeachment Congressman Dennis Kucinich has filed against Dick Cheney.

Anybody can start an A28 action. It can be as small as writing IMPEACH on the sidewalk in chalk or as large as organizing 2,000 people on a beach to make a human mural. Be creative! Some of the ways that people are talking about spelling it out include: signs, gigantic lasers, toy soldiers, stencils, LED throwies, freewayblogging, banner drops, light projections, t-shirts, rocks, skydivers, skywriters, peaches, christmas lights, flags and balloons. Join the discussion about creative ways to spell it out on A28’s new ImpeachSpace network.

But alas their reach exceeded their grasp — as usual, as even their colleagues at the Washington Post were forced to admit:

Sending a Message, With Unimpeachable Clarity

By Paul Schwartzman
Sunday, April 29, 2007; A04

The protesters assembled on the Mall yesterday with a plan to voice their less-than-generous views about a certain president and his vice president. They would form a human chain to spell out I-M-P-E-A-C-H, even including an exclamation point.

But only 150 or so showed up, far fewer than the 1,000 organizers had hoped for. As their photo opportunity approached, they knew they’d be lucky to spell I-M-P.

“We’re going to have to scrap the big plan,” George Ripley, the protest’s leader, announced. He advised his allies to rearrange everyone. They would still form I-M-P-E-A-C-H-!, he insisted, only on a tad smaller scale.

“A nightmare,” a pony-tailed confederate said, shaking his head…

While everyone waited for the photographers to reach the top of the monument, a guy in a tie-dyed T-shirt led them in a chant:

” Give me an I! . . . Give me an M! . . . Give me a P! . . . ” …

A book was being passed around. Ripley implored the protesters to share their ideas, poems and artwork. Then a cellphone rang. The photographers had reached the top of the monument and were snapping away.

“Thanks so much,” Ripley told the crowd, before another idea came to mind. Would everyone form a big circle around a giant “W,” with a pink slash running through it?

How about it?

There were a few murmurs and mumbles as the protesters started drifting away.

“I can’t do it,” Ripley said with a sigh. “Party’s over.”

Oddly enough the Washington Post didn’t even publish a photo of the turnout. In fact, none of the wire services seemed to have any photographs of this worldwide event.

Apart from these two of the same woman, which the folks at AfterDowingStreet jumped on like a duck on a June bug:

Impeachment photos from AP in Rome, Italy

[AP caption:] Tourists walk past Stephanie Westbrook, of Huston, Texas, a U.S. citizen living in Rome since 1991, holding a placard as she and a handful of country fellows gather near Rome’s Colosseum, Saturday, April 28, 2007, demanding the impeachment of President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, saying they lied to the world about going to war in Iraq.’

Not much to show for all their “efforts.”

And just imagine if these groups didn’t have our watchdog media on their side.

14 Comments »


Iran Bans Western Haircuts, Eyebrow Plucking

April 29th, 2007

From those keepers of the faith at Reuters:


Iran bans Western haircuts, eyebrow plucking for men

April 29, 2007

Tehran, Iran (Reuters) — Iranian police have warned barbers against offering Western-style hair cuts or plucking the eyebrows of their male customers, Iranian media said Sunday.

The report by a reformist daily, later confirmed by an Iranian news agency, appeared to be another sign of authorities cracking down on clothing and other fashion deemed to be against Islamic values.

“Western hairstyles … have been banned,” the newspaper Etemad said in a front-page headline.

It came a week after police launched a crackdown against the growing number of young women testing the limits of the law with shorter, brighter and skimpier clothing ahead of the summer months…

Violators can receive lashes, fines and imprisonment.

The student news agency ISNA quoted a police statement as saying: “In an official order to barbershops, they have been warned to avoid using Western hair styles and doing men’s eyebrows.”

Iranian young men have in recent years started paying more attention to the way they look and dress, especially in affluent parts of the capital Tehran. Spiked up hair, by using gel, is known as the Khorusi (Rooster) style and some also use make-up.

Several hairdressers for men in Tehran offer cuts in the style of Hollywood movie stars and other Western celebrities. Clients can also have their eyebrows plucked.

The head of the barbers’ union, Mohammad Eftekharifard, said police had instructed it to “exercise specific regulations in barbershops that work under its supervision.”

Barbers who do not follow these rules might be closed down for a month and even lose their permits to operate, Etemad quoted him as saying.

“Currently some barbershops apply make-up and use (hair) styles that are in line with those in European countries and America,” Eftekharifard said.

He added: “An official order has been sent to the union … not to apply make-up on men’s faces (or) do eyebrows … and hence the barbers are not allowed to do these things.” …

They know have priorities. Still, think how silly Mr. Ahmadinejad would look if he didn’t pluck his “unibrow.”

Meanwhile, in a world away in Turkey, via an outraged Al Jazeera:


Massive pro-secular demo in Turkey

More than one million secular Turks have protested in Istanbul against the government amid a tense stand-off between the Islamic-led government and the army over presidential elections.

The crowd, carrying Turkish flags, filled Istanbul’s Caglayan Square, on Sunday, in a demonstration organised by about 600 non-governmental organisations.

Police at the scene said that the number of demonstrators, from Turkey and abroad, was well over one million.

“Turkey is secular and will remain secular,” protesters shouted, demanding the resignation of the government headed by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s prime minister.

Al Jazeera’s Barnaby Phillps met many women at the rally who said they fear that their way of life, what they call a modern way of life, is under threat by the possible spread of “political Islam”.

The rally came a day after Erdogan’s government rejected a warning from the military over the country’s disputed presidential election, calling its interference unacceptable…

Guess who is on the wrong side of history.

11 Comments »

Déjà Vu — The Latest “Meltdown” At Free Republic

April 29th, 2007

Since it is a slow news day:

Déjà Vu At The Latest "Meltdown" At Free Republic

by Steve Gilbert (aka Mojo, Hon and Sam Hill at FR)

I have received numerous emails and "Freepmails" asking about Free Republic and what the heck is going on over there. Regular readers here know I don’t like to post about other web sites. And the machinations of Free Republic is an especially tiresome subject to me. So hopefully this will be the first and last thread here about FR and its management.

Rather than attempt a full-fledged exegesis I would prefer to answer whatever questions people might have as fully and accurately as I can. But first let me to give a brief background on this recurring phenomena from my perspective.

I have been aware of Jim Robinson, the owner of FR, since before he started his site. He used to post quite regularly on the Whitewater bulletin board at Prodigy, where he butted heads quite regularly with the moderators. They claimed they were only objecting to his posting of articles that were copyright protected. Robinson claimed they had a political agenda.

Eventually Robinson was banned from Prodigy. He next turned up at another place I and many other conservatives regularly visited at the time (circa 1995), the now legendary usenet group alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater. This site had tremendous influence for a news group and was regularly featured in mainstream media stories in this period.

Mr. Robinson continued to post at a.c-e.c.w the same kind of articles he had posted at Prodigy. Then he began to post links to promote his own fledgling site, Free Republic.

At first Robinson was the only poster at his new site. Again, he posted pretty much the same kind of articles he had posted at Prodigy and a.c-e.c.w. without any commentary from either him or anyone else. Indeed, his site was very much like an early blog. But FR wasn’t all that unique. Some other posters from Prodigy, other news discussion sites and a.c-e.c.w. had similar sites.

Soon Robinson was joined at FR by another poster, Rodger Schultz (if I am remembering correctly). Between the two of them they posted a couple of articles a day from the usual conservative and libertarian sources of the day, plus pieces from slightly more questionable sources like the John Birch Society.

In the early days Robinson was mostly concerned with political scandals. I was later told by Jim and/or by his son John he really had no interest in politics until the Iran-Contra scandal under Reagan hit. So the Lippo Group/Riady business and the supposed drug-dealing through Mena, Arkansas were of major interest to him, as was of course Whitewater. As the Whitewater scandal grew, Free Republic became somewhat more popular. But it was still quite small and crude.

In its earlier days there were often quite ugly arguments, brought on almost entirely by one or two liberals who posted there just to attack the conservative members. This forced Robinson to institute a registration system, which was off-putting to a lot of the regular visitors at the time. Some of whom worried that their private information would end up being used against them by the Clintons or their minions.

Another relatively small but popular place for conservatives, the Drudge Report, linked to FR’s Whitewater page in late 1997. When Drudge uncovered the spiked Monica Lewinsky story and other similar information he got from Lucianne Goldberg, his site took off. And a lot of Drudge’s new readers were funneled from his site to Free Republic.

FR was soon flooded with mainstream conservatives, social conservatives and even moderate Republicans. In turn these new members were soon followed by a smaller but louder influx of libertarians, Birchers and what we now call paleo-conservatives. And there ensued quite a few flame-wars between the older members and some of these new firebrands.

But in the heady days of the Lewinsky scandal and the run up to Clinton’s impeachment Robinson maintained a much more moderate political stance. He regularly tried to tamp down the more extreme members of the libertarian and paleo groups, most notably in a purge in early 1999 now preposterously called the "Night Of The Long Knives."

But almost immediately after the Senate’s failure to convict Bill Clinton, Robinson did an abrupt about-face and went after the more run-of-the-mill conservatives and moderates.

This turnabout began in the May of 1999, when out of left-field Robinson started to post his theories that the CIA funded itself by drug running and that George HW Bush, having been the director of the CIA, was a kingpin in their international drug operations.

Mr. Robinson further claimed the US had fought every conflict since WWII to establish and preserve this drug empire. He also maintained that drugs were introduced and propagated in the US by the CIA for these same nefarious ends.

Unfortunately for me, I was the first to challenge Mr. Robinson’s assertions. Almost immediately I and others who tried to counter these bizarre leftwing fantasies were summarily and gleefully banned. I was told to leave and to take my "blood-sucking party" [meaning the GOP] with me. Which was pretty ironic since I have never been much of a party supporter and had regularly criticized the Republicans’ lack of spine.

Robinson even used the occasion to proudly announce that like all of his ancestors on both sides of the family since the American Revolution, he was a lifelong registered Democrat.

Numerous high profile conservatives like Lucianne Goldberg abandoned Free Republic at that time. Matt Drudge de-linked from them and castigated its new direction. (You can read Salon magazine’s take on the events here.) I was told by insiders that half of FR’s membership was either banned or left at the time.

Many of the libertarians, Birchers and paleo-cons who had been previously shunted aside or even banned were quickly re-instated and placed front and center. They joined Robinson in triumphantly celebrating the exodus of their enemies and FR’s new, "more pure" direction.

But to a great extent Robinson was only returning to his roots. Many of the sentiments he expressed in 1999 were not too far from the claims of many of the sources he regularly posted from when he began FR. And he often said he had learned politics "at the knee" of the notorious crackpot Michael Rivero and another conspiracy writer of the period, Missy Kelly. (They had both been regular posters on the Prodigy board, and Rivero also posted at a.c-e.c.w., where he was largely ridiculed as a nutjob.)

Robinson announced that he wanted to use Free Republic to investigate these CIA drug charges and other long popular leftwing conspiracies, such as the intelligence agencies spying on US citizens via Echelon. This was to be FR’s new mission. But nothing ever came of it.

Still, in the months up to the Republican nomination Robinson regularly and often denounced George W Bush, and loudly proclaimed he would never vote for him. He insisted Bush’s election would just be an extension of the Clinton regime and that it would be highly dangerous for the country.

Robinson and other FR members even claimed the Bushes and Clintons were working in cahoots to pass the Presidency back and forth between their families in order to continue their destruction of the country. Many if not most of these lurid threads have since been expunged from FR.

But in the eleventh hour before the 2000 elections Robinson suddenly experienced another epiphany. He announced his undying commitment to electing George W. Bush. And anyone who spoke out against Bush now faced banishment. Robinson then went on to ban quite a few former comrades who had not gotten the memo and who had blithely continued to oppose Bush’s candidacy.

After Bush’s narrow victory Mr. Robinson made many preposterous claims about how crucial FR’s support had been in his election. Robinson even went so far as to stage a "photo op" of himself registering as a Republican — a couple of weeks after election day.

Since the 2000 elections, through 9/11 and the War On Terror Mr. Robinson has been fairly steadfast in his support of President Bush and our intelligence agencies. Though he has increasingly chided Bush and the Republicans for their domestic policies, most especially their spending.

And, apart from some of the obsessive compulsive Crevo/Evo crowd and some of the more inflammatory participants in the Terry Schiavo debates, there haven’t been any large scale purges to speak of — until now. And once again, his latest volta-face seems to have come out of nowhere.

Of course the Free Republic forum belongs to Jim Robinson. But just as surely he also owes something to the thousands of people who have provided his site with its content over all these years. Just as he owes something to all those people who have actually participated in the political activism that helped to put Free Republic on the map and give it whatever political clout it has enjoyed.

In my own case, I was an organizer and the "line producer" for Free Republic’s first national rally "The March For Justice," which many claim helped the House decide to move forward with Bill Clinton’s impeachment. I was also instrumental in several of FR’s subsequent rallies.

I have also gotten their activities, including the MFJ, C-SPAN coverage. I led many of FR’s letter writing/fax campaigns, by providing exhaustive lists of House and Senate members, along with their contact information and free phone and fax services. And I, like many others, have contributed to the now millions of dollars Mr. Robinson has been given by FR’s members. But on a whim I was kicked down the stairs and lied about at FR for years after. (John Robinson even claimed that I had posted death threats against President Clinton at FR.)

Six years after my 1999 banning I returned to FR to post some of my research about presidential candidate John Kerry at FR. I thought it was important enough to try to reach as many conservatives as possible.

Much of my work was incorporated into FR’s offshoot "Winter Soldier" site. And much of what I first uncovered and posted at FR or got into the media through reporter friends ended up in the second half of Swiftboat John O’Neil’s "Unfit For Command."

I am not bragging about my all too modest accomplishments. I just want to point out that there are or were plenty of people at Free Republic like me who have put in a lot of work for the cause of conservatism. FR can and should be a forum that can accomplish good things for the cause.

So I can readily understand why so many of its members are taken aback when they’re told the site they have worked so long and hard to build up is suddenly going in another, quite different direction. Especially when Mr. Robinson’s goals tend to veer so wildly.

Robinson’s latest anti-Giuliani, anti-abortion jihad is a typical bolt from the blue. For despite his current claims Mr. Robinson has never been much of a "social conservative." Indeed, he used to promote both big and little "L" libertarians at his site. Many who knew him claimed he was a libertarian, and maybe he is.

Free Republic’s home page still links to libertarian Republican groups on its front page. A trip down memory lane via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine will show how strongly FR tilted libertarian in its earlier years.

In fact, FR’s earlier "mission statements" read more like a libertarian screeds than anything else. Ironically, the "mission statement" that graced the site circa 1999 was largely written by a libertarian who was himself banned in the May 1999 purges. It does not specifically mention any "social conservative" points, including abortion.

Robinson himself has long been against the "war on drugs". He has argued for legalizing prostitution and other so-called victimless crimes. And, unless he has recently changed his mind, he is still in the "open borders" camp.

Certainly fighting illegal immigration has never been a top priority for him. To the contrary, Robinson has driven away promoters of the Minuteman project and prohibited threads from being posted about them at FR.

Similarly, in the ten or more years I have followed his postings Mr. Robinson has seldom mentioned abortion as a top concern. Yet now he is using abortion and other "social conservatism" issues to drive away many of the very same people he had previously encouraged at FR.

Who knows why? Perhaps Robinson is simply lashing out in frustration. These "purges" have usually occurred after some major disappointment. Such as when the Senate failed to convict Mr. Clinton. This might just be the culmination of his anger at the Republicans losing Congress and a general but bitter disappointment in the GOP’s less than stellar performance over the last six years.

A conspiracy theorist might even suggest that Free Republic would be far more likely to regain a lot of its former glory and profitability under a Hillary Clinton administration than under a Republican administration. And that this could be a motivation in attacking the GOP front-runner and talking about starting a third party — or just encouraging people to sit the election out in protest.

In any case, I was merely trying to remind people on the current blood-letting thread about Mr. Robinson’s previous turnabouts when I was banned. With the turnover at Free Republic, there are fewer and fewer people who remember its roller-coaster history. And fewer still who are willing to face banishment by bringing it up.

But there it is.

Oh, and for the record, I am not a particular fan of Rudy Giuliani. In fact I haven’t expressed an opinion about any of the current Republican candidates anywhere.

But I would certainly prefer to have Mr. Giuliani in the Presidency over Mrs. Clinton or any of the current crop of Democrat candidates.

In fact, I find it almost impossible to believe anyone who cares about this country would not agree. But clearly some don’t. They must have very different priorities.

161 Comments »

Other News Items For Week Of Apr 29 - May 5

April 29th, 2007

This thread is for our readers to post news items that might not have gotten enough attention during the week. Articles that fit under the topic of a recent thread should be posted there.

Please don’t post pieces from popular sites like the Drudge Report. Also, avoid material from blogs and editorials unless they are truly newsworthy in their own right.

In order to make the articles as readable as possible, try to stick to the format described in the first of these weekly threads here.

As always, remember to excerpt heavily and to provide a link to the original source.

74 Comments »


Watch 501c3 Code Pink Illegally Lobby Congress

April 28th, 2007

Why should the US taxpayers be forced to support Code Pink, a 501c3 "charity," when they break the IRS’s own regulations?

From the Code Pink camp follower Laurel Jensen, via YouTube:

From the IRS guidelines:

Lobbying Activity

In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying)…

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation…

  

  

  

What more evidence is needed?

Again, it’s possible if enough people report this the IRS will actually do something about it:

Where Do You Report Suspected Tax Fraud Activity?

If you suspect or know of an individual or company that is not complying with the tax laws, you may report this activity by completing Form 3949-A. You may fill out Form 3949-A online, print it and mail it to:

Internal Revenue Service
Fresno, CA 93888

If you do not wish to use Form 3949-A, you may send a letter to the address above. Please include the following information, if available:

* Name and address of the person you are reporting
* The taxpayer identification number (social security number for an individual or employer identification number for a business)
* A brief description of the alleged violation, including how you became aware of or obtained the information
* The years involved
* The estimated dollar amount of any unreported income
* Your name, address and daytime telephone number

Although you are not required to identify yourself, it is helpful to do so. Your identity can be kept confidential. You may also be entitled to a reward.

Additionally everyone is encouraged to contact the Senate Finance Committee, which oversees the Internal Revenue Service:

Committee On Finance

219 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-6200

Majority Phone: (202) 224-4515
Minority Phone: (202) 224-5315

Let’s put an end to Code Pink’s taxpayer-supported treason.

13 Comments »

Polygamous Lesbians Flee Nigeria’s Sharia Law

April 28th, 2007

From those defenders of the faith at the BBC:

Polygamous lesbians flee Sharia

Friday, 27 April 2007

A Nigerian lesbian who “married” four women last weekend in Kano State has gone into hiding from the Islamic police, with her partners.

Under Sharia law, adopted in the state seven years ago, homosexuality and same-sex marriages are outlawed and considered very serious offences.

The theatre where the elaborate wedding celebration was held on Sunday has been demolished by Kano city’s authorities.

Lesbianism is also illegal under Nigeria’s national penal code.

Nigeria’s parliament is considering tightening its laws on homosexuality.

Kano’s Hisbah board, which uses volunteers to enforce Islamic law, told the BBC that the women’s marriage was “unacceptable”.

The BBC’s Bala Ibrahim in Kano says Aunty Maiduguri and her four “wives” are thought to have gone into hiding the day after they married.

All five women, who are believed to be film actresses in the local home-video industry, were born Muslims, otherwise they would not be covered by Sharia law.

Islam says a man can take up to four wives if he is able to support them.

“As defenders of the Sharia laws, we shall not allow this unhealthy development to take root in the state,” the Hisbah’s deputy commander Ustaz Abubakar Rabo told Nigeria’s This Day newspaper.

Mr Rabo told the BBC’s Focus on Africa programme that if the women were found guilty of lesbianism they faced one of two punishments.

For a married woman the offence would be considered adultery for which the punishment is death by stoning. A single woman would be caned

Eyewitnesses say there was a large turnout for the marriage and guests were given leaflets as a souvenir showing Aunty Maiduguri surrounded by her “brides”…

Eleven other states in mostly Muslim northern Nigeria have adopted Sharia law.

It must have been a tough call for the BBC, deciding which side of this story they should champion.

All five women, who are believed to be film actresses in the local home-video industry, were born Muslims, otherwise they would not be covered by Sharia law.

Says who?

5 Comments »

Riots Rock Estonia Over Removal Of Soviet Statue

April 28th, 2007

From those keepers of the faith at France’s AFP:

Photo

Members of the “Young Guards of United Russia” movement wearing WWII Soviet army uniforms, hold a poster reading “No fascism” during a rally in front of the Estonian embassy in Moscow, 27 April 2007..

Scores hurt, more than 600 detained as more riots rock Estonia

Sat Apr 28

TALLINN (AFP) - Nearly 100 people were injured and more than 600 detained in a second night of rioting in the Estonian capital Tallinn after the removal of a Soviet war memorial, officials said Saturday.

Ninety-six people were injured, including seven police officers, as gangs made up mainly of young Russian speakers ran riot in Tallinn, smashing the windows of the Art Academy, breaking into the National Theatre and robbing shops, police said.

Some 600 people were detained in Tallinn, twice the number as the previous night, police said…

Another 40 people were detained after several hundred people rampaged through Johvi, a town 165 kilometres (100 miles) northeast of Tallinn in a region inhabited mainly by ethnic Russians.

Rioting had first erupted in Tallinn on Thursday night when police tried to prevent a small group of youths from breaking through a security cordon set up around a towering bronze figure of a Red Army soldier ahead of the statue’s removal.

The Russian foreign ministry said Saturday that a Russian citizen had been killed in the unrest in Tallinn, which is the worst since Estonia regained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991…

The Bronze Soldier was moved to a secret location in the early hours of Friday in an attempt to prevent more riots.

On Saturday, only a handful of people were in the square where the monument used to stand.

Concrete barricades have been erected in front of parliament after around 60 youngsters demonstrated outside, shouting “Fascists” in Russian and calling on Prime Minister Andrus Ansip to come out.

The last time the Estonian parliament was barricaded was in 1991, when Soviet tanks advanced on Tallinn to crush the drive for independence.

In Johvi, rioters smashed windows and vandalised a statue of General Aleksander Tonisson, who led an Estonian army unit against the Russians during Estonia’s war of independence in 1918.

The statue of Tonisson, who went on to become mayor of Tallinn and was executed by the Soviets when they first occupied Estonia in 1940, was doused in a flammable liquid and set on fire.

Estonia was briefly independent between the two World Wars, before being occupied by the Soviets at the start of World War II and then by the Nazis.

It was forcibly incorporated into the Soviet Union at the end of the war and only regained independence in 1991, when the USSR crumbled.

The Bronze Soldier Soviet war memorial at the heart of the unrest is seen by Estonians as a symbol of 50 years of Soviet occupation, during which tens of thousands of Estonians were murdered or deported and large numbers of ethnic Russians shipped in as Moscow tried to ‘russify’ the Baltics.

Russia considers it a sacred memorial to the Red Army soldiers who defeated Nazism in World War II.

Russia reacted angrily after the statue was moved. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused the Estonian government of fomenting tensions, and the Russian senate passed a resolution calling for diplomatic relations with Estonia to be broken off.

Gangs of youths in downtown Tallinn shouted “Rossiya! Rossiya!” (Russia in Russian) and waved Russian flags in the overnight unrest, as police tried to keep them away from aggressive Estonian youths.

The government said it had restricted access to its website Saturday after an increase in attacks “originating from servers in other countries”.

How ironic to see men dressed in Stalinist-era Soviet uniforms carrying signs that read “No Fascism.”

Yet they are pining for those salad days of Stalin’s tyranny.

3 Comments »


Suspect In Attack On 101 Year Woman Arrested

April 28th, 2007

From those champions of justice at the Associated Press:

Man arrested in mugging of woman, 101

By TOM HAYS, Associated Press Writer Sat Apr 28

NEW YORK - She was brutally mugged in a crime that outraged New Yorkers, but the 101-year-old victim said the attack hasn’t intimidated her.

“I’m not fearful at all,” Rose Morat said Friday as police made an arrest in the case. “Whatever is going to happen is going to happen.”

Jack Rhodes, 44, was arrested on charges of robbery, grand larceny, burglary and assault, police said. They did not have an address for Rhodes, who was also accused of robbing an 85-year-old woman the same day Morat was attacked, police said.

“I am so sorry for what happened,” Rhodes said as he was led out of a police station, the New York Post reported Saturday.

Police began questioning Rhodes after noticing he matched a photo of a person wanted for questioning in robberies of women in Queens. He was initially held on a charge of possession of a crack pipe.

There was no telephone listing for Rhodes in the New York metropolitan area, and police did not know whether he was represented by a lawyer.

“If it’s the right man, it’s wonderful,” Morat told The Associated Press when reached Friday by phone.

Morat’s March 4 holdup was captured on a surveillance tape. It shows Morat, who was using a walker, trying to leave her apartment building to go to church.

The mugger, who looms over her and is holding onto a bicycle, pretends to help her get through the vestibule. Then he turns to grab Morat’s head, delivers three hard punches to her face and swipes her purse. The dazed victim tries to reach for her purse when the mugger hits her again, pushing her and her walker to the ground.

He got away with $33 and Morat’s house keys. She suffered a fractured cheekbone and spent time in the hospital.

Morat told the AP on Friday that she’s feeling better, though her doctor has told her to try to slow down.

She previously declared that if she’d been just a bit younger, she’d have gone after the guy…

Just another tile in the gorgeous mosaic.

19 Comments »

Dan Rather Warns Against Propaganda As News

April 28th, 2007

From the oh so ”PC” PC Magazine:

Dan Rather Issues Warning About the Future of News

04.26.07

By Kyle Monson

We sat down with veteran news anchor Dan Rather, formerly of CBS News and now with HDNet, to chat about technology, blogs versus mainstream media outlets, and the value of reporting (and watching) wars in high-definition. Rather also tells us what it’s like to have Mark Cuban for a boss.

Q: The trend in news right now is to shrink it down, to put it in smaller clips, and we’re watching it in smaller windows on small computer screens. And yet you’re broadcasting long-form journalism in high-definition on huge displays for people to watch. Do you feel like this gives the audience a chance to get more emotionally involved?

A: First of all, I think your analysis is correct. One thing that’s happening in journalism is that there are pressures to keep it short—as in KISS (Keep It Short, Stupid). There’s certainly a place for that. But it’s gone too far. I’ve always believed there’s a place for the longer form. I think the advantage to the viewer is when we do a story saying, for example, we want you to know what the war is—what it really is—as opposed to what someone wants you to believe it to be. And we’re going to spend an hour showing you in high definition, which is more detailed, more vivid, more in-depth than any pictorial war coverage in history. When we’re able to wed good reporting and good writing with the best pictures that have ever been on television, then there is added value for the viewer. For the first time in my career, I can spend every moment of every day concerning myself with the quality of the program, not the quantity of the audience. That’s been more liberating than I ever imagined it could be.

Q: Do you see a difference in reporting between TV news and newspapers, newsweekly magazines, or even blogs that don’t get into the field as much?

A: Some bloggers do get into the field, and I hope that tribe increases. Good journalism finds a way, whether it’s blogging or some other form on the Internet, as opposed to radio, TV, print, and so on. The fundamentals don’t change.

Q: Do you agree that new technologies make it easy for bloggers to capture reality and throw it in the face of those who would want to distort it?

A: New technologies can be used to our advantage to speak truth, expose corruption, and increase people’s knowledge. But we have to be careful on this new frontier—the Internet, iPods, pictures on phones, and so on—to be ever alert to the potential for propaganda.

Oh, my sides.

No, Mr. Rather, we can’t have that.

(This is just an excerpt. But if you are a glutton for comedy, go to the link for the full 27 minute video interview.)

9 Comments »


« Front Page | To Top
« Previous Articles |